(Get Answer)

How does considering sociocultural aspects into assessment design support the validity argument? What might be good examples of socioculturally responsive assessments?

please only cite this two readings, don't use other sources
JOURNALOFRESEARCHINSCIENCETEACHINGVOL.54,NO.9,PP.1143–1173(2017)ResearchArticleAMetasynthesisoftheComplementarityofCulturallyResponsiveandInquiry-BasedScienceEducationinK-12Settings:ImplicationsforAdvancingEquitableScienceTeachingandLearningJulieC.BrownDepartmentofCurriculumandInstruction,STEMEducationCenter,UniversityofMinnesota,St.Paul,MinnesotaReceived29August2016;Accepted30April2017Abstract:Employingmetasynthesisasamethod,thisstudyexamined52empiricalarticlesonculturallyrelevantandresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingstodeterminethenatureandscopeofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepractices(i.e.,scienceandengineeringpracticesidentiﬁedintheNationalResearchCouncil’sFrameworkforK-12ScienceEducation).Theﬁndingsfromthisstudyindicateseveralareasofcomplementarity.Mostoften,theinquiry-basedpracticesObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation,ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions,andDevelopingandUsingModelswereusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstructionandassessment.Theuseanddevelopmentofmodels,inparticular,allowedstudentstoexplorescientiﬁcconceptsthroughfamilies’fundsofknowledgeandexplaincontentfromWesternscienceandIndigenousKnowledgeperspectives.Moreover,studentsfrequentlyAnalyzedandInterpretedDatawheninterrogatingsciencecontentinsociopoliticalconsciousness-raisingexperiences,suchasidentifyingpollutionandasthmaincidencesinanurbanareaaccordingtoneighborhoodlocation.Speciﬁcinquiry-basedpracticeswereunderutilizedwhenadvancingculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,though.Forexample,UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinkingandEngaginginArgumentfromEvidencewereinfrequentlyencountered.However,culturallyresponsiveengineering-relatedpracticesweremostoftenconnectedwiththese,andthus,representpotentialareasforfuturecomplementarity,particularlyastheUnitedStatesembracestheNextGenerationScienceStandards.Inconsideringinnovativedirectionsforadvancingequitablescienceeducation,severalpossibilitiesarediscussedinlightoftheﬁndingsofthisstudy.#2017WileyPeriodicals,Inc.JResSciTeach54:1143–1173,2017Keywords:culturallyresponsivescience;culturallyrelevantscience;inquiry-basedscience;metasynthesisThoughitisnotoftentreatedasaculturalphenomenon,scienceasitiscommonlytaughtinK-12settingshasasystemofacceptedpracticesforunderstandingandexplainingthenaturalworld,and,thushasculture.Whilecertainculturalelementsofscience(e.g.,askingquestionsabouttheworld)areuniversal,othersareattributedtoWesternthinkingandvalues(e.g.,usingempiricalcriteria)(Chang,Lee,&Yen,2010).Asaresult,studentsfromculturallyandlinguisticallydiversebackgroundsmay“bringdifferentinstructional,home,andcommunityknowledgebasesandDiscoursestobearontheclassroom”thatareoftencompeting(Mojeetal.,2004,p.41).IntheUnitedStates,thesecompetingDiscourses(language—communicatedCorrespondenceto:J.C.Brown;E-mail:jcbrown@umn.eduDOI10.1002/tea.21401Publishedonline3June2017inWileyOnlineLibrary(wileyonlinelibrary.com).#2017WileyPeriodicals,Inc.
throughtalking,behaving,andwriting—thatisembeddedinparticularwaysofknowingtheworld,Gee,2005)increaseinscienceclassroomswhereBlack,Latino/a,NativeAmericanstudents,andEnglishlanguagelearnersaremorelikelytobetaught.Intheirreformreport,AFrameworkforK-12ScienceEducation,theNationalResearchCouncil(NRC,2012)contendsthatbyengagingstudentsininquiry-basedscienceeducation,equitablesciencelearningopportunitieswillresult.Thereisevidencethatinquiryexperiencesimprovetheacademicachievementofstudentsofcolor(Geieretal.,2008)anddiminishtheexpansionofachievementgapstypicallyseenbetweenstudentsofcolorandWhitestudents(Wilson,Taylor,Kowalski,&Carlson,2010).However,MeyerandCrawford(2011)positthatinquiry-basedscienceinstructionmay“challengestudents’culturalwaysofknowing”(p.525)whendevoidofculturalresponsiveness,or“usingtheculturalcharacteristics,experiences,andperspectivesofethnicallydiversestudentsasconduitsforteaching”(Gay,2002,p.106).GiventhatthemajorityofUnitedStates’school-agedpopulationwillbecomprisedofstudentsofcolorincomingyears(U.S.CensusBureau,2012),meaningfulracial,cultural,andlinguisticconnectionstoscienceinstructionarecrucial.Severalscholarshavedetailedstudiesdocumentingthebeneﬁtsofculturallyresponsivescienceinstructionforstudentsofcolor,suchas,positivescienceidentities,scientiﬁcliteracy,andcontentknowledge(Carlone,Haun-Frank,&Webb,2011;O.Lee,2004;Mojeetal.,2004).Withinthisresearchbase,somehavearguedthatthenatureandpracticesofculturallyresponsiveandWesternscienceareattimesirreconcilable,owingtoepistemologicaldifferences.Atthesametime,ithasalsobeensuggestedthatinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceinstructionarecomplementary(Johnson,2011).Inactuality,thereexistslimitedevidenceattestingtothis(Tan,2011).Consideringthepotentialofbothapproachesforimprovingthescienceacademicoutcomesofstudentsofcolor,acloserexaminationiswarranted.ThepurposeofthisstudywastousetheempiricalliteratureonculturallyrelevantandresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingstocharacterizethissupposed“complementarity,”whichIdeﬁneasinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivesciencepracticesbeingusedalongsideandinserviceofoneanothertoadvancesciencecontentand/ornatureofscienceunderstanding.Bydetermininginstancesofcomplementarity,practitioners,teachereducators,andresearcherscanbemoreknowledgeableandintentionalaboutcreatingequitable,rigoroussciencelearningexperiences.TheresearchquestionIsoughttoanswerwas:“Whatisthenatureandscopeofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducationinK-12settings?”Thispaperisdividedintofourmajorsections.First,Ibrieﬂydeﬁneandcharacterizehowinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationareconceptualizedinthismanuscript.Second,Iintroducemetasynthesisastheguidingmethodforthisstudyinadditiontoarticulatingthestudyselectionandanalysisprocedures,whichincludesanidentiﬁcationofhowtheterms“culturallyresponsive”and“inquiry-based”scienceeducationwereoperationalized.Third,Ipresentﬁndingsbydescribingthelandscapeofthestudiesexaminedinthismetasynthesis,notinggeneraltrendsamongthem.Ithenreportonareasofcomplementaritymostfrequentlyobservedbeforehighlightingsalientcomplementingpracticesandconcludingwithadiscussionofpracticesunderutilizedinconjunctionwithoneanother.Fourth,IprovideimplicationsforadvancingequitablescienceteachingandlearningexperiencesacrossK-12settings.Inquiry-BasedScienceEducationSupportedbyanexpansiveresearchbaseontheknowledgepossessedbyexpertsandeffectivelearningexperiences,numerousscientists,scienceeducators,andpractitionershavetoutedinquiryastheepitomeofscienceteachingandlearningactivities.AlthoughhowitisdeﬁnedJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1144BROWN
varies,inquirycanbeconsideredawayofengaginginsciencepractices(and,morerecently,engineering-relatedpractices)tolearnscientiﬁcconceptsandthenatureofscience.Assuch,itencompassesbothapedagogyandalearningoutcome(seeCrawford,2014forafullreview).Situatedinthena€ıverealismtradition,epistemologicalfoundationsofWesternscienceassume“thattheclaimsandrepresentationsmaynotbeactualone-to-onedepictionsofreality;buttheyarereasonablefacsimilesofitandtheprogressiontowardmoreexactingdepictions”(Abramsetal.,2014,p.675).Thus,inquiryisessentialtothescientiﬁcenterpriseasitsmethodsenablevalidclaimstobemadeaboutnaturalphenomena.Thoughtheliteraturehasarticulatedaspectsofinquiryovertime,thereisstillalackofconsensusleavingAnderson(2007)toassert,“inquiryisanimpreciseword...ithasdifferentmeaningsinvariedcontexts,andishardtoguesswhatparticularmeaningagivenspeakerhasinmindwhenthewordisused”(p.808).Mostrecently,theCommitteeonaConceptualFrameworkforNewK-12ScienceEducationStandards(NRC,2012)convenedtodeviseanewframeworkforscienceeducationexpectationsintheUnitedStatesthatreﬂected21stcenturyidealsandchallenges.Asetofeightscienceandengineeringpracticeswereproposedtodenotetheaspectsofinquiry(Table1).Reﬂectiveofcurrentunderstandingsofwhatitmeanstomeaningfullyengageinscienceandengineering-relatedpursuits,thepracticesofferanupdatedlookatinquiry.Yet,thepracticesarenotintendedtostandaloneasaproxyforinquiry.Rather,theFrameworkemphasizesthreedimensionsofscienceteachingandlearninginwhichthepracticesareintegratedwithcrosscuttingconcepts(applicableacrossthedisciplines,suchas,scale,patterns,structure,andTable1Attributesofinquiry-basedscienceinstructionaccordingtotheNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractices(pp.50–53)AttributeDescriptionAskingquestionsanddefiningproblemsPosingquestionsthatcanbeansweredempiricallyaboutencounteredphenomena,noteproblems,andtheirkeycomponentssoastoindicatepotentialsolutionpathwaysDevelopingandusingmodelsUsingandconstructingrepresentationsofnaturalphenomenatoexplainandpredict,ordetermineflawsinasystemandtestaspectsofaprototypePlanningandcarryingoutinvestigationsDevisingaplantoinvestigate(ortest)phenomenaofinterestanddecidingonappropriatedatacollectionproceduresandnecessaryinstrumentsAnalyzingandinterpretingdataUsingavarietyofapproachestoproperlyorganize,analyze,andinterpretcollecteddatasothatpatternscanbedeterminedandcomparedUsingmathematicsandcomputationalthinkingPerformingtaskssuchasstatisticalanalysis,simulationmanipulation,andmathematicalcalculationstorepresentkeyvariablesandexpresstheirrelationshipsConstructingexplanationsanddesigningsolutionsMakingevidence-basedclaimsaboutscientificcontentandconnectingtheseclaimstoexistingtheoriestoformulatearobustexplanationEngaginginargumentfromevidenceIdentifyingthestrengthsandlimitationsofclaimsmadeaboutscientificcontentaccordingtoavailableinformation,usingthisevidencetocritiquetheclaimsanddefendsuchassertionswithreasoningObtaining,evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationAccuratelycommunicatingscientificinformation—inwritingandorally—thathasbeenacquiredthroughinquiry,sciencetexts,andmathematicalcalculationsJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1145
function)anddisciplinarycoreideasinthephysical,life,andearthandspacesciences,aswellasengineering,technology,andapplicationsofscience.Since1980s,researchoninquiry-basedscienceexperiences—includingproblem-basedandproject-basedlearning—havereportedpositivestudentoutcomeswhenengagingininquiry,suchasgreaterscientiﬁcliteracy,criticalthinking,andpositiveattitudestowardscience(Crawford,2014).Inquirycannotbetreatedasaone-size-ﬁts-allpanacea,however,andlittleevidenceexistsofitsimpactonculturallyandlinguisticallydiverselearners(Geieretal.,2008;O.Lee,Deaktor,Hart,Cuevas,&Enders,2005).WhiletherevisedFrameworkanditsresultingNextGenerationScienceStandards(NGSS)(AchieveInc.,2013)haveattemptedtoimproveupontheirpredecessorwithrespecttoinclusivity,therearestillissuesrequiringattention.Usingsociotransformativeconstructivism(sTc)asatheoreticallenstoanalyzethesedocuments,Rodriguez(2015)critiquedtheFrameworkandNGSSfortheir(in)abilitytomeet“well-intendedgoals”forequityanddiversity.Whilecommendingstrengths—suchasorganizingsciencecontentaroundalearningprogressionsframework,asustainingemphasisondisciplinarycoreideas,makingequity-relatedissuesprominent,andfeaturingengineeringconnections—hequestioned,ifequityreallyisessential,whywasitnotintegrateddirectlyintotheFrameworkandNGSStothesamedegreeasengineering?Rodriguezcalledfora“dimensionofengagement,equityanddiversity”tocombatinequity,promoteculturalrelevance,andclosetheachievementgap.Giventhatinquirycontinuestobeheraldedasthegoldstandardformeaningfulsciencelearningexperiences,butthatengaginginitmayproducecompetingDiscoursesforculturallyandlinguisticallydiversestudents(Mojeetal.,2004),itstandsthatinquiry-basedsciencemaymarginalizeaspectsofthesestudents,includingtheiridentitiesassciencelearners(Carloneetal.,2011).Thus,effortsmustbemadetopromotegreaterequityininquiry-basedscienceeducationthanhavepreviouslybeenthecase.Culturallyresponsivepedagogicalapproachesmaybeonesuchwaytoaccomplishthis.Rodriguez(2015)arguedthat“noexampleswhatsoeverareprovided[intheFramework]forhowtomakethesciencecontentculturallyrelevantandinclusive”(p.1042).Thismetasynthesiswasadirectattempttobeginaddressingsuchacleargap.FoundationsofCulturallyResponsiveScienceEducationInthispaper,Iusetheterm“culturallyresponsivescienceeducation”todenotestudiesemployingLadson-Billings’(1995a)theoryofculturallyrelevantpedagogyorGenevaGay’s(2010)frameworkforculturallyresponsiveteaching.Bothemanatefromculturaldifferencetheory,whichassumesthattheculturalknowledge,practices,andbeliefsofstudentsthathavebeenhistoricallydenieddifferfromthedominantcultureofschools(Howard,2010).Itfollowsthatequitablelearningexperiencesrequirestudents’culturalandlinguisticbackgroundsbeengagedasresourcesforscienceinstruction,therebyeasingbordercrossingbetweenthedominantculturalpracticesofmainstreamschoolingandthosepracticedathome(Aikenhead,2006).Adheringtocriticaltheoryfoundations—which“takesasoneofitscentralprojectsanattempttobediscerningandattentivetothoseplacesandpracticesinwhichsocialagencyhasbeendeniedandproduced”(Giroux,2011,p.3)—culturallyrelevantandresponsivepedagogiesarefurtherconcernedwithemancipatinglearnersthroughinstructionthatofferssocial,political,and/orhistoricalcritiquetochallengehegemonicsystems.Thus,thetwoshareacommongoal:toimprovetheacademicsuccessofstudentsofcolorwhileafﬁrmingtheirexperiences,identities,andhistories.Reﬂectiveofitscriticalandculturaldifferencetheoreticalunderpinnings,Ladson-Billings(1995a)assertedthatculturallyrelevantteachersholdspeciﬁcpedagogicalprinciples;theydemandacademicsuccessoftheirstudents,laudculturalcompetenceasessentialtothissuccess,JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1146BROWN
anddevelopsociopoliticalconsciousnessintheirstudentstoproblematizeoppressionandactaschangeagents.NotwithstandinghersolefocusonteachersofAfricanAmericanstudents,theexplicitconnectionfoundbetweenlearningandappreciationforcultureledLadson-Billingstoassertthatsuchprinciplescouldfostersuccessforallstudents.Thus,sheargued,culturallyrelevantpedagogyisindeed“justgoodteaching”thatissorarelyhappeningintheclassroomsofAfricanAmericanstudents(Ladson-Billings,1995b).Thoughnotconstructedasatheoreticalmodel,GenevaGay’s(2010)frameworkforculturallyresponsiveteachingistheoreticallygroundedand,thus,servesasmorethanasetofidealpractices.Howard(2010)asserted,“itiscenteredinfundamentalbeliefsaboutteaching,learning,students,theirfamilies,andtheircommunities,andanunyieldingcommitmenttoseestudentsuccessbecomelessrhetoricandmoreofareality”(p.67).Gay(2010)characterizedculturallyresponsiveteachingasvalidating,comprehensive,multidimensional,empowering,transformative,andemancipatory.Culturallyresponsiveteachersvalidatestudentsbyacknowledgingtheirfamily-andcommunity-basedfundsofknowledge(Gonzalez,Moll,&Amanti,2005)andincorporatingmulticulturalresourcesintothecurriculum.Theyalsoprovideacomprehensiveandmultidimen-sionaleducationbypurposefullydevelopingstudents’attitudesandvaluesinadditiontocontentknowledge.Asaresult,“success”comprisesoutcomessuchas“culturalcompetence,criticalsocialconsciousness,politicalactivism,andresponsiblecommunitymembership”(Gay,2010,p.33).Itstransformativeandemancipatorynaturesarisefromacommitmenttoconfrontingoppression,powerdifferentials,andthedevelopmentofsocialconsciousness.Ofthis,Gay(2010)arguedthatnotonlyshouldIndigenousandculturallybasedknowledgebemadeaccessiblewhenstudyingcontent,itshouldbetreatedwithequalmerit.Thus,epistemologicalunderpinningsofculturallyresponsiveteachingaresituatedwithinarelativistparadigm,whereknowledgeisfoundedupon“individualinterpretationsbasedonpersonalandlivedexperiencestobejudgedbytheproposer”(Abramsetal.,2014,p.675).Withinscienceeducation,theseframeworkshavebeenappliedtostudiesexaminingtheinclusionofculturallyspeciﬁcknowledgeintosciencecurricula,thepracticesandknowledgeofteachers,andtheperspectivesofstudentstaughtthroughculturallyresponsiveinstruction(Brown&Crippen,2017).Severalstudieshavedepictedlearninginculturallyresponsiveenvironmentsthatalsoinvolvedstudentsininquiry-basedscience.Commonly,thiswasaccomplishedthroughlocallybased,issue-orientedscenariosthatformedthebackdropforscientiﬁcinvestigations.Theseissuesoftenhadsociopoliticalconnections,suchasrisingasthmaratesininner-cityenvironments(Mensah,2011).Asaresult,studentsoftenusedinquiry-basedsciencepracticestoexplore,explain,andchallengescience-relatedissues.Theoreticallyspeaking,inquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivesciencelearningexperiencesareideal.Inreality,documentedexamplesarerareandincomplete(Brown&Crippen,2016a;Crawford,2014).Forthesamereason,ongoingdebatesoftheirreconcilableepistemologicalincompatibilitybetweenthetwo(Abramsetal.,2014)riskbeingout-of-touchwithactualinstancesofculturallyresponsiveand/orinquiry-basedscienceinstructioninK-12settings.Becausescholarssuggestthatinquiryandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationhavecommonfeatures,themotivationforthisstudywasadesiretousetheexistingliteraturetobetterunderstandtheircomplementarity.MethodThispaperreportstheresultsofametasynthesisthatwasconductedtoidentifyanypatternsassociatedwiththecomplementarityofculturallyresponsive-andinquiry-basedscienceinstructioninthecurrentempiricalliterature.Inthissection,IdeﬁnemetasynthesisandbrieﬂyJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1147
discussitsoriginsasamethodology.Ithendistinguishmetasynthesisfromatraditionalliteraturereview,andconcludebyidentifyingtensionsassociatedwiththemethodology.Metasynthesisisaformofresearchintegrationstudyinwhichsecondaryanalysesareperformedonrelevant,extant(oftenqualitative)empiricalliteraturetoaddressaparticularresearchquestion.Theresearchquestion“stemsfromaneedtoreviewaparticularﬁeldofstudyinordertoprovideacomprehensiveanswerthatgoesbeyondasinglestudy”(Timulak,2014,p.486).Hence,selectedstudiesshouldbeinter-relatedamongatopicorconstruct.Metasynthesishasbeenjustiﬁedthroughtheargumentthat,takenalone,qualitativestudieshavelimitedimpactbecausetheyaresmall-scaleandrichlycontextualized.Giventhislocalizednature,however,itisessentialtoretainandconsidertheuniquecontextsoforiginalstudiesthroughoutthemetasyn-thesisprocess.Thus,ﬁndings,whilesynthesizedacrossstudiestoprovideamorecomprehensivepicture,shouldcontainrichcontextdescriptionswhenappropriate(Thorne,2012).Becausetheintentofmetasynthesisisusingﬁndingsfromexistingstudiestoconstructmorecomprehensiveandsubstantiveclaimsaboutaspeciﬁcphenomenonthanwhatisaffordedbytheindividualinvestigationsthemselves,itisnotthesameasaliteraturereview.Traditionalliteraturereviews,Timulak(2014)argues,“lackasystematicapproachtotheevaluationandsynthesisoftheresearchstudiesexaminingthesamephenomenon/a”(p.481).Whileanexhaustiveand/orcriticalliteraturereviewmayindeedsynthesizeasetofideasaroundaparticularphenomenon(e.g.,Brotman&Moore,2008),ametasynthesisdiffersinthesystematicproceduresusedtogatherandanalyze“rawdata.”Theseproceduresaredetailedintheupcomingsections.Despiteitspotentialutility,therearealsotensionsassociatedwithmetasynthesis.Onesuchtensionpertainstoitssynthesizingnature.Giventhatqualitativeresearch,generallyspeaking,intentionallycaptureslocalized,situatedknowledge,theactofgeneralizingﬁndingsacrossstudiesiscontradictorytotheverynatureofmuchqualitativeresearch(Timulak,2014).Asecond,relatedtensionliesinthedeconstructiveaspectsofmetasynthesis.Inotherwords,becausetheactionofmetasynthesisis“scratchingbelowthesurface”(Thorne,2012,p.513)oforiginalstudiestoconstructnewknowledge,theconclusionsdrawnfrommetasynthesesmaybecritiqued,astheyaretheresultofaresearcher’sinterpretationofthedata.Tolessenthisconcern,WalshandDowne(2005)suggestreadersconsiderthisactionas“openingupspacesfornewinsightsandunderstandingstoemerge,ratherthanoneinwhichtotalizingconceptsarevaluedoverrichnessandthicknessofdescription”(p.205).Itisalsowhyestablishingtrustworthinessoftheresearchprocessisfundamental.Givenitsstrengthsandlimitations,metasynthesisisconsideredavalidendeavorwhenaclearneedfornovelunderstandingaboutaparticularphenomenonhasbeensuggestedbytheexistingliteratureandifconclusionsretainthecontextofindividualstudieswhenpossible.Hence,conclusionsshouldyieldabetterunderstandingofagivenphenomenonacrossaﬁeldofstudywhilepreservingtheintentoftheoriginalstudies.DataCollection/StudySelectionMetasynthesisisasystematizedapproachtoconductingresearch.Assuch,therearecommonlyacceptedproceduresforcollectingandanalyzingextantliteraturetoproducenovelﬁndings.Theprocesstypicallybeginsbyﬁrstevaluatingifthereisasufﬁcientbodyofpublishedstudiesintheﬁeldtowarrantmetasynthesis.Ifadequate,clear,defensibleinclusionandexclusioncriteriashouldbeestablishedforselectingtheappropriatedata(Thorne,2012).BecauseIwasinterestedinexaminingthecomplementarynatureofinquiry-basedscienceexperiencesinstudiespertainingtotheframeworksofculturallyrelevantpedagogyandculturallyresponsiveteaching(hereafterreferredtoas“culturallyresponsive”),thiswasdirectlyreﬂectedinmyinclusioncriteria.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1148BROWN
Severalmetasynthesistscallforstudiestobeappraisedforqualitybeforebeingselectedasdatasources.Thismayincludeanevaluationofhowwellstudyﬁndingsreﬂecttheirascribedmethodologiesorthelevelofdetailcontainedwithinﬁndings(Timulak,2014).Ultimately,thedecisiontoexcludestudiesisatthediscretionoftheresearcheranddependsupontheaimsofthemetasynthesis.WalshandDowne(2005)state,“insomecasesthiswholeissue[ofappraisal]hasbeenby-passedwiththejustiﬁcationthattherigourofindividualstudiesislessimportantthantheattempttobeasinclusiveaspossible”(p.208).OfprimaryconcerntomewasthatstudiesdepictculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingsand,secondarily,containevidenceofinquiry-basedlearningoccurringinthoseculturallyresponsivecontexts.Hence,initialstudyappraisalwasguidedbythefollowinginclusioncriteria:Culturallyresponsivescienceeducationwasa“centralfeature”ofthestudy(i.e.,usedastheguidingframework,containedresearchquestionsspeciﬁctoculturalresponsiveness,and/orreportedﬁndingsonculturallyresponsiveeducation);Althoughtherewasnorequirementthatinquirywasexplicitlystatedinthearticlenorthatitwasa“centralfeature”(aswithculturallyresponsivescienceeducation),tobeconsidered“inquiry-based”thestudymustcontainevidenceoflearnersengagedinatleasttwoNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesastheyexploredsciencecontentand/orthenatureofscience;StudiesoccurredinorpertainedtoK-12scienceeducationacrossformaland/orinformallearningenvironments;andStudieswerepublishedintheperiodbetween1994(whentheterm“culturallyrelevantpedagogy”wasintroducedbyLadson-Billingsinherbook,Thedreamkeepers)andJune,2016.Iselectedtheinquirythreshold(ofatleasttwoNRC[2012]practices)tobeconsistentwiththelevelofinquiry-basedpracticesfoundbyAsayandOrgill(2010)intwodecades’worthofarticlesintheNationalScienceTeachers’Association(NSTA)publication,TheScienceTeacher.Theauthorsfoundthatthelargestpercentageofarticlesfeaturinginquirycontainedtwopractices.Thisthresholdwasalsointendedtobefairtoselectedstudies,asCrawford(2014)acknowledges,“Morethanadecadeintothe21stcentury,manyresearchersclaimthatinquiryisnotverycommonlyobservedandmostcertainlyisnotthecentralorganizingthemeinmostscienceclassrooms”(p.516).Hence,Iusetheterm“inquiry-based”whenexploringcomplementarity.Thepresenceandlevelofinquirywasmorethoroughlyaccountedforandinterrogatedduringtheanalysisphases.Usingtheseinclusioncriteria,thedataselectionprocessoccurredintwoseparatestages,withthesecondstagereﬂectingStraussandCorbin’s(1998)notionoftheoreticalsamplinginwhichdatacollectionis“basedonconceptsthatemergedfrom[earlier]analysisandthatappeartohaverelevancetotheevolvingtheory”(p.202),asopposedtolimitingsamplingtoapredeterminedsetofstudies.Intheﬁrststage,Isearchedacademicdatabases(AcademicSearchPremier,ERIC,EducationFullText)forempiricalarticleswithkeywordssuchas“culturallyrelevant,”“culturallyresponsive,”“scienceeducation,”and/or“science.”Usingthesamekeywords,Ialsoconductedajournal-by-journalsearchacrosspremierscienceeducationjournals,including:JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,ScienceEducation,CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,ResearchinScienceEducation,InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,JournalofScienceEducationandTechnology,andJournalofScienceTeacherEducation.Additionally,Isearchedauthoritativeacademicjournalsnotspeciﬁctoscienceeducation,amongthemAmericanEducationalResearchJournalandUrbanEducation.Thisﬁrststagegenerated62possiblestudies.Myinitialreadingofthestudiesrevealedthat,whilemostofthearticlesyieldedfromtheJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1149
journal-by-journalsearchwereappropriate(and,thus,includedinthismetasynthesis),manystudiesfromthegeneralacademicdatabasesearchhadtobeexcludedbecausetheycoveredtopicsthatwere“culturallyrelevant”and/or“culturallyresponsive”butnotcontainedwithinK-12scienceeducationsettings(e.g.,socialstudieseducation,highereducation,publichealthspaces).Twoadditionalstudiesreportingonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwereexcludedbecausetheydidnotmeetthecriterionforinquiry-basedpractices.Severalwereconceptualreportsandnotempiricalarticles;thus,theywerealsoexcluded.Filteredforappropriateness,29articleswereincludedasdatasourcesfromthisﬁrststage.AsIreadthroughthesearticlesforgeneraltrends,twothingsstoodout:(i)certainrelatedperspectiveswerenotwidelyrepresented(e.g.,thirdspace,TraditionalEcologicalKnowledge)and(ii)emergentpatterns—suchastheuseofIndigenousviewsofnaturalphenomenainformaleducationspaces—indicatedthattheseperspectiveswereneededtoadequatelyrepresenttheﬁeld.WalshandDowne(2005)acknowledgethat,dueto“non-availabilityofmanyqualitativeaccounts,searchstrategiesmustaugmentelectronicsearcheswithmoretraditionalmethodsofreviewing,includingback-trackingofreferences”(p.206).Thus,Ienteredasecondstageofdatacollectiontogathermoreresources.IsearchedthereferencelistsofthetwoHandbookofResearchonScienceEducationchapterspertainingtoculturallyresponsivescienceeducation—McKinleyandGan(2014)andAbramsetal.(2014).Throughthisapproach,50additionalpossiblestudiesdemonstratingculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingswereidentiﬁed.Often,theterms“culturallyrelevant”or“culturallyresponsive”werefoundinthetitlesoftheseworks.Additionally,althoughtopicssuchas“fundsofknowledge,”“culturallysustainingpedagogy,”and“instructionalcongruence”werenotmyexplicitfocus,theywereattimespresentintheempiricalarticlesidentiﬁed.Onrareoccasions,articlesalsoreportedresultsofsecondaryanalysesofexistingempiricalwork(e.g.,Carlone&Johnson,2012)orwerepresentedinforums(e.g.,Chigeza,2011).Aswiththeﬁrststage,becauseIwasinterestedinidentifyingactualexamplesofculturallyresponsivescienceteachingandlearningthatthencontainedelementsofinquiry-basedinstruction,Iexcludedworkthatdidnotallowforcodingdirectevidenceofthis,suchas,positionpapersandempiricalstudiesreportingonlysurveyresultsand/orteachers’perceptions.Threestudiesthatreportedonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwereexcludedfromthesampleatthistimebecausetheydidnotcontainadequateevidenceofinquiry-basedpractices.Furthermore,althoughtheyreportedpositiveimpactsofculturallyresponsivescienceeducationonstudentandteacheroutcomes,somearticlesemployingquantitativeresearchmethodswereexcludedbecausetheyofferedlittledirectevidenceneededtoaddressmyresearchquestion.Lastly,thoughdissertationtheseswereoccasionallyreferredtointheHandbookchapters,theywerenotincludedinthismetasynthesis.Halfofthestudiesfromthissecondstagewereexcludedduetoaforementionedreasons,leaving23studiestobeselectedasdata.Theﬁnalsampletotaled52studiesmeetingthecriteriaforculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwithevidenceofinquiry-basedsciencebeingpracticedinK-12settings.DescriptionsofthesestudiesareavailableonlineinaStudySummariesAppendix.1Thedatasetforthisstudywasconstrainedbythekeywordsearchandinclusionandexclusioncriteria.AlthoughIfollowedproceduresadvocatedbymetasynthesists,itisunlikelythatIgatheredeverysourcereportingonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settings.Thus,ﬁndingsaredelimitedtothespeciﬁcstudiescontainedwithinthismetasynthesis.Toallowforanextensivesearch,theinclusioncriteriadidnotrequireasstrictaqualitylevelwhenitcametostudies’depictionsofculturallyresponsiveand/orinquiry-basedscienceascouldhavebeenifthatweretheprimaryaimofthismetasynthesis.Inotherwords,Idonotclaimthateachstudybeconsideredanexemplar.Nonetheless,myinitialreadingconﬁrmedthatthearticlescontainedJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1150BROWN
valuableexamplesofequitablelearningexperiences.Havingbeenpublishedinpeer-reviewedacademicjournals,eacharticlehadalsopreviouslybeenvettedbyexpertsintheirrespectiveareas.IinvitethereadertofurtherevaluatearticlequalityforthemselvesthroughthedescriptionsprovidedintheStudySummariesAppendix.DataAnalysisTheunitsofanalysisforthismetasynthesisareteachingandlearningexperiences—informalandinformalK-12settings—thatcanbecharacterizedassimultaneouslycontainingculturallyresponsive-andinquiry-basedsciencepracticeswhileadvancingscienceunderstanding.Toprepareandanalyzethedata,IfollowedatechniquearticulatedbyNoblitandHare(1988),whichcallsforthesystematiccomparisonandtranslationofstudiesoverseveralphases.First,Ire-readthroughthestudiestodeterminetheirrelatednessaccordingtokeyconstructs,methodologiesemployed,contexts,anddominantthemesinthereportedﬁndings.Irecordedsimilaritiesanddifferencesnotedacrossstudiesaccordingtotheseparameters.Theseresultsweretabulatedintwolocations:TheStudySummariesAppendixandStudiesDemographictable(Table4,Findingssection).Oncethisprocesswascompleted,Ithenbegan“translatingthestudiesintooneanother”(Noblit&Hare,1988,p.28),wherethemeaningandﬁndingsofindividualstudiesare“folded”intooneanothersothatamoreholisticpictureofthephenomenoncanbederivedacrossstudies.BecauseIwasinterestedindeterminingifcomplementaritybetweeninquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceexperiencesexistedacrossthestudies,allevidencepassageswereverbatimexcerptsfromeithertheFindingsorResultssectionsofarticles.Althoughauthors’interpretationsareindeedvalid,theywerenotcountedasdataunlesstherewasadditionaldirectevidencethatapracticeoccurred(e.g.,observedclassroompracticewasdocumented,originalparticipantquotewasprovided,transcribedexchangebetweenteacherandstudentwasreported).Ibeganthetranslationprocessbyapplyingadeductivecodingschemebuiltonaprioricodesassignedasindicatorsofculturallyresponsiveinstructionandinquiry-basedscience.TheeightNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesservedasindicatorsofinquiry-basedscienceinstruction(refertoTable1).Asmentionedearlier,inordertomeetthe“inquiry-based”threshold,eachstudyneededtoﬁrstcontainevidenceofatleasttwopracticesbeingusedtodevelopunderstandingofscientiﬁccontentand/ornatureofscience.Oncethiscriterionwassatisﬁed,anydirectevidenceofascienceandengineeringpracticeusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstructioncouldbecoded.Torepresentculturallyresponsiveinstruction,IusedtheCulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(CRIOP)(Powelletal.,2012).CRIOPisavalidatedprotocolthatoperationalizesCRPacrosssevenpillars:ClassroomRelationships,FamilyCollaboration,Assessment,Curriculum/PlannedLearningExperiences,Pedagogy/Instruction,Discourse,andSociopoliticalConsciousness(Table2).ThereisnoclearthresholdforculturallyresponsiveinstructionaccordingtotheCRIOP(Powelletal.,2016).Thus,inadditiontotheinclusioncriteria,eacharticlewasexaminedtoensureitcontainedevidenceofatleasttwoCRIOPpillars.Previously,IhaveusedtheCRIOPtoexaminepreservicesecondaryscienceandmathematicsteachers’attentiontoculturallyresponsiveinstructionalelementsincourseartifacts(Brown&Crippen,2016b)andtoevaluatehighschoollifescienceteachers’practices(Brown&Crippen,2017).ThedecisiontousetheCRIOPandNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticestocharacterizeculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedinstruction,respectively,wastwofold:eachistheproductofsynthesesofsigniﬁcantandtimelyliteratureintheirrespectiveareas;and,particularlyforCRP,eachprovidesoperationaldeﬁnitionsofkeyconstructelements,makingoccasionallynebulousconstructsmoreconcreteanddirectlymeasurable.Infact,theCRIOPsharesseveralsimilaritieswithRodriguez’s(2015)proposeddimensionforengagement,equity,JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1151
anddiversity,suchasincludingsociallyrelevantsciencecontent,usingstudent-centeredpedagogicalstrategies,providingstudentchoiceinactivitiesandwaystodemonstrateknowledge,andincludingfamilyinlearningexperiences.However,becausetheCRIOPwasoriginallyconstructedandvalidatedforuseasanobservationprotocol,notasaninstrumentforliteratureevaluation,therearelimitationstoitsuseforthisstudy.Onesuchlimitationpertainstohowthedegreeofculturalresponsivenessisaccounted.Normally,CRIOPindicatorsareratedona1–4scale,rangingfromNotatAlltoToaGreatExtent,whichallowsclaimstobemadeaboutthe“richness”ofateacher’sculturallyresponsivepracticesduringinstruction.Withthearticles,however,itwasnotpossibletocodedegreeofculturalresponsivenessaccordingtothisscale.Instead,tomeasure“culturalresponsiveness,”Iidentiﬁedexcerpts(i.e.,verbatimsectionsfromtheFindings/Resultsportionsofthe52studies)thatdemonstratedaCRIOPpillar,codedthemaspresentbytheirpillar,andconstructedannotationsdescribingtheirdegreesofpresenceinamorequalitativefashion.IreadthroughtheFindings/Resultssectionsofeacharticle,ﬁrstholistically,andthenline-by-line.Ibegantheﬁrstroundofcodingbyidentifyingexcerptsthatdemonstratedculturallyresponsiveinstructionviatheprocedurementionedabove.Ithenre-enteredthearticlesforasecondroundofcoding,thistimelookingonlyforevidenceofNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractices.Next,Iisolatedthoseexcerptsidentiﬁedduringrounds1and2,thistimeTable2AttributesofculturallyresponsiveinstructionaccordingtotheCulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(CRIOP)(Powelletal.,2012,pp.1–12)Attribute(Pillar)DescriptionClassroomrelationshipsCare,respect,andculturallycongruentinteractionsarepresent;highexpectationsforallstudentsareevidentandsupportedthroughinstructionalscaffolds;studentsworktogetherproductivelyandefficientlytowardacleargoalFamilycollaborationAnequitablepartnershipisestablishedamongparents/familyandteacher;familyfundsofknowledgeareleveragedasresourcesuponwhichtosupportstudentlearningAssessmentFormativeassessment(e.g.,think-pair-share,journalentries)isusedtodeterminestudents’potentialforlearningcontent,gaugeunderstanding,andmodifyinstruction;assessmentsareinclusiveandallowstudentstoself-assess,developevaluationcriteria,anddemonstratelearninginmanywaysCurriculum/plannedlearningexperiencesMaterialsdepictdiverseexperiences,perspectives,andcontainreal-worldconnections;opportunitiesforstudentstopresentandvalidatediverseviewsarebuiltintomaterials,asaresupportsforconnectingcontenttostudents’backgroundsPedagogy/instructionActivitiesareactive,meaningful,andpromotehighstudentengagement;teacherbuildsonstudents’“culturaldatasets”andusesvariousstrategiestoassiststudentsinlearningcontent;studentshavesomechoiceinassignmentsDiscourseAvarietyofdiscourseprotocolsareemployed(e.g.,interactivejournals,smallgroupconversation)topromotestudentparticipation;studentsspeakinhomediscoursewhenappropriateandarealsosupportedinextendeduseofcontent-authenticlanguagepracticesSociopoliticalconsciousnessStudentsexploresocialjustice-andcommunity-relatedissues(e.g.,racism,poverty,inequitableaccesstoservices)andareencouragedtoactivelyaddresssuchproblemsJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1152BROWN
