ERIC EJ1132102: Filling in the Gaps: An Explicit Protocol for Scaffolding Inquiry Lessons

2017·0.36 MB·English

by  ERIC

Austin M. Hitt and Douglas Smith
Filling in the Gaps: An Explicit Protocol
for Scaffolding Inquiry Lessons
Abstract about synthesis and single displacement as a synthesis reaction. Instead, their ex-
The goal of this paper is to introduce reactions. She framed her lesson using planations focused on macroscopic phe-
an explicit protocol that preservice sci- the Predict, Observe, Explain (POE) in- nomena such as the steel wool was “on
ence teachers can use to improve the structional model (Gunstone & Mitchell, fi re,” and “became heavier.” They offered
quality of the scaffolding (written and 1998; Haysom & Bowen, 2010). The no explanations for the increase in mass
oral prompts) of their inquiry lessons. POE instructional model directs stu- of the steel wool other than some type of
Scaffolding is an essential component dents to predict what will happen during “experimental error.” A few of the stu-
of effective inquiry lessons because it a hands-on activity or demonstration, dents correctly identifi ed the reaction as
keeps students focused on the target sci- complete the activity and/or make obser- a synthesis reaction, but they could not
ence content and divides the content into vations, record and analyze the relevant offer a reason for their answer. After the
manageable bits of information, a pro- data, and devise a scientifi c explanation lesson, Rachel met with the university
cess referred to as chunking. The signifi - for the results. supervisor and commented she was sur-
cance of scaffolding for inquiry lessons Rachel divided her students into groups prised the students did not “get it.” It was
and the theoretical framework, develop- of three to four. After completing a re- readily apparent to the supervisor why
ment, and implementation of the inquiry action at one lab station, the students the students did not explain the concept
scaffolding protocol are discussed. moved to a new lab station with a differ- appropriately—insuffi cient scaffolding.
ent set of reactants. The lesson appeared Students, experience, observe, and
Introduction
to have all of the components of an ef- explain the physical world at the macro-
The critical nature of scaffolding for
fective inquiry experience. The students scopic level. Their practical, macroscopic
inquiry can be illustrated through a mini-
were presented with a problem (What experience with fi re is that when objects
case study involving a secondary preser-
type of reaction is taking place?). They burn they fall apart and decrease in mass.
vice teacher, identifi ed as Rachel. Rachel
worked in collaborative groups to com- For example, when a log is placed on a
was teaching a lesson on synthesis and
plete the activity and discuss the results, fi re the fi nal product, wood ash, appears
single displacement reactions to high
and they derived their own explanations and feels less dense than the original log.
school chemistry students. It is the au-
for what occurred. However, the students Subsequently, when Rachel’s students
thors’ experience that preservice teachers,
failed to learn the targeted science con- were asked to describe what happened
like Rachel, often teach these concepts
cepts of synthesis and single displace- during the chemical reaction, they fo-
using a lecture/slide presentation. First
ment reactions. cused on the macroscopic attributes such
they introduce the generic formula for
For example, at lab station #4 the stu- as the formation of a fl ame and increased
synthesis and single displacement re-
dents were directed to take a piece of heat. In the context of their macroscopic
actions (A + B(cid:198)C and AB + C (cid:198) AC
steel wool (iron, Fe) and ignite it (adding perspectives, the measured increase in
+ B). Next, they present the formulas
oxygen, O). First, they placed an evap- the mass of the steel wool was nonsensi-
for the actual chemical reactions, 2Fe 2
orating dish on a triple beam balance cal and could only logically be explained
(s) + 3O (g) (cid:198) FeO (s) and Zn (s) +
2 2 3 and then zeroed out the dish. Next, they as some type of error. In order to pro-
2HCl (l) (cid:198) ZnCl (aq) + H (g). Finally,
2 2 placed a piece of steel wool in the evapo- vide an accurate scientifi c explanation
the preservice teacher provides the stu-
rating dish and determined its mass. Fi- of a chemical reaction, which is defi ned
dents with reaction problems that involve
nally, they ignited the steel wool using a as the rearrangement of atoms and mole-
the students writing a complete and bal-
Bunsen burner and reweighed it. cules, the students needed to think about
anced reaction and then identifying the
After observing the reaction, Rachel the reaction at the molecular level.
type of chemical reaction.
