by pmorgan

-

During our last Science Design Team gathering, we opened with a wondering question, “If we were to ask teachers in our district what instructional framework we use to teach science, what might they say?“ 

Inquiry, of course!

Our district has based its foundation for robust science instruction in inquiry  for a number of years.  However, we have not synthesized the research and developed a concrete, written framework that can be effectively used to describe  the components of science inquiry so that all teachers can access this mental model.

In our districtwide science focus year efforts, we have spent last year examining the new state standards and conducting a gap analysis between what we currently have as expectations for student learning and what we need to have as expectations for student learning. We have also been keeping up to date with the ongoing status of the Next Generation Science Standards that are being developed at the national level.  Our work has identified potential gap areas that will need to be mitigated with the selection of additional materials and/or repurposing of existing materials.

Before we can make sound curriculum materials selection decisions, we need a comprehensive framework for research-based approaches to science instruction. With limited access to resources, it is critical that we develop strong criteria for our selection decision-making process.

In order to frame our thinking about instructional frameworks, we read and analyzed Arthur H. Camins’ article on Dimensions of Inquiry. Then we reviewed the P-12 Comprehensive Balanced Math, K-2 Comprehensive Balanced Literacy, 3-5 Comprehensive Balanced Literacy, 6-12 Comprehensive Balanced Literacy and Art Instructional Frameworks already used in our district.

Finally, we scanned documents and information related to the Science Inquiry Model as depicted in the literature.

• 5 E’s of Science Learning Overview
• Science Learning Experiences Using the 5 E’s
• Inquiry Teaching Model

- -