codingforevidenceofagivenCRIOPpillarandNRC(2012)practiceoccurringtogether.Iconstructedannotationsdescribingthenatureofcomplementarity(Table3).Theannotationswereimportantforthenextanalysisphase,allowingmetolookacrossthedatamoreholisticallyfortrends.Afterthe52sourcesweredeductivelycoded,Icountedthenumberofexcerptsexhibitingcomplementarity.Agivenexcerptmayhavecontainedmultiplecomplementingpractices,aswasthecasewithUpadhyay(2006)andBasuandCalabreseBarton(2007)(Table3).However,eachtimetwopractices(oneculturallyresponsiveandoneinquirybased)werefoundtobecomplementing,itwasrecordedinitsrespectivecellinatabledepictingthebreakdownofCRIOPpillarsfoundwithinthespeciﬁcNRC(2012)practices.Forinstance,theexcerptfromBasuandCalabreseBarton(2007)wastalliedintwolocations:onceinthecellwherePedagogyintersectedPlanningandCarryingOutInvestigationsandonceinthecellwherePedagogyintersectedObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation.ThistablebecamethefoundationforFigure1,presentedlaterintheFindingssection.Additionally,coding“clusters”(threeormoreculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedpracticespresenttogetheratthesametime)wererecordedinmemos,aidingdataorganization,andinterpretation.Ialsokeptmemostocaptureanyemergingpatternsortrendsamongthedatasources.AccordingtoStraussandCorbin(1998),memos—or“theresearcher’srecordofanalysis,thoughts,interpretations,questions,anddirectionsforfurtherdatacollection”(p.110)—assistwiththeprogressionofrawdatatotheoreticalinsights.NoblitandHare(1988)alsorecognizedthatmemosassistwithholisticinterpretation.Assuch,thereviewingandsortingofmemosandannotationsintoabstractcategorieswasacentralelementoftheﬁnalphaseofthismetasynthesis,thatofsynthesizingthetranslationsintoamorecomprehensivepiece.Thepurposeofthisphasewasto“elucidatemorereﬁnedmeanings,exploratorytheoriesandnewconcepts”(Walsh&Downe,2005,p.209).Hence,IusedtheﬁrstanalysisphaseresultstodescribeconditionsunderwhichpracticessurfacedinK-12settings.Tomovetowardabstractionofnotablethemesacrossthestudies,IstartedbyisolatingtheNRC(2012)practicesmost-andleast-frequentlyencounteredalongsideCRIOPpillars.Itreatedeachseparatelyatﬁrst,examiningthenatureoftheircomplementarities.DuringthisprocessIaskedquestionsofthedata,suchas,underwhatconditionswasObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationpresentalongsideSociopoliticalConsciousness?Wasthisconsistentacrossallstudyexcerpts,orpresentonlyinisolatedinstances?What,ifany,otherculturallyresponsivepracticeswerepresent?Whatwastheinstructionalgoalduringthistime?Withwhomdidtheseexperiencesoccur(gradebands)andforwhatpurpose(s)?Thisprocessallowedforunexpectedpatternsandthemestobeuncovered.Icontinuedinterrogatingthedatainthismannerforinstanceswhensalientcomplementingpracticeswerepresent.Forexample,aidedbymymemosandannotations,IexploredwhetherthedataindicatedthatEngaginginArgumentfromEvidenceoccurredmoreofteninsecondaryspaceswhenalongsideculturallyresponsivepractices,andwhetherornotPlanningandCarryingOutInvestigationswaslargelypresentininformallearningenvironmentsthatofferedtheluxuryoftimeandnomandatedcurriculum.Oncethemeswereestablished,Iveriﬁedtheirstrengthacrosstheoveralldatasetthroughaconstantcomparativeprocess(Strauss&Corbin,1998)thatwasfurtherconﬁrmedbythechart.Thesethemeswerewrittenintoseparatesummarysheets,whichbecamethefoundationforwritingﬁndings.EstablishingTrustworthinessIemployedtwoacceptedstrategiestoensuretrustworthiness.First,acolleagueandIengagedintworoundsofindependentlycodingasubsetofstudiesaccordingtotheaprioricodestoJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1153
Table3ExcerptcodingexampleswithannotationsCodesExcerptAnnotationCRIOP:Oneofthestudentsaskedwhybabyfoodshavealotofmilkproducts;anotherstudentaskedwhybabyfoodsareeitherliquidorlikeporridge.Janethenfacilitatedadiscussiononwhatkindsoffoodthestudentsateeachdayandwhetherthefoodwasanimalproductorplantproduct.Theydiscussedtheirdietbasedontheirfoodsourcesandhowandwhytheywouldchangethediet.Duringthisclass,theintegrationofstudents’experiencesandJane’sexperiencesplayedamajorroleinguidingthelessonanddiscussionsthatfollowed(Upadhyay,2006,p.105).Thisisaclearexampleofhowstudentwonderingsdrivelessoncontent...althoughherstudentsweren’taskedtotabulatetheirresponses,Janedidaskthemtoshareandbegintoanalyzetheir“data”(whattheyateandifitwasanimal-orplant-based)astheydiscussedchangestheywouldmakebasedontheirinterpretationsofthedatatheyshared.Thisexperiencehelpedstudentsstudyfoodfarmingandharvestingpractices,[whichwas]partofthegreater[LiFE]unit...They’re[PedagogyandAnalyzingandInterpretingData]complementingsincesheactivelybuildsontheirexperiencestoassisttheminanalyzing“data”(foodseaten)accordingtomultipleattributes(kindeaten,plantoranimalproduct,howoften)...Janescaffoldedthediscussiontoallowmultipleperspectivestobeshared(pillar6[Discourse]),andshepromotedacademicconversation(atelementarylevel)aroundameaningfulandfamiliartopic.Idon’tyetfullyknowwhich/howmanystudentsparticipatedintheensuingdiscussion.(recordedon1/29/16)PedagogyDiscourseNRC(2012)practice:AnalyzingandinterpretingdataCRIOP:Whenstudyingﬁshbehavior,Neilcreatedaseriesofexperimentsandobservationshewantedtoconductontheﬁshandoftencametovisittheﬁshduringrecess,lunch,andafter-schooltogatheradditionaldata.[Hispartner]Gabrieldecidedtostudytheﬁshbybuildingananatomicalmodel,bothoutofclayandaluminum(Basu&CalabreseBarton,2007,p.484).ForateachingorlearningexperiencetobeculturallyresponsiveinitsPedagogy,itmustfosterstudentbuy-inandownership.Studentsshouldhaveclearchoiceinwhichlearningexperiencestopursueandhowtheywanttopursuethem.NeilpreferredtoeitherworkaloneorwithGabriel,asopposedtoworkinginlargergroups.Theexperiencemustalsobeexploratoryandallow“student-generatedquestions[to]formthebasisforfurtherstudyandinvestigation”(Powelletal.,2012,p.9).TheseexperienceswerepresentforNeilandgavehimthespace(andarguablymotivation,astheafterschoolprogramwascompletelyvoluntary)torepeatedlydesignandimplementexperimentstostudyaspectsoffishbehavior,akeyNOS[natureofscience]element.PedagogyNRC(2012)practice:PlanningandcarryingoutinvestigationsObtaining,evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1154BROWN
determineourlevelofcodingconsistency.Thissubsettotaledsixstudies,withthreestudiesindependentlycodedduringeachroundfollowedbyadiscussionofourresults.Eachtime,wemettosharetheexcerptswecodedashavingaspectsofinquiryenactmentandelementsofculturallyresponsiveinstruction,aswellasexcerptsthatwerelesscertaintous.Wealsodiscussedourrationaleforcodingtheexcerptsaswedid,andreconciledanydifferencesamongourchoiceswhenpossible.Ourintercoderreliabilityforthesetworoundswascalculatedas76%and88%,respectively,indicatingadequatereliabilityoverall(Creswell,2009).Ialsoaimedtoestablishcredibility,which,fromthemetasynthesistraditionmeans“faithfulnessinhandlingthedatasothatitremainstruetoitssource[suchthat]theoriginalresearchparticipantsshouldbeabletorecognizetheirexperiencesinthemeta-synthesis”(Walsh&Downe,2005,p.209).ThiswasattemptedthroughtheconstructionoftheStudySummariesAppendixandtherichcontextdescriptionforthespeciﬁcexcerptsusedassupportingevidenceintheFindingssection.FindingsStudyDemographicsThe52studiesservingasdatasourcesaredescribedinTable4.Mostoften,butnotexclusively,thesestudiesemployedvariousqualitativemethodologies.Inadditiontogeneralqualitativemethods,casestudyandethnographywerethemostcommonmethodologicalapproachesemployedaslensesthroughwhichtoexploreandinterpretdata(e.g.,Buxton,2006;Johnson,2011).Amongthesources,thefocusofinvestigationfavoredtheteacherorstudents.However,elderswereprimaryparticipantsinafewinstances.Middleschoolandelementaryschoolsettingswereoverrepresentedacrossresearchcontexts(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012;Upadhyay,2006).Onseveraloccasions,multiplegradelevelswerepresentinaparticularstudy,aswasthecasewithCarloneandJohnson(2012)whoreportedretrospectivelyontheexperiencesofJulio,aMexicanAmericanstudent,duringhis4th-,6th-,and7th-gradescienceclasses.Whiletheformalschoolenvironmentwasthemostcommonsiteatwhichstudieswereconducted(e.g.,Patchen&Cox-Petersen,2008),multiplestudiesoccurredininformalsettings(e.g.,Fusco,2001),aswellasinprofessionaldevelopmentprograms(e.g.,O.Lee,2004)orsciencemethodscourses(e.g.,Mensah,2011)thatextendedtotheclassroomthroughdirectobservationsofteachers’practices.Thelifescience,physicalscience,andenvironmentalsciencedisciplinesweremostoftenrepresented.Itisimportanttonotethattherewere10instancesinwhichaWesternscienceworldview(aviewofsciencecloselyalignedwiththenormativecanon)waspresentalongsideIndigenousKnowledge(IK)orTraditionalEcologicalKnowledge(TEK)worldviews(knowledgeofscienceandnaturalphenomenaacquiredbyinformalexperiments,experiences,andstorytellingthatispasseddownbygenerationsofelders,knowledgekeepers,and/orfamilymembers)(Hewson&Ogunniyi,2011).Often,thisoccurredwithenvironmentalsciencecontent(e.g.,Chinn,2006),butwasalsopresentinconjunctionwithphysicalscience(e.g.,Changetal.,2010).Multiplesciencedisciplineswerepresentinsettingswherestudentsoftenhadchoicesofwhichsciencetopicstoinvestigate,suchasBasuandCalabreseBarton’s(2007)afterschoolscienceprogram.Instancesinwhichnoclearsciencecontentwasspeciﬁedwasduetostudieseitheremphasizingnatureofscienceunderstandingsintheirlearnersorhavingacentralfocusonsomeaspectofscienceteachers,suchastheirperceptionsoftheimportanceofincorporatingAboriginalknowledgeintoscienceinstruction(e.g.,Aikenhead&Huntley,1999).Lastly,themajorityofstudieswereconductedintheUnitedStates,leavinglittlevoicefromcountriesandJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1155
Table4Descriptionofthestudies(N¼52)DescriptorNumber%FrequencyResearchparadigmQualitative4688Quantitative24Mixedmethod48MethodologyCasestudy1630Generalqualitativemethods1529Ethnography713Surveyresearch36Groundedtheory36Actionresearch24Designexperiments,community-baseddesignresearch24Narrativeinquiry24Quasi-experiment12Experiment12PrimaryparticipantsTeacher3058Student2038Elder/knowledgekeeper24Gradelevels/rangeMiddleschool1631Elementary/primary1427Highschool917Multiplegradelevels611Secondary(encompasses6–12)510Earlychildhood12Notdisclosed12PrimarylearningenvironmentFormalschoolsetting3466Informalschoolsetting815Professionaldevelopmentprogram713Formalteacherpreparationcourse36Sciencecontentarea/disciplineLifescience(includeanatomy/physiology)1325Physicalscience1020Environmentalscience917Multiplesciencedisciplines917Nosciencecontentspecified713Earthscience48Chemicalscience00Nation/countryrepresentedUnitedStates3770Canada36Taiwan24NorthQueensland24TrinidadandTobago24Philippines12Malawi12NewZealand12Kenya12PapuaNewGuinea12SouthAfrica12JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1156BROWN
nations,suchas,Taiwan(e.g.,Changetal.,2010),Kenya(e.g.,Nashon&Anderson,2013),andTrinidadandTobago(e.g.,George,2013).InterrogatingtheComplementarityofK-12CulturallyResponsiveandInquiry-BasedScienceEducationAccordingtotheempiricalliterature,thereisindeedcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducation.Figure1depictsthetotalnumberoftimesthatcomplementaritywasobservedacrosscodedexcerpts(verbatimpassagesintheFindings/Resultssectionsofarticles)fromthe52studies.Amongallstudies,therewasatotalof851instanceswhereatleastoneCRIOPpillarwasobservedtogetherwithatleastoneNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractice.Eacharticlecontainedanaverageof16instancesofcomplementarityacrossitscodedexcerpts,rangingfromaminimumofoneinstanceofcomplementarityidentiﬁed(n¼8articles)toamaximumof37instances(n¼2articles).Themodewas12instances.Forexample,theﬁrstcolumnindicatesthat,acrossthestudies,thepracticeAskingQuestionsandDeﬁningProblems(listedas“1:AQ&DP”)wasfoundwitheveryCRIOPpillarexceptAssessment.Thismeansthat,whenpresentacrossthearticles,AskingQuestionsandDeﬁningProblemsadvancedallculturallyresponsivepracticesexceptAssessment.Inall,therewere235“clusters”amongthesecodedexcerpts,indicatingthat,onaverage,eachexcerptactuallycontained3.6inquiry-basedand/orculturallyresponsivepracticescomplementingoneanother.Inthissection,Ibeginbydescribingsomeofthemostfrequentlyobservedtrends,notingspeciﬁcculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepracticesinsupportingexemplars,andconcludewithadiscussionofanareawherecomplementaritywasinfrequentlyobserved.Becauseitwasoftenthecasethatmultiplecomplementingpracticeswerepresentinagivenexcerpt,Iwillhighlightthoseotherpracticeswhendescribingevidencepassages.ThethreeaspectsofinquirymostoftenusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsivescienceeducationincludedObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(listedas“8:OECI”)(codedpresentwithCRIOPpillars230times,27%ofallinstancesacrossthestudies),ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions(“6:CE&DS”)(20%,presentwithCRIOPpillars166times),andDevelopingandUsingModels(“2:DaUM”)(13%,112times)(Figure1).Thethreeculturallyresponsivepracticesmostoftenfoundinconjunctionwithinquiry-basedsciencepracticesincluded:Pedagogy(30%,codedascomplementarywithNRC[2012]practices254times),Curriculum(22%,183instances),andClassroomRelationships(18%,156times).Obtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwastheinquiry-basedsciencepracticethatmostoftenintersectedwithclear,observableculturallyresponsivepedagogy(CRP)practices(i.e.,CRIOPpillars).Insuchinstances,therewasevidenceofmeaningfullearningopportunitiesthatdrewdirectlyuponstudents’experiences(e.g.,Warren,Ballenger,Ogonowski,Rosebery,&Hudicourt-Barnes,2001),wherestudentswereencouragedtoposequestions,investigateanswerstothosequestions,anddevelopscientiﬁcliteracythroughactivities(e.g.,Roehrigetal.,2011).Whileexploringfundsofknowledgethatlow-income,urban6thgradestudentsbroughttoMr.M’sscienceclassroomintheirdesignexperiment,CalabreseBartonandTan(2009)noted...duringthelessonwherefastfoodrestaurantswerecompared,studentsreviewedMcDonalds’datasheetscontainingdatatableswithcalories,fatcontent,vitamincontent,iron,andcholesterolofeachitemonthefast-foodmenu.WhenMr.M.gaveageneralexplanationtotheclassonhowtoreadtheseintimidatingtables...wewitnessedhowstudentswhohad“ﬁgureditout”explainedtotheirteammatesusingtheexamplesonthemenutheyweremorefamiliarwith(p.63).JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1157
Figure1.Breakdownoftheinstancesofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepracticesthatwereobservedacrosscodedexcerptsofthe52studies.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1158BROWN
Byhavingstudentsobtainandanalyzenutritionalinformationcontainedinfastfoodmenusandthencommunicatetheirﬁndingstoteammates,Mr.Maffordedhisstudentsthechancetocollaborativelyevaluatetheirfoodintakedecisionsfromascientiﬁcallyinformedperspective.Thisactivitywasanintegralpartofafoodandnutritionunitwherestudentslearnedaboutacalorieintermsofitsenergypotentialand“calculate[d]dailycaloricintakeasafunctionofbodymass”(p.53).Inhelpingoneanother,Mr.M’sclassroomenvironmentreﬂectedacollectivistorientation,wherestudentswereaccountableforoneanother’ssuccess(Ladson-Billings,1995a).Duetoitshighlypersonalnature(studentsoftenhadlimitedaccesstohealthieralternativesduetoﬁnancialandgeographicconstraints),thisinvestigationalsoallowedstudentstoexercisesolidaritywhileraisingsociopoliticalissues,suchasinequitableaccesstodietaryoptionsandfoodsecurity.ThiswassimilartootherstudiesinthatthepracticeofObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwasoftenusedforempoweringpurposes,suchasidentifyingtipsforhealthylivingforAfricanAmericanswithsicklecell(e.g.,Boutte,Kelly-Jackson,&Johnson,2010)anddevelopinganutritionplanforpeoplelivingwithType2diabetesbasedonknowledgeofglucoseregulationmechanismsinthebody(e.g.,Brown&Crippen,2017).InstanceslikethesewerealsocodedasthePedagogycategoryofculturallyresponsiveinstructionbecausethey“buil[t]on[students’]existingculturalknowledgeand‘culturaldatasets’”(Powelletal.,2012,p.8).Obtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwasalsothepracticemostfrequentlyassociatedwithculturallyresponsiveAssessment,whichitselfwasraretoobserve(codedwithNRC[2012]practices14times,2%ofallexcerpts).Whenpresent,Assessmentwasseenasstudentsdemonstratingcompetenceinmultipleways.Forexample,7thgradestudentsinMaestroTomas’bilingualimmersionclassdemonstratedknowledgeofenvironmentalscienceconceptsthroughtraditionalandinnovativetasks:Foreachpollutantrepresentedintheplay,studentsweretowritewhethertheythoughtthepollutantaffectedtheairintheircommunityandtoprovideevidencefromtheschoolandhomeobservationstheyhadmade.Finally,thestudentswereaskedtodrawapictureoftheirobservationsshowingthe“thingsthatmaybeaffectingthequalityofair,”“thingsthatmayshowtheeffectsofpollutedair,”andthe“pollutantsthatmightbeintheair”(Moje,Collazo,Carillo,&Marx,2001,p.482).Asaculminatingevent,MaestroTomas’studentsdisplayedtheirlearningbyposingevidence-basedclaimsaboutpollutionintheircommunityandtentativeexplanationsfortheimpactofpollutiononairandwaterqualityinthatcommunity.ByallowingstudentstodemonstratesciencecontentknowledgethroughmultipleDiscourses,MaestroTomasprovidedculturallyresponsiveassessmentopportunities.Indoingso,students’sciencecommunicationwassupportedthrough“frequentandauthenticusesoflanguageandcontent,”whichissoundpedagogyforallstudentsbutespeciallysoforEnglishlanguagelearners(Powelletal.,2012,p.11).ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions.Giventhatmanyofthestudieswereconductedpriortotherecentemphasisonengineeringpracticesinscienceeducation(NRC,2012),therewasanover-representationofConstructingExplanations(presentwithCRIOPpillars129times,78%ofallinstancesforthiscategory)comparedtoDesigningSolutions(37times,22%).Together,thesepracticeswereusedtoadvanceculturallycongruentcommunicationandlinguisticcompetence(e.g.,Reveles&Brown,2008),drawuponstudents’experiencesandknowledgeduringinstruction(e.g.,Carlone&Johnson,2012;Nametal.,2012),andadvancesociopoliticalconsciousness(e.g.,Boutteetal.,2010;Chinn,2006),therebypromotingJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1159
meaningfullearningtasksthatwereconnectedtostudents’lives.Forexample,inhiscasestudyofJane’s4thgradeclassroomcomprisedprimarilyofLatino/astudents,Upadhyay(2006)discussedtheimportanceofwelcomingandhonoringstudents’backgroundswhenscaffoldingopportunitiestoconstructexperience-basedexplanationsofnaturalphenomena:Janewasteaching“what[do]plantsneedtogrow?”fromtheLiFE[LinkingFoodandtheEnvironment]curriculum.Shewasdiscussinghowplantsneedcarbondioxidegastomakefood.Oneofthestudentssharedthatplantscouldsurvivewithoutairbecausebeansproutscouldgrowinacupboardwherethereishardlyanyair.Headdedthatathomehisgrandmotherusesdifferentseedsandsproutsthembysoakingtheseedsovernightandpackingtheminaclothwhichsheputsawayinadarkplaceforcoupleofdays.Janethenusedthisstudent’sfundsofknowledgeonseedgerminationexperiencetoexplainseedgerminationprocessesandwhatkindofgasanimalsandplantsneedtosurvive(p.104).Inthisexcerpt,Janeallowedmultipleperspectivesonplant-growingtobevoicedfromherstudents,whichledtoonestudentsharinghisexperienceswithseedgermination.Janethenvalidatedthisknowledgeinherownexplanationoftheprocessofseedgermination,ultimatelycreatingalearningatmospherewherestudentknowledgewastreatedasauthoritative.Bysurfacingtheirperspectivesonthetopic,Janetreatedstudents’experiencesasresourcesforlearning,notasinferiorknowledgetobereplacedandcorrected.Accordingly,thisexcerptwascodedasConstructingExplanationscomplementingtheCRIOPpillars,CurriculumandPedagogy.TherewerealsoaccountsofstudentsworkingtogetherproductivelytoDesignSolutionsbasedonissuestheyhadbeenresearching.Attimes,thisledtostudentsengaginginengineering-relatedpracticeswasawaytoraisecriticalconsciousness(e.g.,Mensah,2011)andfosterculturalcompetence(e.g.,Chinn,2006).Additionally,suchpracticeswereusedtoadvancesocialchangeandyouthempowerment.Forexample,byDeﬁningProblemsandDesigningSolutions,Fusco(2001)reportedinheractionresearchstudythatthe15homelessyouthwithwhomshehadbeenworkingtoconstructanurbangardenrealizedthatthespacecouldbeenhancedbyelicitingadditionalexpertise:Asecondoutcomeofinvitingotheradultswithvariousexpertiseandperspectivestosupportourvision[foranurbancommunitygarden]wasaccesstoavarietyofprofessionaldiscoursesandpracticesitgavetheyoungpeople.Forinstance,aconversationwithanenvironmentalpsychologistledustoconsidernewquestionssuchas:Whatdesignqualitiesarebeingconsidered(e.g.,thestructuralarrangement,theactivitiesofferedwithinthespace,access)?Thisquestiontriggeredfurtherthinkingandplanning.Webegantorealizethatastagewouldrequireseating,agardenwouldrequiresunlight,aplaygroundofferedactivitiesforchildrenbutwehadnotconsideredactivitiesforolderpeople(p.868).Thisexcerptillustratesthatculturallyresponsivepedagogicalpracticescanoccurbeyondtheconﬁnesoftheformalclassroom.Theurbangardenprojectbuiltdirectlyonyouth’sculturalknowledgeofthecommunity,astheirinsightswereessentialtoeachdecision-makingstep.Byresearchingandenactingscienceideas,youthdemonstratedunderstandingsofaspectsofthenatureofscienceandthenatureofengineering(i.e.,designprocess).Nowarmedwithamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofpossibilitiesforthegardenthanbefore,theteenagedyouthandFuscoenacteddesignideaslearnedduringtheirresearchprocess.Intheir“practicingcultureofJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1160BROWN
sciencelearning,”(p.869)theteamcreatedaspaceusablebyallcommunitymembersandformultiplepurposes.ClassroomRelationshipsshouldbeequitableandproductiveinallscienceclassrooms,notjustthosethatexemplifyculturalrelevance.WhatmadetheseparticularrelationshipsreﬂectiveofCRP,however,wasthattherewereoftengroupandindividualgoalsforsuccessthatpromotedacollectivist,“family-like”environment(e.g.,Mensah,2011;Patchen&Cox-Petersen,2008),patternsofinteractiondemonstratedbytheteacherthatweredeterminedtobeculturallycongruentwithstudents’andfamilies’linguisticandculturalbackgrounds(e.g.,Chigeza,2011;O.Lee,2004),andstudentgroupsthatpurposefullysupportedoneanother’slearninginwaysthatassuredsuccessforall(e.g.,Kelly-Jackson&Jackson,2011).Asaresult,culturallyresponsiveclassroomrelationshipswereoftennotedalongsideinquiry-basedpracticessuchasObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationasreferredtointhispassagereportedbyCarloneetal.(2011)intheirethnographicstudy:Incountlessways,Ms.Wolfeheldstudentsaccountableforcriticallylisteningtoandjointlyconstructingknowledgewiththeirpartnersinsmallgroupsandwholegroups.Shequestionedstudentsabouttheirgroupmates’ideasandhadapolicythat“bothpeople,orallthreepeople[inagroup]areresponsibleforbeingabletoshareout[tothewholegroup]”(Interview,8/13/08).Sheoftenprivilegedthevoicesofthequieteststudents—“I’mgonnapicktheleasttalkativepersonwhoprobablyhasnotstoodupforthemselvesandsay,‘Thegroupcan’tstartuntilthispersontellsmewhattheplanis”(p.471).Byencouragingher4thgradestudentstoparticipatefullyandequitably,Ms.Wolfecultivatedalearningenvironmentwherestudentsworkedtogetherproductively,holdingeachotheraccountableforsharinginformation—ﬁrstwithoneanotherandthentothewholeclass—astheyconstructedandusedmodelstoexploretheﬂowofelectricitythroughcircuits.Otherinstancesofcommunicatingscientiﬁcinformationoccurredthroughwrittenexplanations(e.g.,Xu,Coats,&Davidson,2012),classpresentations(e.g.,Buxton,2006),andcreativeexpressionssuchascomposingsongsandmodifyingmagnets(e.g.,CalabreseBarton,Tan,&Rivet,2008).Allofwhichwerenotedtofosterpositivelearningandidentity-buildingexperienceswheresciencewasthefocus.DevelopingandUsingModelstoCritiqueandExpandtheScienceCurriculumThirteenpercent(presentwithCRIOPpillars113times)ofallcodedexcerptsacrossthestudiescontainedevidenceofDevelopingandUsingModels(Figure1)inconcertwithvariousCRPpractices.ComplementingpracticeswereobservedwhenbothWesternscience(WS)-basedmodels(e.g.,Fusco,2001)andIndigenousKnowledge(IK)-orTraditionalEcologicalKnowledge(TEK)-basedmodelswereusedtoexplorephenomena(e.g.,Herbert,2008).Infact,althoughtheCRPcategoryFamilyCollaborationwasnotedwithclearinquiry-basedsciencepracticesinonly7%ofallexcerpts,itwasabundantininstancesofDevelopingandUsingModelswhenthemodelsoriginatedfromIKworldviews.Inparticular,familyandcommunityfundsofknowledgewereleveragedtosupportstudents’sciencelearning.InherinstrumentalcasestudyofpreparingtoteachculturallyresponsivescienceteachersinTrinidadandTobago,George(2013)recountedforthescienceteachercandidateswithwhomsheworked:Oneteacherusedanaccountofthepracticeofafarmerinanearbyvillageusingurineontherootsofthebananaandplantainplants(toenhancegrowth)asthesetinductioninalesson.HereturnedtotheidealaterinthelessonafterexplaininghowfertilizersfunctionandtheJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1161
advantagesanddisadvantagesoforganicandinorganicfertilizers.Twoparticipantsreferencedlocalfoodpreservation/preparationtechniquestoillustrateattemptsatreducingmoisturecontentinfoodtoinhibitspoilage(p.2126).Intheirethnographicstudy,H.Lee,Yen,andAikenhead(2012)detailhow4thgradeAmisstudents(anIndigenousTaiwanesetribe)exploredtimemeasurementthroughbothWestern(timeasalinearmeasure)andIndigenous(timeascyclicoccurrences)views:Afterstudentsweretaughtthatthe12ceremonialsacriﬁcesoftheAmistribe,whichareusedtojudgethetimeoftheyear,correspondedtoplantingcropsandthegrowthofplants,thestudentsbegantounderstandthatthedatesfortheﬁsh-catchingceremonyandharvestfestivalweredeterminedthroughthecyclesofplantingandharvestingtheyhadexperiencedsincechildhood.Thedateswerescheduledalongsidethesequenceofdifferentceremonialsacriﬁcessothattheﬁsh-catchingceremonywascloselylinkedwiththenaturalarrivaloftheﬂyingﬁshtotheirlocalenvironment(p.1196).ThesetwoexamplesrepresentatrendnoticedaroundthetreatmentofsciencecontentwhenIKwaspresent—suchknowledgewastreatedasamodelfromwhichtoexplorescientiﬁcphenomenaandameanstoexpandandcritiquetheofﬁcialsciencecurriculum(codedasCRIOPpillarCurriculum).ThesemodelshelpedstudentsexplainandpredictnaturalphenomenainequallyvalidmannersasistypicallybestowedonWesternsciencemodels.Indoingso,theyalsobroughttotheforefrontareminderthat“forcenturiesdifferentvarietiesof[IndigenousKnowledge]werenormal—atleastuntilconquestandcolonizationdethronedthemandreplacedthemwith‘authenticscience’”(GallardMartınez,2011,p.720).Resultantly,IK-basedmodelswereoftenintentionallyintroducedtocountertheprevailingargumentthat“theepistemologiesthatstudentscometoclassroomswithareinferior,orlessproductive,comparedwiththeone(s)thatresearchersandeducators...aretryingtoassiststudentsinlearning”(Bang&Medin,2010,p.1015).AswasnotedinthecaseofH.Leeetal.(2012),theAmismethodoftellingtimehadarichtradition,andwasconsistentandusefulforpredictingtheonsetofgrowingseasonsandanimalmigrationpatterns.ItwasalsocommontoseetheinterweavingofWSandIKasawaytopromotebi-literatestudentsthatunderstoodandappreciatedmultipleperspectivesonscientiﬁcphenomena.Intheseinstances,studentsmostoftenwereengagedinscienceinstructionthathonoredIndigenousKnowledgebyusingculturalreferentsas“startingpoints”forinvestigationsguidedbymoreWesternsciencecontent(e.g.,Bang&Medin,2010;Chigeza,2011).AsChinn(2006)discussesinher3-yearstudyontheprofessionaldevelopmentofpreK-12scienceteachersinHawai’i:TeachersusedtheHawaiianpracticeofintegratingstream-fedlo’ikalo(taropatches)withlokoi’a(ﬁshponds)tohelpstudentsunderstandsciencestandardsdealingwithecosystems,cyclesofmaterialsandenergy,andsustainability.Theybuiltclassroommodelsandfull-scale“livingmachines”...onKauai,Oahu,andHawai’itodemonstratehowbiologicalsystemscleanupnutrientrichwastewaterfromanimalraisingprojects(p.395).Insomecases,thesecultural“startingpoints”weretreatedmoreexplicitly,withfamilymembers’andcommunity-basedknowledgedepictedasdifferentwaystointerpretandexplainthesameconcepts,suchasthisexamplefromGrimbergandGummer(2013),whoconductedaquasi-experimentalstudyoftheimpactofprofessionaldevelopmentexperiencesonK-8scienceteachersonornearAmericanIndianreservationsinMontana:JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1162BROWN
Thescienceconceptofacceleratedmotionwasidentiﬁedintheculturalpracticeofarrowmakingandthrowing.Theshapeofthebow,theelasticityofthematerialsofthearrowandbow,thetensioninthestring,thebodypositioninthethrow,andmanymoreintricaciesofthispracticewerematchedtotheconceptofforceandacceleratedmotion.Inthisexampletheempiricalepistemologyofthetribalpracticewasmatchedtotheabstract,model-basedepistemologyofschoolscienceasbothknowledgebaseshavethesamepurpose:thepredictionofthemotionofanobjectsubjecttoanunbalancedforce(p.19).Evenininstanceswhereminimalconnectionstoculturalknowledgeweremade,studentsengagedwithmodelsasawayto“discover”normativescientiﬁcphenomenaanddevelopexplanationsfromtheiruseandtesting.Asapractice,DevelopingandUsingModelsinculturallyresponsivesettingscreatedaspaceforstudentstobuild,test,andobservephysicalrepresentationsofscientiﬁcphenomena,whilebeingsupportedbyoneanotherandexploringtopicsofinterest.However,studentsdidnotnecessarilyworktogetherwhenusingmodels(asnotedbytheminimalpresenceofClassroomRelationshipswithinthiscategory).Intheseinstances,teacherswereoftenthemainpersonresponsiblefordemonstratingthemodel,withstudentsassumingmorepassiveroles.SciencePracticesasaVehicletoPromoteSociopoliticalConsciousnessOfculturallyrelevanteducation,Ladson-Billings(1995a)states,“notonlymustteachersencourageacademicsuccessandculturalcompetence,theymusthelpstudentstorecognize,understand,andcritiquecurrentsocialinequities”(p.476).Engagingstudentsinsociopoliticalconsciousness-raisingexperiencescanaccomplishthislastgoal,andculturallyresponsivescienceeducationisrepletewithsuchopportunities.Thoughinfrequentlyobservedalongsidespeciﬁcinquiry-basedpracticesinthe52studies(8%ofexcerptsacrossallstudies,coded68timesascomplementarywithscienceandengineeringpractices),atonepointintimeoranotherallNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticeswereusedtoadvancesociopoliticalconsciousness,andthisoccurredacrossallgradebands(refertoFigure1).Mostfrequently,theseactivitiesincludedopportunitiesforstudentstoObtain,Evaluate,andCommunicateInformation(29%or20ofthecodedexcerptsforthiscategory)andAnalyzeandInterpretData(22%or15codedexcerptsforthiscategory).Inherqualitativestudyemployinggroundedtheoryanalyticmethods,Mensah(2011)notedofanelementarypre-serviceteacherwhomshetaughtduringtheunitplanningandimplementationportionsofasciencemethodscourse,Estelle,forher2-daylesson,focusedon“environmentalracism”whereshewanted“toincludeacultural/communityperspective”(Microteachingpaper)andquestiontheeffectsofairpollutiononstudentsandself...Estelleaskedstudentstousetheirownzipcodestomaphowclosetheirhomesweretomajorsourcesofairpollution(i.e.,busdepots,wastetreatmentplants,wastetransferstations,MTAtrainyards),andstudent-groupsusedclassroomcomputerstoresearchasthmahospitalizationratesinNewYorkCity...Duringtheposterpresentationinclass,studentsdemonstratedunderstandingofman-madecausesofairpollution;negativeaffectsofairpollutiononhumans,animals,plants,andtheenvironment;andidentiﬁedseveralcomponentsthatmakeuptheairandairquality(p.304).Alongwithtwootherelementarypre-serviceteachersthathelpedco-plantheunit,Estellefeltitimportantthather4thand5thgradestudentsexplorelocalproblems,suchaspollutionandasthmaincidences,throughscience.Indoingso,studentslearnedaboutcomponentsoftheair,JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1163
howtodetermineairquality,andtoidentifysourcesofatmosphericemissionsfromindustry.Childrenanalyzed,visuallyrepresented,andpresentedthisinformationtosuggestwaystoreduceairpollutionlocally.Additionally,thiswastheonlyclearinstanceinwhichstudentsUsedMathematicsandComputationalThinking(listedas“5:UMCT,”Figure1)toexploreissueswithsociopoliticalties.Inothercases,studentsanalyzeddataandlearnedsciencecontenttobetterunderstandtopicswithsociopoliticalconnections,suchasexaminingdiseasesprevalentinspeciﬁcethniccommunities(e.g.,Xuetal.,2012)andtheprevalenceofunhealthyfastfoodoptionsavailablelocally(e.g.,CalabreseBarton&Tan,2009).Onfeweroccasions,scientiﬁcpracticesandcontentwerescrutinizedasawaytonameandchallengeoppression—therebyemphasizingnatureofscienceandsciencecontentexploration—suchaswhenAnatomyandPhysiologystudentsexploredphrenologyasapseudoscience(e.g.,Brown&Crippen,2017)andmiddleschoolstudentsexaminedbiasinherentinthescientiﬁcenterprise,suchasLaughterandAdams’(2012)qualitativestudyoftheculturallyrelevantpracticesofascienceteacher:Ineachclass,Adamsbeganwithanintroductiontoandreadingsaboutbiasinscience...Thereadingsexaminedhowseveralscientists’expectationsofintelligencewerebiasedbyracialorgenderfactors,includingSamuelMorton’smeasurementsofskullvolumeandLawrenceSummer’scommentsaboutscientiﬁcaptitudedifferencesbetweenmenandwomen.Adamswantedherstudentstounderstandhowascientist’sindividualandcommunalprejudicesmightleadtobiasinaparadigmthatpurportsobjectivity;thatis,assheoftenrepeated,“Scienceisnotbiasedbutscientistsare”(p.1120).Suchtopicsarosewhenstudentswereallowedtoposeandinvestigatetheirownquestions(e.g.,Mojeetal.,2001),whenteacherswerepersonallyconnectedtotheissues(e.g.,Mensah,2011)andfeltmorallyobligatedtodiscussinjustice(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012),orwhendesignedforinadvancewithpre-madecurriculummaterials(e.g.,Tsurusaki,CalabreseBarton,Tan,Koch,&Contento,2013).Throughtheseopportunities,studentsengagedinsciencepracticesinmeaningfulandempoweringways,andwerealsocodedasCRIOPpillarsCurriculumandPedagogy.Notonlydidsuchinstancesprovidestudentswithopportunitiestoenhancetheircontentknowledgeandscienceliteracy,theyfosteredauthenticexperienceswherestudentsObtained,Evaluated,andCommunicatedInformationacrossallgradelevels.AreasUnderutilizedinCulturallyResponsive,Inquiry-BasedScienceEducationThethreeNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesleastfrequentlyencounteredalongsideculturallyresponsivepracticesincludedUsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking(4%ofallcodedexcerpts,presentwithaCRIOPpillar30times),PlanningandCarryingOutInvestigations(7%,58times),andEngaginginArgumentfromEvidence(7%,62times).Ihighlighttwoareasofferingpotentialforadvancingcomplementarity:UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking(“5:UMCT”)andEngaginginArgumentfromEvidence(“7:EAE”).UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking.Whenpresent,thispracticewasfrequentlyobservedalongsidetheCRIOPpillarsClassroomRelations,CurriculumandPedagogy(refertoFigure1).Inaddition,theinquiry-basedpracticesAnalyzingandInterpretingData(e.g.,O.Lee,2004)andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(e.g.,Fusco,2001)werenotedalongsidethispractice,meaningthatculturallyresponsive,inquiry-basedscienceexamplesweremostlikelytohavethesecomplementingpracticesworkingtogether.Forexample,intheircaseJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1164BROWN
