|
 |
Overview |
|
Science education is an opportunity to build new theories of learning and
rigorously test existing theories of learning. In one project, we are
developing new theoretical models for the long-term development of
engagement with a content area (science, as career, as avocation, as
way of thinking). In the other project, we are testing the strength
of cognitive science theories by putting them to the test of systematically
modifying science curricula according to core cognitive science principles.
|
|
|
|
| |
Schunn
Lab: Meghan Bathgate, Li Sha, Adar Ben-Eliyahu, Wendy Bennett, Lou Alfieri |
|
|
| |
Collaborators:
Lisa Brahms, Kevin Crowley, Liz Richey, Kalyani Raghavan, Mary Sartoris,
Jennifer Cromley, Joe Merlino, Nora Newcombe, Andy Porter, Laura Desimone |
|
|
|
 |
Current
Projects |
Science Learning Activation Lab (ActLab). The Science Learning Activation Lab is a national research and design effort to learn and demonstrate how to activate children in ways that ignite persistent engagement in science learning and inquiry. Led by the Learning Research Development Center at the University of Pittsburgh, the Lawrence Hall of Science at the University of California Berkeley, and SRI, International, the Lab is conducting research to identify the characteristics of young children that are predictive of successful science learning and future participation in science, as well as to design learning environments that promote such outcomes. Working with a team of national experts, the Activation Lab has developed a theoretical framework to guide our investigation in systematic ways across learning settings. Our research will explore and define the elements of an activated learner, the trajectory of predicted outcomes, and the learning experiences that support or maintain activation.
The
21st Century Research and Development Center on Cognition
and Science Education. Can we improve
science education through cognitive science principles of learning?
Cognitive science has now been around for 40 yrs as a strong
discipline. Have we progressed far enough to make a difference in real
world applications? ln this center-level effort, we team across Pitt,
Penn, and Temple to systematically modify and test our cognitive-science
based modifications to popular instances of hands-on and
textbook based middle school science curricula and then
conduct large scale efficacy trials of the resulting materials.
|
|
|
|
| |
- Singh, C., & Schunn, C. D. (2009). Connecting three pivotal concepts
in K-12 science state standards and maps of conceptual growth to research
in physics education. Journal of Physics Teacher Education Online,
5(2), 16-28. pdf
- Schunn, C. D. & Nelson, M. M. (2009). Expert-novice studies:
An educational perspective. To appear in Eric Anderman (Ed.), Psychology
of Classroom Learning: An Encyclopedia. Detroit, MI: Macmillan Reference.
- Moin, L., Dorfield, J., & Schunn, C. D. (2005). Where can we
find future K-12 science & math teachers? A search by academic
year, discipline, and achievement level. Science Education, 89(6),
980-1006. pdf
- Crowley, K., Schunn, C.D., & Okada, T. (Eds.) (2001). Designing
for Science: Implications from Professional, Instructional, and Everyday
Science. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
- Schunn, C. D., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Science education in
universities: Explorations of what, when, and how. In K. Crowley, C.D.
Schunn, & T. Okada (Eds.), Designing for Science: Implications
from Professional, Instructional, and Everyday Science. Mahwah, NJ:
Erlbaum.
- Schunn, C. D., & Anderson, J. R. (1999). The generality/specificity
of expertise in scientific reasoning. Cognitive Science, 23(3), 337-370.
pdf
|
|
|