If you want good insights and data about why lectures are a lousy tool for learning, what the fundamental flaws in school systems are, and why students are not engaged Chalkbored(by Jeremy Scheider 2007, a former high school chemistry teacher) is a must read.
Schneider makes the point that all popular movies depict US secondary schools as weak or downright bad. While there are some good teachers that rise up, they do it against the bleakest of conditions (such as in Freedom Writers).
Savvy enough to avoid the “L” word (or lecture), teachers and administrators call them discussions. In Chapter 1, Scheider writes: “In a one-hour class, a teacher who speaks 87% of the time leaves eight minutes for students. If you divide this by thirty students, each student gets to speak for 16 seconds (and listen for 59 minutes and 44 seconds). If I had a conversation like that (it sounds like a really bad blind date), “discussion” would not be the first term to pop into my head—“lecture” or “nightmare” would be closer.”
Scheider weaves great factual information with lively narrative. He makes the point often that it isn’t the teachers’ fault; it is the system that pushes them into this mode. I agreed with many of his points because they are logical and data based.
Here are some points and questions he raises. See if you agree or disagree:
If we want students to take high school math and science classes, why do we punish them by making these classes have the lowest average grades? (Example science course average = 2.68, while Physical Education is 3.34)
“Grades should never be used unless followed by clear explanations and opportunities to correct mistakes.”
The focus on Shakespearean literature and classic literature in schools has more to do with avoiding paying royalties to current authors than it does with truly trying to excite students about reading.
“Parents who want their children to succeed must insist upon higher standards than those set by the school.”
“Students should be given as much choice as we can cram into schools.”
It would be more efficient and produce more memorable learning experiences if great lessons were prepared in one place with a big budget and distributed to teachers using various media, rather than asking individual teachers to make their own great lessons.
“All meta-analyses agree that computers are more effective than traditional instruction.”
“There is no more CAI [computer assisted instruction] in high schools today than there was forty year ago.”
The book is certainly an interesting and provocative read. But if you are a classroom teacher, you probably should read this during the summer, when you can develop plans to do things a bit differently. But if you are an administrator, you might want to get a copy immediately. Scheider doesn’t just suggest change; he is trying to instill an uprising.
Living just north of Phoenix, we get the warm sunny 70° January weather, but we can drive 100 miles to the north to play in snow. Snow takes on a reverent beauty when you are just visiting it, playing in it, and having the air full of thick, downy flakes. When it makes unwanted intrusions, such as when I lived in New York, Ohio, and Iceland, it becomes more difficult to appreciate.
To the right you will see some snow fun pictures from our snow play in Flagstaff yesterday. It is interesting to see the evolution of “sledding”. Even in my childhood, toboggans were on their way out. Wooden sleds with two rails and a steering bar, like the Flexible Flyer, ruled the hills. I didn’t even see one of these on the hills.The disc or flying saucer seems to be waning.The flexible-foam, body length “sled” is the new king of the slopes. But what slides down the snow best?
The “coefficient of friction” (COF) is used to express the amount of friction between surfaces and this is proportional to the force pushing the surfaces together, or the weight of the rider and sled on the snow. The greater the COF the more friction there is. The COF for not-yet moving surfaces (static friction) is greater than sliding surfaces (kinetic friction). Engineers have measured different COFs (link). For instance, the kinetic COF for leather on oak is 0.52 and for those interested in glass-on-glass action, the kinetic COF is 0.4. Google has enlightened me. I had no idea there was so much research done on snow, and that there is a vibrant field called “snow engineering”, which might be called the ultimate snow job. Without going too deep into it, the COF for a moving skier (ski on snow) was analyzed to be between 0.01 and 0.3. I’d have to think that metal on snow would be a lower COF than foam on snow. It is good to think about, and students could do some fun experiments to find out.
Virtual science experiences must engage students and must have rich interactions. If it is just a Flash animation, I am not ready to call it an “experience” when the term video is much more suitable. If a teacher is going to bring laptop carts into a room or sign up weeks ahead for the computer lab, they should have computer-learning experiences that feature an engagement, a significant interaction, a closure, and multiple means of assessment.
“Sliding on Different Surfaces,” an Activity Object by Adaptive Curriculum, features these aforementioned characteristics. For an engagement, students play a game where they steer a sled down a hill while encountering different types of surfaces. If they steer over the surfaces with the least amount of friction, they will go faster. They receive a score based upon how well they did.
In the student interaction, students are in an office. They slide a pencil case across a desk and then mark the distance. Their mission is to find different things in the room such as a towel, newspaper, and sandpaper (obviously a rough office) and see how the pencil case sliding distance varies. (Elearning Physics Preview)
This elearning physics experience moves forward to an explanation of friction and factors that influence friction. There is an optional paper-and-pencil activity sheet that students can complete as they do the Activity Object, with two questions to be answered when they are finished.The activity sheets promote writing and become a permanent record of their learning for their science notebooks. If a teacher has a projector or interactive whiteboard and is doing a whole class lesson, the activity sheet is even more essential.
After the closure, students move onto the multiple-choice assessment, where they answer five questions and receive instant feedback about their learning. Teachers can log in to access student scores for the assessment. They can also see how long students took doing the Activity Object.If students are up for a bit of gaming, with their new understanding of friction, they can go back to the game and improve their time.
I did the Activity Object and played the game, and I observed that compared to my 8 and 11 year old sons, my sled in Flagstaff went much farther than their sleds. I would like to think that this was because I selected the patches of snow with the least friction and thus I picked up more speed. But these foam “sleds” are not very steerable and so, unfortunately, I have to consider the competing hypothesis that since my mass is a wee bit more than my sons (well okay, actually my weight is about 50 pounds more than both of them together), this may have had an influence. Since momentum is equal to mass x velocity, my momentum should be much greater than my sons’, and thus it would take longer to bring me to a stop. An impulse (force x time) can change the momentum of an object. Since my momentum is much bigger, and assuming that friction is about the same, I coast longer and thus farther.
But I think I will choose the happier hypothesis – that my greater knowledge of friction, rather than greater weight, made me go farther. Which just goes to show the subjective side of science after a happy family day in the snow.
Last evening my 11 year-old son shared with me the YouTube Video “Charlie Bit My Finger”. If you are more like my son and less like me, you probably have already seen the cute sibling clip that is approaching 70 million views and dozens of new posted remixes and re-enactments. If you do a Google search in quotes, you can find over 300,000 sites sharing or discussing this video.
As science teachers, we know the power of analogies to help students connect new concepts to existing conceptions already wired into their brains. Certainly, knowing what students know is a prerequisite for using analogies. References to pop culture can be a good source. Now, for example, if someone does something that is likely to cause a problem in science class, I could say, “Obviously if you put your finger in Charlie’s mouth, it’s going to get bitten!” And of course, we know the power of humor for keeping science class lively. Every time my son says, “Char-lie bit me and that really hurt,” with a British accent, I chuckle.
I had a science teacher colleague in the Bronx, who argued with me that we shouldn’t relate to students through their culture, but should expose them to a higher culture. Since she went to Stanford as an undergraduate, and I went to the University of Buffalo, it is possible that I never scaled that same cultural plateau (but I did have my high school biology class dissect chicken wings which are world famous because of Buffalo, NY). But I know there are others like me who like to stay connected with the youth we teach.
So how does my generation stay connected with the top videos?
Within the YouTube environment, clicking on videos, you can sort by “most popular” or “most viewed” and you can select the timeframe desired (such as one day, one week, or one month). In this way, I came across “Sneezing Panda”, usable in all sorts of lessons, such as stimulus and response, the nervous system, or animal behavior. There is also the Viral Video Chart, where you can see the graphs of popularity rankings for videos on the internet, not just on YouTube.
Of course, I had to select the category “Science and Technology” to see the most viewed videos of all time in this category. Sadly, most had nothing to do with science, but I found the very well produced and suspenseful “Oxygen (new version) – Periodic Table of Videos”.
So you can search, view, and relate to the world of adolescents. Or, you can wait for an adolescent to share a bit of their world with you. In retrospect, I’m glad I didn’t discover “Charlie” on my own because it was delightful having my son share it with me. And even though he saw it many times before, when he showed it to me we both had hearty laughs—together.