studyofa6thgradeteacher’senactmentofa“science-richandculturallyrelevant”curriculum,Tsurusakietal.(2013)sharedanaccountbetweenMrs.Hansonandherstudentsduringalessononguidelinesforhealthfuleating:Mrs.Hansonaskedstudentstolookattheir24-hourfoodlogs,wheretheyhadcollecteddataabouttheservingsandamountsofwhattheyhadconsumed...[she]focusedherstudentsonthistaskbyusingalineofquestioningtoguidetheirworkthatevokedbothpersonalnarrativeanddataspeciﬁcity:“Howaboutfastfoodrestaurants?Inthelast24hourshowmanytimesdidyoueatatafastfoodrestaurant?Ifyouwentonceputa1.Ifyouwent4timesputa4.Ifyouwent0timesputa0.Thinkabouthowmanytimesaweekyougo...Whenyoulookbackatthethreegraphsyoujustdid,doesanythingreallyjumpoutatyouandyousay,whoa!I’mreallyoffhere?I’mnotevenclosetowhattherecommendedamountisforsomething?”(pp.13–15).Inthissegment,Mrs.Hansoncreatedalearningopportunitycontextualizedinstudents’livesthatdrewupontheirpersonalexperiencesandknowledge,providingacontextforscientiﬁcpracticesofprecisioninanalyzingandinterpretingdataontheirdailyfood/drinkintake.Byengaginginmathematicsandcomputationalthinking,Ms.Hanson’sstudentsanalyzeddataandvisuallyrepresentedtheirﬁndingstoexploretrendsandpatternsintheirdietaryintakearoundﬁverecommendedgoals.Resultantly,thisalsoexempliﬁesculturallyresponsiveCurriculumandPedagogy.Overall,UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinkingwasrarelyobservedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstruction.Moreover,FamilyCollaborationwasabsentfromthiscategoryand,thus,pointstoanareaofpotentialforgreatercomplementarity.Giventhatfamily/parentaleducationalinvolvementispositivelyassociatedwithstudentachievement(Jeynes,2007),cultivatingspacesfor“hybridscience”isessential.Includingfamilymoremeaningfullyinsciencelearningexperiencescouldbeonewaytoachievethis.Forexample,Hagiwara,CalabreseBarton,andContento(2007)observedthatDominicanparentswhoassistedwithclassroomscienceinstructionby“address[ing]questions,develop[ing]student-inquiryskills,[and]manag-[ing]groupactivities”(p.483)wereidentiﬁedbytheirchildrenasteachers(ormaestras)withauthoritativeknowledge.Byexpandingsuchrolestoincludeassistancewithrepresentingrelationshipsamongscienceconceptsthroughgraphsandothercomputationalapproaches,theculturallyresponsiveinstructionexperiencedbystudentsmightbeimproved.Ifsuchanapproachistobetaken,however,itmustbeconsiderateoffamilies’needs,aseducationalparticipationpatternsoftendifferwithculturalheritage.Racialminorityandimmigrantparentsmaybelesslikelytoprovideknowledgeandresourcesreﬂectiveofstrongsocialcapital(J.Lee&Bowen,2006)andreportfeelinguneasywithtraditionalschoolscienceinvolvementbecauseofcognitiveandculturalconﬂicts(Albrecht,2015).Whileinvolvingfamilymeaningfullyinscienceexperiencesmayhavepositivelearningoutcomesforchildren,itnecessitatesaculturallysensitiveapproach.EngaginginArgumentFromEvidence.Whenpresent,thispracticecoincidedwithexplicitCRPpractices(7%ofallcodedexcerpts,presentwithCRIOPpillars62times)mostoftenaroundDiscourse,ClassroomRelationships,andCurriculum(refertoFigure1).Inaddition,theinquiry-basedpracticesAnalyzingandInterpretingData(e.g.,O.Lee,2004;Lim&CalabreseBarton,2006),ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions(e.g.,Kelly-Jackson&Jackson,2011),andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(e.g.,Nashon&Anderson,2013)wereexclusivelylinkedwiththispractice.Meaningthat,whenpresentinculturallyresponsivescienceeducationstudies,EngaginginArgumentfromEvidencewasobservedwithJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1165
onlytheseotherscienceandengineeringpractices.SuchanexamplecomesfromXuetal.(2012),whoreportedonthepracticesofMr.Harris,a4th-gradescienceteacher,intheircasestudyofthescienceteachingofexemplaryAfricanAmericaneducators.Inthisexcerpt,Mr.Harrisrecalledhowhescaffoldsargumentationinhisstudents:Sometimeswhenwehavegroupdiscussions,Iwouldputonesideagainsttheotherside.Iletonesidestartwithanopeningargument,andthenlettherestonthatsideweighinwhatevertheywanttosay.Fortheoppositegroup,Iwouldgivethemachancetorespond.Itellthemtolookforsomethingthattheymayhavenotunderstoodoraskmorein-depthquestions.Ionlyusemyselfasalastresort,saying,“Well,ifyoucan’tcometoanagreement,thenyoucanasktheexpert.Andthat’sme.”IfIcan’tansweraquestion,Iencouragethemtodomoreresearch.Iexplaintothemthisiswhatscientistsdowhenevertheyhaveaquestionaboutsomething(Xuetal.,2012,p.144).SimilartoMr.Harris,theteacherswithwhomWarrenetal.(2001)workedpurposefullycreatedspacesforstudentstoengageinargumentation.Thoughpittingstudentsagainstoneanothermayappearcountertotheaimsofculturallyresponsiveteaching,thiswasnotthecentralexperienceMr.Harriswastryingtocultivateinhisclassroom.Rather,hewasmoreinterestedinfosteringcollaborationamongteammembers,givingstudentsachancetointeractwithoneanothertowardacommongoal,voicemultipleperspectivesastheycraftedtheirteam’sargument,andengagerespectfullywiththeotherteamduringtheprocess.Throughhisinstructionalapproach,Mr.Harrisattemptedtogivehisstudentsopportunitiestomeaningfullyparticipateinclassroomdiscourse.BecauseWesternsciencehaswell-establishednormsforcommunicatingscientiﬁcknowledge,“byengaging[students]insuchpractices...theysimultaneouslybuildontheirunderstandingofscienceandtheirlanguageproﬁciency,”bothnecessarycomponentsofequitablelearningexperiences(AchieveInc.,2013,p.6).ThisisparticularlyconsistentwithresearchonEnglishlanguagelearners(O.Lee&Buxton,2010).AlthoughthestudiesfrequentlydocumentedK-12studentsconstructingevidence-basedclaimsandexplanations,itwaslesslikelytonotethemidentifyingandchallengingaclaim’slimitationsorweaknesses.SuchargumentationisahallmarkoftheWesternscientiﬁcenterprise,however,andisnecessaryforanindividualtobecomea“criticalconsumerofscience”(NRC,2012,p.71).Thisabsencesuggestedanareaofpotentialforadvancingfurthercomplementarityinculturallyresponsivescienceeducation.Asmentionedpreviously,theﬁeldaboundswithopportunitiestoincludeissuesimportanttothecommunity(e.g.,Tsurusakietal.,2013)andconfrontnegativestereotypes,biases,andformsofoppression(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012).Withoutidentifyingthestrengthsandlimitationsinsuchclaims,however,studentsareleftatadisadvantage.Engagingstudentsinexaminingcommunity-basedissuesandinjusticeinlightofavailableevidencewhileworkingtowardthemostcredibleexplanationsisnecessarytodevelopnotonlycriticalthinkingskillsbutalsocriticalconsciousness.ImplicationsforPracticeandFutureResearchForsometimenow,ithasbeenarguedthatculturallyresponsive-andWesternscience-basededucationareatodds(McKinley&Gan,2014;Nametal.,2012).Yet,thestudiesexaminedinthismetasynthesisprovideevidencetothecontrary.Findingsshowclearpatternsofcomplementarityamonginquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settings.Astheyengagedinscienceexperiencesthatwereempowering,validating,andrelevanttotheirlives,studentsofcolor,Englishlanguagelearners,andlow-incomestudentspracticedmanyaspectsofinquirythatwerereﬂectiveofWesternscience(WS).Thislargelytooktheformofobtaining,JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1166BROWN
evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationthatbecamethefoundationforevidence-basedclaimsmadebystudentsaboutscientiﬁcphenomena.Studentsalsousedmodels—frombothWSandIndigenousKnowledge(IK)worldviews—toexplainandoccasionallypredictthesephenomena.Despiteanabundanceofcomplementingpractices,certainareaswereunderutilized.Forexample,cleartiesbetweenculturallyresponsivepracticesandinstancesinwhichstudentsusedmathematicsandcomputationalthinkingorengagedinargumentfromevidencewereinfrequentlyobserved.TheseandotherpatternsdiscussedinthispaperhaveclearimplicationsfortheﬁeldthatcouldadvanceMeyerandCrawford’s(2011)calltomakeinquiry-basedscienceintentionallyculturallyresponsive.ImplicationsforScienceTeacherEducationTeachersneedclearexamplesofthetypesofinstructiontheyareexpectedtoprovide.Severalscholarshavedocumentedthechallengesfacedbyscienceteacherswhenattemptingtofacilitateculturallyresponsivelearningexperiences(Johnson,2011;Nametal.,2012).Pre-andin-serviceteachereducationprogramsmustassistteachersintranslatingculturallyresponsivesciencefromtheorytoreality.AccordingtoFerguson(2008),“Althoughresearchersadvocateforamulticulturalscienceeducation,traditionalpreserviceprogramsintheU.S.havenotemphasizedorrequiredtheincorporationofmulticulturaleducationintheircurricula”(p.551).Itismorelikelythatprospectivescienceteachersexittheirprogramsknowinghowtoteachinquirythanhowtoenactculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction.Byhighlightingconnectionsbetweeninquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,suchaswasdoneinthismetasyn-thesis,practicingandprospectivescienceteacherscanidentifyconcreteleveragepointsforequitablelearningopportunities.Examplesalone,however,areunlikelytopromoteculturallyresponsivescienceteachingwithoutadditionalsupports.Amongeffectiveinquiry-focusedprofessionaldevelopmentprogramfeaturesareopportu-nitiesforscienceteacherstodevelopinnovativelessons;buildcontentknowledge;andactivelyengagein,reﬂecton,andcritiqueexemplaryinstruction(Capps,Crawford,&Constas,2012).Restructuringsuchexperiencesaroundtheﬁndingsofthisstudymayprovideapathwayfordevelopingculturallyresponsive,inquiry-basedscienceteachers.Forinstance,aswasthecaseforteacherswithwhomChinn(2006)andGeorge(2013)worked,opportunitiestobuildcontentknowledgecouldfocusonbothWSandIKperspectivesofscientiﬁcphenomena.Thisknowledgecouldthenbeusedalongsidemultipleaspectsofinquiry,muchliketheteachersofGrimbergandGummer’s(2013)studywhenteachingforceandmotionconceptsthrougharrow-making.Suchapracticeallowsculturallyresponsiveinstructiontomeaningfullymaterializeinscienceclass-rooms,asopposedtofeelinglikeanadd-onordisjointedfromthecurriculum.Byinvolvingteachersintheactivelearningandcritiqueofexemplaryinstruction(alignedwiththeprogram’svisionofscienceinstruction)fortheircontexts,theirownershipandcomfortwithimplementationimproves.Inthecontextofculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,itisespeciallyimportantthatteachersbearinmindstudents’backgroundswhenevaluatingexemplars(Brown&Crippen,2016a).Whenimaginingculturallyresponsiveinstructionintheirownclassrooms,bothpre-serviceandin-serviceteacherscouldevaluate“modellessons”accordingtotheﬁndingsofthisstudy.Forinstance,inthelesson,werestudentsallowedtoobtain,evaluate,andcommunicatescientiﬁcinformationastheychallengedandattemptedtoaddressalocalissue?Towhatdegreewasfamilyexpertiseutilizedwhencarryingoutinvestigationsorconstructingscientiﬁcexplanations?Anynumberofquestionslikethesecouldstructurelessonevaluationandsubsequentmodiﬁcation.Itissuggestedthatthisoccurnotonlyforthoseareaswherecomplementarityalreadyexists,butalsotospeculateonwaystoimproveunderutilizedareas.Asforaresearchagenda,evaluationstudieswillneedtobeconductedtoJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1167
determinehowwellprogramswithsuchaimsperformaccordingtotheirgoals.Inadditiontodeterminingtheimpactofresultingteachereducationprogramsonteachers’knowledge,skills,anddispositions,itwillalsobeessentialtodetermineassociationsbetweenspeciﬁcteacheroutcomesandprogramfeatures.Thisstudy’saimwasneithertodeterminewhichpractices(inquiryorculturallyresponsive)weremosteffectiveatprovidingequitablelearningopportunitiesforstudents,norwhichpracticesweremostcloselyaligned.Accordingly,thesearetwofruitfulareasforfutureresearch.ImplicationsforScienceCurriculumMaterialsAlthoughthereisno“one-size-ﬁts-all”culturallyresponsivecurriculum,theﬁndingsofthismetasynthesissuggestleveragepointsforimprovingtheculturalrelevanceofexistingsciencecurriculummaterials.Ithaslongbeenknownthatcurriculumplaysacentralroleinateacher’sclassroompractice(Ball&Cohen,1996).Byintentionallyrevisingsuchmaterialswiththeresultsofthisstudy,wearebetterpositionedasacommunitytodeliveronthevisionofequitablescienceespousedintheFramework(NRC,2012).Rodriguez(2015)stated,“justaseveryNGSSforeverygradelevelincludestablesillustratingtheknowledgeandscientiﬁc/engineeringpracticesexpectationsforeachdimension,adimensionofengagement,equityanddiversitycouldhaveillustratedhowthesciencecontentcouldhavebeenmademoreculturallyandsociallyrelevant”(p.1042).Withexamplesfromthispaperservingasmodelsforcurriculumenhancement,Rodriguez’sproposalmaystandclosertorealization.Byﬁrstarticulatingcleargoalsthatarereﬂectiveofbothculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducation,designerscanusetheﬁndingsofthisstudytobolsterspeciﬁcareasoftheirmaterials.Forexample,giventhatmanyculturallyrelevantDiscourse-fosteringstrategies—promotingprimarylanguageuse(e.g.,Chigeza,2011),allowingstudentstochoosetheirpreferredformsofDiscourse(e.g.,Mojeetal.,2001),providingcleardirectionsforlanguageuse(e.g.,Carloneetal.,2011)—wereinfusedpredominantlyintotheinquiry-basedpracticesConstructingExplanations,EngaginginArgumentfromEvidence,andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicat-ingInformation,thesemaybeareastotarget.If,ontheotherhand,culturallyrelevantassessmentstructureswereofinterest—usingvariedassessmentforms,includingrubricsandportfolios(e.g.,Chinn,2006);modifyinginstructionbasedonstudents’observedneedsinthemoment(e.g.,Johnson,2011)—therelativelyfewinstancesinwhichtheywerepresentwerethroughtheverysameinquiry-basedpracticesasDiscourse,aswellasbyAnalyzingandInterpretingData.Together,thesetrendsindicatespeciﬁcapproachesforconstructingequitablesciencecurricula.Despitethepotentialforcomplementarityamongculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscience,itisalsoimportanttoquestionwhetherornotallscienceandengineeringpracticesshouldbeintegratedintoculturallyresponsivelearningexperiences.Someresearchhascontendedthatcertainpractices,suchasargumentation,areincongruentwithculturallyresponsiveinstructionduetodifferencesassignedtotheaimsofdialogueacrossvariousculturalgroups(e.g.,consensusversuscritique)(GallardMartınez,2011).Otherscholarshaveseenmorepotentialfortheircompatibility,however.Ogunniyi(2004)proposedtheContiguityArgumentationTheory(CAT)model,whichincorporatesculturalknowledgetoassistlearnersin“verbalizingtheirviewpoints,anddecidingontherelativepowerofthedifferentideasbeingexpressed”especiallywhenattemptingtoreconciledifferencesbetweenIndigenousKnowledgeandWesternscienceworldviews(citedinHewson&Ogunniyi,2011,p.683).Thus,itisimperativethatcurriculumdesignersﬁrstcriticallyexaminetheappropriatenessoftheseapproaches.Asitismorelikely,however,thatteacherswillberesponsiblefordesigningcurriculathanhavingpre-madematerialsfromwhichtodraw(e.g.,Boutteetal.,2010;George,2013;LaughterJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1168BROWN
&Adams,2012),amorevaluableuseoftheseﬁndingsmightbethroughcurriculumdesignsupportsforscienceteachers.Forinstance,intheirTransformativeProfessionalDevelopment(TPD)model,JohnsonandMarx(2009)reportedthatthemiddleschoolscienceteacherswithwhomtheyworkedcontinuallymodiﬁedtheircurriculummaterialstobemoreculturallyresponsivebasedoninformationtheylearnedabouttheirstudentsfromhomevisits,aSpanishclassthatwaspartoftheTPD,andabookstudy.AndBrownandCrippen(2016a)providedmultiplecurriculumdesignsupportsforthescienceteachersintheirprofessionaldevelopmentprogram,includingongoingcriticalreﬂectionontriallessonstheyimplementedandexemplarstheyexperienced,collectiveparticipationduringbrainstormingandcurriculumwritingsessions,andstructuredunit-planningtemplatesbuiltfromtheexistingresearch.Giventhatcurriculumdesignisacomplexprocess,supportstothisendwouldbebeneﬁcial,aswoulddeterminingtheireffectivenessforenhancingteachers’pedagogicaldesigncapacitiesforculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction(i.e.,abilitiestomobilizeresourceswhenmodifyingandenactinginstructionalmaterials)(Brown,2009).ImplicationsforNewHorizons:CulturallyResponsiveEngineeringEducationInAppendixD,AllStandards,allStudents,theFrameworkCommitteefortheNextGenerationScienceStandards(AchieveInc.,2013)contendthat“engineeringhasthepotentialtobeinclusiveofstudentswhohavetraditionallybeenmarginalizedinscienceasbeingrelevanttotheirlivesorfuture”(p.5).Theresultsofthisstudysupportthisclaimandalsosuggestadditionalbeneﬁtsofstudentsengaginginengineeringpracticesinculturallyrelevantcontexts.Thoughinfrequentlyencounteredwithclearculturallyresponsivepractices,whenpresent,engineering-speciﬁcpractices(DeﬁningProblemsandDesigningSolutions)fosteredculturalcompetenceandsocialaction,keytenetsofculturallyresponsivepedagogy(Gay,2010;Ladson-Billings,1995a).Often,thiswasthroughDesigningSolutionssuchaswhenacollectiveofK-12teachersandtheirstudentsdevelopedaninvasiveseaweedremovalandnativespeciesrestorationprograminaccordancewithrecommendationsfromlocalexpertsacrossmultipledisciplines(Chinn,2006).Additionally,instancesofculturallyrelevantinstructionwithengineeringtiesofferedgreatpotentialforstudentstousemathematicsandcomputationalthinking(e.g.,Fusco,2001;Lim&CalabreseBarton,2006).Giventhatculturallyresponsiveengineeringeducationisnewlyemergent,manyofthesameapproachesusedtoresearchculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwouldalsobeappropriate.Asstudentsofcolorengagewithengineeringpracticesinculturallyrelevantcontexts,whatpositiveacademicoutcomes(ifany)areproduced?Thiscouldbeinterrogatedacrossmultipledimensions,suchasthosewhohavestudiedidentities(e.g.,Carloneetal.,2011)andachievement(e.g.,O.Leeetal.,2008)pertainingtoculturallyrelevantandinquiry-basedscienceinstruction.SuchanagendawouldafﬁrmandcrystallizeclaimsmadeinNextGenerationScienceStandardsinevidence-basedways(AchieveInc.,2013).Toadvanceequityinscienceteachingandlearning,manyvoices,cultures,andlanguagesmustberepresented.Whileinquiry-basedscienceinstructioncanhelpstudentsofcolorachieveacademically,culturallyresponsiveapproachesareneededtovalidatetheirbackgrounds,challengeoppressivesystems,andovercomedeﬁcitperspectivesoftheirabilities(O.Lee&Buxton,2010).Byexposingthewaysthatinquiry-basedscienceandengineeringpracticescanintentionallybeusedinserviceofculturallyresponsiveinstruction,theresultsofthisstudyprovidedirectionforachievingtheequitablesciencelearningopportunitiesofwhichtheNRC(2012)advocated.Note1Acompletelistanddescriptionsofthe52studiesexaminedinthismetasynthesisisaccessibleonlineathttp://z.umn.edu/1d5bJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1169
ReferencesAbrams,E.,Yore,L.D.,Bang,M.,Brayboy,B.M.J.,Castagno,A.,Kidman,J.,...Yen,C.-F.(2014).Culturallyrelevantschoolinginscienceforindigenouslearnersworldwide.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.671–696).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.AchieveInc.(2013).Thenextgenerationsciencestandards.RetrievedMarch2016.Availableonlineat:http://www.nextgenscience.orgAikenhead,G.S.(2006).Scienceeducationforeverydaylife:Evidence-basedpractice.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Aikenhead,G.S.,&Huntley,B.(1999).Teachers’viewsonAboriginalstudentslearningwesternandAboriginalscience.CanadianJournalofNativeEducation,23(2),159–175.Albrecht,N.J.(2015).ViewsofscienceteachingandlearningbyimmigrantSomalielders:Perceptionsofconﬂictandacceptance(Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation).UniversityofMinnesota.Anderson,R.D.(2007).Inquiryasanorganizingthemeforsciencecurricula.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(pp.807–830).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Asay,L.D.,&Orgill,M.K.(2010).AnalysisofessentialfeaturesofinquiryfoundinarticlespublishedinTheScienceTeacher,1998–2007.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,21,57–79.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9152-9Ball,D.L.,&Cohen,D.K.(1996).Reformbythebook:Whatisormightbe—Theroleofcurriculummaterialsinteacherlearningandinstructionalreform?EducationalResearcher,25(9),6–8,14.Bang,M.,&Medin,D.(2010).Culturalprocessesinscienceeducation:Supportingthenavigationofmultipleepistemologies.ScienceEducation,94(6),1008–1026.Basu,S.J.,&CalabreseBarton,A(2007).Developingasustainedinterestinscienceamongurbanminorityyouth.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,44(3),466–489.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20143Boutte,G.,Kelly-Jackson,C.,&Johnson,G.L.(2010).Culturallyrelevantteachinginscienceclassrooms:Addressingacademicachievement,culturalcompetence,andcriticalconsciousness.Interna-tionalJournalofMulticulturalEducation,12(2),1–20.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2016a).Designingforculturallyresponsivescienceeducationthroughprofessionaldevelopment.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,38(3),470–492.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2016b).Thegrowingawarenessinventory:Buildingcapacityforculturallyresponsivescienceandmathematicswithastructuredobservationprotocol.SchoolScienceandMathematics,113(6),127–138.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2017).Theknowledgeandpracticesofhighschoolscienceteachersinpursuitofculturalresponsiveness.ScienceEducation,101(1),99–133.Brown,M.W.(2009).Theteacher-toolrelationship:Theorizingthedesignanduseofcurriculummaterials.InJ.Remillard,B.Herbel-Eisenmann,&G.M.Lloyd(Eds.),Mathematicsteachersatwork:Connectingcurriculummaterialsandclassroominstruction(pp.17–36).NewYork,NY:Routledge.Brotman,J.S.,&Moore,F.M.(2008).Girlsandscience:Areviewoffourthemesinthescienceeducationliterature.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(9),971–1002.Buxton,C.A.(2006).Creatingcontextuallyauthenticscienceina“low-performing”urbanelementaryschool.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,43(7),695–721.CalabreseBarton,A.,&Tan,E.(2009).Fundsofknowledgeanddiscoursesandhybridspace.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,46(1),50–73.CalabreseBarton,A.,Tan,E.,&Rivet,A.(2008).Creatinghybridspacesforengagingschoolscienceamongurbanmiddleschoolgirls.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,45(1),68–103.Capps,D.K.,Crawford,B.A.,&Constas,M.A.(2012).Areviewoftheempiricalliteratureoninquiryprofessionaldevelopment:Alignmentwithbestpracticesandacritiqueoftheﬁndings.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,23,291–318.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1170BROWN
Carlone,H.,Haun-Frank,J.,&Webb,A.(2011).Assessingequitybeyondknowledge-andskills-basedoutcomes:Acomparativeethnographyoftwofourth-gradereform-basedscienceclassrooms.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,48(5),459–485.Carlone,H.,&Johnson,A.(2012).Unpacking‘culture’inculturalstudiesofscienceeducation:Culturaldifferenceversusculturalproduction.EthnographyandEducation,7(2),151–173.Chang,J.-M.,Lee,H.,&Yen,C.-F.(2010).AlternativeconceptionsaboutburningheldbyAtayalindigenestudentsinTaiwan.InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation,8,911–935.Chigeza,P.(2011).Culturalresourcesofminorityandmarginalisedstudentsshouldbeincludedintheschoolsciencecurriculum.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,401–412.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9316-8Chinn,P.W.U.(2006).Preparingscienceteachersforculturallydiversestudents:Developingculturalliteracythroughculturalimmersion,culturaltranslators,andcommunitiesofpractice.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,1,367–402.Crawford,B.A.(2014).Frominquirytoscientiﬁcpracticesinthescienceclassroom.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.515–541).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Creswell,J.W.(2009).Researchdesign:Qualitative,quantitative,andmixedmethodsapproaches(3rded.).ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.Ferguson,R.(2008).Ifmulticulturalscienceeducationstandardsexisted,whatwouldtheylooklike?JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,19,547–564.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-008-9108-5Fusco,D.(2001).Creatingrelevantsciencethroughurbanplanningandgardening.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(8),860–877.GallardMartınez,A.J.(2011).Argumentationandindigenousknowledge:Socio-historicalinﬂuencesincontextualizinganargumentationmodelinSouthAfricanschools.CulturalStudiesinScienceEducation,6,719–723.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9358-yGay,G.(2002).Preparingforculturallyresponsiveteaching.JournalofTeacherEducation,53(2),106–116.Gay,G.(2010).Culturallyresponsiveteaching:Theory,research,andpractice(2nded.).NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Gee,J.P.(2005).Anintroductiontodiscourseanalysis:Theoryandmethod(2nded.).London,England:Routledge.Geier,R.,Blumenfeld,P.C.,Marx,R.W.,Krajcik,J.S.,Fishman,B.,Soloway,E.,&Clay-Chambers,J(2008).Standardizedtestoutcomesforstudentsengagedininquiry-basedsciencecurriculainthecontextofurbanreform.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(8),922–939.George,J.(2013).“Doyouhavetopack?”PreparingforculturallyrelevantscienceteachingintheCaribbean.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,35(12),2114–2131.Giroux,H.A.(2011).Oncriticalpedagogy.NewYork,NY:TheContinuumInternationalPublishingGroup.Gonzalez,N.,Moll,L.C.,&Amanti,C.(2005).Fundsofknowledge:Theorizingpracticesinhouseholds,communities,andclassrooms.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Grimberg,B.I.,&Gummer,E.(2013).Teachingsciencefromculturalpointsofintersection.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,50(1),12–32.Hagiwara,S.,CalabreseBarton,A.,&Contento,I.(2007).Culture,food,andlanguage:Perspectivesfromimmigrantmothersinschoolscience.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,2,475–515.https://doi.10.1007/s11422-007-9063-zHerbert,S.(2008).Collaterallearninginscience:Students’responsestoacross-culturalunitofwork.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,30(7),979–993.Hewson,M.G.,&Ogunniyi,M.B.(2011).Argumentation-teachingasamethodtointroduceindigenousknowledgeintoscienceclassrooms:Opportunitiesandchallenges.CulturalStudiesinScienceEducation,6,679–692.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9303-5JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1171
Howard,T.C.(2010).Whyraceandculturematterinschools:ClosingtheachievementgapinAmerica’sclassrooms.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Jeynes,W.H.(2007).Therelationshipbetweenparentalinvolvementandurbansecondaryschoolacademicachievement:Ameta-analysis.UrbanEducation,42(1),82–110.Johnson,C.C.(2011).Theroadtoculturallyrelevantscience:Exploringhowteachersnavigatechangeinpedagogy.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,48(2),170–198.Johnson,C.C.,&Marx,S.(2009).Transformativeprofessionaldevelopment:Amodelforurbanscienceeducationreform.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,20,113.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9127-xKelly-Jackson,C.P.,&Jackson,T.O.(2011).Meetingtheirfullestpotential:Thebeliefsandteachingofaculturallyrelevantscienceteacher.CreativeEducation,2(4),408–413.Ladson-Billings,G.(1994).Thedreamkeepers:SuccessfulteachersofAfricanAmericanchildren.SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.Ladson-Billings,G.(1995a).Towardatheoryofculturallyrelevantpedagogy.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,32(3),465–491.Ladson-Billings,G.(1995b).Butthat’sjustgoodteaching!Thecaseforculturallyrelevantpedagogy.TheoryIntoPractice,34(3),159–165.Laughter,J.C.,&Adams,A.D.(2012).Culturallyrelevantscienceteachinginmiddleschool.UrbanEducation,47(6),1106–1134.Lee,H.,Yen,C.-F.,&Aikenhead,G.(2012).Indigenouselementarystudents’scienceinstructioninTaiwan:IndigenousknowledgeandWesternscience.ResearchinScienceEducation,42,1183–1199.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9240-7Lee,J.,&Bowen,N.K.(2006).Parentinvolvement,culturalcapital,andtheachievementgapamongelementaryschoolchildren.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,43(2),193–218.Lee,O.(2004).TeacherchangeinbeliefsandpracticesinscienceandliteracyinstructionwithEnglishlanguagelearners.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,41(1),5–93.Lee,O.,&Buxton,C.A.(2010).Diversityandequityinscienceeducation:Research,policy,andpractice.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Lee,O.,Deaktor,R.,Enders,C.&Lambert,J.(2008).Impactofamultiyearprofessionaldevelopmentinterventiononscienceachievementofculturallyandlinguisticallydiverseelementarystudents.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(6),726–747.Lee,O.,Deaktor,R.A.,Hart,J.E.,Cuevas,P.,&Enders,C.(2005).Aninstructionalintervention’simpactonthescienceandliteracyachievementofculturallyandlinguisticallydiverseelementarystudents.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,42(8),857–887.Lim,M.,&CalabreseBarton,A.(2006).Sciencelearningandasenseofplaceinaurbanmiddleschool.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,1,107–142.McKinley,E.,&Gan,M.J.S.(2014).Culturallyresponsivescienceeducationforindigenousandethnicminoritystudents.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.284–300).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.Mensah,F.M.(2011).Acaseforculturallyrelevantteachinginscienceeducationandlessonslearnedforteachereducation.JournalofNegroEducation,80(3),296–309.Meyer,X.,&Crawford,B.A.(2011).Teachingscienceasaculturalwayofknowing:Mergingauthenticinquiry,natureofscience,andmulticulturalstrategies.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,525–547.Moje,E.B.,Collazo,T.,Carrillo,R.,&Marx,R.W.(2001).“Maestro,whatis‘quality?’”:Language,literacy,anddiscourseinproject-basedscience.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(4),469–498.Moje,E.B.,Ciechanowski,K.M.,Kramer,K.,Ellis,L.,Carrillo,R.,&Collazo,T.(2004).Workingtowardthirdspaceincontentarealiteracy:Anexaminationofeverydayfundsofknowledgeanddiscourse.ReadingResearchQuarterly,39(1),38–70.Nam,Y.,Roehrig,G.H.,Kern,A.,&Reynolds,B.(2012).PerceptionsandpracticesofculturallyrelevantscienceteachinginAmericanIndianclassrooms.InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation,11,143–167.Nashon,S.M.,&Anderson,D.(2013).InterpretingstudentviewsoflearningexperiencesinacontextualizedsciencediscourseinKenya.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,50(4),381–407.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1172BROWN
NationalResearchCouncil[NRC].(2012).AframeworkforK-12scienceeducation:Practices,crosscuttingconcepts,andcoreideas.CommitteeonaConceptualFrameworkforNewK-12ScienceEducationStandards.BoardofScienceEducation,DivisionofBehavioralandSocialSciencesandEducation.Washington,D.C.:TheNationalAcademiesPress.Noblit,G.W.,&Hare,D.(1988).Meta-ethnography.ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublishing.Ogunniyi,M.B.(2004).Thechallengeofpreparingandequippingscienceteachersinhighereducationtointegratescientiﬁcandindigenousknowledgesystemsfortheirlearners.SouthAfricanJournalofHigherEducation,18,289–304.Patchen,T.,&Cox-Petersen,A.(2008).Constructingculturalrelevanceinscience:Acasestudyoftwoelementaryteachers.ScienceEducation,92(6),994–101.Powell,R.,Cantrell,S.C.,Malo-Juvera,V.,&Correll,P.(2016).Operationalizingculturallyresponsiveinstruction:PreliminaryﬁndingsofCRIOPresearch.TeachersCollegeRecord,118,1–46.Powell,R.,Cantrell,S.,GallardoCarter,Y.,Cox,A.,Powers,S.,Rightmyer,E.C.,...Wheeler,T.(2012).CulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(revised).Lexington,KY:CollaborativeCenterforLiteracyDevelopment.Reveles,J.M.,&Brown,B.A.(2008).Contextualshifting:Teachersemphasizingstudents’academicidentitytopromotescientiﬁcliteracy.ScienceEducation,92(6),1015–1041.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20283Rodriguez,A.J.(2015).Whataboutadimensionofengagement,equity,anddiversitypractices?Acritiqueofthenextgenerationsciencestandards.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,52(7),1031–1051.Roehrig,G.H.,Dubosarsky,M.,Mason,A.,Carlson,S.,&Murphy,B.(2011).Welookmore,listenmore,noticemore:Impactofsustainedprofessionaldevelopmentonheadstartteachers’inquiry-basedandculturallyrelevantscienceteachingpractices.JournalofScienceEducationandTechnology,20,566–578.Strauss,A.,&Corbin,J.(1998).Basicsofqualitativeresearch:Techniquesandproceduresfordevelopinggroundedtheory(2nded.).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications,Inc.Tan,A.(2011).Homeculture,science,schoolandsciencelearning:Isreconciliationpossible?CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,559–567.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9343-5Thorne,S.E.(2012).Meta-synthesis.InL.M.Given(Ed.),TheSAGEencyclopediaofqualitativeresearchmethods(pp.511–513).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications,Inc.Timulak,L.(2014).Qualitativemeta-analysis.InU.Flick(Ed.),TheSAGEhandbookofqualitativedataanalysis(pp.481–496).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications.Tsurusaki,B.K.,CalabreseBarton,A.,Tan,E.,Koch,P.,&Contento,I.(2013).Usingtransformativeboundaryobjectstocreatecriticalengagementinscience:Acasestudy.ScienceEducation,97(1),1–31.Upadhyay,B.R.(2006).Usingstudents’livedexperiencesinanurbanscienceclassroom:Anelementaryschoolteacher’sthinking.ScienceEducation,90(1),94–110.U.S.CensusBureau.(2012).StatisticalabstractoftheUnitedStates:2012.Washington,DC:GovernmentPrintingOfﬁceAccessedonlineat:http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/education.htmlWalsh,D.,&Downe,S.(2005).Meta-synthesismethodforqualitativeresearch:Aliteraturereview.JournalofAdvancedNursing,50(2),204–211.Warren,B.,Ballenger,C.,Ogonowski,M.,Rosebery,A.S.,&Hudicourt-Barnes,J.(2001).Rethinkingdiversityinlearningscience:Thelogicofeverydaysense-making.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(5),529–552.Wilson,C.D.,Taylor,J.A.,Kowalski,S.M.,&Carlson,J.(2010).Therelativeeffectsandequityofinquiry-basedandcommonplacescienceteachingonstudents’knowledge,reasoning,andargumentation.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,47(3),276–301.Xu,J.,Coats,L.T.,&Davidson,M.L.(2012).Promotingstudentinterestinscience:TheperspectivesofexemplaryAfricanAmericanteachers.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,49(1),124–154.JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1173

