Live Courses for Professional Development

I have been researching different sources to help keep teachers up to date in the science content area. This week I found a great case study discussing a new type of professional development offered by NASA. The office of education at NASA along with the NASA explorer school have put together live, short courses for NASA Explorer School. The project is being funded by a grant.  The case study discusses whether they are effective or not.  The courses are intended to be a tool for professional development in the field of science.

I found it interesting that this case study pointed out that the responsibility for professional development rest entirely on teacher’s shoulders.  We will have to take it upon ourselves to find reliable sources, which is why this case study is worth reading. Science changes more than any other subject, so we have to know where to go to stay current. One thing that I noticed right away is that this study included teachers from all across the board, not just science. The classes are meant to be flexible and require little time. And lastly, the courses include real classroom applications.

Some important goals that the courses attempt to meet include:

1.     Relate to relevant day to day practice

2.     Provide opportunities for professional sharing and collaboration

3.     Contribute to teacher professional growth

4.     Have an accessible format for a wide range of teachers

The courses are based on the social constructivist theory. NASA feels that this is what makes what they have created different than anything else out there.  Each class allows time for collaboration with other teachers. Guest speakers from a variety of fields speak during each session. The intent is for teachers not only to build their content knowledge but share with others about what works and doesn’t. I think these courses seem great.  Personally collaborating helps me understand almost everything better than just reading it on a website. The results of the study show that many other people feel the same way. Most people who participated said they saw positive results from taking the courses. 

Weather

     I am currently enrolled in science and math methods.  I am doing my math practicum in kindergarten and my science practicum in sixth grade.  While in my kindergarten class, I asked the teacher how she makes science fun for her students.  She told me anything hands on.  I had already thought about this hands on idea because I love anything hands on for the students.  Being able to actually take part in an activity or experiment using their hands enhances the student's comprehension and thus furthers their learning. 
     I started searching the internet for some hands on activities.  Turns out, there are a lot of them!  This particular web site I found very easy to follow and full of good hands on activities.  Go to http://ee.user.edu/webweather/activities.html  This web site has great ideas about our weather.  I think that students in elementary grades would find these activities fun and they can relate the activity to their every day life. 
     One of the activities is making fog in  a glass jar.  How many times have you wondered how fog is made?  I have!  I like these activities because the students can relate to them.  Every day our weather is different in Iowa.  We have four seasons and each day our weather is different from the day before. 
     Yes, the students can learn about the weather they see out their window.  In Iowa we may not fully understand what a hurricane is but because we have a background knowledge of tornadoes and thunderstorms, the students can make a connection and understand and learn a little more about hurricanes.  This background knowledge will further their understanding of hurricanes and the next time they are watching the news and a reporter is reporting on a hurricane off the coast of Mexico, the students can make a real life, every day connection to that story. 
     Hands on is a great way to teach and make science fun for you and the students.  Push your sleeves up and dig in to the science fun!

Teaching Science in Five Countries: Results from the TIMMS 1999 Analyses Report

The report, Teaching Science in Five Countries: Results from the TIMMS 1999 Analyses Report, (United States Department of Educations, Institute of Education Sciences NCES 2006-011) is comprised of 271 pages of tables, figures and text explaining the methods and limitations of the study, the content differences of eighth grade science lessons, how evidence was used in the lessons, methods for inquiry, collaboration, methods of engaging students, and the significance of students’ responsibility in learning science.   A summary of the results of this paper was presented in my previous blog.

A limitation is included in the report that the achievement test results may not be related to teaching methods because a student’s background, both in and out of school, his or her parental influence and or cultural influences may also play a role in academic achievement.  I find this a rather strange limitation considering that the 4 countries chosen for comparison to the United States were chosen based on the fact that they scored higher on the 1999 Trends in Mathematics and Science (TIMSS) assessment.  

Table 1.2 - Average Science Scale Scores of Eighth Grade Students, by Country, 1995, 1999, and 2003, (below) provides a great insight to the relative achievement of students in the United States versus the other 4 countries.  It appears that we are slowly closing the achievement score gap.  In 2003, the difference in achievement between all 5 countries was 25 points, compared to 42 in 1999.  The United States was the only country that has improved achievement consistently since 1995. 

The report looked at what the 4 countries that scored higher than the United States had in common with respect to teaching methods.  Two similarities were observed. 

