Peter English, Ph.DSchool of Biological Sciences

Center for Inquiry in Math and Sciences

integrated, evidence-based natural science

for pre-service elementary teachers

NSTA National Convention 2012hands-on-science.cns.utexas edu

Children Love Science• In elementary school, kids

(boys and girls) like science

• NCES: – 68% of 4th grade boys– 66% of 4th grade girls

Self-report they “like” science

• That’s fully 2/3 of 4th grade students

• It’s as many girls as boys

Source: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES)

… but somehow we beat it out of them

• In about 5th grade, we start to lose children in the sciences– approximate equality of boys and girls

• Source: US Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer, Washington DC

Grade 4 Grade 8 Grade 12

Perc

enta

ge o

f Stu

dent

s Pa

ssin

g M

ath

Profi

cien

cy (%

)

Landscape before this programPre-service teachers took same classes as any other major, despite radically different goals

National Committee on Teaching and America’s Future (1996)

• Inadequate time– insufficient time for content courses

• Fragmentation–content, methods, and field service courses not aligned

• Uninspired teaching methods–how do teachers learn to engage children

• Superficial curriculum–too many certifications and degree requirements

Good at tests

• UT pre-service teachers arrive at university–top 10% of high school graduating class–have done well on standardized tests • TAKS in Texas

• Apparently lack core knowledge and reasoning that we claim to value–wrong emphasis?–missing the the forest for the trees?

Which represents food for plants?

• 8th grade TAKS test question• 90% of UT students correctly choose “glucose”

“Stuff” of a tree?

Sun Water SoilNot AIR!

On the backs of giants...Building upon Goldberg and Nelson to integrate models

of energy and matter in

physicschemistrygeologybiology

astronomyclimate

Core methods

• All lessons use hands-on learning• facts by experimentation and discovery•models through evidence

• Unified methodology for each day’s learning• each day has a beginning, middle, and end

• Consistent and very specific language across all disciplines • compound vs. molecule vs. mineral vs. solution

• Early field experience - learn by teaching

Core goals

• Change the perception of science• increase self-efficacy and decreased anxiety

• Increase content knowledge

What does a day look like?

• Initial ideas (10 minutes)–discussion of preconceptions

• Explorations to gather evidence (60-80 minutes)–typically data gathering with questions

• Summarizing questions with whiteboarding to pull it together (20 minutes)

One day’s activity from Biology chapter 3

One day’s activityfrom Bio chapter 3

• Just finished looking at radiant energy as different from conduction/convection

• Entry into idea of tracking energy in living systems

Initial Ideas• What part of the radiant energy spectrum is most

important for plants ?

Initial Ideas

Answers are typically:–IR, visible, and UV because these are

the peak emissions from the sun–IR because we need heat to live–no idea, never really thought about

it

Recall “sunlight energy” from the TAKS

Explorations

Treatment (energy reaching disk)

Number of leaf disks floating (n=10)

Incandescent light(IR, visible, UV)

10

IR filter(visible and UV)

10

UV filter (only visible)

10

black cloth (none)

0

Observations from this exploration

• Leaf disks sink after syringe treatment

• Leaf disks float when exposed to visible light

• Leaf disks emit tiny bubbles immediately before floating and then continue

Summarizing question 1

Why did leaf disks sink after syringe treatment?

•because they became more dense when air is removed•but why does removing particles cause leaf to be more dense

• discussion of mass and volume

•air replaced by water

Summarizing question 2

Why did leaf disks float?

•gas was produced•gas displaced water causing change in density

Summarizing question 3

Is there evidence of a chemical or physical change?

•production of a gas is evidence of a chemical change•change in density is evidence of a physical change

Summarizing question 4

Is there evidence that visible light is the energy source for this exploration?

•Yes, –floated when IR was removed–floated when UV was removed–did not float when visible light was removed

Integration of this lesson into overall curriculum

• Previous course covers chemical and physical changes separately, this is first observation of both at the same time• filters remove something

•water and coffee filters cloud this issue

• Visible light is the energy causing some chemical change• Is a leaf alive when it is removed from a tree?

The rest of the chapter

What is the gas we saw?

Dissolved oxygen

Same chamber for CO2

Lugol’s solution to test for starch

Balanced equation?

C6H12O6

“Energy arrows”

Balanced equation!