Expert Answer

How does considering sociocultural aspects into assessment design support the validity argument? What might be good examples of socioculturally responsive assessments? please only cite this two readings, don't use other sources JOURNALOFRESEARCHINSCIENCETEACHINGVOL.54,NO.9,PP.1143–1173(2017)ResearchArticleAMetasynthesisoftheComplementarityofCulturallyResponsiveandInquiry-BasedScienceEducationinK-12Settings:ImplicationsforAdvancingEquitableScienceTeachingandLearningJulieC.BrownDepartmentofCurriculumandInstruction,STEMEducationCenter,UniversityofMinnesota,St.Paul,MinnesotaReceived29August2016;Accepted30April2017Abstract:Employingmetasynthesisasamethod,thisstudyexamined52empiricalarticlesonculturallyrelevantandresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingstodeterminethenatureandscopeofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepractices(i.e.,scienceandengineeringpracticesidentiﬁedintheNationalResearchCouncil’sFrameworkforK-12ScienceEducation).Theﬁndingsfromthisstudyindicateseveralareasofcomplementarity.Mostoften,theinquiry-basedpracticesObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation,ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions,andDevelopingandUsingModelswereusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstructionandassessment.Theuseanddevelopmentofmodels,inparticular,allowedstudentstoexplorescientiﬁcconceptsthroughfamilies’fundsofknowledgeandexplaincontentfromWesternscienceandIndigenousKnowledgeperspectives.Moreover,studentsfrequentlyAnalyzedandInterpretedDatawheninterrogatingsciencecontentinsociopoliticalconsciousness-raisingexperiences,suchasidentifyingpollutionandasthmaincidencesinanurbanareaaccordingtoneighborhoodlocation.Speciﬁcinquiry-basedpracticeswereunderutilizedwhenadvancingculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,though.Forexample,UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinkingandEngaginginArgumentfromEvidencewereinfrequentlyencountered.However,culturallyresponsiveengineering-relatedpracticesweremostoftenconnectedwiththese,andthus,representpotentialareasforfuturecomplementarity,particularlyastheUnitedStatesembracestheNextGenerationScienceStandards.Inconsideringinnovativedirectionsforadvancingequitablescienceeducation,severalpossibilitiesarediscussedinlightoftheﬁndingsofthisstudy.#2017WileyPeriodicals,Inc.JResSciTeach54:1143–1173,2017Keywords:culturallyresponsivescience;culturallyrelevantscience;inquiry-basedscience;metasynthesisThoughitisnotoftentreatedasaculturalphenomenon,scienceasitiscommonlytaughtinK-12settingshasasystemofacceptedpracticesforunderstandingandexplainingthenaturalworld,and,thushasculture.Whilecertainculturalelementsofscience(e.g.,askingquestionsabouttheworld)areuniversal,othersareattributedtoWesternthinkingandvalues(e.g.,usingempiricalcriteria)(Chang,Lee,&Yen,2010).Asaresult,studentsfromculturallyandlinguisticallydiversebackgroundsmay“bringdifferentinstructional,home,andcommunityknowledgebasesandDiscoursestobearontheclassroom”thatareoftencompeting(Mojeetal.,2004,p.41).IntheUnitedStates,thesecompetingDiscourses(language—communicatedCorrespondenceto:J.C.Brown;E-mail:jcbrown@umn.eduDOI10.1002/tea.21401Publishedonline3June2017inWileyOnlineLibrary(wileyonlinelibrary.com).#2017WileyPeriodicals,Inc. throughtalking,behaving,andwriting—thatisembeddedinparticularwaysofknowingtheworld,Gee,2005)increaseinscienceclassroomswhereBlack,Latino/a,NativeAmericanstudents,andEnglishlanguagelearnersaremorelikelytobetaught.Intheirreformreport,AFrameworkforK-12ScienceEducation,theNationalResearchCouncil(NRC,2012)contendsthatbyengagingstudentsininquiry-basedscienceeducation,equitablesciencelearningopportunitieswillresult.Thereisevidencethatinquiryexperiencesimprovetheacademicachievementofstudentsofcolor(Geieretal.,2008)anddiminishtheexpansionofachievementgapstypicallyseenbetweenstudentsofcolorandWhitestudents(Wilson,Taylor,Kowalski,&Carlson,2010).However,MeyerandCrawford(2011)positthatinquiry-basedscienceinstructionmay“challengestudents’culturalwaysofknowing”(p.525)whendevoidofculturalresponsiveness,or“usingtheculturalcharacteristics,experiences,andperspectivesofethnicallydiversestudentsasconduitsforteaching”(Gay,2002,p.106).GiventhatthemajorityofUnitedStates’school-agedpopulationwillbecomprisedofstudentsofcolorincomingyears(U.S.CensusBureau,2012),meaningfulracial,cultural,andlinguisticconnectionstoscienceinstructionarecrucial.Severalscholarshavedetailedstudiesdocumentingthebeneﬁtsofculturallyresponsivescienceinstructionforstudentsofcolor,suchas,positivescienceidentities,scientiﬁcliteracy,andcontentknowledge(Carlone,Haun-Frank,&Webb,2011;O.Lee,2004;Mojeetal.,2004).Withinthisresearchbase,somehavearguedthatthenatureandpracticesofculturallyresponsiveandWesternscienceareattimesirreconcilable,owingtoepistemologicaldifferences.Atthesametime,ithasalsobeensuggestedthatinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceinstructionarecomplementary(Johnson,2011).Inactuality,thereexistslimitedevidenceattestingtothis(Tan,2011).Consideringthepotentialofbothapproachesforimprovingthescienceacademicoutcomesofstudentsofcolor,acloserexaminationiswarranted.ThepurposeofthisstudywastousetheempiricalliteratureonculturallyrelevantandresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingstocharacterizethissupposed“complementarity,”whichIdeﬁneasinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivesciencepracticesbeingusedalongsideandinserviceofoneanothertoadvancesciencecontentand/ornatureofscienceunderstanding.Bydetermininginstancesofcomplementarity,practitioners,teachereducators,andresearcherscanbemoreknowledgeableandintentionalaboutcreatingequitable,rigoroussciencelearningexperiences.TheresearchquestionIsoughttoanswerwas:“Whatisthenatureandscopeofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducationinK-12settings?”Thispaperisdividedintofourmajorsections.First,Ibrieﬂydeﬁneandcharacterizehowinquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationareconceptualizedinthismanuscript.Second,Iintroducemetasynthesisastheguidingmethodforthisstudyinadditiontoarticulatingthestudyselectionandanalysisprocedures,whichincludesanidentiﬁcationofhowtheterms“culturallyresponsive”and“inquiry-based”scienceeducationwereoperationalized.Third,Ipresentﬁndingsbydescribingthelandscapeofthestudiesexaminedinthismetasynthesis,notinggeneraltrendsamongthem.Ithenreportonareasofcomplementaritymostfrequentlyobservedbeforehighlightingsalientcomplementingpracticesandconcludingwithadiscussionofpracticesunderutilizedinconjunctionwithoneanother.Fourth,IprovideimplicationsforadvancingequitablescienceteachingandlearningexperiencesacrossK-12settings.Inquiry-BasedScienceEducationSupportedbyanexpansiveresearchbaseontheknowledgepossessedbyexpertsandeffectivelearningexperiences,numerousscientists,scienceeducators,andpractitionershavetoutedinquiryastheepitomeofscienceteachingandlearningactivities.AlthoughhowitisdeﬁnedJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1144BROWN varies,inquirycanbeconsideredawayofengaginginsciencepractices(and,morerecently,engineering-relatedpractices)tolearnscientiﬁcconceptsandthenatureofscience.Assuch,itencompassesbothapedagogyandalearningoutcome(seeCrawford,2014forafullreview).Situatedinthena€ıverealismtradition,epistemologicalfoundationsofWesternscienceassume“thattheclaimsandrepresentationsmaynotbeactualone-to-onedepictionsofreality;buttheyarereasonablefacsimilesofitandtheprogressiontowardmoreexactingdepictions”(Abramsetal.,2014,p.675).Thus,inquiryisessentialtothescientiﬁcenterpriseasitsmethodsenablevalidclaimstobemadeaboutnaturalphenomena.Thoughtheliteraturehasarticulatedaspectsofinquiryovertime,thereisstillalackofconsensusleavingAnderson(2007)toassert,“inquiryisanimpreciseword...ithasdifferentmeaningsinvariedcontexts,andishardtoguesswhatparticularmeaningagivenspeakerhasinmindwhenthewordisused”(p.808).Mostrecently,theCommitteeonaConceptualFrameworkforNewK-12ScienceEducationStandards(NRC,2012)convenedtodeviseanewframeworkforscienceeducationexpectationsintheUnitedStatesthatreﬂected21stcenturyidealsandchallenges.Asetofeightscienceandengineeringpracticeswereproposedtodenotetheaspectsofinquiry(Table1).Reﬂectiveofcurrentunderstandingsofwhatitmeanstomeaningfullyengageinscienceandengineering-relatedpursuits,thepracticesofferanupdatedlookatinquiry.Yet,thepracticesarenotintendedtostandaloneasaproxyforinquiry.Rather,theFrameworkemphasizesthreedimensionsofscienceteachingandlearninginwhichthepracticesareintegratedwithcrosscuttingconcepts(applicableacrossthedisciplines,suchas,scale,patterns,structure,andTable1Attributesofinquiry-basedscienceinstructionaccordingtotheNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractices(pp.50–53)AttributeDescriptionAskingquestionsanddefiningproblemsPosingquestionsthatcanbeansweredempiricallyaboutencounteredphenomena,noteproblems,andtheirkeycomponentssoastoindicatepotentialsolutionpathwaysDevelopingandusingmodelsUsingandconstructingrepresentationsofnaturalphenomenatoexplainandpredict,ordetermineflawsinasystemandtestaspectsofaprototypePlanningandcarryingoutinvestigationsDevisingaplantoinvestigate(ortest)phenomenaofinterestanddecidingonappropriatedatacollectionproceduresandnecessaryinstrumentsAnalyzingandinterpretingdataUsingavarietyofapproachestoproperlyorganize,analyze,andinterpretcollecteddatasothatpatternscanbedeterminedandcomparedUsingmathematicsandcomputationalthinkingPerformingtaskssuchasstatisticalanalysis,simulationmanipulation,andmathematicalcalculationstorepresentkeyvariablesandexpresstheirrelationshipsConstructingexplanationsanddesigningsolutionsMakingevidence-basedclaimsaboutscientificcontentandconnectingtheseclaimstoexistingtheoriestoformulatearobustexplanationEngaginginargumentfromevidenceIdentifyingthestrengthsandlimitationsofclaimsmadeaboutscientificcontentaccordingtoavailableinformation,usingthisevidencetocritiquetheclaimsanddefendsuchassertionswithreasoningObtaining,evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationAccuratelycommunicatingscientificinformation—inwritingandorally—thathasbeenacquiredthroughinquiry,sciencetexts,andmathematicalcalculationsJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1145 function)anddisciplinarycoreideasinthephysical,life,andearthandspacesciences,aswellasengineering,technology,andapplicationsofscience.Since1980s,researchoninquiry-basedscienceexperiences—includingproblem-basedandproject-basedlearning—havereportedpositivestudentoutcomeswhenengagingininquiry,suchasgreaterscientiﬁcliteracy,criticalthinking,andpositiveattitudestowardscience(Crawford,2014).Inquirycannotbetreatedasaone-size-ﬁts-allpanacea,however,andlittleevidenceexistsofitsimpactonculturallyandlinguisticallydiverselearners(Geieretal.,2008;O.Lee,Deaktor,Hart,Cuevas,&Enders,2005).WhiletherevisedFrameworkanditsresultingNextGenerationScienceStandards(NGSS)(AchieveInc.,2013)haveattemptedtoimproveupontheirpredecessorwithrespecttoinclusivity,therearestillissuesrequiringattention.Usingsociotransformativeconstructivism(sTc)asatheoreticallenstoanalyzethesedocuments,Rodriguez(2015)critiquedtheFrameworkandNGSSfortheir(in)abilitytomeet“well-intendedgoals”forequityanddiversity.Whilecommendingstrengths—suchasorganizingsciencecontentaroundalearningprogressionsframework,asustainingemphasisondisciplinarycoreideas,makingequity-relatedissuesprominent,andfeaturingengineeringconnections—hequestioned,ifequityreallyisessential,whywasitnotintegrateddirectlyintotheFrameworkandNGSStothesamedegreeasengineering?Rodriguezcalledfora“dimensionofengagement,equityanddiversity”tocombatinequity,promoteculturalrelevance,andclosetheachievementgap.Giventhatinquirycontinuestobeheraldedasthegoldstandardformeaningfulsciencelearningexperiences,butthatengaginginitmayproducecompetingDiscoursesforculturallyandlinguisticallydiversestudents(Mojeetal.,2004),itstandsthatinquiry-basedsciencemaymarginalizeaspectsofthesestudents,includingtheiridentitiesassciencelearners(Carloneetal.,2011).Thus,effortsmustbemadetopromotegreaterequityininquiry-basedscienceeducationthanhavepreviouslybeenthecase.Culturallyresponsivepedagogicalapproachesmaybeonesuchwaytoaccomplishthis.Rodriguez(2015)arguedthat“noexampleswhatsoeverareprovided[intheFramework]forhowtomakethesciencecontentculturallyrelevantandinclusive”(p.1042).Thismetasynthesiswasadirectattempttobeginaddressingsuchacleargap.FoundationsofCulturallyResponsiveScienceEducationInthispaper,Iusetheterm“culturallyresponsivescienceeducation”todenotestudiesemployingLadson-Billings’(1995a)theoryofculturallyrelevantpedagogyorGenevaGay’s(2010)frameworkforculturallyresponsiveteaching.Bothemanatefromculturaldifferencetheory,whichassumesthattheculturalknowledge,practices,andbeliefsofstudentsthathavebeenhistoricallydenieddifferfromthedominantcultureofschools(Howard,2010).Itfollowsthatequitablelearningexperiencesrequirestudents’culturalandlinguisticbackgroundsbeengagedasresourcesforscienceinstruction,therebyeasingbordercrossingbetweenthedominantculturalpracticesofmainstreamschoolingandthosepracticedathome(Aikenhead,2006).Adheringtocriticaltheoryfoundations—which“takesasoneofitscentralprojectsanattempttobediscerningandattentivetothoseplacesandpracticesinwhichsocialagencyhasbeendeniedandproduced”(Giroux,2011,p.3)—culturallyrelevantandresponsivepedagogiesarefurtherconcernedwithemancipatinglearnersthroughinstructionthatofferssocial,political,and/orhistoricalcritiquetochallengehegemonicsystems.Thus,thetwoshareacommongoal:toimprovetheacademicsuccessofstudentsofcolorwhileafﬁrmingtheirexperiences,identities,andhistories.Reﬂectiveofitscriticalandculturaldifferencetheoreticalunderpinnings,Ladson-Billings(1995a)assertedthatculturallyrelevantteachersholdspeciﬁcpedagogicalprinciples;theydemandacademicsuccessoftheirstudents,laudculturalcompetenceasessentialtothissuccess,JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1146BROWN anddevelopsociopoliticalconsciousnessintheirstudentstoproblematizeoppressionandactaschangeagents.NotwithstandinghersolefocusonteachersofAfricanAmericanstudents,theexplicitconnectionfoundbetweenlearningandappreciationforcultureledLadson-Billingstoassertthatsuchprinciplescouldfostersuccessforallstudents.Thus,sheargued,culturallyrelevantpedagogyisindeed“justgoodteaching”thatissorarelyhappeningintheclassroomsofAfricanAmericanstudents(Ladson-Billings,1995b).Thoughnotconstructedasatheoreticalmodel,GenevaGay’s(2010)frameworkforculturallyresponsiveteachingistheoreticallygroundedand,thus,servesasmorethanasetofidealpractices.Howard(2010)asserted,“itiscenteredinfundamentalbeliefsaboutteaching,learning,students,theirfamilies,andtheircommunities,andanunyieldingcommitmenttoseestudentsuccessbecomelessrhetoricandmoreofareality”(p.67).Gay(2010)characterizedculturallyresponsiveteachingasvalidating,comprehensive,multidimensional,empowering,transformative,andemancipatory.Culturallyresponsiveteachersvalidatestudentsbyacknowledgingtheirfamily-andcommunity-basedfundsofknowledge(Gonzalez,Moll,&Amanti,2005)andincorporatingmulticulturalresourcesintothecurriculum.Theyalsoprovideacomprehensiveandmultidimen-sionaleducationbypurposefullydevelopingstudents’attitudesandvaluesinadditiontocontentknowledge.Asaresult,“success”comprisesoutcomessuchas“culturalcompetence,criticalsocialconsciousness,politicalactivism,andresponsiblecommunitymembership”(Gay,2010,p.33).Itstransformativeandemancipatorynaturesarisefromacommitmenttoconfrontingoppression,powerdifferentials,andthedevelopmentofsocialconsciousness.Ofthis,Gay(2010)arguedthatnotonlyshouldIndigenousandculturallybasedknowledgebemadeaccessiblewhenstudyingcontent,itshouldbetreatedwithequalmerit.Thus,epistemologicalunderpinningsofculturallyresponsiveteachingaresituatedwithinarelativistparadigm,whereknowledgeisfoundedupon“individualinterpretationsbasedonpersonalandlivedexperiencestobejudgedbytheproposer”(Abramsetal.,2014,p.675).Withinscienceeducation,theseframeworkshavebeenappliedtostudiesexaminingtheinclusionofculturallyspeciﬁcknowledgeintosciencecurricula,thepracticesandknowledgeofteachers,andtheperspectivesofstudentstaughtthroughculturallyresponsiveinstruction(Brown&Crippen,2017).Severalstudieshavedepictedlearninginculturallyresponsiveenvironmentsthatalsoinvolvedstudentsininquiry-basedscience.Commonly,thiswasaccomplishedthroughlocallybased,issue-orientedscenariosthatformedthebackdropforscientiﬁcinvestigations.Theseissuesoftenhadsociopoliticalconnections,suchasrisingasthmaratesininner-cityenvironments(Mensah,2011).Asaresult,studentsoftenusedinquiry-basedsciencepracticestoexplore,explain,andchallengescience-relatedissues.Theoreticallyspeaking,inquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivesciencelearningexperiencesareideal.Inreality,documentedexamplesarerareandincomplete(Brown&Crippen,2016a;Crawford,2014).Forthesamereason,ongoingdebatesoftheirreconcilableepistemologicalincompatibilitybetweenthetwo(Abramsetal.,2014)riskbeingout-of-touchwithactualinstancesofculturallyresponsiveand/orinquiry-basedscienceinstructioninK-12settings.Becausescholarssuggestthatinquiryandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationhavecommonfeatures,themotivationforthisstudywasadesiretousetheexistingliteraturetobetterunderstandtheircomplementarity.MethodThispaperreportstheresultsofametasynthesisthatwasconductedtoidentifyanypatternsassociatedwiththecomplementarityofculturallyresponsive-andinquiry-basedscienceinstructioninthecurrentempiricalliterature.Inthissection,IdeﬁnemetasynthesisandbrieﬂyJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1147 discussitsoriginsasamethodology.Ithendistinguishmetasynthesisfromatraditionalliteraturereview,andconcludebyidentifyingtensionsassociatedwiththemethodology.Metasynthesisisaformofresearchintegrationstudyinwhichsecondaryanalysesareperformedonrelevant,extant(oftenqualitative)empiricalliteraturetoaddressaparticularresearchquestion.Theresearchquestion“stemsfromaneedtoreviewaparticularﬁeldofstudyinordertoprovideacomprehensiveanswerthatgoesbeyondasinglestudy”(Timulak,2014,p.486).Hence,selectedstudiesshouldbeinter-relatedamongatopicorconstruct.Metasynthesishasbeenjustiﬁedthroughtheargumentthat,takenalone,qualitativestudieshavelimitedimpactbecausetheyaresmall-scaleandrichlycontextualized.Giventhislocalizednature,however,itisessentialtoretainandconsidertheuniquecontextsoforiginalstudiesthroughoutthemetasyn-thesisprocess.Thus,ﬁndings,whilesynthesizedacrossstudiestoprovideamorecomprehensivepicture,shouldcontainrichcontextdescriptionswhenappropriate(Thorne,2012).Becausetheintentofmetasynthesisisusingﬁndingsfromexistingstudiestoconstructmorecomprehensiveandsubstantiveclaimsaboutaspeciﬁcphenomenonthanwhatisaffordedbytheindividualinvestigationsthemselves,itisnotthesameasaliteraturereview.Traditionalliteraturereviews,Timulak(2014)argues,“lackasystematicapproachtotheevaluationandsynthesisoftheresearchstudiesexaminingthesamephenomenon/a”(p.481).Whileanexhaustiveand/orcriticalliteraturereviewmayindeedsynthesizeasetofideasaroundaparticularphenomenon(e.g.,Brotman&Moore,2008),ametasynthesisdiffersinthesystematicproceduresusedtogatherandanalyze“rawdata.”Theseproceduresaredetailedintheupcomingsections.Despiteitspotentialutility,therearealsotensionsassociatedwithmetasynthesis.Onesuchtensionpertainstoitssynthesizingnature.Giventhatqualitativeresearch,generallyspeaking,intentionallycaptureslocalized,situatedknowledge,theactofgeneralizingﬁndingsacrossstudiesiscontradictorytotheverynatureofmuchqualitativeresearch(Timulak,2014).Asecond,relatedtensionliesinthedeconstructiveaspectsofmetasynthesis.Inotherwords,becausetheactionofmetasynthesisis“scratchingbelowthesurface”(Thorne,2012,p.513)oforiginalstudiestoconstructnewknowledge,theconclusionsdrawnfrommetasynthesesmaybecritiqued,astheyaretheresultofaresearcher’sinterpretationofthedata.Tolessenthisconcern,WalshandDowne(2005)suggestreadersconsiderthisactionas“openingupspacesfornewinsightsandunderstandingstoemerge,ratherthanoneinwhichtotalizingconceptsarevaluedoverrichnessandthicknessofdescription”(p.205).Itisalsowhyestablishingtrustworthinessoftheresearchprocessisfundamental.Givenitsstrengthsandlimitations,metasynthesisisconsideredavalidendeavorwhenaclearneedfornovelunderstandingaboutaparticularphenomenonhasbeensuggestedbytheexistingliteratureandifconclusionsretainthecontextofindividualstudieswhenpossible.Hence,conclusionsshouldyieldabetterunderstandingofagivenphenomenonacrossaﬁeldofstudywhilepreservingtheintentoftheoriginalstudies.DataCollection/StudySelectionMetasynthesisisasystematizedapproachtoconductingresearch.Assuch,therearecommonlyacceptedproceduresforcollectingandanalyzingextantliteraturetoproducenovelﬁndings.Theprocesstypicallybeginsbyﬁrstevaluatingifthereisasufﬁcientbodyofpublishedstudiesintheﬁeldtowarrantmetasynthesis.Ifadequate,clear,defensibleinclusionandexclusioncriteriashouldbeestablishedforselectingtheappropriatedata(Thorne,2012).BecauseIwasinterestedinexaminingthecomplementarynatureofinquiry-basedscienceexperiencesinstudiespertainingtotheframeworksofculturallyrelevantpedagogyandculturallyresponsiveteaching(hereafterreferredtoas“culturallyresponsive”),thiswasdirectlyreﬂectedinmyinclusioncriteria.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1148BROWN Severalmetasynthesistscallforstudiestobeappraisedforqualitybeforebeingselectedasdatasources.Thismayincludeanevaluationofhowwellstudyﬁndingsreﬂecttheirascribedmethodologiesorthelevelofdetailcontainedwithinﬁndings(Timulak,2014).Ultimately,thedecisiontoexcludestudiesisatthediscretionoftheresearcheranddependsupontheaimsofthemetasynthesis.WalshandDowne(2005)state,“insomecasesthiswholeissue[ofappraisal]hasbeenby-passedwiththejustiﬁcationthattherigourofindividualstudiesislessimportantthantheattempttobeasinclusiveaspossible”(p.208).OfprimaryconcerntomewasthatstudiesdepictculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingsand,secondarily,containevidenceofinquiry-basedlearningoccurringinthoseculturallyresponsivecontexts.Hence,initialstudyappraisalwasguidedbythefollowinginclusioncriteria:Culturallyresponsivescienceeducationwasa“centralfeature”ofthestudy(i.e.,usedastheguidingframework,containedresearchquestionsspeciﬁctoculturalresponsiveness,and/orreportedﬁndingsonculturallyresponsiveeducation);Althoughtherewasnorequirementthatinquirywasexplicitlystatedinthearticlenorthatitwasa“centralfeature”(aswithculturallyresponsivescienceeducation),tobeconsidered“inquiry-based”thestudymustcontainevidenceoflearnersengagedinatleasttwoNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesastheyexploredsciencecontentand/orthenatureofscience;StudiesoccurredinorpertainedtoK-12scienceeducationacrossformaland/orinformallearningenvironments;andStudieswerepublishedintheperiodbetween1994(whentheterm“culturallyrelevantpedagogy”wasintroducedbyLadson-Billingsinherbook,Thedreamkeepers)andJune,2016.Iselectedtheinquirythreshold(ofatleasttwoNRC[2012]practices)tobeconsistentwiththelevelofinquiry-basedpracticesfoundbyAsayandOrgill(2010)intwodecades’worthofarticlesintheNationalScienceTeachers’Association(NSTA)publication,TheScienceTeacher.Theauthorsfoundthatthelargestpercentageofarticlesfeaturinginquirycontainedtwopractices.Thisthresholdwasalsointendedtobefairtoselectedstudies,asCrawford(2014)acknowledges,“Morethanadecadeintothe21stcentury,manyresearchersclaimthatinquiryisnotverycommonlyobservedandmostcertainlyisnotthecentralorganizingthemeinmostscienceclassrooms”(p.516).Hence,Iusetheterm“inquiry-based”whenexploringcomplementarity.Thepresenceandlevelofinquirywasmorethoroughlyaccountedforandinterrogatedduringtheanalysisphases.Usingtheseinclusioncriteria,thedataselectionprocessoccurredintwoseparatestages,withthesecondstagereﬂectingStraussandCorbin’s(1998)notionoftheoreticalsamplinginwhichdatacollectionis“basedonconceptsthatemergedfrom[earlier]analysisandthatappeartohaverelevancetotheevolvingtheory”(p.202),asopposedtolimitingsamplingtoapredeterminedsetofstudies.Intheﬁrststage,Isearchedacademicdatabases(AcademicSearchPremier,ERIC,EducationFullText)forempiricalarticleswithkeywordssuchas“culturallyrelevant,”“culturallyresponsive,”“scienceeducation,”and/or“science.”Usingthesamekeywords,Ialsoconductedajournal-by-journalsearchacrosspremierscienceeducationjournals,including:JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,ScienceEducation,CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,ResearchinScienceEducation,InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,JournalofScienceEducationandTechnology,andJournalofScienceTeacherEducation.Additionally,Isearchedauthoritativeacademicjournalsnotspeciﬁctoscienceeducation,amongthemAmericanEducationalResearchJournalandUrbanEducation.Thisﬁrststagegenerated62possiblestudies.Myinitialreadingofthestudiesrevealedthat,whilemostofthearticlesyieldedfromtheJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1149 journal-by-journalsearchwereappropriate(and,thus,includedinthismetasynthesis),manystudiesfromthegeneralacademicdatabasesearchhadtobeexcludedbecausetheycoveredtopicsthatwere“culturallyrelevant”and/or“culturallyresponsive”butnotcontainedwithinK-12scienceeducationsettings(e.g.,socialstudieseducation,highereducation,publichealthspaces).Twoadditionalstudiesreportingonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwereexcludedbecausetheydidnotmeetthecriterionforinquiry-basedpractices.Severalwereconceptualreportsandnotempiricalarticles;thus,theywerealsoexcluded.Filteredforappropriateness,29articleswereincludedasdatasourcesfromthisﬁrststage.AsIreadthroughthesearticlesforgeneraltrends,twothingsstoodout:(i)certainrelatedperspectiveswerenotwidelyrepresented(e.g.,thirdspace,TraditionalEcologicalKnowledge)and(ii)emergentpatterns—suchastheuseofIndigenousviewsofnaturalphenomenainformaleducationspaces—indicatedthattheseperspectiveswereneededtoadequatelyrepresenttheﬁeld.WalshandDowne(2005)acknowledgethat,dueto“non-availabilityofmanyqualitativeaccounts,searchstrategiesmustaugmentelectronicsearcheswithmoretraditionalmethodsofreviewing,includingback-trackingofreferences”(p.206).Thus,Ienteredasecondstageofdatacollectiontogathermoreresources.IsearchedthereferencelistsofthetwoHandbookofResearchonScienceEducationchapterspertainingtoculturallyresponsivescienceeducation—McKinleyandGan(2014)andAbramsetal.