Maya Patel Barbara A. Crawford Deborah Trumbull Elizabeth Fox Cornell University

1. Learning the process and nature of science in the context of cutting-edge plant biotechnology research: Assessing a research experience for undergraduates June 5, 2008 Maya Patel Barbara A. Crawford Deborah Trumbull Elizabeth Fox Cornell University Enriching the Academic Experience of College Science Students Ann Arbor, MI, 2008

2. From Ithaca, New York ?

3. How can we create learning environments that support diverse learners at all levels, in developing a deep understanding of science? • Key questions include: • 1) what counts as authentic? • 2) for whom is a setting authentic? • 3) how can we move all students towards the inner circle of scientific literacy?

5. What does it mean to move students towards the inner circle?

6. the problem exists prior to college • Many students, including those of underrepresented groups, begin to lose interest in science in middle school. • Nature of science , scientific inquiry, and history of science ideas have had limited emphasis in science classes and assessments (Anderson, 2002). • In classroom settings, NOS and inquiry tend to remain marginalized in textbooks and in science classrooms, where knowing the “facts of science” dominates (Gallagher, 1991; NRC 1996, 2000).

7. Importance of Inquiry-based instruction • “Students should develop and understanding of what science is, what science is not, what science can and cannot do, and how science contributes to culture”, (National Research Council, 1996, p21)

8. Importance of Inquiry-based instruction • There is evidence that underrepresented student groups proportionally show greater academic gains through participation in inquiry-based instruction (Amaral, Garrison, & Klentschy, 2002; Buxton, 2006; Lee, Buxton, Lewis, & LeRoy, 2006).

9. Standards-based science education goals specifically state that students • a) learn how to reason scientifically • b) gain an ability to communicate scientific ideas • c) gain an understanding of the tentative and epistemic status of scientific claims, theories, and models (NRC, 2000)

10. What do we mean by inquiry? • scientifically oriented questions; • giving priority to evidence in responding to questions; • formulating explanations from evidence; • connecting explanations to scientific knowledge; • and communicating and justifying explanations (NRC, 2000)

11. Two Goals of Teaching Science as Inquiry • Abilities to do inquiry • formulating questions • designing investigations • dealing with data • constructing and testing explanations • communicating results • Knowledge about inquiry • Scientists use varied methods • Scientific inquiry involves testing ideas • Scientists use logic, higher-order thinking, and current knowledge • Scientific investigations lead to more questions • (NRC 1996; 2000)

12. Evolving nature of science inquiry • Reason scientifically • Communicate scientific ideas • Understand the epistemic status of scientific claims, theories, and models.

13. construct of authenticity • multiple meanings in science education research literature. • varied views of what counts as authentic in school science • (See Barab & Hay, 2001; Benze & Hodson, 1999; Braund & Reiss, 2006; Chinn & Malhotra, 2002; Crawford, Zembal-Saul, Munford, & Friedrichsen, 2005; Dewey, 1938; Edelson, 1998; Hodson, 1998; Marx, Blumenfeld, Krajcik, &, Soloway,1997; Roth, 1995; Roth & Calabrese-Barton, 2004; Ruopp, 1994; Richmond & Kurth, 1999; Schwartz & Crawford, 2004; Woolnough, 2000).

14. What counts as an authentic science experience? • An authentic setting is one that provides a context for real and meaningful science learning aligned with the kind of work that scientists actually do, and one that also has relevancy for the learner. • Students engage in investigations that are meaningful to them (Crawford et al., 1999; Crawford, 2000)

15. Situating the learning--authentic questions

16. A B Crawford BA, Cullin MJ (2004) Supporting prospective teachers' conceptions of modelling in science International Journal of Science Education 26 (11), 1379-1401

18. Socio-Contextual Inquiry Model(SCI) Five essential elements • 1) Relevant authentic questions; • 2) Sense making of data using cultural tools; • 3) Social negotiation of ideas; • 4) Linking the doing of science with the nature of science; • 5) Reflection on learning or metacognition

19. Relevant authentic questions

20. Sense making of data using cultural tools High school ecology teacher mentored his students in collecting and analyzing data to assess the living and nonliving components of a nearby slough (3 year study). The teacher modeled the importance of using logic and evidence. (Crawford, 2000)

21. More than just the experience • Authentic experiences, authentic in the sense of actual laboratory and fieldwork, by themselves, do not necessarily effect dramatic changes in students’ gain in scientific literacy (Bell, Blair, Crawford, & Lederman, 2003).

