Science education? The earlier, the better!

Science education is sort of like the weather -- everyone discusses it but nobody seems to know what to do about it. From Ars Technica comes an article that says stressing science education in middle and high school is bad timing. What we really need to do is start educating them in kindergarten.

They're right on the mark when they say that even very young kids "figure out" how the world works -- and they're often wrong about it or confused about how things work. The direct method of teaching (where it's explained what's going on) is the best for the youngest kids when it comes to bringing concepts to them. But without the "magic" of the curiosity-inducing "discovery method" of teaching (where students devise, execute, and interpret their own experiments), some of the fundamentals can be lost.

And here teachers are sitting on the horns of a dilemma. It's pretty easy to outline a "direct" method of teaching (just lecture.) "Socratic methods" where you lead them through it with leading questions usually only work best for Socrates -- the rest of us end up with an audience who asks questions we don't expect. Discovery methods are very good -- but only once you've taught the kids how to do a proper experiment.

The best solution seems to be to combine all three -- give a short lecture, ask leading questions, have them explore.

...of course, this assumes you've got a perfect class and that Rudy and Maxie will NOT decide to throw spitballs in the middle of the lesson just to see if they can annoy each other.

Desperately Seeking Science Education

Are in-school "special programs" starting to replace science education in this age of teacher and education cutbacks? A rash of "just in time for schol to start" articles about science education suggests that teachers and schools are turning to special programs to help interest kids in science and teach them some basic concepts. And it's no wonder -- if a recent study in California is any indication, students are getting less than 40 hours of science education for the entire school year!

Quantum Camp (is one of a number of programs designed to supplement this lack by bringing science education by science teachers into the classroom. They bridge the gap between education and entertainment and spark curiosity with interesting experiments and even by incorporating music and storytelling.


But -- as an ex-teacher, I have to ask just how effective this is. While it's better than nothing (20 hours per year), 30 minutes of excitement does not replace five hours of drilling and practice. While kids will become engaged with experiments like mentos and cokes, will they remember and understand the reasons why this process happened -- and will they be able to apply these scientific principles in the future. Can someone educated by science entertainment go beyond the simple and start asking the complex questions and making the sophisticated connections needed for good science research?

I have already seen how kids use videos on message boards to "make" a point without really understanding the background of the question and the material. It's a troubling idea when you consider the reports that we're falling behind on science education.

Quantum Camp: http://news.yahoo.com/science-education-takes-quantum-leap-silicon-valley-070408132.html

Guerilla Science music and science experience http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-with-moxie/2011/08/10/guerilla-science-blends-music-and-science-at-escape2ny/

Science storytelling http://www.scienceteller.com/

Direct Instruction -- time to rethink strategies?

I haven't been keeping up with all the latest buzz in the education field since I retired years ago, but I was aware of the trend in the past 20 years of "discovery learning" where kids were encouraged to explore and think on their own. This was something that I didn't have much of an opinion on, but seemed to be highly thought of by people who did a lot of home schooling. So I was surprised to find in a recently promoted National Science Teachers Association digest that kids learn better research skills if they're taught by "direct instruction" rather than "discovery learning."

Instruction versus exploration in science learning

http://www.teach-nology.com/teachers/methods/models/direct/

With the ongoing screams about how schools are failing to teach children, some are advocating a return to this kind of instruction. But today's society isn't quite as accepting of this method as it was in the past. The argument is that it's "canned teaching" and it's "not personal" and may not appeal to what the child wants to do.

Now, as someone who grew up under the Really Old School method of teaching, I'll admit I'm rather uncomfortable with some of today's teaching practices. When I was in school (along with the dinosaurs), we didn't work in groups, we had to sit still and keep quiet (and were punished for not being on task) -- and we hated it because it stressed drills and homework, but my generation still ended up being one of the most well educated generations in America (highest number of college graduates, etc.) This is still the method used in totalitarian countries.

Further googling turned up a very interesting op-ed piece on this by Jeff Lindsay, which includes summaries of some of the studies. http://www.jefflindsay.com/EducData.shtml

That's as far as I've gotten into this today and I need to go attend to other things -- but I want to go back into the material and review it and see if things in there can make me a better educator, both when speaking informally to the public as well as when I'm doing lessons for afterschool science.

 

 

--- Patricia Griffin

Pre-publication PDF of book: Framework for K-12 Science Education

A pre-publication copy of the PDF for the book,  A Framework for K-12 Science Education:Practices, Crosscutting Concepts, and Core Ideas  is available for download from the National Academies press. 

 The authoring organizations stress that science, engineering, and technology can provide answers to meeting many of humanity's great challenges, both present and future. This book is proposing a new approach to science at all grade levels that will capture students’ interest and provide them with the necessary foundational knowledge in the field.

To quote the press release:

Framework for K-12 Science Education outlines a broad set of expectations for students in science and engineering in grades K-12. These expectations will inform the development of new standards for K-12 science education and, subsequently, revisions to curriculum, instruction, assessment, and professional development for educators. This book identifies three dimensions that convey the disciplinary core ideas and practices around which science and engineering education in these grades should be built. These three dimensions are: cross-cutting concepts that unify the study of science and engineering through their common application across these fields; scientific and engineering practices; and core ideas in four disciplinary areas: physical sciences, life sciences, earth and space sciences, and engineering, technology, and the applications of science. The overarching goal is for all high school graduates to have sufficient knowledge of science and engineering to engage in public discussions on science-related issues; be careful consumers of scientific and technological information; and have the skills to enter the careers of their choice.

Framework for K-12 Science Education is the first step in a process that will inform state-level decisions and provide a research-grounded basis for improving science teaching and learning across the country. The book will guide standards developers, curriculum designers, assessment developers, teacher educators, state and district science administrators, teachers, and educators who work in informal science environments.

I find this interesting and exciting and have bookmarked the document to download and read later this week.  I'm glad someone is taking this approach but I fear that the statement, "will inform state level decisions" was made by someone who never dealt with Rick Perry and the Texas Board of Education.




Still, I'm eager to see what they've come up with and how it might be integrated in some of the things that I teach!   If you'd like to review it, it is currently available as a PREPRINT at this link (sidebar on left)