 |
||
|
|
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
||||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
Cognition & Development Research Groups
DOR ABRAHAMSON
Ph.D. Northwestern University.
Mathematics cognition through the lenses of design-based frameworks
dor@berkeley.edu | Web site: http://edrl.berkeley.eduEmbodied Design Research Laboratory Research Group (EDRL) began functioning in the spring of 2006. The group's research is characterized by a theoretical strain (embodied cognition), a methodological line (design-based research), and a disciplinary emphasis (mathematics). Thus, the laboratory hosts the full cycle of design-research projects that are geared to contribute to theory and practice of multi-modal mathematical learning and reasoning as well as to design theory.
Research-group participants share and present for discussion their own design-related work as they progress from tackling a design problem through to design, implementation, data analysis, and writing up for publication. In this research group, we: (a) design, build, and field-test learning environments that foster K-16 students' inquiry-based learning of targeted mathematical concepts; (b) develop methodologies that enable us to elicit the data we need for inquiring into questions that go beyond "Did it work?" to exploring how and why things work; (c) analyze videotaped data and student artifacts to contextualize discussions of relations between objects, media, activities, perception, and reasoning; and (d) draw on relevant literature, such as work pertaining to design frameworks, to improve our designs, enrich our interpretation of data, and articulate and present our work such that it addresses the needs and interests of a broad community of education researchers and practitioners.
return to top
ANDREA A diSESSA
Ph.D. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Physics and computation cognition
adisessa@soe.berkeley.edu | Web site: http://dewey.soe.berkeley.edu/boxer/Boxer Research Group deals with two long-term themes: (1) computer learning environments, especially approaches to a deep computational literacy for all, and (2) conceptual development, mainly in science. For 2009-2011, a main concern will be finishing on-going work on the "Patterns" project (described below) and developing a new line of work directed toward engaging diverse student populations.
The "Patterns of Change and Control" (aka "Patterns") Project is investigating a "bottom up" version of curriculum development. "Bottom-up" means we are spending a great deal of time studying the naïve knowledge state, looking mainly for secure footings for learning. The topic, "patterns..." concerns familiar phenomena such as balance, equilibration, "tipping point," oscillation, pumping, resonance, stickiness, and so on. The goals of our instruction are to parlay this naïve knowledge into understanding a slice of the professional domain of "dynamical systems theory." We have found a lot of naïve competence in this area, characterized it, and have been building instructional strategies based on it.
Research topics in the Patterns Project concern the nature and content of students' naïve knowledge, "natural learning paths," and plausible conceptual goals in instructed learning. A key focus is the concept of "abstract." How abstract are student ideas? How do we understand "abstraction" in learning? The role of computer representations - as simulations, analytic forms to help students learn, and as an expressive medium to help students think - is another key focus. Having developed, taught, and analyzed several formative classes on patterns, we will be continuing study of student competence, including both lab experiments and classroom teaching.
return to top
RANDI A ENGLE
Ph.D. Stanford University
Classroom discussions in science and mathematics
raengle@berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/RAEngle/RAEngle.htmlDiscourse, Interaction and Learning Lab (DILL) are open to anyone interested in investigating how learning occurs through discourse or other forms of social interaction. My own research focuses on these issues in the context of teaching and learning in mathematics and biology, but folks interested in other disciplines are welcome as well. Each Friday afternoon there is time both for students to get feedback on work-in-progress as well as to participate in ongoing research projects with me and my colleagues.
