Zangori Forbes Biggers 2012

8/17/2019 Zangori Forbes Biggers 2012

1/7

See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284626770

This is inquiry right? Strategies for effectively adapting elementary science lessons

Article · March 2012

CITATION

1READS

13

3 authors:

Laura Zangori

University of Missouri

19 PUBLICATIONS 91 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Cory T. Forbes

University of Nebraska at Lincoln


SEE PROFILE

Mandy Biggers

Pennsylvania State University


SEE PROFILE

All in-text references underlined in blue are linked to publications on ResearchGate,

letting you access and read them immediately.

Available from: Cory T. Forbes

Retrieved on: 06 May 2016

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mandy_Biggers?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_7https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mandy_Biggers?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laura_Zangori?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4https://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Missouri?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_6https://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_1https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mandy_Biggers?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_7https://www.researchgate.net/institution/Pennsylvania_State_University?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_6https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mandy_Biggers?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_5https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Mandy_Biggers?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cory_Forbes?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_7https://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Nebraska_at_Lincoln?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_6https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cory_Forbes?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_5https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Cory_Forbes?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laura_Zangori?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_7https://www.researchgate.net/institution/University_of_Missouri?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_6https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laura_Zangori?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_5https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Laura_Zangori?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_4https://www.researchgate.net/?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_1https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284626770_This_is_inquiry_right_Strategies_for_effectively_adapting_elementary_science_lessons?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_3https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284626770_This_is_inquiry_right_Strategies_for_effectively_adapting_elementary_science_lessons?enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA%3D%3D&el=1_x_2


2/7

48 Science and Children

Strategies for effectivelyadapting elementaryscience lessons


By Laura Zangori, Cory Forbes, and Mandy Biggers


3/7

September 2012 49

This Is Inquiry... Right?

that they generate their own questions independently,

work with peers and teachers to select a question, re-

fine an existing question, or are provided a question

by the teacher or lesson plan (NRC 2012).The original version of the student pages for the

magnets lesson included multiple investigation ques-

tions located in the title of the worksheet and three

additional subquestions. This made it diff icult to de-termine what students should focus on while perform-

ing the investigation. These resources are all available

for review online (see Internet Resource). Our first

modification was to remove the existing questionson the student worksheet to provide a single, clear,

concrete, “how” investigation question: “How does

adding layers of tape affect the strength of a magnet?”

(see Table 1, p. 50). First, this change helps clarify the

question. Second, the modified question highlights

(a) the relationship between tape layers and magnet

strength (which the original question did not); and (b)the explicit learning goal of the lesson—that forces can

act at a distance.

Giving Priority to EvidenceThe original lesson had a well-defined data collection

table with explicit instructions for what data to record

and where to record it, so no modifications were nec-

essary (see Internet Resource). Students who do not

require such a high level of guidance might decide

what data to collect and how to collect it themselves.However, an important next step after collecting data

is to analyze and look for patterns and relationshipsthrough graphs, diagrams, charts, or classification

schemes. The original lesson asked students to graph

their data (see Internet Resource). However, the

step before graphing asked students to make predic-

tions from their data for a new investigation and trythe new investigation before analyzing data for their

current investigation. If students had followed this

detour, they may not have been able to answer their

investigation question because they began a new in-

vestigation in the midst of the current one! To help

the students analyze their data, we asked them what

they noticed about their graphs as soon as they weredone graphing and did not ask questions about newinvestigations until the end of the lesson (see Table 1,

p. 50). We did ask the students what was happening

to the paperclip as we added more pieces of tape. One

student, holding up her graph said, “It holds less!”

She then pointed out that when she added more tape

the magnet held fewer paperclips. As a modification,

students who are ready for a more student-directed

lesson might decide for themselves how to analyze thedata (NRC 2012).

s teachers, many of us have taught our share of

science lessons that needed improvements. For

the past eight years, we have been working with

elementary teachers to implement quick andeasy strategies to modify existing science lessons to

make them more inquiry-based. Elementary teachers

can use these strategies to adapt existing science les-

sons to address the five essential features of inquiryand scientific practices defined by the National Re-

search Council ([NRC] 2000; 2012). Incorporating

these practices of science into an existing lesson “helps

students understand how scientific knowledge devel-ops” (NRC 2012, p. 42) through active engagement in

the processes of science.

