What Happens in Scientific Inquiry in Middle School Classroom: An Empirical Study Based on Multiple Cases

PEI Xinning; LIU Xinyang

doi:10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.011

Volume 36 Issue 4

Jul. 2018

Turn off MathJax

Article Contents

Article Navigation > Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences) > 2018 > 36(4): 107-121+165+166

PEI Xinning, LIU Xinyang. What Happens in Scientific Inquiry in Middle School Classroom: An Empirical Study Based on Multiple Cases[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 2018, 36(4): 107-121+165+166. doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.011

Citation:

PEI Xinning, LIU Xinyang. What Happens in Scientific Inquiry in Middle School Classroom: An Empirical Study Based on Multiple Cases[J]. Journal of East China Normal University (Educational Sciences), 2018, 36(4): 107-121+165+166. doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.011

Citation:

PDF( 872 KB)

What Happens in Scientific Inquiry in Middle School Classroom: An Empirical Study Based on Multiple Cases

doi: 10.16382/j.cnki.1000-5560.2018.04.011

PEI Xinning¹,
LIU Xinyang²

1.
College of Teacher Education, Faculty of Education, East China Normal University, Shanghai 200062, China
2.
Department of Educational Technology, Faculty of Education, Shandong Normal University, Jinan 250014, China

Publish Date: 2018-08-20

Abstract

Abstract

The emerging forms of science education in the world have challenged the ideas and practice of scientific inquiry. However, scientific inquiry, aiming at developing students' scientific understanding by their engaging in science practice, is still the essential approach to science education for the 21st century. From the socio-cultural perspective of learning, and using a cross-culturally contextual thinking, the authors conduct two interrelated sub-studies to track the instructional process of nine middle school science teachers in city W. The study describes the overall features of their inquiry-based science teaching, and demonstrates the underlying process structure and detailed characteristics. Moreover, the study reveals that science classroom in middle schools has the general structure of scientific inquiry process, and the teacher-led collective dialogic inquiry-session has shown positive effect, but at the expense of students' active experience and autonomy gen-erally. For teachers, partial understanding of scientific inquiry, lack of pedagogical strategies and tools to support students' inquiries, as well as external influences from organized evaluating-class and trainings, could possibly impede them to conduct an authentic inquiry-based science teaching.
- scientific inquiry,
- inquiry-based science teaching,
- science education reform,
- middle school

FullText(HTML)

References(37)

