The Practice Turn in Learning Theory and Science Education

  • Ellice A. Forman


Recent developments in learning theory, referred to as the “practice turn” have suggested incorporation of disciplinary practices into classroom instruction. Instead of relying on a set of disembodied laboratory procedures and teacher-centered didactic instruction, advocates of this pedagogy propose that teachers and students create a new activity system that supports an epistemic culture for authentic scientific inquiry. It introduces students to the creative aspects of scientific practices through engagement in activities that involve representing, explaining, persuading, testing models, and making sense of scientific inquiry. Research in learning theory, science studies, and science education that has been used to articulate the practice turn in science education is reviewed and critiqued in this chapter.


  1. Bang, M., Warren, B., Rosebery, A. S., & Medin, D. (2012). Desettling expectations in science education. Human Development, 55, 302–318.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bazerman, C. (1988). Shaping written knowledge: The genre and activity of the experimental article in science. Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  3. Berland, L. K., & Reiser, B. J. (2009). Making sense of argumentation and explanation. Science Education, 93(1), 26–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackstock, M. D. (2002). Water-based ecology: A first nations’ proposal to repair the definition of a forest ecosystem. BC Journal of Ecosystems and Management, 2, 1–6.Google Scholar
  5. Chinn, C. A., & Malhotra, B. A. (2002). Epistemologically authentic inquiry in schools: A theoretical framework for evaluating inquiry tasks. Science Education, 86, 175–218.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cobb, P., Confrey, J., diSessa, A. A., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2003). Design experiments in educational research. Educational Researcher, 32(1), 9–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Cole, M. (1996). Cultural psychology: A once and future discipline. Cambridge, MA: Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  8. diSessa, A. (2006). A history of conceptual change research. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 265–281). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Engle, R. A., & Conant, F. R. (2002). Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction, 20, 399–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ford, M. J., & Forman, E. A. (2006). Redefining disciplinary learning in classroom contexts. In J. Green & A. Luke (Eds.), Review of educational research (Vol. 30, pp. 1–32). Washington, DC: American Education Research Association.Google Scholar
  11. Forman, E. A., Engle, R. A., Venturini, P., & Ford, M. (2014). International examinations and extensions of the productive disciplinary engagement framework. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 149–155.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Forman, E. A., & Ford, M. (2014). Authority and accountability in light of disciplinary practices in science. International Journal of Educational Research, 64, 198–209.Google Scholar
  13. Inhelder, B., & Piaget, J. (1958). The growth of logical thinking from childhood to adolescence: An essay on the constructional of formal operational structures (trans: Parsons, A. & Milgram, S.). New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  14. Kilpatrick, J., Martin, W. G., & Schifter, D. (Eds.). (2003). A research companion to the principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics.Google Scholar
  15. Latour, B. (1987). Science in action. Milton Keynes, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  16. Latour, B. (1990). Drawing things together. In M. Lynch & S. Woolgar (Eds.), Representation in scientific practice (pp. 19–68). Cambridge, MA: The M.I.T. Press.Google Scholar
  17. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006a). Cultivating model-based reasoning in science education. In R. K. Sawyer (Ed.), The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences (pp. 371–387). New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2006b). Scientific thinking and scientific literacy. In W. Damon, R. Lerner, K. A. Renninger, & E. Sigel (Eds.), Handbook of child psychology (Vol. 4, 6th ed., pp. 153–196). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.Google Scholar
  20. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2012). Seeding evolutionary thinking by engaging children in modeling its foundations. Science Education, 96, 701–724.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (2015). The development of scientific thinking. In R. M. Lerner (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology and developmental science (Vol. 2, 7th ed., pp. 671–715). New York: Wiley.Google Scholar
  22. Lehrer, R., Schauble, L., & Petrosino, A. J. (2001). Reconsidering the role of experiment in science education. In K. Crowley, C. D. Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for science: Implications from everyday, classroom, and professional settings (pp. 251–278). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.Google Scholar
  23. Longino, H. (2002). The fate of knowledge. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  24. Manz, E. (2015). Representing student argumentation as functionally emergent from scientific activity. Review of Educational Research, 85(4), 553–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Metz, K. E. (2004). Children’s understanding of scientific inquiry: Their conceptualization of uncertainty in investigations of their own design. Cognition and Instruction, 22(2), 219–290.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Mody, C. C. M. (2015). Scientific practice and science education. Science Education, 99(6), 1026–1032.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. NCTM. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, Inc.Google Scholar
  28. Nersessian, N. J. (2008). Creating scientific concepts. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  29. NRC. (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  30. NRC. (2007). Taking science to school: Learning and teaching science in grades K-8. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar
  31. NRC. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.Google Scholar
  32. Passmore, C. M., Gouvea, J., & Giere, R. (2014). Models in science and in learning science: Focusing scientific practice on sense-making. In M. Matthews (Ed.), International handbook of research in history, philosophy and science teaching (pp. 1171–1202). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.Google Scholar
  33. Passmore, C. M., & Stewart, J. (2002). A modeling approach to teaching evolutionary biology in high schools. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 39(3), 185–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Pera, M. (1994). The discourses of science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  35. Pickering, A. (1995). The mangle of practice: Time, agency, & science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  37. Sfard, A. (1998). On two metaphors for learning and the dangers of choosing just one. Educational Researcher, 27(2), 4–13.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Shulman, L. S., & Quinlan, K. M. (1996). The comparative psychology of school subjects. In D. C. Berliner & R. C. Calfee (Eds.), Handbook of educational psychology (pp. 399–422). New York: Simon & Schuster.Google Scholar
  39. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2008). Beyond the scientific method: Model-based inquiry as a new paradigm of preference for school science investigations. Science Education, 92, 941–967.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2012). Proposing a core set of instructional practices and tools for teachers of science. Science Education, 96, 878–903.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ellice A. Forman
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Instruction and LearningUniversity of PittsburghPittsburghUSA

Personalised recommendations