Time: Time: Wed 5-8PM SZB 438

Contact Information

Dr. Anthony Petrosino
Email: ajpetrosino@mail.utexas.edu
Sanchez Building, Room 462-A Office: 512-232-9681

Office Hours: Wednesday 1PM-3PM or by appointment

Course Number: EDC 385G
Course Name: Knowing and Learning in Mathematics and Science
Room Number: SZB 438
Unique Number: 08525

1 . Course Overview:

The purpose of this course is to understand different approaches to theorizing and studying mathematics and science learning and epistemology as represented by developments in mathematics and science, educational research, and other social science fields. The course is centered upon the recent publication of the National Academy of Sciences publication "How People Learn" and will consider theories of learning mathematics and science in light of understanding and advancing students' learning, classroom interactions, and the organization of schools. Issues specific to learning mathematics and science are considered, with attention to the rationale for content-specific theories. Readings will include theoretical expositions, syntheses of empirical research, and case studies of thinking and learning. This course attempts to synthesize the scientific basis of learning mathematics and science. The scientific achievements include a fuller understanding of: (1) memory and the structure of knowledge; (2) problem solving and reasoning; (3) the early foundations of learning; (4) regulatory processes that govern learning, including metacognition; and (5) how symbolic thinking emerges from the culture and community of the learner." A major project will focus on studying students' thinking in a particular mathematical or scientific domain.

2. Course Expectations

Prepare for and participate in class discussion and class work.

Hand in a weekly critique of an assigned article.

Leading class discussion - Each week a different member(s) of the class will be asked to lead the class discussion. Discussion leaders will be responsible for initiating the discussion with a summary of the week's readings, for posing questions concerning the readings, and for summarizing the group's perspectives on the topic. The summary should be no longer than 15 minutes in length in order to allow time for discussion. The format may be a discussion or it may take other creative forms including small group activities, role-playing, brainstorming, etc. Discussion leaders should contact the instructor with plans no later than Friday of the previous week.

Participation in class - A major goal of this class is for you to be able to articulate your understanding of theories related to problem-based learning and to describe issues regarding the design of problem-based learning environments. Class discussion is crucial to the development of this skill. By participating in a critical debate of the week's readings, you and your classmates will improve your ability to speak publicly about issues and ideas and to question (politely) the positions of others. A second goal of this class is for you to learn to work collaboratively to produce a complex project. Part of class time will be used for group project meetings. Missing class puts an unfair burden on the rest of your project group.

Attendance - Class discussions are an extremely important part of learning and on-time class attendance is mandatory. If you must miss class, please notify me in advance to discuss the situation. In order for an absence to be excused, students must complete a writing assignment on the discussion topic for that day in addition to the regularly assigned reflection paper. The writing assignment is due within two weeks of the missed class or by the last meeting of class whichever comes earlier.

Course research project - 2 Options

TRADITIONAL: Conceive, implement, analyze and write-up a research project utilizing clinical interviews.

NON-TRADITIONAL: Incorporate the LEGACY cycle (more details to follow) in the development of a unit you create founded on the principle of the How People Learn framework.

3. Required Material

Readings - Reading scholarly articles is the primary means for keeping abreast of developments in the field of the learning sciences. Learning to critique these articles and relate them to your work is an important part of the lifelong learning required in today's rapidly changing world.

Each week you will be assigned one or more book chapters or journal articles on a topic related to learning in mathematics and science education. These articles form the basis for your work in this course and it is essential that you read these articles and reflect on them prior to coming to class.

The readings can be found in two books and a course pack. The books are:

How People Learn : Brain, Mind, Experience, and School by John D. Bransford (Editor), Ann L. Brown (Editor), Rodney R. Cocking (Editor). ( also available on the Internet at http://www.nap.edu/books/0309070368/html/).

Wiggins, G. & McTighe, J. (1998). Understanding by Design. Alexander, VA:ASCD.

The course pack can be purchased at Speedway Copying and Printing in the Dobie Mall (512-478-3334). They are open Monday-Friday from 8am-6pm and on Saturday from noon - 6PM. This year we will be using Netpaks.com which will offer you the choice of downloading the course packet from a browser or picking up a hard copy of the course pak in the brick and mortar store in the Dobie Mall.

