Book Review

Golan, Tal. (2004). Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Pp. 325. ISBN-10 0-674-02580-6 (pbk.). $22.95

Abstract:
Tal Golan’s book Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America is a relatively brief and thoroughly engaging treatment of an important yet mostly neglected topic, and should be of interest to students, teachers, and practitioners of both science and law.

Book Review:
In light of the public’s recent interest in the intersections of science and the law, as well as the incorporation of forensics into many science classes, Tal Golan’s Laws of Men and Laws of Nature: The History of Scientific Expert Testimony in England and America (2004, Harvard University Press) is a fascinating, well-written, and thoroughly researched perspective on this neglected topic, covering the last few centuries. Comprised (disappointingly) of only six chapters, it is a relatively brief, yet engrossing and clever history that leaves the reader wanting more, particularly from this author, who has an engaging but scholarly writing style. Chronological and yet contextual in style, the first chapter of the book deals with the earliest appearances of science in matters of law in Europe, while chapters two and three address legal and scientific issues in Victorian England and later across the Atlantic in America, as the industrial revolution brings about a deluge of litigation. The remaining chapters are concerned with, in order, the development, utilization, and acceptance into the courts of microscopic blood analysis techniques, x-ray images, and polygraph technology.
According to Golan, recurrent themes that seemed to resonate vividly concerning scientific expert testimony in American and English courts of law, both in the Victorian and modern eras, were the conundrum of conflicting scientific opinions, as well as the financial issue of whether scientists should be paid for their testimony or not. In addition, the ability of jurors, judges, and lawyers to understand and effectively utilize scientific concepts in courts of law to achieve fair and accurate legal outcomes was an essential issue. For science educators, this book should reinforce that a general public that is equipped with a fair degree of scientific literacy, coupled with critical thinking skills, is a highly desired and valuable product. This principle is the same over the centuries and across the oceans, regardless of whether a case involves heating whale oil, patent litigation over a chemical process, medical malpractice, advances in microscopy, x-ray technology, DNA, or polygraph tests.
The “professionalization” of science was a hastened tremendously in Victorian times. Meetings, journals, societies, correspondences between scientists, and industrialization of scientific developments all contributed to this, but surprisingly the paid testimony of scientists in court cases seemed to also be one of the most prominent factors. Up to this point in time, the practice of science was mostly limited to landed gentlemen and aristocracy who took up science as a way to spend their otherwise idle time, since they did not have to work for a living, and this group seemed particularly critical of what they perceived as the “prostitution” of science in the courtroom. This divide, particularly in England, between the wealthy gentlemen who indulged their spare time as scientists and those who actually made their living from testifying, collecting, writing, and experimenting, continued to grow. In America, on the other hand, the use of science to make a living or even achieve great wealth was not seen as being a danger to the “purity” of science and its quest for knowledge and understanding of the natural world.
Another major theme of this book is the visual nature of much of the scientific evidence and testimony in a legal setting, and the potential for variability, or even unscrupulousness, in its interpretation. The author discusses how photographs, microscopic evidence, and x-ray exposures could be interpreted from both a subjective and objective view point. Is such evidence to be taken at face value for what it represents, or should the human element of the production and interpretation of this type of evidence be given precedence? Who is qualified to obtain such evidence, and further, to interpret and explain it? Golan’s answer is that some types of visual evidence, such as surveillance camera footage, can stand alone and essentially speak for it self, while other types, such as x-ray images, require a trained and trusted specialist to produce the image and clarify its meaning. Golan discusses in an enlightening manner how new technologies such as lie-detectors were gradually accepted by the courts and society in general, and how scientific court room testimony sometimes contributed to the creation of entirely new disciplines and specializations in science and medicine, with new knowledge often originating when experiments were recreated for the benefit of the courts.

Was it the adversarial nature of the courts, or the moral and ethical degradation of the scientists involved that created the greatest problems for expert scientific testimony over the centuries? The apparent conflict between the procedures of law and methods of science seem to Golan to be the root cause, especially that lawyers, judges, and jurors who lacked scientific backgrounds and knowledge were being asked to decide cases on their scientific merit. The author goes further, expounding that scientists were not entirely at fault, when they appeared to be at odds on the witness stand. The vagaries of science, from differing methods and interpretations, are part of what make it a unique enterprise. One never “closes the books” on any scientific topic, believing that we know everything there is to know about it. The reproducibility and nature of continuous questioning in science served to instigate many of the apparent conflicts with the absolute nature of law and the legal system. This is not to say that there were not some devious charlatans or even legitimate, well-meaning scientists who in effect did indeed sell their testimony to the highest bidder at times.
One of the few reservations about this book was the absence of any in-depth treatment on DNA technology and its role in the modern courtroom. It is also possible the author did the reader a disservice by not presenting and discussing at least some of the major cases in which the “mad doctors” of insanity trials played a role. Golan unfortunately glosses over these potentially significant episodes by stating they are covered sufficiently elsewhere, and it would have been enlightening to see how the “soft sciences” played out in court, especially in relation to how the “hard sciences” were involved, both in the Victorian and modern ages. Of course, Golan devotes an entire chapter to the development and early use of lie-detectors or polygraph machines, which again seems incongruous to me, in terms of discussing one aspect of psychology and the law and not the other. Nevertheless, chapters five and six, on the use of x-ray images and polygraph results in court, illuminate the greatest difference in the early and later chapters. As the twentieth century dawned, new technologies like these created a demand for specialists to administer, supervise, and explain the results in court and likewise for the courts to accept them as the valid procedures and evidence they were. This continues even today with new medical imaging, DNA, and other forensic technologies.
Overall Laws of Men and Laws of Nature is a fascinating and informative read on a mostly neglected yet important topic, and it will definitely enhance anyone’s knowledge of the history of expert scientific testimony in courts of law. For science educators, this reading also reinforces that teachers have the responsibility of being sure their students understand that science is an inquiry-based and dynamic process, and not just a static collection of facts. Just as there is historically no one definitive “scientific method”, students must be aware that science is open-ended, accomplished through a variety of techniques, its results are subject to interpretation, and its theories are subject to change as new data become available. Scientists, science teachers and students, and productive and responsible citizens in general should all be open-minded and receptive of new thoughts and points of view on any given topic. At the same time, the population should also be scientifically literate and prepared to think critically and be skeptics if necessary. Golan’s book brings to mind the long-running advertisements that suggest that “four of five dentists recommend product X”. Students need to be aware that these dentists and their opinions, like many of the scientific expert witnesses and their testimony in this book, should be subject to scrutiny and must be considered in the context in which they and their opinions are presented. This includes the dynamic nature of science, possible financial entanglements, and the social and legal climate of the time and place in question. This book is heartily recommended for science educators, students, attorneys and anyone interested in forensics, law, or science.

Summer Science Institutes Literature Review

Introduction
The Need for More Effective Science Teaching
Every week the news media is full of stories describing concerns about America’s competitiveness in a global economy and decline in our standing as a world leader in science and technology. Entities ranging from the president to the National Science Board to local school boards and even individual teachers have pointed to the lack of student proficiency on national and international tests of mathematics and science and the decline of students pursuing science and engineering degrees from universities nationwide as a cause for economic and societal apprehension and concern. It is also evident that some of the most critical and fastest growing occupations are dependent upon a knowledge base in science and mathematics. Solutions to these concerns include starting students as early as possible in inquiry-based science programs taught by proficient and knowledgeable teachers comfortable with the use of technology and the nature of science and inquiry. This can partially be brought about by effective constructivist, inquiry-based professional development workshops and institutes and with mentorship by practicing scientists particularly in the summer months and in association with institutions such as natural history museums, school districts, and universities.

Science teacher self-efficacy, science literacy, and understanding of the nature of science all seem to be strongly linked to an understanding of the nature of inquiry (Akerson and Hanuscin, 2006). Professional development workshops and institutes with an emphasis on research activities and constructivist, inquiry-based science likewise seem to be the most effective and practical ways to bring this about (Radford, 1998). Both pre-service and in-service teachers seem to benefit from these types of activities, particularly in the summer and in association with institutions such as museums and universities, as do their schools and their individual students (Melber and Cox-Peterson, 2005). Loucks-Horsley and Matsumoto (1999) have emphasized the link between effective professional development and its impact on student achievement. It is imperative to undertake more studies of this type to reinforce and support this viewpoint, and then to design and implement workshops of this nature and encourage as much active participation by our nation’s science teachers as possible (Johnson, 2007).

