The transfer of nature of science understandings: a question of similarity and familiarity of contexts

It is important to question the generalizability of the knowledge about the nature of science (NOS), and thus know whether the knowledge about NOS can be transferred to various contexts. As such, the purpose of this study was to investigate whether students were able to transfer their acquired NOS understandings into contexts that vary in their similarity to the context of learning. Thirty-eight 7th grade students in two intact sections participated in the study. The treatment extended over seven weeks and involved teaching a unit about plate tectonics, earthquakes, and volcanoes. Only one of the two groups was explicitly taught about NOS in relation to the topics under study. To assess the change in students’ understandings of NOS and their ability to transfer these acquired understandings, a five-topic open-ended questionnaire and individual semi-structured interviews were used. Some of the questionnaire topics focused on scientific issues and were considered similar to the context of learning, while other topics were socioscientific and were considered less similar. Results showed that the transfer of participants’ acquired NOS understandings occurred when the context was similar to the context of learning and when the context was more familiar based on prior knowledge. Interpretations related to knowledge base schema, the distance between contexts, as well as the explicit teaching about transfer were discussed.     

美国新版K-12科学教育框架对我国基础教育阶段科学教育的启示

新版K-12科学教育框架的出台表明美国拉开了新一轮科学教育改革的序幕。美国新版K-12科学教育框架主要特点:聚焦于核心概念的科学教学、工程与科学相提并论、知行合一的\"实践\"和整体化设计。结合我国当前基础教育阶段科学教学存在的问题,阐释了我们应该从美国新版K-12科学教育框架借鉴的教学改革理念与做法。     

美国《CSTA K—12计算机科学课程标准(2017年修订版)》的解读与启示

普及信息技术教育,是我国国家战略和教育发展改革的重要组成部分,扎根于课堂教学是有效落实的根本。《CSTA K-12计算机科学课程标准(2017年修订版)》基于全纳教育的教育理念、计算机科学的学科本质、面向未来的教育需求和实践可操作的教学标准进行研制和表达,其学科概念结构化体系、普及计算机科学教育、将计算思维作为思维方式和教学目标融于多学科教学中、系统进阶的结构化表述与呈现方式等方面的设计,对我国信息技术学科课程建设、课程标准内容的设计、面向每个学生的课堂教学的推进,提供了有益的参考和借鉴。     

The Nature of Scientific Explanation: Examining the perceptions of the nature,quality, and “goodness” of explanation among college students,science teachers,and scientists

Issues regarding scientific explanation have been of interest to philosophers from Pre-Socratic times. The notion of scientific explanation is of interest not only to philosophers, but also to science educators as is clearly evident in the emphasis given to K-12 students' construction of explanations in current national science education reform efforts. Nonetheless, there is a dearth of research on conceptualizing explanation in science education. Using a philosophically guided framework—the Nature of Scientific Explanation (NOSE) framework—the study aims to elucidate and compare college freshmen science students', secondary science teachers', and practicing scientists' scientific explanations and their views of scientific explanations. In particular, this study aims to: (1) analyze students', teachers', and scientists' scientific explanations; (2) explore the nuances about how freshman students, science teachers, and practicing scientists construct explanations; and (3) elucidate the criteria that participants use in analyzing scientific explanations. In two separate interviews, participants first constructed explanations of everyday scientific phenomena and then provided feedback on the explanations constructed by other participants. Major findings showed that, when analyzed using NOSE framework, participant scientists did significantly “better” than teachers and students. Our analysis revealed that scientists, teachers, and students share a lot of similarities in how they construct their explanations in science. However, they differ in some key dimensions. The present study highlighted the need articulated by many researchers in science education to understand additional aspects specific to scientific explanation. The present findings provide an initial analytical framework for examining students' and science teachers' scientific explanations.     