To illustrate these adaptation strategies, we use a

freely available elementary science lesson on magnetism,

which one teacher taught in her third-grade classroom

(see Internet Resource). In this lesson, students inves-

tigate the strength of a magnet by adding layers of tapeand observing how the pieces of tape affect the ability of

the magnet to attract paper clips. We purposefully chose

this standards-based, reform-oriented science lesson to

highlight that these adaptation strategies are helpful to

modify even well-designed science lessons.

A Note on DirectionThese lesson adaptation strategies are not a series of

steps. Rather, teachers may choose to use one or more

of them to modify specific science lesson plans to better

engage their students in either more teacher- or student-

directed variations of the essential features of inquiry.A common assumption among science teachers is that

“true” inquiry is predominantly student-directed. We,

like the NRC (2000; 2007; 2012), do not advocate more

open, student-directed inquiry as the gold standard

over other variations of inquiry. As we have observed,

and as research shows, early learners often require more

guidance to engage productively in inquiry—particu-

larly those who have limited past experience doing so(Metz 2008) —and require science lessons that are more

teacher-directed. However, inquiry-oriented lessons

can be highly student-directed, teacher-directed, or

anywhere in between. In the end, it is our students’ ex-isting ideas and unique needs that should determine the

amount of structure and guidance we provide to sup-

port their learning through inquiry.

Scientific QuestionsTo engage students in scientific questions, an effec-

tively designed science lesson should include an an-swerable investigation question that guides students’

work in the classroom. Depending on the level of sup-

port students require, the lesson modification may be

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==


4/7


Table 1.

Modification strategies for the magnet lesson.

Feature Existing lesson Suggested lesson modifications

Question The lesson had four investigation questions:

• How strong is your magnet?

• Can your small magnet attract a paper

clip from across the room?

• Can your small magnet attract a paper

clip from across your desk?

• How can you find out how strong your

magnet is?

Change to a single, focused investigation “what” or“how” question:

• How does adding layers of tape alter the strength of

a magnet?

Data Evidence The lesson asked questions to guide stu-dents through data analysis such as:

• Was your magnet able to hold more or lesspaperclips as you added pieces of tape?

• Is it the tape that is causing a change

in the number of paper clips held?

• Add data collection table to the student pages.

• Add blank graph to the student pages for students to

graph their results.

• Keep existing questions.

• Move new experiment reference to new investigationto “Communicate/Justify” section.

Explanation The lesson asked students to:

• predict what will happen and why.

• include their data and analysis in their

journal or on their worksheets and writean explanation for their results.

• Keep prediction based on prior knowledge.

• Use class discussions for predicting and explanation

construction.

• Have students record predictions.

• Keep data record and data analysis.

• Ask students to use what they know (their evidence), andhow and why they know it to construct an explanation:

• “How do you explain your investigation’s results?Use your data in your explanation.”

• “As you began adding layers of tape, what

happened? Why?”

• “What happens to the strength of the magnet as

you add more layers of tape? Why?”

• Our investigation question was “How does adding

layers of tape alter the strength of a magnet?”Based on your results explain your answer to this

question.

Alternate

Explanation The lesson did not evaluate an alternate

explanation. Add to the student pages or in student journal:

• “Why didn’t each group get the exact same results?”• “Are there any anomalies in the data (e.g., a group

had more paper clips after adding three more pieces

of tape)? What could that mean?”

• “Does hearing about [others’ results, scientific expla-

nations, and so on] make you think differently about your explanation?”

Communicate/

Justify The lesson only addressed evidence by

asking students to present a graph of their

results.

Add to the student pages or journal: “How does adding

layers of tape alter the strength of a magnet? Based on

your results explain your answer to this question.”


5/7

September 2012 51


Formulating Evidence-BasedExplanations

Formulating scientific explanations is a challengingpractice for elementary students because, in everydaydiscourse, “to explain” often means to describe what

happened. As a result, explanations in the classroom can

become easily confused as a restatement of what the data

shows rather than an inference based on the evidence. A

scientific explanation requires students to make connec-

tions back to the evidence and articulate a claim about

what they have observed. By formulating evidence-basedexplanations, students have the opportunity to connect

what they knew, what they now know, and how and why

they know it. To make this connection easier, have stu-

dents share and record their initial ideas (e.g., what theyknew) before they start the lesson, for example, justified

predictions (see Table 1). Students not only predict what

they think will happen in the investigation, but also why.

Unfortunately, though many science lessons ask studentsto make predictions, most do not ask students to provide

reasoning for their predictions; however, this lesson did.

We extended this lesson by engaging students in a

whole-class discussion in which students shared underly-

ing reasons and evidence for their predictions. Students

suggested, for example, that pieces of tape “will affect themagnet’s strength by the paper clip with the hook. Thetape makes the paper clip farther away from the magnet,”

and the tape “will affect the magnet’s strength by not

having the paper clip touching the magnet.” Students

recorded their predictions and underlying reasoning on

the same worksheet that they used throughout the lesson,

so they could refer back to them later (see Figure 1).

After performing the investigation, students shoulduse their evidence (e.g., what they know now) to con-

struct explanations (e.g., how and why they know it)

that fully answer the investigation question. The original

magnets lesson plan mentioned explanations but didnot explicitly link explanations to evidence, nor did it

provide students a concrete opportunity to formulate

an evidence-based explanation. To support students in

linking their evidence to their explanation, we added aprompt to the student worksheet asking students to in-

clude their evidence in their answer (Figure 2; Table 1).

Figure 1.

Sample prediction.

Figure 2.

Sample evidence-based prediction.


6/7


During the lesson, the students observed their mag-

net holding fewer paper clips as more pieces of tape

were added. Students used their evidence to formulate

explanations such as “The more tape, the less strength.

When we had no tape, 17 attached. When we used

21 pieces of tape only 2 attached. I believe the tapecaused less paper clips because you block the magnets’

strength.” Another student wrote, “In my experiment

the results show more tape the less amount of paper clip

because tape blocks the magnetic force.” By analyzing

these and other students’ evidence-based explanations,

we found that students grasped the underlying concept

highlighted in the magnets lesson.When we held a group discussion of students’ new

explanations from their experiment, one student ex-

plained, “The tape is blocking the magnet.” When we

asked her how she knew this, she modeled it for us using

her roll of tape and her magnets showing the tape as a

barrier, saying, “This is on my graph.” Because a criti-

cal part of students’ explanations is to fully answer theoriginal investigation question, we reminded students

(see Table 1), and encouraged them to use evidence

from the investigation to construct an explanation

that answers this question. This is an important f inal

step in explanation construction because it brings the

lesson full circle. Referring back to the original inves-

tigation question provides students the opportunity to

make important connections between what they knew

(prediction), what they now know (evidence), and howand why they know it (explanation). Students’ answers

to the investigation question included “The magnet is

farther away so the magnetic field gets weaker when

you add tape” and “Layers of tape alter the strength

of magnets by blocking the magnetic fields.” Again,

depending on the level of support the students require,

the lesson modification may provide a great deal ofsupport by explicitly telling the student how to use evi-

dence to formulate an explanation. For modification,

students who have experience crafting evidence-based

explanations and do not require that level of support

might formulate an evidence-based explanation ontheir own without explicit instruction (NRC 2012).

Evaluating Evidence-Based

ExplanationsStudents should evaluate evidence-based explanations by

asking questions such as “Does my evidence support my

explanation?” and “Does my explanation answer the in-

vestigation question?” To self-assess the explanations they

formulate, students need to have opportunities to compare

their own explanation to other explanations. This can be

accomplished by comparing their explanations to (a) class-mates’ explanations, (b) their predictions or pre-existing

explanations, or (c) the scientifically accepted explanation

for the topic they are investigating (see Table 1).

The original magnet lesson did not ask students to

evaluate explanations, so we made three specific lesson

adaptations. First, toward the end, we asked students to re-

turn to the predictions they made before the investigation.This allowed them to compare their ideas over time and

reflect upon how they changed. During this whole-class

discussion, when asked to report how the results compared

to their predictions, one group responded, “The number

surprised us because we had guessed a higher number but

the number was really low.” We also engaged students in

peer sharing of their explanations and asked the students

to record how their thinking changed after hearing other

groups’ explanations. The individual groups’ explana-tions were similar, suggesting students had developed

conceptual understanding of the effect of the tape on the

strength of the magnet.