C6H12O6

Photosynthesis

In the presence of visible light

• Carbon dioxide is a reactant • Water must be reactant for the matter in

the equation to balance• Oxygen is a product• Glucose is a product and location of

energy storage

Now photosynthesis is the story of energy

• Radiant energy in the form of visible light is transformed into chemical potential energy stored in the covalent bonds of glucose

The Curriculum

Energy and

Matter

Energy in Electrical Circuits Energy in

Particles: Temperature

and Sound Energy in Chemical

Bonds

Earth Climate

Earth as a Habitat for Life in the Solar System

Radiant Energy &

Optics

Making Connections Across the Natural Sciences

See also G. Nelson, “Physics and Everyday Thinking as a Model for Introductory Biology and Geology Courses,” presented at PTEC-Northwest Regional Conference, Seattle, Washington: October 10, 2008

First semester

Third semester

Energy in the Earth:

convection conduction

Earth’s Plate Tectonics

Geologic Time

Energy in Life: Photosynthesis

What it means to be alive

Genetics, populations,and diversity

Whiteboarding on iPads

projected around the room

• Our students present activities related to our curriculum.• Teach content aligned with students’ classes

Early Field Experiences

• Collaboration with UTeach to bring in elementary classes

• We all learn best by teaching the material ourselves!

Summer Teacher Workshops 2012: • Astronomy• Physics• Biology •Chem/Geo

In-Service Teacher Professional Development

Inquiry is useful for In-Service teachers too!

Assessment Results from Hands-on-Science

How Do We Measure Content?

• Assessments from the MOSART (Misconceptions-Oriented Standards-based Assessment Resources for Teachers) Project–Elementary and middle school topics geared to assess

teachers and their students

• Additionally, written justification for each multiple choice question

We Are Making Progress

Our students show comparable gains in knowledge across all content areas!

Normalized gain

• Students already know some amount of information• We can only teach them what they do not know

Normalized Gain = Post – Pre1 – Pre

______________

Student Gains in Knowledge Our students learn between 20-30% of the

material that they didn’t already know.

Student Gains in Content Justification• Students asked to justify their answers on pre- and post-tests• Justification Score = Correct answer and correct justification

• Marked improvement in justifying the information answered correctly, but could not initially explain

ScoresSubject N Pre-test Post-test Gain

Mean Uncert Mean Uncert

Physical Sciences 246 58.7 11.6 68.0 11.8 0.21

Chemistry/Geology 183 70.8 12.7 77.8 9.7 0.19

Biological Sciences 115 74.0 10.5 80.5 7.8 0.20

Astronomy/Climate 63 57.2 10.3 70.1 10.1 0.30

ExplanationsSubject N Pre-test Post-test Gain

Mean Uncert Mean Uncert

Physical Sciences 262 37.6 13.0 54.9 16.8 0.27

Chemistry/Geology 181 45.5 18.6 64.3 15.0 0.32

Biological Sciences 121 53.1 15.0 63.1 16.4 0.21

Astronomy/Climate 64 30.2 12.4 54.3 17.2 0.23

Compared to othersSubject N Pre-test Post-test Gain

Mean Uncert Mean Uncert

Physics 309 70 64.9 11.7 64.5 12.0 0

Chem 301 127 68.3 13.4 71.5 15.0 0.08

Bio 301 177 77.4 9.5 81.4 9.3 0.17*

Astro 301 109 62.2 13.5 67.2 14.9 0.11

Student Attitudes Based on SurveysOn a scale of 1 to 5, for each of the following items, indicate how much the situation makes you feel anxious or worried

Pretest (1-5)

Posttest (1-5) Diff.

Looking through the pages in a science text. 2.356 2.133 -0.222

Thinking about an upcoming science test one day before the test. 3.840 3.166 -0.674

Reading and interpreting a scientific graph, chart, or illustration. 2.411 2.061 -0.350

Taking an exam in a science course. 3.855 3.341 -0.514

Student Attitudes Based on Surveys

Pretest (1-5)

Posttest (1-5)

Diff.

Listening to a teacher explaining a scientific concept or phenomena. 2.425 2.179 -0.246

Waiting to get a science test returned in which you expected to do well. 3.519 3.039 -0.481

Walking on campus and thinking about a science course. 2.194 1.850 -0.344

Being given a ‘pop’ quiz 4.221 3.608 -0.613

(where a score of 1 represents not at all anxious or worried and a score of 5 represents very much anxious or worried).

Key findings thus far• Content gains in all courses–gains most dramatic in explanation of core concepts –larger gains than we find in standard lecture courses

• Decreased anxiety related to science–increased self-efficacy

What can we offer?• Four-course integrated sequence for use

at other higher-ed institutions–course manuals–answer keys and equipment/setup manuals–possibility of implementation assistance from UT

instructors and authors

• Future integration with UT’s Quest Online Learning Tool–Professional Development focus

Center for Inquiry in Mathematics and Sciences

Ruth FranksCIMS Director

Biology

Peter EnglishProgram Director

Biology

Mark BaumannPhysics

Dennis Dunn Geology Cynthia LaBrake

Chemistry Randi Ludwig Astronomy

Antonia ChimonidouPhysics

Established to support inquiry-based instruction in the College

of Natural Sciences

Alex BarrPhysics

Thank you.