Resources:
Adaptive Curriculum’s “Habit Designer: Panda” (which will create a much nicer habitat than what you see in the “Sneezing Panda” video.
Perhaps the first assay we learned in science class was the starch test, where we dropped iodine on a substance, and if it turned “blue-black”, it indicated the presence of starch.
Now, as modern-day science teachers, we carry on the wisdom of generations of science teachers, and continue to avoid calling the positive result “black and blue”, as no science teacher wants students to associate bruises with white bread or potatoes.
The starch test has become such a common test, that I believe the term “starch test” should replace “litmus test” as the analogy cliché for social or political tests. (For example, Wikipedia states, “A litmus test is a question asked of a potential candidate for high office, the answer to which would determine whether the nominating official would choose to proceed with the appointment or nomination.”) How many non-science teachers even know what litmus is or what a litmus test is? Let’s start using analogies more people can relate to. [People would really start liken that (with an intended pun on the nature of litmus)!]
Today is the six-month anniversary of this blog. It seems such a short time ago, but alas, on June 20, 2008, my first blog was posted. This made me wonder, “How does one know if one is successful after just six short months?
To find the answer to this query, I did a search on blogs. I found no numerical metrics for success. Looking at the latest report from Google Analytics, I did see that more than 35 people per day have read this blog, and that this month alone, there were over 1,000 readers from 70 countries/territories.
The search for blogs about blogs (i.e. metablogs) yielded no numbers, which I viewed once again as evidence that collective wisdom can often be found in groups of people. The qualitative metric I did derive, however, from reading the advice of more experienced blog pundits was this: If a blogger enjoys writing about their interests, and some people are reading, then it should be considered successful. As far as this starch test is concerned, I judge this blog as a success, and I thank you for reading it.
But now on to science teaching and technology, which is the focus of this blog. In the living world, photosynthesis is one of the most important processes. Fortunately, Adaptive Curriculum has a free interactive activity that teachers and students (from all 70 countries/territories) can use to learn more about photosynthesis. In “Plants Needs for Photosynthesis” students conduct several investigations, where they can add or subtract water, light, carbon dioxide, and oxygen. The plant then does its thing (AKA: metabolism) for four hours.
After this, the starch test is performed to see if photosynthesis occurred. In the starch test, the leaves are boiled and then dipped into hot alcohol to remove the green chlorophyll. Next, the leaves are dipped into room temperature water. Finally, drops of iodine are placed upon the leaves. Through these discovery-based learning experiences, students are able to determine the conditions that are needed for photosynthesis to occur.
Thank you to Adaptive Curriculum for giving us this free Flash-based activity, and for their support of this blog. And no matter what your starch test or litmus test for happiness may be, I wish you a happy holiday season.
Resources:
If you (or your students) don’t know what a litmus test is, here are some links:
Whether at the high school or middle school level, students studying graphs of motion are often confused. One area of confusion occurs in the difference between distance-time graphs and displacement-time graphs. Virtual activities can cause more confusion, unless the right ones are chosen.
Distance-time graphs are a part of many middle school math and science curricula. A Google search for “distance-time graphs” reveals about 10,500 websites with many Java-based and Flash-based online activities. The problem for physics learners and teachers is that in many cases, the developers call their graph a distance-time graph but in reality they are displacement-time graphs.
Here are some examples of (otherwise) good websites making this error:
There are a few good sites that accurately portray distance-time graphs.
“Crocodile-clips” is a simple, free site where students move a helicopter and create a real-time distance-time graph. It doesn’t matter if the helicopter is moved away from or closer to the starting point. The true distance traveled is displayed on the graph. It is simple but effective.
Commonwealth Curriculum Pack (CCP) is a more involved site. I used this with my mixed age physics class last week and it made the point and kept their interest.
This site uses the context of the 100-meter race to show different arrival speeds. Quickly, my students learned that the steeper the slope (gradient), the greater the speed of the runner. Then we viewed several nice animated sequences of interpolation, which they then interpreted.
Students observe stick figures run 400-meter races. They can see the runners move at actual speeds or average speeds, so this serves as a good way to help students understand instantaneous speed versus average speed.
Motion graphs will probably always be confusing for some students. We can reduce confusion with distance-time and displacement-time graphs by using internet resources that accurately portray the difference.
