Science & Education最新文献

{"title":"“We Don't Come Here to Learn; We Come to Pass.” Promoting Deliberative Peer Dialogue in an Underserved and Diverse Science Class","authors":"María Helena Salas,&nbsp;Antonia Larrain","doi":"10.1002/sce.70085","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70085","url":null,"abstract":"<div>\u0000 \u0000 <p>In a complex, interconnected world in which socio-scientific problems such as climate change, vaccination, and genetic testing are emerging alongside political polarization and fake news, it is crucial to teach younger generations to critically understand science, imagine possible solutions, and adopt positions that consider different identities and worldviews. To accomplish this, the long tradition of dialogic teaching could be a crucial pedagogical approach. However, despite efforts to promote dialogic teaching, transferring these pedagogies to classrooms has proven difficult, especially in underserved schools. In these contexts, pedagogical innovations are even more challenging, often reinforcing traditional teaching or the belief that dialogic pedagogies are only for upper/middle-class students. Added to this, narratives of dialogic teaching experiences from the Global South are still scarce. This single case study illustrates in-depth the process of enacting a South American dialogic design––deliberative teaching––in an underserved science class in Chile. With a mixed design focused on a qualitative narrative of the experience, it addresses the relationship between teacher and researcher, who collaborate on a project of deliberative pedagogy in an 11th-grade science class. Codification of peer interaction data is presented to complement the case narrative. The study illustrates the complexities of implementing dialogic pedagogies in challenging contexts, and how relationships of collaboration, dialogue, trust, and flexibility were needed to address the pedagogical innovation. It emphasizes that, with enough support, peer dialogue, motivation, and engagement can flourish.</p>\u0000 </div>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 6","pages":"1546-1566"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149099411","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Authentic” Science: A Conversation With Philosopher Melinda Bonnie Fagan, Ph.D.","authors":"Melinda Bonnie Fagan,&nbsp;David Stroupe","doi":"10.1002/sce.70100","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70100","url":null,"abstract":"&lt;p&gt;We are excited to launch a conversation series between researchers in science education and colleagues in the fields of History and Philosophy of Science (HPS) and Science and Technology Studies (STS) to hear their perspectives on active questions in the field of science education. Perhaps you have encountered HPS and STS literature at some point in your career and recognize that such work has explicitly and implicitly shaped how our field thinks about science, education, and the purpose of our research and teaching. However, we wonder if you have ever engaged in a conversation with a HPS or STS scholar about science education, and if so, have ever asked how their work might inform our research and collaborations with teachers, students, schools, community-based organizations, and policymakers. We hope that this series will catalyze questions and conversations about our past, present, and future research. If you are interested in engaging in a conversation with a HPS or STS scholar as part of this series, please contact us with your idea.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;David:&lt;/b&gt; We will begin with introductions to set the stage for readers. I am a professor of science education at the University of Utah, and one of the Co-Editors of the journal &lt;i&gt;Science Education&lt;/i&gt;. I became intrigued by how HPS might inform science education during my graduate school days, and this interest provided a foundation for my initial research around epistemic agency and epistemic injustice in science classrooms.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Melinda:&lt;/b&gt; I am a professor of philosophy at the University of Utah, and I am interested in questions about scientific knowledge and modeling. My background is in the laboratory sciences, where I got a PhD in biology before switching to philosophy. My career has been based on linking my STEM experiences with conversations that philosophers of science have about scientific knowledge. I've recently published a book synthesizing these experiences and proposing a community-centric account of explanation across the sciences (&lt;i&gt;Explanatory Particularism in Scientific Practice&lt;/i&gt;, Oxford 2025). I know this is an important issue in science education, and I am excited to find connections.&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;David&lt;/b&gt;: Your unique perspective is great for a conversation about science education!