当前位置: X-MOL 学术J. Res. Sci. Teach. › 论文详情
Our official English website, www.x-mol.net, welcomes your feedback! (Note: you will need to create a separate account there.)
21st‐century science education digital ecologies: Technology, technique, shoelaces, promise, and pitfalls?
Journal of Research in Science Teaching ( IF 3.918 ) Pub Date : 2020-09-11 , DOI: 10.1002/tea.21667
Noemi Waight 1 , Knut Neumann 2
Affiliation  

This special issue, Science teaching, learning, and assessment with 21st century, cutting‐edge digital ecologies, aimed to examine the use and impact of 21st‐century cutting‐edge technologies, technological platforms, technological activity, and digital ecologies on science teaching, learning, and assessment. The call for this issue also focused on conceptual and/or critical analyses related to theories and frameworks needed to advance the ways in which digital ecologies and technological activity can transform science teaching, learning, and assessment, as well as the potential of these technologies and platforms to realize equity in access and outcomes in science education for all learners. We sought to feature empirical and conceptual scholarship that would help us to understand how technological advancement in transportation, medicine, agriculture, and science was being translated, adopted, and represented in K‐16 formal and informal science teaching and learning. Importantly, we saw this as an opportunity to understand how massive monetary investments in technology‐related funding in STEM domains matched the rhetoric that technologies are meant to make learning, among other things, efficient, visual, interesting, dynamic, entertaining, and/or reinforce the tools and practices of science. Overall, the present special issue was an attempt to assess the state of theoretically grounded and rigorous research that is intended to inform how we design, implement, adopt, and enact technological tools and platforms in science classrooms. This was an attempt to understand how the full cycle from conceptualization and design to enactment and impact assessment are undertaken by science education researchers to meet the changing landscape and address the challenges of realizing a literate science populace, racially and linguistically diverse science classrooms, and a robust and inclusive science pipeline, all within a global framework that motivates the work of scientists and science educators.

An analysis of technology‐related research in the Journal for Research in Science Teaching (JRST) for the last 20 years revealed work related to major domains of practice, which include but are not limited to technology and inquiry (Scalise & Midura, 2018; Waight & Abd‐El‐Khalick, 2011); teacher education (Bell, Maeng, & Binns, 2013); impact on affective factors; contexts of learning and tools related to disciplinary teaching and learning practices (Nielsen & Hoban, 2015); design‐based practices (Lewis, 2006); STEM (Moote, Archer, Dewitt, & MacLeod, 2020); learning and understanding (Liu & Hmelo‐Silver, 2009; She & Liao, 2010; Wendt & Rockinson‐Szapkiw, 2014); and assessment (Hickey, Taasoobshirazi, & Cross, 2012). In comparison to the above areas of focus, only a few studies focused on equity concerns, and these were primarily gender and language related (Ryoo & Bedell, 2018; Voyles, Fossum, & Haller, 2008). No studies focused on issues of cultural, ethnic, and racial equity and social justice. Similarly, no studies engaged in critiques of technology practice related to teaching and learning. In fact, most studies reported favorable, positive outcomes of technological implementation and enactment. With a broad thematic overlap, these studies reflect the kind of research that is valued by the science education community, for better or for worse. Of significance here is that, in the last 20 years, we have witnessed the exponential growth and development of technologies in science, transportation, and medicine and in our personal lives and popular culture. With this special issue, we wanted to understand the evolution of technology and how understanding of technologies has evolved in parallel with other domains that have significant implications on science education teaching and learning trajectories.



中文翻译:

21世纪的科学教育数字生态学:技术,技术,鞋带,承诺和陷阱?

本期特刊《21世纪的科学教学,学习和评估》,尖端的数字生态学旨在研究21世纪尖端技术,技术平台,技术活动和数字生态学对科学教学,学习和评估的使用和影响。对这一问题的呼吁还集中在与理论和/或批判性分析相关的概念和/或批判性分析,这些理论和框架需要改进数字生态学和技术活动可以改变科学教学,学习和评估的方式,以及这些技术和技术的潜力。平台,实现所有学习者在科学教育中获得机会和取得成果方面的公平。我们试图提供经验和概念性奖学金,以帮助我们了解交通,医药,农业和科学领域的技术进步是如何被翻译,采用,并参加了K‐16正式和非正式科学教学。重要的是,我们认为这是一个了解STEM领域中与技术相关的资金的大量货币投资如何与技术旨在使学习(其中包括有效,视觉,有趣,动态,娱乐和/或其他)的言论相匹配的机会。加强科学的工具和实践。总体而言,本期专刊旨在评估理论基础和严格研究的现状,旨在告知我们如何在科学教室中设计,实施,采用和制定技术工具和平台。

科学教学研究杂志》(JRST)最近20年对技术相关研究的分析揭示了与实践的主要领域相关的工作,其中包括但不限于技术和探究(Scalise&Midura,2018 ; Waight &Abd‐El‐Khalick,2011年);教师教育(Bell,Maeng和Binns,2013年);对情感因素的影响;与学科教学和学习实践相关的学习环境和工具(Nielsen&Hoban,2015); 基于设计的实践(Lewis,2006);STEM(Moote,Archer,Dewitt和MacLeod,2020年);学习和理解(Liu和Hmelo-Silver,2009; She&Liao,2010 ; Wendt&Rockinson‐Szapkiw,2014); 和评估(Hickey,Taasoobshirazi和Cross,2012年)。与上述重点领域相比,只有少数研究关注公平问题,这些研究主要涉及性别和语言(Ryoo和Bedell,2018年; Voyles,Fossum和Haller,2008年))。没有研究关注文化,种族,种族平等和社会正义问题。同样,也没有研究批评与教学有关的技术实践。实际上,大多数研究报告了技术实施和制定的有利的积极成果。这些研究在主题上有广泛的重叠,反映了科学教育界对这种研究的好与坏的评价。在这里重要的是,在过去的20年中,我们目睹了科学,运输和医学技术以及我们的个人生活和大众文化中技术的指数增长和发展。有了这个特刊,

更新日期:2020-09-11
down
wechat
bug