Thinking Beyond the Experiment: Expanding Framings of an Undergraduate Laboratory Course

• In Event: Thinking Across Representations: Designing to Leverage Material and Computational Investigations for Science Learning

Abstract

Objectives. Scientific practices such as experimentation, modeling, and argumentation, interact with one another, inspiring new directions and giving context to interpretations (Ford, 2015; Gooding, 1990; MacLeod & Nersessian, 2013; Pickering, 1995). In school settings however, practices are often conducted in isolation (e.g. Hodson, 1996; Koponen & Mäntylä, 2006). In undergraduate laboratory courses, for example, experiments are the sole focus of activity, creating narrow understandings of their purpose and meaning (Hofstein & Lunetta, 2004). In this project we examine iterations on the design of a laboratory course aimed at engaging students in a broader range of concepts, practices and epistemic considerations by designing for more expansive framings.

Theoretical Framework. Expansive framings can emerge when participants understand their activity to be connected across contexts and to larger purposes (Engle, 2006). Engle and colleagues (2006, 2012) call for redesigning learning environments for expansive framing by 1) positioning students as authors who feel responsible and empowered to adapt ideas and practices and 2) emphasizing connections across settings and over time. In our work, we build on this conception, designing to expand the epistemological framing of the laboratory to include a range of practices and ideas that extend beyond the bounds of a single experiment.

Methods and Data. We analyzed data from three iterations of a longer-term design experiment. These three iterations were chosen because they represented a marked shift in design towards increasingly expansive framings. Table 1 summarizes two aspects of the design that we conjectured would influence the expansiveness of framings. The first concerns how the two main scientific activities (experimentation and computer modeling) were positioned and understood by students as either discrete or interconnected. The second concerns the extent to which individual lab groups were positioned as separate or part of a larger scientific community.
For each design iteration, we analyzed classroom video, interviews, and written work of one illustrative focal group. The focus of our analysis was to identify evidence of 1) the scope of disciplinary ideas raised and related, 2) students’ use of scientific practices and relationship between them and 3) epistemic considerations in students’ scientific activity.

Results and significance. By comparing three focal groups we make three preliminary claims about how a more expansively framed laboratory course influenced students’ activity (Table 2). First, we found that as the design expanded to integrate activities and groups, students’ discourse and written work showed evidence of engagement in a larger set of disciplinary ideas and questions. Second, we found that students’ engagement in scientific practices shifted from more linear and discrete to more integrated and fluid. Finally, we saw an expansion in the epistemic criteria considered by the three groups, shifting from concerns about correctness to considerations of consistency and generativity.
Engle and colleagues (2006, 2012) argued that expansive framing is important for supporting the transfer of ideas across contexts. We expand on this work to argue that expansive framing can foster flexible, interconnected forms of scientific practice and relevant epistemic considerations.

Authors

• Julia Svoboda Gouvea, Tufts University

• Aditi Wagh, Massachusetts Institute of Technology