(2014).Throughthisapproach,50additionalpossiblestudiesdemonstratingculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settingswereidentiﬁed.Often,theterms“culturallyrelevant”or“culturallyresponsive”werefoundinthetitlesoftheseworks.Additionally,althoughtopicssuchas“fundsofknowledge,”“culturallysustainingpedagogy,”and“instructionalcongruence”werenotmyexplicitfocus,theywereattimespresentintheempiricalarticlesidentiﬁed.Onrareoccasions,articlesalsoreportedresultsofsecondaryanalysesofexistingempiricalwork(e.g.,Carlone&Johnson,2012)orwerepresentedinforums(e.g.,Chigeza,2011).Aswiththeﬁrststage,becauseIwasinterestedinidentifyingactualexamplesofculturallyresponsivescienceteachingandlearningthatthencontainedelementsofinquiry-basedinstruction,Iexcludedworkthatdidnotallowforcodingdirectevidenceofthis,suchas,positionpapersandempiricalstudiesreportingonlysurveyresultsand/orteachers’perceptions.Threestudiesthatreportedonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwereexcludedfromthesampleatthistimebecausetheydidnotcontainadequateevidenceofinquiry-basedpractices.Furthermore,althoughtheyreportedpositiveimpactsofculturallyresponsivescienceeducationonstudentandteacheroutcomes,somearticlesemployingquantitativeresearchmethodswereexcludedbecausetheyofferedlittledirectevidenceneededtoaddressmyresearchquestion.Lastly,thoughdissertationtheseswereoccasionallyreferredtointheHandbookchapters,theywerenotincludedinthismetasynthesis.Halfofthestudiesfromthissecondstagewereexcludedduetoaforementionedreasons,leaving23studiestobeselectedasdata.Theﬁnalsampletotaled52studiesmeetingthecriteriaforculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwithevidenceofinquiry-basedsciencebeingpracticedinK-12settings.DescriptionsofthesestudiesareavailableonlineinaStudySummariesAppendix.1Thedatasetforthisstudywasconstrainedbythekeywordsearchandinclusionandexclusioncriteria.AlthoughIfollowedproceduresadvocatedbymetasynthesists,itisunlikelythatIgatheredeverysourcereportingonculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settings.Thus,ﬁndingsaredelimitedtothespeciﬁcstudiescontainedwithinthismetasynthesis.Toallowforanextensivesearch,theinclusioncriteriadidnotrequireasstrictaqualitylevelwhenitcametostudies’depictionsofculturallyresponsiveand/orinquiry-basedscienceascouldhavebeenifthatweretheprimaryaimofthismetasynthesis.Inotherwords,Idonotclaimthateachstudybeconsideredanexemplar.Nonetheless,myinitialreadingconﬁrmedthatthearticlescontainedJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1150BROWN valuableexamplesofequitablelearningexperiences.Havingbeenpublishedinpeer-reviewedacademicjournals,eacharticlehadalsopreviouslybeenvettedbyexpertsintheirrespectiveareas.IinvitethereadertofurtherevaluatearticlequalityforthemselvesthroughthedescriptionsprovidedintheStudySummariesAppendix.DataAnalysisTheunitsofanalysisforthismetasynthesisareteachingandlearningexperiences—informalandinformalK-12settings—thatcanbecharacterizedassimultaneouslycontainingculturallyresponsive-andinquiry-basedsciencepracticeswhileadvancingscienceunderstanding.Toprepareandanalyzethedata,IfollowedatechniquearticulatedbyNoblitandHare(1988),whichcallsforthesystematiccomparisonandtranslationofstudiesoverseveralphases.First,Ire-readthroughthestudiestodeterminetheirrelatednessaccordingtokeyconstructs,methodologiesemployed,contexts,anddominantthemesinthereportedﬁndings.Irecordedsimilaritiesanddifferencesnotedacrossstudiesaccordingtotheseparameters.Theseresultsweretabulatedintwolocations:TheStudySummariesAppendixandStudiesDemographictable(Table4,Findingssection).Oncethisprocesswascompleted,Ithenbegan“translatingthestudiesintooneanother”(Noblit&Hare,1988,p.28),wherethemeaningandﬁndingsofindividualstudiesare“folded”intooneanothersothatamoreholisticpictureofthephenomenoncanbederivedacrossstudies.BecauseIwasinterestedindeterminingifcomplementaritybetweeninquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceexperiencesexistedacrossthestudies,allevidencepassageswereverbatimexcerptsfromeithertheFindingsorResultssectionsofarticles.Althoughauthors’interpretationsareindeedvalid,theywerenotcountedasdataunlesstherewasadditionaldirectevidencethatapracticeoccurred(e.g.,observedclassroompracticewasdocumented,originalparticipantquotewasprovided,transcribedexchangebetweenteacherandstudentwasreported).Ibeganthetranslationprocessbyapplyingadeductivecodingschemebuiltonaprioricodesassignedasindicatorsofculturallyresponsiveinstructionandinquiry-basedscience.TheeightNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesservedasindicatorsofinquiry-basedscienceinstruction(refertoTable1).Asmentionedearlier,inordertomeetthe“inquiry-based”threshold,eachstudyneededtoﬁrstcontainevidenceofatleasttwopracticesbeingusedtodevelopunderstandingofscientiﬁccontentand/ornatureofscience.Oncethiscriterionwassatisﬁed,anydirectevidenceofascienceandengineeringpracticeusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstructioncouldbecoded.Torepresentculturallyresponsiveinstruction,IusedtheCulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(CRIOP)(Powelletal.,2012).CRIOPisavalidatedprotocolthatoperationalizesCRPacrosssevenpillars:ClassroomRelationships,FamilyCollaboration,Assessment,Curriculum/PlannedLearningExperiences,Pedagogy/Instruction,Discourse,andSociopoliticalConsciousness(Table2).ThereisnoclearthresholdforculturallyresponsiveinstructionaccordingtotheCRIOP(Powelletal.,2016).Thus,inadditiontotheinclusioncriteria,eacharticlewasexaminedtoensureitcontainedevidenceofatleasttwoCRIOPpillars.Previously,IhaveusedtheCRIOPtoexaminepreservicesecondaryscienceandmathematicsteachers’attentiontoculturallyresponsiveinstructionalelementsincourseartifacts(Brown&Crippen,2016b)andtoevaluatehighschoollifescienceteachers’practices(Brown&Crippen,2017).ThedecisiontousetheCRIOPandNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticestocharacterizeculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedinstruction,respectively,wastwofold:eachistheproductofsynthesesofsigniﬁcantandtimelyliteratureintheirrespectiveareas;and,particularlyforCRP,eachprovidesoperationaldeﬁnitionsofkeyconstructelements,makingoccasionallynebulousconstructsmoreconcreteanddirectlymeasurable.Infact,theCRIOPsharesseveralsimilaritieswithRodriguez’s(2015)proposeddimensionforengagement,equity,JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1151 anddiversity,suchasincludingsociallyrelevantsciencecontent,usingstudent-centeredpedagogicalstrategies,providingstudentchoiceinactivitiesandwaystodemonstrateknowledge,andincludingfamilyinlearningexperiences.However,becausetheCRIOPwasoriginallyconstructedandvalidatedforuseasanobservationprotocol,notasaninstrumentforliteratureevaluation,therearelimitationstoitsuseforthisstudy.Onesuchlimitationpertainstohowthedegreeofculturalresponsivenessisaccounted.Normally,CRIOPindicatorsareratedona1–4scale,rangingfromNotatAlltoToaGreatExtent,whichallowsclaimstobemadeaboutthe“richness”ofateacher’sculturallyresponsivepracticesduringinstruction.Withthearticles,however,itwasnotpossibletocodedegreeofculturalresponsivenessaccordingtothisscale.Instead,tomeasure“culturalresponsiveness,”Iidentiﬁedexcerpts(i.e.,verbatimsectionsfromtheFindings/Resultsportionsofthe52studies)thatdemonstratedaCRIOPpillar,codedthemaspresentbytheirpillar,andconstructedannotationsdescribingtheirdegreesofpresenceinamorequalitativefashion.IreadthroughtheFindings/Resultssectionsofeacharticle,ﬁrstholistically,andthenline-by-line.Ibegantheﬁrstroundofcodingbyidentifyingexcerptsthatdemonstratedculturallyresponsiveinstructionviatheprocedurementionedabove.Ithenre-enteredthearticlesforasecondroundofcoding,thistimelookingonlyforevidenceofNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractices.Next,Iisolatedthoseexcerptsidentiﬁedduringrounds1and2,thistimeTable2AttributesofculturallyresponsiveinstructionaccordingtotheCulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(CRIOP)(Powelletal.,2012,pp.1–12)Attribute(Pillar)DescriptionClassroomrelationshipsCare,respect,andculturallycongruentinteractionsarepresent;highexpectationsforallstudentsareevidentandsupportedthroughinstructionalscaffolds;studentsworktogetherproductivelyandefficientlytowardacleargoalFamilycollaborationAnequitablepartnershipisestablishedamongparents/familyandteacher;familyfundsofknowledgeareleveragedasresourcesuponwhichtosupportstudentlearningAssessmentFormativeassessment(e.g.,think-pair-share,journalentries)isusedtodeterminestudents’potentialforlearningcontent,gaugeunderstanding,andmodifyinstruction;assessmentsareinclusiveandallowstudentstoself-assess,developevaluationcriteria,anddemonstratelearninginmanywaysCurriculum/plannedlearningexperiencesMaterialsdepictdiverseexperiences,perspectives,andcontainreal-worldconnections;opportunitiesforstudentstopresentandvalidatediverseviewsarebuiltintomaterials,asaresupportsforconnectingcontenttostudents’backgroundsPedagogy/instructionActivitiesareactive,meaningful,andpromotehighstudentengagement;teacherbuildsonstudents’“culturaldatasets”andusesvariousstrategiestoassiststudentsinlearningcontent;studentshavesomechoiceinassignmentsDiscourseAvarietyofdiscourseprotocolsareemployed(e.g.,interactivejournals,smallgroupconversation)topromotestudentparticipation;studentsspeakinhomediscoursewhenappropriateandarealsosupportedinextendeduseofcontent-authenticlanguagepracticesSociopoliticalconsciousnessStudentsexploresocialjustice-andcommunity-relatedissues(e.g.,racism,poverty,inequitableaccesstoservices)andareencouragedtoactivelyaddresssuchproblemsJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1152BROWN codingforevidenceofagivenCRIOPpillarandNRC(2012)practiceoccurringtogether.Iconstructedannotationsdescribingthenatureofcomplementarity(Table3).Theannotationswereimportantforthenextanalysisphase,allowingmetolookacrossthedatamoreholisticallyfortrends.Afterthe52sourcesweredeductivelycoded,Icountedthenumberofexcerptsexhibitingcomplementarity.Agivenexcerptmayhavecontainedmultiplecomplementingpractices,aswasthecasewithUpadhyay(2006)andBasuandCalabreseBarton(2007)(Table3).However,eachtimetwopractices(oneculturallyresponsiveandoneinquirybased)werefoundtobecomplementing,itwasrecordedinitsrespectivecellinatabledepictingthebreakdownofCRIOPpillarsfoundwithinthespeciﬁcNRC(2012)practices.Forinstance,theexcerptfromBasuandCalabreseBarton(2007)wastalliedintwolocations:onceinthecellwherePedagogyintersectedPlanningandCarryingOutInvestigationsandonceinthecellwherePedagogyintersectedObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation.ThistablebecamethefoundationforFigure1,presentedlaterintheFindingssection.Additionally,coding“clusters”(threeormoreculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedpracticespresenttogetheratthesametime)wererecordedinmemos,aidingdataorganization,andinterpretation.Ialsokeptmemostocaptureanyemergingpatternsortrendsamongthedatasources.AccordingtoStraussandCorbin(1998),memos—or“theresearcher’srecordofanalysis,thoughts,interpretations,questions,anddirectionsforfurtherdatacollection”(p.110)—assistwiththeprogressionofrawdatatotheoreticalinsights.NoblitandHare(1988)alsorecognizedthatmemosassistwithholisticinterpretation.Assuch,thereviewingandsortingofmemosandannotationsintoabstractcategorieswasacentralelementoftheﬁnalphaseofthismetasynthesis,thatofsynthesizingthetranslationsintoamorecomprehensivepiece.Thepurposeofthisphasewasto“elucidatemorereﬁnedmeanings,exploratorytheoriesandnewconcepts”(Walsh&Downe,2005,p.209).Hence,IusedtheﬁrstanalysisphaseresultstodescribeconditionsunderwhichpracticessurfacedinK-12settings.Tomovetowardabstractionofnotablethemesacrossthestudies,IstartedbyisolatingtheNRC(2012)practicesmost-andleast-frequentlyencounteredalongsideCRIOPpillars.Itreatedeachseparatelyatﬁrst,examiningthenatureoftheircomplementarities.DuringthisprocessIaskedquestionsofthedata,suchas,underwhatconditionswasObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationpresentalongsideSociopoliticalConsciousness?Wasthisconsistentacrossallstudyexcerpts,orpresentonlyinisolatedinstances?What,ifany,otherculturallyresponsivepracticeswerepresent?Whatwastheinstructionalgoalduringthistime?Withwhomdidtheseexperiencesoccur(gradebands)andforwhatpurpose(s)?Thisprocessallowedforunexpectedpatternsandthemestobeuncovered.Icontinuedinterrogatingthedatainthismannerforinstanceswhensalientcomplementingpracticeswerepresent.Forexample,aidedbymymemosandannotations,IexploredwhetherthedataindicatedthatEngaginginArgumentfromEvidenceoccurredmoreofteninsecondaryspaceswhenalongsideculturallyresponsivepractices,andwhetherornotPlanningandCarryingOutInvestigationswaslargelypresentininformallearningenvironmentsthatofferedtheluxuryoftimeandnomandatedcurriculum.Oncethemeswereestablished,Iveriﬁedtheirstrengthacrosstheoveralldatasetthroughaconstantcomparativeprocess(Strauss&Corbin,1998)thatwasfurtherconﬁrmedbythechart.Thesethemeswerewrittenintoseparatesummarysheets,whichbecamethefoundationforwritingﬁndings.EstablishingTrustworthinessIemployedtwoacceptedstrategiestoensuretrustworthiness.First,acolleagueandIengagedintworoundsofindependentlycodingasubsetofstudiesaccordingtotheaprioricodestoJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1153 Table3ExcerptcodingexampleswithannotationsCodesExcerptAnnotationCRIOP:Oneofthestudentsaskedwhybabyfoodshavealotofmilkproducts;anotherstudentaskedwhybabyfoodsareeitherliquidorlikeporridge.Janethenfacilitatedadiscussiononwhatkindsoffoodthestudentsateeachdayandwhetherthefoodwasanimalproductorplantproduct.Theydiscussedtheirdietbasedontheirfoodsourcesandhowandwhytheywouldchangethediet.Duringthisclass,theintegrationofstudents’experiencesandJane’sexperiencesplayedamajorroleinguidingthelessonanddiscussionsthatfollowed(Upadhyay,2006,p.105).Thisisaclearexampleofhowstudentwonderingsdrivelessoncontent...althoughherstudentsweren’taskedtotabulatetheirresponses,Janedidaskthemtoshareandbegintoanalyzetheir“data”(whattheyateandifitwasanimal-orplant-based)astheydiscussedchangestheywouldmakebasedontheirinterpretationsofthedatatheyshared.Thisexperiencehelpedstudentsstudyfoodfarmingandharvestingpractices,[whichwas]partofthegreater[LiFE]unit...They’re[PedagogyandAnalyzingandInterpretingData]complementingsincesheactivelybuildsontheirexperiencestoassisttheminanalyzing“data”(foodseaten)accordingtomultipleattributes(kindeaten,plantoranimalproduct,howoften)...Janescaffoldedthediscussiontoallowmultipleperspectivestobeshared(pillar6[Discourse]),andshepromotedacademicconversation(atelementarylevel)aroundameaningfulandfamiliartopic.Idon’tyetfullyknowwhich/howmanystudentsparticipatedintheensuingdiscussion.(recordedon1/29/16)PedagogyDiscourseNRC(2012)practice:AnalyzingandinterpretingdataCRIOP:Whenstudyingﬁshbehavior,Neilcreatedaseriesofexperimentsandobservationshewantedtoconductontheﬁshandoftencametovisittheﬁshduringrecess,lunch,andafter-schooltogatheradditionaldata.[Hispartner]Gabrieldecidedtostudytheﬁshbybuildingananatomicalmodel,bothoutofclayandaluminum(Basu&CalabreseBarton,2007,p.484).ForateachingorlearningexperiencetobeculturallyresponsiveinitsPedagogy,itmustfosterstudentbuy-inandownership.Studentsshouldhaveclearchoiceinwhichlearningexperiencestopursueandhowtheywanttopursuethem.NeilpreferredtoeitherworkaloneorwithGabriel,asopposedtoworkinginlargergroups.Theexperiencemustalsobeexploratoryandallow“student-generatedquestions[to]formthebasisforfurtherstudyandinvestigation”(Powelletal.,2012,p.9).TheseexperienceswerepresentforNeilandgavehimthespace(andarguablymotivation,astheafterschoolprogramwascompletelyvoluntary)torepeatedlydesignandimplementexperimentstostudyaspectsoffishbehavior,akeyNOS[natureofscience]element.PedagogyNRC(2012)practice:PlanningandcarryingoutinvestigationsObtaining,evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1154BROWN determineourlevelofcodingconsistency.Thissubsettotaledsixstudies,withthreestudiesindependentlycodedduringeachroundfollowedbyadiscussionofourresults.Eachtime,wemettosharetheexcerptswecodedashavingaspectsofinquiryenactmentandelementsofculturallyresponsiveinstruction,aswellasexcerptsthatwerelesscertaintous.Wealsodiscussedourrationaleforcodingtheexcerptsaswedid,andreconciledanydifferencesamongourchoiceswhenpossible.Ourintercoderreliabilityforthesetworoundswascalculatedas76%and88%,respectively,indicatingadequatereliabilityoverall(Creswell,2009).Ialsoaimedtoestablishcredibility,which,fromthemetasynthesistraditionmeans“faithfulnessinhandlingthedatasothatitremainstruetoitssource[suchthat]theoriginalresearchparticipantsshouldbeabletorecognizetheirexperiencesinthemeta-synthesis”(Walsh&Downe,2005,p.209).ThiswasattemptedthroughtheconstructionoftheStudySummariesAppendixandtherichcontextdescriptionforthespeciﬁcexcerptsusedassupportingevidenceintheFindingssection.FindingsStudyDemographicsThe52studiesservingasdatasourcesaredescribedinTable4.Mostoften,butnotexclusively,thesestudiesemployedvariousqualitativemethodologies.Inadditiontogeneralqualitativemethods,casestudyandethnographywerethemostcommonmethodologicalapproachesemployedaslensesthroughwhichtoexploreandinterpretdata(e.g.,Buxton,2006;Johnson,2011).Amongthesources,thefocusofinvestigationfavoredtheteacherorstudents.However,elderswereprimaryparticipantsinafewinstances.Middleschoolandelementaryschoolsettingswereoverrepresentedacrossresearchcontexts(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012;Upadhyay,2006).Onseveraloccasions,multiplegradelevelswerepresentinaparticularstudy,aswasthecasewithCarloneandJohnson(2012)whoreportedretrospectivelyontheexperiencesofJulio,aMexicanAmericanstudent,duringhis4th-,6th-,and7th-gradescienceclasses.Whiletheformalschoolenvironmentwasthemostcommonsiteatwhichstudieswereconducted(e.g.,Patchen&Cox-Petersen,2008),multiplestudiesoccurredininformalsettings(e.g.,Fusco,2001),aswellasinprofessionaldevelopmentprograms(e.g.,O.Lee,2004)orsciencemethodscourses(e.g.,Mensah,2011)thatextendedtotheclassroomthroughdirectobservationsofteachers’practices.Thelifescience,physicalscience,andenvironmentalsciencedisciplinesweremostoftenrepresented.Itisimportanttonotethattherewere10instancesinwhichaWesternscienceworldview(aviewofsciencecloselyalignedwiththenormativecanon)waspresentalongsideIndigenousKnowledge(IK)orTraditionalEcologicalKnowledge(TEK)worldviews(knowledgeofscienceandnaturalphenomenaacquiredbyinformalexperiments,experiences,andstorytellingthatispasseddownbygenerationsofelders,knowledgekeepers,and/orfamilymembers)(Hewson&Ogunniyi,2011).Often,thisoccurredwithenvironmentalsciencecontent(e.g.,Chinn,2006),butwasalsopresentinconjunctionwithphysicalscience(e.g.,Changetal.,2010).Multiplesciencedisciplineswerepresentinsettingswherestudentsoftenhadchoicesofwhichsciencetopicstoinvestigate,suchasBasuandCalabreseBarton’s(2007)afterschoolscienceprogram.Instancesinwhichnoclearsciencecontentwasspeciﬁedwasduetostudieseitheremphasizingnatureofscienceunderstandingsintheirlearnersorhavingacentralfocusonsomeaspectofscienceteachers,suchastheirperceptionsoftheimportanceofincorporatingAboriginalknowledgeintoscienceinstruction(e.g.,Aikenhead&Huntley,1999).Lastly,themajorityofstudieswereconductedintheUnitedStates,leavinglittlevoicefromcountriesandJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1155 Table4Descriptionofthestudies(N¼52)DescriptorNumber%FrequencyResearchparadigmQualitative4688Quantitative24Mixedmethod48MethodologyCasestudy1630Generalqualitativemethods1529Ethnography713Surveyresearch36Groundedtheory36Actionresearch24Designexperiments,community-baseddesignresearch24Narrativeinquiry24Quasi-experiment12Experiment12PrimaryparticipantsTeacher3058Student2038Elder/knowledgekeeper24Gradelevels/rangeMiddleschool1631Elementary/primary1427Highschool917Multiplegradelevels611Secondary(encompasses6–12)510Earlychildhood12Notdisclosed12PrimarylearningenvironmentFormalschoolsetting3466Informalschoolsetting815Professionaldevelopmentprogram713Formalteacherpreparationcourse36Sciencecontentarea/disciplineLifescience(includeanatomy/physiology)1325Physicalscience1020Environmentalscience917Multiplesciencedisciplines917Nosciencecontentspecified713Earthscience48Chemicalscience00Nation/countryrepresentedUnitedStates3770Canada36Taiwan24NorthQueensland24TrinidadandTobago24Philippines12Malawi12NewZealand12Kenya12PapuaNewGuinea12SouthAfrica12JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1156BROWN nations,suchas,Taiwan(e.g.,Changetal.,2010),Kenya(e.g.,Nashon&Anderson,2013),andTrinidadandTobago(e.g.,George,2013).InterrogatingtheComplementarityofK-12CulturallyResponsiveandInquiry-BasedScienceEducationAccordingtotheempiricalliterature,thereisindeedcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducation.Figure1depictsthetotalnumberoftimesthatcomplementaritywasobservedacrosscodedexcerpts(verbatimpassagesintheFindings/Resultssectionsofarticles)fromthe52studies.Amongallstudies,therewasatotalof851instanceswhereatleastoneCRIOPpillarwasobservedtogetherwithatleastoneNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpractice.Eacharticlecontainedanaverageof16instancesofcomplementarityacrossitscodedexcerpts,rangingfromaminimumofoneinstanceofcomplementarityidentiﬁed(n¼8articles)toamaximumof37instances(n¼2articles).Themodewas12instances.Forexample,theﬁrstcolumnindicatesthat,acrossthestudies,thepracticeAskingQuestionsandDeﬁningProblems(listedas“1:AQ&DP”)wasfoundwitheveryCRIOPpillarexceptAssessment.Thismeansthat,whenpresentacrossthearticles,AskingQuestionsandDeﬁningProblemsadvancedallculturallyresponsivepracticesexceptAssessment.Inall,therewere235“clusters”amongthesecodedexcerpts,indicatingthat,onaverage,eachexcerptactuallycontained3.6inquiry-basedand/orculturallyresponsivepracticescomplementingoneanother.Inthissection,Ibeginbydescribingsomeofthemostfrequentlyobservedtrends,notingspeciﬁcculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepracticesinsupportingexemplars,andconcludewithadiscussionofanareawherecomplementaritywasinfrequentlyobserved.Becauseitwasoftenthecasethatmultiplecomplementingpracticeswerepresentinagivenexcerpt,Iwillhighlightthoseotherpracticeswhendescribingevidencepassages.ThethreeaspectsofinquirymostoftenusedtoadvanceculturallyresponsivescienceeducationincludedObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(listedas“8:OECI”)(codedpresentwithCRIOPpillars230times,27%ofallinstancesacrossthestudies),ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions(“6:CE&DS”)(20%,presentwithCRIOPpillars166times),andDevelopingandUsingModels(“2:DaUM”)(13%,112times)(Figure1).Thethreeculturallyresponsivepracticesmostoftenfoundinconjunctionwithinquiry-basedsciencepracticesincluded:Pedagogy(30%,codedascomplementarywithNRC[2012]practices254times),Curriculum(22%,183instances),andClassroomRelationships(18%,156times).Obtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwastheinquiry-basedsciencepracticethatmostoftenintersectedwithclear,observableculturallyresponsivepedagogy(CRP)practices(i.e.,CRIOPpillars).Insuchinstances,therewasevidenceofmeaningfullearningopportunitiesthatdrewdirectlyuponstudents’experiences(e.g.,Warren,Ballenger,Ogonowski,Rosebery,&Hudicourt-Barnes,2001),wherestudentswereencouragedtoposequestions,investigateanswerstothosequestions,anddevelopscientiﬁcliteracythroughactivities(e.g.,Roehrigetal.,2011).Whileexploringfundsofknowledgethatlow-income,urban6thgradestudentsbroughttoMr.M’sscienceclassroomintheirdesignexperiment,CalabreseBartonandTan(2009)noted...duringthelessonwherefastfoodrestaurantswerecompared,studentsreviewedMcDonalds’datasheetscontainingdatatableswithcalories,fatcontent,vitamincontent,iron,andcholesterolofeachitemonthefast-foodmenu.WhenMr.M.gaveageneralexplanationtotheclassonhowtoreadtheseintimidatingtables...wewitnessedhowstudentswhohad“ﬁgureditout”explainedtotheirteammatesusingtheexamplesonthemenutheyweremorefamiliarwith(p.63).JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1157 Figure1.Breakdownoftheinstancesofcomplementaritybetweenculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedsciencepracticesthatwereobservedacrosscodedexcerptsofthe52studies.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1158BROWN Byhavingstudentsobtainandanalyzenutritionalinformationcontainedinfastfoodmenusandthencommunicatetheirﬁndingstoteammates,Mr.Maffordedhisstudentsthechancetocollaborativelyevaluatetheirfoodintakedecisionsfromascientiﬁcallyinformedperspective.Thisactivitywasanintegralpartofafoodandnutritionunitwherestudentslearnedaboutacalorieintermsofitsenergypotentialand“calculate[d]dailycaloricintakeasafunctionofbodymass”(p.53).Inhelpingoneanother,Mr.M’sclassroomenvironmentreﬂectedacollectivistorientation,wherestudentswereaccountableforoneanother’ssuccess(Ladson-Billings,1995a).Duetoitshighlypersonalnature(studentsoftenhadlimitedaccesstohealthieralternativesduetoﬁnancialandgeographicconstraints),thisinvestigationalsoallowedstudentstoexercisesolidaritywhileraisingsociopoliticalissues,suchasinequitableaccesstodietaryoptionsandfoodsecurity.ThiswassimilartootherstudiesinthatthepracticeofObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwasoftenusedforempoweringpurposes,suchasidentifyingtipsforhealthylivingforAfricanAmericanswithsicklecell(e.g.,Boutte,Kelly-Jackson,&Johnson,2010)anddevelopinganutritionplanforpeoplelivingwithType2diabetesbasedonknowledgeofglucoseregulationmechanismsinthebody(e.g.,Brown&Crippen,2017).InstanceslikethesewerealsocodedasthePedagogycategoryofculturallyresponsiveinstructionbecausethey“buil[t]on[students’]existingculturalknowledgeand‘culturaldatasets’”(Powelletal.,2012,p.8).Obtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationwasalsothepracticemostfrequentlyassociatedwithculturallyresponsiveAssessment,whichitselfwasraretoobserve(codedwithNRC[2012]practices14times,2%ofallexcerpts).Whenpresent,Assessmentwasseenasstudentsdemonstratingcompetenceinmultipleways.Forexample,7thgradestudentsinMaestroTomas’bilingualimmersionclassdemonstratedknowledgeofenvironmentalscienceconceptsthroughtraditionalandinnovativetasks:Foreachpollutantrepresentedintheplay,studentsweretowritewhethertheythoughtthepollutantaffectedtheairintheircommunityandtoprovideevidencefromtheschoolandhomeobservationstheyhadmade.Finally,thestudentswereaskedtodrawapictureoftheirobservationsshowingthe“thingsthatmaybeaffectingthequalityofair,”“thingsthatmayshowtheeffectsofpollutedair,”andthe“pollutantsthatmightbeintheair”(Moje,Collazo,Carillo,&Marx,2001,p.482).Asaculminatingevent,MaestroTomas’studentsdisplayedtheirlearningbyposingevidence-basedclaimsaboutpollutionintheircommunityandtentativeexplanationsfortheimpactofpollutiononairandwaterqualityinthatcommunity.ByallowingstudentstodemonstratesciencecontentknowledgethroughmultipleDiscourses,MaestroTomasprovidedculturallyresponsiveassessmentopportunities.Indoingso,students’sciencecommunicationwassupportedthrough“frequentandauthenticusesoflanguageandcontent,”whichissoundpedagogyforallstudentsbutespeciallysoforEnglishlanguagelearners(Powelletal.,2012,p.11).ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions.Giventhatmanyofthestudieswereconductedpriortotherecentemphasisonengineeringpracticesinscienceeducation(NRC,2012),therewasanover-representationofConstructingExplanations(presentwithCRIOPpillars129times,78%ofallinstancesforthiscategory)comparedtoDesigningSolutions(37times,22%).Together,thesepracticeswereusedtoadvanceculturallycongruentcommunicationandlinguisticcompetence(e.g.,Reveles&Brown,2008),drawuponstudents’experiencesandknowledgeduringinstruction(e.g.,Carlone&Johnson,2012;Nametal.,2012),andadvancesociopoliticalconsciousness(e.g.,Boutteetal.,2010;Chinn,2006),therebypromotingJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1159 meaningfullearningtasksthatwereconnectedtostudents’lives.Forexample,inhiscasestudyofJane’s4thgradeclassroomcomprisedprimarilyofLatino/astudents,Upadhyay(2006)discussedtheimportanceofwelcomingandhonoringstudents’backgroundswhenscaffoldingopportunitiestoconstructexperience-basedexplanationsofnaturalphenomena:Janewasteaching“what[do]plantsneedtogrow?”fromtheLiFE[LinkingFoodandtheEnvironment]curriculum.Shewasdiscussinghowplantsneedcarbondioxidegastomakefood.Oneofthestudentssharedthatplantscouldsurvivewithoutairbecausebeansproutscouldgrowinacupboardwherethereishardlyanyair.Headdedthatathomehisgrandmotherusesdifferentseedsandsproutsthembysoakingtheseedsovernightandpackingtheminaclothwhichsheputsawayinadarkplaceforcoupleofdays.Janethenusedthisstudent’sfundsofknowledgeonseedgerminationexperiencetoexplainseedgerminationprocessesandwhatkindofgasanimalsandplantsneedtosurvive(p.104).Inthisexcerpt,Janeallowedmultipleperspectivesonplant-growingtobevoicedfromherstudents,whichledtoonestudentsharinghisexperienceswithseedgermination.Janethenvalidatedthisknowledgeinherownexplanationoftheprocessofseedgermination,ultimatelycreatingalearningatmospherewherestudentknowledgewastreatedasauthoritative.Bysurfacingtheirperspectivesonthetopic,Janetreatedstudents’experiencesasresourcesforlearning,notasinferiorknowledgetobereplacedandcorrected.Accordingly,thisexcerptwascodedasConstructingExplanationscomplementingtheCRIOPpillars,CurriculumandPedagogy.TherewerealsoaccountsofstudentsworkingtogetherproductivelytoDesignSolutionsbasedonissuestheyhadbeenresearching.Attimes,thisledtostudentsengaginginengineering-relatedpracticeswasawaytoraisecriticalconsciousness(e.g.,Mensah,2011)andfosterculturalcompetence(e.g.,Chinn,2006).Additionally,suchpracticeswereusedtoadvancesocialchangeandyouthempowerment.Forexample,byDeﬁningProblemsandDesigningSolutions,Fusco(2001)reportedinheractionresearchstudythatthe15homelessyouthwithwhomshehadbeenworkingtoconstructanurbangardenrealizedthatthespacecouldbeenhancedbyelicitingadditionalexpertise:Asecondoutcomeofinvitingotheradultswithvariousexpertiseandperspectivestosupportourvision[foranurbancommunitygarden]wasaccesstoavarietyofprofessionaldiscoursesandpracticesitgavetheyoungpeople.Forinstance,aconversationwithanenvironmentalpsychologistledustoconsidernewquestionssuchas:Whatdesignqualitiesarebeingconsidered(e.g.,thestructuralarrangement,theactivitiesofferedwithinthespace,access)?Thisquestiontriggeredfurtherthinkingandplanning.Webegantorealizethatastagewouldrequireseating,agardenwouldrequiresunlight,aplaygroundofferedactivitiesforchildrenbutwehadnotconsideredactivitiesforolderpeople(p.868).Thisexcerptillustratesthatculturallyresponsivepedagogicalpracticescanoccurbeyondtheconﬁnesoftheformalclassroom.Theurbangardenprojectbuiltdirectlyonyouth’sculturalknowledgeofthecommunity,astheirinsightswereessentialtoeachdecision-makingstep.Byresearchingandenactingscienceideas,youthdemonstratedunderstandingsofaspectsofthenatureofscienceandthenatureofengineering(i.e.,designprocess).Nowarmedwithamorecomprehensiveunderstandingofpossibilitiesforthegardenthanbefore,theteenagedyouthandFuscoenacteddesignideaslearnedduringtheirresearchprocess.Intheir“practicingcultureofJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1160BROWN sciencelearning,”(p.869)theteamcreatedaspaceusablebyallcommunitymembersandformultiplepurposes.ClassroomRelationshipsshouldbeequitableandproductiveinallscienceclassrooms,notjustthosethatexemplifyculturalrelevance.WhatmadetheseparticularrelationshipsreﬂectiveofCRP,however,wasthattherewereoftengroupandindividualgoalsforsuccessthatpromotedacollectivist,“family-like”environment(e.g.,Mensah,2011;Patchen&Cox-Petersen,2008),patternsofinteractiondemonstratedbytheteacherthatweredeterminedtobeculturallycongruentwithstudents’andfamilies’linguisticandculturalbackgrounds(e.g.,Chigeza,2011;O.Lee,2004),andstudentgroupsthatpurposefullysupportedoneanother’slearninginwaysthatassuredsuccessforall(e.g.,Kelly-Jackson&Jackson,2011).Asaresult,culturallyresponsiveclassroomrelationshipswereoftennotedalongsideinquiry-basedpracticessuchasObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformationasreferredtointhispassagereportedbyCarloneetal.(2011)intheirethnographicstudy:Incountlessways,Ms.Wolfeheldstudentsaccountableforcriticallylisteningtoandjointlyconstructingknowledgewiththeirpartnersinsmallgroupsandwholegroups.Shequestionedstudentsabouttheirgroupmates’ideasandhadapolicythat“bothpeople,orallthreepeople[inagroup]areresponsibleforbeingabletoshareout[tothewholegroup]”(Interview,8/13/08).Sheoftenprivilegedthevoicesofthequieteststudents—“I’mgonnapicktheleasttalkativepersonwhoprobablyhasnotstoodupforthemselvesandsay,‘Thegroupcan’tstartuntilthispersontellsmewhattheplanis”(p.471).Byencouragingher4thgradestudentstoparticipatefullyandequitably,Ms.Wolfecultivatedalearningenvironmentwherestudentsworkedtogetherproductively,holdingeachotheraccountableforsharinginformation—ﬁrstwithoneanotherandthentothewholeclass—astheyconstructedandusedmodelstoexploretheﬂowofelectricitythroughcircuits.Otherinstancesofcommunicatingscientiﬁcinformationoccurredthroughwrittenexplanations(e.g.,Xu,Coats,&Davidson,2012),classpresentations(e.g.,Buxton,2006),andcreativeexpressionssuchascomposingsongsandmodifyingmagnets(e.g.,CalabreseBarton,Tan,&Rivet,2008).Allofwhichwerenotedtofosterpositivelearningandidentity-buildingexperienceswheresciencewasthefocus.DevelopingandUsingModelstoCritiqueandExpandtheScienceCurriculumThirteenpercent(presentwithCRIOPpillars113times)ofallcodedexcerptsacrossthestudiescontainedevidenceofDevelopingandUsingModels(Figure1)inconcertwithvariousCRPpractices.ComplementingpracticeswereobservedwhenbothWesternscience(WS)-basedmodels(e.g.,Fusco,2001)andIndigenousKnowledge(IK)-orTraditionalEcologicalKnowledge(TEK)-basedmodelswereusedtoexplorephenomena(e.g.,Herbert,2008).Infact,althoughtheCRPcategoryFamilyCollaborationwasnotedwithclearinquiry-basedsciencepracticesinonly7%ofallexcerpts,itwasabundantininstancesofDevelopingandUsingModelswhenthemodelsoriginatedfromIKworldviews.Inparticular,familyandcommunityfundsofknowledgewereleveragedtosupportstudents’sciencelearning.InherinstrumentalcasestudyofpreparingtoteachculturallyresponsivescienceteachersinTrinidadandTobago,George(2013)recountedforthescienceteachercandidateswithwhomsheworked:Oneteacherusedanaccountofthepracticeofafarmerinanearbyvillageusingurineontherootsofthebananaandplantainplants(toenhancegrowth)asthesetinductioninalesson.HereturnedtotheidealaterinthelessonafterexplaininghowfertilizersfunctionandtheJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1161 advantagesanddisadvantagesoforganicandinorganicfertilizers.Twoparticipantsreferencedlocalfoodpreservation/preparationtechniquestoillustrateattemptsatreducingmoisturecontentinfoodtoinhibitspoilage(p.2126).Intheirethnographicstudy,H.Lee,Yen,andAikenhead(2012)detailhow4thgradeAmisstudents(anIndigenousTaiwanesetribe)exploredtimemeasurementthroughbothWestern(timeasalinearmeasure)andIndigenous(timeascyclicoccurrences)views:Afterstudentsweretaughtthatthe12ceremonialsacriﬁcesoftheAmistribe,whichareusedtojudgethetimeoftheyear,correspondedtoplantingcropsandthegrowthofplants,thestudentsbegantounderstandthatthedatesfortheﬁsh-catchingceremonyandharvestfestivalweredeterminedthroughthecyclesofplantingandharvestingtheyhadexperiencedsincechildhood.Thedateswerescheduledalongsidethesequenceofdifferentceremonialsacriﬁcessothattheﬁsh-catchingceremonywascloselylinkedwiththenaturalarrivaloftheﬂyingﬁshtotheirlocalenvironment(p.1196).ThesetwoexamplesrepresentatrendnoticedaroundthetreatmentofsciencecontentwhenIKwaspresent—suchknowledgewastreatedasamodelfromwhichtoexplorescientiﬁcphenomenaandameanstoexpandandcritiquetheofﬁcialsciencecurriculum(codedasCRIOPpillarCurriculum).ThesemodelshelpedstudentsexplainandpredictnaturalphenomenainequallyvalidmannersasistypicallybestowedonWesternsciencemodels.Indoingso,theyalsobroughttotheforefrontareminderthat“forcenturiesdifferentvarietiesof[IndigenousKnowledge]werenormal—atleastuntilconquestandcolonizationdethronedthemandreplacedthemwith‘authenticscience’”(GallardMartınez,2011,p.720).Resultantly,IK-basedmodelswereoftenintentionallyintroducedtocountertheprevailingargumentthat“theepistemologiesthatstudentscometoclassroomswithareinferior,orlessproductive,comparedwiththeone(s)thatresearchersandeducators...aretryingtoassiststudentsinlearning”(Bang&Medin,2010,p.1015).AswasnotedinthecaseofH.Leeetal.(2012),theAmismethodoftellingtimehadarichtradition,andwasconsistentandusefulforpredictingtheonsetofgrowingseasonsandanimalmigrationpatterns.ItwasalsocommontoseetheinterweavingofWSandIKasawaytopromotebi-literatestudentsthatunderstoodandappreciatedmultipleperspectivesonscientiﬁcphenomena.Intheseinstances,studentsmostoftenwereengagedinscienceinstructionthathonoredIndigenousKnowledgebyusingculturalreferentsas“startingpoints”forinvestigationsguidedbymoreWesternsciencecontent(e.g.,Bang&Medin,2010;Chigeza,2011).AsChinn(2006)discussesinher3-yearstudyontheprofessionaldevelopmentofpreK-12scienceteachersinHawai’i:TeachersusedtheHawaiianpracticeofintegratingstream-fedlo’ikalo(taropatches)withlokoi’a(ﬁshponds)tohelpstudentsunderstandsciencestandardsdealingwithecosystems,cyclesofmaterialsandenergy,andsustainability.Theybuiltclassroommodelsandfull-scale“livingmachines”...onKauai,Oahu,andHawai’itodemonstratehowbiologicalsystemscleanupnutrientrichwastewaterfromanimalraisingprojects(p.395).Insomecases,thesecultural“startingpoints”weretreatedmoreexplicitly,withfamilymembers’andcommunity-basedknowledgedepictedasdifferentwaystointerpretandexplainthesameconcepts,suchasthisexamplefromGrimbergandGummer(2013),whoconductedaquasi-experimentalstudyoftheimpactofprofessionaldevelopmentexperiencesonK-8scienceteachersonornearAmericanIndianreservationsinMontana:JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1162BROWN Thescienceconceptofacceleratedmotionwasidentiﬁedintheculturalpracticeofarrowmakingandthrowing.Theshapeofthebow,theelasticityofthematerialsofthearrowandbow,thetensioninthestring,thebodypositioninthethrow,andmanymoreintricaciesofthispracticewerematchedtotheconceptofforceandacceleratedmotion.Inthisexampletheempiricalepistemologyofthetribalpracticewasmatchedtotheabstract,model-basedepistemologyofschoolscienceasbothknowledgebaseshavethesamepurpose:thepredictionofthemotionofanobjectsubjecttoanunbalancedforce(p.19).Evenininstanceswhereminimalconnectionstoculturalknowledgeweremade,studentsengagedwithmodelsasawayto“discover”normativescientiﬁcphenomenaanddevelopexplanationsfromtheiruseandtesting.Asapractice,DevelopingandUsingModelsinculturallyresponsivesettingscreatedaspaceforstudentstobuild,test,andobservephysicalrepresentationsofscientiﬁcphenomena,whilebeingsupportedbyoneanotherandexploringtopicsofinterest.However,studentsdidnotnecessarilyworktogetherwhenusingmodels(asnotedbytheminimalpresenceofClassroomRelationshipswithinthiscategory).Intheseinstances,teacherswereoftenthemainpersonresponsiblefordemonstratingthemodel,withstudentsassumingmorepassiveroles.SciencePracticesasaVehicletoPromoteSociopoliticalConsciousnessOfculturallyrelevanteducation,Ladson-Billings(1995a)states,“notonlymustteachersencourageacademicsuccessandculturalcompetence,theymusthelpstudentstorecognize,understand,andcritiquecurrentsocialinequities”(p.476).Engagingstudentsinsociopoliticalconsciousness-raisingexperiencescanaccomplishthislastgoal,andculturallyresponsivescienceeducationisrepletewithsuchopportunities.Thoughinfrequentlyobservedalongsidespeciﬁcinquiry-basedpracticesinthe52studies(8%ofexcerptsacrossallstudies,coded68timesascomplementarywithscienceandengineeringpractices),atonepointintimeoranotherallNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticeswereusedtoadvancesociopoliticalconsciousness,andthisoccurredacrossallgradebands(refertoFigure1).Mostfrequently,theseactivitiesincludedopportunitiesforstudentstoObtain,Evaluate,andCommunicateInformation(29%or20ofthecodedexcerptsforthiscategory)andAnalyzeandInterpretData(22%or15codedexcerptsforthiscategory).Inherqualitativestudyemployinggroundedtheoryanalyticmethods,Mensah(2011)notedofanelementarypre-serviceteacherwhomshetaughtduringtheunitplanningandimplementationportionsofasciencemethodscourse,Estelle,forher2-daylesson,focusedon“environmentalracism”whereshewanted“toincludeacultural/communityperspective”(Microteachingpaper)andquestiontheeffectsofairpollutiononstudentsandself...Estelleaskedstudentstousetheirownzipcodestomaphowclosetheirhomesweretomajorsourcesofairpollution(i.e.,busdepots,wastetreatmentplants,wastetransferstations,MTAtrainyards),andstudent-groupsusedclassroomcomputerstoresearchasthmahospitalizationratesinNewYorkCity...Duringtheposterpresentationinclass,studentsdemonstratedunderstandingofman-madecausesofairpollution;negativeaffectsofairpollutiononhumans,animals,plants,andtheenvironment;andidentiﬁedseveralcomponentsthatmakeuptheairandairquality(p.304).Alongwithtwootherelementarypre-serviceteachersthathelpedco-plantheunit,Estellefeltitimportantthather4thand5thgradestudentsexplorelocalproblems,suchaspollutionandasthmaincidences,throughscience.Indoingso,studentslearnedaboutcomponentsoftheair,JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1163 howtodetermineairquality,andtoidentifysourcesofatmosphericemissionsfromindustry.Childrenanalyzed,visuallyrepresented,andpresentedthisinformationtosuggestwaystoreduceairpollutionlocally.Additionally,thiswastheonlyclearinstanceinwhichstudentsUsedMathematicsandComputationalThinking(listedas“5:UMCT,”Figure1)toexploreissueswithsociopoliticalties.Inothercases,studentsanalyzeddataandlearnedsciencecontenttobetterunderstandtopicswithsociopoliticalconnections,suchasexaminingdiseasesprevalentinspeciﬁcethniccommunities(e.g.,Xuetal.,2012)andtheprevalenceofunhealthyfastfoodoptionsavailablelocally(e.g.,CalabreseBarton&Tan,2009).Onfeweroccasions,scientiﬁcpracticesandcontentwerescrutinizedasawaytonameandchallengeoppression—therebyemphasizingnatureofscienceandsciencecontentexploration—suchaswhenAnatomyandPhysiologystudentsexploredphrenologyasapseudoscience(e.g.,Brown&Crippen,2017)andmiddleschoolstudentsexaminedbiasinherentinthescientiﬁcenterprise,suchasLaughterandAdams’(2012)qualitativestudyoftheculturallyrelevantpracticesofascienceteacher:Ineachclass,Adamsbeganwithanintroductiontoandreadingsaboutbiasinscience...Thereadingsexaminedhowseveralscientists’expectationsofintelligencewerebiasedbyracialorgenderfactors,includingSamuelMorton’smeasurementsofskullvolumeandLawrenceSummer’scommentsaboutscientiﬁcaptitudedifferencesbetweenmenandwomen.Adamswantedherstudentstounderstandhowascientist’sindividualandcommunalprejudicesmightleadtobiasinaparadigmthatpurportsobjectivity;thatis,assheoftenrepeated,“Scienceisnotbiasedbutscientistsare”(p.1120).Suchtopicsarosewhenstudentswereallowedtoposeandinvestigatetheirownquestions(e.g.,Mojeetal.,2001),whenteacherswerepersonallyconnectedtotheissues(e.g.,Mensah,2011)andfeltmorallyobligatedtodiscussinjustice(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012),orwhendesignedforinadvancewithpre-madecurriculummaterials(e.g.,Tsurusaki,CalabreseBarton,Tan,Koch,&Contento,2013).Throughtheseopportunities,studentsengagedinsciencepracticesinmeaningfulandempoweringways,andwerealsocodedasCRIOPpillarsCurriculumandPedagogy.Notonlydidsuchinstancesprovidestudentswithopportunitiestoenhancetheircontentknowledgeandscienceliteracy,theyfosteredauthenticexperienceswherestudentsObtained,Evaluated,andCommunicatedInformationacrossallgradelevels.AreasUnderutilizedinCulturallyResponsive,Inquiry-BasedScienceEducationThethreeNRC(2012)scienceandengineeringpracticesleastfrequentlyencounteredalongsideculturallyresponsivepracticesincludedUsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking(4%ofallcodedexcerpts,presentwithaCRIOPpillar30times),PlanningandCarryingOutInvestigations(7%,58times),andEngaginginArgumentfromEvidence(7%,62times).Ihighlighttwoareasofferingpotentialforadvancingcomplementarity:UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking(“5:UMCT”)andEngaginginArgumentfromEvidence(“7:EAE”).UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinking.Whenpresent,thispracticewasfrequentlyobservedalongsidetheCRIOPpillarsClassroomRelations,CurriculumandPedagogy(refertoFigure1).Inaddition,theinquiry-basedpracticesAnalyzingandInterpretingData(e.g.,O.Lee,2004)andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(e.g.,Fusco,2001)werenotedalongsidethispractice,meaningthatculturallyresponsive,inquiry-basedscienceexamplesweremostlikelytohavethesecomplementingpracticesworkingtogether.Forexample,intheircaseJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1164BROWN studyofa6thgradeteacher’senactmentofa“science-richandculturallyrelevant”curriculum,Tsurusakietal.(2013)sharedanaccountbetweenMrs.Hansonandherstudentsduringalessononguidelinesforhealthfuleating:Mrs.Hansonaskedstudentstolookattheir24-hourfoodlogs,wheretheyhadcollecteddataabouttheservingsandamountsofwhattheyhadconsumed...[she]focusedherstudentsonthistaskbyusingalineofquestioningtoguidetheirworkthatevokedbothpersonalnarrativeanddataspeciﬁcity:“Howaboutfastfoodrestaurants?Inthelast24hourshowmanytimesdidyoueatatafastfoodrestaurant?Ifyouwentonceputa1.Ifyouwent4timesputa4.Ifyouwent0timesputa0.Thinkabouthowmanytimesaweekyougo...Whenyoulookbackatthethreegraphsyoujustdid,doesanythingreallyjumpoutatyouandyousay,whoa!I’mreallyoffhere?I’mnotevenclosetowhattherecommendedamountisforsomething?”(pp.13–15).Inthissegment,Mrs.Hansoncreatedalearningopportunitycontextualizedinstudents’livesthatdrewupontheirpersonalexperiencesandknowledge,providingacontextforscientiﬁcpracticesofprecisioninanalyzingandinterpretingdataontheirdailyfood/drinkintake.Byengaginginmathematicsandcomputationalthinking,Ms.Hanson’sstudentsanalyzeddataandvisuallyrepresentedtheirﬁndingstoexploretrendsandpatternsintheirdietaryintakearoundﬁverecommendedgoals.Resultantly,thisalsoexempliﬁesculturallyresponsiveCurriculumandPedagogy.Overall,UsingMathematicsandComputationalThinkingwasrarelyobservedtoadvanceculturallyresponsiveinstruction.Moreover,FamilyCollaborationwasabsentfromthiscategoryand,thus,pointstoanareaofpotentialforgreatercomplementarity.Giventhatfamily/parentaleducationalinvolvementispositivelyassociatedwithstudentachievement(Jeynes,2007),cultivatingspacesfor“hybridscience”isessential.Includingfamilymoremeaningfullyinsciencelearningexperiencescouldbeonewaytoachievethis.Forexample,Hagiwara,CalabreseBarton,andContento(2007)observedthatDominicanparentswhoassistedwithclassroomscienceinstructionby“address[ing]questions,develop[ing]student-inquiryskills,[and]manag-[ing]groupactivities”(p.483)wereidentiﬁedbytheirchildrenasteachers(ormaestras)withauthoritativeknowledge.Byexpandingsuchrolestoincludeassistancewithrepresentingrelationshipsamongscienceconceptsthroughgraphsandothercomputationalapproaches,theculturallyresponsiveinstructionexperiencedbystudentsmightbeimproved.Ifsuchanapproachistobetaken,however,itmustbeconsiderateoffamilies’needs,aseducationalparticipationpatternsoftendifferwithculturalheritage.Racialminorityandimmigrantparentsmaybelesslikelytoprovideknowledgeandresourcesreﬂectiveofstrongsocialcapital(J.Lee&Bowen,2006)andreportfeelinguneasywithtraditionalschoolscienceinvolvementbecauseofcognitiveandculturalconﬂicts(Albrecht,2015).Whileinvolvingfamilymeaningfullyinscienceexperiencesmayhavepositivelearningoutcomesforchildren,itnecessitatesaculturallysensitiveapproach.EngaginginArgumentFromEvidence.Whenpresent,thispracticecoincidedwithexplicitCRPpractices(7%ofallcodedexcerpts,presentwithCRIOPpillars62times)mostoftenaroundDiscourse,ClassroomRelationships,andCurriculum(refertoFigure1).Inaddition,theinquiry-basedpracticesAnalyzingandInterpretingData(e.g.,O.Lee,2004;Lim&CalabreseBarton,2006),ConstructingExplanationsandDesigningSolutions(e.g.,Kelly-Jackson&Jackson,2011),andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicatingInformation(e.g.,Nashon&Anderson,2013)wereexclusivelylinkedwiththispractice.Meaningthat,whenpresentinculturallyresponsivescienceeducationstudies,EngaginginArgumentfromEvidencewasobservedwithJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1165 onlytheseotherscienceandengineeringpractices.SuchanexamplecomesfromXuetal.(2012),whoreportedonthepracticesofMr.Harris,a4th-gradescienceteacher,intheircasestudyofthescienceteachingofexemplaryAfricanAmericaneducators.Inthisexcerpt,Mr.Harrisrecalledhowhescaffoldsargumentationinhisstudents:Sometimeswhenwehavegroupdiscussions,Iwouldputonesideagainsttheotherside.Iletonesidestartwithanopeningargument,andthenlettherestonthatsideweighinwhatevertheywanttosay.Fortheoppositegroup,Iwouldgivethemachancetorespond.Itellthemtolookforsomethingthattheymayhavenotunderstoodoraskmorein-depthquestions.Ionlyusemyselfasalastresort,saying,“Well,ifyoucan’tcometoanagreement,thenyoucanasktheexpert.Andthat’sme.”IfIcan’tansweraquestion,Iencouragethemtodomoreresearch.Iexplaintothemthisiswhatscientistsdowhenevertheyhaveaquestionaboutsomething(Xuetal.,2012,p.144).SimilartoMr.Harris,theteacherswithwhomWarrenetal.