Dr David Anderson david.anderson@ubc.ca Research Methods Investigating STEM Education in an Amusement Park Setting Dr David Anderson david.anderson@ubc.ca

STEM in Education STEM Science Technology Engineering Mathematics Many positive benefits – but, still difficult to practice in the reality of high-school systems.

Amusement Park Physics Video – Global News BC

Metacognition Metacognition is defined most simply as “thinking about thinking.” Metacognitive involves awareness and regulation Awareness Control Monitoring Planning Evaluation Self Efficacy

Awareness Control Monitoring Planning I am aware of when I have learning difficulties. Control I change my thinking strategies to suit different learning situations (e.g. lab, classroom, field-trip). Monitoring I self-check my progress at various stages during learning activities Planning I try to predict possible problems that might occur with my learning. Evaluation I stop from time to time to check my progress on a learning task. Self Efficacy I'm confident of understanding the most complex material presented by the teacher in this course.

Research Questions Describe the metacognitive characters of students. Understand individual students’ and group metacognitive characteristics influence and shape knowledge construction processes. Mete Question – How can were refine our Research Methods to better describe Metacognition?

Methodology Interpretive case studies to elucidate students’ metacognitive and knowledge construction processes. (Gallagher & Tobin, 1991; Merriam, 1998; Stake, 1995). Capture highly descriptive accounts of the richness of students’ metacognition in a STEM context.

Participants Year 11 and 12 Students Multiple case group Usually 4 per group Multiple Case context Amusement park physics Natural forest ecology environment Marine Science Centres

Staged approach – Refining Methods

Interventions and Data Collection Over the course of two weeks Pre-Measures of Metacognition – BMQ Engineer Measuring Tools The Amusement Park Field Trip Interactions and conversation recorded given to student for reflection.

Various Kinematic Tasks

Post-Visit Interviews Stimulated recall. In-Class Activities connected with the AP Post-Activity Interviews Stimulated recall.

Our Evolution of Methods The research team was afforded the benefit of itself learning and developing and refining the study’s methodological practices. Our repeated critical reflections led to changes in methods.

1. Individual Units of Analysis to Group units of Analysis

2. Individual Audio Stimulated Recall to Whole Group Video Stimulated Recall

3. Researcher Selected to Participant Selected Incidents of Whole Group Interactions

4. Researcher Driven Interview Discourse to Participant Driven Interview Discourse

Conclusions In qualitative research we seek better understandings (descriptions) of the phenomenon. We allow our methods to improve so they become more powerful towards understanding the phenomenon.

Some articles Anderson, D., Thomas, G. (2014).  ‘Prospecting for metacognition’ in a science museum – A metaphor reflecting hermeneutic inquiry and questioning into metacognition in a new context.  Issues in Educational Research, 24(1) 1-20. Thomas, G., & Anderson, D., (2012). Parents’ metacognitive knowledge: Influences on parent- child interactions in a science museum setting. Journal of Research in Science Education, 43(3), 1245-1265. Anderson, D., Thomas, G.P., & Nashon, S.M. (2009). Social barriers to engaging in meaningful learning in biology field trip group work. Science Education, 93(3), 511-534. Anderson, D., Nashon, S.M., & Thomas, G.P. (2009). Evolution of research methods for probing and understanding metacognition. Research in Science Education, 39(2),181-195. Nielsen, W., Nashon, S., & Anderson, D. (2009). Metacognitive engagement during field-trip experiences: A case study of students in an amusement park physics program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 265- 288. Thomas, G.P., Anderson, D., & Nashon, S.M. (2008). Development and validity of an instrument designed to investigate elements of science students’ metacognition, self-efficacy and learning processes: The SEMLI-S. International Journal of Science Education, 30(13), 1701-24. Anderson, D., & Nashon, S. (2007). Predators of knowledge construction: Interpreting students’ metacognition in an amusement park physics program. Science Education, 91(2), 298-320. Hisasaka, T., Anderson, D., Nashon, S., & Yagi, I.  (2005).  Research regarding children’s metacognition in physics learning environments: Using cognitive psychology to improve physics education.  Physics Education in Tohoku, 14, 69-74.

STEM 2020: Changing the Story www.stem2020.ubc.ca

STEM 2020 – Timeline Call for Papers: September 1, 2019 Deadline for Submission: November 1, 2019 Notification of Acceptance: February 14, 2020 Early Bird Registration deadline: May 2, 2020 Conference Dates: July 09-11, 2020 Photo: Tourism Vancouver

UBC STEM 2020: Organizing Committee Conference Co-Chairs Dr. Samson Nashon Science & Mathematics Department Head Dr. David Anderson Museum Education & Science Education Dr. Marina Milner-Bolotin Science Education Dr. Hartley Banack Physical & Health Education Dr. Jillianne Code Media & Technology Studies Dr. Cynthia Nicol Mathematics Education Dr. Stephen Petrina Media & Technology Studies Dr. Sandra Scott Science Education

Downtown Vancouver Photo: Tourism Vancouver

Join us in Vancouver in July 2020！ E-mail: stem.2020@ubc.ca Web：http://st\em2020.ubc.ca Photo: Tourism Vancouver