Jun27

Critical Science "Skills"

What are the critical skills you think students need to be successful in science?
—Niki, Baltimore, Maryland

In science department meetings, we often agonize over what and how much content to "cover." We lament that students don’t seem to remember much content from one year or subject to the next. Inquiry and in-depth study often take a back seat to presenting content that will be on a final exam or state test.

When identifying skills critical to science, I wonder if we should include traditional skills such as balancing equations, calculating answers to problems, measuring, or memorizing definitions? Communications and mathematics are certainly critical in science, but they should be put in context. Most of us as adults read for a purpose such as entertainment or information. Most of our writing is purposeful, too: memos, reports, logs, journals, self-expression. Few of us do arithmetic calculations without a specific purpose (although I am addicted to KenKen puzzles).

One of my favorite quotations (often attributed to Albert Einstein) is "Education is what's left after you've forgotten everything." In other words, even though we might not remember everything, we take basic experiences from a learning environment with us into new situations. When I switched from teaching middle to high school, the principal asked about my philosophy of learning. I had never written any formal document, so I listed the "big picture" skills I wanted my students to take away from my classes. I also posted these in my classroom, discussing them with the students:

  • Problem solving: Not in the sense of the problems at the end of the chapter or "problems" such as global warming or pandemic diseases, but the ability to work through a situation by asking questions, defining problems, investigating, engaging in inquiry, observing, finding and evaluating information, communicating (both verbally and graphically), and active listening.
  • Risk-taking: We need to get students out of their intellectual comfort zones and try something where the answers may not be known ahead of time, if at all.
  • Imagination/creativity: Kindergarten students are wonderful at this, and then we somehow program it out of students. We insist they do things exactly as we tell them to do, or we give students a template (a good thing to start with), then never allow them to deviate from it or customize it to their own learning.
  • Dedication: It's easy for students to be distracted, but seeing a task through to completion, knowing one's strengths, working on one's weaknesses, and striving for more than mediocrity are real boosts to self-esteem—even better than someone saying "good job."
  • Enthusiasm (my students preferred the word enjoyment, which was fine with me): Learning is interesting and it's part of what makes us human. Not all learning experiences are necessarily "fun," but good teachers can make any topic interesting by showing their own passion and through engaging classroom activities.

These "skills" are not measurable in the sense of a standardized test, and they evolve as students progress through the years, gaining more exposure to content and in learning subject-specific skills. They require modeling by the teacher: if a teacher is not a risk-taker or has little enthusiasm for a topic, it's hard for students to develop that attribute. I found it was important to make the classroom a "safe" place where students can develop and use these skills, to put them in the context of the content topics, to recognize and support student efforts in these areas, and to help students see the connections among the content, other topics in science, other content areas, and within their own lives.

Lifelong and independent learning beyond the classroom is based on these skills. We have to realize that not all students will pursue a science-related career or even have the same passion for the subject we have. But they will be voters, taxpayers, parents, employees, business owners, travelers, professionals, and hobbyists who will need not only basic content knowledge but also the skills to be lifelong learners in science-related issues. How many of our schools' mission statements contain that phrase? What are we doing to make sure this happens?
Published: Jun-27-09 | 0 Comments | 0 Links to this post

Jun18

Highly Qualified Teachers

I've been asked to teach a different science course next year. I'm looking forward to the change, but I'm a little nervous about teaching a subject I've never taught before. I was told I am "highly qualified." What does this mean? How do I prepare?
-- Charlotte, Olathe, Kansas
 
The phrase "highly qualified" could have several meanings. According to the No Child Left Behind website, "To be deemed highly qualified, teachers must have: 1) a bachelor's degree, 2) full state certification or licensure, and 3) prove that they know each subject they teach." So, for example, if you're certified in chemistry and physics, you could be considered "highly qualified" in both, even if you haven't taught physics before. I'm assuming your certification process included coursework in the sciences for which you're certified or required you pass a test in those subjects.

You didn't mention the grade level of your new assignment. Some states have separate credentials or endorsements for teaching at the middle school level. Before accepting the position, check with the personnel/human resources director and your teachers' association to be sure you are properly credentialed for this new assignment. When this documentation is in place, you're ready to start the next chapter of your career.

There has been much research on the challenges faced by novice teachers. However, I know of very little research on what happens when veteran teachers change subjects or grade levels (an interesting dissertation topic for an education researcher?). A veteran fifth-grade teacher who is assigned to a first-grade class may struggle at first with the primary curriculum and the students’ maturity (or lack thereof). It's a humbling experience as a veteran teacher to realize you may not have all of the answers right away in a new situation and that you'll make some mistakes. On the other hand, as a middle school teacher who switched to high school, I already had a repertoire of strategies to deal with the ninth-graders everybody else complained about.