anticipated the students would “see” Rachel could have guided her students
Rachel did not want to use such a
the mass of the steel wool increased and thinking to the correct level by providing
rote procedure. Instead, she wanted her
conclude that oxygen molecules in the them guiding questions. For example,
students to experience and think deeply
air covalently bonded with the iron at- the students could have been prompted
oms in the steel wool. However, the stu- to: “Describe how the iron and oxygen
Keywords: inquiry instruction, scaffolding, dents did not attribute the increase in the atoms interact with each other during the
conceptual understanding mass to oxygen or identify the reaction reaction.”; or to “Create a particle model
WINTER 2017 VOL. 25, NO. 2 133
that depicts the reaction between iron teachers will plan multiple lessons using scientifi c knowledge (Driver, Asoko,
atoms in the steel wool and oxygen mol- a variety of inquiry approaches (NSTA, Leach, Mortimer & Scott, 1994; Novak,
ecules in the air.” 2012).” Additionally, the Next Genera- 1998). Public or institutional construc-
In our roles as science teacher educa- tion Science Standards (NGSS) state that tivism refers to how scientists construct
tors, the authors have had many similar cross-cutting science concepts, discipline- new scientifi c understandings of the
experiences working with preservice sci- specifi c concepts and the science and en- world. For example, the physicist Ernest
ence teachers. They commonly submit gineering practices should be integrated Rutherford could not directly observe an
inquiry lesson plans and teach inquiry and taught through inquiry (NGSS Lead atom. Subsequently, he could not discover
lessons that are not adequately scaffolded. States, 2015). What is less clear in the or fi nd the structure of the atom as if he
In the past, the authors approached the national standards and the research liter- was an explorer on an expedition (Orzel,
scaffolding issue by pointing out the gaps ature is what constitutes inquiry science 2014). Instead, he devised an experiment
in the preservice teachers’ lessons. Com- instruction (Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, & whereby invisible alpha particles were
monly, this process involved the authors Briggs, 2012). The diaphanous nature directed at a thin sheet of gold foil. A
sharing their ideas as to how the lesson of inquiry makes it diffi cult to develop glass window coated with zinc sulfi de
could be improved with the preservice a generalizable approach for scaffolding was placed in various positions around
teacher taking copious notes. Eventually, inquiry lessons. Subsequently, the au- the gold foil. If an alpha particle col-
after multiple one-on-one meetings and thors reviewed the literature with the in- lided with the coated glass a small blip
additional teaching experiences, most tent of developing a defi nition of inquiry of light was produced. By comparing the
of the preservice teachers developed a instruction that would (1) incorporate number of light blips and the positon of
sense of how to scaffold inquiry lessons. the major philosophical perspectives and the coated glass, Rutherford was able to
However, there were always preservice (2) be applicable to diverse instructional construct a model of the atom. Based on
science teachers who consistently strug- approaches. the observable data and some calcula-
gled to provide appropriate scaffolding tions, he was able to infer that atoms are
in their inquiry lessons. The best we The Attributes of Inquiry Science comprised of a dense, compact nucleus
could hope for was that with additional Instruction surrounded mostly by empty space.
years of practical teaching experience After reviewing the science education The second constructivist tradition
they would develop an intuition for scaf- literature, the authors identifi ed three ma- refers to the slow, and often error-fi lled,
folding inquiry lessons. jor approaches or paradigms for inquiry process by which individuals learn and
science teaching: discovery learning, the retain science concepts. In order to suc-
Inquiry Science Instruction
call for authentic inquiry experiences, cessfully integrate a novel concept into
As stated in the introduction, the au-
and constructivism. First the imminent existing schema learners must (a) be
thors’ goal is to present an explicit proto-
educational psychologist Jerome Bruner aware of their present understandings or
col, Inquiry Scaffolding Protocol (ISP),
introduced the idea that students can conceptual schema, (b) compare differ-
to help preservice science teachers ap-
learn science and mathematics through ences between their existing schema and
propriately scaffold their inquiry lessons.
a process of discovery (Bruner, 1961). new concepts, and (c) modify or possibly
Before we introduce and demonstrate
When engaged in discovery learning, replace schema in order to accommodate
how to use the ISP, the authors discuss
students develop hypotheses that they new concepts (Vosniadou, 2013). The
the context in which it was developed.
use to guide their investigations and to effi ciency of this concept integration
First, we discuss our working defi nition
uncover latent mathematics and science can be optimized through open discus-
of inquiry science instruction and make
concepts. sions among learners and instructors
a case as to why explicit scaffolding is
Second, the biologist Joseph Schwab (Vosniadou, 2013).
needed. Second, the inquiry instructional
introduced the paradigm of authentic sci- Using the above information the au-
model on which the scaffolding protocol
ence instruction (Schwab & Brandwein, thors developed the a defi nition for inquiry
is based is presented. Third, the compat-
1962). He envisaged that students should science instruction as an approach that
ibility of the instructional model with
be engaged in thinking like scientists and (1) probes students’ previous knowledge
the Next Generation Science Standards
using the equipment that scientists use in and experiences, (2) provides students
(NGSS) is discussed.
their investigations. The goal of authen- with a problem or unknown situation
The Nature of Inquiry Science tic inquiry instruction is to have students so they can construct their own mental
Instruction concurrently learn science content and models and explanations, (3) engages
The signifi cance of inquiry as an in- develop a deeper understanding of how students in thinking and discussing sci-
structional approach is highlighted by science is done. ence content and (4) involves students
its inclusion in the 2014 National Sci- Third, is the idea of constructivism using authentic science equipment. The
ence Teachers Association (NSTA) Pre- that can be parsed into the public or in- authors contend this defi nition is applica-
service Teacher Preparation Standards. stitutional creation of scientifi c knowl- ble to a diverse set of research-based in-
Specifi cally it is stated that, “Preservice edge and the personal construction of quiry instructional models including the
134 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
3-step Learning Cycle (Atkin & Karplus, literature in cognitive science and educa- visual, auditory, tactile, taste, and ol-
1962), 5-E Learning Cycle (Trowbridge tional psychology indicates this type of factory stimuli. Second, the student fi l-
& Bybee, 1990), 6-E Learning Cycle localized scaffolding, using written and ters the extraneous stimuli and focuses
(Chessin & Moore, 2004), 7-E Learning oral prompts, facilitates student learning on the relevant information. Third, the
Cycle (Eisenkraft, 2003), Problem- and is especially effective when students student actively thinks about the sen-
Based Learning, PBL, and Problem- are learning new content (Lazonder & sory data, a condition described as per-
Based Instruction, PBI (Krauss & Harmsen, 2016). ception. Fourth, the student’s working
Boss, 2013), and Predict-Observe- memory processes the information, and
Explain (Gunstone & Mitchell, 1998; Why Scaffolding Works if the student is suffi ciently engaged, the
Haysom & Bowen, 2010). All of these The Information Processing Model information is transferred and stored in
inquiry instructional models incorporate, (IPM) of Cognition is a widely studied long-term memory. Finally, by actively
at some point, (1) analyses of students’ and accepted explanation of human learn- refl ecting upon the target content and
prior knowledge or preconceptions, ing (Schacter, Gilbert, Wegner & Nock, with practice, the student can readily
(2) problem situations whereby students 2011). It is an internal cognitive model, access and apply the information when
can construct their own mental models but it can readily be integrated with ex- prompted to do so.
and explanations, (3) opportunities for ternal social learning theories such as A key factor affecting the integration
students to apply scientifi c thinking and Vygotsky’s Social Cognitive Theory and of science concepts into students’ long-
(4) situations whereby students can use specifi cally the notion of the Zone of term memory is their ability to focus
authentic scientifi c equipment. Proximal Development (ZPD). Combined on the relevant information. Students
the IPM and ZPD effectively explain why have limited background knowledge
Scaffolding of Inquiry Lessons scaffolding is an essential component of and subsequently they are often unable
Based on the relative level of scaffold- inquiry instruction (Figure 1). to identify and focus their attention on
ing, inquiry lessons can be classifi ed as The IPM explains how students pro- the relevant information (Brophy, 2010).
open inquiry, guided inquiry or struc- cess the information they are presented The issue of how science instructors can
tured inquiry (Furtak, Seidel, Iverson, & in the science classroom. First, the help students focus on the relevant infor-
Briggs, 2012; Zion & Mendelovici, student intakes sensory information: mation is addressed through Vygotsky’s
2012; Bevins & Price, 2016). Open in-
quiry lessons emulate an investigation
conducted by working scientists. The
students are responsible for devising a
research question or problem, develop-
ing the data collection procedures, and
analyzing the research results. No sys-
tematic scaffolding is provided in an
open inquiry lesson.
Guided inquiry lessons are more scaf-
folded because the research question or
problem is provided by the instructor.
The students use the instructor’s question
to guide the development of their data
collection procedures and to analyze the
research results. Finally, a structured in-
quiry lesson is the most scaffolded. The
research question and the data collection
procedures are established by the in-
structor and the students are responsible
for analyzing the results.
In reality, effective science instruc- Figure 1. Integration of the Information Processing Model (IPM) and the Zone of Proximal Develop-
tors provide localized scaffolding during ment (ZPD). (A) The IPM is the top fi gure and it depicts how students learn science content. The
open, guided and structured inquiry les- students intake sensory stimuli, sort through this stimuli to identify relevant information (perception),
process this information in working memory, if the working memory is engaged for a suffi cient period
sons. For example, during an open inquiry
of time the information is then transferred to the long-term memory, and with additional practice and
lesson the instructor may conduct a think-
refl ection the target science concept is effectively integrated with the student’s thinking. (B) The Zone
a-loud session in order to assist students of Proximal Development (ZPD) model depicts how the student (novice) receives guidance through
in the development of more focused and scaffolding prompts and questions during the initial phases of learning and then gradually the student
tractable research questions. The research assumes more responsible for learning the target science concepts.
WINTER 2017 VOL. 25, NO. 2 135
notion of the Zone of Proximal Develop- to concepts in other science fi elds such as cohorts of preservice science teachers
ment (ZPD). biology and physics (Figure 1). The TLT to plan and teach inquiry lessons. Based
The bottom half of Figure 1 shows the identifi es three levels or scales at which on our experiences, we have made sev-
basic tenets of the ZPD. In the progression concepts can be described—the macro- eral modifi cations to the model in order
depicted, the Novice has defi ciencies scopic, sub-microscopic, and symbolic. to make it clearer and more effective
in some combination of the knowledge, The macroscopic level refers to the tan- (Figure 2). First the triangle is inverted
skills, and/or dispositions (KSD) that are gible or visible attributes of science con- to create a wedge and the model attri-
prerequisite to progressing toward mas- cepts. The sub-microscopic level refers to bute is positioned at the bottom as the
tery of the task or learning of interest. At phenomena that occur at the level of at- fulcrum of the wedge. This change was
the point when the Novice has acquired oms or molecules. Finally, the symbolic implemented in order to highlight the
the requisite KSD and the Master begins level refers to the terms, defi nitions and critical role that model construction
instruction, the two have entered the mathematical formulas that are used to plays in learning science content. For
Novice’s ZPD. The roles of Master and explain a science concept. For example, example, an inquiry lesson with too
Novice are represented opposite each the concept of a chemical reaction has many or too intensive activities distracts
other depicting the gradual release of observable macroscopic attributes (color, students from learning the targeted
responsibility for learning through scaf- temperature and phase changes), sub- concepts. This is a phenomenon iden-
folding from the Master to the Novice microscopic attributes (the arrangement tifi ed as activitymania (Moscovici &
(from left to right in the fi gure.) Ulti- of atoms and molecules) and symbolic Holmlund-Nelson, 1998). Conversely,
mately, the Novice will become indepen- attributes (the formulas representing a focusing too much on terms and defi ni-
dent and achieve task mastery. chemical reaction). The Three Levels tions results in the students superfi cially
Combined, the Information Process- of Thought (TLT) has been used to help memorizing the information (Willingham,
ing Model (IPM) and Zone of Proximal chemistry teachers develop student- 2010). What is needed to balance an in-
Development (ZPD) explain how infor- centered lessons (Lewthwaite & Wiebe, quiry lesson is ample opportunities for
mation is processed and why it is essen- 2011). Additionally, lessons based on students to refl ect and to create their
tial for students to focus on the relevant TLT instructional model have been dem- own models and explanations. Through
science content. They also explain why onstrated to improve students’ chemistry the construction their own models, the
seemingly engaging hands-on science content knowledge and reasoning skills students can make connections between
activities may fail to improve students’ (Dori & Barak, 2001; 2003). the macroscopic attributes (observable
understandings. Through the process In order to make the TLT instructional properties) and the symbolic attributes
of inquiry, students utilize a variety of more compatible with topics in other (terms and defi nitions) used to describe
skills, gather multiple forms of data, and science fi elds, such a biology and phys- a targeted concept (Hitt & Townsend,
engage in multiple dialogs with their ics, Hitt and Townsend (2004; 2007) re- 2007).
