LOUCA, ELBY, HAMMER, KAGEY EPISTEMOLOGICAL RESOURCES Epistemological Resources: Applying a New Epistemological Framework to Science Instruction Loucas Louca Department of Curriculum and Instruction University of Maryland, College Park Andrew Elby Department of Physics University of Maryland, College Park David Hammer Department of Curriculum and Instruction and Department of Physics University of Maryland, College Park Trisha Kagey Montgomery County Public Schools Most research on personal epistemologies has conceived them as made up of relatively large, coherent, and stable cognitive structures, either developmental stages or beliefs (perhaps orga- nized into theories). Recent work has challenged these views, arguing that personal epistemologies are better understood as made up of finer grained cognitive resources whose ac- tivation depends sensitively on context. In this article, we compare these different frameworks, focusing on their instructional implications by using them to analyze a third-grade teacher’s epistemologically motivated intervention and its effect on her students. We argue that the re- sources framework has more predictive and explanatory power than stage- and beliefs-based frameworks do. As teachers and science education researchers, our interest in personal epistemologies stems largely from their effect on stu- dents’ learning of science. Students holding more sophisti- cated epistemological views tend to approach learning more actively and tend to acquire a better conceptual understanding (Linn & Songer, 1993; Schommer, Crouse, & Rhodes, 1992; May & Etkina 2002; Hammer 1994). Classroom interventions aimed explicitly at addressing students’ epistemologies can lead to improved learning (Carey & Smith, 1993; Linn & Hsi, 2000; Smith, Maclin, Houghton, & Hennessey, 2000). Given the importance of epistemologies for learning, how can teachers foster epistemological sophistication most effi- ciently? The answer, we argue in this article, depends on the form of students’ personal epistemologies and on teachers’ perceptions of that form. By “form” we mean the grain size, stability, and context dependence of the relevant cognitive elements. Some researchers view epistemologies as develop- mental stages (King & Kitchener, 2004), others as collec- tions of beliefs (Schommer-Aikins, 2004). We view epistemologies as constructed from finer grained cognitive elements, as described later in this article. In this article, we apply these three theoretical frame- works—developmental, beliefs, and resources—to a third-grade science conversation motivated by the teacher’s epistemological diagnosis of her students’ difficulties. After comparing the frameworks, we evaluate which one has the most descriptive, predictive, and explanatory power with respect to the teacher’s interventions and the students’ reactions to them. THE FORM OF EPISTEMOLOGIES Most research on epistemologies has assumed them to con- sist of developmental stages or beliefs. We review those EDUCATIONAL PSYCHOLOGIST, 39(1), 57–68 Copyright © 2004, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc. Requests for reprints should be sent to Loucas Louca, Department of Curriculum and Instruction, University of Maryland, 2226 Benjamin Bldg., College Park, MD 20742. E-mail: LL109@umail.umd.edu Do Not Copy