Journal Article Detail Page
When teachers or students assess the quality of ideas in science classes, they do so mostly based on textbook correctness; ideas are good to the extent they align with or lead to the content as presented in the textbook or curriculum. Such appeals to authority are at odds with the values and practices within the disciplines of science. There has been significant amount of attention to this mismatch in the science education research literature, primarily with respect to experimentation and argumentation as core disciplinary means of assessing ideas. In this article, we call attention to another aspect of scientific reasoning: a focus on causal mechanisms in explaining natural phenomena. We highlight examples and research from the history and philosophy of science to clarify what scientists mean by "mechanism" and to make the case for its centrality. We then present an excerpt from a second-grade class in which a student provides an incorrect mechanistic explanation, and the teacher gives priority to textbook correctness. As the conversation proceeds, the student shifts from mechanistic sensemaking to quoting terminology she does not understand. We argue that attention to mechanism in the classroom would better support student reasoning and better reflect disciplinary epistemology.
Science and Education: Volume 93, Issue 5, Pages 875-891
ComPADRE is beta testing Citation Styles!
Record Link
<a href="https://www.per-central.org/items/detail.cfm?ID=12334">Russ, R, J. Coffey, D. Hammer, and P. Hutchison. "Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking." Sci. & Educ. 93, no. 5, (September 1, 2009): 875-891.</a>
AIP Format
R. Russ, J. Coffey, D. Hammer, and P. Hutchison, , Sci. & Educ. 93 (5), 875 (2009), WWW Document, (https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320).
AJP/PRST-PER
R. Russ, J. Coffey, D. Hammer, and P. Hutchison, Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking, Sci. & Educ. 93 (5), 875 (2009), <https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320>.
APA Format
Russ, R., Coffey, J., Hammer, D., & Hutchison, P. (2009, September 1). Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking. Sci. & Educ., 93(5), 875-891. Retrieved December 6, 2024, from https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320
Chicago Format
Russ, R, J. Coffey, D. Hammer, and P. Hutchison. "Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking." Sci. & Educ. 93, no. 5, (September 1, 2009): 875-891, https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320 (accessed 6 December 2024).
MLA Format
Russ, Rosemary, Janet Coffey, David Hammer, and Paul Hutchison. "Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking." Sci. & Educ. 93.5 (2009): 875-891. 6 Dec. 2024 <https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320>.
BibTeX Export Format
@article{
Author = "Rosemary Russ and Janet Coffey and David Hammer and Paul Hutchison",
Title = {Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking},
Journal = {Sci. & Educ.},
Volume = {93},
Number = {5},
Pages = {875-891},
Month = {September},
Year = {2009}
}
Refer Export Format
%A Rosemary Russ %A Janet Coffey %A David Hammer %A Paul Hutchison %T Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking %J Sci. & Educ. %V 93 %N 5 %D September 1, 2009 %P 875-891 %U https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320 %O application/pdf
EndNote Export Format
%0 Journal Article %A Russ, Rosemary %A Coffey, Janet %A Hammer, David %A Hutchison, Paul %D September 1, 2009 %T Making classroom assessment more accountable to scientific reasoning: A case for attending to mechanistic thinking %J Sci. & Educ. %V 93 %N 5 %P 875-891 %8 September 1, 2009 %U https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20320 Disclaimer: ComPADRE offers citation styles as a guide only. We cannot offer interpretations about citations as this is an automated procedure. Please refer to the style manuals in the Citation Source Information area for clarifications.
Citation Source Information
The AIP Style presented is based on information from the AIP Style Manual. The AJP/PRST-PER presented is based on the AIP Style with the addition of journal article titles and conference proceeding article titles. The APA Style presented is based on information from APA Style.org: Electronic References. The Chicago Style presented is based on information from Examples of Chicago-Style Documentation. The MLA Style presented is based on information from the MLA FAQ. |
ContributeSimilar Materials |