classmates. As a result, inquiry lessons defi ned the sub-microscopic or particle Second, the literature on the psychol-
generate a signifi cant amount of informa- level as the model level (Figure 1). The ogy and philosophy of mathematics in-
tion that students must winnow through rationale for this conceptual shift is that dicates mathematical formulas are more
in order to learn the targeted science con- (1) models are ubiquitous cognitive and accurately classifi ed as a type of model
tent. The quantity of information can be physical tools that are common to all sci- (Lakoff & Nunez, 2000). Subsequently,
overwhelming for students and result in entifi c disciplines and (2) the concept of the model attributes now refer to the fol-
cognitive overload (Willingham, 2010). a model can be applied to a broad range lowing types of models: propositional
In order to prevent cognitive overload, of phenomena from the extremely large models (analogies and metaphors), vi-
instructors should scaffold their inquiry (ecosystems and galaxies) to the very sual models (analog representations of
lessons by incorporating guiding prompts small (genes and atoms) (Gilbert & Ireton, external phenomena like cartoon models
and questions (Lazonder & Harmsen, 2003; Gilbert, 2011). This version of the of an animal cell), and mathematical
2016). Scaffolding guides the students’ TLT instructional model has been re- formulas and equations (Johnson-Laird,
thinking and helps them to focus on and ported to be an effective tool for train- 1986; Lakoff & Nunez, 2000; Bryce
process the relevant information. ing novice science teachers to develop et al. 2015). The symbolic attribute re-
student-centered, inquiry lessons and to fers specifi cally to the words and syntax
The Framework for the Inquiry
improve middle level and high school (language) used to communicate science
Scaffolding Protocol (ISP)
students’ understandings of science con- concepts.
Three Levels of Thought cepts (Gilman, Hitt & Gilman, 2015). Third, a hook question was added to
Instructional Model Three Levels of Thinking (TLT) instruc-
Johnstone (1991) developed the Three The Three Levels of Thinking Model tional model. The purpose of the hook
Levels of Thought (TLT) instructional Version II (TLT-II) question is to engage students in think-
model primarily to explain chemistry The authors have used the TLT in- ing about the target concepts and to
concepts, but he indicated it is applicable structional model to train multiple provide the instructor with information
136 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
The TLT-II Instructional Model & concepts. For example, an instructor can
the Next Generation Science have students address the model attribute
Standards of a targeted concept through the cre-
To recap, the authors defi ne inquiry as ation of models that (a) reveal patterns
an instructional approach that meets the in the data, (b) explain a cause and effect
following conditions: (1) probes students’ relationship, (c) display various quanti-
previous knowledge and experiences, ties, proportions or scales, (d) explain
(2) provides students with a problem or the connection between a structure and
unknown situation so they can construct its function, and (e) display trends such
their own models and explanations, as stability or change (Gilbert, 2011;
(3) engages students in thinking about Bryce et al. 2015). These crosscutting
and discussing science content and (4) concepts are inherent in certain types of
engages students is the use of authentic models. Science instructors can further
science equipment. The TLT-II emphasizes help students’ focus and refl ect on these
Figure 2. (A) The Three Levels of Thought (TLT)
the need to provide some type of hook crosscutting concepts through guiding
concept analysis and instructional model pro-
question in order to determine students’ prompts and questions integrated into
posed by Johnstone (1991). This model focuses
prior knowledge and beliefs (condition the lesson.
on the physical scale of a science concept.
The macroscopic level refers to the observable 1). Next, the students are presented with The NGSS Science and Engineer-
properties of the target concept such as a color a macroscopic phenomenon they must ing Practices can also be integrated into
change that occurs during a chemical reaction. investigate, and the students then develop the TLT-II instructional model. When
The sub-microscopic or particle level refers to their own models and explanations for students examine and refl ect on the at-
the phenomena that are too small to observe
what they have observed (conditions 2 tributes of a target concept they are uti-
directly and subsequently must be represented
and 3). Finally, during an investigation, lizing science and engineering practices.
using a molecular or particle model. The symbolic
the students use a variety of scientifi c in- For example, students can be prompted
level refers to the science terms, defi nitions and
formulas used to represent the target science struments and equipment in order to re- to ask questions about and to investigate
concept. (B). The modifi ed TLT instructional model cord and analyze the emerging data and a macroscopic phenomenon. Through
proposed by Hitt & Townsend (2004; 2007). to make conclusions (condition 4). the construction of their own models stu-
The only difference between this model and the The TLT-II also aligns with the vision dents can be engaged in analyzing and
original TLT models is the reconceptualization of
of science profi ciency espoused in the interpreting data, using mathematics
the sub-microscopic or particle level as the model
National Research Council’s A Frame- and computational thinking, and con-
level. A model can be a physical representation
(3-D model, diagram, etc.) or an image for a work for K-12 Science Education (2012). structing explanations and designing
phenomenon. This change was implemented to Within the context of the Framework, solutions. Finally, when students address
refl ect the signifi cant role of models in science |science profi ciency is defi ned as under- the symbolic attributes of a target con-
research. Additionally, the concept of a model standing science as a continuously refi ned cept they can potentially be engaging
is more applicable to diverse science fi elds and
and revised body of knowledge that is in arguments from evidence and obtain-
physical scales. For example a model can be
produced through evidence-based and the- ing, and evaluating and communicating
used to explain a phenomenon that is too large
ory building processes (Schweingruber, information. By creating explicit scaf-
(galaxies or plate tectonics) or too small (atoms
and molecules) to observe directly. Keller, & Quinn, 2012). In order to folding questions and prompts, a science
achieve this depth of science profi ciency, instructor can facilitate students’ use and
about the students’ existing schema. Fi- students need to experience inquiry-based awareness of the relevant Science and
nally, the need to provide scaffolding in instruction that integrates the disciplinary Engineering Practices.
order to focus students’ attention on the core ideas, crosscutting concepts, and
relevant macroscopic, model and sym- science and engineering practices Inquiry Scaffolding Protocol
bolic attributes is explicitly incorporated (Schweingruber, Keller, & Quinn, 2012, (ISP)
in the model. Huff, 2016). The authors contend the A key factor leading to the success-
These modifi cations to the TLT in- TLT-II instructional model is compatible ful implementation of the TLT-II in-
structional model do not represent a with the three dimensional instructional structional model is scaffolding. It is
paradigm shift because the core com- approach presented in the Framework. the authors’ experiences that the TLT-II
ponents are intact. However, the authors First, the TLT-II has been used to cre- instructional model (fi gure 3) improves
believe the changes do signifi cantly alter ate lessons and to improve students’ the scaffolding in our preservice science
its appearance and how it used. In order understandings of diverse discipline spe- teachers’ lessons. However, analyses of
to avoid confusion, the authors refer to cifi c concepts (Gilman, Hitt & Gilman, lesson plans and feedback provided by
the modifi ed version of the TLT instruc- 2015). Second, the crosscutting concepts our preservice science teachers, indi-
tional model as the Three Levels of can be addressed by having students re- cated the TLT-II did not provide enough
Thought Version II or TLT-II. fl ect on the attributes of targeted science explicit guidance for developing and
WINTER 2017 VOL. 25, NO. 2 137
scaffolding inquiry lessons. In order to Prior to introducing the Inquiry Scaf- In the following sections, the indi-
address this issue the authors developed folding Protocol (ISP), the lesson devel- vidual steps in the ISP are listed and
an explicit approach to scaffolding, the opers should become familiar with the described. Each step is followed by a
Inquiry Scaffolding Protocol (ISP). idea of science concepts as categories of description of how the protocol can be
The ISP consists of two phases. Phase information that have macroscopic, mod- applied to an inquiry activity designed to
I-Content Analysis, involves the lesson el, and symbolic attributes. A useful way teach students the concept of density.
developers examining their understand- of introducing this perspective is to prac-
ings of the macroscopic, model, and tice analyzing the macroscopic, model, ISP Phase I- Concept Analysis
symbolic attributes of the target science and symbolic attributes of science con- Step 1. Identify the target science
concepts. Phase II-Instructional Plan- cepts from different science disciplines. concepts within the appropriate stan-
ning, involves the development or selec- After the lesson developers have a robust dards. The appropriate national, state,
tion of an inquiry lesson and evaluating understanding of the three attributes of or district standards are selected and the
the effectiveness of the scaffolding for science concepts, they are primed to use target concept or concepts are identi-
the macroscopic, model and symbolic the ISP to analyze and develop a variety fi ed. Additionally, the key action verbs
attributes of the target concept. of inquiry lesson plans and activities. describing the performance and level of
understanding the students must demon-
strate are noted. This information will be
used to guide the development and/or se-
lection of the specifi c activities related to
the target science concept.
7.P.2B.1 Analyze and interpret
data to describe substances us-
ing physical properties (including
state, boiling/melting point, density,
conductivity, color, hardness, and
magnetic properties) and chemical
properties (the ability to burn or rust)
This seventh grade science standard
includes 10 concepts related to the nature
of matter (South Carolina Department of
Education, 2015). (Each concept is un-
derlined). The action verbs, appearing
in bold, indicate the students should be
engaged in analyzing and interpreting
data in order to describe a substance.
Since the target concept is density, the
inquiry lesson developed or selected
should engage students in analyzing and
interpreting data to explain the concept
of density.
Step 2. Identify the macroscopic at-
tributes of the target concept. There are
two general categories of macroscopic
attributes: (1) basic sensory experiences
(e.g. color, texture, smell, motion, etc.)
