Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Using Students’ Conceptual Models to Represent Understanding of Crosscutting Concepts in an NGSS-Aligned Curriculum Unit About Urban Water Runoff

  • Published:
Journal of Science Education and Technology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Recent science education reforms, as described in the Framework for K-12 Science Education (NRC, 2012), call for three-dimensional learning that engages students in scientific practices and the use of scientific lenses to learn science content. However, relatively little research at any grade level has focused on how students develop this kind of three-dimensional knowledge that includes crosscutting concepts. This paper aims to contribute to a growing knowledge base that describes how to engage students in three-dimensional learning by exploring to what extent elementary students represent the crosscutting concept systems and system models when engaged in the practice developing and using models as part of an NGSS-aligned curriculum unit. This paper answers the questions: How do students represent elements of crosscutting concepts in conceptual models of water systems? How do students’ representations of crosscutting concepts change related to different task-based scaffolds? To analyze students’ models, we developed and applied a descriptive coding scheme to describe how the students illustrated the flow of water. The results show important differences in how students represented system elements across models. Findings provide insight for the kinds of support that students might need in order to move towards the development of three-dimensional understandings of science content.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

Deidentified data is available upon request.

References

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O. Z., & Orion, N. (2005). Development of system thinking skills in the context of earth system education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 42(5), 518–560.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Baek, H., Schwarz, C., Chen, J., Hokayem, H., & Zhan, L. (2011). Engaging elementary students in scientific modeling: The MoDeLS fifth-grade approach and findings. In Models and modeling (pp. 195–218). Springer, Dordrecht.

  • Baumfalk, B., Bhattacharya, D., Vo, T., Forbes, C., Zangori, L., & Schwarz, C. (2019). Impact of model-based science curriculum and instruction on elementary students’ explanations for the hydrosphere. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 56(5), 570–597.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ben-Zvi Assaraf, O. Z., & Orion, N. (2010). System thinking skills at the elementary school level. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(5), 540–563.

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson, J., Davis, E. A., & Buxton, C. (2013). Supporting the implementation of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) through research: Curriculum materials. https://www.narst.org/blog/ngss-curriculum

  • Chin, C. (2007). Teacher questioning in science classrooms: Approaches that stimulate productive thinking. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(6), 815–843.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chiu, J. C., McElhaney, K. W., Zhang, N., Biswas, G., Fried, R., Basu, S., & Alozie, N. (2019). A principled approach to NGSS-aligned curriculum development integrating science, engineering, and computation: A pilot study. Paper presented at the NARST Annual International Conference

  • Covitt, B. A., Gunckel, K. L., & Anderson, C. W. (2009). Students’ developing understanding of water in environmental systems. The Journal of Environmental Education, 40(3), 37–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davis, E. A., & Linn, M. C. (2000). Scaffolding students’ knowledge integration: Prompts for reflection in KIE. International Journal of Science Education, 22(8), 819–837.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Duschl, R. A., & Osborne, J. (2002). Supporting and promoting argumentation discourse in science education. Studies in Science Education, 38(1), 39–72.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fick, S. J. (2018). What does three-dimensional teaching and learning look like?: Examining the potential for crosscutting concepts to support the development of science knowledge. Science Education, 102(1), 5–35. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21313

  • Fick, S. J. & Arias, A. M. (2019, March). Examination of the Role(s) of Crosscutting Concepts in Research Articles 2012- June 2018. Paper presented at NARST Annual International Conference, Baltimore, MD.

  • Fick, S. J., Nordine, J., & McElhaney, K. W. (Eds.). (2019). Conference Proceedings of the Summit for Examining the Potential for Crosscutting Concepts to Support Three-Dimensional Learning. Charlottesville: University of Virginia. Retrieved from: http://education.virginia.edu/CCC-Summit

  • Forbes, C. T., Zangori, L., & Schwarz, C. V. (2015). Empirical validation of integrated learning performances for hydrologic phenomena: 3rd-grade students’ model-driven explanation-construction. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 52(7), 895–921.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Goldstone, R. L., & Wilensky, U. (2008). Promoting transfer by grounding complex systems principles. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 17(4), 465–516.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • González-Howard, M., & McNeill, K. L. (2019). Teachers’ framing of argumentation goals: Working together to develop individual versus communal understanding. Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

  • Hmelo, C. E., Holton, D. L., & Kolodner, J. L. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. The Journal of the Learning Sciences, 9(3), 247–298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hutchins, N. M., Biswas, G., Maróti, M., Lédeczi, Á., Grover, S., Wolf, R., Blair, K. P., Chin, D., Conlin, L., Basu, S., and McElhaney, K. (2020). C2stem: a system for synergistic learning of physics and computational thinking. Journal of Science Education and Technology, pages 83–100.

