Ever since, and probably before, Robert Yager’s (1983) study that suggested the amount of new vocabulary in science textbooks exceeded the number of vocabulary words for learning a foreign language, many educators have been concerned with the number of terms introduced in science classes and methods to help students learn vocabulary.

Recent reforms of state standards, starting with Project 2061, have hopefully reduced the amount of superficial knowledge we ask students to learn. Nevertheless, the new vocabulary can be daunting. The NCLB focus on math and English, with the consequential neglect of science in the elementary grades has resulted in many students entering the middle grades with deficits in their science vocabulary (Cunningham & Allington, 2007).

The teaching of vocabulary is the job of all teachers (Blachowicz & Fisher, 2002). The understanding of content vocabulary is, after all, an excellent predictor of success in the subject area (Wilcox 2006). While inquiry skills, concept development, and understanding are more important goals, students knowing and using key vocabulary are important outcomes of science education.

I recently discovered a tool to assist in vocabulary acquisition. Andrew Sutherland created Quizlet in 2005 when he was a 15 year-old student studying French vocabulary. From what I can tell, it has become a phenomenal success, with over 200,000 registered users. More than flashcards, Quizlet has activities in the following sections: (a) Familiarize, (b) Learn, (c) Test, (d) Play Scatter, and (e) Play Space Race. The great thing about Quizlet is it is all internet based, so there is no need to download and install software, which can be annoying in some situations and impossible in many schools.

Students can type in their own words and definitions and then learn them through a variety of activities. I also like, however, having access to the great repository of already prepared quizlets. For instance, I just taught a unit on magnetism in my son’s middle school classroom. If I would have discovered Quizlet sooner I might have assigned the quizlet on magnets to review for the test. As a parent, my other son (in third grade) had some vocabulary words to learn from his language arts book in the section “Pepita Talks Twice.” A few different quizlets for these words were already established. My son and I reviewed a few words on my iPhone on the way back from soccer practice.  

While we need to be mindful of reducing the “tyranny of terminology” that sometimes describes science courses, we must also help our students learn the key words. Quizlet is a free tool that can help students learn and use scientific vocabulary.

Resources

Adaptive Curriculum, Magnetic Field of  Magnet.  http://www.adaptivecurriculum.com/us/details/USSXP080401

Cunningham, P. M. & Allington, R. L.  (2007). Classrooms that work: They can all read and write. 4th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Wilcox, J. (2006). Chicago teachers learn to build academic vocabulary. ASCD Education Update 48 (6): 1–2.

Blachowicz, C., and P. Fisher. 2002. Teaching vocabulary in all classrooms. 2nd ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill Prentice- Hall.

Quizlet. http://quizlet.com/

Thelen, J. N. (1984). Improving reading in science.2nd ed. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Yager, R. E. (1983). The Importance of Terminology in Teaching K-12 Science. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 20(6), 577-88. 

               “Teaching means creating situations where structure can be discovered.” –Jean Piaget

Many science teachers struggle with the idea of free exploration. Free exploration takes advantage of the natural tendency for children to just mess around with materials, without following any rigid procedures. If you have ever watched a child playing in sand, you have seen free exploration.

I have observed some preservice teachers struggle with a hands-on science lesson because they pass out the materials to the children and then they try to explain what they should do with them. More experienced teachers know that once children start to interact with the materials, they begin to tune the teacher out. A better strategy, therefore, is to explain to the children all that they need to know before passing out the materials.

Free exploration purposely allows students to mess around with the materials. It is a shame that for so many teachers, science experiences are always canned (first do this, and then do this). I have no objections to well articulated experiences that lead to discovery, but students also need opportunities to mess about. Each time they change something and see the result, they are developing ideas and approaches that will deepen their abilities to design and understand experiments.

The virtual world can be a great place to mess around without causing a great mess! The activity object, “Space Objects Interaction Explorer,” presents a great canvas to mess around with. Students are presented with two celestial objects, larger than the other. By changing the size and direction of the arrow, they control their initial velocities. Then they hit the play button and the objects move according to their initial velocities, and their motion is immediately influenced by gravity. Lines are drawn as the planets move so the orbital paths are evident.

Experienced teachers also are aware that challenges can really keep students engaged, such as with GEM’s Bubble-ology, where the teacher walks around and says, “Okay, let’s see who can produce the largest bubble!” or “Wow, great! Now, can you blow a bubble within a bubble?”

In “Space Objects Interaction Explorer,” the first challenge is easy. Make the objects collide. A fiery explosion rewards success, but there is no big bang—of course, contrary to Hollywood misconceptions, sound does not travel in the vacuum of outer space.

The second challenge is to make the smaller object orbit the bigger one. Most children can’t do this at first, but neither can most adults. It is interesting that most adults know what an orbit is, but they can’t at first produce one. It is very different being able to define the term orbit versus being able to explain why an object orbits another. Through trial-and-error learning, both children and adults can get one object to orbit the other—and develop intuitive ideas about orbits.

Inevitably, the first orbit produced by the learner is not a circle but an elliptical orbit. The third challenge is to achieve a circular orbit. When this task is completed it helps students really understand that orbits are an interplay between velocity (moving tangentially to the orbit) and gravitational interaction. Then, when orbits are explained, students have the experiences to understand why they occur.

