In this article, we report on a three-pronged effort to create a hypothetical learning progression for quantification in science. First, we drew from history and philosophy of science to define the quantification competency and develop hypothetical levels of the learning progression. More specifically, the quantification competency refers to the ability to analyze phenomena through (a) abstracting relevant measurable variables from phenomena and observations, (b) investigating the mathematical relationships among the variables, and (c) conceptualizing scientific ideas that explain the mathematical relationships. The quantification learning progression contains four levels of increasing sophistication: level 1, holistic observation; level 2, attributes; level 3, measurable variables; and level 4, relational complexity. Second, we analyzed the practices in the Next Generation Science Standards for current, largely tacit, assumptions about how quantification develops (or ought to develop) through K-12 education. While several pieces of evidence support the learning progression, we found that quantification was described inconsistently across practices. Third, we used empirical student data from a field test of items in physical and life sciences to illustrate qualitative differences in student thinking that align with levels in the hypothetical learning progression for quantification. By generating a hypothetical learning progression for quantification, we lay the groundwork for future standards development efforts to include this key practice and provide guidance for curriculum developers and instructors in helping students develop robust scientific understanding.
Using data from a nationally representative survey of faculty teaching introductory college courses, this exploratory study compares course planning procedures of full-time and part-time faculty teaching courses in eight academic fields. The choice of variables examined was guided by a general model of course design developed from earlier studies of course planning. To control for discipline-related differences in faculty planning assumptions, separate analyses were conducted for the eight fields. No key differences were found between full-time and part-time faculty on the primary factors under investigation: substantive content-related influences on courses, strength of influence within the instructional environment, and planning steps and content arrangements faculty preferred. 相似文献
The study of higher education journals – that is, refereed academic journals wholly focused on higher education – reveals much about the field of higher education research. This analysis identified 86 such journals published in the English language, considering their focus, ownership, location, orientation, age, size and ranking. From this analysis, a shorter list of 28 key journals is identified. It is argued that, given the scale of the contribution being made to higher education research – for example, the 86 journals between them published over 16,000,000 words in 2016, with this total increasing year on year – it may be time to spend more effort on synthesising and disseminating what we have already learnt, rather than, or before, undertaking fresh research. 相似文献
This study assessed kinematic differences between different foot strike patterns and their relationship with peak vertical instantaneous loading rate (VILR) of the ground reaction force (GRF). Fifty-two runners ran at 3.2 m · s?1 while we recorded GRF and lower limb kinematics and determined foot strike pattern: Typical or Atypical rearfoot strike (RFS), midfoot strike (MFS) of forefoot strike (FFS). Typical RFS had longer contact times and a lower leg stiffness than Atypical RFS and MFS. Typical RFS showed a dorsiflexed ankle (7.2 ± 3.5°) and positive foot angle (20.4 ± 4.8°) at initial contact while MFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (?10.4 ± 6.3°) and more horizontal foot (1.6 ± 3.1°). Atypical RFS showed a plantar flexed ankle (?3.1 ± 4.4°) and a small foot angle (7.0 ± 5.1°) at initial contact and had the highest VILR. For the RFS (Typical and Atypical RFS), foot angle at initial contact showed the highest correlation with VILR (r = ?0.68). The observed higher VILR in Atypical RFS could be related to both ankle and foot kinematics and global running style that indicate a limited use of known kinematic impact absorbing “strategies” such as initial ankle dorsiflexion in MFS or initial ankle plantar flexion in Typical RFS. 相似文献
