Collaborative Research: Critical Thinking for Civic Thinking in Science

跨学科(99)这个项目通过明确关注批判性思维和公民思维之间的关系，解决了培养具有科学素养的公民的任务。目标受众是正在学习科学入门课程、地质学和生物学的非理科专业的学生。这项合作工作有助于确定促进学生在这些领域学习的教学实践，涉及来自四个机构的教师，并建立在一项初步研究的基础上，该研究最初得到卡内基教学与学习学院的支持。该项目分两个阶段实施。首先，参与的讲师将公民思维的批判性思维(CT)2练习纳入他们的课程。这些练习包括开放式情景，要求学生应用科学推理并制定公民行动计划。它们构成了一个本质上有科学基础的公民问题(例如，人类健康和饮用水质量)。该项目的第二阶段包括确定和测试具体教学干预措施的相对有效性的实验设计。参加该计划的教职员工将于2007年参加一个暑期学院，讨论第一阶段的结果，并确定提高学生学习能力的做法。他们将设计一项实验方案，以测试哪些变量似乎是改善学生学习的最显著的自变量。随后的分析将在2007-2008学年进行。向参与机构增加的STEM教员提供的小额赠款正用于将教学方法扩展到其他学科。智力价值：正在进行分析，以确定批判性思维和公民思维能力是否倾向于在理科初学者中同时或独立发展。四个机构之间的合作允许使用共同的评估措施来比较和对比多个机构的学生反应。从历史上看，大多数对特定学生的学习成果感兴趣的机构要么试图在自己的机构背景下定义和衡量这些结果，要么使用不容易与特定课程或教学干预相联系的国家标准考试。正在创建的实验设计是基于参与教师对他们课堂上使用的实际教学实践的合作、分析和反思。更广泛的影响：对于参与的学生来说，参与(CT)2练习向他们介绍了在解决开放式的现实世界问题时科学推理和怀疑论的严谨性。这些练习鼓励学生看到科学方法的实践必要性和价值。对于教师来说，暑期学院是一个机会，让参与的教师根据学生学习的直接证据来反思他们的教学实践。对于教育研究人员来说，在机构间的背景下进行对照实验，将学生批判性思维和公民思维能力的提高联系起来，有助于理解有效的教学实践，并建议对科学教学进行改革。

Interdisciplinary (99)This project addresses the task of generating a scientifically literate citizenry by paying explicit attention to the relationship between critical thinking and civic thinking. The target audience is non-science majors taking introductory science courses, geology and biology. This collaborative work helps identify the pedagogical practices that advance student learning in these areas, involves faculty from four institutions, and builds on a pilot study that was initially supported by the Carnegie Academy for the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning. The project is being implemented in two stages. First, participating instructors incorporate Critical Thinking for Civic Thinking (CT)2 exercises in their courses. These exercises consist of open-ended scenarios that require students to apply scientific reasoning and develop a civic action plan. They pose a civic problem that has an essentially science base (e.g. Human Health and the Quality of Drinking Water). The second stage of this project consists of an experimental design that identifies and tests the relative effectiveness of specific pedagogical interventions. Participating faculty are meeting for a summer institute in 2007 to discuss the results from the first-stage and to identify the practices that enhance student learning. They will devise an experimental protocol to test what appears to be the most salient independent variable (or variables) in improving student learning. The subsequent analysis will be carried out in the 2007-2008 academic year. Small grants to additional STEM faculty at the participating institutions are being used to expand the pedagogical approach to other disciplines. Intellectual Merit: Analysis is being conducted to determine if critical and civic thinking skills tend to develop concurrently or independently among beginning science students. The collaboration between four institutions permits the use of common assessment measures to compare and contrast student responses across multiple institutions. Historically, most institutions interested in specific student learning outcomes either have tried to define and measure them within their own institutional context or have used nationally standardized exams that can not be easily connected to specific curricula or pedagogical interventions. The experimental design being created is based on the participating faculty's collaboration, analysis, and reflection upon the actual pedagogical practices that are used in their classrooms. Broader Impacts: For participating students, engagement with (CT)2 exercises introduces them to the rigors of scientific reasoning and skepticism in addressing open-ended, real world problems. The exercises encourage students to see the practical necessities and value of the scientific method. For faculty, the summer academy serves as an opportunity for the participating instructors to reflect on their teaching practice in light of direct evidence of student learning. For educational researchers, a controlled experiment within an inter-institutional context that links improvements in student's abilities in critical thinking and civic thinking contributes to the understanding of effective teaching practices and suggests reforms in the teaching of science.