Your collection of lessons, assessments, and materials may no longer be appropriate, so you'll have to spend time creating or adapting materials and lab investigations. Ask for a copy of the curriculum, textbook, and other resources to review ahead of time. If you change schools, you'll have to get used to new schedules and get to know a new group of teachers. If you're teaching a different subject, you may need to refresh your content knowledge. NSTA can assist with resources such as SciLinks and the resources on the NSTA Learning Center. As an NSTA member, you can access the journals’ online archives (and you may want to switch your print subscription, too, if you’re switching grade levels).

Veteran teachers are usually not required to participate in induction programs, but my district did assign "mentors" to teachers who changed schools, grade levels, or subject areas. It was helpful in a new assignment to have a go-to person to answer questions and share resources and information. Try to find a colleague who also changed teaching positions and pick his or her brain about what to expect from a different age group or in a new school.

Your experience gives you an advantage over a novice teacher. You already have a strong foundation in science, and you'll be able to help students see the connections between science concepts. You'll already know a variety of strategies for instruction, assessments, lab safety, and classroom management.

Some teachers are content to teach the same subject to the same grade level in the same classroom/lab for their entire career. I've found, however, that changing assignments was both personally and professionally rejuvenating. It forced me to learn new content and how to relate to different age groups of students. I learned new instructional skills and expanded my circle of professional colleagues. I loved working with the enthusiasm of middle school students, but I also thoroughly enjoyed the intellectual interactions with high school and college students. Reflecting on your question, I realized working in a variety of situations helped me feel even more "highly qualified" as an educator, beyond the official definition.

If anyone has any other suggestions to help Charlotte with the transition, please feel free to add a comment.
Published: Jun-18-09 | 0 Comments | 0 Links to this post

Jun08

Science and NCLB

I'm concerned about the decrease in scheduled time for science instruction, especially in the primary grades. The teachers say that it's all because of NCLB (No Child Left Behind) and its emphasis on reading and mathematics. Is this the case everywhere?
-- Greg, Westminster, Colorado

The phrase "No Child Left Behind" implies we're going somewhere. As science teachers, we need to make sure where we're going with the students is a worthwhile place and the journey is an interesting one.

"We aren't allowed to teach science until after the state tests in April." I couldn't believe it when I heard this at an elementary school I visited recently. I knew many schools were focusing on reading and mathematics (the two subjects whose test scores are used to calculate a school's Adequate Yearly Progress, or AYP), but this sounded like an extreme case.

According to the 2008 study "Initial Impacts of No Child Left Behind on Elementary Science Education," published in the Journal of Elementary Science Education, 60% of the teachers surveyed said they cut back on time for science instruction as a result of NCLB. So your school and the one I visited are not isolated cases.

Even before NCLB, science was often shortchanged in terms of scheduled time. (Although we're discussing science here, I'm equally concerned that social studies, the arts, and physical education are also on the back burner in some schools.) I know some teachers who were strong in science before NCLB are still making time for science and their students are doing well on the reading and math tests. But I suspect some teachers have not protested too much about the de-emphasis of science.

If teachers decide to pursue this issue in their own schools, the real cause for the decrease in time for science should be determined. I'm not sure NCLB is the sole factor in every school where science time has been cut back. The study does mention other factors: few resources, lack of administrative support, outdated materials, and inadequate professional development. In addition, I know some schools use the time scheduled for science or social studies as "pull out" time for students who need remedial work in reading and math.

I'd also be concerned about the quality of science instruction during the time currently scheduled for science. If a science class consisted of worksheets, lectures, and busywork, then perhaps making the class shorter was not necessarily a bad thing. Another complication is that now states administer science tests based on their science standards as a part of NCLB. One eighth-grade teacher mentioned she felt she had to cut back on lab investigations to try to "cover" everything for the test, which included the standards for grades 6, 7, and 8.

There are those who suggest science content could be integrated with reading instruction. There certainly are many interesting nonfiction books students could use in reading class. But I think we're shortchanging students when we substitute assignments in reading class for planned and purposeful science instruction including both science content and processes such as hands-on investigations, vocabulary development, observations, writing, measuring, and questioning. In a well-planned science class, students apply their skills in reading and math to authentic situations.

The study mentioned earlier describes research conducted by Michael Klentschy, which showed inquiry science led to increased student performance in math, reading, and writing, even in schools with large number of at-risk students. So if test scores are an issue, I wonder if schools should increase time for inquiry science, rather than decreasing it! Perhaps if we give students more opportunities to apply their reading and math skills in other content areas, they will begin to see how their subject areas are connected.

Published: Jun-08-09 | 0 Comments | 0 Links to this post