2014
Science Instructional Framework
DRAFT
Lena Baucum
Woodburn School District
2/14/2014
Table of Contents
Introduction……………………………………………………………………………………………………...
A historical overview of the Woodburn School District’s (WSD) journey into and
through science.
4-6
A Definition and Rationale for Science ……………………………………………………………..
7-8
Philosophy…………………………………………………………………………………………………………
A brief statement that identifies the philosophical underpinnings and research of
science in Woodburn.
9
Dimensions of Science………………………………………………………………………………………..
A definition of science, the cross cutting concepts and the 8 science and engineering
practices.
● Nature of Science
● Cross Cutting Concepts
● 8 Science and Engineering Practices
10-14
Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
An explanation of the systems and processes that support our philosophy.
15-17
Methods……………………………………………………………………………………………………………
An overview of methods for the implementation of effective science instruction.
Organization …………………………………………………………………………………………………….
An overview of the scheduling of possible routines within a science classroom.



Planning tool
Public Representations
Discourse
Assessment …………………………………………………………………………………………………….
An overview of the types of formative, summative, proficiency and portfolio
assessments that are used specifically in Woodburn inform science instruction.
Q&A …………………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
Woodburn School District reading norms on a variety of topics in Q&A format.
References ………………………………………………………………………………………………………..
An annotated list of resources that support various components of the WSD
2
instructional framework.
Glossary…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….
A short dictionary of terminology used throughout the document.
3
Introduction
Historically, Woodburn School District (WSD) has supported and valued the contributions of
science education. Prior to the mid 90’s, teachers were given the charge of determining what to
teach without the support of standards. Science was a subject that was required in grades 7
through 12. In 1991, an effort was made to develop a curriculum for grade 6. At this time,
classes were textbook driven and topical in nature as teachers worked to cover the various
domains of scientific information.
In 1996, at the onset of Woodburn’s English Transition Program (later to be changed to the
Dual Language Program), WSD conducted a textbook adoption and for the first time sought out
materials in Spanish. Following the publishing of the National Science Education Standards in
1996, Oregon state standards followed suit. The textbooks that had been purchased no longer
matched the standards that teachers were to teach. The new standards were numerous and
still very topic driven.
In the subsequent years, teachers were given a great deal of latitude in the purchasing of
instructional materials and curriculum design. At a national level the tides were changing with
the initiation of Project 2061 that pushed science education to look more like the work of actual
scientists and include the inquiry process.
In 2004, WSD secondary science teachers worked together to research best practices in leading
student inquiry. The subsequent year, teachers continued their research and expanded it to
include a quest for materials that aligned to inquiry-based instructional methods. In 2005, the
same year that Pluto was demoted to a protoplanet, new inquiry-based textbooks made their
debut in secondary classrooms across the district.
In 2007 the state science standards changed yet again. That same year, elementary schools
adopted and piloted science materials.
Between 2007 and 2013 the rigor of many high school science classes was increased to include
credit for college.
In April of 2013, the Next Generation Science Standards were published and in June, science
teachers from middle level worked to scope and sequence the new standards and determine
gaps in their current materials.
In February of 2014, WSD launched an effort to develop a unified approach to science
instruction across the district. The instructional framework process has been comprised of an
4
initial drafting of the document by teachers with representation from all grade bands. The
document has then been vetted three times by teams from K-5, 6-8, and 9-12. The following
document is the result of this work:
● Document the WSD’s philosophical beliefs about science instruction,
● Guide the district initiatives in science and professional development through a
continuous cycle of inquiry and research,
● Outline a methodology to guide our practice, and
● Provide clear pedagogy and practices for teachers to utilize in classrooms.
Participants:
Administrators
Teachers
Facilitator
Laurie Cooper
Simi Waage
Rachel Franklin
Neil Wilhelm
Jonathan Pope
Molly Charnes
Chris Kresin
Karin Teyler
Lena Baucum
Seth Stoddard
5
Long range goals:
● Standards by grade level
● Scope and sequence
● Unit development
● Materials adoption
Elementary
Middle
2013-14
All coaches and principals
receive exposure to science
IF and standards (heavy
emphasis on
interconnectivity of Science,
math and LA standards.