Figure 3. The Levels of Thought Version II (TLT-II) as proposed by the authors. The TLT-II instructional model and (2) concrete examples and/or ap-
explicitly incorporates pedagogical principles that were implied in the two versions of the TLT instructional plications of the target science concept
model. There are four key differences. First, the instructional model starts with the students answering a (Johnson-Laird, 1986).
hook question designed to probe their understandings and preconceptions of the target science concept. Macroscopic attributes of density can
Second, the model attribute of a science concept includes mathematical models that were identifi ed as a
include (a) the perceived tactile differ-
symbolic attribute in the TLT model. Third, instruction targeting each attribute of the target science concept
ences between a cork sphere (light) and
is scaffolded with guiding questions or prompts designed to focus the students’ attention and thinking on
an iron sphere (heavy) that occupy the
the respective attribute. Finally, a synthesis prompt designed to probe the students’ understandings of the
connections between the three attributes of science concepts is included. The synthesis prompt serves as a same volume, (b) the visible layering of
summative assessment for the students’ understanding of the target science concept. liquids in a column due to differences in
138 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
density and (c) a 355 mL can of regular volume (the amount of space a substance between mass and volume relate to den-
soda sinking but a 355 mL can of diet occupies), and density (the ratio of mass sity. Finally, the students respond to an
soda fl oating in tap water due to differ- to volume of a specifi c substance). open-ended question that reveals their
ences in density. relative understanding of the concept of
Step 3. Identify and construct mod- Phase II – Instructional Planning density (Evaluation Stage).
els for the target concepts. Different Step 1. Create or identity an inquiry Step 2. Analyze the hook question.
types of models representing the target lesson or activity for a target concept. An effective hook question probes both
science concepts are identifi ed or cre- Once the lesson designers have a robust the students’ relative understanding of
ated. Models can include visual models understanding of the target concept they the macroscopic, model, and the sym-
(simplifi ed images for the target con- are primed to develop or select inquiry bolic attributes of the targeted science
cept), propositional models (analogies lessons that will effectively teach stu- concepts. If a hook question is ineffec-
and metaphors or simple, non-technical dents the target science concept(s). An tive, it can be modifi ed, or a new one can
explanations) and mathematical mod- original inquiry lesson plan based on the be inserted into the activity. An example
els (numbers and variables) (Lakoff & TLT instructional model or other instruc- of an effective hook question targeting
Nunez, 2000). If possible, the target tional models such as the Learning Cycle, the concept of density is provided below:
concepts should be represented through Predict-Observe-Explain and Problem-
Cargo ships are comprised of many
multiple models. This is especially true Based Learning (PBL) can be created or
steel sheets and carry tons of cargo
for concepts such as density that are an existing lesson can be selected.
across the world’s oceans. Howev-
commonly represented using math- For example, the lesson developer
er, if you were to take a single steel
ematical models. Mathematical models may select a 5-E Learning Cycle lesson
sheet from a cargo ship and drop it
are the most abstract type of model and designed to teach students the concept of
into the ocean it would sink. (mac-
are the most diffi cult for students to con- density through the process of construct-
roscopic attribute)
nect to their existing schema. Presenting ing a clay boat. First, the students answer
students with more tangible visual and a hook question about density (Engage (a) Create a diagram and write a
propositional models prior to introduc- Stage). Next the students investigate how non-technical explanation for
ing the mathematical models enhances they can construct a clay boat that will why a single steel sheet sinks
their ability to integrate and retain the fl oat on water (Explore Stage). The stu- but a cargo ship comprised of
mathematical models (Gilbert, 2011). dents are provided with a clay sphere. thousands of steel sheets fl oats.
The concept of density can be repre- They weigh the sphere and measure its (model attribute)
sented visually using particle models volume and record the data in their sci-
(b) If possible, use the terms density,
that depict equal volumes of two differ- ence notebooks. Next, they place the clay
mass and volume to explain why a
ent solids, liquids or gases consisting of sphere in a container fi lled with water
cargo ship fl oats but a single steel
different quantities of particles or dif- and observe what happens; it should sink
sheet sinks. (symbolic attribute)
ferent sized particles. (The greater the immediately. The students then manipu-
number of particles or the more massive late the clay sphere in order to create a Step 3. Analyze the macroscopic
the constituent particles the greater the structure that will fl oat. The students may prompts for the target concepts. The
density). An example of a propositional have to try several designs. Once they macroscopic attributes of a targeted sci-
model is a thought experiment involving have produced a clay boat that fl oats, they ence concept are identifi ed. For each
the placement of a 1kg bag of feathers record its volume. The mass of the clay inquiry activity the guiding prompts
and a 1 kg block of lead in a container remains constant throughout the activity. should focus students’ attention on the
fi lled with water. The bag of feathers oc- The students record the masses and relevant macroscopic attributes of the
cupies a greater volume than the lead the volumes of the clay spheres and their target concept. If no prompts are pres-
block and is less dense. The differences boats in a class data table. Next, they ent or if the prompts are ineffective, new
in the densities explains why the feathers examine their data (qualitative observa- prompts should be created.
fl oat on water while the lead block im- tions and quantitative measurements) For the clay boat inquiry lesson, prompts
mediately sinks. Finally, density can be in order to devise a model that explains effectively targeting the macroscopic attri-
represented using the algebraic expres- why the clay sphere sinks and their butes of density during the Explore Stage
sion of D=m/v. clay boat fl oats (Explain Stage). Then, can be: “What are the two properties of
Step 4. Identify the symbolic attri- students pool their data in a class data matter that you will measure during this
butes. The relevant scientifi c terms and table, identify any trends in the data, activity?” and “How do you think these
defi nitions used to describe a target sci- and use this information to confi rm of properties affect sinking and fl oating?”
