Model of Educational Reconstruction as a Theoretical and Methodological contribution to the Design of Environments of Science Teaching and Learning
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.22600/1518-8795.ienci2020v25n1p262Keywords:
Model of Educational Reconstruction, Intermediate framework, Design tools, Educational interventions, Science educationAbstract
In this paper, the Model of Educational Reconstruction (MER) was presented as a theoretical and methodological framework for the design of science teaching and learning environments. For this, it was necessary to explain the role of great theories, intermediate framework and design tools in the design process of educational interventions. Based on this understanding, the theoretical deepening of the MER was made, which resulted in the clarification of its intermediate framework. Furthermore, the deepening of the methodological structure of the ERM allowed the clarification of the relationships between its three components: clarification and analysis of science content, investigation into students ‘perspectives and design and evaluation of teaching and learning environments. All these discussions contributed for the MRE to be defended in this work as a fruitful theoretical and methodological model to assist teachers and researchers of science education in the process of developing educational interventions that address scientific contents.References
Anderson, T., & Shattuck, J. (2012). Design-Based Research: A Decade of Progress in Education Research? Educational Researcher, 41(1), 16–25. Recuperado de https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X11428813
Chalmers, A. F., & Fiker, R. (1993). O que é ciência afinal?. São Paulo, SP: Brasiliense.
Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., Kattmann, K., Komorek, M., & Parchmann, I. (2012). The Model of Educational Reconstruction – A Framework for Improving Teaching and Learning Science. In D. Jorde & J. Dillon (Eds.), Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Restropertive and Prospective (pp. 13–38). Sense Publishers. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-6091-900-8_2
Duit, R. (2006a). La investigación sobre enseñanza de las ciencias. Revista Mexicana de Investigación Educativa, 11, 741–770.
Duit, R. (2006b). Science Education Research–An Indispensable prerequisite for improving instructional practice. In ESERA Summer School, Braga (pp. 1–18). Recuperado de http://www.esera.org/media/summerschool/esera2006/DUITBR.pdf
Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., Kattmann, U., Komorek, M., & Parchmann, I. (2012). The Model of Educational Reconstruction: A Framework for Improving Teaching and Learning Science. (D. Jorde & J. Dillon, Eds.), Science Education Research and Practice in Europe: Restropertive and Prospective. Rotterdam, The Netherlands: Sense Publishers.
Duit, R., Treagust, D. F., & Widodo, A. (2013). Teaching Science for Conceptual Change. International Handbook of Research on Conceptual Change, (10872), 487–503. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203154472.ch25
El-Hani, C., & Bizzo, N. V. (2002). Formas de construtivismo: Teoria da mudança conceitual e construtivismo contextual. In Ensaio Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências (pp. 1–25). https://doi.org/10.1590/1983-21172002040104
Felzmann, D. (2014). Using Metaphorical Models for Describing Glaciers. International Journal of Science Education, 36(16), 2795–2824. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2014.936328
Fischler, H. (2011). Didaktik Didaktik —An Appropriate Framework for the Professional Work of Science Teachers SCIENCE TEACHERS ? In The Professional Knowledge Base of Science Teaching (pp. 31–50). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-3927-9_3
Howe, K. R., & Berv, J. (2000). Constructing Constructivism, Epistemological and Pedagogical. In D. C. Phillips (Ed.), Constructivism in education: Opinions and second opinions on controversial issues. (pp. 19–40). Chicago: National Society for the Study of Education.
Kattmann, U. (2007). Didaktische Rekonstruktion – eine praktische Theorie. In Theorien in der biologiedidaktischen Forschung. (pp. 93–104). Berlim: Springer Netherlands.