Last week I had the good fortune to attend the NYSCATE conference. As an enthusiastic science educator, I have always enjoyed and profited from science teacher conferences, such as the NSTA regional and national conferences and state conferences (NY, AZ, and OH).I still get those special sensations of “I am with my own people” and “Let the science geek inside me run free” whenever I am part of the science teacher convention scene. I think at my first science teacher conference, I must have felt like Barack Obama when he visited Kenya for the first time and met his welcoming relatives.
After attending NSCATE and NECC, I have to confess that these tech folks really know how to have fun. Of course, upstate New Yorkers tend to be on the friendly side anyway, but the NYSCATE folks really planned on powerfully fun experiences. Is it something about teachers and administrators who use technology that make them more fun? Or is it just that sponsors of technology conferences are more lavish in their support?
At the conference I was fortunate enough to have Helen Padgett, the incoming ISTE president, introduce me to Peter Reynolds (photo to the right), the author of many children’s books including Northstar (online reading at http://www.fablevision.com/northstar/). In Northstar, Peter reminds us to take our own paths, take time to explore the world around us (like why leaves float), and that things we learn along the journey will later be useful.
Of course, NECC was also a lot of fun, with even bigger budgets and all kinds of parties. This year NECC is in Washington, DC. All sorts of ideas can be learned and new products discovered at technology conferences which can be used as one progresses in his or her own journey. Because of the learning and the fun, I recommend that all science educators experience at least one tech conference!
The New York State Association for Computers and Technologies in Education (NYSCATE) Metro Conference, May 18-19, 2009, Hilton Rye Town Hotel, 99 Westchester Ave., Rye Brook, NY http://www.nyscate.org/conferences.cfm?subpage=281
I received the following email from a reader of this blog:
Hi Peter – I have a professional question for you as a teacher, a parent, and a science guru…
Do you think it is appropriate or inappropriate for a 5th grade (kids age 10) teacher to show her class a series of YouTube movies about the theory that the US astronauts did NOT land on the moon back in the 1960’s?This is during a unit on Astronomy.
I know my own take on it – I just wanted to see what you thought/think?
-Amy
Thank you for the question Amy. Here is my answer….
First, it is difficult to know the motivation of the teacher for showing this. If she had expertise in the space program and she was presenting these non-scientific ideas to show how science and logic can refute them, I would say excellent.
But alas, I suspect this was not the case. More likely the teacher heard of the allegations that the landing on the Moon was a fraud, and was interested enough to read the allegations, without spending the time to look deeper. Sharing just the allegations with students through YouTube videos is not, in my opinion, what a teacher of science should do.
I still remember my parents waking me up from bed and leading me downstairs to the playroom to watch the astronauts landing on the Moon. The NASA accomplishment helped Americans realize the importance of science and technology, and for many children, it ignited more interest in science.
Of course there are so many lunar landing conspiracy theories throwing up so many trial balloons, that it would take a team of scientists a lifetime to keep shooting them all down. Some are easy to dismiss. “Hey, the US flag is blowing in the wind and there is no air on the moon. It’s a fake!” Although I don’t remember much as a 9 year old, I remember the announcers making the point that since there was no air or wind, NASA put wires into the flag to hold it up.
Then there is the logical question, why can’t we just point a telescope at the places where they landed so we can see if their stuff is there?
But according to NASA, “The Moon is 384,400 km away. At that distance, the smallest things Hubble can distinguish are about 60 meters wide.” We will someday have probes and people return to the moon that will confirm the existence of these leftover materials. You might think that would put it all to rest but guess what? This is already anticipated by the conspiracy theorists, who say, well un-manned vessels could have put the materials there.
If it was a hoax, you would think the fewer people involved the better. Why not pretend to go just once, instead of nine times so less people are involved? There are 12 astronauts that walked on the moon, who indicated it really happened. There are hundreds of other NASA personnel who also say the same thing. From personal accounts to moon rocks, the evidence suggests this did happen.
I can’t take the time to research all the theories and all the counter-arguments. But in my mind, science is so rarely taught in elementary classrooms, that it is a sin to spend science instructional time on pseudo-science via YouTube videos. Let’s spend time helping students learn about science and the contributions it has made.