ence concept are identifi ed. modify their model/explanation for sink- Step 4. Analyze the model prompts
The terms connected to the concept of ing/fl oating (Elaborate Stage). At this for the target concepts. The model
density include: mass (the relative amount stage of the activity the students are also prompts should direct students to (a)
of matter in an object or material), prompted to explain how the relationship develop different types of models
WINTER 2017 VOL. 25, NO. 2 139
(propositional, visual, or mathematical) one should be added. A sample synthesis Additionally, the summary questions
and (b) discuss their models and ideas prompt for the concept of density is pro- tend to require students to use informa-
with their classmates. If no prompts are vided below: tion obtained during the lab or activity in
present or if the prompts are ineffective, order to answer the questions. Often, the
You observe a glass column that has
new prompts should be created. summary questions require students to
4 liquids inside. The liquids remain
For the clay boat activity, the students use information from both the lab/activity
in distinct layers due to differences
can be directed to create a diagram that and the textbook.
in density. (macroscopic).
depicts how mass and volume relate to Finally, the ISP facilitates the develop-
sinking and fl oating. The students can (a) Create a particle diagram that ment lessons incorporating a reasonable
then discuss their models with their explains the layering of the number of novel concepts. Prior to using
classmates and record any new informa- liquids in the column. (model) the ISP, the preservice science teachers
tion they gleaned from their discussions. tended to plan lessons that contained a
(b) Explain why the liquids remain in
Next, the students can create a math- relatively large number of concepts. As
separate layers. Include the follow-
ematical model by analyzing the class a result, their lessons often overwhelmed
ing terms in your explanation, den-
data. For example the students could be or cognitively overloaded the targeted
sity, mass and volume. (symbolic).
asked to, “Compute the mass to volume middle level and high school students.
ratios for the clay spheres and clay boats. Conclusions Conversely, when the preservice sci-
Use these data to explain the pattern of The authors have used the Inquiry ence teachers use the ISP, their lesson
sinking and fl oating.” The students can Scaffolding Protocol (ISP) with multiple plans and classroom instruction focus
discuss their ideas with their classmates cohorts of middle level and secondary on fewer concepts. It is the authors’ view
and to record any new information they preservice science teachers. Subsequent- that the analysis and refl ection on the
gleaned from their discussions. ly, we have gleaned several benefi ts to macroscopic, model, and symbolic at-
Step 5. Analyze the symbolic prompts using the ISP. First, the ISP provides the tributes of the target concepts increases
for the target science concept. The sym- preservice teachers an explicit set of pro- the preservice teachers’ awareness of
bolic attribute prompts are designed to cedures for scaffolding inquiry lesson the complex nature of science concepts.
(a) introduce the relevant scientifi c terms plans. As a result, the quantity and qual- Subsequently, they become aware that
and defi nitions and (b) help students ity of scaffolding within the preservice they need to (a) reduce the pace of their
connect the language of science to their science teachers’ lesson plans increased. lessons/instruction, (b) cover fewer con-
macroscopic experiences and models. As Specifi cally, the preservice teachers tend cepts per lesson, and (c) provide students
stated previously, if no prompts are pres- to include more explicit questions that with suffi cient time and opportunities to
ent or if the prompts are ineffective, new focus the students’ attention on the target integrate the targeted science concepts
prompts should be created. science concepts and provide clearer di- into their existing schema.
In the context of the clay boat activity, rections for students.
the key terms are density (ratio of mass Second, the ISP improves the loca- References
to volume), mass (amount of material tion and quality of prompts within pre- Atkin, J. M., & Karplus, R. (1962). Discov-
comprising an object), and volume (the service science teachers’ lesson plans. ery or invention? The Science Teacher,
space an object occupies). The students Prior to using the ISP, a majority of the 29(5), 45-51.
should respond to prompts designed to lesson plans produced by our preservice Bevins, S., & Price, G. (2016). Reconcep-
help them make connections between science teachers consisted of (a) a brief tualising inquiry in science education.
both the symbolic terms and defi nitions introduction, (b) a set of procedures for International Journal of Science Educa-
tion, 38(1), 17-29.
and macroscopic experiences and men- completing the activity and recording the
tal models. For example the students can data, and (c) a set of summary questions Brophy, J. (2010). Motivating students to
be directed to, “Explain why the clay designed to connect the lab or activity to learn (3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
boat fl oated and the clay sphere sunk us- the appropriate scientifi c terms and defi - Bruner, J. S. (1961). The act of discovery.
ing the terms, density, mass and volume.” nitions. Generally, the preservice teach- Harvard Education Review, 31, 21-32.
Step 6. Analyze the macroscopic, ers’ lessons provided minimal or no Bryce, C. M., Baliga, V. B., De Nesnera,
model and symbolic synthesis prompts. guiding questions during the lab or ac- K. L., Fiack, D., Goetz, K., Tarjan, L. M., &
The last part of the lesson should con- tivity. Also, the summary questions were Ash, D. (2016). Exploring Models in the
sist of prompts designed to assess the commonly disconnected from the lab or Biology Classroom. The American Biol-
students’ ability to connect their mac- activity and could be answered by simply ogy Teacher, 78(1), 35-42.
roscopic experiences, models, and the reviewing the glossary or specifi c pages Chessin, D.A., & Moore, V.J. (2004). The
symbolic terms and defi nitions for the in a science textbook. However, the pre- 6-E learning model. Science & Children
target. The synthesis prompt constitutes service teachers who use the ISP, gener- 42(3): 47–49.
the summative assessment. If a synthe- ally incorporate more guiding questions Dori, Y. J., & Barak, M. (2001). Virtual &
sis prompt is not included in the lesson and prompts throughout their lessons. physical molecular modeling: Fostering
140 SCIENCE EDUCATOR
model perception and spatial under- scientifi c understanding. Arlington, VA: Schwab, J. J., & Brandwein, P. F. (1962).
standing. Educational Technology & NSTA Press. The teaching of science: The teaching
Society, 4(1), 61–74. of science as enquiry (Vol. 253). Cam-
Huff, K. L. (2016). Addressing Three Com-
bridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Dori, Y. J, & Barak, M. (2003). A Web- mon Myths About the Next Generation
based chemistry course as a means to Science Standards. Science and Chil- Schweingruber, H., Keller, T., & Quinn,
foster freshmen learning. Journal of dren, 53(5), 30. H. (Eds.). (2012). A framework for K-12
Chemical Education, 80(9):1084-1092. Johnson-Laird, P. N. (1986). Mental mod- science education: Practices, crosscut-
ting concepts, and core Ideas. Washing-
Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, els. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Univer-
ton, D.C: National Academies Press.