Kattmann, U., Duit, R., Gropengießer, H., & Komorek, M. (1996). Educational Reconstruction – Bringing Together Issues of Scientific Clarification and Students’ Conceptions. In Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching (NARST) (p. 19). https://doi.org/Kiel
Kersting, M., Henriksen, E. K., Bøe, M. V., & Angell, C. (2018). General relativity in upper secondary school: design and evaluation of an online learning environment using the model of educational reconstruction. Physical Review Physics Education Research, 14, 010130. https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevPhysEducRes.14.010130
Klafki, W. (1995). Didactic analysis as the core of preparation of instruction (Didaktische Analyse als Kern der Unterrichtsvorbereitung). Journal of Curriculum Studies, 27(1), 13–30.
Komorek, M., & Kattmann, U. (2008) The model of educational reconstruction. In Mikelskis-seifert, S., Ute, R., Brückmann, M. (Eds.). Four decades of research in science education: from curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 171-188). Münster/newyork/münchen/berlin: Waxmann.
Labudde, P. (2008) The role of constructivism in science education: yesterday, today and tomorrow. In Mikelskis-seifert, S., Ute, R., Brückmann, M. (Ed.). Four decades of research in science education: from curriculum development to quality improvement (pp. 139-156). Münster/newyork/münchen/berlin: Waxmann.
Matta, A. E. R., Silva, F. P. S., & Boaventura, E. M. (2014). Design-based research ou pesquisa de aplicada de inovação em educação do século xxi. Revista Da FAEEBA – Educação e Contemporaneidade, 23(42), 23–36.
McKenney, S. E., & Reeves, T. C. (2012). Conducting Educational Design Research. Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.
McKenney, S., & Reeves, T. C. (2014). Educational design research. In J. M. Spector, M. D. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. J. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (4th ed., p. 1005). Springer Netherlands.
Méheut, M., & Psillos, D. Teaching-learning sequences: Aims and tools for science education research. International Journal of Science Education, 26(5), 515–535.
Neves, R. F. (2015). Abordagem do conceito célula: uma investigação a partir das contribuições do Modelo de Reconstrução Educacional (MRE). UFRPE. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781107415324.004
Niebert, K., & Gropengieber, H. (2014). Understanding the Greenhouse Effect by Embodiment - Analysing and Using Students’ and Scientists’ Conceptual Resources. International Journal of Science Education, 36(2), 277–303. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2013.763298
Niebert, K., & Gropengiesser, H. (2013). The Model of Educational Reconstruction : A framework for the Design of Theory-based Content Specific Interventions . The example of Climate Change. In Educational design research – Part B: Illustrative cases (pp. 511–531). Enschede, the Netherlands: SLO.
Pereira, A. P. (2012). Distribuição conceitual no ensino de física quântica: uma aproximação sociocultural às teorias de mudança conceitual. [s.l.]. (Tese de doutorado.). Programa de Pós-Graduação em Ensino de Fïsica. Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, RS.
Pereira, A. P. (2017). Um Panorama da Pesquisa Internacional sobre Mudança Conceitual. Revista Brasileira de Pesquisa em Educação em Ciências, 17(1), 215–242.
Phillips, C. D. (2000). Constructivism in Education: Opinions and Second Opinions on Controversial Issues. Ninety-Ninth Yearbook of the National Society for the Study of Education, p. 340.
Pietrocola, M. (2002). A Matemática como estruturante do conhecimento físico. Caderno Brasileiro de Ensino de Física, 19(1), 93-114.
Pintrich, P. R., Marx, R. W., & Boyle, R. A. (1993). Beyond cold conceptual change: The role of motivational beliefs and classroom contextual factors in the process of conceptual change. Review of Educational Research, 63, 167–199.
Plomp, T. (2007). Educational design research: an introduction. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds.), An introduction to educational design research (p. 130). Shanghai: Proceedings of the seminar conducted at the East China Normal University.
