Recent recommendations for reforming science instruction have advocated placing inquiry activities such as evidence evaluation, model-building, explanation, and argumentation at the center of the curriculum. An increasing number of studies indicate that instruction focused on these inquiry activities promote deep content learning and an informed understanding of the nature of science. A major challenge in any inquiry program is developing methods to move students’ reasoning forward. I report on the results of three studies aimed at exploring strategies to make science inquiry instruction more productive. The first two studies focus on the development of students’ ideas about epistemic criteria. Study 1 examines 324 middle school students’ preinstructional ideas about epistemic criteria for good scientific models. Study 2 examines four class discussions in which students propose, vet, and adopt class lists of epistemic criteria. Collectively, these two studies provide important information about students’ preinstructional ideas about scientific models and epistemic criteria as well as strategies for promoting student understanding of epistemic criteria. The third study focuses on students’ ability to coordinate evidence in order to develop a more inclusive, accurate model as well as their understanding of epistemic criteria for good evidence. Study 3 describes the results of an interview study in which 29 middle school students attempted to coordinate multiple pieces of conflicting evidence. Overall, the three studies provide insights into ways to design inquiry learning environments. In particular, they have implications for scaffolding inquiry--I argue that productive scientific discourse and inquiry activities can be scaffolded through reflection on epistemic criteria for evaluating the quality of models and evidence. Criteria provide important information on the extent to which student need to be introduced to science-specific criteria and the extent to which students need to be scaffolded when engaging with multiple pieces of evidence. Finally all three studies provide important theoretical information on students’ epistemic resources and the overall sophistication of their understanding of the nature of science.
Subject (authority = RUETD)
Topic
Education
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Cognition
Subject (authority = ETD-LCSH)
Topic
Epistemic logic
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Rutgers University Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = RULIB)
ETD
Identifier
ETD_6328
PhysicalDescription
Form (authority = gmd)
electronic resource
InternetMediaType
application/pdf
InternetMediaType
text/xml
Extent
1 online resource (vi, 219 p. : ill.)
Note (type = degree)
Ph.D.
Note (type = bibliography)
Includes bibliographical references
Note (type = statement of responsibility)
by William J. Pluta
RelatedItem (type = host)
TitleInfo
Title
Graduate School - New Brunswick Electronic Theses and Dissertations
Identifier (type = local)
rucore19991600001
Location
PhysicalLocation (authority = marcorg); (displayLabel = Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey)
Rutgers University. Graduate School - New Brunswick
AssociatedObject
Type
License
Name
Author Agreement License
Detail
I hereby grant to the Rutgers University Libraries and to my school the non-exclusive right to archive, reproduce and distribute my thesis or dissertation, in whole or in part, and/or my abstract, in whole or in part, in and from an electronic format, subject to the release date subsequently stipulated in this submittal form and approved by my school. I represent and stipulate that the thesis or dissertation and its abstract are my original work, that they do not infringe or violate any rights of others, and that I make these grants as the sole owner of the rights to my thesis or dissertation and its abstract. I represent that I have obtained written permissions, when necessary, from the owner(s) of each third party copyrighted matter to be included in my thesis or dissertation and will supply copies of such upon request by my school. I acknowledge that RU ETD and my school will not distribute my thesis or dissertation or its abstract if, in their reasonable judgment, they believe all such rights have not been secured. I acknowledge that I retain ownership rights to the copyright of my work. I also retain the right to use all or part of this thesis or dissertation in future works, such as articles or books.