Reflections on elementary school science

JOURNAL OF ELEMENTARY SCIENCE EDUCATION VOl. 4, No. 2, Pp. 13-22, {1992) (C) 1992, Curry School of Education, Universily o! Virg[nŸ

REFLECTIONS ON ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SCIENCE

Greg P. Stefanich

Abstract There is a considerable discrepancy between research on effective practice and emerging trends in elementary school science, ff we ate to produce the world's best prepared graduates in science and mathematics by the end of the decade, our efforts must redirect current practice, for # is early patterns of behavior which often dictate future goals and aspirations. Teachers, administrators, and teacher educators must collaborate in efforts to strengthen curriculum reorganization, utilize multi-modal instructionat practice, use time efficiently, integrate science across curricular boundaries, and develop evaluation practices which accurately measure desired student outcomes.

introdur During the past decade there have been numerous reports

containing statements critical of American public education, frequently citing inadequate preparation of students in science (Goodlad, 1983; Moore, 1990). Ir we are to produce the world's best prepared high school graduates in science and mathematics by the end of this decade, our efforts must begin when students first start their educational experiences, for it is early patterns of behavior wh[ch so often dictate future goals and aspirations. The increased utilization of textbooks, emerging use of technology, integration of Science/Technology/Society issues into the curriculum, and increased attention to accountability are influencing science content and how science is being taught in our nation's classrooms. Teachers will need to assume a major role in the ongoing review and selection of science resources to augment the basal program, the adaptation of materials and instruction for greater student diversity, and participation in staff development programs for self-Jmprovement.

Elementary science, in too many classrooms, has become a routine of reading, notetaking, and worksheets. Memorization of vocabulary and the learning of isolated facts are emphasized in both the standard curriculum and the methods of instruction (Goodlad, 1983). With

Reflections on Elementary Science

increased accountability through standardized testing, these practices are likely to find increased usage.

Trends The following paragraphs address reflections on likely trends during

the next decade followed by suggestions for teachers and science educators.

1. The increased use of deDartmentalization often extendina below grade 5. Departmentalization in the intermediate grades has increased considerably during the past decade. Many educators are concerned about increased curricular fragmentation, increased student anonymity, and adapting instruction to individual student differences (Toepfer, 1990; Van Horne & Strahan, 1988). There is a strong research base which documents the need for unique delivery systems for early adolescents, yet the departmenta]ization of junior high schDols has become the curriculum organization in many middle schools (Carnegie Council on Adolescent Development, 1989).

2. Increased textbook usage in schools. There is a growing concern on the part of some educators and citizens that knowledge objectives have been deemphasized too much. As a result, the trend is toward more content through utilization of textbook-based materials. Elementary teachers appreciate the clarity of content and convenience for yearly planning afforded by the scope and sequence outlines offered in the textbook series. They feel greater confidence that students are acquiring a core of essential knowledge and appreciate the opportunity to have reading materia~s for students which are tied to specific concepts, in addition they feel a greater sense of self-confidence with the suggestions and background information offered in teacher guides.

3. From a Iow dearee to a hiah dearee of teacher adaDtatioq. Current elementary science textbook series have not been as effective in the.development of higher level reasoning skills in students as the activity- based programs of the 1970s (Shymansky, 1989). If teachers use textbook programs without drawing on supplemental sources, students will understand science mainly as a collection of facts to be memorized. More responsibility is being placed upon the teacher to select from suppfemental sourcebooks in constructing a science program which best fits local needs. In many cases this involves the integration of activity- based supplemental units, resource books, and computer software materials with new textbook programs. Teachers are also expected to adapt materials for students of differing abilities and those with physical or

14


emotionaJ handicaps. With increased mainstreaming, the need fora pool of resources from which the classroom teacher can draw will increase.

4. Greater emDhasis on deskwork and teacher demonstration. The effect of inflation has also impacted e]ementary schools. Deskwork and demonstration can Iower program costs. It is becoming more commonplace, even in National Science Foundation (NSF) developed materials, to suggest larger work groups or to see what was formerly a hands-on activity be converted into a worksheet or picture reading activity.

There is disappointing news about how science is being taught. Table 1 provides a summary of how teachers teach science using data from a survey of 1148 teachers. An initial survey was conducted in 1980

Table 1

Comparison of "Hands-On" Percentage of Science Time AIIotments

1980 and 1987 Percenta~e of Time

i

Grades 0-20 21-50 51-80 81- 100

1. 1980 25.53 38.30 23.41 12.77 1987 55.34 26.67 12.00 6.00

2. 1980 25.17 41.06 33.17 10.60 1987 56.32 28.48 12.65 2.52

3. 1980 23.35 46.71 19.76 10.18 1987 48.68 36.73 7.48 6.80

4. 1980 18.24 44.71 23.53 13.53 1987 63.52 26.35 5.41 4.73

5. 1980 21.94 39.68 26.13 12.26 1987 52.94 27.21 13.24 6.62

6. 1980 20.45 37.50 29.92 12.12 1987 52.31 34.88 11.62 1.16

Note: 1980_n = 1140; 1987 _n-- 1148 15


by Anderson (1980, p. 64); Norton (1987, p. 70) and was replicated in 1987. The percentage of teachers who spend less than 20% of their instructional time in active investigation has increased by 30% at all grade levels, while the percentage of teachers who devote over 80% of class time using hands-on science has decreased considerably.

5. Toward develoDina a consciousness for the social ends of education. The 1960s appeared to reftect a science which was theoretical and did not apply to contemporary society. New programs tend to develop a more humanistic orientation with considerable emphasis on the people of science and contemporary societal and environmental issues. Science, technology and society topics are being included that go beyond the limits of the textbook activities; these topics involve the students in experiences that transcend the school environment and address problem identification and problem resolution. Addressing current issues within instruction should encourage greater emphasis on multidisciplinary units as teachers accept greater breadth in teaching responsibility.