Queiroz, G. R. P. C., & Barbosa-Lima, M. C. A. (2007). Conhecimento Científico, seu Ensino e Aprendizagem: atualidade do construtivismo. Ciência & Educação (Bauru), 13(3), 273–291. https://doi.org/10.1590/s1516-73132007000300001
Reinfried, S., Aeschbacher, U., Kienzler, P. M., & Tempelmann, S. (2015). The model of educational reconstruction - a powerful strategy to teach for conceptual developmente in physical geography: the case of water springs. International Research in Geographical and Environmental Education, 24(3), 237–257. https://doi.org/10382046.2015.1034459
Reinfried, S., Mathis, C., & Kattmann, U. (2009). Das Modell der Didaktischen Rekonstruktion. Eine innovative Methode zur fachdidaktischen Erforschung und Entwicklung von Unterricht. Beiträge Zur Lehrerinnen- Und LehrerBildung, 3(27), 404–414.
Riemeier, T., & Gropengieber, H. (2008). On the roots of difficulties in learning about cell division: Process-based analysis of students’ conceptual development in teaching experiments. International Journal of Science Education, 30(7), 923–939. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500690701294716
Ruthven, K., Laborde, C., Leach, J., & Tiberghien, A. (2009). Design tools in didactical research: instrumenting the epistemological and cognitive aspects of the design of teaching sequences. Educational Researcher, 38(5), 329–342. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X09338513
Sam, A., Niebert, K., Hanson, R., & Twumasi, A. K. (2015). the Model of Educational Reconstruction: Scientists’ and Students’ Conceptual Balances To Improve Teaching of Coordination Chemistry in Higher Education. International Journal of Academic Research and Reflection, 3(7), 1–11.
Sander, E., Jelemenská, P., & Kattmann, U. (2006). Towards a better understanding of ecology, Journal of Biological Education, 40(3), 119-123. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00219266.2006.9656028
Sarmento, A. C. H., Muniz, C. R. R., Silva, N. R., Pereira, V. A., Santana, M. A. S., Sá, T. S., & El-Hani, C. N. (2013). Investigando princípios de Design de una sequência didáctica sobre metabolismo energético. Ciência & Educação, 19(3), 573–598. https://doi.org/10.1590/S1516-73132013000300006
Shattuck, J., & Anderson, T. (2013). Using a Design-Based Research Study to Identify Principles for Training Instructors to Teach Online. International Review of Research in Open and Distance Learning, 14(5), 186–210.
Stavrou, D. (2015). Educational reconstruction of nonlinear systems: transforming the science content into a content into a content for instruction. In ESERA (pp. 785–791).
Van den Akker, J. (1999). Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training. (J. van den Akker, R. M. Branch, K. Gustafson, N. Nieveen, & T. Plomp, Eds.), Design Approaches and Tools in Education and Training. Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-011-4255-7
Van Dijk, E. M., & Kattmann, U. (2007). A research model for the study of science teachers’ PCK and improving teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 23(6), 885–897. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2006.05.002
Viiri, J., & Savinainen, A. (2008). Teaching-learning sequences: A comparison of learning demand analysis and educational reconstruction. Latin-American Journal of Physics Education, 2(2), 80–86. https://doi.org/1870-9095
Werneck, V. R. (2006). Sobre o processo de construção do conhecimento: O papel do ensino e da pesquisa. Ensaio Avaliação em Políticas Públicas em Educação, 14(51), 173–96. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0104-40362006000200003
Zabala, A. (1998). A prática educativa: como ensinar. Porto Alegre, RS: Artmed.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
IENCI is an Open Access journal, which does not have to pay any charges either for the submission or processing of articles. The journal has adopted the definition of the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI), which states that the users have the right to read, write down, copy, distribute, print, conduct searches and make direct links with the complete texts of the published articles.
The author responsible for the submission represents all the authors of the work and when the article is sent to the journal, guarantees that he has the permission of his/her co-authors to do so. In the same way, he/she provides an assurance that the article does not infringe authors´ rights and that there are no signs of plagiarism in the work. The journal is not responsible for any opinions that are expressed.
All the articles are published with a Creative Commons License Attribution Non-commercial 4.0 International. The authors hold the copyright of their works and must be contacted directly if there is any commercial interest in the use of their works.
