{"title":"掌握在教师学习环境中如何谈论科学计算实践的方法","authors":"Amy Voss Farris, Gözde McLaughlin","doi":"10.1111/jcal.12976","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div>\n \n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Background</h3>\n \n <p>Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Objectives</h3>\n \n <p>This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Methods</h3>\n \n <p>We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\n \n <p>These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something <i>about computing</i> (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.</p>\n </section>\n \n <section>\n \n <h3> Takeaways</h3>\n \n <p>Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices <i>in service</i> of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.</p>\n </section>\n </div>","PeriodicalId":48071,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","volume":"40 4","pages":"1922-1940"},"PeriodicalIF":5.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.12976","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Getting a grip on how we talk about computational practices in science in settings of teacher learning\",\"authors\":\"Amy Voss Farris, Gözde McLaughlin\",\"doi\":\"10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div>\\n \\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Background</h3>\\n \\n <p>Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Objectives</h3>\\n \\n <p>This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Methods</h3>\\n \\n <p>We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Results and Conclusions</h3>\\n \\n <p>These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something <i>about computing</i> (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.</p>\\n </section>\\n \\n <section>\\n \\n <h3> Takeaways</h3>\\n \\n <p>Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices <i>in service</i> of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.</p>\\n </section>\\n </div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48071,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"volume\":\"40 4\",\"pages\":\"1922-1940\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"95\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12976\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"教育学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Computer Assisted Learning","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jcal.12976","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
Getting a grip on how we talk about computational practices in science in settings of teacher learning
Background
Science teachers' understanding of the roles of computing practices in science frame how they enact scientific computational practices in their teaching and how their students perceive the relationship between computational practices and scientific endeavours.
Objectives
This critical, integrative review synthesizes teacher learning literature about the role of computational literacy and computing practices in K-12 science teaching.
Methods
We examined 54 peer-reviewed articles and analysed the ways the researchers and teacher participants describe the affordances of integrating computational thinking (CT) and other computational practices in science. We characterize how CT and computational practices are framed in relation to scientific learning goals. We identify six primary affordances for integrating computational practices with science that are conveyed to teachers and by teachers, as represented in these studies of teacher learning.
Results and Conclusions
These six perspectives include (1) learning computer science principles, (2) developing CT dispositions, (3) engagement and inclusion in science, (4) taking ownership of science, (5) supporting learning science content, and (6) participating in computational practice as a form of scientific epistemic practice. Our analysis indicates that computational thinking and computational practices are often integrated in science in order to teach something about computing (e.g., Perspective 1), rather than to support learners' scientific work. Only the 29 articles coded for the sixth perspective—that is, in service of epistemic aims in science—demonstrate commitment to students' uses of computational ideas and practices as epistemic tools to participate in the sensemaking work of science.
Takeaways
Comparison of Perspectives 5 and 6 illustrates the nuance between computational practices in science that reify something students have already “figured out,” rather than those that serve epistemic goals. Perspective 6 encapsulates the deep synergy among (1) the reflexive nature of computing with scientific ideas and (2) computing as a central practice in science and engineering. We contend that a more focused message of computational practices in service of scientific sensemaking goals is necessary if we expect teachers to enact CT and related computational practices in their classrooms.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Computer Assisted Learning is an international peer-reviewed journal which covers the whole range of uses of information and communication technology to support learning and knowledge exchange. It aims to provide a medium for communication among researchers as well as a channel linking researchers, practitioners, and policy makers. JCAL is also a rich source of material for master and PhD students in areas such as educational psychology, the learning sciences, instructional technology, instructional design, collaborative learning, intelligent learning systems, learning analytics, open, distance and networked learning, and educational evaluation and assessment. This is the case for formal (e.g., schools), non-formal (e.g., workplace learning) and informal learning (e.g., museums and libraries) situations and environments. Volumes often include one Special Issue which these provides readers with a broad and in-depth perspective on a specific topic. First published in 1985, JCAL continues to have the aim of making the outcomes of contemporary research and experience accessible. During this period there have been major technological advances offering new opportunities and approaches in the use of a wide range of technologies to support learning and knowledge transfer more generally. There is currently much emphasis on the use of network functionality and the challenges its appropriate uses pose to teachers/tutors working with students locally and at a distance. JCAL welcomes: -Empirical reports, single studies or programmatic series of studies on the use of computers and information technologies in learning and assessment -Critical and original meta-reviews of literature on the use of computers for learning -Empirical studies on the design and development of innovative technology-based systems for learning -Conceptual articles on issues relating to the Aims and Scope