Our main meeting is every Friday, which is when students share their work-in-progress with each other. There are also two weekly research meetings after the main DILL meeting related to a new NSF-funded project that is investigating ways of fostering the transfer-of-learning. One group conducts and/or designs tutoring experiments to test my hypotheses about how framing influences transfer in both biology and mathematics. A second group analyzes data from a high school biology teacher who already employs many aspects of the expansive framing in his classroom instruction. New research projects may also be forming around: (a) understanding the use of content comparisons in online discussions, (b) understanding and supporting struggling mathematics students, and (c) methods for systematically revisiting and problematizing prior class discussions to support knowledge building over time.
http://gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/RAEngle/RAEngle.html
return to top
CAROLYN HARTSOUGH
Research Seminars: Inquiry in Educational Psychology
carolyh@socrates.berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/CSHartsough/CSHartsough.html
return to top
SUSAN HOLLOWAY
Family and Schooling in Cultural Context
S_hollo@berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/SDHolloway/SDHolloway.htmlThe Parenting and Culture research group focuses on parents' ideas about childrearing -- including their conceptions about the role of parent and self-evaluation of their parenting capability -- and the actions they take to nurture their children and support their schooling. Group members often have a special interest in how parents' perceptions are constructed within the context of culture and class.
The activities of the group differ from one semester to the next, depending on my projects and the needs of the participating students. We always find time to discuss new articles and provide feedback on each others' work. We are often engaged in reviewing the literature, developing proposals, or collecting and analyzing data.
Participants in the group should be prepared to spend at least 5 hours of reading time outside of class. Full and enthusiastic participation is always appreciated. The group is open to students who have taken or are concurrently enrolled in EDUC 215.
return to top
MARCIA C LINN
Ph.D. Stanford University.
Cognitive processes, science, computer instruction
mclinn@berkeley.edu | Web sites: http://TELSCenter.org; http://www.psych.ucla.edu/iddeas/Technology-Enhanced Learning Research Group focuses on leveraging technology to enhance science teaching and learning. Fall theme: Cumulative learning for students and teachers.
Research group activities include:
Planning and review of research investigations,
Planning of professional development programs,
Design of assessments and curriculum materials,
Development of effective research methods,
Critical friend feedback on papers, proposals, or designs,
Analysis of theoretical frameworks, and
Discussions of research papers.Research of group members includes: (1) designing and investigating artifacts such as models or simulations and learning environments that support students as they carry out complex activities, (2) observing and studying how students and teachers use new technologies including programming software, models, simulations, and learning games, (3) investigating ways to orchestrate student and teacher interactions around science activities, (4) studying the role of factors such as reasoning, metacognition, personal relevance, or identity, (5) investigating issues of equity and diversity since both science and technology have been stereotyped as male domains and since access to technology varies with economic resources in our culture. Group members can collaborate with others to conduct larger projects and get help from others in conducting their own projects.
Group Responsibilities
Members of the group should plan to participate in discussions, give and get feedback from a critical friend about once a month, make presentations of research papers, meet with Linn regularly, present their own research, get help on their own research, and contribute to the research of others. Contributions might include helping another participant develop a rubric, giving feedback on an activity, helping with an analysis, or helping with a research activity such as observing or interviewing. Participants develop mentoring skills by mentoring newcomers. New members should plan to read background papers, visit a classroom where group members are conducting research, become familiar with assessments, and reflect on their observations. Normally students enroll for 2 or 3 units.
return to top
return to top
KATHLEEN E. METZ
Ed.D. University of Massachusetts.
Development of scientific cognition in young children
NORMA MING
Learning from Analogies, Comparisons, and Examples (LACE) Research Group
norming@berkeley.eduThe focus of this research group is to explore the processes by which and the circumstances in which people learn most productively from comparisons, with a particular emphasis on math and science learning. Major themes include analogical transfer, contrasting cases, example-based problem-solving, and learning to generalize vs. discriminate. We will discuss methods for assessing knowledge representation as well as principles of instructional design and research design that illuminate and draw from these themes. In addition to presenting and discussing relevant readings of common interest, members will share their own research-in-progress as it relates to these themes. The mutually supportive atmosphere of the research group will provide many opportunities for lab members to obtain constructive feedback on research projects in all stages from design to analysis, as well as on drafts and revisions of papers and presentations.
