Toward a practice‐based theory for how professional learning communities engage in the improvement of tools and practices for scientific modeling
Toward a practice‐based theory for how professional learning communities engage in the improvement of tools and practices for scientific modeling
复制标题
建立基于实践的理论，探讨专业学习社区如何参与科学建模工具和实践的改进
DOI：
10.1002/sce.21547
复制
发表时间：
2019
影响因子：
4.3
通讯作者：
Christie Barchenger
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Jessica Thompson;Sara Hagenah;Scott P. McDonald;Christie Barchenger
为了组织科学教学的改进，教师需要有机会从实践中协作学习，在实践中，并从事课堂工具的修订。在本文中，我们研究了一个专业学习社区（PLC），由中学教师和研究人员组成，致力于改进雄心勃勃的科学教学（AST）的做法，并开发了教学实践和工具，支持基于模型的调查。本文重点介绍了为期5年的研究实践伙伴关系的第一年，教师和研究人员定期共同计划，共同教学，并通过改进周期代码介绍科学课程。我们对教师设计的工具、反思性谈话和课堂观察进行了分析。一年来，所有教师都参与了越来越复杂的AST实践，并开始使用类似的工具与学生一起构建科学模型。然而，有两个不同的变化，与年级水平的团队。一个团队开发了一个实践和工具，支持学生的最终形式的思想与模型的衔接，另一个团队开发了一个实践和工具，支持在一个教学单元的模型的修订。我们认为，这两个年级的团队从事生产性学习和PLC受益于有不同的观点相对相似的做法脚手架学生的科学建模。在调查结果的基础上，我们提出了三个关键组成部分，以实践为基础的理论，PLC如何谈判的工具，作为教学实践的改进的一部分：锚定在一个特定的工具和实践的改进，支持教师学习的变化，使教师的教学推理明确。
To organize for the improvement of science instruction teachers need opportunities to collaboratively learn from practice, in practice, and to engage in the revision of classroom tools. In this paper, we examine how a professional learning community (PLC), comprised of middle school teachers and researchers, worked on the improvement of Ambitious Science Teaching (AST) practices and developed instructional practices and tools supporting model‐based inquiry. This paper focuses on the first year of a 5‐year research–practice partnership in which teachers and researchers routinely coplanned, cotaught, and codebriefed science lessons via improvement cycles. We conducted an analysis of teacher‐designed tools, reflective talk, and classroom observations. All teachers engaged in increasingly sophisticated forms of AST practices over the year and began to use a similar tool to scaffold scientific modeling with students. Yet, there were two distinct variations that evolved with grade‐level teams. One team developed a practice and tool supporting students’ final form articulation of ideas with models and the other team developed a practice and tools supporting the revision of models over a unit of instruction. We argue that both grade‐level teams engaged in productive learning and that PLC benefited from having different perspectives on relatively similar practices for scaffolding students’ scientific modeling. On the basis of the findings, we propose three key components to a practice‐based theory for how PLCs negotiate tools as a part of the improvement of teaching practices: anchoring improvement in a particular tool and practice, supporting variation in teacher learning and making teachers’ pedagogical reasoning explicit.