“First, in each of the four higher-achieving countries, the core instructional approach appeared to hold students to high science content standards defined in various ways. Second, in each country, the means to achieve these content standards appeared to be a consistent, commonly shared strategy across teachers for organizing the content and engaging students in doing science work.”

So in order to improve the academic achievement of students in the United States, the students must truly understand the basis for their learning and connect the science to the exercise or lesson plan.  This idea seems so basic that by allowing the students to ask “Why are we leaning this?” or ”What is the significance to my life?” and challenging them to ask questions, they will become engaged, will learn and will retain the material.  Also, presenting the information in a consistent, organized manner will provide clarity to the students. 

I love the following line that ended the section in the report called “Do the Higher-Achieving Countries Share Any Commonalities?” 

“That being said, it must also be kept in mind that a different set of analyses or using different data collection methods may lead to alternative hypotheses or conclusions.”

I am not sure it that is a lack of confidence in the study, an effort to cover the proverbial butt or just a reiteration of scientific method, but it seems out of place in the report.  Any comments on that line?

I will leave this paper for now.  My next step will be to see which countries have the highest academic achievement in science of all countries, and why.   I am not sure at this point where the four countries included in the study (Netherlands, Japan, Australia, Czech Republic and the United States) are in relation to the rest of the world.  

Science on a budget!

How can I do science experiments if my school has a low budget?

When I think about science I think about hands on, fun experiments, which then of course means a lot of supplies that will cost me as the teacher a lot of money. However after visiting http://nicholasacademy.com/scienceexperiments.html I realized I could not be more wrong. On this website it shows how to correctly conduct science experiments with your students that will not burn a hole in your wallet. In fact this website lists more than 128 science experiments. Although, some are cheaper than others, they are all for the most part inexpensive. The experiments on this website are for a variety of ages. Some of the experiments are...

• Egg in a bottle
• Cabbage Indicator
• Spoon Reversal
• Sweet Tea
• Floating M's
• Why we use Soap

As you can tell from just these few experiments that I listed they are inexpensive because they use items that are around your house. This also great because that means the students have access to the supplies as well, so they will be able to conduct the experiment at their homes on their own. I really enjoyed this website and encourage you to check it out.

Learners First

What differences, if any, are there with respect to how students are taught science in other countries?

Since the United States is always being compared unfavorably with respect to comparison of students’ level of learning science.  I thought this would be a great question for my Learners First assignment.

The first article that I came across related to teaching science in other countries was titled What Science Teaching Looks Like: An International Perspective.[1]   The article summarized a study of teaching practices in 5 countries: the United States, the Czech Republic, Japan, Australia, and the Netherlands. The latter 4 countries were chosen because they outperformed the United States in science achievement on the 1999 Trends in Mathematics and Science (TIMSS) assessment.   One hundred 8^th grade science lessons were randomly chosen for the study from each of the 6 countries. 

The following is a summary of the observations that were made:

• The Czech Republic.  The Czech Republic teaching strategy included challenging the students with theoretical science topics.  The students were responsible for learning and understanding the content via public discussions.  The teacher would begin the class by providing a review.  The students would be called upon to answer questions of their understanding of not only the immediate subject but of other topics as well.  The students would be graded on these answers.   Teachers minimally provided students with “hands on” activities.   This type of teaching was sited in the article as “Learning Challenging Content.”

• Japan.  The Japanese teaching strategy included presenting more conceptual content than theoretical.  Similar to the inquiry-based teaching that we have been learning about, the Japanese classroom taught via inquiry methods.  The students would be presented with one or two main ideas which were developed via inquiry, data collection, observations, discussions, “hands on” activities and followed by more classroom discussions.   The lesson was summarized by the teacher to drive home the main purpose of the exercise.   This type of teaching was sited in the article as “Using Evidence to Develop Concepts.”

• Australia.  The Australian teaching strategy was similar to the Japanese strategy, but differed by providing “real life” applications to their science lessons and used activities such as games, puzzles, comedy, and exciting demonstrations to keep the students focused.   Interestingly, the Australian lessons often ended in “tentative conclusions” with a question for the students to further ponder.  This type of teaching was sited in the article as “Using Evidence and Real-Life Connections.

• The Netherlands.  The Netherlands teaching strategy was more of a “self-learn” strategy.  Students were presented with reading and writing assignments.  The teacher would go over assignments and clarify content as students required.   Class discussions and short demonstrations/lectures would follow to supplement the student’s independent learning.  This type of teaching was sited in the article as “Learning Science Content Independently.”

