Undergraduate science research projects and students - School of ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Undergraduate Learning in Science Project Working Paper 5undergraduate projects in the physical sciences that focus upon establishedtechniques, however, in areas such as organic chemistry. In the biologicalsciences, some areas of research do focus upon knowledge claims andevidence/data. An example of this sort of work would be models of thefactors influencing gene expression, or models of the interactions atmembranes that influence the functioning of ionophores.It is interesting to speculate upon the reasons for us having seen the types ofprojects that we did in the physical and biological sciences, and in particularthe absence of projects focusing upon knowledge claims and evidence/data inthe biological sciences. Much routine work in the biological sciencesinvolves using established techniques, and both students and supervisors ofresearch projects talked about the importance of learning particular laboratorytechniques during research projects for getting Ph.D. places. This mayexplain the particular focus of the projects that we saw in this study. It couldbe argued that students are being presented with a limited view of the natureof scientific practice in their disciplines if they are not exposed to workwhich focuses upon knowledge claims and evidence/data. In order to achievethis, it may not be necessary for students to carry out original research workwhich focuses upon knowledge claims and evidence/data during theirprojects, providing that they are given insights into the broad lines of work inwhich their projects are based.In some cases, it is easy to see how particular images of science might act asbarriers to progress. Consider the case of student A (section 6.1). At thebeginning, this student seemed to view the knowledge claims of her projectas purely descriptive. In order for her to make progress with her work it wasnecessary for her to recognise the model-like nature of the knowledge claimsthat she would encounter, and the implications of this for data collection andanalysis. A descriptive view of knowledge claims would restrict herprogress. However, in other cases a descriptive view of knowledge claimsmay be quite adequate. In the case of student J, for example, it appears quitereasonable to view knowledge claims about the sequence of amino acids on aparticular protein as descriptive. Of course, broader images of the nature ofknowledge claims may well be necessary in other areas of student J’sdiscipline.7.4 Learning about science: curricular implicationsA number of different approaches to developing students’ epistemologicaland sociological knowledge about science have been advocated. Giere (1991)argues that students should follow courses where the focus is upon thehistory and philosophy of science, in addition to conventional courses. Asimilar argument is made by Matthews (1994). Although courses such asthese may well influence the profile of epistemological and sociologicalreasoning that students are able to draw upon to inform action in specificcontexts, questions arise about the extent to which explicit teaching ingeneral contexts will influence the implicit knowledge drawn upon byindividuals to inform action in specific contexts.78
Undergraduate Learning in Science Project Working Paper 5If the purpose of developing undergraduate students’ profiles ofepistemological and sociological reasoning is to influence the implicitknowledge drawn upon to inform actions, we see an argument for basingteaching in specific contexts. For example, students’ understanding of themodel-like nature of particular scientific knowledge claims and theimplications of this for data handling in their disciplines might better bedeveloped through research projects, other laboratory-based work or workwith secondary data sets, rather than by attending philosophy of sciencelectures on the nature of scientific knowledge. In this way, knowledge isbeing learnt in contexts similar to those in which the knowledge is used byprofessional scientists (Seely Brown et al 1989). Such contexts will betermed ‘authentic’ in the remainder of this paper.Approaches to developing students’ implicit epistemological and sociologicalknowledge of science in authentic contexts can be characterised on aspectrum. One extreme might best be characterised as a form of ‘osmosis’:put the student in an authentic context and wait for appropriate learning tohappen. At the other extreme, explicit instruction would be presented aboutthe epistemological and sociological underpinnings of authentic contexts.The research projects investigated in this study fall at various points on thisspectrum. In some cases, project supervisors commented that they usedparticular teaching techniques to make the nature of an area of researchexplicit to students, whereas in other cases it was apparent that no attemptwas made to address this issue explicitly in projects. (The approaches ofsupervisors to this aspect of teaching are discussed in Ryder and Leach1996a). Some departments also address the nature of knowledge claims andtheir warranting in their particular discipline area explicitly in tutorials andlectures.One powerful way of explicitly encouraging students to reflect on their workin an authentic setting is to require them to give talks about their project workto other students and researchers. Such seminars can be made a regularfeature of student project work and could also include seminars given byexperienced researchers in which they describe their activities as a scientist.Furthermore, students whose project work takes place within an activeresearch laboratory and who feel that they are part of a small researchcommunity will be continually exposed to images of authentic science. Sucha working environment also encourages informal exchanges between thestudent and other researchers (particularly PhD researchers) which can helpto develop the student’s images of the activities of a scientist in theirdiscipline.The ‘osmosis’ approach to developing students’ implicit knowledge hassome merits. There is considerable evidence that implicit, useableknowledge is often developed in this way (e.g. Nunes et al 1993). However,it is not hard to imagine that students’ learning in authentic contexts could beenhanced if particular aspects of the context were made more explicit. Wesaw a case of this in student J’s response to a TV programme describing anexample of theory change in her subject area. On the other hand, teaching79
Page 1 and 2:
Undergraduate Learning in Science P
Page 3 and 4:
Page 5 and 6:
Page 7 and 8:
Page 9 and 10:
Page 11 and 12:
Page 13 and 14:
Page 15 and 16:
Page 17 and 18:
Page 19 and 20:
Page 21 and 22:
Page 23 and 24:
Page 25 and 26:
Page 27 and 28: Undergraduate Learning in Science P
Page 77: Undergraduate Learning in Science P
show all

Undergraduate science research projects and students - School of ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?