This week, I had the good fortune to meet with Conrad Storad, who is well known in Arizona for his children’s book Don’t Call Me Pig! We didn’t talk about javelinas, but we did talk about science education. Conrad reminded me and my dean (Mari Koerner) about the widespread use of the ASU science magazine, Chain Reaction, by middle grade children in Arizona.
Conrad and his staff, who produce the ASU Research magazine, also produce Chain Reaction. At their website, teachers can request class sets of Chain Reaction magazine, and it is all free. The magazine issues are thematic, with the following topics developed: urban ecology, solar system, Sonoran Desert, Weather Station, and Biotechnology. For teachers outside of Arizona, there is the electronic option, downloading the stories from the website.
On the website are the science standards (see Teacher Tips) addressed and some complimentary activities. But the best part is the lively presentation of the science content in the articles. Conrad has data that suggests that language arts teachers commonly use the magazines as a way to bring nonfiction reading in the classroom. This seems like a great tool for teachers to compliment other forms of instruction.
For example, after students used Adaptive Curriculum’s Activity Object “Greenhouse Effect,” they could follow it up with reading of “carbon-dioxide-questions” from Chain Reaction’s issue on Urban Ecology and in the process learn about ASU plant biologist Tad Day.
Duke and Bennett-Armistead summarize six reasons for having students read nonfiction as a normal part of instruction.
1) Provides the key to success in later schooling
2) Prepares students to handle real-life reading
3) Appeals to readers’ preferences
4) Addresses students’ questions and interests
5) Builds knowledge of the natural and social world
6) Boosts vocabulary and other kinds of literacy knowledge
Whatever type of instruction is used in a classroom, Chain Reaction can be a useful resource for middle grade science learning and literacy. It brings science alive and helps students meet real scientists.
About the Images
First image: The cover of Chain Reaction’s issue on Urban Ecology.
Second Image: A scene from Adaptive Curriculum’s Activity Object called “Greenhouse Effect,” This scene is summarizing the results of an interactive experiment where students compare the warming of the air in a container with a lid to a container with no lid.
I was teaching a middle school lesson on static electricity on Halloween so I dressed up as “StaticElectricity.” We did the usual activities with balloons, such as picking up paper, rice crispies, and coffee grounds. I used water balloons, but of course, we filled them with air. I liked their shape better, but some students had difficulty blowing them up. One variation that one of my university students found was to draw two circles on opposite sides of a balloon. After that, one side was rubbed on hair, and the other was not. Students could accurately predict that the circle rubbed would pick up stuff, but most did not accurately predict about the other circle. It didn’t pick up anything, as the balloon was an insulator and the charges stayed where they were placed.
I found a good applet on static electricity. It is from PhET, the makers of The Circuit Construction Kit, which I positively reviewed in a previous blog. It is fine for a teacher to demonstrate that electrons move but positive charges do not, however, as a student activity it has limited potential. When you start, the balloon has no net charge. When you rub it on the wool sweater the balloon picks up electrons (shown in blue) and the sweater loses electrons. Now the balloon will stick to the sweater because positive and negative charges attract. if you move the balloon towards the wall it repels the electrons in the wall and it sticks to the wall.
I had the good fortune to spend a few days in the City of Brotherly Love. Of course, having a friend with local insights and views into the culture made the travel experience more intriguing. The city of Philadelphia, which I suspect is a friendly place under normal circumstances, was exuding globs of amiability the morning after their beloved Phillies clinched their first National League title in a very long time.
My friend, John Larkin, took me to an Italian restaurant for lunch where I had my first real Philly cheesesteak sandwich. I asked John how to have it, and he said, “With Whiz.” So I had it with Cheese Whiz, with onions, and with mushrooms, all on an Amoroso roll. I took a picture (to the right) and enjoyed my lunch.
John went on to tell me about Geno’s and Pat’s, two local establishmentsthat are famous for their cheesesteaks. Intriguingly, he told that Geno’s would kick you out of line if you didn’t know what you were doing when you ordered. This even applied to foreign tourists. Pat’s was more welcoming.