Discussion
Science Professional Development Models

Low science teacher self-efficacy, failure to employ learning cycles in lesson development, technology deficits, and a lack of understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines may contribute to lowered student achievement. Relevant components of competent science teaching may be increased through effective professional development workshops and summer science institutes. Methods of remediation in summer science workshops may include participation in generating and carrying out learning cycles, authentic scientific research projects with an expert mentor, utilization of appropriate technologies, and presentations on the effectiveness and types of learning cycles. It may also be possible to follow up in subsequent months and years with the targeted teachers, schools, and even monitor specified corresponding levels of student achievement. General models of science professional development used previously include curriculum development, mentoring, lesson study, teacher-directed study groups, action-research programs, and immersion experiences (Loucks-Horsley, et al, 2003).

This model proposes to incorporate elements of immersion, technology, curriculum generation and development, and mentoring of research projects by practicing scientists to create and implement a truly effective professional development model for K-12 science educators. Howe and Stubbs (1996) developed a useful and promising constructivist/sociocultural model for the professional development of science teachers. The central vehicle of their model is a series of institutes where teachers first listen to scientists present recent research findings and then write classroom activities using and adapting the information and ideas presented. Their results indicate that many of these teachers have now become empowered to assume responsibility for their own professional development, and even assume positions of leadership in their schools, districts, and state organizations. In another study (Westerlund, et al, 2002) clearly indicated that a professional development model of prolonged engagement in research activity mentored by practicing scientists can be successful at promoting teacher change towards more inquiry teaching, enhance their knowledge of science content, and increase their enthusiasm for teaching science. Morrison and Estes (2007) stated that using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers was an effective strategy for encouraging them to teach science as a process and help them strengthen their science content understanding. A study from Australia found that a professional development model mentoring of elementary school teachers by university science professors has positive short-term implications for implementing constructivist science teaching strategies and facilitating the understanding of science content by the teachers (Koch and Appleton, 2007).

Problems with Traditional Science Teaching Methods and Professional Development Activities

The literature suggests that students need to “learn more than can be absorbed from simply reading about science-they need to do science, becoming critical thinkers and evaluators of what they observe and learn” to compete in today’s rapidly changing world (Rhoton and Bowers, 2001, p. 13). The state of Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS) and the National Science Education Standards (NSES) recommend an inquiry approach to science teaching. Unfortunately many new and even experienced teachers feel ill-equipped to meet this challenge. Many K-12 school teachers have never been involved in a science inquiry investigation (Kielborn & Gilmer, 1999). Teachers use textbooks or cookbook type laboratories to teach science to their students. Textbook readings, note-taking, and cookbook lab activities give students the impression that science is scripted and that every experiment provides the correct answer. These types of activities do not accurately reflect the investigative and historically varied nature of scientific inquiry and do not require students to develop the critical thinking skills needed to compete in our changing world.

Evidence of Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Professional Development

There is much in the scientific educational research literature to support the idea that inquiry-based science instruction can be extremely effective. Chun and Oliver (2000) found significant gains in science teacher self-efficacy during a two-year study involving participation in inquiry-based professional development workshops. In 2004, Jarvis and Pell demonstrated similar increases in science teachers’ attitudes and cognition and corresponding student achievement gains during and after professional development activities. Likewise, a seven-year study in Iowa found tremendous gains in student achievement when science teachers designated as team leaders undertook ongoing training in constructivist teaching strategies advocated by the National Science Education Standards (Kimble, Yager, and Yager, 2006). Raudenbush, Rowan, and Cheong (1992) found that the level of teacher preparation was a strong predictor of self-efficacy in the science classroom, and engaging in highly collaborative environments such as professional development workshops and institutes helped to facilitate this. Luft (2001) noted that an inquiry-based professional development program positively impacted both the beliefs and practices of secondary science teachers. Supovitz and Turner (2000) indicated a strong link between the quantity of professional development in which teachers participate and the level of inquiry-based teaching practice and investigative classroom culture. Another study found that professional development linking theory and practice through curriculum decision making had a profound influence on decisions concerning classroom environments, especially when the teachers were engaged and mentored by university scientists and science educators, and informed by theoretical perspectives of science teaching (Parke and Coble, 1998).

Summary/Conclusion

This review of the literature supports a professional development model that expects to 1) increase the scientific literacy and efficacy of K-12 school teachers by providing authentic scientific inquiry experiences with technology that promote an understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines and 2) present teachers with an approach to science teaching that translates this genuine inquiry experience into classroom practice. Clearly, the evidence provided by prior research suggests that such a model should be effective in achieving these goals. The author’s own personal experience also suggests that this type of professional development, with an emphasis on authentic, mentored research and generation of inquiry-based curricula, can have a profound impact on both a personal, as well as a school or district-wide basis. This involves shifting from a traditional didactic and textbook-driven science curriculum to a more inquiry-based, constructivist one and professional development institutes and workshops are the most practical and appropriate means to achieve these goals.





References

Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching nature of science through inquiry: results of a 3-year professional development program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.

Chun, S., & Oliver, J. (2000). A quantitative examination of teacher self-efficacy and knowledge of the nature of science. 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.

Howe, A. C., & Stubbs, H. S. (1996). Empowering science teachers: a model for professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 8, 167-182.

Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a two-year in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1787-1811.

Johnson, C. C. (2007). Effective science teaching, professional development and No Child Left Behind: barriers, dilemmas, and reality. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 133-136.

Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo J. D. (2006). A study of the effect of sustained, whole –school professional development on student achievement in science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 1-12.

Kielborn, T., Gilmer, P., & Southeastern Regional Vision for Education (SERVE), T. (1999). Meaningful science: teachers doing inquiry + teaching science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434008) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.

Kimble, L. L., Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (2006). Success of a professional-development model in assisting teachers to change their teaching to match the more emphasis conditions urged in the National Science Education Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1007-1021.

Koch, J. & Appleton, K. (2007). The effect of a mentoring model for elementary science professional development. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 209-231.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, S. E., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. W. (2003). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics: second edition. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Loucks-Horsley, S. & Matsumoto, C. (1999). Research on professional development for teachers of mathematics and science: the state of the scene. School Science and Mathematics, 99, 213-233.

Luft, J. A. (2001). Changing inquiry practices and beliefs: the impact of an inquiry-based professional development programme on beginning and experienced secondary science teachers. International Journal of Science Education, 23, 517-534.

Melber, L. M., & Cox-Peterson, A. M., (2005). Teacher professional development and informal learning environments: investigating partnerships and possibilities. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 16, 103-120.

Morrison, J. A., & Estes, J. C. (2007). Using scientists and real-world scenarios in professional development for middle school science teachers. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 18, 165-184.

Parke, H. M. & Coble, C. R. (1998). Teachers designing curriculum as professional development: a model for transformational science teaching. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 34, 773-789.

Radford, D. L. (1998). Transferring theory into practice: a model for professional development for science education reform. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 35, 73-88.

Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F., (1992). Contextual effects on the self-perceived efficacy of high school teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167.

Rhoton, J., Bowers, P., & National Science Teachers Association, A. (2001). Professional development planning and design. Issues in science education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED449040) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.

Supovitz, J. A. & Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37, 963-980.

Westerlund, J. F., Garcia, D. M., Koke, J. R., Taylor, T. A., & Mason, D. S. (2002). Summer scientific research for teachers: the experience and its effect. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13, 63-83.

Summer Science Professional Development Workshops and Science Teacher Self-Efficacy and Knowledge of the Nature of Inquiry

Every week the news media is full of stories describing concerns about America’s competitiveness in a global economy and decline in our standing as a world leader in science and technology. Entities ranging from the president to the National Science Board to local school boards and even individual teachers have pointed to the lack of student proficiency on national and international tests of mathematics and science and the decline of students pursuing science and engineering degrees from universities nationwide as a cause for economic and societal apprehension and concern. It is also evident that some of the most critical and fastest growing occupations are dependent upon a knowledge base in science and mathematics. Solutions to these concerns include starting students as early as possible in inquiry-based science programs taught by proficient and knowledgeable teachers comfortable with the nature of science and inquiry, and this can partially be brought about by effective inquiry-based professional development workshops and institutes, particularly in the summer months.

