Development and validation of an observation-based protocol to measure the eight scientific practices of the next generation science standards in K-12 science classrooms
Development and validation of an observation-based protocol to measure the eight scientific practices of the next generation science standards in K-12 science classrooms
复制标题
DOI：
10.1002/tea.21716
复制
发表时间：
2021-06-08
影响因子：
4.6
通讯作者：
Terada, Takeshi
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Chen, Ying-Chih;Terada, Takeshi
下一代科学标准（NGSS）中的八项科学实践是反映科学本质的重要理论建构，旨在指导科学教学。然而，这些做法在学生学习方面的可操作性仍然有限，需要一个衡量八种做法的工具。使用互动-建设性-主动-被动（ICAP）的理论框架，本研究开发了这样一个协议，题为ICAP测量观察NGSS科学实践在课堂上的实施（IONIC）。该协议可以应用于K-12科学教室，以确定学生参与八种实践的水平。数据收集从152个视频录制的经验教训后，3年的专业发展（PD）计划，旨在让教师更好地理解和使用NGSS的做法。我们检验了IONIC的效度（内容、表面、翻译和结构）和信度（内部和评分者间）。实证因素分析进行了验证三个相互竞争的理论模型：吝啬（三个阶段的知识发展：调查，意义，评估和沟通，合并的八个NGSS的做法），NGSS（八个做法），和全面。后者由上层（吝啬）和下层（NGSS）组成。结果表明，综合模型是三者中的首选模型。在上一级，第三阶段（评估和沟通）的得分明显低于其他两个阶段。在较低的水平，课堂分数的做法5，使用数学和计算思维，做法7，参与论证的证据，和做法8，获取，评估和交流信息，显着低于大多数其他。回归分析的结果表明，教师参与PD的年数可以预测学生的IONIC成绩。研究结果表明，IONIC是一个有效的和可靠的基于观察的协议，促进学生如何能够有效地在课堂上从事科学实践的理解。
The eight scientific practices in the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) are significant theoretical constructs that reflect the nature of science; they are intended to guide science teaching and learning. Yet, operationalization of these practices in terms of student learning remains limited, and a measurement tool for the eight practices is needed. Using an Interactive-Constructive-Active-Passive (ICAP) theoretical framework, this study develops such a protocol, entitled ICAP to Measure by Observation NGSS Science Practice Implementation in the Classroom (IONIC). This protocol can be applied in K-12 science classrooms to determine the level of student engagement with the eight practices. Data were collected from 152 video-recorded lessons obtained after a 3-year professional development (PD) program designed to engage teachers to better understand and use the NGSS practices. We examined validity (content, face, translation, and construct) and reliability (internal and interrater) of IONIC. Confirmatory factor analysis was conducted to verify three competing theoretical models: Parsimonious (three phases of knowledge development: Investigation, Sensemaking, and Evaluating and Communicating, merged with the eight NGSS practices), NGSS (the eight practices), and Comprehensive. The latter consists of an upper-level (Parsimonious) and a lower-level (NGSS). The results suggest the Comprehensive Model is the preferred model among the three. In the upper-level, the score for Phase 3, Evaluating and communicating, is significantly lower than the other two. In the lower-level, classroom scores for Practice 5, Using mathematics and computational thinking, Practice 7, Engaging in argument from evidence, and Practice 8, Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information, are significantly lower than most of the others. Results of regression analyses suggest that the number of years the teacher participated in PD can predict student IONIC scores. The findings suggest that IONIC is a valid and reliable observation-based protocol, facilitating an understanding of how students can effectively engage in scientific practices in the classroom.