Enriching Students’ Scientific Thinking Through Relational Reasoning: Seeking Evidence in Texts, Tasks, and Talk
As reflected in the Next Generation Science Standards, concerns about the adequacy of education and career preparation in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) fields have led to fundamental shifts in the focus of K-12 science education. Such shifts are also highlighted in many of the articles within this special issue, and the issue focus on the role of relational reasoning in learning in STEM domains. Within this commentary, we reflect upon how the articles within this special issue align with, and shed new light on, the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), specifically with respect to relational reasoning. We then describe a novel pedagogical approach designed to augment students’ acquisition of NGSS practices and core ideas (i.e., Quality Talk Science (QTs)) and how evidence from our research on QTs has shown increases in relational reasoning. In this section, we also provide multiple discourse excerpts that serve as exemplars for each of the four types of relational reasoning (i.e., analogy, anomaly, antinomy, and antithesis). Finally, we present specific exemplars from QTs that reinforce the ideas and findings forwarded by the authors of each of the papers within this special issue and propose some thoughts regarding future directions for research.
KeywordsRelational reasoning Classroom discussions Critical-analytic thinking Next Generation Science Standards
This research was supported by the National Science Foundation, through Grant 1316347 to the Pennsylvania State University. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed are those of the author(s) and do not represent the views of the National Science Foundation.
- Alexander, P. A., & the Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory (2010). The challenges of developing competent literacy in the 21st century. Washington, DC: The National Academy of Sciences. http://www7.nationalacademies.org/dbasse/Research_on_21st_Century_Competencies_ Papers_and_Presentations.htm
- Alexander, P. A., & the Disciplined Reading and Learning Research Laboratory (2012). Reading into the future: competence for the 21st century. Educational Psychologist, 47(4), 1–22. doi: 10.1080/00461520.2012.722511.
- Begolli, K. N., Richland, L. E., & Jaeggi, S. (2015). The role of executive functions for structure-mapping in mathematics. Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Annual Meeting, Pasadena, CA.Google Scholar
- Greene, J. A., Murphy, P. K., Butler, A., Firetto, C. M., Allen, E. M., Wang, J., Wei, L., & Yu, S. (2016). Fostering relational reasoning and scientific understanding through Quality Talk discourse. In D. Dumas (Chair), The malleability of relational reasoning: effects of direct or indirect interventions on learning processes and outcomes. Symposium conducted at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washington, DC.Google Scholar
- Kendeou, P., & O’Brien, E. J. (2014). The knowledge revision components (KReC) framework: processes and mechanisms. In D. N. Rapp & J. L. G. Braasch (Eds.), Processing inaccurate information: theoretical and applied perspectives from cognitive science and the educational sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
- Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., & Butler, A. (2015). Integrating Quality Talk professional development to enhance professional vision and leadership for STEM teachers in high-needs schools (technical report no. 2). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
- Murphy, P. K., Greene, J. A., & Butler, A. (2016). Integrating Quality Talk professional development to enhance professional vision and leadership for STEM teachers in high-needs schools (technical report no. 3). University Park: The Pennsylvania State University.Google Scholar
- National Assessment of Educational Progress (2009). Science framework for the 2009 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.Google Scholar
- Richland, L. E., Begolli, K. N., Simms, N., Frausel, R. R., & Lyons, E. A. (2016). Cognitive insights into supporting mathematical discussions. Educational Psychology Review. doi: 10.1007/s10648-016-9382-2
- Roseman, J. E., Fortus, D., Krajcik, J., & Reiser, B. J. (2015). Curriculum materials for Next Generation Science Standards: what the science education research community can do. Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Association for Research in Science Teaching, Chicago, IL.Google Scholar
- Schwarz, C. V., Reiser, B. J., Davis, E. A., Kenyon, L., Achér, A., Fortus, D., & 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, 632–654. doi: 10.1002/tea.20311.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: the development of higher mental psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
- Wilkinson, I. A. G., Soter, A. O., & Murphy, P. K. (2010). Developing a model of Quality Talk about literary text. In M. G. McKeown & L. Kucan (Eds.), Bringing reading research to life (pp. 142–169). New York, NY: Guilford Press.Google Scholar