Designing a Deeply Digital Science Curriculum: Supporting Teacher Learning and Implementation with Organizing Technologies

详细信息    查看全文

• 作者：Heather Leary ; Samuel Severance ; William R. Penuel…
• 关键词：Digital curriculum ; Design ; based implementation research ; Instructional technology ; Teacher learning
• 刊名：Journal of Science Teacher Education
• 出版年：2016
• 出版时间：February 2016
• 年：2016
• 卷：27
• 期：1
• 页码：61-77
• 全文大小：1,154 KB
• 参考文献：Christensen, C., Horn, M., & Johnson, C. (2010). Disrupting class, expanded edition: How disruptive innovation will change the way the world learns. New York: McGraw-Hill Education.
  Coburn, C. E., Penuel, W. R., & Geil, K. E. (2013). Research-practice partnerships at the district level: A new strategy for leveraging research for educational Improvement. New York, NY: William T. Grant Foundation.
  Cole, M., & Engeström, Y. (2007). Cultural-historical approaches to designing for development. In J. Valsiner & A. Rosa (Eds.), The Cambridge handbook of sociocultural psychology (pp. 484–507). New York: Cambridge University Press. doi:10.​1017/​CBO9780511611162​.​026 CrossRef
  Dickes, A. C., & Sengupta, P. (2013). Learning natural selection in 4th grade with multi-agent-based computational models. Research in Science Education, 43, 921–953. doi:10.​1007/​s11165-012-9293-2 CrossRef
  Engeström, Y. (1987). Learning by expanding: An activity-theoretical approach to developmental research. Helsinki: Orienta-Konsultit.
  Engeström, Y., Engeström, R., & Kärkkäinen, M. (1995). Polycontextuality and boundary crossing in expert cognition: Learning and problem solving in complex work activities. Learning and Instruction, 5, 319–336. doi:10.​1016/​0959-4752(95)00021-6 CrossRef
  Engeström, Y., & Sannino, A. (2010). Studies of expansive learning: Foundations, findings and future challenges. Educational Research Review, 5, 1–24. doi:10.​1016/​j.​edurev.​2009.​12.​002 CrossRef
  Ertmer, P. A. (1999). Addressing first- and second-order barriers to change: Strategies for technology integration. Educational Technology Research and Development, 47(4), 47–61.CrossRef
  Ertmer, P. A. (2005). Teacher pedagogical beliefs: The final frontier in our quest for technology integration? Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(4), 25–39.CrossRef
  Fishman, B., Penuel, W. R., Allen, A., Haugan Cheng, B., & Sabelli, N. (2013). Design-based implementation research: An emerging model for transforming the relationship of research and practice. National Society for the Study of Education, 112(2), 136–156.
  Forbes, C. T. (2013). Curriculum-dependent and curriculum-independent factors in preservice elementary teachers’ adaptation of science curriculum materials for inquiry-based science. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24, 179–197. doi:10.​1007/​s10972-011-9245-0 CrossRef
  Gutiérrez, K. (2014). Syncretic approaches to literacy learning: Leveraging horizontal knowledge and expertise. In P. J. Dunston, L. B. Gambrell, K. Headley, S. K. Fullerton, & P. M. Stecker (Eds.), LRA yearbook (pp. 48–60). Altamonte Springs, FL: Literacy Research Association.
  Johnson, R., Severance, S., Penuel, W. R., & Leary, H. (2016). Teachers, tasks, and tensions: Lessons from a research-practice partnership. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education. doi:10.​1007/​s10857-015-9338-3 .
  Kim, M. C., Hannafin, M. J., & Bryan, L. A. (2007). Technology-enhanced inquiry tools in science education: An emerging pedagogical framework for classroom practice. Science Education, 91, 1010–1030.CrossRef
  Kopcha, T. J. (2012). Teachers' perceptions of the barriers to technology integration and practices with technology under situated professional development. Computers & Education, 59(4), 1109–1121.CrossRef
  Lawless, K. A. & Pellegrino, J. W. (2007). Professional development in integrating technologin into teaching and learning: Knowns, unknowns, and ways to pursue better questions and answers. Review of Educational Research, 77(4), 575–614.CrossRef
  Mardis, M., & Everhart, N. (2013). From paper to pixel: The promise and challenges of digital textbooks for K-12 schools. In M. Orey, et al. (Eds.), Educational media and technology yearbook (Vol. 37). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRef
  National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  National Research Council. (2014). Developing assessments for the next generation science standards (J. W. Pellegrino, M. Wilson, J. A. Koenig, & A. S. Beatty, Eds.). Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.
  Penuel, W. R., & Fishman, B. (2012). Large-scale science education intervention research we can use. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49, 281–304. doi:10.​1002/​tea.​21001 CrossRef
  Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B., Haugan Cheng, B., & Sabelli, N. (2011). Organizing research and development at the intersection of learning, implementation, and design. Educational Researcher, 40(7), 331–337. doi:10.​3102/​0013189X11421826​ CrossRef
  Penuel, W. R., Roschelle, J., & Shechtman, N. (2007). Designing formative assessment software with teachers: An analysis of the co-design process. Research and Practice in Technology Enhanced Learning, 2, 51–74. doi:10.​1142/​S179320680700030​0 CrossRef
  Reiser, B. (2013). What professional development strategies are needed for successful implementation of the next generation science standards? Paper prepared for K-12 Center at ETS, invitational symposium on science assessment. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://​www.​k12center.​org/​rsc/​pdf/​reiser.​pdf
  Reiser, B. (2014). Designing coherent storylines aligned with NGSS for the K-12: How do we bring practices into K-12 classrooms? Presentation at the annual National Science Education Leadership Association conference, Boston, MA.
  Schneider, R. M., & Krajcik, J. (2002). Supporting science teacher learning: The role of educative curriculum materials. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 221–245.CrossRef
  Severance, S., Leary, H., & Johnson, R. (2014). Tensions in a multi-tiered research-practice partnership. In J. L. Polman, E. A. Kyza, D. K. O’Neill, I. Tabak, W. R. Penuel, A. S. Jurow, K. O’Connor, T. Lee, & L. D’Amico (Eds.), Learning and becoming in practice: The International Conference of the Learning Sciences (ICLS) 2014, (Vol. 2, pp. 1171–1175). Boulder: International Society of the Learning Sciences.
  Severance, S., Penuel, W. R., Sumner, T., & Leary, H. (2016). Organizing for teacher agency in curriculuar co-design (submitted).
  Somekh, B. (2008). Factors affecting teachers’ pedagogical adoption of ICT. In J. Voogt & G. Knezek (Eds.), International handbook of information technology in primary and secondary education (pp. 449–460). New York: Springer-Science + Business Media.CrossRef
  Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.
  Whitworth, B. A. & Chiu, J. L. (2015). Professional development and teacher change: The missing leadership link. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 26(2), 121–137.CrossRef
  
• 作者单位：Heather Leary (1)
  Samuel Severance (2)
  William R. Penuel (2)
  David Quigley (2)
  Tamara Sumner (2)
  Holly Devaul (3)
  
  1. Brigham Young University - Idaho, Rexburg, ID, 83460, USA
  2. University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, CO, 80309, USA
  3. University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, Boulder, CO, USA
  
• 刊物类别：Humanities, Social Sciences and Law
• 刊物主题：Education
  Science Education
  Teacher Education
  
• 出版者：Springer Netherlands
• ISSN：1573-1847

文摘

This paper examines the impacts of technology (e.g., Chromebooks, Google Drive) on teacher learning and student activity in the development and implementation of a deeply digital high school biology unit. Using design-based implementation research, teachers co-designed with researchers and curriculum specialists a student-centered unit aligned to the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) that utilizes classroom technology. Qualitative and quantitative data were collected to understand the barriers that inhibit the implementation of a digital curriculum as well as the extent that teachers engage in the design process and begin to make shifts in their practice. We found that through the co-design process teachers began to shift their knowledge of NGSS, technology implementation, and adapted to tensions and barriers inherent in the process.