return to top
MICHAEL A RANNEY
Ph.D. University of Pittsburgh
Reasoning, learning, cognitive science and society
ranney@soe.berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/MRanney/MRanney.htmlReasoning Group, headed by Michael Ranney, is currently open to all. Historically, it has had a very broad scope, studying the variety of ways in which people reason about science, math, and society. A central, continuing, theme involves assessing, understanding, and/or improving the coherence of scientific arguments and explanations. One of the group's sub-themes focuses on a general numeracy project we call Reasoning With Numbers (which has both descriptive and prescriptive flavors)--but it is hardly just about numbers and it is hardly traditional math-education research. We look at how people reason about, and with, numerical propositions-for instance, the immigration, murder, or abortion rates--along with other content/knowledge propositions. (This Numerically Driven Inferencing paradigm often involves a procedure in which we provide an actual rate as feedback once people have generated an estimate, then see how it changes folks' minds--but we have been using variants of that procedure,as well.) We tend to focus on numbers that have policy implications, and have analyzed journalists' numerical reasoning ("Journalism with Numbers"), and how to improve it; the goal of the curricular element is to improve news reporting and thus improve the knowledge base of those who consume news --that is, virtually all of us. Finally, a strongly re-emerging Reasoning Group sub-theme involves cognition about global warming and evolution--as well as how and why societies differ in accepting these notions. In general, most sciences and mathematics-end even a bit of historical analysis--are ripe for study within the current Reasoning Group.
Default participation in Reasoning is for two units of S/U or P/NP credit for EDUC 223B, sec. 06; letter-grades and more units are possible via negotiation. Folks are welcome to stop by, hang for a while, and see what's up.
Generally, the meetings are a mixture of (a) reports on ongoing or planned research, (b) reality-testing about such research (e.g., about designs or materials), and (c) "journal club" activities, in which we decide which readings from the literature we will collectively address.
http://gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/MRanney/MRanney.html
return to top
GEOFFREY SAXE
Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley.
Mathematical cognition in children
saxe@berkeley.edu | Web site: http://gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/gsaxeLearning Mathematics through Representations (LMR) research group is engaged with developing and studying a research based curriculum unit on integers and fractions for the upper elementary grades. The research component that has proceeded in concert with the curriculum development effort includes three strands of empirical work: interview studies investigating children's understandings of integers and fractions using structured clinical interview techniques; tutorial studies investigating teaching strategies that may help children build upon their mathematical understandings and strategies; and classroom studies that provide formative information on the effectiveness of pilot lessons using a range of measures (observation, student work, teacher and student interviews) as well as analyses of the travel of ideas in classroom communities. Collectively these three strands guide formative decisions about the design and improvement of the LMR curriculum.
LMR research group members participate in all phases of the research: design of studies, collection of interview and tutorial data, creation of coding schemes for analyses of interview and tutorial videotapes, coding using (using and learning to use) qualitative software packages (e.g., StudioCode, FileMaker Pro), drawing packages (Omnigraffle, DeltaGraph), and analysis of coded data using statistical packages (e.g., SPSS), and preparation of articles for scholarly journals and chapters in edited volumes. LMR research group members also participate in discussions of LMR work-in- progress with faculty, collaborating teachers, and our consultants (Deborah Ball and Hyman Bass, Univ. of Michigan), and every summer LMR faculty and a group of research group members attend the Elementary Mathematics Laboratory at the University of Michigan to work with our Michigan colleagues. In the final year of the current project (2010-2011), a summative investigation of the overall success of the novel curriculum will consist of an experimental study that contrasts the outcomes for students working with the LMR curriculum vs. district-mandated textbooks; analysis of the resulting implementation and achievement data will involve hierarchical linear modeling.
The group has regularly presented papers and symposia of ongoing work at professional conferences, including AERA, NCTM, PME, and EARLI, sometimes in collaboration with our colleagues at other institutions, like the Michigan group.
return to top
ALAN H SCHOENFELD
Ph.D. Stanford University.
Mathematical thinking, teaching, and learning
alans@berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/AHSchoenfeld/AHSchoenfeld.html1) The Algebra Teaching Study Research Group is concerned broadly with effective mathematics teaching, and more narrowly with the teaching of (a) middle school algebra word problems, and (b) practices that are effective for a wide range of diverse students.
