Defining the Third Dimension, A Necessary Precursor to Fulmer et al.’s Challenges

Fick, Sarah J.; Arias, Anna Maria

doi:10.1002/tea.21538

Cited by 4 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Their argument blurs the lines between DCIs and CCCs in the discipline of engineering. Despite this challenge, several nonempirical articles discussed the importance of CCCs in developing a deep understanding of particular DCIs (Cooper & Klymkowsky, 2013; Cunningham & Carlsen, 2014; Freire et al, 2019) or for deep knowledge of all DCIs (Fick & Arias, 2019; Saleh et al, 2019). Moreover, Lee et al (2014) see opportunities to use CCCs as a question of equitable access to scientific sensemaking.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Moreover, most of the articles pointed to the need for future research in the area of CCCs as a bridge across disciplines as they discuss potential implications of their studies for the use of the CCCs in science learning. Two theoretical articles, Fick and Arias (2019) and Saleh et al (2019), suggest the need for more exemplars of explicit, coherent teaching of the CCCs and support for developing teachers' practice and knowledge. Areas of promise for supporting students' learning about and application of the CCCs across disciplines include the development and use of common language and representations as well as the consideration of coherences across units and courses.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, this literature review expands on this work by looking at the range of research and theoretical articles that explicitly address CCCs beyond the Framework and standards documents. As is needed by the field (Fick & Arias, 2019; Fulmer et al, 2019), the purpose of this review is to examine how research defines and uses the CCCs.…”

Section: The Cccs As Part Of Three‐dimensional Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

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

Fick

Arias

2022

J Res Sci Teach

Self Cite

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

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: The Cccs As Part Of Three‐dimensional Learningmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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

Fick

Arias

2022

J Res Sci Teach

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In contrast, the third dimension of crosscutting concepts is more novel. Instruction in the crosscutting concepts has been tacit with limited research on the matter (Fick & Arias, 2019; National Research Council, 2012; Nordine & Lee, 2021). As such, it is unsurprising that about half of the SSCs had yet to figure out how to articulate this part of their 3D instructional visions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Leading instructional improvement in elementary science: State science coordinators' sense‐making about the Next Generation Science Standards

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…We decided, therefore, to focus on explicit discussion of one or more CCC with students as the minimum requirement for counting that dimension as present in the lesson materials. We recognize there is disagreement on what it means for a CCC to be "explicit" (Bandrinarayan et al, 2019;Fick & Arias, 2019), and therefore we looked for instances where the curriculum materials directed teachers to name relevant CCCs for students and identify them as CCCs. Because the other two dimensions can be more clearly observed in the classroom activity, we did not expect teachers to explicitly name a practice or core idea.…”

Section: Data Collection and Analysismentioning

confidence: 99%

Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS

2020

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The adoption of the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) requires many teachers to drastically change their classroom instruction. Curricular materials offer a tool to support this transition, but there are questions about the degree to which available curricula truly reflect the shifts required by the NGSS. This study proposes a framework of four key elements of NGSS design that can be used to analyze both curriculum and instruction for alignment to the NGSS. The four key elements include phenomenonbased, three-dimensional, supports student epistemic agency, and coherent. We used this analytic framework to analyze one commercially available middle school curriculum and its implementation in two classrooms. We found that the curriculum and instruction oversimplified the complex vision of science learning required by using natural phenomena primarily as hooks or examples, creating lessons in which students engaged in core ideas and science practices but separately in service of different goals, placing the cognitive load on the teacher to do most of the sensemaking rather than the students, and having the teacher, rather than the students, build coherence between the lessons. Our work suggests that future curriculum should focus on asking students to tell a how and why story around a phenomenon to support threedimensionality, student epistemic agency, and coherence. Furthermore, future work should explore how educative

show abstract

Defining the Third Dimension, A Necessary Precursor to Fulmer et al.’s Challenges

Cited by 4 publications

References 5 publications

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

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

Leading instructional improvement in elementary science: State science coordinators' sense‐making about the Next Generation Science Standards

Redesign or relabel? How a commercial curriculum and its implementation oversimplify key features of the NGSS

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About