22. Linking Doing of Science to Nature of Science Field Study Explicit instruction of NOS and reflection on models and modeling Metacognition Model-It

23. A study of preservice teachersWe situated students in scientific research labs to learn the nature of science (Schwartz, Lederman, & Crawford, 2004) • What is the general purpose of the research (e.g. better human life, satisfy curiosity, develop technology, etc…)? Do you think all scientific research has a similar purpose? Explain. • What scientific concepts (theories, laws, etc) are guiding the research project you are most familiar with in your placement? • Describe aspects of NOS as you see them represented within your research setting. Student Journal Questions

24. instruction that enhances understandings of science concepts • students should be taught that science is one way of knowing about the world, based on the use of evidence to develop explanations about how things happen in the world Reflection on learning or metacognition

25. Lake Source Cooling Relevant authentic questions

26. Lake Source Cooling Project at Cornell University • Cold water is pumped to a heat-exchange facility at the shore from about 250 feet deep in Cayuga Lake • It absorbs the heat from water in Cornell’s cooling system • Heat exchange is done through solid stainless steel plates • Water is returned to Cayuga Lake and the chilled water is pumped to campus to cool buildings

27. Proposed monitoring sites Sense making of data using cultural tools

28. Linking the doing of science with the nature of science

29. Journal question: What is a scientific model? How is the model you built like a scientific model? Metacognition/Reflection on the nature of science

30. UREs defined Undergraduate Research Experiences (UREs) Kinkaid (2003): • “[includes] scientific inquiry, creative activity, and scholarship” • produces (or contributes to) some original work • apprenticeship model – work is mentored by a faculty member, graduate student, professional researcher etc. Includes: • Research-credit (traditional lab work for credit – thesis or non-thesis) • Summer Internship Programs • Apprenticeship-style Courses – both group and individual work

31. Undergraduate Research Experiences (UREs) have been shown to: • be effective for attracting and sustaining talented students, including underrepresented minority students, in pathways leading toward scientific careers (Bauer & Bennett, 2003; Gonzalez-Espada & Zaras, 2006; Lopatto, 2004a; Nagda et al., 1998; Seymour et al., 2004). • be effective at teaching laboratory and research skills (Kardash, 2000; Seymour et al., 2004). • cause gains in student learning about the process of inquiry and some aspects of NOS(Ryder et al., 1999; Kardash, 2000). • promote students’ metacognitive and personal development. (Hunter et al., 2006; Lopatto, 2004b).

32. Problem: • Ultimate problem: Reform undergraduate science education in ways that attract and retain a greater diversity of students. • Proximal problem: Describe the ways in which UREs promote science learning and student development.

33. Theoretical Framework • Social constructivist perspective on learning: Learning is a continual process of integrating old and new knowledge (or reconstructing knowledge). This process is situated within a particular social and cultural context as the learner internalizes cultural tools for learning. (Vygotsky, 1978; Cobb, 1994). • Cognitive apprenticeship model of teaching: The learner engages in authentic but scaffolded domain specific tasks; interactions with “experienced other” encourage metacognitive development as learners progress toward independent practice. • Lave & Wenger’s (1991) model of learning through legitimate peripheral participation within a community of practice - movement from periphery towards center of a discipline through guided, authentic practice. • Baxter Magolda’s (1999)epistemological reflection model of development toward contextual knowing and “self-authorship;” scientific inquiry as a constructivist-developmental pedagogy (intertwining of cognitive and identity development).

34. Context – Summer URE in Biotechnology and Genomics • Ten-week, intensive summer research internship program • Hosted by a Plant Genomics Research Institute at a Large NE University • Highly collaborative, international research • Large, active, state-of-the-art laboratories • Program’s stated goals are to provide Interns with • broader knowledge of plant genomics and cutting-edge techniques • better understanding of genuine scientific research • preparation for future academic work

35. Context – Research Internship • Interns are placed within participating laboratories – matching by interest if possible • Mentored by graduate student or post-doctoral researcher • Supervised, independent research directly related to Mentor’s research • Additional activities include • Written research proposal • Participate in lab meetings • Attend PI seminar series • Symposium-style presentation of research and results

36. Participants - Interns 2007 summer URE cohort • 17 Biology majors, 1 Env. Science major • 6 Jrs., 9 Srs., 3 recent graduates • 11 females, 7 males • 8 minority students

37. Participants - Interns Table 1: Intern sample drawn from the 2007 summer URE cohort.

38. ResearchQuestions: • Descriptive/Explanatory • What understandings about science content (biotechnology and genomics) do Interns develop? • What understandings/abilities in doing scientific research (inquiry) do Interns develop? • What understandings about NOS do Interns develop? • Predictive/Relational • What attributes of the Interns correlate best with gains? • What attributes of the program correlate best with gains?