&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;b&gt;Melinda:&lt;/b&gt; Not too many philosophers of science today address educational issues directly, but quite a lot of the theories and ideas are extremely relevant. Questions about knowledge and how we know, these big picture issues about the nature of explanation and evidence, are all—as you were just saying, David—core issues about what is built into the frames of science and teaching. Digging into those implicit background assumptions is one of the main roles of philosophy in the analytic tradition. We hope to bring assumptions out of the background and make them explicit. Ideally, unearthing assumptions informs how we ask questions about evidence and assessment. While I do not have an","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 6","pages":"1519-1529"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70100","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149099871","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Science for All? A Systematic Literature Review on Effective Teaching Approaches in Inclusive and Separate Settings","authors":"Silvia Fränkel,&nbsp;Nadine Großmann,&nbsp;Melanie Basten","doi":"10.1002/sce.70090","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70090","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This systematic literature review examines intervention studies focused on teaching science to a diverse range of learners. It adopts a broad definition of inclusion and makes use of the PRISMA statement. The review aims to provide an overview of evidence-based teaching approaches in the current literature, identify the science skills targeted, and synthesize the evidence for the approaches used in inclusive and separate settings in the context of <i>science for all</i>. The review analyzed intervention studies published between 2013 and 2022. Only quantitative, methodologically sound intervention studies were included (<i>N</i> = 31). The findings revealed that almost all identified studies adopted a narrow definition of inclusion. The six identified teaching approaches include digital learning (<i>n</i> = 14), peer support (<i>n</i> = 2), self-directed learning (<i>n</i> = 9), design-based engineering learning (<i>n</i> = 2), systematic instruction (<i>n</i> = 16), and universal design for learning (<i>n</i> = 3). Positive evidence was found for systematic instruction, mixed evidence for digital learning and self-directed learning, and insufficient but promising evidence for peer support, design-based engineering learning, and universal design for learning. Furthermore, the results suggest that studies in the context of <i>doing science, learning about science</i>, and <i>learning to address socioscientific issues</i> are lacking, and further research is required.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 6","pages":"1567-1595"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70090","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149100085","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"From Consensus to Plurality: Three Waves of Nature of Science Research?","authors":"Cristiano Barbosa de Moura","doi":"10.1007/s11191-026-00791-z","DOIUrl":"10.1007/s11191-026-00791-z","url":null,"abstract":"","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"35 5","pages":"1279 - 1283"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-09-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"149099269","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Welcome to the Jungle: An Examination of the Making of Science Standards","authors":"Allison M. Esparza,&nbsp;Joanne K. Olson","doi":"10.1002/sce.70078","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70078","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Nearly 50 million public school students in the United States are required to learn the content prescribed by state-mandated science standards. Although much is known about the implementation of science standards and teachers' perceptions of them, the development process of these standards remains unclear. Understanding standards development is crucial to ensure the process employed is thoughtful, fair, considers expertise, and results in standards of sufficient quality to warrant implementation. This study examined the development of science standards in Texas to determine the enacted process, the expertise involved, who held decision-making authority, and how authority was exercised. State Board of Education meetings were transcribed, coded, and supplemented with online documents and public records requests. Experts on learning were not present, and expertise in physics, earth science, and chemistry was weak to non-existent. Teachers played a role in the early stages of the process, but the board ultimately had the authority to override, modify, and write the final standards document. The board was observed adding developmentally inappropriate content, overriding teachers' and subject-matter experts' concerns, and using humor about their lack of subject-matter knowledge. The findings raise important concerns about placing responsibility for standards development on an elected board of public officials, given their limited time, expertise, and connections to special interest groups. Given the immense influence of standards on what students are taught, we recommend an independent standards development process that balances decision-making authority across experts in teaching, learning, the subject matter, and the milieu.