Finalize scope and sequence
for grades 6-8
2014-15
All teachers are provided
time to read and discuss
standards and Instructional
Framework
Start unit development 6-8
High
Create scope and sequence
for grades K-2
2015-16
K-2 Begin Unit Development
Create scope and sequence
for grades 3-5
2016-17
K-2 teaches ⅓ of units
K-2 Continues Unit
Development
3-5 Begin Unit Development
2017-18
K-2 teaches ⅔ of units
K-2 Continues Unit
Development
3-5 Teaches ⅓ of units
3-5 Continues Unit
Development
2018-19
K-2 teaches all units
3-5 Teaches ⅔ of units
3-5 Continues Unit
Development
2019-20
3-5 teaches all units
6
Definition of Science and Rationale
“There is no doubt that science--- and, therefore, science education----is central to the lives of all
Americans. Never before has our world been so complex and science knowledge so critical to making
sense of it all. When comprehending current events, choosing and using technology, or making informed
decisions about one’s health care, science understanding is key.” (NGSS, Executive Summary, 2013)
Although the nature of science in the real world has changed little over the past decade, the practice of
science education has changed drastically as the United States has begun to shift science education to
reflect the real work of scientists in the field. No longer should we see science education as a collection
of information to be memorized with sporadic labs to provoke curiosity. Instead science education is a
study of an ever-evolving body of knowledge through study and practices. Science refers to a system of
acquiring knowledge. This system uses observation and experimentation to describe and explain
phenomena.
7
Scientists, and therefore students, create models of reality and using methods of investigation, and
modify and revise those models over time. In science, students are now expected to grapple with real
world problems and to use the same methods that scientists and engineers use.
In the modern world, some knowledge of science is essential for everyone. It is an integral part of basic
education for the following reasons:

Science is a significant part of human culture and represents one of the pinnacles of
human thinking capacity.

It provides a laboratory of common experience for development of language, logic, and
problem-solving skills in the classroom.

A democracy demands that its citizens make personal and community decisions about
issues in which scientific information plays a fundamental role, and they hence need
knowledge of science as well as an understanding of scientific methodology.

For some students, it will become a lifelong vocation or avocation.

The nation is dependent on the technical and scientific abilities of its citizens for its
economic competitiveness and national needs.
(Citation, ????)
8
Philosophy
Science is a process of logical reasoning about evidence, a process of theory change, and the
participation in a culture of scientific practices (National Research Council, 2007). Students
learn these processes best when their interests, experiences, and innate curiosity about the
world around them are used to answer relevant questions. (Piaget, ___ ). Teachers combine
constructivist approaches (Piaget, ___; Vygotsky, ___) and the practices of scientific inquiry
(___, ___) to convert students’ innate curiosity into scientific understanding. Students practice
interpreting what they see and hear in the light of their own schemas (Piaget,___) as they work
to make sense of the world around them. Students skillfully participate in a learning
environment that mimics the scientific community (___, ___) wherein students master
productive ways of representing ideas, using scientific tools, and interacting with peers about
science ideas and principles. (Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms, pg. 21).
Students practice scientific discourse and argumentation as a means of developing scientific
reasoning, concepts, and language. Students produce and revise models that represent their
evolving ideas and allow for making thinking visible and developing critical thinking skills
(National Research Council, 2008). (Ready, Set, Science, Chapter 5) Students use metacognition
to evaluate and reflect on both their evolving scientific models and their use of the science and
engineering practices. (Dewey J. How We Think: A Restatement of the Relation of Reflective
Thinking to the Educative Process. Boston: Heath; 1933)
9
Methodology
In order to fulfill our district philosophy of science and meet the learning needs of all students,
we simultaneously employ Model-Based Inquiry, the Gradual Release of Responsibility through
levels of inquiry and Sheltered Instruction. These three methodologies are explained
individually in some detail in the following:
Model-Based Inquiry
“Modeling is the process by which scientists represent ideas about the natural world to each other, and
then collaboratively make changes to these representations over time in response to new evidence and
understandings” (tools4teachingscience.org , 2013). Explanatory models can be represented by
drawings, diagrams, flow charts, equations, graphs, computer simulations, or even physical replicas.
From the past twenty years of research on learning, we know that students make dramatic advances in
their understanding of science by generating and revising explanatory models. For both scientists and
students, modeling is something done publicly and collaboratively; it organizes and guides many other
forms of practice, and importantly it opens up opportunities to reason about ideas, data, arguments,
and new questions.