Possible Methods of Remediation

Low science teacher self-efficacy and lack of understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines may contribute to lowered student achievement because of less effective teaching. Relevant components of competent science teaching may be increased through effective professional development workshops and summer science institutes. Methods of remediation in summer science workshops may include participation in generating and carrying out Learning Cycles, authentic scientific research projects with an expert mentor, and presentations on the effectiveness and types of Learning Cycles. A Learning Cycle is a teaching philosophy in which the students gather data, the teacher helps them develop the concept of interest, and then together they expand and apply the concept. Instruments to be administered to judge the effectiveness of a workshop may include a Demographic Information Survey, the Science Teacher Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI-B Pre/Post), a qualitative Nature of Inquiry Pre/Post component, and a Summative Post-workshop Survey. It may also be possible to follow up in subsequent months and years with the targeted teachers, schools, and even specific, corresponding levels of student achievement.

Problems with Traditional Science Teaching Methods

The literature suggests that students need to “learn more than can be absorbed from simply reading about science-they need to do science, becoming critical thinkers and evaluators of what they observe and learn” to compete in today’s rapidly changing world (Rhoton and Bowers, 2001, p. 13). The state of Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS) and the National Science Education Standards (NSES) recommend an inquiry approach to science teaching. Unfortunately many new and even experienced teachers feel ill-equipped to meet this challenge. Most K-12 school teachers have never been involved in a science inquiry investigation (Kielborn & Gilmer, 1999). Teachers use textbooks or cookbook type laboratories to teach science to their students. Textbook readings, note-taking, and cookbook lab activities give students the impression that science is scripted and that every experiment provides the correct answer. These types of activities do not accurately reflect the investigative and historically varied nature of scientific inquiry and do not require students to develop the critical thinking skills needed to compete in our changing world. This study expects to 1) increase the scientific literacy and efficacy of K-12 school teachers by providing authentic scientific inquiry experiences that promote an understanding of the nature of inquiry in scientific disciplines and 2) present teachers with an approach to science teaching that translates this genuine inquiry experience into classroom practice.

Evidence of Effectiveness of Inquiry-Based Science Professional Development Workshops

There is much in the scientific educational research literature to support positive answers to the questions posed above. A reliable measure of science teacher self-efficacy is necessary to evaluate the pre- and post-effects of workshops and other training methods, and the Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI-B) has been used by many of the studies cited here, as well as in others (Enochs and Riggs, 1990). Chun and Oliver (2000) found significant gains in science teacher self-efficacy during a two-year study involving participation in inquiry-based professional development workshops. In 2004, Jarvis and Pell demonstrated similar increases in science teachers’ attitudes and cognition and corresponding student achievement gains during and after professional development activities. Likewise, a seven-year study in Iowa found tremendous gains in student achievement when science teachers designated as team leaders undertook ongoing training in constructivist teaching strategies advocated by the National Science Education Standards (Kimble, Yager, and Yager, 2006). Raudenbush, Rowan, and Cheong (1992) found that the level of teacher preparation was a strong predictor of self-efficacy in the science classroom, and engaging in highly collaborative environments such as professional development workshops and institutes helped to facilitate this.

Discussion

Science teacher self-efficacy seems to be strongly linked to an understanding of the nature of inquiry, and by extension so does greater student achievement in science. Professional development workshops and institutes with an emphasis on research activities and inquiry-based science likewise seem to be one of the most effective and practical ways to bring this about. Both preservice and inservice teachers seem to benefit from these types of activities, as do their schools and their individual students. It is imperative to undertake more studies of this type to reinforce and support this viewpoint, and then to design and implement workshops of this nature and encourage as much active participation by our nation’s science teachers as possible.

Purpose of Research

The objective of this research project is to evaluate the effectiveness of a summer science professional development workshop in increasing the scientific literacy and efficacy of participating K-12 school teachers, and increase the use of inquiry-based curricula in K-12 classrooms. The research questions to be posed are: 1) Does participation in a professional development experience with authentic scientific research and inquiry-based teaching components increase science teaching efficacy among K-12 teachers? 2) Does participation in a professional development experience with authentic scientific research and inquiry-based teaching components increase use of inquiry-based approaches in classroom instruction among K-12 teachers? 3) Does participation in a professional development experience with authentic scientific research and inquiry-based teaching components change attitudes of K-12 teachers towards teaching science and the nature of inquiry?
References

Akerson, V. L., & Hanuscin, D. L. (2007). Teaching Nature of Science through Inquiry: Results of a 3-Year Professional Development Program. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44, 653-680.

Chun, S., & Oliver, J. (2000). A Quantitative Examination of Teacher Self-Efficacy and Knowledge of the Nature of Science. 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science.

Enochs, L., & Riggs, I. (1990). Further Development of an Elementary Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument: A Preservice Elementary Scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 694-706.

Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a two-year in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1787-1811.

Johnson, C. C., Kahle, J. B., & Fargo J. D. (2006). A Study of the Effect of Sustained, Whole –School Professional Development on Student Achievement in Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 10, 1-12.

Kielborn, T., Gilmer, P., & Southeastern Regional Vision for Education (SERVE), T. (1999). Meaningful Science: Teachers Doing Inquiry + Teaching Science. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED434008) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.

Kimble, L. L., Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (2006). Success of a Professional-Development Model in Assisting Teachers to Change Their Teaching to Match the More Emphasis Conditions Urged in the National Science Education Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1007-1021.

Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F., (1992). Contextual Effects on the Self-perceived Efficacy of High School Teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167.

Rhoton, J., Bowers, P., & National Science Teachers Association, A. (2001). Professional Development Planning and Design. Issues in Science Education. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED449040) Retrieved June 13, 2007, from ERIC database.

Literature Review Outline and Reference List

Summer Science Professional Development Workshops and Science Teacher Self-Efficacy

I. Low science teacher self-efficacy and lack of understanding of inquiry, the nature of science, and concept development in lesson design may contribute to lowered student achievement and less effective teaching

II. Relevant components of effective science teaching that may be increased through effective professional development workshops
a. High science teacher self-efficacy
b. Understanding of the nature of science
c. Understanding of the nature of inquiry
d. Effective concept development through proper lesson design
e. More use of inquiry-based components in the classroom

III. Methods of remediation in summer science workshops
a. Participation in generating and carrying out Learning Cycles
b. Authentic scientific research projects with an expert mentor
c. Presentations on effectiveness and types of Learning Cycles

IV. Instruments to be administered to evaluate effectiveness of workshops
a. Demographic Information Survey
b. Qualitative Inquiry Component
c. Qualitative Lesson Design and Concept Development
d. Nature of Science Scale (NOSS)
e. Science Teacher Efficacy Belief Instrument (STEBI-B)
f. Understanding the Learning Cycle (ULC)
g. Summative Participant Survey (SPS)

V. Discussion

Annotated Reference List:

Chun, S., & Oliver, J. (2000). A Quantitative Examination of Teacher Self-Efficacy and Knowledge of the Nature of Science. 2000 Annual Meeting of the Association for the Education of Teachers in Science. This study indicated that teacher self-efficacy and beliefs about the nature of science are not easily changed, but increases in both were shown over the course of this three year study.

Enochs, L., & Riggs, I. (1990). Further Development of an Elementary Science Teaching Efficacy Belief Instrument: A Preservice Elementary Scale. School Science and Mathematics, 90, 694-706. This paper showed the STEBI-B to be a valid and reliable instrument for determining science teachers’ self-efficacy, and compared the self-efficacy level of scientists, science teachers, and philosophers.

Jarvis, T., & Pell, A. (2004). Primary teachers’ changing attitudes and cognition during a two-year in-service programme and their effect on pupils. International Journal of Science Education, 26, 1787-1811. This two year study demonstrated increases in the science teachers’ confidence, self-efficacy, attitudes to managing science in the classroom and understanding of science when participating in the workshops.

Kimble, L. L., Yager, R. E., & Yager, S. O. (2006). Success of a Professional-Development Model in Assisting Teachers to Change Their Teaching to Match the More Emphasis Conditions Urged in the National Science Education Standards. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 17, 1007-1021. This paper showed how science teachers’ use of constructivist strategies increased in the classroom after in-service training, and a corresponding rise in student achievement.

