The Science and Engineering Practices
This microcredential represents educators' ability to appropriately use science and engineering practices to support student sensemaking. This stack of microcredentials fulfills one of the requirements of the pathway for the Secondary Science Endorsement.
-
Utah Effective Teaching Standards > Standard 2: Instructional Design Clarity
Element 1: Content - Demonstrating a comprehensive understanding of Utah Core Standards, communicating relevance of content, communicating clear pathways to student mastery and designing learning experiences aligned to clear learning intentions and success criteria. -
Utah Effective Teaching Standards > Standard 2: Instructional Design Clarity
Element 3: Instructional Planning - Planning high quality, personalized instructional activities that are informed by student progress data, provide multiple opportunities for students to reflect upon and assess their own growth and allow multiple opportunities and means for demonstration of competency. -
Utah Effective Teaching Standards > Standard 3: Instructional Practice
Element 1: Instructional Strategies - Using appropriate academic language and evidence-based strategies to stimulate higher-level thinking, discourse and problem solving and to scaffold learning experiences to meet the needs of all students. -
Utah Effective Teaching Standards > Standard 3: Instructional Practice
Element 2: Assessment Practices - Critically analyzing evidence from both formative and summative assessments to inform and adjust instruction and provide feedback to students to support learning and growth.
To earn this microcredential you will collect and submit two sets of evidence demonstrating your effective and consistent instruction that engages learners with the Science and Engineering Practices. You will also complete a written or video reflective analysis.
Science and Engineering practices are what students do to make sense of phenomena. They are both a set of skills and a set of knowledge to be internalized. The SEPs reflect the major practices that scientists and engineers use to investigate the world and design and build systems. SEP’s are not used in isolation as they support the use of crosscutting concepts with disciplinary core ideas to make sense of phenomena.
The things that scientists and engineers do and how they actively engage in their work. They include: Asking Questions; Developing and using models; Planning and Carrying Out Investigations; Analyzing and Interpreting Data; Using Mathematics and Computational Thinking; Constructing Explanations; Engaging in Argument from Evidence; Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information.
Research from A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas (National Research Council, 2012), states that “to develop a thorough understanding of scientific explanations of the world, students need sustained opportunities to work with and develop the underlying ideas and to appreciate those ideas’ interconnections over a period of years rather than weeks or months” (p. 26). This document also asserts that “The framework focuses on a limited set of core ideas in order to avoid the coverage of multiple disconnected topics—the oft-mentioned mile wide and inch deep. This focus allows for deep exploration of important concepts, as well as time for students to develop meaningful understanding” (p. 25). This places the focus on students using the other two dimensions of science instruction identified in The Framework (NRC, 2012), crosscutting concepts and science and engineering practices, to deepen understanding of disciplinary core concepts.
The Framework (NRC, 2012) document is the foundational resource that informed the development of the current Utah Science with Engineering Education (SEEd) Standards (USBE, 2019). Within these standards, the concept of sensemaking of core ideas through crosscutting concepts and science and engineering practices is a foundational principle of science education.
For teachers to include appropriate sensemaking experiences into instruction, they must also understand how to develop it in students. This microcredential stack focuses on teacher understanding and implementation of student sensemaking as a foundation for building effective science instruction in Grades 6-12. Each microcredential in the stack is meant to provide evidence of the competencies necessary to demonstrate effective three-dimensional science and engineering teaching.
Reference: National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Category: Preparation and Planning
Submit the evidence listed below to demonstrate your effective and consistent preparation and planning for instruction with the SEPs.
Submit a unit plan you have used as a part of your instruction that demonstrates your competency in using Science and Engineering Practices to prepare and plan experiences that support student sensemaking. Be sure to include:
A. At least one standard (performance expectation)
B. The use of at least four Science and Engineering Practices throughout the unit
C. A description of the assessment for the Science and Engineering Practice found in the standard
D. A rationale for the Science and Engineering Practice progression appropriate for this grade band.
Use and cite sources to support your rationale and instructional decisions. See the Resources section for sources to cite.
Category: Implementation
Submit the evidence listed below to demonstrate your effective and consistent implementation of appropriate instructional practices with the SEPs.
Create and submit components of a portfolio that provide evidence for your competency in using the Science and Engineering Practices. The portfolio must include the following:
A. Samples of student work (video, written work, etc.) showing the use of at least four of the Science and Engineering Practices identified in the unit plan.
B. An assessment of the students’ ability to use the Science and Engineering Practice found in the standard, including an example of student responses to the assessment.
C. A written reflection on how students used the identified Science and Engineering Practices to facilitate sensemaking.
Use and cite sources to support your rationale and instructional decisions. Be sure to follow your district/charter policies for student privacy.
Review Criteria
Criterion 1: Evidence demonstrates the use of an assessment that adequately assesses the Science and Engineering Practice associated with the selected SEEd standard.
Criterion 2: Evidence demonstrates the consistent and effective use of a variety of Science and Engineering Practices, aligned within the grade band and SEEd standard, to guide student sensemaking.
How do Science and Engineering Practices fit into broader 3D Science teaching and learning in your classroom?
How has the explicit use of the Science and Engineering Practices in your instruction adjusted the teaching and learning in your classroom? What effects are you seeing in student work?
Review Criteria
Criterion 1: The reflective analysis indicates an awareness of the importance of the Science and Engineering Practices and their importance in the broader 3D framework.
Criterion 2: The reflective analysis indicates and acknowledges the impact that the use of Science and Engineering Practices has on student sensemaking in the educators classroom.
https://www.nap.edu/read/13165/chapter/1
A teacher friendly research document that explains the three dimensions of science including science and engineering practices, crosscutting concepts, and disciplinary core ideas. Each dimension as well as their specific progressions from grades K to 12 is explained in depth within its own chapter. The disciplinary core ideas are grouped into major disciplines (i.e., Physical Sciences; Life Sciences; Earth and Space Sciences; Engineering, Technology, and Applications of Science). Each discipline is explained in a separate chapter. The report also describes developmentally appropriate learning progressions. Additionally there are chapters on important topics such as integrating the three dimensions (Ch.9), Implementation into the classroom (Ch.10), Equity and Diversity (Ch.11).
National Research Council. (2012). A Framework for K-12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Committee on a Conceptual Framework for New K-12 Science Education Standards. Board on Science Education, Division of Behavioral and Social Sciences and Education. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press.
Ambitious Science Teaching
This book explores how to support student sensemaking of science concepts. It includes specific vignettes, examples, and practical suggestions for implementing in the classroom.
Windschitl, M., Thompson, J., & Braaten, M. (2018). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Education Press
STEM Teaching Tools - Science and Engineering Practices
https://stemteachingtools.org/tgs/Practices
This collection of practice briefs outlines best practices in science and engineering teaching and learning.
Helping Students Make Sense of the World Using Next Generation Science and Engineering Practices
https://my.nsta.org/resource/105619
This book explores each of the Science and Engineering Practices in detail with examples used in the classroom. Schwarz, Chrstina V, Passmore, Cynthia, & Reiser, Brian J. (2017). Arlington, VA: NSTAPress.
Danielle Brown
Shauna Chapa
Margaret Grindstaff
A'Lura Hutchins
Britt Rohde
Elizabeth Stott
Mindy Timothy
250 East 500 South
Salt Lake City, UT 84111-3204
Phone: 801.538.7807