Finally, we introduced an age-appropriate, content-

rich reading that provided scientific language for the

evidence-based explanations the students had con-

structed. We then asked the students what they nowthought about their explanations. After the reading, we

began to see students incorporate the language of sci-

ence into their previously constructed explanations. For

example, the student who originally wrote, “The more

Figure 3.

Sample evidence-based prediction.


7/7

September 2012 53


tape, the less strength” changed her explanation after

hearing the scientific explanation to “Yes, the farther

the magnet, the weaker the magnetic field” (Figure 3).

This step helped connect the science terminology withthe students’ evidence-based explanations and provided

an opportunity for cross-curricular connections with

language arts. To modify for a more student-directed les-

son, the students might be asked to seek out a scientificexplanation and form these links themselves. In a more

teacher-directed lesson, the modification may provide

more guidance and support to the student pages to make

these connections (NRC 2012).

Communicating and JustifyingExplanationsCommunicating about science, which should occur

throughout an investigation, is often an exciting experi-ence for early learners. However, a crucial part of the

communication involves students communicating and justifying explanations. The original lesson did not in-

clude a discussion component for students to commu-

nicate and justify their explanations with their peers,

but it did include class data analysis by creating a class

chart on a classroom medium for all groups to record

their data. A convenient consequence of the commu-nicating and justifying feature is that by modifying a

lesson to meet the other features, this feature will al-

most always be met automatically! When we modified

the lesson for students to discuss their explanations

(see “Formulating Evidence-Based Explanations” and

“Evaluating Evidence-Based Explanations” above) wealso supported communicating explanations. When we

modified the student worksheet to base explanations onevidence and to answer the original investigation ques-

tion (discussed in the aforementioned “Formulating

Evidence-Based Explanations”) we also supported jus-

tifying (see Table 1). In a more teacher-directed lesson

the modification may be for explicit direction on what

to communicate and justify, whereas in a more student-

directed lesson the modifications may allow students todetermine on their own what is required to communi-

cate and justify their explanations (NRC 2012).

Final Thoughts“The actual doing of science…can…pique students’curiosity, capture their interest, and motivate their con-

tinued study” (NRC 2012, p. 42). The lesson adaptation

strategies for the five essential features of inquiry and sci-

entific practices discussed here provide teachers the flex-

ibility to account for the needs of their particular group

of students to better engage them in the practices of sci-

ence. The most practical approach to adapting a given

lesson may be to choose one or two features of inquiry to

Connecting to the Standards This article relates to the following National Science

Education Standards (NRC 1996):

Teaching StandardsStandard A:

Teachers of science plan an inquiry-based science

program for their students.

Standard B:

Teachers of science guide and facilitate learning.

National Research Council (NRC). 1996. National

science education standards. Washington, DC:

National Academies Press.

NSTA ConnectionFor a copy of the authors’ modified lesson

plan, visit www.nsta.org/SC1209 .

enhance and strengthen. Even if the lesson already em-

phasizes some features of inquiry, making small, targeted

adaptations may help you better meet the unique needsof your particular group of students.

Laura Zangori ([email protected]) and Mandy Biggers are science education doctoral studentsworking with Cory Forbes, assistant professor ofscience education, Department of Teaching and Learning, College of Education, University of Iowain Iowa City.

Internet ResourceMagnets 2: How Strong Is Your Magnet?

http://sciencenetlinks.com/lessons/magnets-2-how-strong-is- your-magnet/

ReferencesMetz, K. 2008. Narrowing the gulf between the practices of

science and the elementary school science classroom.

Elementary School Journal 109 (2): 138–161.

National Research Council (NRC). 2000. Inquiry and the

national science education standards: A guide for teaching

and learning. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council (NRC). 2007. Taking science to

school: Leaning and teaching science in grades K–8.

Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

National Research Council (NRC). 2012. A framework for

K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts,

and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies

Press.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234674784_Narrowing_the_Gulf_between_the_Practices_of_Science_and_the_Elementary_School_Science_Classroom?el=1_x_8&enrichId=rgreq-ecba9260-9249-453f-828b-fbb089a55bf7&enrichSource=Y292ZXJQYWdlOzI4NDYyNjc3MDtBUzozMzc0NTE3NjQ3MzE5MDVAMTQ1NzQ2NjE3ODU5OA==

Documents

Zangori Forbes Biggers 2012