Design, Make, Play; Growing the Next Generation of
STEM Innovators
How DESIGNING, MAKING, AND
PLAYING RELATE
TO THE LEARNING
GOALS OF K-12 SCIENCE EDUCATION, Helen Quinn and
Philip Bell
Quinn
and Bell give a comprehensive synthesis of the DMP structure alongside the
Framework of a holistic and interactive K-12 science education. An intimate
relationship between science skills and Engineering skills is emphasized and
even defined a little more, especially with respect to the classroom demands
that this framework synthesis demands.
Quinn
and Bell acknowledge the need for a Classroom culture change, a shifting of
focus to a holistic and comprehensive learning environment lined with diversity
of skillset equipment rather than singular skill development—more specifically,
a move from every student performing the ‘same task at the same time’ to each
student performing each unique skill role that encompasses the Engineering
tasks, as it associates with the science skill building as well. This is a very
important concept because the social roles of Engineering process and science
is an important neglected component that is addressed in this framework. The ‘guess
and check’, argumentative nature of the previous few frameworks we have
discuessed give important attention to this social aspect as well. The
expectations of skill sets of students in Engineering practices in this K-12
framework is clearly articulated—and incorporating the capacity for group
dynamicism is essential to create an accurate reflection of the experiences experts
have in these fields.
Towards a
More Authentic Science
Curriculum:
The contribution of
out‐of‐school
learning
Martin Braund and Michael
Reiss
Braund and Reiss use this clip to explain that Science
Education, to this point, has missed the crucial part of authentic context and
environment for science learning and the acquisition of a skill set in the
relevant conditions. ‘School science’ is presented in a distinct manner from ‘real
world science’ and the applicability of schoolwork and school material
decreases because it did not occur in an environment reflective of ‘real world
science’. Therefore, this piece gives another ‘framework’ (as we have been
calling these recently) with clear steps, describing out-of-classroom contexts
and the indespensible role they play in Science Education.
Making an exerted effort to increase the extended
practical work beyond the current limits of practical lab work is really
compelling and, I think, extremely important. There exists many limits in the
lab classroom that restrict the extent to which students can observe phenomena
dictated not only by ecology but also physics, chemistry, etc. (this is a
strong point made in the reading). Particuarly I think about first column
elements and water. Maybe that is just my own personal desire to see stuff blow
up. But it is indeed representative of what we can do with out-of-classroom
context learning.
I truly agree with extending practical work beyond limiting lab work; first column elements and water reacting violently is very exciting but perhaps more can be done in the lab setting. The distinction between school and real world science also struck me, and it's difficult to answer these questions when students raise them in school.
ReplyDeleteI like your comment about being able to observe physical sciences in the real world. When we normally think about science field trips, I feel like we as a society have this tunnel vision of "let's hit the zoo!" and we neglect a lot of other interesting ways to observe scientific phenomena outside of the classroom.
ReplyDelete