Raudenbush, S. W., Rowan, B., & Cheong, Y. F., (1992). Contextual Effects on the Self-perceived Efficacy of High School Teachers. Sociology of Education, 65, 150-167. This study showed how self-efficacy can vary from teacher to teacher, and how it can be related to the level of students being taught, amount of control over key working conditions, and working in highly collaborative environments.

A Learning Cycle: Forces

Forces: A Learning Cycle


Science Concept: A force is a push or a pull. Unbalanced forces cause motion, balanced forces do not.

Age/Grade of Students: 6-8th graders, mostly
10 to 14 years old.



TEACHER’S GUIDE

Forces: A Learning Cycle

Concept:

A force is a push or a pull. Unbalanced forces cause motion, balanced forces do not.

Materials:

Open area with 5-10 m diameter circle, rope, block of wood with hooks in opposite ends, two spring scales, gloves, helmets, paper, and pencil

Safety:

A soft or grassy surface is preferred, and helmets and gloves are recommended for both the “reverse sumo” and tug of war.

Procedures:

See Teacher’s and Student’s Guides

Assessment:

-Completion and class discussion of questions on student’s guide.
-Appropriate practice problems.
-Quiz or test.
-Completion of Expansion(s) with discussion and observation to facilitate and confirm student understanding.

















TEACHER’S GUIDE


“A TUG OF WAR”

EXPLORATION PART A:

TEACHER NOTE: Explain each setup and have students make predictions before each game.
On the first setup evenly split the class into two separate teams.
On the second setup move 5 players from the red team and put them on the blue team to create a team with a larger number. (Numbers may vary depending on class size.)
On the third setup pick students who are the strongest and put them on the team with the lowest number of players. (Keep the ration the same as in the second setup.) For each setup, play 3 games and have students record their information between each trial.

Prediction 1:

Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? Answers will vary. Students may say something about strength or size

because the numbers are the same.

Prediction 2:

Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? Students will probably say the blue team will win because they have more

people.

Prediction 3:

Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? Students will either predict the team with the strongest members OR the

team with the most members. Either will be accepted.







TEACHER’S GUIDE



Number on each team
Game 1
Game 2
Game 3
Team with most wins
Red _____
Blue_____





Red _____
Blue_____





Red _____
Blue_____









You may want to make a copy of the table for the overhead or put the table on the board.

When the teams were even who won the most games? Why? Answers will vary,

Explanation may be because a student is stronger or bigger.

When the teams were uneven who won the most games? Why? Students may

say the team that had the most people.

When the teams were divided by size, who won the most games? Why? Students

may say the team with the most members or the team with the stronger players.

Were your predictions correct or incorrect? Explain. Answers will vary.












TEACHER’S GUIDE

PUSHING EACH OTHERS “BUTT”ONS

EXPLORATION PART B:

TEACHER NOTE: The gym was suggested because it already has circles on the floor. You may also want to tape down a 2m X 2m square to use if you want more than one group to go at a time. Teacher will line up 2 students back-to-back at the center line. When the teacher blows the whistle the students will attempt to push each other out of bounds. The students may not use their hands to accomplish this and must stay back-to-back. If they fall or become disconnected they reconnect and begin again. The game ends when one student is pushed out of the circle or square. Have students record the winner in their table.


1. Who won the most games in your group? Explain why this happened.

Answers will vary depending on results.

2. Did the size of the person determine who won? Why or why not?

Answers will vary depending on results.























TEACHER’S GUIDE


IDEA

Go over the answers to the IDEA page.
Students may not come up with the idea that a force is a push or pull. Teacher may have to invent the term force. It needs to be stated that the change in motion that is experienced in these activities indicates that a force is present. For example, when the rope is not in motion and is stopped, a force is applied. Teacher should also express to students that even if the object is not moving a force may still be applied.

1. During the tug of war game, was the rope in motion before the rope was

touched? The rope was not in motion before it was touched.

2. How do you know if the rope was or was not in motion? We know the rope

was not in motion because the bandana was not moving toward or away from

the reference point.

3. What observations about the rope did you make when the game of tug of war

began? What caused this to happen? Answers may include the rope is

moving or starts moving. Students may say this is caused because they are

pulling on it. Some students may also bring the term force out at this time.

4. At any point in the game was the rope not in motion? If so, when and why?

The rope was not in motion when both teams were pulling with the same

strength on both ends.

5. In exploration A, what action was taking place? pulling

6. In exploration B, what action was taking place? pushing

7. Do the actions in the explorations have the ability to cause an object to move?

Yes, both pulling and pushing can cause an object to move or change

direction.

TEACHER’S GUIDE

IDEA CONT.,

8. Are the actions described above, considered to be forces? Explain. At this

point, hopefully students can say yes because pushing or pulling is applying

a force.

9. What idea do you have about forces? Students should say that a force is a

push or pull and can cause a change in motion.

10. Do forces always cause the object to move? Explain. Forces do not cause

objects to move. For example, in the tug of war game when the equal force is

being applied to both sides of the rope.

11. Give your definition of what a force is. Answers will vary but students should

state that a force is a push or a pull. Unbalanced forces cause motion,

balanced forces do not.





















TEACHER’S GUIDE

“A BALANCING ACT”

EXPANSION
Teacher may want to make an overhead or put on the board the tables so that the results may be discussed as a group. Teacher also needs to explain the proper use of a spring scale.

Procedure:
1. Using the tape the teacher provides, tape a center line on the desk.
2. Place the object evenly on the center line.
3. Attach a spring scale to each side of the object.
4. Each person pulls with a force of 1 Newton.
5. Determine whether or not the object is in motion using the tape line as a reference point.
Student #1 Force


Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?
1N

1 N




Repeat activity with one student pulling with a force of 1 Newton while the other
Student does not apply a force.

Student #1 Force
Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were the forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?
1N

0 N




Repeat activity with both students pulling with a force of 1 Newton on the same
side of the object.

Student #1 Force
Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were the forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?







TEACHER’S GUIDE

Balance forces are when the forces are equal or unequal.

Balance forces cause motion or do not cause motion.

Unbalanced forces are when the forces are equal or unequal.

Unbalanced forces cause motion or do not cause motion.

Give a definition of balanced forces based on your information or observation.

Balanced forces are when equal forces are applied in opposite directions.

Give a definition of unbalanced forces based on your information or observation.

Unbalanced forces are unequal forces applied in opposite directions. Students

may also say when 2 forces applied in the same direction.

Give an example of a real life situation in which there are unbalanced forces.

Students may say kicking a soccer ball, closing a door, opening a drawer. Other

possible answers will be accepted.

Give an example of a real life situation in which there are balanced forces.

Answers may include leaning against a wall, telephone lines being held up or

other possible answers.

When the forces were applied in the same direction was it a balanced or

unbalanced force on the object? Explain. When forces are applied in the same

direction it will be an unbalanced force because there is nothing to prevent the

start of motion.







STUDENT’S GUIDE

“A TUG OF WAR”

EXPLORATION PART A:

Materials:
Tug of war rope
Gym or large area
Bandana

Procedure:
1. The rope is positioned so that the bandana is placed on the half court line.
2. Your teacher will divide the class into 2 EVEN teams.
3. Your teacher will assign your team a color and a specific end of the rope.
4. Your teacher will tell you when to start pulling.
5. When half of the team passes the center court line, the game is over and the teacher will instruct you to drop the rope.
6. Make a prediction before the game begins.

Prediction 1:
Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? ____________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________

Now the teacher will divide the class into 2 different teams.

Prediction 2:
Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? ____________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Now the teacher will divide the class into different teams again.

Prediction 3:
Who do you think will win the most of three games? RED BLUE (circle one)

Why? ____________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

STUDENT’S GUIDE

TUG OF WAR CONT.,


Complete the data table with the results of each game by filling in the team that won.

Number on each team
Game 1
Game 2
Game 3
Team with most wins
Red _____
Blue _____





Red _____
Blue _____





Red _____
Blue _____







1. When the teams were even who won the most games? Why? ___________________

_______________________________________________________________________

2. When the teams were uneven who won the most games? Why? _________________

________________________________________________________________________

3. When the teams were divided by size, who won the most games? Why? __________

________________________________________________________________________

4. Were your predictions correct or incorrect? Explain. __________________________

________________________________________________________________________











STUDENT’S GUIDE

PUSHING EACH OTHERS “BUTT”ONS

EXPLORATION PART B:

Procedure:
1. Find a partner (only 2 per group).
2. Your teacher will instruct you where to line up back to back.
3. When the teacher blows the whistle, begin pushing your partner. You must stay back to back and you may NOT use your hands.
4. Repeat the procedure 2 more times.
5. Record the name of the winner in the table below.