  • Jin, H., & Anderson, C. W. (2012). A learning progression for energy in socio-ecological systems. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 49(9), 1149–1180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krajcik, J., McNeill, K. L., & Reiser, B. J. (2008). Learning-goals-driven design model: Developing curriculum materials that align with national standards and incorporate project-based pedagogy. Science Education, 92(1), 1–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20240

  • Krajcik, J., Codere, S., Dahsah, C., Bayer, R., & Mun, K. (2014). Planning instruction to meet the intent of the next generation science standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 25(2), 157–175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), Cambridge Handbook of the Learning Sciences. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Manz, E. (2012). Understanding the co-development of modeling practice and ecological knowledge. Science Education, 96(6), 1071–1105.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Manz, E. (2015). Representing student argumentation as functionally emergent from scientific activity. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 553–590. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654314558490

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, K. L. (2009). Teachers’ use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena. Science Education, 93(2), 233–268. psyh.

  • McNeill, K. L., & Krajcik, J. (2008). Scientific explanations: Characterizing and evaluating the effects of teachers’ instructional practices on student learning. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(1), 53–78.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • McNeill, K., Lizotte, D., Krajcik, J., & Marx, R. (2006). Supporting students’ construction of scientific explanations by fading scaffolds in instructional materials. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 15(2), 153–191.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas. The National Academies Press.

  • NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next generation science standards: For states. By States: The National Academies Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Opitz, S. T., Neumann, K., Bernholt, S., & Harms, U. (2019). Students’ energy understanding across biology, chemistry, and physics contexts. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 521–541.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods (3rd ed.). Sage Publications.

  • Rehmat, A. P., Lee, O., Nordine, J., Novak, A. M., Osborne, J., & Willard, T. (2019). Modeling the Role of Crosscutting Concepts for Strengthening Science Learning of All Students. In S. J. Fick, J. Nordine, & K. W. McElhaney (Eds.), Proceedings of the Summit for Examining the Potential for Crosscutting Concepts to Support Three-Dimensional Learning (pp. 66–73). University of Virginia. https://www.curry.virginia.edu/ccc-summit

  • Sampson, V., & Clark, D. (2009). The impact of collaboration on the outcomes of scientific argumentation. Science education, 93(3), 448–484.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., Shwartz, Y., Hug, B., & Krajcik, J. (2009). Developing a learning progression for scientific modeling: Making scientific modeling accessible and meaningful for learners. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(6), 632–654.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slotta, J. D., & Linn, M. C. (2009). WISE science: Web-based inquiry in the classroom. Technology, Education-Connections: Teachers College Press, New York, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yoon, S. A., Goh, S. E., & Park, M. (2018). Teaching and Learning About Complex Systems in K–12 Science Education: A Review of Empirical Studies 1995–2015. Review of Educational Research, 88(2), 285–325. https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654317746090

  • Zangori, L., & Forbes, C. T. (2015). Exploring third-grade student model-based explanations about plant relationships within an ecosystem. International Journal of Science Education, 37(18), 2942–2964.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zangori, L., Forbes, C. T., & Schwarz, C. V. (2015). Exploring the effect of embedded scaffolding within curricular tasks on third-grade students’ model-based explanations about hydrologic cycling. Science & Education, 24(7–8), 957–981.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This project was funded by NSF Grant #DRL-1742195. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. College of Education, Department of Teaching and Learning, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, USA

    Sarah J. Fick

  2. College of Education and Human Development, Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, VA, USA

    Anne M. McAlister & Jennifer L. Chiu

  3. Learning Sciences Research, Digital Promise, San Mateo, CA, USA

    Kevin W. McElhaney

Authors
  1. Sarah J. Fick
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Anne M. McAlister
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jennifer L. Chiu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Kevin W. McElhaney
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sarah J. Fick.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the IRB Office of the [University].

Informed Consent

All participants in the study received the approved IRB forms and were explained the study procedures. Participation in the study was part of normal classroom activities.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Fick, S.J., McAlister, A.M., Chiu, J.L. et al. Using Students’ Conceptual Models to Represent Understanding of Crosscutting Concepts in an NGSS-Aligned Curriculum Unit About Urban Water Runoff. J Sci Educ Technol 30, 678–691 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09911-6

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10956-021-09911-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation