Student Uncertainty as a Pedagogical Resource (SUPeR) approach for developing a new era of science literacy: practicing and thinking like a scientist

References

• Aguirre-Mendez, C., Y.-C. Chen, T. Terada, and R. Techawitthayachinda. 2020b. Predicting components of argumentative writing and achievement gains in a general chemistry course for nonmajor college students. Journal of Chemical Education 97 (8):2045–56. doi: 10.1021/acs.jchemed.0c00042.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Brem, S. K., and L. J. Rips. 2000. Explanation and evidence in informal argument. Cognitive Science 24 (4):573–604. doi:10.1207/s15516709cog2404_2.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Cervetti, G., and P. D. Pearson. 2012. Reading, writing, and thinking like a scientist. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 55 (7):580–6. doi:10.1002/JAAL.00069.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C. 2020. Dialogic pathways to manage uncertainty for productive engagement in scientific argumentation: A longitudinal case study grounded in an ethnographic perspective. Science & Education 29 (2):331–75. doi: 10.1007/s11191-020-00111-z.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. C. 2022. Epistemic uncertainty and the support of productive struggle during scientific modeling for knowledge co-development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 59 (3):383–422. doi: 10.1002/tea.21732.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. C., M. J. Benus, and J. Hernandez. 2019. Managing uncertainty in scientific argumentation. Science Education 103 (5):1235–76. doi: 10.1002/sce.21527.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y. C., and R. Techawitthayachinda. 2021. Developing deep learning in science classrooms: Tactics to manage epistemic uncertainty during whole-class discussion. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 58 (8):1083–116. doi: 10.1002/tea.21693.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Chen, Y.-C., T. Terada, and C. Aguirre-Mendez. 2023. Action research to explore argumentative writing projects supported with online simulation for developing conceptual knowledge and motivation to learn. Reading and Writing 36 (9):2275–317. doi: 10.1007/s11145-022-10363-6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Clore, G. L. 1992. Cognitive phenomenology: Feelings and the construction of judgment. The Construction of Social Judgments 10:133–63.
   Google Scholar
• Doyle, W. 1988. Work in mathematics classes: The context of students’ thinking during instruction. Educational Psychologist 23 (2):167–80. doi:10.1207/s15326985ep2302_6.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Durak, B., and H. O. Arslan. 2021. A perspective-evidence link diagram activity: Focus on COVID-19. Science Activities 58 (4):151–65. doi:10.1080/00368121.2021.1999888.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Elsner, J. N., T. D. Sadler, L. Zangori, P. J. Friedrichsen, and L. Ke. 2022. Student interest, concerns, and information-seeking behaviors related to COVID-19. Disciplinary and Interdisciplinary Science Education Research 4 (1):11. doi:10.1186/s43031-022-00053-2.
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Engle, R. A., and F. R. Conant. 2002. Guiding principles for fostering productive disciplinary engagement: Explaining an emergent argument in a community of learners classroom. Cognition and Instruction 20 (4):399–483. doi:10.1207/S1532690XCI2004_1.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feinstein, N. W., and D. I. Waddington. 2020. Individual truth judgments or purposeful, collective sensemaking? Rethinking science education’s response to the post-truth era. Educational Psychologist 55 (3):155–66. doi:10.1080/00461520.2020.1780130.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Feynman, R. P. 2009. The meaning of it all: Thoughts of a citizen-scientist. New York, NY: Perseus Books.
   Google Scholar
• Ford, M. J. 2012. A dialogic account of sense-making in scientific argumentation and reasoning. Cognition and Instruction 30 (3):207–45. doi:10.1080/07370008.2012.689383.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrett, H. J. 2020. Containing classroom discussions of current social and political issues. Journal of Curriculum Studies 52 (3):337–55. doi:10.1080/00220272.2020.1727020.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hidi, S. E., and K. A. Renninger. 2019. Interest development and its relation to curiosity: Needed neuroscientific research. Educational Psychology Review 31 (4):833–52. doi:10.1007/s10648-019-09491-3.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Howell, E. L., and D. Brossard. 2021. (Mis) informed about what? What it means to be a science-literate citizen in a digital world. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 118 (15):e1912436117. doi:10.1073/pnas.1912436117.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jirout, J., and D. Klahr. 2012. Children’s scientific curiosity: In search of an operational definition of an elusive concept. Developmental Review 32 (2):125–60. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2012.04.002.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, M. E., and A. S. Babrow. 2013. Communication in creative collaborations: The challenges of uncertainty and desire related to task, identity, and relational goals. Communication Education 62 (2):210–32. doi: 10.1080/03634523.2013.769612.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Jordan, M. E., and R. R. McDaniel. Jr, 2014. Managing uncertainty during collaborative problem solving in elementary school teams: The role of peer influence in robotics engineering activity. Journal of the Learning Sciences 23 (4):490–536. doi: 10.1080/10508406.2014.896254.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kampourakis, K., and K. McCain. 2019. Uncertainty: How it makes science advance. New York: Oxford University Press.
   Google Scholar
• Kervinen, A., and T. Aivelo. 2023. Secondary school students’ responses to epistemic uncertainty during an ecological citizen science inquiry. Science Education 107 (5):1352–79. doi:10.1002/sce.21809.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Kirch, S. A. 2012. Understanding scientific uncertainty as a teaching and learning goal. In Second international handbook of science education, ed. B. J. Fraser, K. Tobin, and C. J. McRobbie, 851–64. Dordrecht: Springer.
   Google Scholar
• Ko, M.-L M., and M. J. Luna. 2023. The glue that makes it “hang together”: A framework for identifying how metadiscourse facilitates uncertainty navigation during knowledge building discussions. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 30 doi:10.1002/tea.21893.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lamnina, M., and C. C. Chase. 2019. Developing a thirst for knowledge: How uncertainty in the classroom influences curiosity, affect, learning, and transfer. Contemporary Educational Psychology 59:101785. doi:10.1016/j.cedpsych.2019.101785.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lee, H., H. Lee, and D. L. Zeidler. 2020. Examining tensions in the socioscientific issues classroom: Students’ border crossings into a new culture of science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 57 (5):672–94. doi:10.1002/tea.21600.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lemke, J. L. 1990. Talking science: Language, learning, and values. Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing.
   Google Scholar
• McNeill, K. L., and L. Berland. 2017. What is (or should be) scientific evidence use in k-12 classrooms? Journal of Research in Science Teaching 54 (5):672–89. doi:10.1002/tea.21381.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Morrell, E. 2012. 21st-century literacies, critical media pedagogies, and language arts. The Reading Teacher 66 (4):300–2. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01125.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Murphy, P. K., J. A. Greene, C. M. Firetto, B. D. Hendrick, M. Li, C. Montalbano, and L. Wei. 2018. Quality talk: Developing students’ discourse to promote high-level comprehension. American Educational Research Journal 55 (5):1113–60. doi:10.3102/0002831218771303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• National Research Council. 2012. A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. The National Academy of the Sciences.
   Google Scholar
• NGSS Lead States. 2013. Next generation science standards: For states, by states. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi:10.17226/18290.
   Google Scholar
• Norris, S. P., and L. M. Phillips. 2003. How literacy in its fundamental sense is central to scientific literacy. Science Education 87 (2):224–40. doi:10.1002/sce.10066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Parker, L. 2021. Literacy in the post-truth era: The significance of affect and the ethical encounter. Educational Philosophy and Theory 53 (6):613–23. doi:10.1080/00131857.2020.1803834.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Phillips, A. M., J. Watkins, and D. Hammer. 2018. Beyond “asking questions”: Problematizing as a disciplinary activity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 55 (7):982–98. doi:10.1002/tea.21477.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Priest, S. 2013. Critical science literacy: What citizens and journalists need to know to make sense of science. Bulletin of Science, Technology & Society 33 (5–6):138–45. doi:10.1177/0270467614529707.
   Google Scholar
• Radinsky, J. 2008. Students’ roles in group-work with visual data: A site of science learning. Cognition and Instruction 26 (2):145–94. doi:10.1080/07370000801980779.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Rapkiewcz, J., J. Park, Y.-C. Chen, and M. Jordan. 2023. Student uncertainty as a pedagogical resource (SUPeR): Using the SUPeR approach to investigate electromagnetic force. Science Scope 46 (7):34–41. doi: 10.1080/08872376.2023.12315903.
   Google Scholar
• Reznitskaya, A. 2012. Dialogic teaching: Rethinking language use during literature discussions. The Reading Teacher 65 (7):446–56. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01066.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Richards, A. H., J. Ercan-Dursun, J. K. Suh, B. Hand, and G. Fulmer. 2023. Anchoring phenomena and summary writing working together to improve student learning. Science Activities 60 (2):51–7. doi:10.1080/00368121.2023.2168242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Silseth, K. 2018. Students’ everyday knowledge and experiences as resources in educational dialogues. Instructional Science 46 (2):291–313. doi:10.1007/s11251-017-9429-x.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vandegrift, E. V., R. A. Beghetto, J. S. Eisen, P. M. O’Day, M. G. Raymer, and N. C. Barber. 2020. Defining science literacy in general education courses for undergraduate non-science majors. Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning 20 (2):15–30. doi:10.14434/josotl.v20i2.25640.
   Google Scholar
• Varelas, M., C. C. Pappas, J. M. Kane, A. Arsenault, J. Hankes, and B. M. Cowan. 2008. Urban primary-grade children think and talk science: Curricular and instructional practices that nurture participation and argumentation. Science Education 92 (1):65–95. doi:10.1002/sce.20232.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Washburn, E., and A. Cavagnetto. 2013. Using argument as a tool for integrating science and literacy. The Reading Teacher 67 (2):127–36. doi:10.1002/TRTR.1181.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Watkins, J., and E. Manz. 2022. Characterizing pedagogical decision points in sense-making conversations motivated by scientific uncertainty. Science Education 106 (6):1408–41. doi:10.1002/sce.21747.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Zhang, J., G. Lee, A. C. Iluore, J. E. Relyea, and M. G. L. Wui. 2022. Fostering civic reasoning through disciplinary literacy. The Reading Teacher 76 (3):248–60. doi:10.1002/trtr.2143.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar