Search for: All records

ABSTRACT Reform‐oriented science classrooms encourage environments in which students engage in a collective enterprise of making sense of their science ideas together. Teachers who strive for these sorts of environments support students in collaboratively constructing and answering their own questions about phenomena and making sense of competing ideas together. However, to engage with one another productively, students must ask questions, share incomplete thoughts, and comment on each other's ideas, all of which can be seen as risky and unfamiliar behavior that may result in feelings of uncertainty or other negative classroom consequences. We conduct an explanatory case study using student and teacher interviews, teacher surveys, and classroom video collected over 2 years to investigate how one teacher used classroom norms to establish and maintain a culture in which students appeared committed to taking risks to improve their collective knowledge‐building. We found that norms were one practical tool the teacher used to encourage students to take risks and that also seemed helpful for negotiating individual and group uncertainty. Norms were also tools the teacher used to ensure that she and her students had similar expectations for classroom engagement. This study practically addresses some key challenges teachers face in enacting reform‐oriented science teaching and offers suggestions for how continued research regarding norms and uncertainty can continue to further science reform efforts. 

Abstract This article explores the challenges of enacting reform‐oriented curriculum in science classrooms. We use the concept of figured worlds to analyze a case study of an eighth‐grade science class where the teacher reported that the students were resistant to changes she was trying to make. By examining stimulated recall interviews with the teacher (including the associated classroom episodes) and post‐unit interviews with a subset of the students, we found that the students and the teacher constructed different figured worlds about the science learning in the classroom. These differences centered on the goals that students and teachers had for the class and the roles of the teacher and students in the learning environment. Specifically, we found that there was a lack of alignment around how students and the teacher viewed the purpose of student agency and collaboration and therefore they had different ideas about how they should interact with one another in the classroom. We conclude by discussing the implications of our findings for science education. We believe that the concept of figured worlds allows researchers and teachers to better understand the challenges of implementing reform‐oriented practices in science classrooms. This understanding can help teachers and professional development providers to create strategies for bridging the gap between different figured worlds and creating more collaborative and productive learning environments for all students. 

Science learning reforms require shifting epistemic and power structures so students and teachers build knowledge together within the context of meaningful questions and problems. Curricular customization allows teachers to preserve these reform-oriented goals while adapting for their specific contexts and students. This paper presents three cases from professional learning communities (PLCs) who followed the same curriculum customization model, but with different equity goals: supporting bi/multilingual learners’ ownership of learning, increasing the relevance of curriculum for students, and encouraging more student voices and multiple perspectives. Together, these cases highlight how the collaborative customization model facilitated productive tensions that lead to teacher learning