This is part of an NSF-funded project conducted jointly with Bob Floden at MSU; we will meet in videoconference with our MSU colleagues. From the NSF proposal: "Specifically, we propose to explore the following two questions: (1) What instructional practices are frequently used by teachers judged to be doing an exceptional job of helping students to develop proficiency in solving word problems? and (2) What analytic procedures can be developed and used to characterize these promising teaching practices, with low enough cost so that connections between teaching and learning can be examined for a large number of classrooms?" This work is closely related to our Gates-funded work in developing formative assessment lessons and our work with the San Francisco Unified School district to develop materials, methods, and support structures for teaching middle school mathematics effectively.
2) The Functions Research Group serves as research forum for students and others interested in varied aspects of mathematical cognition. Its agenda is to serve the research needs of its members. Thus, on demand, we may have sessions of the following types:
• Someone may want feedback on a draft of a course paper, a research plan, a dissertation proposal, a dissertation chapter, or a paper to be submitted for publication. The work is distributed to the group and we go over it together.
• Someone may be working on data that's hard to make sense of, an analysis that he or she wants to try on us, or drafts of materials or assessments for proposed research. In that case, we have a working session.
• We may decide to read and discuss a particular paper or papers the group is interested in, or to discuss current events.
• People give practice talks of all kinds: rehearsals for AERA, PME, NCTM, job talks, etc.
In short, we do whatever we can to help each other make sense of issues related to mathematical thinking, teaching, and learning.
return to top
BARBARA Y WHITE
Barbara Y. White
Ph.D. Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
Science education: cognition, computers
bywhite@berkeley.edu | Web site: http://thinkertools.org1) Teaching Scientific Inquiry
In the first project, we are collaborating with upper elementary and middle school teachers to develop and refine instructional approaches aimed at (1) making scientific inquiry accessible to a wide range of students, and (2) enabling students to acquire widely applicable capabilities for collaborative inquiry and reflective learning.Our work includes:
Models of Expertise: Creating and testing theories of expertise and its acquisition, including models of scientific inquiry and reflective learning, which form the foundation for the instructional tools, methods, and assessments that we develop;
Inquiry Curricula: Developing instructional approaches aimed at fostering collaborative scientific inquiry and reflective learning, including creating curricular materials and teacher's guides that embody these approaches;
Software that Supports Inquiry and Reflection: Creating computer-based tools that guide students as they undertake research projects and as they reflect on their inquiry processes with the aim of improving them;
Assessments that Serve Learning: Developing alternative methods of assessment that evaluate understanding, inquiry, and metacognition, with the aim of supporting teaching and learning, as well as serving accountability purposes.2) Developing Widely Useful Capabilities Through Role Playing
The main focus of this project is on analyzing videotapes of fifth grade students playing cognitive, social, and metacognitive roles, such as the Theory Manager, the Collaboration Manager, the Planning Manager, and the Reflection Manager. These students were engaged in a curriculum, designed by our research team, in which they played such roles as they tried to understand a work of historical fiction that they were reading and discussing in groups and then as they undertook a scientific inquiry project, which was also done in groups. The aim of the curriculum is to (1) help fifth graders acquire and understand widely useful cognitive capabilities, like theorizing and synthesizing, (2) develop their collaborative skills through a focus on group processes, (3) enable them to improve metacognitive awareness and self-regulation, and (4) help students to develop theories of their own cognitive, social, and metacognitive processes with the aim of improving them. The purpose of our research team's analyses of the classroom videotapes is to investigate and understand the use of role playing and reflection as instructional tools for developing students' capabilities for learning through collaborative group work.
Undergraduate and graduate students in the ThinkerTools group typically pursue one these two areas of research. The group serves as vehicle for developing ideas and coming up with good research questions, designing studies to investigate the questions, as well as analyzing and interpreting the data.
return to top
MARK WILSON
mrwilson@socrates.berkeley.edu; Telephone: 510-642-7966
return to top
FRANK C WORRELL
Research Seminar
frankc@berkeley.edu | Web site: gse.berkeley.edu/faculty/FCWorrell/FCWorrell.html
|