Ravit Golan Duncan

Scaffolding and Achievement in Problem-Based and Inquiry Learning: A Response to Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006)

Many innovative approaches to education such as problem-based learning (PBL) and inquiry learning (IL) situate learning in problem-solving or investigations of complex phenomena. Kirschner, Sweller, and Clark (2006) grouped these approaches together with unguided discovery learning. However, the problem with their line of argument is that IL and PBL approaches are highly scaffolded. In this article, we first demonstrate that Kirschner et al. have mistakenly conflated PBL and IL with discovery learning. We then present evidence demonstrating that PBL and IL are powerful and effective models of learning. Far from being contrary to many of the principles of guided learning that Kirschner et al. discussed, both PBL and IL employ scaffolding extensively thereby reducing the cognitive load and allowing students to learn in complex domains. Moreover, these approaches to learning address important goals of education that include content knowledge, epistemic practices, and soft skills such as collaboration and self-directed learning.

A Scaffolding Design Framework for Software to Support Science Inquiry.

The notion of scaffolding learners to help them succeed in solving problems otherwise too difficult for them is an important idea that has extended into the design of scaffolded software tools for learners. However, although there is a growing body of work on scaffolded tools, scaffold design, and the impact of scaffolding, the field has not yet converged on a common theoretical framework that defines rationales and approaches to guide the design of scaffolded tools. In this article, we present a scaffolding design framework addressing scaffolded software tools for science inquiry. Developed through iterative cycles of inductive and theory-based analysis, the framework synthesizes the work of prior design efforts, theoretical arguments, and empirical work in a set of guidelines that are organized around science inquiry practices and the challenges learners face in those practices. The framework can provide a basis for developing a theory of pedagogical support and a mechanism to describe successful scaffolding approaches. It can also guide design, not in a prescriptive manner but by providing designers with heuristics and examples of possible ways to address the challenges learners face.

The Role of Domain-Specific Knowledge in Generative Reasoning About Complicated Multileveled Phenomena

Promoting the ability to reason generatively about novel phenomena and problems students may encounter in their everyday lives is a major goal of science education. This goal proves to be a formidable challenge in domains, such as molecular genetics, for which the accumulated scientific understandings are daunting in both amount and complexity. To develop effective instruction that fosters generative reasoning we need to have a sound understanding of the types of knowledge in the domain that are critical for such reasoning. In this study I examined the ensemble of knowledge, both general and domain-specific, undergraduate students employed in reasoning about problems in genetics. I found that students initially formulate a solution in terms that are not domain specific and that serve as a frame–solution frame–that outlines and constrains a more specific and domain-appropriate explanation. This solution frame is then filled in with two powerful forms of domain-specific knowledge I term: domain-specific heuristics and domain-specific explanatory schemas. These knowledge forms embody understandings of central mechanisms and entities in molecular genetics. By invoking these domain-specific knowledge forms, students were able to reason about a variety of both familiar and novel genetics problems. I present a cognitive model that highlights the role of these powerful conceptual understandings in promoting generative reasoning in genetics.

From Theory to Data: The Process of Refining Learning Progressions

Learning progressions (LPs) are theoretical models of how learners develop expertise in a domain over extended periods of time. Recent policy reports have touted LPs as a promising approach to aligning standards, curriculum, and assessment. However, the scholarship on LPs is relatively sparse, and the jury is still out on the theoretical and practical value of this approach. To realize any potential of LPs researchers need to systematically refine these hypothetical models in real-world contexts. Such refinement efforts are challenging, as they require the coordination of messy empirical data with often underspecified theoretical models. Many of the current reports involving the empirical refinement and validation of LPs do not sufficiently explicate the process of how one goes about making modifications to the LP based on empirical data. In this article we present heuristics for facilitating the coordination of data and LP models. Using an illustrative example of a genetics LP and data from a 2-year longitudinal study of this LP, we demonstrate the use of these heuristics to refine the hypothesized levels of the LP. We also discuss the process we used to identify contingencies (relationships) between the constructs of this LP. We conclude with a discussion of implications of the refinement process for the alignment of curriculum, instruction, and assessment.

Exploring Middle School Students’ Understanding of Three Conceptual Models in Genetics

Genetics is the cornerstone of modern biology and a critical aspect of scientific literacy. Research has shown, however, that many high school graduates lack fundamental understandings in genetics necessary to make informed decisions about issues and emerging technologies in this domain, such as genetic screening, genetically modified foods, etc. Genetic literacy entails understanding three interrelated models: a genetic model that describes patterns of genetic inheritance, a meiotic model that describes the process by which genes are segregated into sex cells, and a molecular model that describes the mechanisms that link genotypes to phenotypes within an individual. Currently, much of genetics instruction, especially in terms of the molecular model, occurs at the high school level, and we know little about the ways in which middle school students can reason about these models. Furthermore, we do not know the extent to which carefully designed instruction can help younger students develop coherent and interrelated understandings in genetics. In this paper, we discuss a research study aimed at elucidating middle school students’ abilities to reason about the three genetic models. As part of our research, we designed an eight-week inquiry unit that was implemented in a combined sixth- to eighth-grade science classroom. We describe our instructional design and report results based on an analysis of written assessments, clinical interviews, and artifacts of the unit. Our findings suggest that middle school students are able to successfully reason about all three genetic models.

Development of Preservice Teachers’ Ability to Critique and Adapt Inquiry-based Instructional Materials

Current standards emphasize student engagement with inquiry practices. However, implementing inquiry instruction is a formidable challenge for teachers as they often lack models for using and adapting inquiry-based instructional materials. Teacher education programs can provide scaffolded contexts for developing teachers’ ability to critique, adapt, and design inquiry-based materials. We describe a qualitative study of 17 preservice teachers enrolled in two consecutive science methods courses. The study characterizes the development of preservice teachers’ ability to critique and revise instructional materials. Our findings suggest that teachers improved in their ability to critique lesson plans and to suggest revisions that would make them more inquiry oriented. In particular, the teachers’ critiques and revisions increased in sophistication after engaging in instructional design activities during the second methods course.