Student #1 __________________________ Student #2 ___________________________

Trial 1
Trial 2
Trial 3
Most Wins








Find 2 other groups and record their information below.

Student 1__________________ vs. Student 2 __________________ Winner __________

Student 1__________________ vs. Student 2 __________________ Winner __________


Who won the most games in your group? Explain why this happened.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Did the size of the person determine who won? Why or why not?

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________






STUDENT’S GUIDE

IDEA

During the tug of war game, was the rope in motion before the rope was touched?

_________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

How do you know if the rope was or was not in motion? ____________________

__________________________________________________________________

What observations about the rope did you make when the game of tug of war

began? What caused this to happen? ___________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

At any point in the game was the rope not in motion? If so, when and why?

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

In the exploration A, what action was taking place? ________________________

__________________________________________________________________

In the exploration B, what action was taking place? ________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Do the actions in the explorations have the ability to cause an object to move?

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Are the actions described above, considered to be forces? Explain. ___________

__________________________________________________________________


STUDENT’S GUIDE

IDEA CONT.,

What idea do you have about forces? ___________________________________

_________________________________________________________________

Do forces always cause the object to move? Explain. ______________________

__________________________________________________________________

Give you definition of what a force is. __________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

































STUDENT’S GUIDE

EXPANSION

Procedure:
1. Using the tape the teacher provides, tape a center line on the desk.
2. Place the object evenly on the center line.
3. Attach a spring scale to each side of the object.
4. Each person pulls with a force of 1 Newton.
5. Determine whether or not the object is in motion using the tape line as a reference point.
Student #1 Force


Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?
1N

1 N




Repeat activity with one student pulling with a force of 1 Newton while the other
Student does not apply a force.

Student #1 Force
Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were the forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?
1N

0 N




Repeat activity with both students pulling with a force of 1 Newton on the same
side of the object.

Student #1 Force
Student #2 Force
Did the object move?
Were the forces equal?
Are the forces working in the same or opposite direction?











STUDENT’S GUIDE

Underline the bold word that completes the sentence correctly.

Balance forces are when the forces are equal or unequal.

Balance forces cause motion or do not cause motion.

Unbalanced forces are when the forces are equal or unequal.

Unbalanced forces cause motion or do not cause motion.

Give a definition of balanced forces based on your information or observation.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Give a definition of unbalanced forces based on your information or observation.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Give an example of a real life situation in which there are unbalanced forces.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

Give an example of a real life situation in which there are balanced forces.

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________

When the forces were applied in the same direction was it a balanced or

unbalanced force on the object? Explain. _______________________________

__________________________________________________________________

__________________________________________________________________








Bibliographic Note:

Edmund Marek and Timothy Laubach, "Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice: A Success Story from Science Education", (M. Gordon, T. O'Brien (eds.), Bridging Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, 47-59. copyright 2007 Sense Publishers.

Edmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002.

National Science Education Standards from the National Academy of Sciences, 1995.

“Interrogations”on Scientific American Articles

Abstract

Group oral quizzes based on notes students have taken from Scientific American articles are an effective means of developing, expanding, and applying science concepts.

Interrogations!!!

Don’t let the term “interrogations” scare you away from the idea of using relatively advanced science magazine and even journal articles to facilitate concept development and expansion in your learning cycles. This teaching method has been given this somewhat intimidating name at least somewhat affectionately by the students subjected to them, and many former students have reported back that as far as college preparation in high school was concerned, nothing helped them more than our friendly “interrogations”, regardless of their major.

I began my teaching career in 1988 in El Paso, Texas at Coronado High School, considered at the time the top academic high school in that area. After “paying my dues” for all of two years teaching mostly remedial math and science while “floating” from one classroom to another each period, I was fortunate enough to be able to move into teaching the Honors Biology I and II courses due to the retirement of Mr. Rayburn Ray. Mr. Ray was an educational icon at Coronado and around El Paso county, having taught there for 35 years. He and his courses were renowned for their rigor, his test scores were always among the best in the county and district, and a large number of his students went on to be successful in research, education, and medicine, often citing Mr. Ray as a prime influence and motivator who helped spark and drive their success. Although the El Paso school district provided specific and detailed curriculum guides keyed to state TAAS (Texas Assessment of Academic Skills) and national objectives for each course, there was still some latitude for the individual teachers to use specific teaching techniques and methods of their own preference. Mr. Ray left behind all of his teaching materials upon his retirement, taking only his coffee mug and a few other personal effects, and the only thing he insisted I do as he did was to maintain and continue to include what he and the students referred to as “interrogations”. He even went so far as to have me visit his classroom several times during my conference period the year before he left, so that I could observe the mechanics and protocol of the interrogations myself, so after he left I could do them correctly in my own classroom.

Scientific American articles have several advantages and positive features that make them useful in this format, particularly for advanced high school students with a solid background in basic science. This includes the progression in how they are written, from general to specific, and often including a relevant and fascinating historical context as well. The articles are a good bridge to introducing students to actual scientific papers from journals, because they are written by the actual researchers and deal with topics of advanced and current research, but as more of a science magazine they are less “science-centric” in that they are more easily understandable. The articles also often include outstanding graphics, tables, and charts that elucidate critical concepts from the article and the research it sprang from. Another plus concerning Scientific American is the occasional special issue, concerned only with articles pertaining to a specific topic such as AIDS or immunology, and featuring articles by several of the world’s experts in the particular topic. I have experimented with using lower-level articles from science sources such as National Geographic Reader, Owl, Muse, and Discovery for Kids for younger and/or less advanced students, with mixed but encouraging results, and I feel this is something that could be tested and developed further.

The basic mechanics and procedure of the interrogations are as follows. Upon completion of a unit in Honors Biology II (later AP and/or IB Biology), students are assigned one or more articles concerned with that topic. They are given from one day to up to week depending on the number of articles and their degree of difficulty and complexity to take notes on the article(s). On the day of the interrogation the students are divided randomly into groups ranging from two to no more than five or six. The classroom’s furniture is arranged into a horseshoe configuration with the teacher at the open end, and students are dispersed by groups, with their notes. The teacher must have prepared a series of questions and answers from the day’s article, progressing from easier and more general to more difficult and specific as the articles themselves are written. The teacher asks the first group a question, and the students may discuss among themselves who is going to answer, but not the actual answer to the question. Once a student is designated to answer, they may refer to their notes, but are encouraged to not read verbatim from them, but instead formulate an answer in their own words based on their notes. A grade is assigned subjectively by the teacher, and the students at the end receive a cumulative group grade. Questioning continues to the next group, and the same question may be repeated until it is answered to the teacher’s satisfaction. Because the students never know who is going to be in their group and they receive a group grade, there is a sense of cohesiveness and not wanting to let their classmates down that fuels the dissection, note taking, and understanding of the article. Questions and answers (whether right or wrong!) often serve as a springboard for further in-depth discussion of a topic as well. One 45-55 minute class period is usually required for a single interrogation, although more than one article may be served if they are shorter in length or content. Students are even encouraged to communicate with the article’s author(s), and this has even led to students undertaking summer internships with one of the researchers!

I believe this activity helps students to learn to think, which should be the goal of all educational processes, and most importantly think critically, employing several of the rational powers. It helps toward meeting the National Science Education Standards’ vision of a scientifically literate populace, specifically the K-12 Unifying Concepts and Processes Standards that “provide students with productive and insightful ways of thinking about and integrating a range of basic ideas that explain the natural and designed world”. In Oklahoma the PASS (Priority Academic Student Skills) for secondary science are met by this method because virtually any of the content standards may be addressed, as well as the literacy benchmarks and even some of the “Science Process and Inquiry” standards. This classroom technique is also ideally suited as an Expansion activity in a Learning Cycle, and could even be used to facilitate Concept Development. From Piaget’s point of view then, the organization of mental structures is facilitated by the use of articles in this way.