CLASS MEETINGS
Discussion topics, assigned readings, and class activities

8/29 - Week 1 - Introduction to Course

9/5 - Week 2 - Overview of the Learning Sciences

Bransford, J., Brophy, S., and Williams, S. (2000). When computer technologies meet the learning sciences: Issues and opportunities. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology. Vol. 21(1) 59-84.

CTGV (2000). Lessons in Anchored Instruction: Lessons from beyond the Ivory Tower.

HPL: Chapter 1: Learning- From Speculation to Science

9/12 - Week 3 - Knowledge Centered 1

Bransford, J.D., & Schwartz, D. (1999). Rethinking transfer: A simple proposal with multiple implications. In A. Iran-Nejad & P.D. Pearson (Eds.), Review of research in education (Vol.24, pp. 61-100). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.

HPL: Chapter 3: Learning and Transfer

HPL: Chapter 4: How Children Learn

9/19 - Week 4 - Knowledge Centered 2

Vellom, R. P. and Anderson, C. W. (1999). Reasoning about data in middle school science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 36, No.2, pp. 179-199.

Cobb, P. (1999). Individual and collective mathematical development: The case of statistical data analysis. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 1(1), 5-43.

Petrosino, A. J., Lehrer, R., & Schauble, L. (submitted). Structuring Error and Experimental Variation as Distribution in the Fourth Grade. Journal of Mathematical Thinking and Learning.

9/26 - Week 5 - Assessment Centered 1

Duschl, R. A., & Gitomer, D. H. (1997). Strategies and challenges to changing the focus of assessment and instruction in science classrooms. Educational Assessment, Vol. 4(1), 37-73.

HPL: Chapter 6: The Design of Learning Environments

10/3 - Week 6 - Assessment Centered 2

Larkin, J. H., McDermott, J., Simon, D. P. (1980). Expert and novice performance in solving physics problems. In H. Simon (Ed.). Models of Thought Volume II. Yale University Press.

Goldman, S. R., Petrosino, A. J., & CTGV (1999). Design principles for instruction in content domains: Lessons from research on expertise and learning. In F. Durso (Ed.) Handbook of Applied Cognition. Wiley.

HPL: Chapter 2: How Experts Differ From Novices

10/10 - Week 7 - Learner Centered 1

Carey, S., and Smith, C. (1993). On understanding the nature of scientific knowledge. Educational Psychologist, 28(3), 235-251.

Confrey, J. (1999). Voice, perspective, bias, and stance: Applying and modifying Piagetian theory in mathematics education. Learning Mathematics: From Hierarchies to Networks. L. Burton (Ed.). Falmer Press: New York.

10/17 - Week 8 - Learner Centered 2

Nathan, M. J., Koedinger, K. R., and Alibali, M. W. (manuscript). Expert blind spot: When content knowledge eclipses pedagogical content knowledge.

HPL: Chapter 7: Effective Teaching- Examples in History, Mathematics, and Science.

HTL Chapter 8: Teacher Learning

10/24 - Week 9 - Community Centered 1

Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1996). Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles and systems. In L. Schauble and R. Glaaser (Eds.). Innovations in Learning: New Environments for Education. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates: Mahwah, NJ.

Brown, J. S., Collins, A., & Duguid, P. (1989). Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educational Researcher, pp. 32-42.

10/31 - Week 10 - Community Centered 2

Calabrese Barton, A. (1998). Teaching science with homeless children: Pedagogy, Representation and Identity. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Vol. 35 (4) pp. 379-394.

Rodriguez, A. J. (1998). Strategies for counterresistance: Toward sociotransformative constructivism and learning to teach science for diversity and for understanding. The Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 35 (6) pp. 589-622.

Treisman, U. (1992). Studying students studying calculus: A look at the lives of minority mathematics students in college. College Mathematics Journal Vol. 23, No.5.

11/7 - Week 11 - Methodological Perspectives

Lawson, A. E. (1988). The acquisition of biological knowledge during childhood: Cognitive conflict or tabula rasa? Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 25(3) pp.185-199.

Lythcott, J. and Duschl, R. (1990). Qualitative research: From methods to conclusions. Science Education 74(4). Pp. 445-460.

