Search for: All records

This work follows a group of four science teachers in the second year of an intensive PD. Our analyses revealed two distinct variations in their instruction. These differences were accompanied by similar differences in their instructional vision. We argue that instructional vision can illuminate teachers’ thinking about their work, insights that may be useful in helping PD facilitators better hone such experiences. 

Reflection allows teachers to evaluate their past instruction and make decisions to guide their future practice (i.e., Killion & Todnem, 1991; Moore-Russo & Wilsey, 2014). The literature on teacher sensemaking suggests that engaging in reflection might support sensemaking about changes to teachers’ practice (e.g., Marco-Bujosa et al., 2017; Senzen-Barrie et al., 2020). However, prior research has not connected teachers’ engagement in reflection to their sensemaking. By using video data of PD, we analyzed the category of reflection (Moore-Russo & Wilsey, 2014) teachers participated in, the process of sensemaking (Robertson & Richards, 2017), as well as what teachers were sensemaking about in relation to the PD’s design. Our analysis indicated that teachers typically reflected by sharing their individual viewpoints and used the process of negotiation to consider how to facilitate productive talk. Additionally, different features designed as a part of the PD (i.e., general discussion, redesign, video) supported teachers to participate in different types of reflection and processes of sensemaking. The findings from this study have implications for teacher PD design features and their role in facilitating reflection and promoting sensemaking. 

Reform-based instruction that fosters all students’ intellectual engagement and sensemaking is possible. However, it is not yet prevalent across many science classrooms. To gain more insight into how to design and enact science instruction supporting students’ intellectual engagement, this investigation centered on understanding how to design and implement science lessons for promoting students’ intellectual engagement as epistemic agents who shape knowledge building happening in the classroom. We examined a middle school science teacher's design and implementation of four lessons that she did as part of a PD focused on fostering productive science talk in science classrooms. Our analysis revealed that her efforts in fostering opportunities for students’ epistemic agency were evident in both her lesson design and implementation. Her responsiveness to students’ thinking/intellectual engagement throughout the lesson implementations via principled improvisations supported opportunities for students’ epistemic agency. Her efforts allow us to understand how the design and implementation of science lessons with the focus of opening space and maintaining this space by being responsive to students’ thinking are critical for fostering students’ epistemic agency. These findings can provide implications for professional development efforts that seek to develop teachers’ capacity for reform-based instruction in science classrooms. 

Using the IQA-SOR instrument, we analyzed participating teachers' classroom implementation of instructional resources and models. Teachers who collaboratively designed their materials for the focal lessons demonstrated more rigorous implementation, while those who only experienced the focal lessons during the PD experience did not implement as rich of instruction. However, all participating teachers did show strengths in implementing particular aspects of the focal lessons. 

Reform efforts targeting science instruction emphasize that students should develop scientific proficiency that empowers them to collaboratively negotiate science ideas as they develop meaningful understandings about science phenomena through science practices. The lessons teachers design and enact play a critical role in engaging students in rigorous science learning. Collaborative design, in which teachers work together to design, enact, and reflect on their teaching, holds potential to support teachers’ learning, but scarce research examines the pathways by which collaborative design can influence teachers’ instructional practices. Examining the teaching and reflective thinking of two science teachers who engaged in collaborative design activities over two years, we found that their enactment practices became more supportive of students’ rigorous learning over time, and that they perceived collaborative efforts with teacher educators and partner teachers to plan lessons and analyze videos of instruction as supportive of their learning to enact rigorous instruction. 

Reform-based rigorous instruction which fosters all students’ thinking and sensemaking is possible; however, it is not yet prevalent in science classrooms. This study explored promoting rigorous instruction by enhancing students’ intellectual work through cognitively demanding tasks. We examined instruction during the five lessons in a science classroom. We found variations in students’ intellectual work across the lessons. Our analysis revealed that the instructional practices associated with promoting students’ engagement in rigorous thinking were consequential for promoting students’ epistemic agency. Thus, we argue that maintaining and enhancing demand on students’ intellectual engagement in cognitively demanding tasks requires the work of providing opportunities for students to learn science-as-practice by acting as epistemic agents. These findings can inform professional efforts regarding rigorous instruction. 

Reform efforts targeting science instruction emphasize that students should develop scientific proficiency that empowers them to collaboratively negotiate science ideas as they develop meaningful understandings about science phenomena through science practices. The lessons teachers design and enact play a critical role in engaging students in rigorous science learning. Collaborative design, in which teachers work together to design, enact, and reflect on their teaching, holds potential to support teachers’ learning, but scarce research examines the pathways by which collaborative design can influence teachers’ instructional practices. Examining the teaching and reflective thinking of two science teachers who engaged in collaborative design activities over two years, we found that their enactment practices became more supportive of students’ rigorous learning over time, and that they identified collaborative efforts with teacher educators and partner teachers to plan lessons and analyze videos of instruction as supportive of their learning to enact rigorous instruction. 

Fundamental to the recent reform vision for science education (NRC, 2012) are ambitious forms of teaching, such as facilitating productive discussions, that capitalize on students’ ideas and experiences to support students’ sensemaking (Kloser, 2014; Windschitl & Calabrese- Barton, 2012). This type of teaching, however, is not a natural act for many teachers; they need support to appropriate a vision of such teaching. This study seeks to understand teachers’ vision in practice (i.e., professional vision) and its relation to their vision of ambitious teaching after their involvement in a two-year professional learning program centered on facilitating productive science discussions aligned to reform vision. 

The reform vision brought forth by the Framework for K-12 Science Education emphasizes the integration of scientific knowledge with scientific practices as students try to figure out a phenomenon. During this process of making sense of phenomenon, students experience moments of uncertainty which is important because scientific activity is driven by this need to manage uncertainty. Using cognitively demanding tasks in science classrooms presents a means to integrate uncertainty into students’ experiences. Our analysis of video records of science lessons during the implementation of chemistry tasks at different cognitive demand levels revealed how types of uncertainty that students experienced differed in these lessons and the ways in which uncertainty was evoked during the implementation of cognitively demanding science tasks.