Next Generation Science

Standards Advancing Inquiry-based Teaching & Learning through Action Research

NGSS (2013)

NGSS serves as a guideline for states, districts, schools and teachers to facilitate student learning

Goals reflect what students should know and are able to do

NGSS’ VisionNGSS’ VisionSCIENCE TEACHING SCIENCE LEARNING

• Coherent, rigorous inquiry-based instruction

Direct engagement in scientific practices in order to fully appreciate the nature of scientific knowledge

• Requires identification of assumptions, use of critical and logical thinking, and consideration of alternative explanations.

Acquisition and application of scientific knowledge to unique situations

• Expert teachers arrange performance expectations as deemed necessary to support the developmental needs of learners.

Opportunities to critically think and reason scientifically in order to solve real-world challenges

Click on this link to watch: NGSS’ (2013) Vision for Science Education

Facets of InquiryFacets of InquiryMaking observations

Posing questions

Examining sources of information to learn what is already known

Planning investigation

Reviewing experimental evidence

Using tools to gather, analyze, and interpret data

Proposing answers, explanations, and predictions

Communicating results

The On-going The On-going ChallengeChallenge

“Many teachers have not embraced this pedagogical approach, which encourages students to think scientifically

due to the complexity of teaching in a non-traditional, inquiry-based manner” (Fradd & Lee, 1999).

Elementary science teaching methods continue to most prevalently reflect the use of worksheets and textbook reading of

definitions (Dept. of Edu., 2000).

Despite national efforts to encourage the use of inquiry-based teaching practices, many science teachers still do not practice science as inquiry with their students (Lebak & Tinsley, 2010) .

“There has been a tremendous concern that our efforts are simply not resulting in the desired level of inquiry-based teaching”

(Meyer, Meyer, Nabb, Connell & Avery, 2011).

Tensions between Tensions between Experiment & Experiment &

EnactmentEnactmentLimiting Factors:

Lacking familiarity with scientific inquiry processes

Lacking pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in science

education

The challenging application of the practice in the real-world,

diverse context of the classroom

EDUCATOR EDUCATOR UNCERTAINTYUNCERTAINTY

Together, these considerations generate the grave uncertainty that is often to blame for “teacher anxiety, frustration, and poor teaching” practices in the subject area (Capobianco, 2010).

What is What is Action Research?Action Research?A “systematic, self-reflective, yet collaborative inquiry approach aimed at constructing knowledge about one’s practice, with the major goals of improving and coming to a better understanding of that practice” (Carr & Kemmis, 1986; Cochran-Smith & Lytle, 1993; Stenhouse, 1975).

Practitioners’ “plan, act, observe, reflect, and improve upon their educational situation,” sharing findings publically with all interested in transforming educational practices.

The Promise ofThe Promise ofAction ResearchAction Research

RecommendationRecommendationss

ReferencesReferencesCapobianco, B. M., & Feldman, A. (2010). Repositioning Capobianco, B. M., & Feldman, A. (2010). Repositioning teacher action research in science teacher teacher action research in science teacher education. education. Journal of Science Teacher EducationJournal of Science Teacher Education,,2121(8), (8), 909-915.909-915.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Education, knowledge, and action research. Lewes, UK: Education, knowledge, and action research. Lewes, UK: Falmer.Falmer.

Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1992). Communities for Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. (1992). Communities for teacher research: Fringe or forefront? teacher research: Fringe or forefront? American Journal American Journal of Education, (100),of Education, (100), 298–324. 298–324.

Cullen, T.A., Akerson, V.L., & Hanson, D.L. (2010). Cullen, T.A., Akerson, V.L., & Hanson, D.L. (2010). Using Action Research to Engage K-6 Teachers in Using Action Research to Engage K-6 Teachers in Nature of Science Inquiry as ProfessionalNature of Science Inquiry as Professional Development. Development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 2121(8), 971-992.(8), 971-992.

Fradd, S., & Lee, O. (1999). Teachers’ roles in Fradd, S., & Lee, O. (1999). Teachers’ roles in promoting science inquiry with students from diverse promoting science inquiry with students from diverse language backgrounds. language backgrounds. Educational Researcher, (28),Educational Researcher, (28), 14–20. 14–20.

References References (cont.)(cont.)

Lebak, K., & Tinsley, R. (2010). Can inquiry and Lebak, K., & Tinsley, R. (2010). Can inquiry and reflection be contagious? Science teachers, reflection be contagious? Science teachers, students, and action research. students, and action research. Journal of Science Journal of Science Teacher EducationTeacher Education, , 2121(8), 953-970.(8), 953-970.

Meyer, D., Meyer, A., Nabb, K., Connel, M., & Meyer, D., Meyer, A., Nabb, K., Connel, M., & Avery, L. (2011). A Theoretical and Empirical Avery, L. (2011). A Theoretical and Empirical Exploration of Intrinsic Problems in Designing Exploration of Intrinsic Problems in Designing Inquiry Activities. Inquiry Activities. Research in Science Education, Research in Science Education, (43)(43), 57-76., 57-76.

Next Generation Science Standards (2013). Retrieved May 27, 2013, from http://www.nextgenscience.org/

Stenhouse, L. (1975). Introduction to curriculum Stenhouse, L. (1975). Introduction to curriculum research and development. London: Heinemann.research and development. London: Heinemann.