LIVE INTERACTIVE LEARNING @ YOUR DESKTOP
Preparing for NGSS:
Planning and Carrying Out Investigations
Presented by: Rick Duschl
October 9, 2012
6:30 p.m. – 8:00 p.m. Eastern time
9
NSTA Learning Center
• 9,500+ resources
– 3,200+ free!
– Add to “My Library” to access
later
• Community forums
• Online advisors to assist you
• Tools to plan and document your learning
• http://learningcenter.nsta.org
10
Developing the Standards
11
Developing the Standards
Assessments
Curricula
Instruction
Teacher
Development
July 2011
2011-2013
12
NGSS Development Process
In addition to a number of reviews by state teams
and critical stakeholders, the process includes two
public reviews.
„
1st Public Draft was in May 2012
„
2nd Public Draft will take place in the Fall of 2012
Final Release is expected in the Spring of 2013
IT’S NOT OUT YET!
13
A Framework for K-12 Science Education
„
„
„
„
„
„
14
Released in July 2011
Developed by the National Research Council at the
National Academies of Science
Prepared by a committee of Scientists (including Nobel
Laureates) and Science Educators
Three-Dimensions:
„ Scientific and Engineering Practices
„ Crosscutting Concepts
„ Disciplinary Core Ideas
Free PDF available from The National Academies Press (www.nap.edu)
Print Copies available from NSTA Press (www.nsta.org/store)
Scientific and Engineering Practices
1. Asking questions (for science)
and defining problems (for engineering)
2. Developing and using models
3. Planning and carrying out investigations
4. Analyzing and interpreting data
5. Using mathematics and computational thinking
6. Constructing explanations (for science)
and designing solutions (for engineering)
7. Engaging in argument from evidence
8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information
15
Crosscutting Concepts
1. Patterns
2. Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation
3. Scale, proportion, and quantity
4. Systems and system models
5. Energy and matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation
6. Structure and function
7. Stability and change
16
Disciplinary Core Ideas
Life Science
Physical Science
LS1: From Molecules to Organisms:
Structures and Processes
PS1: Matter and Its Interactions
LS2: Ecosystems: Interactions, Energy, and
Dynamics
LS3: Heredity: Inheritance and Variation of
Traits
PS2: Motion and Stability: Forces and
Interactions
PS3: Energy
PS4: Waves and Their Applications in
Technologies for Information Transfer
LS4: Biological Evolution: Unity and Diversity
Earth & Space Science
Engineering & Technology
ESS1: Earth’s Place in the Universe
ETS1: Engineering Design
ESS2: Earth’s Systems
ETS2: Links Among Engineering,
Technology, Science, and Society
ESS3: Earth and Human Activity
17
Closer Look at a Performance Expectation
Construct and use models to explain that atoms combine to form new substances of varying complexity in terms of
the number of atoms and repeating subunits. [Clarification Statement: Examples of atoms combining can include Hydrogen
(H2) and Oxygen (O2) combining to form hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) or water(H2O). [Assessment Boundary: Restricted to
macroscopic interactions.]
Performance expectations combine practices, core ideas,
and crosscutting concepts into a single statement.
18
Closer Look at a Performance Expectation
Construct and use models to explain that atoms combine to form new substances of varying complexity in terms of
the number of atoms and repeating subunits. [Clarification Statement: Examples of atoms combining can include Hydrogen
(H2) and Oxygen (O2) combining to form hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) or water(H2O). [Assessment Boundary: Restricted to
macroscopic interactions.]
Performance expectations combine practices, core ideas,
and crosscutting concepts into a single statement.
19
Taking
Science to
School
20
For States
21
By States
A Framework to guide changes
in K-12 science
Assessment
s
Curricula
Instruction
Teacher
Development
22
4 Strands of Science Proficiency
• Understanding Scientific Explanations – understand central
concepts and use them to build and critique explanations.
• Generating Scientific Evidence – generating and evaluating
evidence as part of building and refining models and
explanations of the natural world.
• Reflecting on Scientific Knowledge – understand that doing
science entails searching for core explanations and the
connections between them.
• Participating Productively in Science – understand the norms for
presenting scientific arguments and evidence and practice
productive social interactions with peers around classroom
science investigations.