There was something about the arrogance of Geno’s that attracted me. It must be a great cheesesteak for them to be able to kick people out of line who were hesitant in their ordering. So I walked from the East Market train station to South Philly to Geno’s. I went up to the window where the workers/owners were raised on a floor a few feet higher than the sidewalk. I noticed the menu painted on the wall had one thing: cheesesteak sandwiches, and the only option was, “Whiz, American, or provolone cheese.” With a little trepidation, I ordered the Philly steak with provolone and onions. The man up high turned to the cook and said, “Provolone wit.”The “wit” meant “with onions”. I must have gotten it right because I wasn’t kicked out of line. When I asked about a drink, I was told that that was at a different window, so I paid for, and received my sandwich, and proceeded to the next window to pay for, and receive my drink.
It was a delightful cheesesteak; the quality of the beef was better than any other I have had on a sandwich. Although I enjoyed the cheesesteak at the Italian restaurant, this one was much better. I, of course, had to check out Pat’s across the street, and I noticed that they had a lot more options on their menu. The options did look interesting, but I was full.
What does this have to do with technology in science education? There are a few analogies that are detailed below. These analogies lead to questions that we need to think about and ultimately answer.
Arrogance of Computer Makers. After the Apple computer faded away, and up to the last couple of years, there seemed to be an arrogant disdain by computer makers for the educational market place. Sure, they were willing to sell computers to schools, but how much effort did they really put into producing computers that were fully adapted for classroom use?And today, is the arrogance gone? To be sure, as we are seeing mini-notebooks evolve, with names such as “Classmates” (by Intel), the educational marketplace is garnering attention. But beyond being smaller and less expensive, are these really fully adapted for the classroom? And what about desktops? Even though we heard talk of one hard drive running several keyboards and monitors, thus reducing costs dramatically, I haven’t seen these in schools. I see one CPU, one monitor, one keyboard, and one mouse. Even the idea of multiple mice (which I wrote about in a previous blog) has not happened. When will the commercial producers of computers focus their machines on being great tools for the classrooms? Perhaps it is time to wander across the street to find Pat’s….
Focus versus Wide Applications. In the 1970s and 1980s, there were rich varieties of science software titles in many schools. Then consolidations in the education software industry and budget cut backs left many schools with just the suite of Microsoft Products. Students could use Excel, PowerPoint, and Word in many different contexts. In a sense, we went from Pat’s to Geno’s. Perhaps simplicity was good. Indeed, in some of the more successful software applications, such as Inspiration, the simplicity of purpose (concept mapping) make it a strong tool. New products are coming out, such as Pasco’s SPARK, but they purposefully don’t promise to do everything. The SPARK has focus, yet the educational world has matured enough so that we can and should have a rich variety of science educational tools. It is time to move beyond Word, Excel, and PowerPoint. Within the variety, good, simple tools are valued; tools that, like the iPod, do only a few things, but they do them well.
Reluctant to ask for Help. During the teaching part of the year, teachers are as busy as any professionals I know. Teachers know how busy they are and thus how busy their colleagues are. It is no wonder that teachers may be reluctant to ask colleagues for technology help that would involve more than a few minutes. So, many teachers stay in their comfort zone, not pushing the edge because they are not asking for help.This is probably not because the teacher is “afraid of being kicked out of the line,” but because they know how busy their colleagues are. Where are teachers supposed to go for help when everybody seems so busy? From the fellow science teacher to the teacher who gets a prep period to run the computer lab, there seems to be no great solution for support. Perhaps online support and training, such asAdaptive Curriculum’s use of Webex presentations can help solve the problem.
When I visited Philadelphia, I started at Geno’s. Next time I will go to Pat’s.I think I will enjoy the variety, and I think I will be calmer as I ask for a cheesesteak with provolone, onions, AND mushrooms. And I just might ask them, is it possible to get raw onions instead of grilled?
Living just north of Phoenix, we get the warm sunny 70° January weather, but we can drive 100 miles to the north to play in snow. Snow takes on a reverent beauty when you are just visiting it, playing in it, and having the air full of thick, downy flakes. When it makes unwanted intrusions, such as when I lived in New York, Ohio, and Iceland, it becomes more difficult to appreciate.
tion, rather than greater weight, made me go farther. Which just goes to show the subjective side of science after a happy family day in the snow. 
Entries (RSS)