Before I took my methods course I had many different views about science instruction. I only knew only what I had seen during my internship and how I was taught when I was in elementary school. I still stand by my belief that science is everywhere- however, I now believe that that concept and belief is not fitting for a classroom. While science is everywhere, I now know that in order to actually teach science meaningfully and authentically, it has to be purpose driven- it has to be taught through the eyes of scientists. Stated perfectly by Sullenger, "...There is no such thing as "science skills"- observing, measuring, interpreting, analyzing and communicating are all life skills" (1999). Similarly, "We need to distinguish among scientists definitions, ideas, theories and others' ideas and explanations about the same phenomena" (1999, p.26). We need to teach our students how these life skills are used by real scientists. After being in this class for only a week, I gave my opinion of what science is. I stated in my autobiography that, I don't think there is one simple definition of science. I would say science is meaningful, purposeful, and engaging, where students actively learn, question, investigate and think critically about the world around them.
I now believe science is exploring, asking questions and making connections to the world around us. I believe it is important for elementary students to learn science because it fosters curiosity about the world around them and encourages thinking skills that will help them in the real world. As stated in the NGSS Executive Summary, "Never before has our world been so complex and science knowledge so critical to making sense of it all" (2013, p.2). Every day we are presented with different information that we must think about and then form opinions. I think it is absolutely vital that students learn to think for themselves. I think in science students get the chance to think about something and then evaluate evidence to form an educated opinion. I demonstrated this in my portfolio with artifact 11- mealworm inquiry where my students were able to ask questions and then investigate to find the answer.
I believe students learn science best when they are engaged in authentic learning experiences and actually doing science, rather than doing science activities. In an authentic science learning experience students learn "important lessons about how scientists work, challenges they face, the nonlinearity of most science investigations, how scientists present research, differences between scientific research and school science and the gratification that comes when research findings are shared and discussed with other researchers" Olson and Vox-Petersen (2008). I demonstrated creating an authentic learning experience with artifact 3- Zoo Learning Experience. My students got the chance to be zoologists and become an expert by researching one particular animal before our trip and then continued their research at the zoo where they took careful observations, photographs and made claims based on what they read. Then, they used an app called BookPress to create an information text about their learning and present their book to the rest of the class.
When students actually do science it will not be simple and easy, cut and dry. Doing science involves engaging in the inquiry process, asking questions, and learning about content and process skills the way scientists do. It is a real, meaningful experience that can be correlated to real life, which is never simple and easy. As stated by Banchi and Bell in, The many Levels of Inquiry, "while students do reach stumbling blocks in their investigation designs and data collection process, they work through these impasses, all the time learning about the Nature of Science and how to problem solve" (2008). Essentially, savor the struggle- that is where the real learning happens. Referring back to the zoo project, my students did not just write a quick story about their field trip to the zoo- they got to research animals, study them in person and put together and present information like a real scientist. It was not an activity it was a whole learning experience.
I believe science should be taught by incorporating all three aspects of effective science instruction: content, process skills and the Nature of Science and follows a learning cycle (learning cycle and macro). Effective science instruction contains science content, process skills (used in the way that real scientists use them and with a scientific purpose) and explicitly states the Nature of Science. As Weinburgh states in A Leg (or Three) to Stand On, "Science experiences for elementary students should blend the three “legs” in such a way that students learn how to do science, learn specific information about the world around them, and learn what makes the pursuit of knowledge “science"" (2003, p.29). Likewise, coupling practice with content gives the learning context, whereas practices alone are activities and content alone is memorization" NGSS Executive Summary: Pre-Publication NGSS Release (2013). I demonstrated incorporating the three legs in my macro lesson plan cycle (artifact 1) where I explicitly planned out the content, process skills and NOS in my lesson plan. Likewise, while all three legs were present, I was fully aware of which legs were more dominant.
Additionally science should be taught using the 5 E's that make up a science learning cycle. "The learning cycle is an established planning method in science education and consistent with contemporary theories about how individuals learn", Lorsbach. The five E's that make up the learning cycle include engage, explore, explain, extend and evaluate. I demonstrated this in my portfolio with artifact 2, when I created my own learning cycle about animals that give live births verses animals that lay eggs.
Along with fostering curiosity and preparing/implementing science lessons that will provide students with authentic science learning experiences, I believe a science teacher's role is to act as a facilitator and use assessment to guide/inform instruction. "Formative assessment helps teachers understand students' prior knowledge, misunderstandings, learning difficulties and knowledge/skill development and adapt teaching to meet students needs" Lee and Abell (2007). I demonstrated my belief in my portfolio with artifact 4, my science interview and artifact 9, commit and toss strategy. Both of these artifacts involved me eliciting student responses in different ways to either figure out any misconceptions my students had about content or a concept before I taught it, or to figure out what my students had learned after I taught a lesson. I used the information I got from both to guide what or how I will teach next.
As a teacher, I must teach for conceptual change and I must always make sure to teach science with a real world scientific purpose and relation. "Children who are not often asked their opinions are especially reluctant to admit their thinking and will find ways to adjust old ideas before assimilating new ones" Watson and Kopnic (1990). I believe students should question and challenge everything to learn and make sense of what they are naturally curious about. Additionally, strategies that can be used to teach for conceptual change are, "refuting inaccurate ideas by stating how they are inaccurate and how science explains inaccuracies, refining inaccurate ideas by building on their accurate aspects, and giving convincing arguments or explanations that can help students bridge their inaccurate ideas to more scientifically accepted ones" Jeffries (1999). This is demonstrated in my portfolio with artifact 8, using the Paige Keely Probes and artifact 11, the chromatography investigation. The probes allowed my students to read a scenario, choose and answer and then explain and debate why they chose their answer and why they did not choose the other choices. It allowed them to question one another and want to search for the "correct" answer. Likewise, their chromatography investigations allowed them to create question and then investigate to see if they could find an answer. However, the evidence answers they got lead to more questions. It also led to natural questioning of one another and discussion about why some students got different results. At the end of the investigation, even if they thought one thing, they were able to adjust their thinking after they interpreted their investigation results.