NRC, 2008 Ready, Set, Science!
23
Science & Engineering Practices
• 1. Asking questions (for science)
• Planning and Carrying Out
and defining problems (for
Investigations
engineering)
• Scientists and engineers plan and carry
• 2. Developing and using models
out investigations in the field or
laboratory, working collaboratively as well
• 3. Planning and carrying out
as individually. Their investigations are
investigations
systematic and require clarifying what
• 4. Analyzing and interpreting data
counts as data and identifying variables or
• 5. Using mathematics and
parameters.
computational thinking
• Engineering investigations identify the
effectiveness, efficiency, and durability of
• 6. Constructing explanations (for
designs under different conditions.
science) and designing solutions (for
• Planning and carrying out investigations may
engineering)
include elements of all of the other practices.
• 7. Engaging in argument from
evidence
• 8. Obtaining, evaluating, and
communicating information
24
Webinar Outline
• Generating Evidence
• Designing Experiments
• Evaluating Evidence
• Two Broad Themes:
– The role of prior knowledge in scientific thinking at
all ages
– The importance of experience and instruction
25
Generating and Evaluating Chapter 5
Evidence and Explanations TSTS
Major Findings in the Chapter:
• Children are far more competent in their scientific reasoning than first
suspected and adults are less so. Furthermore, there is great variation in the
sophistication of reasoning strategies across individuals of the same age.
• In general, children are less sophisticated than adults in their scientific
reasoning. However, experience plays a critical role in facilitating the
development of many aspects of reasoning, often trumping age.
• Scientific reasoning is intimately intertwined with conceptual knowledge of
the natural phenomena under investigation. This conceptual knowledge
sometimes acts as an obstacle to reasoning, but often facilitates it.
• Many aspects of scientific reasoning require experience and instruction to
develop. For example, distinguishing between theory and evidence and many
aspects of modeling do not emerge without explicit instruction and
opportunities for practice.
26
Poll 1
Familiarity with the NRC Reports Taking Science to
School and Ready, Set, Science!
A. I have read both reports and understand the main messages
and recommendations.
B. I have only read Ready, Set, Science! and understand the main
messages and recommendations.
C. I have read Ready, Set, Science! and I am familiar with the main
messages.
D. I have heard about Ready, Set, Science! but have not examined
the report.
E. I have not heard about Ready, Set, Science!
27
Generating and Evaluating Chapter 5
Evidence and Explanations TSTS
Two Major Shifts from Current Curriculum/Instruction:
– Shifting of science from ‘lone’ scientist in an isolated laboratory to an
image of science as both an individual and deeply social enterprise. (Talk
& Argument) (Critique & Communication) (Models and
Representations)
– Shift in scientific reasoning as a highly developed form of logical thinking
that cuts across scientific domains to the study of scientific thinking as
the interplay of general reasoning strategies, knowledge of the natural
phenomena being studied, and a sense of how scientific evidence and
explanations are generated. (Building & Refining Models, Mechanisms,
and Theories) (Problematize the Evidence)
28
Poll 2 – Generating Evidence
The evidence-gathering phase of inquiry includes
planning and designing the investigation as well as
carrying out the steps required to collect the data.
Which of the statements below do you think is NOT a
part of Generating Evidence?
A. asking questions
B. deciding what to measure
C. developing measures
D. collecting data from the measures
E. structuring the data
29
Generating Evidence
Generating evidence entails all of the following:
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
30
asking questions,
deciding what to measure,
developing measures,
collecting data from the measures,
structuring the data,
systematically documenting outcomes of the investigations,
interpreting and evaluating the data, and
using the empirical results to develop and refine
arguments, models, and theories.
Asking Questions and
Formulating Hypotheses
• An iterative cycle – not a one-time event
• Begin with exploratory study of natural world with
structured observations that lead to specific questions
and hypotheses
• Collection of data could lead to new questions and
revision of hypotheses and perhaps another round of
data collection
• Asking questions is also about formulating the goals
of the activity and generating predictions
31
Rick Duschl
Ted Willard
Submit your questions via the chat.
