|
Rubric
Item: Understanding of Science Education Theory and Literature
The participant has grown to have a stronger understanding of important education literature and theory. |
| Artifact:
Annotated Bibliography (for entire document in
html, click here) In the first of the two education classes I was required to develop a research proposal for an action research project, ostensibly to be completed during the second of the two educaton classes. Professor Pitts, the professor for the second of the two education classes gave us an option to conduct multiple smaller research and inquiry tasks, in place of the one large research project. I chose this option, because I felt it would give me a chance to expose myself to more varied areas of learning and experience in science education. For instance, I had a chance to write a repsonse to a moderated blog, which is something that I would not have had the time, or even thought to do, if I had chosen to focus just on completing the research in my research proposal. Subsequently, I did not complete the actual research at that time, although I did incorporate the proposed techniques into my classroom. Unfortunately, I was not given science classes to teach this year, due to the course demands, and the roster of available teachers, so I was not able to conduct the research this year, either. I do plan, in the future, to try and establish some formal research to try and quantify the efficacy of the technique. As preparation for completing the research in the future, I completed an annotated bibliography for my second education class, in which I re-read and critiqued the sources that I referenced in my research proposal. I chose this annotated bibliography as an artifact for this rubric item, because it is a clear example of the reading and analysis that I have done on education literature and theory. In it, I summarize the content for articles falling within the following categories: student-centered and student-created learning spaces, content-based vs. concept-based science education, and using word walls and KWLs. In addition, I discuss, for each article, its applicability to my teaching practices. For discussion of some of the literature that I read that has helped shape my practice in the area of cogenerative dialogues, see Rubric Item: Pedagogy in Assessment. For a discussion of some of literature that helped develop my use of POGILs and case studies, see Rubric Item: Pedagogy in Instruction. |
| Analysis
of Artifact and Evidence of Growth: Prior to these classes my area of expertise was in English education and literacy. While the educational theory was not new for me, what was new was how to apply it to a science classroom, in which students are often very resistant to the material. Taking the time to read the literature on this greatly improved my instructional methods. For descriptions and analysis specific to each resource, see the full annotated bibliography, linked above. Following is an overview of each category of resource, and how, as a group, they shaped my teaching practices. Student-Centered and Student-Created Learning Spaces These three resources discussed the importance of giving students a feeling of belonging and efficacy within the development of the culture of science learning in the classroom. In particular, urban students feel alienated from the culture of science and learning, which is something that I have observed at the school where I teach. In particular, it looks at encouraging students to participate in developing what they feel are authentic learning goals and assessments to test achievement of those learning goals. In making the learning process participatory, rather than something that is enacted upon them, students are much more likely to buy into the process and activity of the science classroom. Through reading these resources I learned that I had not been doing enough to create an inclusive environment in my classroom. While I recognized the discomfort that many of students felt with science, and being in a science class, it did not occur to me that it might be because of the "fill up the empty vessel" approach that I ws taking with science education. That approach, rather than making the students feel like they were being fed important knowledge, instead made them feel like they were being force fed unpalatable food. As a result, they were turned off to class and the subject, learning nothing. After reading these articles, I instituted the use of cogenerative dialogues (see Rubric Item: Pedagogy in Assessment), and class-development of Enduring Understandings, which I discuss in the next section of resources. Subsequently, the students began to feel more empowered as science learners, and many began to feel comfortable enough to assist in instruction with their fellow students. Content-Based vs. Concept-Based Science Education This group of resources stresses the importance of approaching science education through the development of conceptual understandings, rather than content memorization. All of the articles discuss research that shows that students have higher retention rates and an increased ability to connect ideas between units. In addition, the greater ability to connect ideas between units, itself, lends to greater retention. Partially due to my initial discomfort with the science content, and partially due to my own experience having been taught largely through content memorization, the GPS class I taught in the year before starting MCEP was a content-based class. I found that my students were a) unengaged, b) had low-retention rates after the unit exams, and c) were unable to connect ideas from unit to unit. All of these findings correspond directly with these articles' findings. After reading these articles, I changed to a more project-based, concept-based, inquiry-based approach (facilitated by my own increased comfort with the scientific concepts). One of the ways that changed was that I went from fact-based unit exams for assessment to having students develop Enduring Understandings at the end of each unit as a way of assessing their acquisition of relevant concepts and saw, as a result, a greater retention rate, as well as a greater level of connection between unit concepts (see Rubric Item: Pedagogy in Assessment for an example). Word Walls and KWLs This final group of resources discusses techniques that were not new to me. As a Literacy Teacher Leader, I was very familiar with both word walls and the KWL technique. However, reading again about these techniques helped me to develop ideas about how to better use them in the science classroom, particular if used in conjunction with concept-based education. Previously, I had largely used word walls for individual words and terms. After, I started posting the student-created Enduring Understandings. Previously, I had used KWLs for individual lessons. After, I started using them as a way of shaping an understanding of an entire unit. In addition, I had the students revisit the KWLs at the end of the unit as a form of self-assessment. Reading these resources helped remind me that even if I already think I know it, I should always revisit a subject, because I may have a chance to look at something in a whole new way. |