Consequences of curricular adaptation strategies for implementation at scale

Correspondence Debra Bernstein, TERC, 2067 Massachusetts Ave, Cambridge, MA 02140, USA. Email: debra_bernstein@terc.edu Abstract This study examines and compares how developers designed two primary science curricula to support teacher adaptation and enable use of innovative materials at scale. The two cases—Literacy Science (a science and literacy curriculum for grades 2–5) and Science as Inquiry (a curriculum focused on matter for grades 3–5)—were selected because the curricula shared many key features, yet the designers undertook the challenge of designing for adaptation in substantially different ways. Data sources for analysis included interviews with design teammembers, the curriculum materials, and a range of project documentation. A comparative case study approach was chosen to enable an examination of key contrasting features within the context of each curriculum. Both curricula provide teachers with supports to enact an inquiry‐based curriculum in ways that honor science epistemologies. However, one designer team designed explicitly for adaptation by providing worked examples that described a range of possible classroom and learner contingencies, along with alternative solutions. By contrast, the other design 9team sought to build teachers' pedagogical capacity by providing access to content and explanations from the cognitive and natural sciences. The paper examines how these design stances informed materials developed to support teachers' content knowledge, as

[1]  Susan McKenney,et al.  Designing and researching technology-enhanced learning for the zone of proximal implementation , 2013 .

[2]  Daniel C. Edelson Learning-for-use : A framework for the design of technology-supported inquiry activities , 2001 .

[3]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  Psychological theory and the design of innovative learning environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. , 1996 .

[4]  Marianne Wiser,et al.  Learning Progressions as Tools For Curriculum Development , 2012 .

[5]  Joseph Krajcik,et al.  Enacting Reform-Based Science Materials: The Range of Teacher Enactments in Reform Classrooms , 2005 .

[6]  Susan McKenney,et al.  Work-Based Curriculum to Broaden Learners’ Participation in Science: Insights for Designers , 2020 .

[7]  J. Remillard Examining Key Concepts in Research on Teachers’ Use of Mathematics Curricula , 2005 .

[8]  W. McComas Benchmarks for Science Literacy , 2014 .

[9]  C. Coburn,et al.  Rethinking Scale: Moving Beyond Numbers to Deep and Lasting Change , 2003 .

[10]  G. Roehrig,et al.  Teacher and school characteristics and their influence on curriculum implementation , 2007 .

[11]  Joseph J. Schwab The "Impossible" Role of the Teacher in Progressive Education , 1959, The School Review.

[12]  Donatella Persico,et al.  Techniques for Fostering Collaboration in Online Learning Communities: Theoretical and Practical Perspectives , 2010 .

[13]  Susan McKenney,et al.  Designing science curriculum for implementation at scale: Considerations for diverse and resource-limited settings , 2016 .

[14]  A. M. White The Process of Education , 1994 .

[15]  Jodi Asbell-Clarke,et al.  LEARNING PROGRESSIONS AS TOOL FOR CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT: LESSONS FROM THE INQUIRY PROJECT , 2009 .

[16]  William R. Penuel,et al.  Analysing teachers’ curriculum implementation from integrity and actor-oriented perspectives , 2014 .

[17]  Michael Barnett,et al.  Designed curriculum and local culture: Acknowledging the primacy of classroom culture , 2003 .

[18]  Joni Falk,et al.  State Testing and Inquiry-Based Science: Are They Complementary or Competing Reforms? , 2004 .

[19]  Philip Scott,et al.  The tension between authoritative and dialogic discourse: A fundamental characteristic of meaning making interactions in high school science lessons , 2006 .

[20]  Brian Drayton,et al.  Biocomplexity: Aligning an “NGSS-Ready” Curriculum with NGSS Performance Expectations , 2017, The American Biology Teacher.

[21]  Miriam Gamoran Sherin,et al.  Practicing Change: Curriculum Adaptation and Teacher Narrative in the Context of Mathematics Education Reform , 2006 .

[22]  David E. Kanter,et al.  Doing the project and learning the content: Designing project-based science curricula for meaningful understanding† , 2009 .

[23]  Frederick Grinnell,et al.  Everyday Practice of Science: Where Intuition and Passion Meet Objectivity and Logic , 2009 .

[24]  B. Reiser A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas: National Research Council, Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education , 2012 .

[25]  Cyrille Gaudin,et al.  Video viewing in teacher education and professional development: A literature review , 2015 .

[26]  Joseph L. Polman,et al.  Adaptation by Design: A Context-Sensitive, Dialogic Approach to Interventions , 2013 .

[27]  L. Shulman Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching , 1986 .

[28]  Katherine L. McNeill,et al.  Moving beyond Pseudoargumentation: Teachers' Enactments of an Educative Science Curriculum Focused on Argumentation. , 2017 .

[29]  Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar,et al.  Designing Educative Curriculum Materials: A Theoretically and Empirically Driven Process , 2014 .

[30]  Lizanne DeStefano,et al.  Impact of a Student-Teacher-Scientist Partnership on Students' and Teachers' Content Knowledge, Attitudes toward Science, and Pedagogical Practices. , 2014 .

[31]  A. Huberman,et al.  Qualitative Data Analysis: A Methods Sourcebook , 1994 .

[32]  William R. Penuel,et al.  Designing educational systems to support enactment of the Next Generation Science Standards , 2018, Journal of Research in Science Teaching.