REMINDERS
32
•
To turn off notifications of other participants arriving go to:
¾ Edit -> Preferences -> General -> Visual notifications
•
You can minimize OR detach and expand chat panel
•
Continue the discussion in the Community Forums
¾ http://learningcenter.nsta.org/discuss
Brynn Slate
Collecting and Structuring Data
Exercise for Healthy Heart
1. Intro Unit and Lab 1 (Day 1)
– Conduct prelab including demonstration of STEP test and taking a
pulse. Students collect data Lab 1- Resting Heart Rate at at 6,10,15,&
60 seconds.
2. Data Collection Labs 2&3 (Days 2&3)
– Lab 2 - Activity Level (slow/fast stepping) and Heart Rate
– Lab 3 - Weight (with/without hand weights) and Heart Rate
3. Data Analysis for Labs 2&3(Days 4&5)
– Knowledge Forum Activity “What Matters in Getting Good Data”
– Determining Trends and Patterns of Data
– Developing and Evaluating Explanations for the Patterns of Data
33
Poll 3 - Exercise for a Healthy Heart
Agree/Disagree with the following statements.
✔ = Agree, ✖ = Disagree
1. It matters where you take a pulse
ƒ Wrist, neck, thigh
2. It matters how long you take a resting pulse
ƒ 6-10-15-60 seconds
3. It matters how long you take an exercising pulse
ƒ 6-10-15-60 seconds
4. It matters who takes a pulse
34
Resting Heart Rates 6, 10, 60 sec
Heartrate/min 60 s
35
92
33
86
85
81
81
80
79
75
75
75
73
72
70
70
68
67
67
66
66
64
64
62
60
60
60
60
59
59
57
56
31
29
27
25
23
student
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
51
50
49
3
1
36
0
35
20
40
60
heartrate
80
100
Designing Experiments
Experimentation can be designed to:
– Generate observations/measurements that induce a
hypothesis to account for a pattern (Discovery
Context)
– Test an existing hypotheses under consideration
(Confirmation/Verification Context)
– Isolating variables – control of variables is a basic
strategy that allows for valid inferences and
constrains the number of possible experiments to
consider.
36
Prior Knowledge
• At all ages, prior knowledge of the domain
under investigation plays an important role in
the formulation of questions and hypotheses.
• Time engaging with the phenomena is very
important; in some domains students have this
experience, in others it must be built into the
classroom events.
37
Prior Knowledge &
Benchmark Activities
• Tasks that are given to students at the
beginning of a unit prior to any instruction
• Students can choose how to respond –
Drawing, Labeled Drawing, Story Board,
Symbols, Writing
• Used by teachers to target instruction and
identify learner’s
– Commonsense understandings (misconceptions)
– Productive intuitions
38
What does the child seem to understand? What does the child appear to confuse?
What is the student ready to learn?
Drawing 1
Drawing 2
39
What differences did you see?
• Use of arrows – S1 as lines of force; S2 as pointers
• Force concept – S1 uses word ‘force’; S2 does not
• Confusions
– S1 has ‘weight of air’ acting as a downward force, a frequent
commonsense idea; gravity arrows sideways
– S2 has buoyancy > gravity to explain sinking
• Guiding conception
– S1 uses density to explain floating/sinking
– S2 uses gravity=buoyancy to explain floating/sinking
• Productive intuitions
– S1 uses buoyancy arrows to show water pressure acting in all directions
40
Designing Experiments
Domain-general – minimize the role of prior knowledge
(knowledge lean)
– Example – Law of the Pendulum – isolate the 3 variables (length of
string, size of weight, height weight is released) to determine which
variable influences the period/time of swing. One Lesson.
Domain-specific – infuses the role of prior knowledge
(knowledge rich)
– Example – Build a 1 second timer using the data set gathered from class
investigations examining varying lengths of string; find out if the 1
second length works with wooden sticks and/or metal pipes; i.e., will it
give the same results for a 1 second timer. A Sequence of Lessons.
Sequence matters! Sustained engagement with the phenomena is
essential! “Get a grip on nature!”
41
Heartrate/min 60 sec
What’s the
range for a
normal
heart rate?
