SCIED 552: Science Teaching and Learning Developing Models of Science Teaching

Well, I am very happy that I tried to preview my first attempt at this blog and realized that it is not lost somewhere in cyberspace! Here goes my second attempt:

In processing the reading, the Private Universe video clip, and reflecting on my past teaching experiences, I came up with many questions (although I will not ask them all).

 How does a student decide that he/she is dissatisfied with a concept? Posner points to the fact concept change is dependent on 1) dissatisfaction with current concept, 2) Intelligibility of the new concept, 3) the new concept is plausible, and 4) the new concept show fruitfulness.

Suppose these conditions are not met. Is the new concept simply not learned?

In viewing the video clip Private Universe, I was amazed at the student’s concept of Earth’s orbit and her idea of indirect rays of the sun. I wonder where and when these ideas were formed. She, the student, still held onto these ideas even after a new concept was “learned”, or at least instructed to her.

Does a new concept exist along side an older concept? Or does the new concept, once learned, replace the old one? TSS chapter 4 seems to suggest two theories: 1) that domains of knowledge do exist “along side” others in a person’s mind and 2) that domains of knowledge are revisable.

In Tyson’s article (page 398), a triangle is presented that suggests the multidimensional framework of conceptual change. Do all factors have the same effect on the process of conceptual change? I am assuming that each varies according to each student. Related to this is a recollection of a teaching experience while teaching evolution (everyone say “uh-oh”) to students. Upon completion of the unit, and the subsequent assessment, some students gave the default explanation of “humans came from monkeys”. It would appear that a new concept was indeed not incorporated. According to my interpretation of Posner’s ideas, the student was not dissatisfied with an original idea and therefore did not see a need for a concept change. How much influence was prior knowledge on this?

I always consider very strongly the influence that learning in the home has on a student in a classroom. Parents, believe it or not, sometimes teach a child something that contradicts what is later taught in a classroom. I wonder how a student would perform in a science class after learning from parents that are scientifically literate. Would they fair better than a child of a parent who is not scientifically literate?

Let’s hope I don’t lose this blog!

I was impressed by the readings and I will admit that it took me a few times to get a grip on selected pieces.

I did enjoy, although not at first, Dewey’s piece. I identified with his definition of science as “the systematic methods of inquiry, when they are brought to bear on a range of facts, enable us to understand them better and control them more intelligently, less haphazardly and with less routine.” I was particularly impressed with the range of scientific disciplines with which he treated the field of education. I agree with his idea that “the scientific content of education consists of whatever subjected matter…enables the educator…to see and think more clearly about whatever he is doing.” While teaching throughout my career, I believe that I never really thought about how I was teaching…I just taught. This article was refreshing and thought provoking.

Skinner’s article made me wonder if he was concerned about teaching or training students. I was able to see his points, but his suggestions and methods seemed too sterile and more programmed.

Both chapters of Taking Science To School were stimulating, as I am beginning to see some ideas that I was not previously exposed to while in my undergraduate, graduate, and subsequent professional careers. In schools, there always seemed to be a “higher” status for science teachers as teachers in other disciplines always seemed to shy away from science teacher. In reading the two chapters, I can see why. Science does seem to occupy a special position in regard to its applicability to many aspects of human life. I can also see why science would be intimidating and others may shy away from it.

As this is my first blog, ever, I hope this it does not ramble and that I have not missed the point (completely). I will end my entry now for fear of writing too much.

Taking Science To School Chapter 1: Science Learning Past and Present

After taking several courses which included readings, discussions, and timelines regarding the historical aspect of science curriculum, I was very interested to see which elements this first chapter would include.   What always amazes me is no matter how many different sources you read, new information is always gleaned.  For example, I didn’t realize the depth of influence the National Science Foundation exerted on science education reform through it’s series of over 20 curriculum projects in the early 60’s.  Speaking of influence, another interesting observation is the influence of the National Research Council, as they have sponsored over 5 reports in the early twenty-first century, ranging from How People Learn (1999) to Systems for State Science Assessment (2005).  I wonder how their efforts in learning, assessment, and science education will be viewed historically?

Of course, history always seems to be cyclical, and the Sputnik scare on the state of education in the United States and the impending risk of falling behind  both economically and defensively to the Soviet Union has resurfaced in the 80’s with “A Nation at Risk” and the concerns US students are falling behind internationally.  The result of this report became the catalyst for standards based reform in the 90’s.  Yet American students still lag behind other countries and improvement efforts continue to not bring anticipated results of improvement.  As we look at history in an effort not to repeat it, it seems our society is often destined to do just that.

I also found the section on recent developments in science, learning, and teaching interesting.  While I find myself surrounded by the technologies of today, I don’t often think about these ramifications for children and young adults.  As they spend more and more time electronically connected, and no longer spend as much time outside observing nature or fixing things, one wonders how this impacts their science interest.  While this lack of prior knowledge can be challenging,  this is also an opportunity for educators to expose students to the wonder and excitement of science.  As scientific knowledge is expanding and the scientific disciplines are overlapping more than ever, this lack of self directed investigation can provide us with an opportunity to show students the exciting fields of science.

As a science educator, I have to be careful not to become too pessimistic about our ability, or inability as I sometimes think,  to make a difference in science education reform.  If left unchecked, I can quickly spiral into a discussion about why education won’t change and the systemic challenges in creating effective teaching and learning opportunities.  However, each year and decade seems to bring in new ideas and a change in society to look at effective research and how to bring about systemic change which may grow into a national education effort which is effective and long-lasting.

Taking Science to Schools Chapter 2:  Goals for Science Education

I appreciated this chapter, as it really gave a nice overview of the following ideas:  What is science, the language of science, and why teach science.  I was struck by the different perspectives on the process of science (p. 27) and the three different perspectives.  I can’t help but think that science process really is a combination of all three:  logical reasoning, theory change, and scientific practices.  It intrigues me that each group becomes so wedded to their research and ideas that they can’t see the importance and value of all three!  

I was also struck by the section discussing scientific argumentation. This is a vital aspect of science, yet one that often is totally ignored in the K-12 classroom.  I will never forget the impact of a teacher workshop in which the teachers witnessed various leading scientists engage in this argumentation.  They were awed that a scientist would challenge a presenter; one in which the scientist had invited and respected, about their science and findings!  They were equally impressed with the evidence the scientist sited in backing up his claim.  And the fact that they all went out for a beer afterward!  It really was exciting to watch this “science in action” and it made a huge impact on these teachers.  One can only hope they took this element of science back with them and incorporated it into their classroom instruction.

The Strands of Scientific Proficiency take account not only these three perspectives mentioned earlier, but the work of other researchers in developing an intertwined concept of an effective science education.  All areas must be considered and experiences provided for learners in obtaining the end goal…scientific literacy.