A response to Saleh et al.: The wrong call to action

Osborne, Jonathan; Rafanelli, Stephanie

doi:10.1002/tea.21536

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…In our review of the literature, eight articles proposed other crosscutting ideas that might support students' scientific sensemaking rather than the ones listed in the Framework . A pair of theoretical articles (Osborne et al, 2018; Osborne & Rafanelli, 2019) built on an argument from a previous article that was not included in this literature review because the original article did not have a relationship to CCCs (Kind & Osborne, 2017). Osborne and colleagues argue that the seven CCCs listed in the Framework and NGSS might not be the most appropriate CCCs for supporting student learning, and instead pose styles of reasoning (Kind & Osborne, 2017) as an alternative set of CCCs.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

A review of literature that uses the lens of the next generation science crosscutting concepts: 2012–2019

Fick

Arias

2022

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

New reforms in science education call for threedimensional learning by integrating disciplinary core ideas, science and engineering practices, and crosscutting concepts (CCCs). These reforms defined the new term, crosscutting concept (CCC), as a lens that has explanatory power across disciplines. To describe how researchers are examining and using the CCCs related to science teaching and learning, a literature review was conducted to identify articles that included the term "crosscutting concept" since its introduction in 2012. The articles were narrowed to those that use the term CCC as a component of the framing, analysis, findings, or discussion of their empirical or nonempirical article. A subset of the identified papers elaborated on the CCCs beyond existing policy documents and references. These papers were open-coded to identify themes in how the CCCs were used. The identified themes suggest that the CCCs are useful for science teaching, learning, and research in terms of creating opportunities to learn, connecting to the big idea, linking to practice, drawing on funds of knowledge, and connecting across topics and disciplines. These themes were analyzed to identify areas of existing focus and those in need of additional research. This synthesis of the literature has implications for using and studying

show abstract