35
92
33
86
85
31
81
81
80
79
29
27
75
75
75
73
72
70
70
68
67
67
66
66
64
64
62
60
60
60
60
59
59
57
56
25
23
student
21
19
17
15
13
11
9
7
5
51
50
49
3
1
36
0
20
40
60
heartrate
42
80
100
43
Growth: First Grade
44
Growth: Third Grade
45
Growth: Fifth Grade
Shifts in Distribution Signal Transitions
in Growth Processes
46
47
Epistemic (What Counts?) Discourse &
Data Texts
Data Texts
– Selecting/Obtaining
Raw Data
– Selecting Data for
Evidence
– Patterns & Models of
Evidence
– Explanations of Patterns
& Models
48
Data Transformations for
Epistemic Dialog
– T1 - what data count, are
worth using
– T2 - what patterns &
models to use
– T3 - what explanations
account for patterns &
models
49
Evaluating Evidence that
Contradicts Prior Beliefs
Chinn and Brewer propose that there are eight possible
responses to anomalous data. Individuals can:
(1) ignore the data,
(2) reject the data (e.g., because of methodological error, measurement error,
bias);
(3) acknowledge uncertainty about the validity of the data;
(4) exclude the data as being irrelevant to the current theory;
(5) hold the data in abeyance (i.e., withhold a judgment about the relation of
the data to the initial theory);
(6) reinterpret the data as consistent with the initial theory;
(7) accept the data and make peripheral change or minor modification to the
theory;
50
(8) accept the data and change the theory.
Rick Duschl
Ted Willard
Submit your questions via the chat.
REMINDERS
51
•
To turn off notifications of other participants arriving go to:
¾ Edit -> Preferences -> General -> Visual notifications
•
You can minimize OR detach and expand chat panel
•
Continue the discussion in the Community Forums
¾ http://learningcenter.nsta.org/discuss
Brynn Slate
PRACCIS
Promoting Reasoning and Conceptual Change in
Science
Clark A. Chinn
Richard A. Duschl
Ravit G. Ducan
Principal Investigators
52
Learning Targets:
The scientific strategies
1. Reasoning about methodological strengths and weaknesses of
studies
• E.g., sample size; reliability and accuracy of measures; alternative
interpretations of data; the adequacy of controls.
2. Interpreting data
3. Constructing models or explanations that fit complex
patterns of data from multiple studies
4. Resolving conflicts among studies with seemingly incompatible
results
5. Deciding the extent to which one can generalize
53
Lesson 2: Modeling Cellular Transport
Overview: In this lesson students develop several models for how materials cross cellular
membranes. Each of these models will be explored in more detail over the week. Students
view the results of the iodine experiment which proves the viability of the ‘Squeeze model’
of cellular transport (i.e. simple diffusion into the cell). Students set up the egg experiment
which will test the squeeze model in more detail in Lesson 3 – it is essential that the egg
experiment be set up on this day – students must at the very least complete Row A and B
(from which they can easily calculate C, time-permitting). Finally, time permitting; students
discuss criteria for evaluating models (this can be moved to the next day if necessary).
Driving Question: How could things get inside cells?
Learning Objectives: Students will learn that the very basic ‘Squeeze model’ (i.e. simple
diffusion into the cell) is a viable model of cellular transport. Students will learn more
about how models work and how to build and justify them.
Materials:
• Handouts: Egg experiment directions, Egg experiment data sheet.
• Overheads: Students models (drawn by teacher from discussion); ‘3 Kinds of Models’
• Egg Experiment: Per group – 2 deshelled eggs, 4 cups, balance, 100ml syrup, 100 ml
water, plastic wrap, soap, paper towel, 2 plastic spoons.
54
Data Table
55
Data Table
56
High
57
Medium/High
58
Medium
I think the less the
density of the
substance the easier for
smaller things to get
into / through
something small like
the cell membrane.
Something else is water
goes from when there is
more molecules to
where theres less
molecules
59
Low
I know that lead can get into
people’s blood stream. I
don’t think it can do
anything besides eat the cell
so that is why I think that.
Then I think it takes over
the cell so that it is dead.
