An official website of the United States government
To prepare students to use science knowledge in their later personal or professional lives, we must attend to what they believe it means to know and learn science (i.e., epistemology). Unfortunately, we have little understanding of how students' epistemologies shift and are stabilized as they navigate their science courses. Researchers have made intuitive arguments that many microscale epistemological messages sum over time to give rise to macro‐scale understandings of knowing and learning, but we have no theoretical model for how this sum unfolds. Here, we begin to build such a theoretical model. To do so, we focus on assessments and related materials in a college chemistry course as potentially consequential sources of messages about valued knowledge products and processes. We then elicited students' evolving understandings of assessment‐related epistemological messages in several one‐on‐one interviews conducted throughout the semester. Analysis of how three students experienced, negotiated, and responded to assessment‐related messages showed that interactions with the course system stabilized a consistent, well‐resolved picture of the ways of knowing and learning that counted in the focal course. Specifically, good knowledge must have specific authority‐mandated features and knowledge is justified primarily via alignment with an instructor‐authored key. Students found utility in different (reliable) processes for achieving the aim of authorized knowledge, and some of these differences were maintained throughout the semester. Implications for modeling students' experience with course‐embedded epistemological messages over time and how this work might inform practice are discussed.
more »
« less
Beliefs versus resources: a tale of two models of epistemology
Compelling evidence, from multiple levels of schooling, suggests that teachers’ knowledge and beliefs about knowledge, knowing, and learning ( i.e. , epistemologies) play a strong role in shaping their approaches to teaching and learning. Given the importance of epistemologies in science teaching, we as researchers must pay careful attention to how we model them in our work. That is, we must work to explicitly and cogently develop theoretical models of epistemology that account for the learning phenomena we observe in classrooms and other settings. Here, we use interpretation of instructor interview data to explore the constraints and affordances of two models of epistemology common in chemistry and science education scholarship: epistemological beliefs and epistemological resources. Epistemological beliefs are typically assumed to be stable across time and place and to lie somewhere on a continuum from “instructor-centered” (worse) to “student-centered” (better). By contrast, a resources model of epistemology contends that one's view on knowledge and knowing is compiled in-the-moment from small-grain units of cognition called resources . Thus, one's epistemology may change one moment to the next. Further, the resources model explicitly rejects the notion that there is one “best” epistemology, instead positing that different epistemologies are useful in different contexts. Using both epistemological models to infer instructors’ epistemologies from dialogue about their approaches to teaching and learning, we demonstrate that how one models epistemology impacts the kind of analyses possible as well as reasonable implications for supporting instructor learning. Adoption of a beliefs model enables claims about which instructors have “better” or “worse” beliefs and suggests the value of interventions aimed at shifting toward “better” beliefs. By contrast, modeling epistemology as in situ activation of resources enables us to explain observed instability in instructors’ views on knowing and learning, surface and describe potentially productive epistemological resources, and consider instructor learning as refining valuable intuition rather than “fixing” “wrong beliefs”.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2225025
- PAR ID:
- 10445640
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Chemistry Education Research and Practice
- Volume:
- 24
- Issue:
- 2
- ISSN:
- 1109-4028
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 768 to 784
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Symmetry is a foundational concept in inorganic chemistry, essential for understanding molecular properties and interactions. Yet, little is known about how instructors teach symmetry or what shapes their instructional and curricular choices. To investigate this, we analyzed classroom observations from fourteen inorganic chemistry instructors from various institutions, focusing on their use of student-centered practices and emphasis on symmetry content. We then conducted semi-structured interviews to explore the reasoning behind their decisions, using the Teacher-Centered Systemic Reform (TCSR) model to interpret influences from personal factors (e.g., teaching experience), teacher thinking (e.g., beliefs about teaching and learning), and contextual factors (e.g., classroom layout). Minute-by-minute analyses of teaching revealed four instructional profiles (student-centered, high-interactive, low-interactive, and instructor-centered) and four content profiles, ranging from an emphasis on symmetry fundamentals (e.g., symmetry elements and operations, point group assignment) to symmetry applications (e.g., spectroscopy, molecular orbitals, character tables). Three themes emerged: (1) instructional approaches and content emphasis vary substantially across instructors; (2) more student-centered instructors tend to focus on foundational symmetry concepts and skills, whereas more instructor-centered instructors tend to prioritize advanced applications; and (3) instructors’ beliefs and prior experiences, more than personal and contextual factors, drive instructional decisions for teaching symmetry.more » « less
-
Abstract BackgroundMetacognitive processes have been linked to the development of conceptual knowledge in STEM courses, but previous work has centered on the regulatory aspects of metacognition. PurposeWe interrogated the relationship between epistemic metacognition and conceptual knowledge in engineering statics courses across six universities by asking students a difficult concept question with concurrent reflection prompts that elicited their metacognitive thinking. MethodWe used a mixed‐methods design containing an embedded phase followed by an explanatory phase. This design allowed us to both prompt and measure student epistemic metacognition within the learning context. The embedded phase consisted of quantitative and qualitative analyses of student responses. The explanatory phase consisted of an analysis of six instructor interviews. ResultsAnalysis of 267 student responses showed greater variation in students' epistemic metacognition than in their ability to answer correctly. Students used different kinds of epistemic metacognitive resources about the nature and origin of knowledge, epistemological forms, epistemological activities, and stances toward knowledge. These resources generally assembled into one of two frames: aconstructed knowledge framingvaluing conceptual knowledge and sense‐making, and anauthoritative knowledge framingforegrounding numerical, algorithmic problem‐solving. All six instructors interviewed described resources that align with both frames, and none explicitly considered student epistemic metacognition. ConclusionsInstructors' explicit attention to epistemic metacognition can potentially shift students to more productive frames for engineering learning. Findings here also inform two broader issues in STEM instruction: student resistance to active learning, and the direct instruction versus inquiry‐based learning debate.more » « less
-
Jones, Dyan; Ryan, Qing X.; Pawl, Andrew (Ed.)Designing physics courses that support students' activation and development of expert-like physics epistemologies is a significant goal of Physics Education Research. However, very little research has focused on how physics students' interactions with course structures resonate with different epistemological views. As part of a course redesign effort to increase student success in introductory physics, we interviewed introductory physics students about their experiences with course structures and their learning and belonging beliefs. We present here a case from this broader data corpus in which a student, Robyn, discusses his epistemological views of physics problem solving and his experiences with physics lectures, office hours, and discussion sections. We find that Robyn's physics epistemology manifests consistently across his interactions with each of these different course structures, suggesting a possible resonance between students' beliefs and their experiences with course structures and the value of further investigation into the potential merits of comprehensive course design.more » « less
-
In this paper, we seek to understand how grassroots activists, operating within the hegemony of data-centrism, are often disempowered by data even as they appropriate it towards their own ends. We posit that the shift towards data-driven governance and organizing, by elevating a particular epistemology, can pave over other ways of knowing that are central to social movement practices. Building on Muravyov's [102] concept of ''epistemological ambiguity,'' we demonstrate how data-focused activism requires complex navigations between data-based epistemologies and the heterogeneous, experiential, and relational epistemologies that characterize social movements. Through three case studies (two drawn from existing literature and the third being an original analysis), we provide an analytical model of how generative epistemological refusals can support more value-aligned navigations of epistemological ambiguity that resist data-centrism. Finally, we suggest how these findings can inform pedagogy, research, and technology design to support communities navigating datafied political arenas.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1039/D2RP00290F
