Inquiry and History & Nature of Science Instruction: Why so rare?

Michael P. CloughSchool of Education

Iowa State Universitymclough@iastate.edu

10th ICHSSE ConferenceMinneapolis, MN

July 21-25, 2014

Often stated goals for science educationStudents will:• Demonstrate deep robust accurate understanding of fundamental science concepts.• Use critical thinking skills.• Convey a realistic understanding of the history and nature of science.• Identify and solve problems effectively.• Use communication and cooperative skills effectively.• Participate in working towards solutions to local, national, and global problems.• Be creative and curious.• Set goals, make decisions, and self-evaluate.• Convey a positive attitude about science.• Access, retrieve, and use the existing body of scientific knowledge in the process of

investigating phenomena.• Exhibit a strong work-ethic, self-confidence and perseverance.• Demonstrate an awareness of the importance of science in many careers.

Yet instruction promoting these widely agreed upon goals is rare in science education

Teaching science through inquiry and as inquiry is crucial to promoting these goals!

• Teaching science through inquiry – pedagogical practices that require and support extensive and significant conceptual decision-making by students while exploring phenomena.

• Teaching science as inquiry – pedagogical practices that accurately and unmistakably draw students’ attention to, and assist them in thinking about, the authentic practices of scientists.

Inquiry and NOS Instruction (Herman et al., 2013a)

Inquiry and the NOS(Herman et al., 2013a)

• Teachers who require extensive student decision-making while exploring phenomena have far more opportunities than other teachers for purposeful NOS instruction.

• Much NOS instruction by high and medium NOS implementers was not planned. Rather, high and medium NOS implementers often seized on NOS teaching opportunities when they unexpectedly arose in the context of student decision-making during inquiry.

• Planning for NOS instruction is important, but teaching science through inquiry (i.e., requiring student decision-making while exploring phenomena) create both planned and unplanned opportunities for teaching the NOS.

However…

• Teaching science through inquiry does not mean the NOS will be accurately and effectively taught.

• Teaching science through inquiry will always fall short of accurately reflecting authentic science inquiry.

• The knowledge that teachers possess and the assistance they provide as well as the context of schooling in teaching science through inquiry immediately distinguishes it from authentic science (students have outs!).

• Thus, authentic historical and contemporary science stories that accurately portray science in the making play an essential role.

Why are teaching science through inquiry and accurate history and NOS instruction so rare?

• NOS instruction appears to be contrary to “expectations held of science and science teaching in schools, not only by teachers and pupils but also those perceived as being held by parents and society” (Lakin & Wellington, 1994, p. 186).

• Teaching science through inquiry also appears to be contrary to expectations held of science teaching in schools by teachers, students, parents and society.

But far more is at play

Factors influencing NOS instruction• Constraints (Abd-El-Khalick et al., 1998; Bell et al., 2000);• Intentions, goals, and perceptions of students (Lederman, 1999);• Views of the NOS, pedagogy, and perceived teaching outcomes (Abd-

El-Khalick et al., 1998; Bell et al., 2000; Lakin & Wellington, 1994);• Subject matter and NOS understanding;• NOS PCK (Schwartz & Lederman, 2002);• Perceptions regarding the value of NOS for teaching, learning and

socioscientific decision-making (Herman et al., 2013b);• Sense of personal responsibility to teach the NOS; views about how

people learn; self-reflection abilities; participation in support networks with those who share similar views about teaching and learning; and strategies for coping with teaching constraints (Herman et al., 2013b).

These same sorts of factors surely impede efforts to teach science through inquiry and incorporate history of science.

Additional Factors Influencing NOS Instruction (Herman et al., 2013a)

• Implementing inquiry labs and other activities that require student decision-making appear to be the reforms-based practices most important for creating opportunities for accurate NOS instruction.

• Asking thought-provoking extended-answer questions and playing off students’ ideas in ways that scaffold them to desired understandings appear to be the most important teacher practices for seizing on opportunities to effectively teach the NOS.

Messy, messy, messy!• Authentic science is messy.• Accurate historical and contemporary portrayals of science

will have varying levels of messiness.• Teaching science through inquiry will have varying levels

of messiness.• Working with students’ ideas and scaffolding to more

accurate understanding is messy.

Ubiquitous teaching practices reflect efforts to sanitize teaching, science content, and the history and nature of science.

• Lecture• Popular science textbooks & curriculum materials• Cookbook activities and other common tasks• True-false, multiple-choice, fill-in-the-blank assessments• Dichotomous and recall questioning• Judging students’ answers

Teachers often look for activities and materials that unambiguously and reliably “work”.

“Guide on the side” is not helpful advice

• Teacher decision-making and their synergetic effect (Clough et al., 2009) must be part of efforts to effectively promote teaching science through inquiry, history and NOS instruction.

• More attention must be devoted to helping teachers learn to ask effective questions. phrasing of questions that avoid dichotomous and mere recall

responses logic flow of questioning playing off students’ responses with questions that assist in

meaning-making

Effective Teaching is Complex and Demands Attention to Teacher Behaviors and Teacher-Student Interaction

• “It’s obvious if you just look at it.”• “Maybe you remember incorrectly, or maybe what you were taught is

incorrect.”• Eraser in hot crucible.• Effective questioning is a crucial aspect of effective teaching. Dan: “Mr.