39. Fundamental Understandings about Scientific Inquiry: (NRC, 2000) • Scientific investigations are undertaken for a variety of reasons (confirmation, explanation, discovery, testing, prediction) and • Scientific investigations are guided by the principles, knowledge and theory of the day. • Scientists rely on technology and mathematics. • Scientific explanations must adhere to criteria that are determined by the scientific community. • Scientific results are communicated so that they may be subject to critical review by the scientific community.

40. Essential Inquiry Abilities: (NRC, 2000) • Identify questions and concepts that guide scientific questions. • Design and conduct scientific investigations (determine what constitutes evidence and collect it). • Use technology and mathematics (summarize and present evidence). • Formulate and revise scientific explanations and models using logic and evidence. • Examine other resources and form links to explanations. • Recognize and analyze alternative explanations and models. • Communicate and defend a scientific argument.

41. Seven Important Aspects of NOS (Lederman et al., 2002) • Science is at least partially based on observation and students should be able to distinguish between observation and inference. • Scientific knowledge is theory-laden (subjective vs. objective NOS). • Students should understand the difference between a theory and a law. • Generating scientific knowledge involves imagination and creativity. • Science is practiced within the context of a larger culture and scientists are a product of that culture. • There is no single scientific method that would guarantee infallible knowledge. • Scientific facts, theories and laws are subject to change as new evidence develops.

42. Data Sources: • Pre-assessments: • Interns’ application essay • Research proposal • Pre-program questionnaire • Post-assessments: • Post-program questionnaire and semi-structured interview • Post-program tracking

43. Data Analysis • Constant comparative approach • Vertical and horizontal • Initial coding framework: • Learning to do: inquiry abilities and other science process skills (e.g. Kardash, 2000) • Learning about: biotechnology and genomics; inquiry and NOS. • Learning from: means by which students learned about and to do their science (e.g. interactions with mentor, engaging the literature, independent practice). • Additional codes were developed during analysis: • Intern and program attributes • other outcomes

44. Preliminary Findings: Science Content • The subject matter of biotechnology and genomics: • Students learned biotechnology and genomics content specific to their project • Novices were less able to discuss this subject matter in-depth during their interview • M: What new question could you ask? • L: Um, probably along the same lines of what I’m doing now, just testing the reaction, uh the response of a plant to like a gene or a pathogen. Probably. • (Lisa, Interview) • More experienced research students described deepening their prior knowledge through participation in the inquiry context • For some Interns, developing deep understanding contributed to feelings of project ownership.

45. I could never have explained the tDNA knock out mutants to you before this program and actually, in the…lab that I worked in for the past two years, I have actually tested double knock out mutants, via the same process … that I used during the summer Internship but I never understood the theory behindit… (Christian, Interview) But in the execution of it, once I figured out really well what I was doing, probably maybe 3 weeks into it or so, once I had a clear, clear picture where I was going, what I was doing it for, and what it was going to be for, at that point I pretty much took ownership of the project. (Christian, Interview)

46. Martin Karl Crystal Christian Violet Lisa Tina Preliminary Findings: Conducting Inquiry Range of inquiry experiences in this URE Brown, Abell & Demir, 2006, pg. 799

47. Preliminary Findings: Conducting Inquiry • Inquiry abilities of greatest importance to Interns in this URE: • Using technology – all Interns rated themselves as experts in the execution of their primary techniques • Scientific communication • Proposal • PowerPoint Presentation • Problem Solving • Conceptual • Technical • But 5/7 could describe how they could use the techniques to address a new research question. • Modeled professional science practice • Helped students to consolidate and organize their knowledge into understanding. • Stories about creativity • Understandings about the methods of science • Appreciation for collaboration btw. scientists • Talk about feelings of independence and ownership

48. I think it’s cool because I’ve learned that I have the drive to be in the laboratory and to enjoy the work and just pursue scientific questions. Because, at first…you know I was trying very hard and it wasn’t working. But the best thing I’ve discovered about myself is that I have the ability to acquire information independently and I have the ability to actually ask intelligent questions that could be tested in the future. (Karl, Interview)

49. Preliminary Findings: Understandings about Inquiry (NRC, 2000;Bybee, 2000) • Scientific investigations are undertaken for a variety of reasons (confirmation, explanation, discovery, testing, prediction) and • Scientific investigations are guided by the principles, knowledge and theory of the day. • Scientists rely on technology and mathematics. • Scientific explanations must adhere to criteria that are determined by the scientific community. • Scientific results are communicated so that they may be subject to critical review by the scientific community. Collaborative/community aspects of scientific inquiry was a strong, though sometimes implicit, message.

50. I think that’s how science is really done…I think that science is a collection of results, not just one person’s results making a big difference. Because I think in every lab it’s a group of people that make the lab work, not just one person. (Violet, Interview)