E., & Scott, P. (1994). Constructing sity Press.
scientifi c knowledge in the classroom. Johnstone, A. H. (1991). Why is science South Carolina Department of Educa-
Educational Researcher, 23(7), 5-12. diffi cult to learn? Things are seldom tion. (2015). Support guide for grade
Eisenkraft, A. (2003). Expanding the 5E what they seem. Journal of Computer seven South Carolina academic standards
model: A proposed 7E model emphasizes Assisted Learning, 7(2), 75-83. and performance indicators for science.
Retrieved from https://ed.sc.gov/scdoe/
“transfer of learning” and the impor- Krauss, J., & Boss, S. (2013). Thinking
assets/File/instruction/standards/
tance of eliciting prior understanding. The through project-based learning: Guid-
Science/Grade%207%20Science_
Science Teacher, 70(6), 56– 59. ing deeper inquiry. Thousand Oaks, CA:
SupportDocument2_0.pdf
Furtak, E. M., Seidel, T., Iverson, H., & Corwin Press.
Trowbridge, L.W., and R.W. Bybee.
Briggs, D. C. (2012). Experimental and Lakoff, G., & Núñez, R. E. (2000). Where
(1990). Becoming a secondary science
quasi-experimental studies of inquiry- mathematics comes from: How the em-
teacher. Columbus, OH: Merrill.
based science teaching a meta-analysis. bodied mind brings mathematics into
Review of Educational Research, 82(3), being. New York, NY: Perseus Books. Vosniadou, S. (2013). Conceptual change
300-329. in learning and instruction: The frame-
Lazonder, A. W., & Harmsen, R. (2016).
work theory approach. In S. Vosnidou
Gilbert, S. W., & Ireton, S. W. (2003). Un- Meta-Analysis of Inquiry-Based Learn-
(Ed). International handbook of re-
derstanding models in earth & space ing Effects of Guidance. Review of Edu-
search on conceptual change, (pp. 11-30).
science. Arlington, VA: NSTA press. cational Research, 20(10), 1-38.
New York, NY: Routledge.
Gilbert, S. (2011). Models-based science Lewthwaite, B., & Wiebe, R. (2011).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and lan-
teaching. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press. Fostering teacher development to a tet-
guage. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts
Gilman, S. L., Hitt, A. M., & Gilman, C. rahedral orientation in the teaching of
Institute of Technology Press.
(2015). Training Master’s-Level Gradu- chemistry. Research in Science Educa-
ate Students to Use inquiry instruction tion, 41(5), 667-689. Willingham, D. (2010). Why don’t students
like school? San Francisco, CA: John
to teach middle-level and high-school Moscovici, H., & Holmlund-Nelson, T.
Wiley & Sons, Inc.
science concepts. School Science and (1998). Shifting from activity mania to
Mathematics, 115(4), 155-167. inquiry. Science and Children, 35(4), Zion, M., & Mendelovici, R. (2012). Mov-
Gunstone, R. F., & Mitchell, I. J. (1998). 14–17. ing from Structured to Open Inquiry:
Challenges and Limits. Science Educa-
Metacognition and conceptual change. Novak, J. D. (1998). The pursuit of a
tion International, 23(4), 383-399.
In J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D. dream: education can be improved. In
Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for un- J. J. Mintzes, J. H. Wandersee, & J. D.
derstanding (pp. 133-163). San Diego, Novak (Eds.), Teaching science for un- Austin M. Hitt, PhD, Associate Profes-
CA: Academic Press. derstanding (pp. 3-29). San Diego, CA: sor of Science Education, Coastal Carolina
Hitt, A., & Townsend, J. S. (2004). Models Academic Press. University, Conway, South Carolina. Cor-
respondence concerning this article should
that matter. The Science Teacher, 71(3), NSTA (2012). NSTA preservice science
be addressed to: Austin M. Hitt, Associate
29-31. standards. Retrieved from http://www.
Professor of Science Education, Coastal
Hitt, A. M., & Townsend, J. S. (2007). Get- nsta.org/preservice/
Carolina University, P.O. Box 261954,
ting to the core issues of science teach- Orzel, C. (2014). Eureka, Discovering Conway, SC 29528-6054. Email: amhitt@
ing: A model-based approach to science your inner scientists. New York, NY: coastal.edu
instruction. Science Educator, 16(2), Basic Books.
20-26.
Schacter, D., Gilbert, D., Wegner, D., & Douglas Smith, PhD, Professor of Educa-
Haysom, J., & Bowen, M. (2010). Predict, Nock, M.H. (2014). Psychology (3rd ed.). tion, Coastal Carolina University, Conway,
observe, explain: Activities enhancing New York, NY: Worth. South Carolina.
WINTER 2017 VOL. 25, NO. 2 141