References

[1]	马西娅·C. 林, 巴特-舍瓦·艾伦. (2016). 学科学和教科学: 利用技术促进知识整合(裴新宁, 刘新阳等译). 上海: 华东师范大学出版社.
[2]	教育部.(2011).初中科学教育标准(修订稿).北京:北京师范大学出版社.
[3]	教育部. (2016). 教育信息化"十三五"规划[EB/OL]. (2016-06-07)[2017-05-23]. http://www.moe.gov.cn/srcsite/A16/s3342/201606/t20160622_269367.html.
[4]	李雁冰. (2012).我国科学课程教学的困境与超越.教育研究与实验, (5), 69-74. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTotal-YJSY201205015.htm
[5]	刘新阳. (2016). "教师-资源"互动视角下的教师教学设计能力研究(博士学位论文). 上海: 华东师范大学.
[6]	美国国家研究理事会. (1999). 美国国家科学教育标准(戢守志等译). 科学与技术出版社.
[7]	裴新宁.(2005).面向学习者的教学设计.北京:教育科学出版社.
[8]	裴新宁.(2013).让学习成功——变构模型及其教学应用.教育生物学杂志, (4), 263-270. http://edu.wanfangdata.com.cn/Periodical/Detail/jyswx201304008
[9]	唐小为, 丁邦平. (2012). "科学探究"缘何变身"科学实践"?——解读美国科学教育框架理念的首位关键词之变.教育研究(11), 141-145. http://www.cnki.com.cn/Article/CJFDTOTAL-CCZL201529073.htm
[10]	赵健, 李锋, 刘亭亭, 吴伟.(2017).创建全球科创中心, 上海学生的数字化素养够了吗?——基于PISA2012相关测试结果的分析, 开放教育研究, 23(5), 30-41. https://www.doc88.com/p-4919198853539.html
[11]	赵健, 裴新宁, 冯锐, 成佳铭, 金莺莲.(2013).我国教师的专业发展实践及其对学生成绩的影响:基于五城市调研的分析.全球教育展望, 42(2), 22-33, 53. http://www.wanfangdata.com.cn/details/detail.do?_type=perio&id=qqjyzw201302003
[12]	周仕东, 郑长龙. (2010).论实现科学本质教育的前提条件.中国教育学刊, (10), 39-41. http://www.cqvip.com/QK/81875X/200511/20707605.html
[13]	周仕东, 孙景霞, 郑长龙. (2006).连堂课的科学探究教学实践与反思.中国教育学刊, (11), 48-50. doi: 10.3969/j.issn.1002-4808.2006.11.015
[14]	Barron, B., & Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Prospects and challenges for inquiry-based approaches to learning. In: Centre for Educational Research and Innovation. (Eds. ). The Nature of Learning: Using Research to Inspire Practice. OECD Publishing, 199-225.
[15]	Berliner, D C.(2004). Describing the behavior and documenting the accomplishments of expert teachers. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society, 24(3), 200-212.
[16]	Clarke, S. N. (2015). The right to speak. In: L. B. Resnick, C. S. C. Asterhan, & S. N. Clarke (Eds. ) Socializing Intelligence through Academic Talk and Dialogue. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association, 167-180.
[17]	Coquidé, M., & Pei, X. (2014). Comparing Teacher's Understanding and Enactment about Scientific Investigation in France and in China. Presentation on the 5^th Seminar on French-Chinese Laboratory for Comparing Curricula in Science Education (C2SE), Oct. 20-22. ENS de Lyon, France.
[18]	Crawford, B. A. (2014). From inquiry to scientific practices in the science classroom. In: N. G. Lederman, & S. K. Abell(Eds. ), Handbook of Research on Science Education, Vol. Ⅱ. New York: Routledge, 515-544.
[19]	Engeström, Y. (2000). Activity theory as a framework for analyzing and redesigning work.Ergonomics, 43(7), 960-974. doi: 10.1080/001401300409143
[20]	European Commission (2011). Final Report-POLLEN. (2011-04-14)[2017-08-04]. Retrieved from: http://cordis.europa.eu/publication/rcn/12661_en.html
[21]	European Commission(2013). S-TEAM Report Summary. (2013-06-04)[2016-08-06]. Retrieved from: http://www.s-teamproject.eu.
[22]	European Commission(2015). Science Education for Responsible Citizenship. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union.
[23]	Grangeat M. (2013)(Ed. ). Les enseignants de sciences face aux démarchesd'investigation: des formations et des pratiques de classe. Grenoble: Presses Universitaires de Grenoble.
[24]	Greeno, J. G., & Moore, J. L. (1993).Situativity and symbols:response to Vera and Simon. Cognitive Science, 17, 49-60. doi: 10.1207/s15516709cog1701_3
[25]	Jacobson, M. J., Taylor, C. E., & Richards, D. (2016).Computational scientific inquiry with virtual worlds and agent-based models:new ways of doing science to learn science.Interactive Learning Environments, 24(8), 2080-2108. doi: 10.1080/10494820.2015.1079723
[26]	Lederman, J. S., Lederman, N. G., Bartos, S. A., Bartels, S. L., Meyer, A. A., & Schwartz, R. S. (2014). Meaningful assessment of learners' understandings about scientific inquiry:The views about scientific inquiry (VASI) questionnaire. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 51(1), 65-83. doi: 10.1002/tea.21125
[27]	Leinhardt G. (1990). Capturing craft knowledge in teaching.Educational Researcher, 19(19), 18-25. http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=a0021610b338ee2be1717ab252886b6b&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn
[28]	Lotter, C., Harwood, W. S., & Bonner, J. J. (2007). The influence of core teaching conceptions on teachers' use of inquiry teaching practices.Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(9), 1318-1347. doi: 10.1002/(ISSN)1098-2736
[29]	Martinand, J.-L. (2003). L'éducation technologique à l'école moyenne en France:problèmes de didactique curriculaire. La revue canadienne de l'enseignement des sciences, des mathématiques et des technologies, 3 (1), 100-116.
[30]	Moallem M.(1998). An expert teacher's thinking and teaching and instructional design models and principles:An ethnographic study. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(2), 37-64. http://cn.bing.com/academic/profile?id=2bc8ff3e3c8034d1922a5d8ae3523b98&encoded=0&v=paper_preview&mkt=zh-cn
[31]	National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2016). Science Literacy:Conceptes, Context, and Consequeces. Washington, DC:The National Academies Press.
[32]	National Acadmies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. (2017). Seeing Students Learning Science: Integrating Assessment and Instruction in the Classroom. Washington, DC: The National Acadmies Press.
[33]	National Research Council (NRC). (1997). Introducing the National Science Standards. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
[34]	National Research Council (NRC). (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education:Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. Washington, DC:The National Academies Press.
[35]	OECD. (2013). The PISA 2015 Draft Science Framework. (2013-03)[2016-09-10]. Retrieved from: http://www.oecd.org/pisa/pisaproducts/Draft%20PISA%202015%20Science%20Framework%20.pdf [July 2016].
[36]	Olson, S., &. Loucks, S. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education Standards:A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, DC:National Academy Press.
[37]	Tobin, K. (2012). Sociocultural perspectives on science education. In: B. Fraser, K. Tobin, C. McRobbie (Eds. ). Second International Handbook of Science Education. Springer, 3-17.