 The fourth challenge involves three objects and asks that two of the objects orbit the largest one, which I will call the star. In putting this together, students (and adults) usually place one object closer and one farther from the star. And they initially make the farthest one have the bigger initial velocity. When they hit play, the nearest object crashes into the star and the larger object shoots out of the star system. Through trial-and-error learning, students will get it right, and later when they learn that Mercury is the fastest moving planet, it isn’t just an isolated fact to be memorized, but becomes an example of a concept they already know.

The last challenge is, appropriately enough, the most difficult to achieve. Appropriate because the really smart kids that solved the other challenges with great speed are fully engaged as everyone else catches up. The challenge is to make the small object orbit the medium object as the medium object orbits the largest object, or in other words, they are challenged to create a moon that orbits a planet, while the planet orbits the star. Students can, of course, adjust the position and velocity of the objects, as well as their masses. Success with this challenge isn’t easy and it takes a lot of messing about, but it is fun to see the interactions and patterns drawn of the paths followed. And when success arrives, it feels sweet!

References:

Adaptive Curriculum. (accessed August 7, 2008). Space Objects Interaction Explorer. https://www.adaptivecurriculum.com/us/details/USSSM150202

Barber, J. (1987) Bubble-ology (Great Explorations in Math and Science). Berkeley: Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California. http://www.lawrencehallofscience.org/gems/

Hawkins, D. (1965). Messing about in science. Science and Children, 2(5), 5-9.

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1967). The Child’s Conception of Space. New York: W. W. Norton.

Most Americans know the story of the powerful John Henry, the man who drove steel into rock. There are many versions of the story and songs that have been passed from generation to generation. For example, listen to a version sung by Van Morrison. With a huge sledgehammer, John Henry drove steel spikes into rocks, as his partner turned them in ¼ rotations with each strike, to help make way for the westward moving railway lines. A salesman had a steam-powered drill that he said could do it faster than a human. John Henry challenged the machine, and with a fantastic display of energy, John Henry beat that machine. We could probably find scores of John Henry teachers in schools, those who, if pitted against a computer for helping students to learn, would handily win. John Henry won the competition but sadly died of exhaustion in the process. I don’t think the experienced teacher would suffer from exhaustion, but I do know many new teachers who are exhausted and overwhelmed by the demands of teaching. 

Today, railway workers use powerful drills to make holes in rocks; someday, teachers will make computers a powerful core tool in student-centered learning.  But it hasn’t happened yet.

While most of us can adduce examples of great things happening in schools with technology, and while students certainly do use computers as tools, such as in writing, presenting, and researching, there is a sense that we haven’t pushed the envelope.

The fault doesn’t lie with the teachers. A recent National Education Association (2008)/American Federation of Teachers survey indicated that (a) there were not enough computes in classrooms “to use computers effectively for classroom instruction;” and (b) training in technology focused more on non-instructional uses of computers. Teachers in the survey were not technophobes, they almost all had internet access at home and 95% answered that technology improved student learning, 89.1% indicated it made student learning more enjoyable, 86.4% said it saves time on the job, and 87.5% said it improves job effectiveness. These results suggest that if computers for student use were provided and better training in using computers for instruction was presented, teachers would make greater use of computers to support student learning.

As schools try to do so many things for so many different children, effectiveness and efficiency are not as easily discerned as they are for drilling a hole in rock. Even as the effectiveness and efficiencies are developed and revealed, the traditions and culture of “the school,” will not change easily. I predict that virtual schools will be the catalyst to transform schools and let teachers drop their “sledgehammers.”

Virtual schools will demonstrate the efficiencies of the extensive use of computers to support student learning. When today’s students show a great proclivity for learning with computers, when parents and students want more and more online classes, when more and more students start attending virtual schools, and when student learning is discovered and efficiencies are dramatically demonstrated, then finally physical schools will have to start rethinking the role of computers in student learning.

Of course, traditional public schools may be the last to change their ways. Charter schools and private schools will be in the vanguard, because if they don’t, many will fail and close their doors. In Arizona, a state that is second to California in the number of publicly supported charter schools (Center for Educational Reform, 2008), charter schools are struggling to compete primarily because they are trying to do the same things with less money. When I see charter schools with untrained teachers and inexperienced teachers, and large class sizes that resemble traditional classrooms, I wonder why anyone would send their children to these schools. I also read about closures of private schools (i.e. Goodman, 2008), most particularly Roman Catholic schools, because the expenses are growing faster than the tuition.

Look to see the charter and private schools emulating the successes of the virtual schools. We will see some charter schools go completely virtual and we will see many more online classes, especially in areas where it is difficult to get qualified teachers (such as Advanced Placement Chemistry, Physics, or Calculus).

The revolution I am most interested in will eventually happen in the “bricks and mortar” classrooms. Parents, teachers, students, and administrators will continue to value the physical presence and great influence of a teacher, but at the same time will also seek the learning gains and efficiencies of computer-based learning. As virtual experiences become a significant part of the classroom enterprise, teachers will increasingly assume the role of the “guide on the side” (rather than the “sage on the stage”), students will have enhanced motivation, and the work of the teacher will be easier. All this will encourage many more teachers to remain engaged in the profession.  In a similar way to railway workers using mechanical drills to make their work easier, computers will be core tools in student learning, and virtual schools will start the revolution.

About these images:

The first image is from the Library of Congress. it shows Fred Dapp in a rock-drilling competition between 1880 and 1900 probably in Colorado.

The second image is from Adaptive Curriculum‘s Activity Object “Nuclear Energy: Fission” showing a scene from an activity with a nuclear submarine.