The Journey from Design-Based Research to Partnerships Changing Practice in Science Classrooms

• In Event: Tracing the Contours of Having an “Impact”: Reflections From Learning Sciences Faculty

Abstract

Purpose: I discuss “the practice turn” (Ford, 2015) of the last three decades of the learning sciences and the impact of this work on policy and practice in science classrooms. This analysis explores how a successful research program in the field can lead to design and implementation of tools that reflect the pedagogical ideas it explores. I consider (a) how this view was reflected design research studies; (b) how a practice focus became part of influential research consensus reports with policy recommendations eventually leading to new science standards; (c) the impact of these policies and standards on the the infrastructures for instructional materials, professional learning, and assessment systems; and (d) the impact of these infrastructural shifts on the pedagogy of practices being taken up across a large number of U.S. classrooms.

Theoretical & Methodological Perspectives: Analyses of disciplinary learning outline a process of becoming a member of a community of practice (Lave & Wenger, 1991). Meaningful participation in disciplines involves shared goals, norms, and ways of building, evaluating, and refining knowledge that draw on shared language, tools, and ways of working with others to accomplish these goals (Lehrer & Schauble, 2006). Early design-based research identified engaging in disciplinary practices as a promising model, designing learning environments in which teachers and tools (curriculum design, software tools) can support students in incrementally developing aspects of disciplinary practices engaging in knowledge building work with tools and disciplinary discourse to address questions and problems they see as relevant (e.g., Brown & Campione, 1990; Cobb, 1992; Engle & Conat, 2002; Warren & Rosebery, 1996).

Data Sources and Results: In the 2000s, research findings from this work influenced consensus studies of research on teaching and learning that identified the importance of disciplinary practices as a framework for learning in mathematics (NRC, 2000) and science (NRC, 2007). These research-based recommendations culminated in the Framework for K-12 Science (NRC, 2012) that led to the development of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS, 2013) and other Framework-based state standards now in 49 of the 50 states. These standards shift from targeting purely declarative ideas and isolated skills to a model of more meaningful practices that build and apply explanatory ideas. Standards adoption became a catalyst for infrastructural shifts, as new approaches in curriculum materials and professional learning programs are being designed, debated, investigated, and scaled. I will describe an example of how these underlying shifts can become realized in classroom practice by considering science storylines, an NGSS curriculum approach that embeds meaningful practices in science learning that anchors students’ sensemaking in questions and problems their classroom identifies (Author 1 et al 2021). Analysis of classroom discourse, student work, and practical measures examine increasing epistemic agency for students, a shift toward collective sensemaking in classroom discourse, and an increasing sense of relevance of science for students’ lives.

Significance: This analysis characterizes how emerging consensus from research can have an impact beyond that of an individual research group’s particular theories or design products to influence policies and infrastructures leading to real impacts on classroom practice. [500 words]

Author

• Brian J. Reiser, Northwestern University