Children's Understanding of Scientific Inquiry: Their Conceptualization of Uncertainty in Investigations of Their Own Design

By Kathleen E. Metz. 2004

312 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/f218ff211dc0d42782cb16cfc357ad3c9c3a30b4

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Education

Citations in the corpus

Mere Renovation is Too Little Too Late: We Need to Rethink our Undergraduate Curriculum from the Ground Up (2015, background): “Kathleen Metz (2004) has studied the learning by fifth graders about randomness and the scientific method, based on their designing, conducting, and presenting their own research projects.”
Examining the Use of Talk and Writing for Students' Development of Scientific Conceptual Knowledge Through Constructing and Critiquing Arguments (2016, background): “However, Metz (2004) argued this probably is not the case for younger children such as the elementary students in this study, who may have developmental constraints and need sustained and systematic scaffolding.”
Disentangling Robust Developmental Constraints From the Instructionally Mutable: Young Children's Epistemic Reasoning About a Study of Their Own Design (2011, background): “With a handful of exceptions (e.g., A. L. Brown, 1997; Gelman & Brenneman, 2004; Hapgood, Magnusson, & Palincsar, 2004; Lehrer & Schauble, 2000; Lehrer, Schauble, & Lucas, 2008; Metz, 2004), the realm of younger children’s scientific cognition and instruction has been largely ignored.”
The Influence of Reasoning with Emergent Quantities on Students' Generalizations (2007, background): “Much of the literature related to modeling describes students’ difficulties in making sense of realistic, messy data (Metz, 2004; Petrosino, 2003) and modeling quantities that are emergent rather than explicit (Lehrer & Schauble, 2004).”
Beyond control of variables: What needs to develop to achieve skilled scientific thinking? (2008, background): “The view has by now been widely expressed that the development of epistemological understanding is critical to young people’s academic progress in science (Leach et al., 1997; Metz, 2004; Sandoval, 2005), to their academic progress more broadly (Buehl & Alexander, 2005; Mason & Boscolo, 2004; Mason ”
Elementary children's judgments of the epistemic status of sources of justification† (2011, background): “Children as young as first grade, for example, can articulate sources of uncertainty in experiments of their own design (Metz, 2004).”
Plausibility Judgments in Conceptual Change and Epistemic Cognition (2016, background): “…(Lombardi, Sinatra, et al., 2013), and research could examine if such abilities could be facilitated at an earlier age (e.g., upper elementary grades 3 to 5, when students may begin to understand some of the basic principles relating to the nature of science and scientific thinking; Metz, 2004).”
A Framework for K-12 Science Education: Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas (2012, background): “Research suggests that personal interest, experience, and enthusiasm—critical to children’s learning of science at school or in other settings—may also be linked to later educational and career choices [27-30].”
Learning progressions and teaching sequences: a review and analysis (2011, background): “Only a few ongoing research programmes (Lehrer & Schauble, under review; Metz, 2011; Smith et al., 2010) attend to factors that effect instructionassisted development. Plummer and Krajcik (2010) presented explicit instructional interventions in their learning trajectories for celestial motion.”
Managing Uncertainty During Collaborative Problem Solving in Elementary School Teams: The Role of Peer Influence in Robotics Engineering Activity (2014, background): “For instance, learners could be taught to recognize the sources of their uncertainty (Metz, 2004), to acknowledge their uncertainty (Jordan, 2012), and to evaluate whether and to what extent their uncertainty is warranted (Sieber, 526 JORDAN AND MCDANIEL Clark, Smith, & Sanders, 1978).”
Direct instruction vs. discovery: The long view (2007, background): “Indeed, Klahr and Nigam’s adoption of the experimental psychologist’s focus on efficiency of instruction departs significantly from the perspectives of those in the field of science education concerned with the teaching of science process skills (Duschl & Grandy, 2005; Metz, 2004; Reiser, 2004; Sand”
The Development of Scientific Thinking Skills in Elementary and Middle School. (2007, methodology): “Domain knowledge and strategic performance have been shown to bootstrap one another, and as such interventions have targeted facilitating domain knowledge (e.g., Echevarria, 2003; Metz, 2004), strategy development (e.”
Urban primary‐grade children think and talk science: Curricular and instructional practices that nurture participation and argumentation (2008, background): “This view is based on what are considered “developmental constraints” that younger children possess in science (Metz, 2004).”