In conclusion these oral quizzes and discussions are in my opinion one of the most effective and enjoyable ways to teach, develop, and organize science concepts I have come across, and I hope you will give it, or your own variation of it, a try in your classroom soon.


Bibliographic Note:

Scientific American

Edmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002.

National Science Education Standards from the National Academy of Sciences, 1995.

The Nature of the Learner and the Learning Cycle

The Learning Cycle allows science to be taught as a process, not as a static collection of facts to be memorized. It also organizes the concepts and terms that are learned in a way that reduces the world around a student to a logical system. The central purpose of American education is, or should be, teaching the ability to think. That is, for the general populace to be able to follow step-wise instructions and evaluate data (Exploration), formulate an explanation and/or viewpoint and use appropriate terminology (Concept Development), and extend and apply it to their lives (Expansion). This correlates to the steps of the Learning Cycle, which are in parentheses above. As the student initially collects data the rational powers of comparing, inferring, and recalling are used. This data must be organized, classified, recalled, and analyzed, all of which are likewise rational powers. In the second phase of the Learning Cycle the student must interpret and draw generalizations from the data in order to develop the new concept, and calls upon the rational powers of inferring, comparing, recalling, and synthesizing. In the third phase of the Learning Cycle the student must expand the concept by explaining, predicting, and applying the generalizations, patterns, and models developed previously. This requires the rational powers of imagining, evaluating, and deducing as well as the others.

This teaching approach also correlates to Piaget's model of mental functioning, or how we learn, and there is neurobiological research that further supports the notion that this is how our brains operate as well. The first phase of the Learning Cycle lends to Piaget’s concept of Assimilation as new information (good data) is acquired from the environment. Disequilibrium occurs as the new data is temporarily in conflict with the student's current viewpoint. In Concept Development this conflict is reconciled as Accommodation, or an understanding of the new mental function, occurs. In Expansion the Organization of the new concept is locked in as the student practices and applies it through various means.

Human intelligence is a concept that can be difficult to define, or defined in various ways. For our purposes the intelligence of an individual can be defined as consisting of four components:
· Quality of Thought (Stages) Model
· Mental Functioning
· Mental Structures
· Mental Content
The four stages of cognition or quality of thought are in order, sensorimotor, which is from birth to roughly 2.5 years old and is characterized by object permanence and language development. This is followed by the preoperational stage from approximately 2 to 7 years of age in which children imitate, play, and talk but are also characterized by egocentrism and irreversibility. Next is the concrete operational stage from 6 or 7 years of age to between 15 and 20 in which the child begins to use the mental operations of seriation, classification, correspondence, reversal, decentering, and inductive and deductive reasoning. The final stage is called formal operational and in it hypothetico-deductive and abstract thought is finally realized. The four factors associated with cognitive development, or movement through the stages, are:
· Maturation
· Physical and Logical-Mathematical Experiences
· Social Interaction and Transmission
· Disequilibrium
It is changes in the mental structures and mental content that drive mental functioning in association with the Learning Cycle, as well as movement through the cognitive stages of development. In other words, mental structures are processes in the brain used to deal with incoming data, and differences in their nature and complexity distinguish one intellectual stage from another. Schemes are the basic unit of mental structures, and as new data is incorporated into existing structures assimilation occurs, as in the Exploration of a Learning Cycle. Disequilibrium, or the mismatch between pre-existing mental structures and what has occurred, causes new schemes to develop (also known as accommodation, associated with Concept Development of a Learning Cycle). These new schemes or structured need to be properly aligned and placed among previous ones, and this is essentially organization, and can be brought about in the Expansion phase of a Learning Cycle. Mental content is how a child believes he or she sees the world.

I feel strongly that the Learning Cycle allows the teacher to teach science as the process it is, and incorporates the rational powers as well as Piaget's model of mental functioning and knowledge of the cognitive stages of development and how one moves through them to give the student the best chance to truly develop the ability to think, which should be the purpose all education.

Bibliographic Note:

Edmund Marek and Timothy Laubach, "Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice: A Success Story from Science Education", (M. Gordon, T. O'Brien (eds.), Bridging Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, 47-59. copyright 2007 Sense Publishers.

Edmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002.

National Science Education Standards from the National Academy of Sciences, 1995.

Making Learning A Never-Ending Story

This article is about "illustrations that instruct".

This article deals with the creation of large murals to teach or reinforce sometimes difficult concepts learned by the students in a science classroom. The author believes that “illustrations that instruct”, as first put forth by Richard Mayer’s reference groundwork in 1993, can use scientific drawings to capture information pictorially and aid student understanding immensely. This technique can be used to help teach or reinforce a single concept in the Concept Development phase of a Learning Cycle, and it can be employed in the Expansion phase of the Learning Cycle to extend a concept or tie several related concepts together in a more general sense. I feel it could even be used in the Exploration phase of the Learning Cycle, as in the habitat drawings of the Learning Cycle I prepared for the Project Wet, Wild, and Learning Tree class we just concluded. I chose this article because I believe based on my own teaching experience that making murals and pictorial representations of science concepts can greatly enhance student understanding, and that article supports my view and also lends itself to use in Learning Cycles. I have in the past had students make murals or large-scale flow charts of topics ranging from the taxonomic diversity of life to the geologic time scale.

More research is cited in the article, such as Edens and Potter (2003) that supports this technique as a viable way for students to learn scientific concepts, and the author himself reports that his ninth grade biology classes produced the highest Biology End-Of-Course (EOC) test scores in the Charlotte-Mecklenberg (North Carolina) schools beginning in 1994. Since then other teachers in the area have adopted his methods with similar results.

The author feels it is important to take a narration or concept and adapt it to visual images, and he refers to this process as diagramming. He lists three rules that must be followed:

The direction and relationships of the components of the concept must be made clear using relevant connectors (arrows with reasons written across them).
Diagrams should dominate.
Explanations must accompany every picture.

Rough drafts are done on connected sheets of 8.5 x 11 inch paper that can be folded accordion-style into students’ notebooks. After several revisions, the final drafts are done on large, scrolling butcher paper. Stencils may be provided and colors are not applied until everything is penciled in first. Students usually present their final projects in class as well.

The author states that diagramming helps toward meeting the National Science Education Standards’ vision of a scientifically literate populace, and he feels strongly that no technique he has used has been as well received or used more successfully in this way. Specifically, the K-12 Unifying Concepts and Processes Standards that “provide students with productive and insightful ways of thinking about and integrating a range of basic ideas that explain the natural and designed world” are well addressed with this activity. It also satisfies four of the five components of National Science Education Content Standard E concerning technological design:

Design a solution or product.
Implement a proposed design.
Evaluate completed technological designs or products.
Communicate the process of technological design.

In conclusion, I agree that diagramming is a valuable tool for the science teacher and student that can enhance the student’s grasp of a science concept. I base this opinion on my own experience, as well as this article and the additional research referenced within it. I also feel that this technique can be useful in developing and expanding a concept, or linking two or more concepts together, from one or more Learning Cycles, thereby making this article relevant to this course.

Bibliographic Note:

Ralph T. Pillsbury, "Making Learning A Never-Ending Story", Science Scope, December 2006, Volume 30, Number 4, pages 22-26.

A Learning Cycle-Project WILD

“Everybody Needs a Home” - Project Wild

Teacher’s Guide

Grade Level(s): K-4

Subject(s):
Interdisciplinary
Arts/Visual Arts
Science/Animals

Duration: 35 - 40 minutes

Description: Animals need a place in which to find food and water. They also need enough space in which to live and find the food, water and shelter they need. Home is more like a "neighborhood" that has everything in it that is needed for survival. The major purpose of this activity is for students to realize that animals need a home.

Goals: Students will be able to generalize that people and other animals share a basic need to have a home for survival.