60
61
“Setting up a model of the world to study the
world does not come easy to children”
Leona Schauble, Vanderbilt University
• Prolonged experience with phenomena
• Posing and revising questions – working over time to make
explicit and refine criteria for good questions
• Parsing objects and events into attributes that bear on the
question
• Considering/debating means of measuring attributes in ways that
support an initial model of the phenomenon (considering the
measure properties of those attributes
• Generating/creating data (observing its measure qualities,
reliability, etc
62
Continued . . .
•
•
•
•
•
•
Structuring data (patterns are made, not found)
Interpreting data as evidence – model construction
Model testing against the original phenomenon & new cases
Generation/entertainment of alternative models
Evaluation of model fit
Model selection/revision . . . which usually results in
theoretically deeper questions
Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., & Lucas, D. (2008). Supporting development of the
epistemology of inquiry. Cognitive Development, 23, 512-529.
63
Rick Duschl
Ted Willard
Submit your questions via the chat.
REMINDERS
64
•
To turn off notifications of other participants arriving go to:
¾ Edit -> Preferences -> General -> Visual notifications
•
You can minimize OR detach and expand chat panel
•
Continue the discussion in the Community Forums
¾ http://learningcenter.nsta.org/discuss
Brynn Slate
NSTA Website (nsta.org/ngss)
65
Upcoming Web Seminars on Practices
Date
66
Topic
Speaker
1
9/11
Asking Questions and Defining Problems
Brian Reiser
2
9/25
Developing and Using Models
Christina Schwarz and
CindyPassmore
3
10/9
Planning and Carrying Out Investigations
Rick Duschl
4
10/23
Analyzing and Interpreting Data
Ann Rivet
5
11/6
Using Mathematics and Computational Thinking
Robert Mayes and
Bryan Shader
6
11/20
Constructing Explanations and Designing
Solutions
Katherine McNeill and
Leema Berland
7
12/4
Engaging in Argument from Evidence
Joe Krajcik
8
12/18
Obtaining, Evaluating and Communicating
Information
Philip Bell, Leah Bricker, and
Katie Van Horne
All take place on Tuesdays from 6:30-8:00 pm ET
Next Web Seminar
October 9 (two weeks from today)
Analyzing and Interpreting Data
Teachers will learn more about:
„
scientific investigations that produce data;
„
the range of tools scientists use for scientific
investigations—including tabulation, graphical
interpretation, visualization, and statistical analysis—to
identify the significant features and patterns in the data;
Presenter: „ how modern technology makes the collection of large data
sets much easier, providing secondary sources for analysis;
Ann Rivet
„
engineering investigations that include analysis of data
collected in the tests of designs; and
„
the range of tools engineers use to identify patterns within
data and interpret the results.
67
Graduate Credit Available
Shippensburg University will offer one (1) graduate
credit to individuals who attend or view all eight
webinars.
Participants must either:
„ Attend the live presentation, complete the survey at the end of
the webinar, and obtain the certificate of participation from
NSTA, or
„ View the archived recording and complete the reflection
question for that particular webinar.
In addition, all participants must complete a 500 word reflection essay.
The total cost is $165.
For information on the course requirements, as well as registration and
payment information visit www.ship.edu/extended/NSTA
68
Community Forums
69
NSTA Area Conferences
These three conferences will include a number of sessions
about the K–12 Framework and the highly anticipated Next
Generation Science Standards.
Among the sessions will be an NSTA sponsored session
focusing on the Scientific and Engineering Practices.
70
NSTA Print Resources
NSTA Reader’s Guide
to the Framework
71
NSTA Journal Articles
about the Framework
and the Standards
Thank you to the sponsor of
tonight’s web seminar:
This web seminar contains information about programs, products, and services
offered by third parties, as well as links to third-party websites. The presence of
a listing or such information does not constitute an endorsement by NSTA of a
particular company or organization, or its programs, products, or services.
72
National Science Teachers Association
Gerry Wheeler, Interim Executive Director
Zipporah Miller, Associate Executive Director,
Conferences and Programs
Al Byers , Ph.D., Assistant Executive Director,
e-Learning and Government Partnerships
Flavio Mendez, Senior Director, NSTA Learning
Center
NSTA Web Seminars
Brynn Slate, Manager
Jeff Layman, Technical Coordinator
73