(2001)workedpurposefullycreatedspacesforstudentstoengageinargumentation.Thoughpittingstudentsagainstoneanothermayappearcountertotheaimsofculturallyresponsiveteaching,thiswasnotthecentralexperienceMr.Harriswastryingtocultivateinhisclassroom.Rather,hewasmoreinterestedinfosteringcollaborationamongteammembers,givingstudentsachancetointeractwithoneanothertowardacommongoal,voicemultipleperspectivesastheycraftedtheirteam’sargument,andengagerespectfullywiththeotherteamduringtheprocess.Throughhisinstructionalapproach,Mr.Harrisattemptedtogivehisstudentsopportunitiestomeaningfullyparticipateinclassroomdiscourse.BecauseWesternsciencehaswell-establishednormsforcommunicatingscientiﬁcknowledge,“byengaging[students]insuchpractices...theysimultaneouslybuildontheirunderstandingofscienceandtheirlanguageproﬁciency,”bothnecessarycomponentsofequitablelearningexperiences(AchieveInc.,2013,p.6).ThisisparticularlyconsistentwithresearchonEnglishlanguagelearners(O.Lee&Buxton,2010).AlthoughthestudiesfrequentlydocumentedK-12studentsconstructingevidence-basedclaimsandexplanations,itwaslesslikelytonotethemidentifyingandchallengingaclaim’slimitationsorweaknesses.SuchargumentationisahallmarkoftheWesternscientiﬁcenterprise,however,andisnecessaryforanindividualtobecomea“criticalconsumerofscience”(NRC,2012,p.71).Thisabsencesuggestedanareaofpotentialforadvancingfurthercomplementarityinculturallyresponsivescienceeducation.Asmentionedpreviously,theﬁeldaboundswithopportunitiestoincludeissuesimportanttothecommunity(e.g.,Tsurusakietal.,2013)andconfrontnegativestereotypes,biases,andformsofoppression(e.g.,Laughter&Adams,2012).Withoutidentifyingthestrengthsandlimitationsinsuchclaims,however,studentsareleftatadisadvantage.Engagingstudentsinexaminingcommunity-basedissuesandinjusticeinlightofavailableevidencewhileworkingtowardthemostcredibleexplanationsisnecessarytodevelopnotonlycriticalthinkingskillsbutalsocriticalconsciousness.ImplicationsforPracticeandFutureResearchForsometimenow,ithasbeenarguedthatculturallyresponsive-andWesternscience-basededucationareatodds(McKinley&Gan,2014;Nametal.,2012).Yet,thestudiesexaminedinthismetasynthesisprovideevidencetothecontrary.Findingsshowclearpatternsofcomplementarityamonginquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceeducationinK-12settings.Astheyengagedinscienceexperiencesthatwereempowering,validating,andrelevanttotheirlives,studentsofcolor,Englishlanguagelearners,andlow-incomestudentspracticedmanyaspectsofinquirythatwerereﬂectiveofWesternscience(WS).Thislargelytooktheformofobtaining,JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1166BROWN evaluating,andcommunicatinginformationthatbecamethefoundationforevidence-basedclaimsmadebystudentsaboutscientiﬁcphenomena.Studentsalsousedmodels—frombothWSandIndigenousKnowledge(IK)worldviews—toexplainandoccasionallypredictthesephenomena.Despiteanabundanceofcomplementingpractices,certainareaswereunderutilized.Forexample,cleartiesbetweenculturallyresponsivepracticesandinstancesinwhichstudentsusedmathematicsandcomputationalthinkingorengagedinargumentfromevidencewereinfrequentlyobserved.TheseandotherpatternsdiscussedinthispaperhaveclearimplicationsfortheﬁeldthatcouldadvanceMeyerandCrawford’s(2011)calltomakeinquiry-basedscienceintentionallyculturallyresponsive.ImplicationsforScienceTeacherEducationTeachersneedclearexamplesofthetypesofinstructiontheyareexpectedtoprovide.Severalscholarshavedocumentedthechallengesfacedbyscienceteacherswhenattemptingtofacilitateculturallyresponsivelearningexperiences(Johnson,2011;Nametal.,2012).Pre-andin-serviceteachereducationprogramsmustassistteachersintranslatingculturallyresponsivesciencefromtheorytoreality.AccordingtoFerguson(2008),“Althoughresearchersadvocateforamulticulturalscienceeducation,traditionalpreserviceprogramsintheU.S.havenotemphasizedorrequiredtheincorporationofmulticulturaleducationintheircurricula”(p.551).Itismorelikelythatprospectivescienceteachersexittheirprogramsknowinghowtoteachinquirythanhowtoenactculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction.Byhighlightingconnectionsbetweeninquiry-basedandculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,suchaswasdoneinthismetasyn-thesis,practicingandprospectivescienceteacherscanidentifyconcreteleveragepointsforequitablelearningopportunities.Examplesalone,however,areunlikelytopromoteculturallyresponsivescienceteachingwithoutadditionalsupports.Amongeffectiveinquiry-focusedprofessionaldevelopmentprogramfeaturesareopportu-nitiesforscienceteacherstodevelopinnovativelessons;buildcontentknowledge;andactivelyengagein,reﬂecton,andcritiqueexemplaryinstruction(Capps,Crawford,&Constas,2012).Restructuringsuchexperiencesaroundtheﬁndingsofthisstudymayprovideapathwayfordevelopingculturallyresponsive,inquiry-basedscienceteachers.Forinstance,aswasthecaseforteacherswithwhomChinn(2006)andGeorge(2013)worked,opportunitiestobuildcontentknowledgecouldfocusonbothWSandIKperspectivesofscientiﬁcphenomena.Thisknowledgecouldthenbeusedalongsidemultipleaspectsofinquiry,muchliketheteachersofGrimbergandGummer’s(2013)studywhenteachingforceandmotionconceptsthrougharrow-making.Suchapracticeallowsculturallyresponsiveinstructiontomeaningfullymaterializeinscienceclass-rooms,asopposedtofeelinglikeanadd-onordisjointedfromthecurriculum.Byinvolvingteachersintheactivelearningandcritiqueofexemplaryinstruction(alignedwiththeprogram’svisionofscienceinstruction)fortheircontexts,theirownershipandcomfortwithimplementationimproves.Inthecontextofculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction,itisespeciallyimportantthatteachersbearinmindstudents’backgroundswhenevaluatingexemplars(Brown&Crippen,2016a).Whenimaginingculturallyresponsiveinstructionintheirownclassrooms,bothpre-serviceandin-serviceteacherscouldevaluate“modellessons”accordingtotheﬁndingsofthisstudy.Forinstance,inthelesson,werestudentsallowedtoobtain,evaluate,andcommunicatescientiﬁcinformationastheychallengedandattemptedtoaddressalocalissue?Towhatdegreewasfamilyexpertiseutilizedwhencarryingoutinvestigationsorconstructingscientiﬁcexplanations?Anynumberofquestionslikethesecouldstructurelessonevaluationandsubsequentmodiﬁcation.Itissuggestedthatthisoccurnotonlyforthoseareaswherecomplementarityalreadyexists,butalsotospeculateonwaystoimproveunderutilizedareas.Asforaresearchagenda,evaluationstudieswillneedtobeconductedtoJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1167 determinehowwellprogramswithsuchaimsperformaccordingtotheirgoals.Inadditiontodeterminingtheimpactofresultingteachereducationprogramsonteachers’knowledge,skills,anddispositions,itwillalsobeessentialtodetermineassociationsbetweenspeciﬁcteacheroutcomesandprogramfeatures.Thisstudy’saimwasneithertodeterminewhichpractices(inquiryorculturallyresponsive)weremosteffectiveatprovidingequitablelearningopportunitiesforstudents,norwhichpracticesweremostcloselyaligned.Accordingly,thesearetwofruitfulareasforfutureresearch.ImplicationsforScienceCurriculumMaterialsAlthoughthereisno“one-size-ﬁts-all”culturallyresponsivecurriculum,theﬁndingsofthismetasynthesissuggestleveragepointsforimprovingtheculturalrelevanceofexistingsciencecurriculummaterials.Ithaslongbeenknownthatcurriculumplaysacentralroleinateacher’sclassroompractice(Ball&Cohen,1996).Byintentionallyrevisingsuchmaterialswiththeresultsofthisstudy,wearebetterpositionedasacommunitytodeliveronthevisionofequitablescienceespousedintheFramework(NRC,2012).Rodriguez(2015)stated,“justaseveryNGSSforeverygradelevelincludestablesillustratingtheknowledgeandscientiﬁc/engineeringpracticesexpectationsforeachdimension,adimensionofengagement,equityanddiversitycouldhaveillustratedhowthesciencecontentcouldhavebeenmademoreculturallyandsociallyrelevant”(p.1042).Withexamplesfromthispaperservingasmodelsforcurriculumenhancement,Rodriguez’sproposalmaystandclosertorealization.Byﬁrstarticulatingcleargoalsthatarereﬂectiveofbothculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscienceeducation,designerscanusetheﬁndingsofthisstudytobolsterspeciﬁcareasoftheirmaterials.Forexample,giventhatmanyculturallyrelevantDiscourse-fosteringstrategies—promotingprimarylanguageuse(e.g.,Chigeza,2011),allowingstudentstochoosetheirpreferredformsofDiscourse(e.g.,Mojeetal.,2001),providingcleardirectionsforlanguageuse(e.g.,Carloneetal.,2011)—wereinfusedpredominantlyintotheinquiry-basedpracticesConstructingExplanations,EngaginginArgumentfromEvidence,andObtaining,Evaluating,andCommunicat-ingInformation,thesemaybeareastotarget.If,ontheotherhand,culturallyrelevantassessmentstructureswereofinterest—usingvariedassessmentforms,includingrubricsandportfolios(e.g.,Chinn,2006);modifyinginstructionbasedonstudents’observedneedsinthemoment(e.g.,Johnson,2011)—therelativelyfewinstancesinwhichtheywerepresentwerethroughtheverysameinquiry-basedpracticesasDiscourse,aswellasbyAnalyzingandInterpretingData.Together,thesetrendsindicatespeciﬁcapproachesforconstructingequitablesciencecurricula.Despitethepotentialforcomplementarityamongculturallyresponsiveandinquiry-basedscience,itisalsoimportanttoquestionwhetherornotallscienceandengineeringpracticesshouldbeintegratedintoculturallyresponsivelearningexperiences.Someresearchhascontendedthatcertainpractices,suchasargumentation,areincongruentwithculturallyresponsiveinstructionduetodifferencesassignedtotheaimsofdialogueacrossvariousculturalgroups(e.g.,consensusversuscritique)(GallardMartınez,2011).Otherscholarshaveseenmorepotentialfortheircompatibility,however.Ogunniyi(2004)proposedtheContiguityArgumentationTheory(CAT)model,whichincorporatesculturalknowledgetoassistlearnersin“verbalizingtheirviewpoints,anddecidingontherelativepowerofthedifferentideasbeingexpressed”especiallywhenattemptingtoreconciledifferencesbetweenIndigenousKnowledgeandWesternscienceworldviews(citedinHewson&Ogunniyi,2011,p.683).Thus,itisimperativethatcurriculumdesignersﬁrstcriticallyexaminetheappropriatenessoftheseapproaches.Asitismorelikely,however,thatteacherswillberesponsiblefordesigningcurriculathanhavingpre-madematerialsfromwhichtodraw(e.g.,Boutteetal.,2010;George,2013;LaughterJournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1168BROWN &Adams,2012),amorevaluableuseoftheseﬁndingsmightbethroughcurriculumdesignsupportsforscienceteachers.Forinstance,intheirTransformativeProfessionalDevelopment(TPD)model,JohnsonandMarx(2009)reportedthatthemiddleschoolscienceteacherswithwhomtheyworkedcontinuallymodiﬁedtheircurriculummaterialstobemoreculturallyresponsivebasedoninformationtheylearnedabouttheirstudentsfromhomevisits,aSpanishclassthatwaspartoftheTPD,andabookstudy.AndBrownandCrippen(2016a)providedmultiplecurriculumdesignsupportsforthescienceteachersintheirprofessionaldevelopmentprogram,includingongoingcriticalreﬂectionontriallessonstheyimplementedandexemplarstheyexperienced,collectiveparticipationduringbrainstormingandcurriculumwritingsessions,andstructuredunit-planningtemplatesbuiltfromtheexistingresearch.Giventhatcurriculumdesignisacomplexprocess,supportstothisendwouldbebeneﬁcial,aswoulddeterminingtheireffectivenessforenhancingteachers’pedagogicaldesigncapacitiesforculturallyresponsivescienceinstruction(i.e.,abilitiestomobilizeresourceswhenmodifyingandenactinginstructionalmaterials)(Brown,2009).ImplicationsforNewHorizons:CulturallyResponsiveEngineeringEducationInAppendixD,AllStandards,allStudents,theFrameworkCommitteefortheNextGenerationScienceStandards(AchieveInc.,2013)contendthat“engineeringhasthepotentialtobeinclusiveofstudentswhohavetraditionallybeenmarginalizedinscienceasbeingrelevanttotheirlivesorfuture”(p.5).Theresultsofthisstudysupportthisclaimandalsosuggestadditionalbeneﬁtsofstudentsengaginginengineeringpracticesinculturallyrelevantcontexts.Thoughinfrequentlyencounteredwithclearculturallyresponsivepractices,whenpresent,engineering-speciﬁcpractices(DeﬁningProblemsandDesigningSolutions)fosteredculturalcompetenceandsocialaction,keytenetsofculturallyresponsivepedagogy(Gay,2010;Ladson-Billings,1995a).Often,thiswasthroughDesigningSolutionssuchaswhenacollectiveofK-12teachersandtheirstudentsdevelopedaninvasiveseaweedremovalandnativespeciesrestorationprograminaccordancewithrecommendationsfromlocalexpertsacrossmultipledisciplines(Chinn,2006).Additionally,instancesofculturallyrelevantinstructionwithengineeringtiesofferedgreatpotentialforstudentstousemathematicsandcomputationalthinking(e.g.,Fusco,2001;Lim&CalabreseBarton,2006).Giventhatculturallyresponsiveengineeringeducationisnewlyemergent,manyofthesameapproachesusedtoresearchculturallyresponsivescienceeducationwouldalsobeappropriate.Asstudentsofcolorengagewithengineeringpracticesinculturallyrelevantcontexts,whatpositiveacademicoutcomes(ifany)areproduced?Thiscouldbeinterrogatedacrossmultipledimensions,suchasthosewhohavestudiedidentities(e.g.,Carloneetal.,2011)andachievement(e.g.,O.Leeetal.,2008)pertainingtoculturallyrelevantandinquiry-basedscienceinstruction.SuchanagendawouldafﬁrmandcrystallizeclaimsmadeinNextGenerationScienceStandardsinevidence-basedways(AchieveInc.,2013).Toadvanceequityinscienceteachingandlearning,manyvoices,cultures,andlanguagesmustberepresented.Whileinquiry-basedscienceinstructioncanhelpstudentsofcolorachieveacademically,culturallyresponsiveapproachesareneededtovalidatetheirbackgrounds,challengeoppressivesystems,andovercomedeﬁcitperspectivesoftheirabilities(O.Lee&Buxton,2010).Byexposingthewaysthatinquiry-basedscienceandengineeringpracticescanintentionallybeusedinserviceofculturallyresponsiveinstruction,theresultsofthisstudyprovidedirectionforachievingtheequitablesciencelearningopportunitiesofwhichtheNRC(2012)advocated.Note1Acompletelistanddescriptionsofthe52studiesexaminedinthismetasynthesisisaccessibleonlineathttp://z.umn.edu/1d5bJournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1169 ReferencesAbrams,E.,Yore,L.D.,Bang,M.,Brayboy,B.M.J.,Castagno,A.,Kidman,J.,...Yen,C.-F.(2014).Culturallyrelevantschoolinginscienceforindigenouslearnersworldwide.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.671–696).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.AchieveInc.(2013).Thenextgenerationsciencestandards.RetrievedMarch2016.Availableonlineat:http://www.nextgenscience.orgAikenhead,G.S.(2006).Scienceeducationforeverydaylife:Evidence-basedpractice.NewYork:TeachersCollegePress.Aikenhead,G.S.,&Huntley,B.(1999).Teachers’viewsonAboriginalstudentslearningwesternandAboriginalscience.CanadianJournalofNativeEducation,23(2),159–175.Albrecht,N.J.(2015).ViewsofscienceteachingandlearningbyimmigrantSomalielders:Perceptionsofconﬂictandacceptance(Unpublisheddoctoraldissertation).UniversityofMinnesota.Anderson,R.D.(2007).Inquiryasanorganizingthemeforsciencecurricula.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(pp.807–830).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Asay,L.D.,&Orgill,M.K.(2010).AnalysisofessentialfeaturesofinquiryfoundinarticlespublishedinTheScienceTeacher,1998–2007.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,21,57–79.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9152-9Ball,D.L.,&Cohen,D.K.(1996).Reformbythebook:Whatisormightbe—Theroleofcurriculummaterialsinteacherlearningandinstructionalreform?EducationalResearcher,25(9),6–8,14.Bang,M.,&Medin,D.(2010).Culturalprocessesinscienceeducation:Supportingthenavigationofmultipleepistemologies.ScienceEducation,94(6),1008–1026.Basu,S.J.,&CalabreseBarton,A(2007).Developingasustainedinterestinscienceamongurbanminorityyouth.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,44(3),466–489.https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20143Boutte,G.,Kelly-Jackson,C.,&Johnson,G.L.(2010).Culturallyrelevantteachinginscienceclassrooms:Addressingacademicachievement,culturalcompetence,andcriticalconsciousness.Interna-tionalJournalofMulticulturalEducation,12(2),1–20.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2016a).Designingforculturallyresponsivescienceeducationthroughprofessionaldevelopment.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,38(3),470–492.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2016b).Thegrowingawarenessinventory:Buildingcapacityforculturallyresponsivescienceandmathematicswithastructuredobservationprotocol.SchoolScienceandMathematics,113(6),127–138.Brown,J.C.,&Crippen,K.J.(2017).Theknowledgeandpracticesofhighschoolscienceteachersinpursuitofculturalresponsiveness.ScienceEducation,101(1),99–133.Brown,M.W.(2009).Theteacher-toolrelationship:Theorizingthedesignanduseofcurriculummaterials.InJ.Remillard,B.Herbel-Eisenmann,&G.M.Lloyd(Eds.),Mathematicsteachersatwork:Connectingcurriculummaterialsandclassroominstruction(pp.17–36).NewYork,NY:Routledge.Brotman,J.S.,&Moore,F.M.(2008).Girlsandscience:Areviewoffourthemesinthescienceeducationliterature.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(9),971–1002.Buxton,C.A.(2006).Creatingcontextuallyauthenticscienceina“low-performing”urbanelementaryschool.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,43(7),695–721.CalabreseBarton,A.,&Tan,E.(2009).Fundsofknowledgeanddiscoursesandhybridspace.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,46(1),50–73.CalabreseBarton,A.,Tan,E.,&Rivet,A.(2008).Creatinghybridspacesforengagingschoolscienceamongurbanmiddleschoolgirls.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,45(1),68–103.Capps,D.K.,Crawford,B.A.,&Constas,M.A.(2012).Areviewoftheempiricalliteratureoninquiryprofessionaldevelopment:Alignmentwithbestpracticesandacritiqueoftheﬁndings.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,23,291–318.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-012-9275-2JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1170BROWN Carlone,H.,Haun-Frank,J.,&Webb,A.(2011).Assessingequitybeyondknowledge-andskills-basedoutcomes:Acomparativeethnographyoftwofourth-gradereform-basedscienceclassrooms.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,48(5),459–485.Carlone,H.,&Johnson,A.(2012).Unpacking‘culture’inculturalstudiesofscienceeducation:Culturaldifferenceversusculturalproduction.EthnographyandEducation,7(2),151–173.Chang,J.-M.,Lee,H.,&Yen,C.-F.(2010).AlternativeconceptionsaboutburningheldbyAtayalindigenestudentsinTaiwan.InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation,8,911–935.Chigeza,P.(2011).Culturalresourcesofminorityandmarginalisedstudentsshouldbeincludedintheschoolsciencecurriculum.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,401–412.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9316-8Chinn,P.W.U.(2006).Preparingscienceteachersforculturallydiversestudents:Developingculturalliteracythroughculturalimmersion,culturaltranslators,andcommunitiesofpractice.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,1,367–402.Crawford,B.A.(2014).Frominquirytoscientiﬁcpracticesinthescienceclassroom.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.515–541).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Creswell,J.W.(2009).Researchdesign:Qualitative,quantitative,andmixedmethodsapproaches(3rded.).ThousandOaks,CA:SagePublications.Ferguson,R.(2008).Ifmulticulturalscienceeducationstandardsexisted,whatwouldtheylooklike?JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,19,547–564.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-008-9108-5Fusco,D.(2001).Creatingrelevantsciencethroughurbanplanningandgardening.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(8),860–877.GallardMartınez,A.J.(2011).Argumentationandindigenousknowledge:Socio-historicalinﬂuencesincontextualizinganargumentationmodelinSouthAfricanschools.CulturalStudiesinScienceEducation,6,719–723.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9358-yGay,G.(2002).Preparingforculturallyresponsiveteaching.JournalofTeacherEducation,53(2),106–116.Gay,G.(2010).Culturallyresponsiveteaching:Theory,research,andpractice(2nded.).NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Gee,J.P.(2005).Anintroductiontodiscourseanalysis:Theoryandmethod(2nded.).London,England:Routledge.Geier,R.,Blumenfeld,P.C.,Marx,R.W.,Krajcik,J.S.,Fishman,B.,Soloway,E.,&Clay-Chambers,J(2008).Standardizedtestoutcomesforstudentsengagedininquiry-basedsciencecurriculainthecontextofurbanreform.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(8),922–939.George,J.(2013).“Doyouhavetopack?”PreparingforculturallyrelevantscienceteachingintheCaribbean.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,35(12),2114–2131.Giroux,H.A.(2011).Oncriticalpedagogy.NewYork,NY:TheContinuumInternationalPublishingGroup.Gonzalez,N.,Moll,L.C.,&Amanti,C.(2005).Fundsofknowledge:Theorizingpracticesinhouseholds,communities,andclassrooms.Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates.Grimberg,B.I.,&Gummer,E.(2013).Teachingsciencefromculturalpointsofintersection.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,50(1),12–32.Hagiwara,S.,CalabreseBarton,A.,&Contento,I.(2007).Culture,food,andlanguage:Perspectivesfromimmigrantmothersinschoolscience.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,2,475–515.https://doi.10.1007/s11422-007-9063-zHerbert,S.(2008).Collaterallearninginscience:Students’responsestoacross-culturalunitofwork.InternationalJournalofScienceEducation,30(7),979–993.Hewson,M.G.,&Ogunniyi,M.B.(2011).Argumentation-teachingasamethodtointroduceindigenousknowledgeintoscienceclassrooms:Opportunitiesandchallenges.CulturalStudiesinScienceEducation,6,679–692.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-010-9303-5JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1171 Howard,T.C.(2010).Whyraceandculturematterinschools:ClosingtheachievementgapinAmerica’sclassrooms.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Jeynes,W.H.(2007).Therelationshipbetweenparentalinvolvementandurbansecondaryschoolacademicachievement:Ameta-analysis.UrbanEducation,42(1),82–110.Johnson,C.C.(2011).Theroadtoculturallyrelevantscience:Exploringhowteachersnavigatechangeinpedagogy.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,48(2),170–198.Johnson,C.C.,&Marx,S.(2009).Transformativeprofessionaldevelopment:Amodelforurbanscienceeducationreform.JournalofScienceTeacherEducation,20,113.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10972-009-9127-xKelly-Jackson,C.P.,&Jackson,T.O.(2011).Meetingtheirfullestpotential:Thebeliefsandteachingofaculturallyrelevantscienceteacher.CreativeEducation,2(4),408–413.Ladson-Billings,G.(1994).Thedreamkeepers:SuccessfulteachersofAfricanAmericanchildren.SanFrancisco,CA:Jossey-Bass.Ladson-Billings,G.(1995a).Towardatheoryofculturallyrelevantpedagogy.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,32(3),465–491.Ladson-Billings,G.(1995b).Butthat’sjustgoodteaching!Thecaseforculturallyrelevantpedagogy.TheoryIntoPractice,34(3),159–165.Laughter,J.C.,&Adams,A.D.(2012).Culturallyrelevantscienceteachinginmiddleschool.UrbanEducation,47(6),1106–1134.Lee,H.,Yen,C.-F.,&Aikenhead,G.(2012).Indigenouselementarystudents’scienceinstructioninTaiwan:IndigenousknowledgeandWesternscience.ResearchinScienceEducation,42,1183–1199.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-011-9240-7Lee,J.,&Bowen,N.K.(2006).Parentinvolvement,culturalcapital,andtheachievementgapamongelementaryschoolchildren.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,43(2),193–218.Lee,O.(2004).TeacherchangeinbeliefsandpracticesinscienceandliteracyinstructionwithEnglishlanguagelearners.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,41(1),5–93.Lee,O.,&Buxton,C.A.(2010).Diversityandequityinscienceeducation:Research,policy,andpractice.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.Lee,O.,Deaktor,R.,Enders,C.&Lambert,J.(2008).Impactofamultiyearprofessionaldevelopmentinterventiononscienceachievementofculturallyandlinguisticallydiverseelementarystudents.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,45(6),726–747.Lee,O.,Deaktor,R.A.,Hart,J.E.,Cuevas,P.,&Enders,C.(2005).Aninstructionalintervention’simpactonthescienceandliteracyachievementofculturallyandlinguisticallydiverseelementarystudents.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,42(8),857–887.Lim,M.,&CalabreseBarton,A.(2006).Sciencelearningandasenseofplaceinaurbanmiddleschool.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,1,107–142.McKinley,E.,&Gan,M.J.S.(2014).Culturallyresponsivescienceeducationforindigenousandethnicminoritystudents.InS.K.Abell&N.G.Lederman(Eds.),Handbookofresearchonscienceeducation(2nded.)(pp.284–300).Mahwah,NJ:LawrenceErlbaumAssociates,Inc.Mensah,F.M.(2011).Acaseforculturallyrelevantteachinginscienceeducationandlessonslearnedforteachereducation.JournalofNegroEducation,80(3),296–309.Meyer,X.,&Crawford,B.A.(2011).Teachingscienceasaculturalwayofknowing:Mergingauthenticinquiry,natureofscience,andmulticulturalstrategies.CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,525–547.Moje,E.B.,Collazo,T.,Carrillo,R.,&Marx,R.W.(2001).“Maestro,whatis‘quality?’”:Language,literacy,anddiscourseinproject-basedscience.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(4),469–498.Moje,E.B.,Ciechanowski,K.M.,Kramer,K.,Ellis,L.,Carrillo,R.,&Collazo,T.(2004).Workingtowardthirdspaceincontentarealiteracy:Anexaminationofeverydayfundsofknowledgeanddiscourse.ReadingResearchQuarterly,39(1),38–70.Nam,Y.,Roehrig,G.H.,Kern,A.,&Reynolds,B.(2012).PerceptionsandpracticesofculturallyrelevantscienceteachinginAmericanIndianclassrooms.InternationalJournalofScienceandMathematicsEducation,11,143–167.Nashon,S.M.,&Anderson,D.(2013).InterpretingstudentviewsoflearningexperiencesinacontextualizedsciencediscourseinKenya.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,50(4),381–407.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching1172BROWN NationalResearchCouncil[NRC].(2012).AframeworkforK-12scienceeducation:Practices,crosscuttingconcepts,andcoreideas.CommitteeonaConceptualFrameworkforNewK-12ScienceEducationStandards.BoardofScienceEducation,DivisionofBehavioralandSocialSciencesandEducation.Washington,D.C.:TheNationalAcademiesPress.Noblit,G.W.,&Hare,D.(1988).Meta-ethnography.ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublishing.Ogunniyi,M.B.(2004).Thechallengeofpreparingandequippingscienceteachersinhighereducationtointegratescientiﬁcandindigenousknowledgesystemsfortheirlearners.SouthAfricanJournalofHigherEducation,18,289–304.Patchen,T.,&Cox-Petersen,A.(2008).Constructingculturalrelevanceinscience:Acasestudyoftwoelementaryteachers.ScienceEducation,92(6),994–101.Powell,R.,Cantrell,S.C.,Malo-Juvera,V.,&Correll,P.(2016).Operationalizingculturallyresponsiveinstruction:PreliminaryﬁndingsofCRIOPresearch.TeachersCollegeRecord,118,1–46.Powell,R.,Cantrell,S.,GallardoCarter,Y.,Cox,A.,Powers,S.,Rightmyer,E.C.,...Wheeler,T.(2012).CulturallyResponsiveInstructionObservationProtocol(revised).Lexington,KY:CollaborativeCenterforLiteracyDevelopment.Reveles,J.M.,&Brown,B.A.(2008).Contextualshifting:Teachersemphasizingstudents’academicidentitytopromotescientiﬁcliteracy.ScienceEducation,92(6),1015–1041.https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20283Rodriguez,A.J.(2015).Whataboutadimensionofengagement,equity,anddiversitypractices?Acritiqueofthenextgenerationsciencestandards.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,52(7),1031–1051.Roehrig,G.H.,Dubosarsky,M.,Mason,A.,Carlson,S.,&Murphy,B.(2011).Welookmore,listenmore,noticemore:Impactofsustainedprofessionaldevelopmentonheadstartteachers’inquiry-basedandculturallyrelevantscienceteachingpractices.JournalofScienceEducationandTechnology,20,566–578.Strauss,A.,&Corbin,J.(1998).Basicsofqualitativeresearch:Techniquesandproceduresfordevelopinggroundedtheory(2nded.).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications,Inc.Tan,A.(2011).Homeculture,science,schoolandsciencelearning:Isreconciliationpossible?CulturalStudiesofScienceEducation,6,559–567.https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-011-9343-5Thorne,S.E.(2012).Meta-synthesis.InL.M.Given(Ed.),TheSAGEencyclopediaofqualitativeresearchmethods(pp.511–513).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications,Inc.Timulak,L.(2014).Qualitativemeta-analysis.InU.Flick(Ed.),TheSAGEhandbookofqualitativedataanalysis(pp.481–496).ThousandOaks,CA:SAGEPublications.Tsurusaki,B.K.,CalabreseBarton,A.,Tan,E.,Koch,P.,&Contento,I.(2013).Usingtransformativeboundaryobjectstocreatecriticalengagementinscience:Acasestudy.ScienceEducation,97(1),1–31.Upadhyay,B.R.(2006).Usingstudents’livedexperiencesinanurbanscienceclassroom:Anelementaryschoolteacher’sthinking.ScienceEducation,90(1),94–110.U.S.CensusBureau.(2012).StatisticalabstractoftheUnitedStates:2012.Washington,DC:GovernmentPrintingOfﬁceAccessedonlineat:http://www.census.gov/library/publications/2011/compendia/statab/131ed/education.htmlWalsh,D.,&Downe,S.(2005).Meta-synthesismethodforqualitativeresearch:Aliteraturereview.JournalofAdvancedNursing,50(2),204–211.Warren,B.,Ballenger,C.,Ogonowski,M.,Rosebery,A.S.,&Hudicourt-Barnes,J.(2001).Rethinkingdiversityinlearningscience:Thelogicofeverydaysense-making.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,38(5),529–552.Wilson,C.D.,Taylor,J.A.,Kowalski,S.M.,&Carlson,J.(2010).Therelativeeffectsandequityofinquiry-basedandcommonplacescienceteachingonstudents’knowledge,reasoning,andargumentation.JournalofResearchinScienceTeaching,47(3),276–301.Xu,J.,Coats,L.T.,&Davidson,M.L.(2012).Promotingstudentinterestinscience:TheperspectivesofexemplaryAfricanAmericanteachers.AmericanEducationalResearchJournal,49(1),124–154.JournalofResearchinScienceTeachingCRPANDINQUIRY-BASEDSCIENCEMETASYNTHESIS1173