Objectives: Students will be able to:
draw a picture of their homes
discuss the differences and similarities between homes
explain why people, animals, and birds need a home

Materials:
drawing paper
crayons
pictures of animals and where they live

Exploration:
1. Ask students to draw a picture of where they live – or to draw a picture of the place where a person they know lives. Ask the students to include pictures in their drawing of the things they need to live where they do; for example, a place to cook and keep food, a place to sleep, and a neighborhood. 2. Once the drawings are finished, have a discussion with students about what they drew. Ask the students to point out the things they need to live that they included in their drawings. 3. Make a “gallery of homes” out of the drawings. Point out to the students that everyone has a home. 4. Ask the students to close their eyes and imagine: a bird's home, an ant's home, a beaver's home, the President's home, their home. 5. Show the students pictures of different places that animals live. 6. Discuss the differences and similarities among the different homes with the students. Talk about the things every animal needs in its home: food, water, shelter and space in which to live, arranged in a way that the animal can survive. 7. Summarize the discussion by emphasizing that although the homes are different, every animal – people, pets, farm animals and wildlife – needs a home. 8. Talk about the idea that a home is actually bigger than a house. In some ways, it is more like a neighborhood. For animals, we can call that neighborhood a “habitat”. People go outside their homes to get food at a store, for example. Birds, ants, beavers and other animals have to go out of their “houses” (places of shelter) to get the things they need to live.

Concept Development:
1. Name three reasons why people need homes and three reasons why animals need homes.
2. Draw a picture of an animal in its habitat and tell how the habitat meets the animal's needs for survival.
Expansion:
1. Pick an animal and research where it lives, then use clay and other materials to build a model and present it to the class
2. Take the students outside and look for animal shelters
3. Draw a picture of a home for an aquatic species

Useful Internet Resources:

Canada's Aquatic Environments http://www.aquatic.uoguelph.ca/
National Wildlife Federation--Backyard Wildlife Habitat http://www.nwf.org/backyardwildlifehabitat/


“Everybody Needs a Home” - Project Wild

Student’s Guide

Materials:
drawing paper
crayons
pictures of animals and where they live

Exploration:
1. Draw a picture of where you live – or draw a picture of the place where a person you know lives. Include pictures in your drawing of the things they need to live where they do; for example, a place to cook and keep food, a place to sleep, and a neighborhood.
2. Once the drawings are finished, have a discussion with the teacher and other students about what they drew. Point out the things they need to live that they included in their drawings.
3. Make a “gallery of homes” out of the drawings, by taping your drawings to the wall.
4. Close your eyes and imagine: a bird's home, an ant's home, a beaver's home, the President's home, their home.
5. Look at pictures of different places that animals live.
6. Discuss the differences and similarities among the different homes with the other students and teacher. Talk about the things every animal needs in its home: food, water, shelter and space in which to live, arranged in a way that the animal can survive.

Concept Development:
1. Name three reasons why people need homes and three reasons why animals need homes. 2. Draw a picture of an animal in its habitat and tell how the habitat meets the animal's needs for survival.

Expansion:
1. Pick an animal and research where it lives, then use clay and other materials to build a model and present it to the class
2. Go outside with your class and look for and try to identify animal shelters
3. Draw a picture of a home for an aquatic species


Philosophical Underpinnings of Lesson

This lesson is a Learning Cycle because the students are given a task, drawing various homes and/or habitats, and then the teacher helps them develop an understanding of why homes are important for virtually all organisms and what factors they should provide for an organism’s survival, as well as the survival of its offspring. Terms such as habitat, resources, environment and so on may even be introduced. The assessment and expansion allow students to further develop and reinforce the concepts. The structure of science is met because the students sequentially apply a process to develop a concept or set of facts and terms and then expand them and even apply them to their own lives.

This lesson meets the central purpose of American education because students are developing the ability to think, and are specifically using the rational powers of comparing, inferring, and recalling in the first phase of drawing. In the second phase of this Learning Cycle the student must interpret and draw generalizations from the data (drawings) in order to develop the new concept of the importance of shelter, and calls upon the rational powers of inferring, comparing, recalling, and synthesizing. In the third phase of this Learning Cycle (the assessment and expansion) the student must expand the concept by explaining, predicting, and applying the generalizations, patterns, and models developed previously by producing and presenting a three-dimensional model. This requires the rational powers of imagining, evaluating, and deducing.

National standards are met because in the National Science Education Standards (NSES) content requirements, “Organisms and Environments” are listed under Level K-4. It also meets the Unifying Concepts and Process Standards of “Evidence, Models, and Explanation”, as well as “Form and Function”. Also, the process of science is clearly shown in this Learning Cycle, and these standards are given as:

· Understanding of scientific concepts.
· An appreciation of "how we know" what we know in science.
· Understanding of the nature of science.
· Skills necessary to become independent inquirers about the natural world.
· The dispositions to use the skills, abilities, and attitudes associated with science

The state of Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Student Skills (PASS) are also satisfied by this lesson as the Process Standards for grades K-4 of Observation, Classifying, Inquiring, Interpreting, and Communicating are all covered. In Grades One and Three, there are Content Standards under Life Science called “Characteristics and Basic Needs of Organisms”, so this unit is also conforming to state standards.

Bibliographic Note:

Project Wild K-12 Curriculum and Activity Guide, Council for Environmental Education, 2004 PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002.http://sde.state.ok.us/home/defaultie.htmlNational Science Education Standards from the National Research Council, 1995.http://books.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/Educational Policies Commission. (1961). the central purpose of American education.

The Relationship between the Nature of Science, the Learning Cycle, and the Central Purpose of American Education

How does the Learning Cycle allow science to be taught as scientists define science and how does the Learning Cycle allow students to achieve the central purpose of American Education?

The Learning Cycle allows science to be taught as the process it actually is and has been historically, not as a static collection of facts to be memorized as it has historically and unfortunately often been taught. It also organizes the concepts and terms that are learned in a way that reduces the world around a student to a logical system, much as a pile of bricks compares to the same bricks organized into a house or other useful structure. The central purpose of American education is, or should be, teaching the students in such a way they can develop the ability to think. That is, for a student/citizen to be able to follow instructions with teacher guidance to collect and evaluate good data (Exploration), formulate an explanation and/or viewpoint and use appropriate terminology (Concept Development), and then extend and apply it to his or her life. (Expansion). This correlates to the steps of the Learning Cycle, which are in parentheses above. The first phase of the inquiry-based Learning Cycle is called Exploration because new information (good data) is acquired. Disequilibrium occurs as the new data is temporarily in conflict with the student's current viewpoint. In Concept Development this conflict is reconciled as an understanding of the new concept occurs and appropriate terminology is put into place. In Expansion the organization of the new concept is locked in and developed further as the student practices, extends, and applies it through various means such as more labs, readings, practice problems, discussions, computer simulations, videos, and so on.

The Central Purpose of American Education was issued as a 21-page pamphlet by the Educational Policies Commission of the National Education Association in 1961. The focus of the report is quoted as "The purpose which runs through and strengthens all other educational purposes—the common thread of education—is the development of the ability to think.” The ability to think draws upon the use of the ten rational powers, which are discussed below. Some other points quoted from the document are:

¶ It is "crucial that the teacher possess a thorough knowledge of the material to be taught," as well as mastery of teaching methods.
¶ "The school must foster not only desire and respect for knowledge but also the inquiring spirit. It must encourage the pupil to ask: 'How do I know?' as well as 'What do I know?' "
¶ Schools should teach "the strategies of inquiry by which man has sought to extend his knowledge and understanding of the world."
¶ the need is for "that kind of education which frees the mind and enables it to contribute to a full and worthy life. To achieve this goal is the high hope of the nation and the central challenge to its schools."

This led to the development of national standards for science education such as the National Science Education Standards (NSES) by the National Research Council and the Benchmarks for Science Literacy by the American Association for the Advancement of Science. Standards like these state that “Inquiry is central to science learning. When engaging in inquiry, students describe objects and events, ask questions, construct explanations, test those explanations against current scientific knowledge, and communicate their ideas to others. They identify their assumptions, use critical and logical thinking, and consider alternative explanations. In this way, students actively develop their understanding of science by combining scientific knowledge with reasoning and thinking skills.”

Oklahoma’s Priority Academic Skills (PASS), which draw upon both of the above sets of national standards, also emphasizes inquiry-based instruction that requires the use of the rational powers and therefore helps develop “the skills and knowledge of a scientifically literate citizen”, and most importantly the ability to think. The PASS objectives also “build conceptual bridges between process and scientific knowledge”. It follows that the Learning Cycle teaching approach would be a logical means to accomplish these goals and objectives.