“Regardless of how models are conceptualized, they generally emerge from some contextual
phenomenon such as an event, a question, or a problem. They involve identifying key features or
attributes of the phenomenon, and they specify how they are related” (Romberg et al., 2005) (Cited
from Windschitl, 2007).
“Inquiry instruction supports a constructivist approach to learning science. According to this approach,
learning is a construction [that is] based on the learner’s prior knowledge. Students take in information
from many sources, including personal discoveries and acquisitions from teachers, books, videos, and
other resources. But in constructing understanding, students must connect new information to their
existing knowledge and experiences, reorganize their knowledge structures [models] and assimilate new
information to them [revise their models], and construct meaning for themselves (Lucks-Horsley et al.,
1998).
Although learners are the ones who construct knowledge, in inquiry instruction teachers are active in
the progress. Teachers provide for new experiences of the natural world, encourage wonder, help
10
students form questions that can be investigated, help them plan investigation strategies, provide
materials for investigations, interact with students as they investigate, assist them in organizing and
making sense of the data, provide direct instruction on concepts, principles, and theories, and guide
them in constructing scientific explanations.” (Bass, Contant, & Carin, 2009)
Gradual Release of Responsibility
The gradual release of responsibility is an instructional design that allows teachers to make sense of the
various levels of teacher support that students may require. “Any academic task can be conceptualized
as requiring differing portions of teacher and student responsibility for successful completion. The
diagonal line on the graph (Figure __) represents a journey from total teacher responsibility (on the far
left) to total student responsibility (on the far right). When the teacher is taking all or most of the
responsibility for task completion, he is ‘modeling’ or demonstrating the desired application of some
strategy. When the student is taking all or most of that responsibility, she is ‘practicing’ or ‘applying’
that strategy. What comes in between those two extremes is the gradual release of responsibility from
teacher to student “(p. 34-35).
“The hope in the model is that every student gets to the point where she is able to accept total
responsibility for the task, including the responsibility for determining whether or not she is applying the
strategy appropriately (i.e. self-monitoring). But the model assumes that she will need some guidance in
11
reaching that stage of independence and it is precisely the teacher’s role to provide such guidance”
(p.35). The model is in a sense a planning of obsolescence in that because it is the goal of the teacher to
become obsolete. However, the role of the teacher cannot be diminished as the teacher gradually
releases the task responsibility to students. (Pearson &Gallagher, 1983)
Levels of Science Inquiry
Science instruction that is inquiry based uses the levels of science inquiry to move students from
heavy teacher dependence to independence. The four levels align to the gradual release of
responsibility. Researchers in the 1960s to 1970s developed a tool for determining the level of
inquiry in any given science activity. The tool is known as Herron’s Scale and describes four
levels of inquiry: exploration, directed, guided, and open-ended. (Herron, 1971) In science,
these levels of inquiry are the student scaffolds to scientific inquiry.
Level 1. Exploration
During these activities, students are given the question and instructions about how to
go about answering the question. Students are already familiar with the concepts being
presented, and they already know the answer to the question being asked. These
activities can serve as an advanced organizer for the learning to come and allows
teachers to tap students’ prior knowledge about the concepts. Exploration activities
often create experiences that cause students to become more curious and ask more
questions.
Level 2. Direct Inquiry
In direct inquiry, the problem and procedure are given directly, but the students are left
to reach their own conclusions. Students investigate a problem presented by the
teacher and use a procedure that is prescribed by the teacher. They have the
opportunity to analyze data and arrive at their own evidence-based conclusions.
Level 3. Guided Inquiry
In guided inquiry, the research problem or question is provided, but students are left to
devise their own methods and solutions. Students take more responsibility during this
12
type of inquiry. They may choose their materials, data organization, and approach to
analysis. They apply their analytical skills and support their evidence-based conclusions.
Level 4. Open-Ended Inquiry
At this level of inquiry, problems as well as methods and solutions are left open. The
goal is for students to take full responsibility for all aspects of the investigation. These
activities involve students in formulating their own research questions, developing
procedures to answer these research questions, collecting and analyzing data, and using
evidence to reach their own conclusions. (Lederman, 2009)
Sheltered instruction
The vocabulary-dense environment of science can be a challenge for any student to navigate. Explicit
teaching of vocabulary and the scaffolding of both expressive and receptive language is necessary for
all students to make sense of the content. Sheltered Instruction has two charges: to provide access to
core content through ensuring that students receive comprehensible input and to scaffold language
production so that all students develop academic competence. (Krashen, 1985) For students to
communicate effectively in the inquiry process, we must provide language support and explicit literacy
skill instruction to enable students to acquire the skills necessary to access complex science texts.