This question has already been tackled by one of our writers and a good grade recorded. You can equally get high grades by simply making your order for this or any other school assignment that you may have.

Every Student Buys Essays from us, here is why!

Pressed for time to complete assignments or when you feel like you cannot write, you can purchase an essay on our website. Some students also want model papers to use as samples when revising or writing. There are also students who approach our essay writing service to beat deadlines. We handle every type of homework, assignment, and academic writing tasks. You can buy college essays and other assignments here. At a glance, here are some reasons students prefer our website.

100% Original Essays and Papers

You can be sure that you are getting a paper that is custom written based on your instructions. We do not sell papers that are pre-written. Instead, we write every essay from scratch. When you say “write my essay,” we respond by giving you a paper that is 100% original and free of any plagiarism. The essays you purchase from us have never been sold anywhere.

Flexible & Affordable Prices

It does not cost a fortune to get academic writing help on our website. If you have a question from class, place an order, get a discount, and get cheap essay writing services. What you see as the price is what you pay for. There are no any hidden charges. If you need urgent papers, they might cost a little more, but the price is worth the quality you get in the end. Hire a professional academic writer beginning from $13 a page.

Anonymity, Privacy, and Confidentiality

No one will ever know that you purchased an essay or assignment from our website. The essays you buy from us are written by experts. Your data is only used to coordinate the essay writing services you get. No one can access your personal information and data. Go ahead and order an essay from our website. It is safe, secure, and convenient.

Order a Unique Copy of this Assignment

Topic

Type of Paper

Pages

275 Words

By placing an order you agree to our terms of service

Place Order »