As the student initially collects data the rational powers of comparing, inferring, and recalling are used. This data must be organized, classified, recalled, and analyzed, all of which are likewise rational powers. In the second phase of the Learning Cycle the student must interpret and draw generalizations from the data in order to develop the new concept, and calls upon the rational powers of inferring, comparing, recalling, and synthesizing. In the third phase of the Learning Cycle the student must expand the concept by explaining, predicting, and applying the generalizations, patterns, and models developed previously. This requires the rational powers of imagining, evaluating, and deducing as well as the others. I feel strongly that the Learning Cycle allows the teacher to teach science as the process it is, and incorporates the rational powers as well to give the student the best chance to truly develop the ability to think, which should be the purpose of all education.

Bibliographic Note:

Edmund Marek and Timothy Laubach, "Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice: A Success Story from Science Education", (M. Gordon, T. O'Brien (eds.), Bridging Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, 47-59. copyright 2007 Sense Publishers.

Marek, Gerber, and Cavallo, Literacy Through the Learning Cycle, http://www.ed.psu.edu/CI/Journals/1998AETS/t3_6_marek.rtfEdmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002.

http://sde.state.ok.us/home/defaultie.html

National Science Education Standards from the National Research Council, 1995.

http://books.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/

Educational Policies Commission. (1961). The central purpose of American education.

Central Purpose of American Education

This article was published in Time when the EPC first released its goals for American education. I found this to be interesting reading in light of my current assignments.

The Goal: How to Think

Friday, Jun. 09, 1961

Though education is its middle name, the teachers' organization known as the National Education Association has found it hard to define a simple and consistent goal for U.S. schools. In 1918 one famed N.E.A. group prescribed "health, command of fundamental processes, worthy home membership, vocational competence, effective citizenship, worthy use of leisure, and ethical character." In 1938 N.E.A.'s Educational Policies Commission called for "self-realization, human relationship, economic efficiency, and civic responsibility" (broken into 43 sub-goals, such as "efficiency in buying"). In 1951 N.E.A. undertook to provide ten more "values," including the Declaration of Independence's "pursuit of happiness."Last week the Educational Policies Commission issued a 21-page pamphlet, The Central Purpose of American Education, that puts aside vagueness and triviality. Said the 19-member* commission: "The purpose which runs through and strengthens all other educational purposes—the common thread of education—is the development of the ability to think."Having got that obvious but long-obscured target into focus, the pamphlet went on to say that "there is no known upper limit to human ability, and much of what people are capable of doing with their minds is probably unknown today." What is known is that "the rational powers of any person"—including the supposedly dull—"are developed gradually and continuously as and when he uses them successfully." Other points:

¶ It is "crucial that the teacher possess a thorough knowledge of the material to be taught," as well as mastery of teaching methods.

¶ "The school must foster not only desire and respect for knowledge but also the inquiring spirit. It must encourage the pupil to ask: 'How do I know?' as well as 'What do I know?' "

¶ Schools should teach "the strategies of inquiry by which man has sought to extend his knowledge and understanding of the world."

¶ The need is for "that kind of education which frees the mind and enables it to contribute to a full and worthy life. To achieve this goal is the high hope of the nation and the central challenge to its schools."

* Headed by Chicago's Superintendent of Schools Benjamin C. Willis, and including Dean John H. Fischer of Teachers College, Columbia University; Historian-Columnist (New York Post) Max Lerner; President O. Meredith Wilson of the University of Minnesota

Bibliographic Note:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,938127,00.html?promoid=googlep

The Nature of Science, The Learning Cycle, and The Central Purpose of American Education

How does the Learning Cycle allow science to be taught as scientists define science and how does the Learning Cycle allow students to achieve the central purpose of American Education?

The Learning Cycle allows science to be taught as a process, not as a static collection of facts to be memorized. It also organizes the concepts and terms that are learned in a way that reduces the world around a student to a logical system. The central purpose of American is, or should be, teaching the ability to think. That is, for a student/citizen to be able to follow step-wise instructions and evaluate data (Exploration), formulate an explanation and/or viewpoint and use appropriate terminology (Concept Development), and then extend and apply it to their lives (Expansion). This correlates to the steps of the Learning Cycle, which are in parentheses above. It also correlates to Piaget's model of mental functioning, that is, how we learn, and there is neurobiological research that further supports the notion that this is how our brains operate as well. The first phase of the Learning Cycle lends to Assimilation as new information (good data) is acquired. Disequilibrium occurs as the new data is temporarily in conflict with the student's current viewpoint. In Concept Development this conflict is reconciled as Accomodation, or an understanding of the new mental function, occurs. In Expansion the Organization of the new concept is locked in as the student practices and applies it through various means. as the student initially collects data the rational powers of comparing, inferring, and recalling are used. This data must be organized, classified, recalled, and analyzed, all of which are likewise rational powers. In the second phase of the Learning Cycle the student must interpret and draw generalizations from the data in order to develop the new concept, and calls upon the rational powers of inferring, comparing, recalling, and synthesizing. In the third phase of the Learning Cycle the student must expand the concept by explaining, predicting, and applying the generalizations, patterns, and models developed previously. This requires the rational powers of imagining, evaluating, and deducing as well as the others. I feel strongly that the Learning Cycle allows the teacher to teach science as the process it is, and incorporates the rational powers as well as Piaget's model of mental functioning to give the student the best chance to truly develop the ability to think, which should be the purpose all education.

Bibliographic Note:

Edmund Marek and Timothy Laubach, "Bridging the Gap between Theory and Practice: A Success Story from Science Education", (M. Gordon, T. O'Brien (eds.), Bridging Theory and Practice in Teacher Education, 47-59. copyright 2007 Sense Publishers.

Marek, Gerber, and Cavallo, Literacy Through the Learning Cycle, http://www.ed.psu.edu/CI/Journals/1998AETS/t3_6_marek.rtf

Edmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

http://sde.state.ok.us/home/defaultie.html (PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002).

http://books.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/ (National Science Education Standards from the National Academy of Sciences, 1995).

The Nature of Science and the Learning Cycle

In the Learning Cycle children engage in explorations of the world around them, and with the teacher's assistance develop ideas and concepts and then apply them to other areas as well as their own everyday lives. The key point here is the experiences (data collection) that the students have are then developed conceptually in the appropriate contexts. The students are learning by doing rather than being placid receptacles of information being fed to them by reading, lectures, notes, etc. The teacher is simply the guide and mentor who facilitates the process. The process of science itself then, is being employed to bring about understanding of the world and how it works. This is because, as several well-known scientists have phrased it with only slight differences in wording, in science we are trying to "coordinate our experiences into a logical system", "extend the range of our experience and reduce it to order", or "science is the quest for knowledge, not the knowledge itself". Regardless of which definition one prefers, the main point is that we cannot teach science without the process, which is the nature of science itself.

Bibliographic Note:

Edmund Marek and Ann Cavallo, The Learning Cycle: Elementary School Science and Beyond, (Portsmouth NH, Heinemann, 1997).

http://sde.state.ok.us/home/defaultie.html (PASS Objectives, Oklahoma State Board of Education, 2002).

http://books.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/ (National Science Education Standards from the National Academy of Sciences, 1995).

Keys to Success

This article deals with identification of methods to help "nonmainstream" pupils make academic gains in all subject areas. The author has worked with students ranging from Native Hawaiians to Zuni and Navajo Indians to Latinos. Researchers from the Center for Research on Education, Diversity, and Excellence at the University of California-Santa Cruz have identified five standards as critical to improving learning for students from diverse ethnic, cultural, linguistic, or economic backgrounds:

• Teachers and students "producing" together, whether they are producing knowledge or some tangible product
• Developing students' language and literacy competence in all subjects
• Connecting school and learning to students' lives, or "contextualizing" knowledge
• Teaching complex thinking
• Teaching through conversation rather than relying on lectures

I was pleasantly surprised at how well these standards coincided with or incorporated the prinicples of the Learning Cycle, reinforcing the idea that teaching science this way is and can be of great benefit to Native American students.

Bibliographic Note:

Debra Viadero, "Keys to Success", Education Week, 02774232, 4/21/04, Vol. 23, Issue 32

Education and the Law (Final Weekend)

I have prepared two legal briefs on cases involving student searches, and completed a Resolution, Equity, and Advocacy Project. I have a comprehensive final exam this weekend, as well as a Legal Improvement and Social Justice Project to finish. I simply didn't realize just how little I, and most of my co-workers, know about legal issues that impact us and our profession on an everyday basis. This course has proven to be very enlightening and rewarding.