An official website of the United States government
Abstract Sensemaking has been advocated as a core practice of science education to support students in constructing their own understanding through a prolonged trajectory. However, the field lacks a discussion of teaching strategies that can better support students as they develop in the trajectory of sensemaking, which includes four phases: initial engagement with a driving question related to a target phenomenon; identification of incoherence and insufficiency in existing understanding; exploration of multiple resources to help develop plausible explanations; and synthesis of solutions and application of new understanding to interpret the target phenomenon. With the view that students' scientific uncertainty, including conceptual and epistemic uncertainties, can motivate or drive the trajectory of sensemaking coherent with students' understanding, this multiple case study examined how two science teachers, one from South Korea and one from the USA, supported students to navigate their scientific uncertainties to shape a trajectory of sensemaking that is coherent to them. Transcripts of video recordings of classroom discourses and student‐created artifacts were analyzed. We identified the dynamic nature of students' scientific uncertainties in the four phases and the teaching strategies in each phase. Three main findings emerged from this study: (1) student uncertainty as a key not only to initiate the trajectory of sensemaking meaningfully but also to continuously develop the trajectory along a coherent pathway, (2) conceptual and epistemic uncertainties having different roles in building different phases of sensemaking, and (3) teaching strategies that support student navigation of scientific uncertainty that drives the trajectory of sensemaking.
more »
« less
Conceptualizing phases of sensemaking as a trajectory for grasping better understanding: Coordinating student scientific uncertainty as a pedagogical resource
Sensemaking is conceptualized as a trajectory to develop better understanding and is advocated as one of the fundamental practices in science education. However, the field is lacking of a framework to view the prolonged process of sensemaking that starts from a raise of uncertainty of a target phenomenon to a grasping of a better understanding of a target phenomenon. The process requires teachers to recognize the role of scientific uncertainty in different phases of sensemaking and develop responsive instructional supports to help students navigate the uncertainties. With an attention on student scientific uncertainty as a potential driver of the trajectory of sensemaking, this study aims to identify different phases of sensemaking that can be developed with students’ scientific uncertainty. This study especially attends to two types of scientific uncertainty—conceptual and epistemic uncertainties. Conceptual uncertainty refers to student struggle of using conceptual understanding (e.g., mastery of content and everyday knowledge) to respond to an encountered phenomenon. Epistemic uncertainty emerges from struggles in using epistemic understanding to generate new ideas. Based on the multiple case study method, we examined sensemaking activities in two Korean science classrooms and one American science classroom and identified three phases of sensemaking: (a) focusing on a driving question related to a target phenomenon, (b) delving into multiple resources to develop plausible explanation(s), and (c) examining the successfulness of the new understanding and concretizing it. Based on the findings, we discuss two emerging themes. First, sensemaking progresses through three distinctive phases driven by students’ dynamically evolving scientific uncertainty. Second, attending to both epistemic and conceptual uncertainties can support developing sensemaking coherent with students’ view.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2100879
- PAR ID:
- 10506289
- Publisher / Repository:
- Research in Science Education
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Research in Science Education
- Volume:
- 54
- Issue:
- 3
- ISSN:
- 0157-244X
- Page Range / eLocation ID:
- 359 to 391
- Subject(s) / Keyword(s):
- Sensemaking · Phases of sensemaking · Uncertainty · Scientific uncertainty · Pedagogical resources
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract An essential aspect of scientific practice involves grappling with the generation of predictions, representations, interpretations, investigations, and communications related to scientific phenomena, all of which are inherently permeated with uncertainty. Transferring this practice from expert settings to the classroom is invaluable yet challenging. Teachers often perceive struggles as incidental, negative, and uncomfortable, assuming they stem from students' deficiencies in knowledge or understanding, which they feel compelled to promptly address to progress. While some empirical research has explored the role of scientific uncertainties in driving productive student struggle, few studies have explicitly examined or provided a framework to unpack scientific uncertainty as it manifests in the classroom, including the sources that lead to student struggle and how teachers can manage it effectively. In this position paper, we elucidate the importance of incorporating scientific uncertainties as pedagogical resources to foster student struggles through uncertainty from three perspectives: scientific literacy, student agency, and coherent trajectories of sensemaking. To develop a theoretical framework, we consider scientific uncertainty as a resource for productive struggle in the sensemaking process. We delve into two types (e.g., conceptual, epistemic), four sources (e.g., insufficiency, ambiguity, incoherence, conflict), and three desirability considerations (e.g., relevance, timing, complexity) of scientific uncertainties in student struggles to provide a theoretical foundation for understanding what students struggle with, why they struggle, and how scientific uncertainties can be effectively managed by teachers. With this framework, researchers and teachers can examine the (mis)alignments between uncertainty‐in‐design, uncertainty‐in‐practice, and uncertainty‐in‐reflection.more » « less
-
In a traditional lecturing environment, students possess limited agency in accepting or rejecting information provided by teachers. A higher level of student agency involves opportunities and actively identifying uncertainties and collaborating with peers to deepen understanding within the classroom community. Teachers play a crucial role in guiding students through sensemaking by addressing uncertainties and assisting in solution development. Student uncertainty is recognized as a pedagogical resource, engaging them in sensemaking and enhancing agency levels. This study analyzed 28 whole-class discussions led by seven science teachers, identifying three phases: problematization, coherence negotiation, and new understanding enactment. The teachers employed eight strategies leveraging student scientific uncertainty as pedagogical resources within three sequential methods: eliciting awareness of uncertainty (e.g., creating hybrid, ambiguous, and problem-solving spaces), seeking a coherent understanding (e.g., connecting students’ lived experiences to empirical data for coherence, juxtaposing different interpretations to build consensus, and weaving together student ideas for coherence), and demonstrating new understanding (e.g., transference, translation). By embracing uncertainty, students become agents of sensemaking, contributing to a collaborative learning environment.more » « less
-
Productive struggle is a process in which students expend effort to grapple with perplexing problems and make sense of something that is not immediately apparent and beyond their current level of understanding and capacity. The experience encourages students to reflect on and restructure their existing knowledge toward a new understanding of scientific concepts and practice. Scientific uncertainty is common in scientific sensemaking practice and is one of the major factors provoking student struggle. A teaching approach called Student Uncertainty as a Pedagogical Resource (SUPeR) is introduced to encourage teachers to engage students in the practice of productive struggle. The SUPeR approach is composed of four phases: (1) problematize a phenomenon, (2) engage in material practice, (3) participate in argumentative practice, and (4) engage in reflection, transformation, and application. An example from an eighth-grade biology class unit on Mendel’s Law of Segregation is used to demonstrate how the SUPeR approach can be implemented in the classroom.more » « less
-
Science learning is thought to be best supported when students engage in sensemaking about phenomena in ways that mirror the work of scientists, work that requires that students are positioned as epistemic agents who share, discuss, and refine their thinking to make sense of science phenomena. Using a case study approach, we explore the experiences of one Black middle school girl, Jessie’s, epistemic efforts and the ways in which her group members’ responses to her efforts either supported or constrained her epistemic agency during small group work in two argumentation lessons. We view this work through the lenses of epistemic aspects of scientific argumentation, rhetorical argumentation, and pseudo argumentation. Our findings show that Jessie’s epistemic efforts were not often taken up by her peers in ways that support her epistemic agency, findings that have implications for student learning and engagement in terms of the epistemic work we ask students to engage in, and the instructional strategies that support this work.more » « less
- Free Publicly Accessible Full Text
-
Accepted Manuscript1.0
- Journal Article:
- https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-023-10144-3