Project 2061: Systemic reform of K-12 education for science literacy

Project 2061 of the American Association for the Advancement of Science is a long-term initiative for systemic reform of K-12 education in science, mathematics, and technology. The project was named after the next return of Halley's comet to envision a future where all Americans are science literate. To fulfill this vision, Project 2061 is developing a coordinated set of reform tools for educators to use in achieving the goals of science literacy.     

Support for EE From the National Science Education Standards and the Internet

Abstract

Two recent developments are likely to have a significant impact on the future of EE: (1) education reform initiatives based on the National Science Education Standards and (2) the development of promising Internet resources for teaching environmental sciences. This article urges the EE community to recognize that the time is ripe for environmental educators to embrace these developments. We examine several Internet-based resources that are used as tools for implementing standards-based reforms and promotion of EE's goals in K-12 classrooms.     

论科学的本质与科学教育

科学的本质是科学教育领域中的一个重要问题。本文从定义和内涵两个角度对科学的本质进行了分析和阐述。科学既是一种过程,同时也是一种结果。科学活动的过程和科学活动的结果是紧密结合在一起的。作为探究与思维的科学、作为态度与精神的科学、作为知识与能力的科学是科学内涵的三个重要体现。在对科学本质进行分析的基础上,本文进一步对科学教育的目标与内容、过程与方法进行了探讨。     

理科教师的科学本质观对科学教育的影响

人们对科学本质的认识经历了由科学的“真理观”向科学的“建构观”的转变。不同的科学本质观将直接影响着教师对科学教育目标的不同理解,对科学知识的不同选择,对教学主题的不同设计、教学话语的不同使用,对学生学习的不同评价。教师不同的科学本质观及其教学行为影响着学生的科学本质观的形成,影响着学生对科学内容的理解以及看待问题的思维方式。     

美国K-12国家可持续发展教育学生学习标准解析

为推进基础教育中的可持续发展教育,美国可持续发展教育合作协会发布了K-12国家可持续发展教育学生学习标准.本文对该标准的框架结构及相关内容作了介绍,并对该标准的特点进行了归纳,以期为我国基础教育中可持续发展教育标准的研制和开发提供参照和借鉴.     

STS与基础科学教育

在各种的教育改革方案里，对于STS内容越来越多的引进，已成为一种趋势。然而，联系到我国目前教育界和学术界的现状，对有关的问题仍缺乏必要的了解和深入研究。根据若干国外的科学教育标准进行比较研究，关注的是在其中STS观念与内容的体现，以及在不同方案中表现出来的特点与差异，我们可以理解STS对于基础科学教育已经产生的影响，看到我国基础科学教育与国际相比较显示出的差距，从而对当前的认识与未来的发展都有重要的意义和借鉴作用。     

美国高中计算机教育对我国相应教育的启示

通过研究美国高中计算机教育对我国相应教育的启示,促进我国高中计算机教育的发展。介绍中美两国中小学计算机教育发展的背景和过程,总结相关研究进展,描述中美两国高中计算机教育框架的组成和目标,分析比较两国体系中核心概念和核心实践的内容。然后,介绍两国高中课程标准,并以算法和程序实现为例,分析两国课程标准的异同。通过比较两国大学先修课程的内容、教学体系、结构和评价方式,探讨两国高中计算机教育对大学计算机教育的影响以及未来两国大学教育可能存在的差异。最后基于全文内容,提出我国高中计算机教育发展的建议和期望。     

美国《科学教育框架》的特点及启示

《科学教育框架》提出了新阶段美国科学教育的发展愿景,反映出美国人才培养方案的新动向,在对科学的理解上,实现从\"探究\"到\"实践\"的跨越,在科学教育方面,体现从\"科学与技术\"到\"科学、技术与工程\"的整合,在学科教育内容方面,体现从科学\"概念\"到学科核心思想的提升。推进我国中小学科学教育,应提高中小学科学课程地位、重视中小学科学教育在人才培养系统中的启蒙性和基础性作用;注重中小学科学课程的统整性、综合性与实践性,适应社会发展需求;充分重视科学教育研究及其成果运用。