• If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Stop wasting time looking for files and revisions! Dokkio, a new product from the PBworks team, integrates and organizes your Drive, Dropbox, Box, Slack and Gmail files. Sign up for free.

View
 

Course Schedule Fall 2014

Page history last edited by Chandra Turpen 5 years, 4 months ago

Return to Maryland Learning Assistant Program  >  Mathematics and Science Education Seminar Fall 2014


 

Course Schedule

 

This schedule is likely to change throughout the course of the semester - updates will always be reflected here.

 

Date/Topic
Required reading (due this day)
Assignments due

Week 1, Sept. 3: Introduction to Scientific Inquiry

None
None

Week 2, Sept. 10:

Questioning

  1. Knuth, E., & Peressini, D. (2001). Unpacking the nature of discourse in mathematics classrooms. Mathematics Teaching in the Middle School, 6(5), 320-325.
  2. Trowbridge, L. W., Bybee, R. W., & Carlson-Powell, J. (2000). Chapter 12: Questioning and discussion. Teaching secondary school science: Strategies for developing scientific literacy (1st ed., pp. 183-192). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill.
  1. Reading reflection

Week 3, Sept. 17: Facilitating Classroom Discourse

  1. van Zee, E. & Minstrell, J. (1997). Using questioning to guide student thinking. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 6(2), 227-269.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Audio recording of Interview #1
  3. Transcript of interview to share (with line #'s)

Week 4, Sept. 24:

Students' Ideas about Specific Scientific Topics

  1. For PHYS131 & PHYS132 & PHYS299L LAs: McDermott, L. C., Rosenquist, M. L., & van Zee, E. (1987). Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics: Examples from kinematics.McDermott, Rosenquist, van Zee_Student difficulties in connecting graphs and physics.pdf American Journal of Physics, 55(6), 503-513.
  2. For BSCI207 LAs: Gregory, T. R. (2008). Understanding evolutionary trees. Evolution: Education and Outreach, 1, 121-137.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Field note #1

Week 5, Oct. 1: Learning from Cognitive Studies

  1. Redish, E. F. (1994). Implications of cognitive studies for teaching physics. American Journal of Physics, 62(9), 796-803.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Plan for videotaping your teaching

Week 6, Oct. 8: Conceptual Change through Analogies

  1. Brown, D.E., (1994). Facilitating conceptual change using analogies and explanatory models. International Journal of Science Education, 16(2), 201-214. 
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Field note #2
Week 7, Oct. 15: Variability in student reasoning
  1. Hammer, D., (2004). "The Variability of Student Reasoning, Lecture 1: Case Studies of Children's Inquires." The Proceedings of the Enrico Fermi Summer School in Physics (Italian Physical Society
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Audio recording of Interview #2
  3. Transcript of  entire interview (with line #'s)

Week 8, Oct. 22: Epistemology

  1. Elby, A. (2001). Helping physics students learn how to learn. Physics Education Research, American Journal of Physics Supplement, 69(7), S54-S64.
  2. Perkins, KK, Adams, WK, Pollock, SJ, Finkelstein, ND, Wieman, CE (2005). Correlating student beliefs with student learning using the Colorado Learning Attitudes about Science Survey. 2004 PERC Proceedings.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Analysis Paper of Interview #2
Week 9, Oct. 29: Argumentation and Metacognition
  1. For PHYS131 & UNIV100 LAs: Schoenfeld, A. H. (1987). What’s all the fuss about metacognition? In A. H. Schoenfeld (Ed.), Cognitive science and mathematics education (pp. 189-215). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
  2. For HLSC207 LAs: Jimenez-Aleixandre, M., Rodrigues, A., & Duschl, R. (2000). “Doing the lesson” or “doing science”: Argument in high school genetics. Science Education, 84, 757-792..
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Field note #3

 

Week 10, Nov. 5: Supporting Collaboration
  1. Smith, M. K., Wood, W. B., Adams, W. K., Wieman, C., Knight, J. K., Guild, N., & Su, T. T. (2009). Why peer discussion improves student performance on in-class concept questions. Science, 323, 122-124. 
  2. Barron, B. (2003). When smart groups fail. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 12(3), 307-359. 2 Excerpts ONLY: 1) Page 331 from "Case Analyses That Preserve Interactional Properties of Joint Work" to Page 337 where Case Examples 1 ends; &  2) Page 344 where Case Example 4 starts to the end of the first paragraph on page 350.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Reflection paper on teaching
Week 11, Nov. 12: Goals in Science Education
  1. Committee on Science Learning, R. A. Duschl, H. A. Schweingruber, and A. W. Shouse (Eds.) (2007). Chapter 2: Goals of Science Education. Taking Science to School: Learning and Teaching Science in Grades K-8.  pp. 26-50.
  2. Public Talks & News articles: 1) Ken Robinson, How schools kill creativity, 2) Sugata Mitra, Kids can teach themselves, 3) Freeman Hrabowski, 4 pillars of college success in science, 4) Dan Pink, On motivation, 5) NYTimes, Top Colleges that enroll rich, middle class and poor, 6) ...more to come
  1. Persuasively argue for the importance of 1-2 goals and the lack of importance of 1-2 goals.
Week 12, Nov. 19: Modeling in Science Education
  1. Svoboda, J. & Passmore, C. (2013). Strategies for Modeling in Biology Education. Science & Education, 22, pp. 119-142.
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Draft of Poster (by class Wed.)
  3. Final Synthesis Paper (Due Saturday)
Week 13, Nov. 26:
NO CLASS
None
  1. SWOT Feedback for Course Instructors

 

Week 14, Dec. 3:

  1. Proofreading/Editing/Revising Final Posters
  2. Post-surveys (FMCE & Perceptions of Teaching)
  1. Reading reflection
  2. Complete Draft of Poster (Due Tues by 1pm for feedback)
Week 15, Dec. 10:
Public Presentation
None
  1. Final Poster (by Sunday Dec. 7th)
  2. Poster presentation

 

Other Possibilities

  • Interdisciplinary Science Education
  • Formative Assessment:
    • Atkin, J. M., Black, P., & Coffey, J. (Eds.) (2001). Assessment in the Classroom. In the Classroom Assessment and the National Science Education Standards, Washington, DC: National Academy Press, pg. 23-58.
    • Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80(2), 139-148.
    • Coffey, J. E., Hammer, D., Levin, D. M., & Grant, T. (2011). The missing disciplinary substance of formative assessment. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(10), 1109-1136. 
  • Nature of Science: 
    • Dunbar, K. (1999). How scientists build models: InVivo science as a window on the scientific mind. In L. Magnani, N. J. Nersessian, & P. Thagard (Eds.), Model-based reasoning in scientific discovery (pp. 85-99). New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Preparation for Future Learning:
    • Constructivism in an age of non-constructivist assessments.  Daniel L. Schwartz, Robb Lindgren & Sarah Lewis. In T. Duffy and S. Tobias (Eds.), Constructivist instruction: Success or failure.
  • Understanding & Supporting Conceptual Change:
    • Hammer, D. Misconceptions or p-prims: How may alternative perspectives of cognitive structure influence instructional perceptions and intentions? The  Journal of the Learning Sciences, 5(2), 97-127.

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.