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1278-1301"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70078","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696277","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Proposing a Framework to Center Justice in Ambitious Science Teaching","authors":"April Luehmann,&nbsp;Gena Merliss,&nbsp;Todd Campbell,&nbsp;Déana Scipio,&nbsp;Yang Zhang,&nbsp;Hannah Cooke,&nbsp;Elizabeth Wilson,&nbsp;Priya Pugh,&nbsp;Adma Gama-Krummel","doi":"10.1002/sce.70065","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70065","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Though educators and researchers have developed shared theory and language for priorities necessary to disrupt the status quo toward more equitable science education, we lack a tool that organizes sets of teaching practices across an instructional unit to support enactment and rehearsal. Core sets of practices, such as those included in the Ambitious Science Teaching (AST) framework (Windschitl et al. 2018), have been shown to nurture diverse students' access, achievement, and identities in science. Though valuable, they stop short of meeting more critical demands of equity, namely that of challenging and expanding what counts as science and using science to transform social injustice. Toward this end, this paper offers the theoretical warrant for the Justice-centered ambitious Science Teaching (JuST) Framework, empirically developed and conceptually aligned with current priorities related to justice-centered science pedagogy. Building on and extending AST, JuST works toward shaping science education in ways that reflect the diversity of sensemaking repertoires of the students in any given classroom and uses science for purposes that matter to them and work toward more just futures. The JuST-FW offers educators and scholars a common organizational tool, language,Davis and core practices as scaffolds for centering justice in planning for and teaching ambitious science units as well as collaboratively reflecting on practice with a common tool.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1302-1331"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70065","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148695984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"“Taking Off the Rose-Colored Glasses”: How Justice-Centered Science Curricula Engages Prehealth Undergraduates' in Critical Consciousness","authors":"Sabah K. Elias,&nbsp;Francisca Dogbe,&nbsp;Ashley R. Acosta-Parra,&nbsp;Arsema Alemayehu,&nbsp;Faizah Asif,&nbsp;Yajing Feng,&nbsp;Jacob Francisco Gomez,&nbsp;Isabella Morimoto,&nbsp;Ofelia Preciado,&nbsp;Dathan Tran,&nbsp;Ross Wohlgemuth,&nbsp;Lucas R. Smith,&nbsp;Eric J. Crossen,&nbsp;Brie Tripp","doi":"10.1002/sce.70074","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70074","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Health disparities rooted in systemic oppression and perpetuated by implicit bias among medical professionals remain pervasive across North America. These inequities are often sustained by providers' limited awareness of social realities that shape the lives of people from marginalized communities. Raising future healthcare practitioners' critical consciousness—the ability to recognize oppressive structures that cause disparities (critical reflection), feeling motivated to challenge them (critical self-efficacy), and taking action to change these circumstances (critical action)—holds promise in addressing healthcare injustice. In this study, undergraduate researchers with lived experience of systemic oppression developed case studies with input from local community partners. These cases were implemented in an upper-division human physiology course that challenged pre-health students to analyze the intersection of physiology, health disparities, and advocacy. Through interviews, findings revealed that students were encouraged to critically reflect and felt confident to act against injustice along a critical consciousness continuum, with the majority describing structural oppression as the root cause of health disparities and motivation to change these circumstances. This attests to the power of justice-centered curricula to foster a more just future in medicine and the potential to cultivate more critically conscious healthcare practitioners.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1405-1423"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70074","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696465","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Learning Trajectories for Constructing Mechanistic Explanations and the Role Played by Epistemic Knowledge","authors":"Ruth Molad,&nbsp;Michal Haskel-Ittah","doi":"10.1002/sce.70066","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70066","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Explaining scientific phenomena by unpacking their underlying mechanisms poses many challenges for high-school students. One central challenge is synthesizing the different parts of a mechanism into a coherent whole and identifying what information is still missing, or whether further learning is required. This study investigates how high-school students learn about mechanisms while constructing mechanistic explanations in biology. Using the lens of epistemic cognition, we examined how students navigate information about biological mechanisms during learning, shifting between parts of the mechanism they have already understood and those that remain as black boxes. Sixty-five students from four biology classes (Grades 10 and 11) participated in a group-based inquiry activity designed to uncover the biological mechanism underlying sun tanning. As students freely navigated available information, they made epistemic decisions about which black boxes to unpack and which to leave unexplored. The analysis focuses on students' learning trajectories and the epistemic knowledge that informed these decisions. Our findings identified three distinct learning trajectories, indicating that students may follow different paths when learning about mechanisms. Each trajectory was associated with a particular combination of epistemic knowledge. We propose that these trajectories emerge because students' epistemic knowledge directs their attention to specific black boxes within a mechanism. Consequently, students prioritize the unpacking of different black boxes and thus follow distinct sequences of learning. We discuss the educational significance of these findings and their implications for evaluating incompleteness and supporting the construction of mechanistic explanations.