Search for: All records

Abstract Reformed science curricula provide opportunities for students to engage with authentic science practices. However, teacher implementation of such curricula requires teachers to consider their role in the classroom, including realigning instructional decisions with the epistemic aims of science. Guiding newcomers in science can take place in settings ranging from the classroom to the undergraduate research laboratory. We suggest thinking about the potential intersections of guiding students across these contexts is important. We describe the Classroom‐Research‐Mentoring (CRM) Framework as a novel lens for examining science practice‐based instruction. We present a comparative case study of two teachers as they instruct undergraduate students in a model‐based inquiry laboratory. We analyzed stimulated‐recall episodes uncovering how these teachers interacted with their students and the rationale behind their instructional choices. Through the application of the CRM Framework, we revealed ways teachers can have instructional goals that align with those of a research mentor. For example, our teachers had the goals of “creating an inclusive environment open to student ideas,” “acknowledging students as scientists,” and “focusing students on skills and ideas needed to solve biological problems.” We suggest three functions of research mentoring that translate across the classroom and research laboratory settings: (1) build a shared understanding of epistemic aims, (2) support learners in the productive use of science practices, and (3) motivate learner engagement in science practices. 

Limited access to undergraduate research experiences for science, technology, engineering, and mathematics students has led to creation of classroom-based opportunities for students to participate in authentic science. Revising laboratory courses to engage students in the practices of science has been shown to have many benefits for students. However, the instructor’s role in successful implementation of authentic-inquiry curricula requires further investigation. Previous work has demonstrated that navigating an instructional role within the open-ended format of an inquiry curriculum is challenging for instructors. Little is known about effective strategies for supporting students in authentic scientific practices. To address this challenge, we investigated instructors with prior experience teaching Authentic Inquiry through Modeling in Biology (AIM-Bio) in order to reveal strategies that are likely to help students succeed in this context. We took a unique approach that uncovered how instructors supported students and how they intended to support students in the scientific practices of modeling and experimental design. Analysis included in vivo recordings of instructor–student interactions paired with instructor interviews over the course of a semester. Findings detail the ways in which instructors flexibly responded to students through their in-the-moment actions. Additionally, the instructor intentions provided crucial explanatory power to explain the rationale behind teaching choices made.