Brown, A. L. (1992). Design experiments: theoretical and methodological challenges in creating complex interventions in classroom settings. Journal of the Learning Sciences, Vol. (2), 141-178.

11/14 - Week 12 - Accountability

McNeil, Linda and Angela Valenzuela (2000). "The Harmful Impact of the TAAS System of Testing in Texas: Beneath the Accountability Rhetoric," in Mindy Kornhaber and Gary Orfield, eds., _Raising Standards or Raising Barriers? Inequality and High Stakes Testing in Public Education_. New York: Century Foundation.

Koschoreck, J. . (2001). Accountability and educational euity in the transformation of an urban district. Education and Urban Society, Vol. 33, No. 3 pp. 284-304.

Linn, R. L. (2000). Assessments and accountability. Educational Researcher, Vol. 29 (2) pp. 4-16.

11/21 - Week 13 - Informal Learning Environments

Schauble, L., Gleason, M., Lehrer, R., Bartlett, K., Petrosino, A., Allen, A., Clinton, K., Ho, E., Jones, M., Lee, Y., Phillips, J., Siegle, J., Street, J. (manuscript). Supporting science learning in museums.

Ash, D. and Klein, C. (1999). Inquiy in the informal learning environment. Minstrell Book

11/28 - Week 14 - Post Secondary Education

Penner, D. E., Giles, N. D., Lehrer, R., and Schauble, L. (1997). Building functional models: designing an elbow. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. Vol. 3, No.2, pp. 125-143.

Pandy MG, Petrosino T, Chang C, Karande T, Barr R (2001). Jumping Jack: a learning module for movement biomechanics. To be presented at the American Society of Engineering Education (ASEE) Annual Meeting, Albuquerque, June 2001. Full-length paper in preparation.

Michael, J. A., et al. (1999). Undergraduate students' misconceptions about respiratory physiology. Advances in Physiology Education. Vol. 22, no.1.

12/5 - Week 15 - Due: Project Presentations and Papers Due

4. Grade Evaluations (Preliminary)

The grade is based upon (a) participation in class (50%), and (b) the quality of the final project (50%). Collaboration is encouraged; you will not be forced into some type of distribution, normal or otherwise.

Participation in class is evaluated as follows:

Adding to class discussion in a meaningful way (10 points)
Leading class discussion of assigned readings (10 points)
Evidence of preparation and readings of assigned articles (5 points)

Final Research Reports are evaluated as follows:

1. Rationale. (2 points)
2. Review of the literature. (10 points)
3. Method. (5 points)
4. Results and analysis. (10 points)
5. General discussion. (10 points)
6. Self-evaluation. (3 points)
7. Presentation (10 points)

Grade Distributions

A: 90-100
B: 82-89
C: < 70

All papers should be written using APA (American PsychologicalAssociation) style. Consult the APA's Publication Manual, or go to http://www.lib.utexas.edu/Libs/UGL/Source/citation.html

For guidelines on writing with academic integrity, see: http://www.utexas.edu/depts/dos/sjs/academicintegrity.html

Academic Integrity

Policy on Scholastic Dishonesty: Students who violate University rules on scholastic dishonesty are subject to disciplinary penalties, including the possibility of failure in the course and/or dismissal from The University. Since such dishonesty harms the individual, all students, and the integrity of The University, policies on scholastic dishonesty will be strictly enforced.

MAJOR PROJECT

Your major assignment in this course is to design a study of thinking in a mathematics and/or science subdomain of your choice, using clinical interview methods. Examples of math or science domains include ratio and proportion, functions, physics of matter, genetics (I'll provide a more extensive list later). Examples of integrated domains include systems thinking, modeling, data generation and representation.

You will choose a domain to pursue in groups of two to four students. As a group, you will gather the available research in the area and design a clinical interview. You will write reviews of the literature individually. You will also conduct the interviews separately, but report your results orally, as a group, in a formal presentation.

There are two parts to this assignment: 1) a mini review of the research in the domain your group has chosen that covers 4-6 articles (individual grade; 10 points); and 2) the design, execution and discussion/oral presentation of the interviews and results (group grade; 10 points).