Scaffolded language support may include: structures for classroom discourse, explicit vocabulary
instruction and practice, supplementing varying levels of background knowledge, visual & contextual
clues to connect vocabulary to concepts and providing language stems for expressive language.
13
Methods
Science Learning Cycle
“Recent research reports, such as How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School (Bransford,
Brown & Cocking, 2000) and its companion, How Students Learn: Science in the Classroom (Donovan &
Bransford, 2005), have confirmed what educators have asserted for many years: The sustained use of an
effective, research-based instructional model can help students learn fundamental concepts in science
and other domains.
As such Woodburn School District uses the work of Robert Karplus and his colleagues who proposed and
used an instructional model based on the work of
Piaget. This model would eventually be called the
Learning Cycle. (Atkin & Karplus, 1962).
Numerous studies have shown that the learning
cycle as a model of instruction is far superior to
transmission models in which students are
passive receivers of knowledge from their
teacher (Bybee, 1997). As an instructional model,
the learning cycle provides the active learning
Add metacognition outside of
evaluation.
experiences recommended by the National
Science Education Standards (National Research
Council, 1996).
Karplus’ learning cycle has been adapted by textbook companies and is called the 5E
Instructional Model or the 5Es, and consists of similar phases: engagement,
exploration, explanation, elaboration, and evaluation presented in a linear fashion.
Woodburn uses the phases of the Learning Cycle due to the fact that evaluation is ongoing as students
create, reflect on, and revise models. Additionally, the phases of engagement, exploration, explanation,
and elaboration are flexible components that may be employed dependent upon the needs of students
and their interaction with the content. Each phase has a specific function and contributes to the
14
teacher’s coherent instruction and to the learners’ formulation of a better understanding of scientific
and technological knowledge, attitudes, and skills. Once internalized, it also can be used flexibly to
inform the many instantaneous decisions that science teachers must make in classroom situations”
(Rodger W. Bybee, 2006).

Engagement: Students are presented with unfamiliar phenomena, objects,
events and/or questions to pique their curiosity and have them make
connections with what they already know. During the engagement phase,
students become mentally and physically engaged. They raise questions,
identify problems to solve, and consider plans to find answers to their
questions. Teachers are able to ascertain prior knowledge and elicit
misconceptions.

Exploration: During this phase, students are provided with a common base of
experiences. They actively examine and manipulate objects and phenomena
through direct investigations organized by the teacher.

Explanation: During this phase, students explain their understanding of the
concepts and processes they have been exploring. They have opportunities to
verbally explain new concepts and/or demonstrate new skills and abilities.
Students are asked to explain and conclude during and after every investigation.
Students are prompted to explain “how they know” their predictions make
sense and to anticipate what they would do differently “next time.”

Elaboration: In this phase of the model, students are given opportunities to
apply concepts in new contexts or situations in order to develop deeper
understandings. Students take part in activities that extend conceptual
understanding and that allow them to practice new skills. They become
involved in more open-ended inquiry, problem solving, and decision making. In
this phase, students may design and carry out their own investigations.

Evaluation: In this phase, students are asked to be metacognitive as they assess
their own knowledge, skills, and abilities. Formal and informal evaluation
should occur in every phase and level of inquiry. (Lederman, 2010)
Blurb about how learning cycle phase, science and engineering practices and dimensions of science
integrate.
Learning Cycle Phase
Science and engineering practices
Dimensions of Science
15
Metacognition explanation
16
Core Practices for Ambitious Science Teaching
Models and Modeling
Discourse
Public Representations
Content Reading
Content Writing
Scaffolding (expressive and interpretive language)
17
Organizing and Planning for Instruction
18
Assessment
Assessing in Different Ways
Assessment is a common practice in today’s classrooms. It usually takes place in predictable ways in
traditional formats. A wide variety of assessment options are available, however, to meet the
instructional needs of teachers and the learning needs of students.
Formative Assessment
Although tests and exams are not going to disappear from schools, student learning can be greatly
enhanced when information from a wide variety of kinds of assessment is used to inform instruction,
provide feedback, and evaluate products and performances. The kind of assessment that occurs before
and during a unit of study is called formative assessment.