I now believe science is exploring, asking questions and making connections to the world around us. I believe it is important for elementary students to learn science because it fosters curiosity about the world around them and encourages thinking skills that will help them in the real world. As stated in the NGSS Executive Summary, "Never before has our world been so complex and science knowledge so critical to making sense of it all" (2013, p.2). Every day we are presented with different information that we must think about and then form opinions. I think it is absolutely vital that students learn to think for themselves. I think in science students get the chance to think about something and then evaluate evidence to form an educated opinion. I demonstrated this in my portfolio with artifact 11- mealworm inquiry where my students were able to ask questions and then investigate to find the answer.
I believe students learn science best when they are engaged in authentic learning experiences and actually doing science, rather than doing science activities. In an authentic science learning experience students learn "important lessons about how scientists work, challenges they face, the nonlinearity of most science investigations, how scientists present research, differences between scientific research and school science and the gratification that comes when research findings are shared and discussed with other researchers" Olson and Vox-Petersen (2008). I demonstrated creating an authentic learning experience with artifact 3- Zoo Learning Experience. My students got the chance to be zoologists and become an expert by researching one particular animal before our trip and then continued their research at the zoo where they took careful observations, photographs and made claims based on what they read. Then, they used an app called BookPress to create an information text about their learning and present their book to the rest of the class.
When students actually do science it will not be simple and easy, cut and dry. Doing science involves engaging in the inquiry process, asking questions, and learning about content and process skills the way scientists do. It is a real, meaningful experience that can be correlated to real life, which is never simple and easy. As stated by Banchi and Bell in, The many Levels of Inquiry, "while students do reach stumbling blocks in their investigation designs and data collection process, they work through these impasses, all the time learning about the Nature of Science and how to problem solve" (2008). Essentially, savor the struggle- that is where the real learning happens. Referring back to the zoo project, my students did not just write a quick story about their field trip to the zoo- they got to research animals, study them in person and put together and present information like a real scientist. It was not an activity it was a whole learning experience.
I believe science should be taught by incorporating all three aspects of effective science instruction: content, process skills and the Nature of Science and follows a learning cycle (learning cycle and macro). Effective science instruction contains science content, process skills (used in the way that real scientists use them and with a scientific purpose) and explicitly states the Nature of Science. As Weinburgh states in A Leg (or Three) to Stand On, "Science experiences for elementary students should blend the three “legs” in such a way that students learn how to do science, learn specific information about the world around them, and learn what makes the pursuit of knowledge “science"" (2003, p.29). Likewise, coupling practice with content gives the learning context, whereas practices alone are activities and content alone is memorization" NGSS Executive Summary: Pre-Publication NGSS Release (2013). I demonstrated incorporating the three legs in my macro lesson plan cycle (artifact 1) where I explicitly planned out the content, process skills and NOS in my lesson plan. Likewise, while all three legs were present, I was fully aware of which legs were more dominant.
Additionally science should be taught using the 5 E's that make up a science learning cycle. "The learning cycle is an established planning method in science education and consistent with contemporary theories about how individuals learn", Lorsbach. The five E's that make up the learning cycle include engage, explore, explain, extend and evaluate. I demonstrated this in my portfolio with artifact 2, when I created my own learning cycle about animals that give live births verses animals that lay eggs.
Along with fostering curiosity and preparing/implementing science lessons that will provide students with authentic science learning experiences, I believe a science teacher's role is to act as a facilitator and use assessment to guide/inform instruction. "Formative assessment helps teachers understand students' prior knowledge, misunderstandings, learning difficulties and knowledge/skill development and adapt teaching to meet students needs" Lee and Abell (2007). I demonstrated my belief in my portfolio with artifact 4, my science interview and artifact 9, commit and toss strategy. Both of these artifacts involved me eliciting student responses in different ways to either figure out any misconceptions my students had about content or a concept before I taught it, or to figure out what my students had learned after I taught a lesson. I used the information I got from both to guide what or how I will teach next.
As a teacher, I must teach for conceptual change and I must always make sure to teach science with a real world scientific purpose and relation. "Children who are not often asked their opinions are especially reluctant to admit their thinking and will find ways to adjust old ideas before assimilating new ones" Watson and Kopnic (1990). I believe students should question and challenge everything to learn and make sense of what they are naturally curious about. Additionally, strategies that can be used to teach for conceptual change are, "refuting inaccurate ideas by stating how they are inaccurate and how science explains inaccuracies, refining inaccurate ideas by building on their accurate aspects, and giving convincing arguments or explanations that can help students bridge their inaccurate ideas to more scientifically accepted ones" Jeffries (1999). This is demonstrated in my portfolio with artifact 8, using the Paige Keely Probes and artifact 11, the chromatography investigation. The probes allowed my students to read a scenario, choose and answer and then explain and debate why they chose their answer and why they did not choose the other choices. It allowed them to question one another and want to search for the "correct" answer. Likewise, their chromatography investigations allowed them to create question and then investigate to see if they could find an answer. However, the evidence answers they got lead to more questions. It also led to natural questioning of one another and discussion about why some students got different results. At the end of the investigation, even if they thought one thing, they were able to adjust their thinking after they interpreted their investigation results.