Clough, the mass of my system went down.”Me: “How do you account for that, Dan?”Dan: “A gas was formed and gases have no mass.”Me: (Inwardly surprised, but maintaining an accepting and inquisitive outward appearance) “What do you think gases consist of?”Dan: “Atoms.”Me: “What do you know about atoms and mass?”Dan: “Atoms have no mass.”Me: (Doubly surprised and searching for a way to help Dan see his misunderstanding) “Dan, from a chemical perspective, what are you made up of?”Dan: “Atoms.” (Pause, followed by a paradoxical look on his face.) “And I have mass.”

Questions that Draw Students’ Attention to the NOS (Clough, 2011)

• How might this black-box activity be similar to and different from real science?

• How does your work in this laboratory activity illustrate that you did not follow a step-by-step scientific method? How is this similar to the work of scientists?

• How does the work of [insert scientist or scientists] illustrate that data does not tell scientists what to think, but instead that creativity is part of making sense of data?

Questions that Draw Students’ Attention to the NOS (cont.)

• The word “theory” in science is often wrongly interpreted by people as meaning “guess”, “opinion”, or a not well substantiated claim. How does that meaning not capture the confidence we have in kinetic molecular theory? [This question is most effective when asked after students have studied and are coming to understand the power of the theory. The question can be asked in the context of any well established theory such as atomic theory, the theory of plate tectonics, the theory of evolution, etc.]

Questions that Draw Students’ Attention to the NOS (cont.)

• How does the DNA work of James Watson, Francis Crick, Maurice Wilkins, Rosalind Franklin, and Linus Pauling illustrate that doing science involves both collaboration and competition?

• Consider the model of the atom and the evidence that supports it. How does this work illustrate that science ideas are developed to account for data (i.e., data doesn’t tell scientists what to think)?

• In what ways does this portion of your textbook distort what real science is like?

Questions that Draw Students’ Attention to the NOS (cont.)

• How does the process by which science came to understand the link between asteroids and dinosaurs illustrate that science requires creativity and does not follow a linear process (see http://undsci.berkeley.edu/article/0_0_0/alvarez_01)?

• What prior knowledge did you use in developing your laboratory procedure and analyzing your data? How does this illustrate that scientific theories guide researchers in determining what questions to ask, how to investigate those questions, and how to make sense of data?

Effectively teaching science through inquiry and as inquiry demands attention to teacher

behaviors and interaction patterns.• Asking well-phrased questions.• Using wait-time I and II• Exhibiting encouraging non-verbal behaviors• Responding to students’ ideas with questions that ask them

to elaborate and questions that play off students’ ideas in a manner that assist them in meaning-making.

These behaviors and the resulting interaction pattern demand much effort! Teachers who struggle with these behaviors will often fail at teaching science through and as inquiry.

ISU SSTEP

Graduate Science Teacher Education Program (Master of Arts in Teaching)

ReferencesAbd-El-Khalick, F., Bell, R. L., & Lederman, N. G. (1998). The nature of science and instructional practice: Making the unnatural natural. Science Education, 82(4), 417–436.

Bell, R. L., Lederman, N. G. & Abd-El-Khalick, F. (2000). Developing and acting upon one’s conception of science: A follow-up study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(6), 563–581.

Clough, M. P. (2011). Teaching and Assessing the Nature of Science: How to Effectively Incorporate the Nature of Science in Your Classroom. The Science Teacher. 78(6), 56-60.

Clough, M. P., Berg, C. A. & Olson, J. K. (2009). Promoting Effective Science Teacher Education and Science Teaching: A Framework for Teacher Decision-Making. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 7(4), 821-847.

Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P. & Olson, J. K. (2013a). Association between Experienced Teachers’ NOS Implementation and Reform-Based Science Teaching Practices. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 24(7), 1077-1102.

Herman, B. C., Clough, M. P. & Olson, J. K. (2013b). Factors Associated with Teachers’ NOS Implementation Efforts: Implications for Science Teacher Preparation. Paper presented at the Association for Science Teacher Education (ASTE) International Conference, Charleston, SC, January 9-12. Manuscript submitted for publication and currently under review.

Lakin, S. & Wellington, J. (1994). Who will teach the nature of science? Teachers‘ views of science and their implications for science education, International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 175–190.

Lederman, N. G. (1999). Teachers’ understanding of the nature of science and classroom practice: factors that facilitate or impede the relationship. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 36(8), 916-929.

Schwartz, R. S. & Lederman, N. G. (2002). “It’s the nature of the beast”: The influence of knowledge and intentions on learning and teaching the nature of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 205-236.

Inquiry and History & Nature of Science Instruction: Why so rare?

Michael P. CloughSchool of EducationIowa State Universitymclough@iastate.edu

10th ICHSSE ConferenceMinneapolis, MN

July 21-25, 2014