Several strategies of formative assessment give students and teachers the kinds of information they
need to improve learning:
1. Strategies for gauging student needs, such as examining student work, analyzing graphic organizers,
brainstorming, etc.
2. Strategies to encourage self-direction, such as self-assessment, peer feedback, cooperative
grouping, etc.
3. Strategies for monitoring progress, such as informal observations, anecdotal notes, learning logs,
etc.
4. Strategies to check for understanding, such as journals, interviews, informal questioning, etc.
Summative Assessment
While formative assessments can give students and teachers information about how well they are doing
while they are working on projects, at some point, most teachers are required to give a report on
student learning at the end of a particular unit or on a particular project. Students also want and need to
know how well they have done. This kind of assessment, done after the fact, is called summative
assessment.
Summative assessments, like unit tests, can provide useful information if teachers and students take the
time to look at them analytically. Teachers can find areas of weakness to address in more depth in
future units and with future groups of students. Students can identify problem areas and set goals for
future learning.
http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/education/k12/assessing-projects/overview-andbenefits/types.html
19
Strands of Proficiency in Science
The committee that authored Taking Science to School described four strands of proficiency that provide
a framework for thinking about the elements of scientific knowledge and practice. The four strands
encompass the knowledge and reasoning skills that students must eventually acquire to be considered
proficient in science. Evidence to date indicates that in the process of achieving proficiency, the four
strands are intertwined so that advances in one strand support and advance those in another.
Used in concert with science standards documents like the Benchmarks for Science Literacy and
the National Science Education Standards, the strands can be useful to educators in their effort to plan
and assess student learning in classrooms and across school systems. They can also be a helpful tool for
assessing the science that is emphasized in a given curriculum guide, textbook, or assessment and for
planning professional development.
Strand 1: Know, use, and interpret scientific explanations of the natural world.
This strand includes acquiring facts and the conceptual structures that incorporate those facts and using
these ideas productively to understand many phenomena in the natural world. This includes using those
ideas to construct and refine explanations, arguments, or models of particular phenomena.
Strand 2: Generate and evaluate scientific evidence and explanations.
This strand encompasses the knowledge and skills needed to build and refine models based on
evidence. This includes designing and analyzing empirical investigations and using empirical evidence to
construct and defend arguments.
Strand 3: Understand the nature and development of scientific knowledge.
This strand focuses on students’ understanding of science as a way of knowing. Scientific knowledge is a
particular kind of knowledge with its own sources, justifications, and uncertainties. Students who
understand scientific knowledge recognize that predictions or explanations can be revised on the basis
of seeing new evidence or developing a new model.
Strand 4: Participate productively in scientific practices and discourse.
This strand includes students’ understanding of the norms of participating in science as well as their
motivation and attitudes toward science. Students who see science as valuable and interesting tend to
be good learners and participants in science. They believe that steady effort in understanding science
pays off – not that some people understand science and other people never will. To engage productively
in science, however, students need to understand how to participate in scientific debates, adopt a
critical stance, and be willing to ask questions.
20
Resources:
Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades
K-8
Committee on Science Learning, Kindergarten through
Eighth Grade, Richard A. Duschl, Heidi A.
Schweingruber, and Andrew W. Shouse, Editors
ISBN: 0-309-66069-6, 404 pages, 7 x 10, (2007)
http://www.instesre.org/NSFWorkshop/TakingScienceToSchool.pdf
Ready, Set, Science!: Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science
Classrooms
Sarah Michaels, Andrew W. Shouse, Heidi A.
Schweingruber, National Research Council
ISBN: 0-309-10615-X, 220 pages, 8 1/4 x 10, (2007)
http://scnces.ncdpi.wikispaces.net/file/view/Ready%20Set%20Science
.pdf/256702030/Ready%20Set%20Science.pdf
Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and
Pursuits
Philip Bell, Bruce Lewenstein, Andrew W. Shouse, and Michael A. Feder,
Editors, Committee on Learning Science in Informal Environments,
National Research Council
ISBN 978-0-309-11955-9
http://www.washingtonstem.org/STEM/media/Media/Resources/Learni
ng-Science-in-Informal-Environments-People-Places-andPursuits.pdf?ext=.pdf
A Framework for K-12 Science Education
http://www.nap.edu/openbook.php?record_id=13165&page=R1
Nature of Science as described by AAAS/Project 2062
http://www.project2061.org/publications/bsl/online/index.php?chapter
=1
10 Resources for Effective Elementary Science Education
http://teachscience4all.wordpress.com/2010/07/15/10-resources-foreffective-elementary-science-instruction/
21
22
Glossary
Word
Definition
REFERENCES
1. Layton, D. (1973). Science for the People: The Origins of the School Science Curriculum in England.
London, England: Allen & Unwin.
2. DeBoer, G.E. (1991). A History of Ideas in Science Education: Implications for Practice. New York:
Teachers College Press.
3. Driver, R., Leach, J., Millar, R., and Scott, P. (1996). Young People’s Images of Science. Buckingham,
England: Open University Press.
4. Schwab, J.J. (1962). The Teaching of Science as Enquiry. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
5. Florman, S.C. (1976). The Existential Pleasures of Engineering. New York: St. Martin’s Press.
6. Petroski, H. (1996). Engineering by Design: How Engineers Get from Thought to Thing. Cambridge,
MA: Harvard University Press.
Methodology
Herron, M.D. 1971. The nature of science inquiry. School Review, 79, 171-212.
Lederman, J.S. (2009). Levels of Inquiry. Monterey, CA: National Geographic School Publishing.
Methods
Lederman, J.S. (2009). Levels of Inquiry and the 5 E’s Learning Cycle Model. Monterey, CA: National
Geographic School Publishing.
Windschitl, M. (2007). Beyond the Scientific Method: Model-Based Inquiry as a New Paradigm of
Preference for School Science Investigations. Published online in Wiley InterScience
(www.interscience.wiley.com).
23
Methods Appendix
What are the Crosscutting Concepts?
These concepts help students connect knowledge from the various disciplines into a coherent
and scientifically based view of the world. These concepts should become common and familiar
themes across the scientific disciplines and grade levels. Explicit reference to the concepts, as
well as their emergence in multiple disciplinary contexts, can help students develop a
cumulative, coherent, and usable understanding of science and engineering.
This set of crosscutting concepts begins with two concepts that are fundamental to the nature
of science: that observed patterns can be explained and that science investigates cause-andeffect relationships by seeking the mechanisms that underlie them. The next concept—scale,
proportion, and quantity—concerns the sizes of things and the mathematical relationships
among disparate elements. The next four concepts—systems and system models, energy and
matter flows, structure and function, and stability and change—are interrelated in that the first
is illuminated by the other three. Each concept also stands alone as one that occurs in virtually
all areas of science and is an important consideration for engineered systems as well.
SEVEN CROSSCUTTING CONCEPTS OF SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING
1. Patterns. Observed patterns of forms and events guide organization and classification, and
they prompt questions about relationships and the factors that influence them.
2. Cause and effect: Mechanism and explanation. Events have causes, sometimes simple,
sometimes multifaceted. A major activity of science is investigating and explaining causal
relationships and the mechanisms by which they are mediated. Such mechanisms can then
be tested across given contexts and used to predict and explain events in new contexts.
3. Scale, proportion, and quantity. In considering phenomena, it is critical to recognize what
is relevant at different measures of size, time, and energy and to recognize how changes in
scale, proportion, or quantity affect a system’s structure or performance.
4. Systems and system models. Defining the system under study—specifying its boundaries
and making explicit a model of that system—provides tools for understanding and testing
ideas that are applicable throughout science and engineering.
5. Energy and matter: Flows, cycles, and conservation. Tracking fluxes of energy and matter
into, out of, and within systems helps one understand the systems’ possibilities and
limitations.
6. Structure and function. The way in which an object or living thing is shaped and its
substructure determine many of its properties and functions.
7. Stability and change. For natural and built systems alike, conditions of stability and
24
determinants of rates of change or evolution of a system are critical elements of study.
(National Research Council, 2012)
Scientific and Engineering Practices
From its inception, one of the principal goals of science education has been to cultivate
students’ scientific habits of mind, develop their capability to engage in scientific inquiry, and
teach them how to reason in a scientific context [1, 2]. There has always been a tension,
however, between the emphasis that should be placed on developing knowledge of the content
of science and the emphasis placed on scientific practices. A narrow focus on content alone has
the unfortunate consequence of leaving students with naive conceptions of the nature of
scientific inquiry [3] and the impression that science is simply a body of isolated facts [4].
