• To increase interest in the discipline
• To increase participation in class
• To increase retention of information

The Penn Instructional Model (PIM) and computer applications can be incorporated in the high school science classroom to enhance both the engagement level of students and their attitudes towards science.  Each marking period, several traditional lecture lessons were replaced by group activities using the PIM.  Students used the computer to conduct and present research using each quarter, and used computers to organize and report data for laboratory experiments regularly.  Students also used the internet to observe online animations and to visit interactive web sites.  Engagement and interest level was observed by student surveys and anecdotally.  The PIM activities were well received; students commented on the activities and their presentation as being positive.  Students were interested in using the computers, and felt that use of the computers added to their educational experiences because they presented traditional information in nontraditional ways, addressing several learning styles. 
 

Introduction and Purpose of Study
       The original goals of my project were to determine the impacts of increased use of technology and the Penn Instructional Model (PIM) on the overall attitude towards chemistry and the interest of students enrolled in my honors level chemistry courses. In addition, retention of information was also to be included.  After contemplation, I decided to focus solely on the impact of the PIM and technology on the interest and attitudes in both Chemistry and  Biology II classes, as the Rose Tree Media School District has been looking to increase level two performance by incorporating strategies that the students reported as most effective or most interesting on “walk through” interviews conducted in the high school.  Past walk through data indicated that students often prefer technology based projects, direct and quick feedback from teachers, and hands-on activities as effective instruments of education.  I was curious to see if the same conclusions about technology and the PIM would be reached in my own classroom.
 In addition, technology is emphasized in the Rose Tree Media School District.  Each science classroom has 6 PC computers with a laser printer.  The school has five mobile carts equipped with 15 laptop computers and a printer, all linked through an infra-red network to the main computer server.  The laptops have complete internet access, as do the three computer labs and 15 computers in the library.  All students have space on the server to save their work. 

Description of Study/ Methods
       Four out of five honors (level 2) Chemistry and Biology courses have been the focus of my research.  The classes are, from a statistical standpoint, the norm for Penncrest High School.  They do not differ significantly from the population of the school as a whole.  In total, 103 students participated in the surveys, signifying approximately 80% of my current students, evenly distributed between grades 11 and 12.  They were also a very “typical” representation of honors level science students at PHS.
       Many PIM activities were used during the year, on the average of one per week.   Examples include making Fruit Loop Lewis structures, molecular models, homework reviews, test reviews, a partner quiz on electron configuration and molecular geometry.  The technology component included mole research on an element, two labs using Excel, and a PowerPoint presentation. 
      Over the course of the year, the technology applications utilized included Excel, Microsoft Word, the internet, and PowerPoint.  Excel was used to create spreadsheets, Microsoft Word to process text documents, the internet to visit interactive web sites and to research topics for PowerPoint for presentations.  Each marking period, students had used all of the four computer applications at least one time, with the exception of PowerPoint in the first marking period. 
      Data sources to evaluate the impact of the PIM and technology on chemistry education included observations, anecdotal evidence, and survey responses after completing the majority of PIM and technology activities. 

Results
 Penn Instructional Model
     In response to using the PIM, approximately 50% of students responded favorably to use of the PIM in class over traditional group work, while an additional 30% stated the PIM helps no more/ less than traditional school work.  The remainder of the students felt that they are worse off for using the PIM, and that is was not helpful as a learning tool.  However, it was noted that students participated to a high degree and asked better questions in follow-up activities and reviews after using the PIM. 
     Positive comments on the PIM indicated that students liked the ability to share information with other students, and the knowledge that information was to be presented helped them to remain focused.  Negative PIM comments (20%) indicated strong feelings and responses, including several responses that indicated that group work and presentations made the student feel inferior or inadequate, and/or that the student did not like relying on others to complete and assignment.

Technology
     In response to technology use in chemistry and biology, students overwhelmingly responded that technology helps them to learn.  82% of all chemistry students surveyed felt that technology has a positive impact on their educational success.  Biology students responded similarly.  However, individual comments such as “it helps me learn but sometimes I focus more on the technology than learning” were common.  Students reported feeling that they needed to be comfortable with the technology before using it on an assignment for class rather than being introduced to a topic at the same time as learning the new technology.  While using Excel for a lab activity, students spent large amounts of time searching for how to put borders on the printed graph, while almost no time putting the data itself into the chart.  Also, at times these junior students were confused as to how to create a data table in the first place, let alone put it into a computer to “look pretty”. 
     In addition, some students responded feeling frustrated by other students “who did not know what they were doing on the computer”.  Several students responded that technology can be difficult if you do not have access to the same programs at home, which makes finishing the assignment challenging in terms of time.  Many concerns addressed this issue, as well as the time spent compared with the amount of time to learn the same concept via lecture.
     Positive responses to survey questions stated that technology allows students to see information in a visual manner, as well as being able to learn a new skill that can be used in other classes. 
    Over the course of the year, data appears more organized, and students seem to enjoy working with the computers.  Each time the computer cart was in the classroom, but the students were not using them (when only Biology or only Chemistry students were to use the carts), students were disappointed and wanted to know when it would be their turn. 

Conclusions
     Any effective science course must have a solid core taught in a fashion that utilizes a variety of sound instructional practices.  The PIM and computer technology can supplement traditional methods used in the chemistry and biology classrooms to maintain interest, and to bring “real world” experiences into the classroom.  However, the teacher must carefully prepare and monitor students to maximize the experience, in order to prevent frustration from negatively influencing the learning process.