Middle

Though addressing sources of uncertainty is an important part of doing science, it has largely been neglected in assessing students' scientific argumentation. In this study, we initially defined a scientific argumentation construct in four structural elements consisting of claim, justification, uncertainty qualifier, and uncertainty rationale. We consulted literature to characterize and score different levels of student performances on each of these four argumentation elements. We designed a test comprised of nine scientific argumentation tasks addressing climate change, the search for life in space, and fresh water availability and administered it to 473 students from 9 high schools in the United States. After testing the local dependence and unidimensionality assumptions, we found that the uncertainty qualifier element was not aligned with the other three. After removing items related to uncertainty qualifier, we applied a Rasch analysis based on a Partial Credit Model. Results indicate that (1) claim, justification, and uncertainty rationale items form a unidimensional scale, (2) justification and uncertainty rationale items contribute the most on the unidimensional scientific argumentation scale as they cover much wider ranges of the scale than claim items, (3) average item difficulties increase in the order of claim, justification, and uncertainty rationale, (4) students' elaboration of uncertainty exhibits dual characteristics: self-assessment of their own knowledge and ability versus scientific assessment of conceptual and empirical errors embedded in investigations, and (5) students who can make warrants between theory and evidence are more likely to think about uncertainty from scientific sources than those who cannot. We identified limitations of this study in terms of science topic coverage and sample selection and made suggestions on how these limitations might have affected results and interpretations.

Students travel through a series of lessons as they analyze data and unpack the meaning of measures of center.

This qualitative study examined how and why research experiences for teachers (RETs) influenced middle and high school science teachers’ beliefs, attitudes, and values about teaching science as inquiry. Changes teachers reported after participating in the RET ranged from modifying a few lessons (belief change) to a comprehensive revision of what and how they taught to better reflect inquiry (attitude change). Some teachers who described comprehensively changing their instruction also described implementing actions meant to change science education within their respective schools, not just their own classrooms (value change). We present how and why teachers went about changes in their practices in relation to the researcher-created teacher inquiry beliefs system spectrum (TIBSS). The TIBSS conceptualizes the range of changes observed in participating teachers. We also describe the features of the RET and external factors, such as personal experiences and school contexts, that teachers cited as influential to these changes.

This report summarizes the 2013, 2014, and 2015 findings from a longitudinal survey of district professional development coordinators across the state of Florida. The results are presented with six sections: 1) District policy and practice, 2) Leadership, 3) Funding, 4) Lesson study schedule, 5) Professional development programs, and 6) Sustaining lesson study.

The state of Florida has taken an unprecedented approach to teacher professional development in its Race to the Top
(RTTT) Program application by proposing to promote an international innovation that originates in Japan, “lesson study,” as
a statewide teacher professional development model. Since winning the US$700 million RTTT funding in 2010, the Florida
Department of Education and districts have been promoting lesson study as one of the statewide vehicles to implement
the state standards aligned with the Common Core State Standards. This study analyzed the state and districts’ approaches
to promote lesson study using policy documents, statewide district survey data, and interviews. We found that a majority
of districts mandated lesson study implementation without securing or spending sufficient funding. In addition, the existing organizational structures and routines for professional development pose a major challenge in capacity building of district leaders and teachers to engage in lesson study.

On July 15-17, 2012 the United States National Commission on Mathematics Instruction and Seoul National University held a joint Korea-U.S. workshop on Mathematics Teaching and Curriculum. The workshop was organized to address questions and issues related to math teaching and curriculum that were generated by each country. This report summarizes the presentations and discussions at the workshop.

Educational and societal phenomena can converge to draw attention to a new focus, such as ELs and STEM, and then trigger new research interests. A funding program can play a critical role in shaping these new research interests by prioritizing specific research topics and designs or by requiring particular specializations of researchers. The study examined whether funding provided through the National Science Foundation’s (NSF) Discovery Research K-12 (DR K-12) program has made a unique contribution to the research in the fields of science and mathematics education for ELs.

This brief gives an overview—and by no means a comprehensive one—of several NGSS-aligned projects in the areas of curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development.

The Proposal & Award Policies & Procedures Guide (PAPPG) 16-1 is comprised of documents relating to the Foundation's proposal and award process. It consists of two parts: the NSF Grant Proposal Guide (GPG)and the NSF Award and Administration Guide(AAG). This document is effective as of January 25, 2016.