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1332-1344"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70066","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696208","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Teachers' Pedagogical Reasoning and Students' Three-Dimensional Learning","authors":"Christie Morrison Thomas,&nbsp;Beth A. Covitt,&nbsp;Qinyun Lin,&nbsp;Stefanie L. Marshall,&nbsp;James B. Hancock II,&nbsp;Charles W. Anderson","doi":"10.1002/sce.70070","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70070","url":null,"abstract":"<p>This article reports analyses of data from a design-based implementation project focused on middle- and high-school science teaching. Drawing on teacher interviews and surveys as well as student learning evidence, we examined the relationships between teachers' pedagogical reasoning and their students' three-dimensional learning. Most teachers were similar in their reasoning about the importance of facilitating students in active learning—what we call active-learning pedagogies. There were also important differences between two groups of teachers, though. Teachers of lower learning-gains classrooms reasoned that they should use investigations and hands-on experiences as means to engage students in a variety of interesting activities. Teachers of higher learning-gains classrooms reasoned that they should engage students in science learning activities including asking questions, carrying out practice-driven investigations, and constructing explanations to support students' sustained scientific engagement with phenomena—what we call three-dimensional pedagogies. The findings suggest the potential benefits of enacting professional learning that attends to and engages with teachers' reasoning about their purposes, their students, and their instructional practices. For example, teachers may benefit from reasoning collectively about how to simultaneously satisfy both commitments to meeting expectations of students, parents, and administrators (which privilege active-learning pedagogies) and commitments to supporting students' sustained scientific engagement (which privilege three-dimensional pedagogies).</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1365-1387"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70070","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696568","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}

{"title":"Embodied, Enacted, and Multimodal: Exploring Science Teachers’ Metaphors in Authentic Classroom Contexts","authors":"Magdalena Kersting,&nbsp;Priscila Kohler,&nbsp;Marianne Ødegaard","doi":"10.1002/sce.70077","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.70077","url":null,"abstract":"<p>Over the past decades, science education research has extensively examined the role of metaphors in teaching and learning science. However, much of the existing research has focused on verbal manifestations of metaphors, thereby overlooking aspects of metaphors that may occur in non-verbal form. This study reconceptualises metaphors as dynamic performances rather than mere verbal expressions by integrating perspectives from embodied cognition, enactivism, and the social semiotic theory of multimodality. We conducted a systematic metaphor analysis coupled with a multimodal interaction analysis of video data collected from five science teachers over 16 science lessons in five lower-secondary schools in Norway. Our findings show that the teachers routinely employed metaphors when introducing abstract concepts and explaining complex processes. These metaphors were often expressed multimodally through speech, gesture, and material objects. We identified five distinct patterns in teachers' metaphorical performances: (1) layering and integration of multiple modes to create rich metaphorical ensembles; (2) using gestures to scale scientific phenomena to human experience; (3) enacting dynamic processes through embodied modes; (4) maintaining metaphoricity through modal anchors; and (5) orchestrating progression from embodied representations to abstract scientific concepts. Additionally, we identified specific functions that different modes serve in the enactment and communication of metaphorical meaning, extending our understanding of multimodal meaning-making in science education. These findings demonstrate that metaphors function both as figures of thought and figures of action in science classrooms. Finally, the patterns shed light on teachers' tacit expertise in multimodal metaphorical communication and offer a framework for fostering reflective awareness in teacher education.</p>","PeriodicalId":771,"journal":{"name":"Science & Education","volume":"110 5","pages":"1469-1496"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0,"publicationDate":"2026-08-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1002/sce.70077","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"148696608","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"OA","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}