• The United States.  The good, the bad and the ugly.  The United States teaching strategy included a plethora of methods including “hands on” activities, independent learning, and classroom discussions.  The problem with the United States teaching strategy is that it neglected to connect the activities, and content to “real life” issues, or to actual scientific ideas.  The question, “Why are we learning this?” was never answered.   The United States teaching strategy was rich in activities and poor in tying the activities to actual scientific concepts.  This type of teaching was sited in the article as “Including More Varied Activities.”

The article continues with suggestions for the United States to achieve scientific excellence.  The bottom line was to link the scientific inquiry and activities to the content or purpose of the lesson and to real-life scenarios.  The lesson must be pertinent to the student not only to engage the student, but to provide a foundation for continual learning. 

It is interesting to me that there is such an array of teaching strategies.  The independent learning for the students of the Netherlands somehow is working better than the hands-on activity-oriented learning strategy of the United States.  It seems counter intuitive,  but as the article suggests, perhaps it doesn’t matter how the material is presented as long as it can be linked to the science behind it and is applicable to real life issues (i.e. make it pertinent to the students).

I found a copy of the April 2006, 271-page document prepared by the National Center for Education Statistics, Teaching Science in Five Countries: Results from the TIMMS 1999 Analyses Report, (United States Department of Educations, Institute of Education Sciences NCES 2006-011).  Once I get through the document, I will provide additional commentary. 

---

[1] Roth, K., and Garnier, H. December 2006/January 2007. What Science Teaching Looks Like: An International Perspective.  Science in the Spotlight, Pages 16-23, Volume 64, Number 4.

Motivation Students In the Science Classrooms

I am researching the best ways to get students motivated in the classroom and to have fun with science.  I am looking at ways teachers can show students that science can be really fun!  The first thing we have to look at as teachers is if the content we are teaching is age appropriate for our students.  It is unfair to our students if we are expecting them to learn something that is too challenging for them because they aren't cognitively ready for that content yet. 

As teachers, we need to figure out our student's schema before we can ask them to do anything.  If we know their schema we can figure out what to teach them. We can figure out their schema by asking questions to get our students thinking.  The Constructivist Learning Theory involves active mental engagement, we can do this by asking questions. The best way to get students motivated is to let them explore first.  The Developmental Learning Theory says we should start concrete then move to abstract then back to concrete.  The best way to get students to think concretely is to explore the "real thing"  this also helps students to get motivated and to have fun in science.  When they get to explore the real thing or close to it, they feel like scientists themselves.

The article I found talks about the best ways to motivate students in the science classroom.  One big idea i took from the article was to integrate science to your student's lives so they become interested in the topic.  If the topic is somehow related to their lives they will be more motivated to learn the topic.  The article also talks about letting students do experiments and explore things on their own so they act like real scientists.  Here is the article that I found interesting.. Link

Science Tips

In my search for science teaching tips i came upon a website that had a bunch of really interesting pod casts from teachers that gave some tips and insight. The pod casts that I listened to dealt with teachers first year teaching.

Teacher Institute Teaching Tips
http://www.exploratorium.edu/webcasts/archive.php?cmd=browse&project=63

So I listened to some and here's a list of tips or insights that I gained:

Podcast 1: Teaching Abroad
When you come into a new teaching environment you cannot expect anything.
The teacher interviewed talked about her first teaching job. She talked about some of the threats and problems she received from students. The little support she received from other staff, as well as the lack a resources (One book from before moon landing, literally). The best tip I gained was that perseverance and hard work pay off in the end.

Podcast 2: A Tale of Adjustment
You won't like everything about your school.
This man talks about not liking or getting along with his mentor or other colleagues. He said that he like his students but didn't like some of his lesson's and therefore they failed. From this I took that you must love your classroom in order to be successful.

Podcast 3: Huh?
This lady was from West Africa, she talked her portable classroom her first year and her struggles of adjusting from teaching in West Africa to the US. She also talked about the struggles of having no to poor resources. The tip I got from this is that when you are surprised by something you just have to role with it.

There are a lot of nice podcasts with tips on how to make specific lessons successful. One problem I have been having is finding tips or lessons to take from teachers who failed and quit. My whole school career I learned from or about successful teachers. I would like to find some tips about what not to do.