Engaging in the practices of science helps students understand how scientific knowledge
develops; such direct involvement gives them an appreciation of the wide range of approaches
that are used to investigate, model, and explain the world. Engaging in the practices of
engineering likewise helps students understand the work of engineers, as well as the links
between engineering and science. Participation in these practices also helps students form an
understanding of the crosscutting concepts and disciplinary ideas of science and engineering;
moreover, it makes students’ knowledge more meaningful and embeds it more deeply into their
worldview.
The actual doing of science or engineering can also pique students’ curiosity, capture their
interest, and motivate their continued study; the insights thus gained help them recognize that
the work of scientists and engineers is a creative endeavor [5, 6]—one that has deeply affected
the world they live in. Students may then recognize that science and engineering can contribute
to meeting many of the major challenges that confront society today, such as generating
sufficient energy, preventing and treating disease, maintaining supplies of fresh water and food,
and addressing climate change. Any education that focuses predominantly on the detailed
products of scientific labor—the facts of science—without developing an understanding of how
those facts were established or that ignores the many important applications of science in the
world misrepresents science and marginalizes the importance of engineering.
PRACTICES FOR K-12 SCIENCE CLASSROOMS
1. Asking questions - Science begins with a question about a phenomenon, such as “Why is
the sky blue?” or “What causes cancer?,” and seeks to develop theories that can provide
explanatory answers to such questions. A basic practice of the scientist is formulating
empirically answerable questions about phenomena, establishing what is already known,
and determining what questions have yet to be satisfactorily answered.
2. Developing and using models - Involves the construction and use of a wide variety of
25
models and simulations to help develop explanations about natural phenomena. Models
make it possible to go beyond observables and imagine a world not yet seen. Models
enable predictions of the form “if … then … therefore” to be made in order to test
hypothetical explanations.
3. Planning and carrying out investigations - Investigations may be conducted in the field or
the laboratory. A major practice of scientists is planning and carrying out a systematic
investigation, which requires the identification of what is to be recorded and, if applicable,
what are to be treated as the dependent and independent variables (control of variables).
Observations and data collected from such work are used to test existing theories and
explanations or to revise and develop new ones.
4. Analyzing and interpreting data - Science produces data that must be analyzed in order to
derive meaning. Because data usually do not speak for themselves, scientists use a range
of tools—including tabulation, graphical interpretation, visualization, and statistical
analysis—to identify the significant features and patterns in the data. Sources of error are
identified and the degree of certainty calculated. Modern technology makes the collection
of large data sets much easier, thus providing many secondary sources for analysis.
5. Using mathematics and computational thinking - Mathematics and computation are
fundamental tools for representing physical variables and their relationships. They are
used for a range of tasks, such as constructing simulations, statistically analyzing data, and
recognizing, expressing, and applying quantitative relationships. Mathematical and
computational approaches enable predictions of the behavior of physical systems, along
with the testing of such predictions. Moreover, statistical techniques are invaluable for
assessing the significance of patterns or correlations.
6. Constructing explanations - The construction of theories that can provide explanatory
accounts of features of the world. A theory becomes accepted when it has been shown to
be superior to other explanations in the breadth of phenomena it accounts for and in its
explanatory coherence and parsimony. Scientific explanations are explicit applications of
theory to a specific situation or phenomenon, perhaps with the intermediary of a theorybased model for the system under study. The goal for students is to construct logically
coherent explanations of phenomena that incorporate their current understanding of
science, or a model that represents it, and are consistent with the available evidence.
7. Engaging in argument from evidence - Reasoning and argument are essential for
identifying the strengths and weaknesses of a line of reasoning and for finding the best
explanation for a natural phenomenon. Scientists must defend their explanations,
formulate evidence based on a solid foundation of data, examine their own understanding
in light of the evidence and comments offered by others, and collaborate with peers in
searching for the best explanation for the phenomenon being investigated.
8. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information - Science cannot advance if
scientists are unable to communicate their findings clearly and persuasively or to learn
26
about the findings of others. A major practice of science is thus the communication of
ideas and the results of inquiry—orally, in writing, with the use of tables, diagrams, graphs,
and equations, and by engaging in extended discussions with scientific peers. Science
requires the ability to derive meaning from scientific texts (such as papers, the Internet,
symposia, and lectures), to evaluate the scientific validity of the information thus acquired,
and to integrate that information.
27