Scientific Practices in Science Education Publications: An Analysis of Research Contexts

S. Costa, F. Broietti
{"title":"Scientific Practices in Science Education Publications: An Analysis of Research Contexts","authors":"S. Costa, F. Broietti","doi":"10.33828/sei.v32.i4.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Scientific Practices play a central role in the Next Generation Science Standards, influencing the standards of more than 70% of students in the United States. Therefore, a view of what has been studied about Scientific Practices in Science Education, globally in the last decade is relevant. Thus, 44 articles from international journals in Science Education in the last decade (2010-2019) were analyzed. This review focuses on the specific research contexts of these articles. The research objectives were: I) To identify in which contexts the authors carried out research involving Scientific Practices and II) To critically discuss the research contexts of Scientific Practices and find research gaps. For this, a systematic literature review was conducted, guided by Bardin's Content Analysis (2011) and the guide to a systematic review by Okoli (2015). Regarding the contexts, six categories were identified: Scientific Practices and teaching proposals (C1); Scientific Practices and distinct theoretical frameworks (C2); Scientific Practices and students (C3); Scientific Practices and assessments (C4); Scientific Practices and teachers (C5); and Scientific Practices and the curriculum (C6). There was a predominant trend to relate Scientific Practices and teaching proposals (38.6%) and Scientific Practices and different theoretical frameworks (22.7%), totaling more than 61% of the analyzed articles. Research gaps have been identified, such as the need for further research on the relationship between Scientific Practices and students (learning) and Scientific Practices and teachers (teaching). Research in this regard can help to clarify: How have students engaged in Scientific Practices? How can teaching be organized to promote Scientific Practices? And what are the relationships between Scientific Practices, school subjects and specific content? The findings of the study revealed that a greater diversity of research contexts is necessary to fully understand the connections between Scientific Practices and the many dimensions involved in Science Education. It was found that there is a need for more research that addresses Scientific Practices as its main focus, considering the importance the concept is given in guiding documents.","PeriodicalId":156311,"journal":{"name":"Science Education International","volume":"100 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Science Education International","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33828/sei.v32.i4.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 4

Abstract

Scientific Practices play a central role in the Next Generation Science Standards, influencing the standards of more than 70% of students in the United States. Therefore, a view of what has been studied about Scientific Practices in Science Education, globally in the last decade is relevant. Thus, 44 articles from international journals in Science Education in the last decade (2010-2019) were analyzed. This review focuses on the specific research contexts of these articles. The research objectives were: I) To identify in which contexts the authors carried out research involving Scientific Practices and II) To critically discuss the research contexts of Scientific Practices and find research gaps. For this, a systematic literature review was conducted, guided by Bardin's Content Analysis (2011) and the guide to a systematic review by Okoli (2015). Regarding the contexts, six categories were identified: Scientific Practices and teaching proposals (C1); Scientific Practices and distinct theoretical frameworks (C2); Scientific Practices and students (C3); Scientific Practices and assessments (C4); Scientific Practices and teachers (C5); and Scientific Practices and the curriculum (C6). There was a predominant trend to relate Scientific Practices and teaching proposals (38.6%) and Scientific Practices and different theoretical frameworks (22.7%), totaling more than 61% of the analyzed articles. Research gaps have been identified, such as the need for further research on the relationship between Scientific Practices and students (learning) and Scientific Practices and teachers (teaching). Research in this regard can help to clarify: How have students engaged in Scientific Practices? How can teaching be organized to promote Scientific Practices? And what are the relationships between Scientific Practices, school subjects and specific content? The findings of the study revealed that a greater diversity of research contexts is necessary to fully understand the connections between Scientific Practices and the many dimensions involved in Science Education. It was found that there is a need for more research that addresses Scientific Practices as its main focus, considering the importance the concept is given in guiding documents.
科学教育出版物中的科学实践:研究背景分析
科学实践在下一代科学标准中发挥着核心作用,影响着美国70%以上学生的标准。因此,在过去十年中,对全球科学教育中的科学实践研究的观点是相关的。因此,我们分析了过去十年(2010-2019)科学教育国际期刊上的44篇文章。本文将重点介绍这些文章的具体研究背景。研究目标是:1)确定作者在哪些背景下进行了涉及科学实践的研究;2)批判性地讨论科学实践的研究背景并发现研究空白。为此,以Bardin的《内容分析》(2011)和Okoli的《系统综述指南》(2015)为指导,进行了系统的文献综述。根据上下文,确定了六个类别:科学实践和教学建议(C1);科学实践和独特的理论框架(C2);科学实践与学生(C3);科学实践和评估(C4);科学实践与教师(C5);科学实践和课程(C6)。科学实践与教学建议相关(38.6%)、科学实践与不同理论框架相关(22.7%)的趋势明显,占分析文章总数的61%以上。已经发现了研究空白,例如需要进一步研究科学实践与学生(学习)和科学实践与教师(教学)之间的关系。这方面的研究有助于澄清:学生是如何从事科学实践的?如何组织教学以促进科学实践?科学实践、学校科目和具体内容之间是什么关系?研究结果表明,为了充分理解科学实践与科学教育中涉及的许多维度之间的联系,更大的研究背景多样性是必要的。人们发现,考虑到指导性文件中给出的概念的重要性,需要更多的研究将科学实践作为其主要焦点。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信