[33]  Savitha Moorthy,et al.  Designing for Productive Adaptations of Curriculum Interventions , 2013 .

[34]  William R. Penuel,et al.  Teaching Routines to Enhance Collaboration Using Classroom Network Technology , 2010 .

[35]  Beth Herbel Eisenmann From Intended Curriculum to Written Curriculum: Examining the "Voice" of a Mathematics Textbook , 2007 .

[36]  T. G.,et al.  Logic in Practice , 1934, Nature.

[37]  Mary Colson,et al.  Planning NGSS-Based Instruction: Where Do You Start? , 2016 .

[38]  Jody Clarke,et al.  Design for Scalability: A Case Study of the River City Curriculum , 2009 .

[39]  D. Cohen A Revolution in One Classroom: The Case of Mrs. Oublier , 1990 .

[40]  Wolfgang Henseler,et al.  Digital Design , 2003 .

[41]  Harold Maurice Collins,et al.  Can We Teach People What Science Is Really Like , 2015 .

[42]  M. Mauss,et al.  Les techniques du corps , 2002 .

[43]  R. Yin,et al.  Case Study Research: Design and Methods (4th ed. , 2009 .

[44]  Christian D. Schunn,et al.  What are critical features of science curriculum materials that impact student and teacher outcomes , 2018 .

[45]  Howard Nicholas,et al.  Factors influencing the uptake of a mechatronics curriculum initiative in five Australian secondary schools , 2012 .

[46]  P. David Pearson,et al.  The instruction of reading comprehension , 1983 .

[47]  Phil Scott,et al.  Talking science: Language and learning in science classrooms , 2006 .

[48]  Barbara J. Benedett,et al.  Curriculum Development , 1967, Nature.

[49]  Ken Appleton,et al.  How Do Beginning Primary School Teachers Cope with Science? Toward an Understanding of Science Teaching Practice , 2003 .

[50]  Robert C. Calfee,et al.  Handbook of educational psychology , 2013 .

[51]  Elizabeth A. Davis,et al.  Teachers and science curriculum materials: where we are and where we need to go , 2016 .

[52]  Brian Drayton,et al.  Digital Curriculum in the Classroom: Authority, Control, and Teacher Role , 2015, Int. J. Emerg. Technol. Learn..

[53]  Hugh Munby,et al.  School science culture: A case study of barriers to developing professional knowledge , 2000 .

[54]  Mary Kay Stein,et al.  Selecting and Supporting the Use of Mathematics Curricula at Scale , 2010 .

[55]  Michael L. Connell,et al.  Reconstructing elementary teacher candidates' understanding of mathematics and science content , 1993 .

[56]  Mike Summers,et al.  Primary School Teachers' Understanding of Science Concepts , 1988 .

[57]  Annemarie Sullivan Palincsar,et al.  Interacting with a Suite of Educative Features: Elementary Science Teachers' Use of Educative Curriculum Materials. , 2016 .

[58]  Ann L. Brown,et al.  How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school. , 1999 .

[59]  Janet Bond-Robinson,et al.  Identifying pedagogical content knowledge (PCK) in the chemistry laboratory , 2005 .

[60]  W. James Popham,et al.  TIGHT BUT LOOSE: SCALING UP TEACHER PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN DIVERSE CONTEXTS , 2008 .

[61]  Janine T. Remillard,et al.  Mathematics Teachers at Work: Connecting Curriculum Materials and Classroom Instruction. Studies in Mathematical Thinking and Learning Series. , 2008 .

[62]  George E. DeBoer,et al.  A history of ideas in science education : implications for practice , 1992 .

[63]  Cognitive Board on Behavioral,et al.  How People Learn II , 2018 .

[64]  Katherine L. McNeill Teachers' use of curriculum to support students in writing scientific arguments to explain phenomena , 2009 .

[65]  B. Crawford Embracing the essence of inquiry: New roles for science teachers , 2000 .

[66]  J. Krajcik,et al.  Designing Educative Curriculum Materials to Promote Teacher Learning , 2005 .

[67]  D. Ball,et al.  Reform by the Book: What Is—or Might Be—the Role of Curriculum Materials in Teacher Learning and Instructional Reform? , 1996 .

[68]  Brian Drayton,et al.  After Installation: Ubiquitous Computing and High School Science in Three Experienced, High-Technology Schools , 2010 .

[69]  J. Osborne,et al.  Supporting and Promoting Argumentation Discourse in Science Education , 2002 .

[70]  W. Doyle,et al.  The practicality ethic in teacher decision-making , 1977 .

[71]  Gene E. Hall,et al.  Change in Schools: Facilitating the Process. SUNY Series in Educational Leadership. , 1987 .

[72]  Susan McKenney Een infrastructuur voor de professionele groei van docenten , 2017 .

[73]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  TAKING SCIENCE TO SCHOOL: LEARNING AND TEACHING SCIENCE IN GRADES K-8 , 2007 .

[74]  Susan McKenney Shaping computer-based support for curriculum developers , 2008, Comput. Educ..

[75]  David A. Gillam,et al.  A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas , 2012 .

[76]  Janine T. Remillard,et al.  Modes of Engagement: Understanding Teachers’ Transactions with Mathematics Curriculum Resources , 2011 .

[77]  Barry Fishman,et al.  Large‐scale science education intervention research we can use , 2012 .

[78]  L. Darling-Hammond,et al.  Effective Teacher Professional Development , 2017 .