6. Concern for the individual. Elementary science programs are being modified from ah aLmost totally cognitive orientation to a considerable emphasis on the affective domain. More attention is being given to how a child feels about learning. Educators are reviewing conceptual schemes and searching for the most comfortable setting for children to develop basic cognitive competencies. Greater concern is being directed to the level of reasoning of the individual student.

7. A new view of curriculum throuah networkina and hiah technoloav. Networking systems for sharing information through high technology are providing a rapidly expanding data base for education. The next decade is likely to produce huge data banks of objectives, activity ideas, textbooks, evaluation tools, and other print materials within easy access of a curriculum supervisor or classroom teacher. The information explosion is likely to increase the importance of defining problems, reviewing information setectively, and knowing how to Iocate and synthesize information. The computer will become a major classroom instructional resource for both teachers and students. Science curricula will contain materials with interactive video, simulation software, problem-solving software, software used in conjunction with active investigation and experiments, and drill and practice software for skill reinforcement.

8. Increased em#hasis on accountabilitv, increased emphasis on evaluating existing programs and applying analyses similar to the meta- analysis techniques employed in the reporting of effective schools research appears to be a future trend. This is likely to produce increased

16


accountability for both administrators and teachers. Although current trends indicate an emphasis on criterion-referenced assessments, a future trend may be a shift toward a form of standardized assessment in science.

Suggestions Considerable discrepancy exists between what authorities in the

field of science education describe as desirable etements within eLementary school science prograrns and current practice. What can we do as educators to strengthen the quality of science learning in our schools? The author has identified five areas which need greater attention in order to strengthen the quality of elementary classroom science instruction:

1. Or(]anization. Since science does not have sequenced programs of skills, little confidence exists that norm-based testing will be able to adequately assess student learning in science. It is important that science programs ate designed to develop certain concepts and processes through age-appropriate, hands-on science lessons. The activities and concepts should be linked to insure that students progress in concept acquisition and process skills.

Several of the trends have impacted science instruction in elementary schools. The increased use of textbooks oŸ results in little adaptation for individual differences. AIIowing greater student freedom to responsible students is important. Students need opportunities to explore alternative resources and use software materials. Continuous updating of resources by teachers through the purchase of trade books and current software is essential, lncreased teacher collaboration through common planning and interdisciplinary team meetings is needed. There are many societal changes that make it important for students to receive a consistent educational program which addresses both their socialization and academic instruction.

2. Utilization of auided discoverv and other mult imodal i tv in~tructional aDDroaches. Instructional strategies which insure that students are given the opportunity to explore, to develop concepts, and to apply their learning through active investigation is essential. Textbooks must become one tool in the arsenal of strategies and resources used in instruction. The use of trade books, activity books, and resource books are also important. Each science unit should provide students with a variety of resources including a wide range of reading levels and considerable variance in concept depth. More importantly, the textbook

17


and reading activities should only exist as an augmentation to substantial hands-on activities. The textbook should be a resource anda guide, not the sole mainstay of the science program. This witl require greater teacher adaptation and place increased responsibility on school administrators to provide money to purchase materials Iocatly. Many of the textbook activities are designed to provide students with only an initial exposure to a concept, not depth and substance through continuing investigation. Teachers will need to engage in ongoing efforts to obtain and develop instructional sequences which promote higher level thinking and process skills in students.

Researchers who have investigated t he impact of various approaches to teaching science on student learning and student attitudes clearly indicated that hands-on learning must remain asa substantive component (Fraser & Tobin, 1988; Renner & Marek, 1988). This is necessary if we are to meet the challenge offered by President Bush to develop superiority among American students in math and science before the end of the decade. When students experience science through hands- on activities, they learn more about specific science topics; gain science process skills; improve their ability to observe and interpret data; and demonstrate improved performance in related skills such as mathematics, reading and language acquisition (Bredderman, 1982; Chenoweth, 1990; Hoffman, 1988).

Science educators continue to receive indications that many elementary teachers feel uncomfortable with scientific subjects and are reluctant to teach them. However, Yager (1983) indicated that when elementary teachers did teach science they were effective, in fact more effective than their secondary counterparts. Walton and Butler (1990) noted that staff development is one of the most difficult problems in sustaining a sound hands-on science program. It appears that the amount of modeling teachers receive in science methods courses is inadequate for instilling confidence in the teaching of hands-on science. Laboratory requirements tend to be minimal in general education programs and investigations tend to be verification rather than inquiry-type laboratory experiments. In addition, few institutions of higher education appear to be willing to devote sufficient faculty resources to insure that preservice elementary science teachers receive appropriate modeling in content courses taught by academic faculty in Colleges of Arts and Sciences.

3. Time. Research investigations done by Anderson (1980) and Norton (1987) revealed that the amount of time being devoted to science teaching has increased considerably during this period at all grade levels.

18


Table 2 provides a brief overview of the time devoted to science teaching by elementary teachers over the past 30 years.

Too often, however, science exists asa "filler" after instruction in the basic skills has been compteted. Asa result, science tearning is sporadic and lacks continuity. It is essential that science becomes an integral part of the curriculum, taught on a regular schedule at least three times a week. Science, when taught well, becomes an excellent vehicle for providing students with opportunities to work in cooperative learning groups. Contemporary issues involving the future of humanity almost always involve scientific reasoning and application of science concepts. Hands- on science learning can be ah excellent vehicle for assisting students with basic skills in a setting where students ate more likely to be receiving related positive associations.

4i Inteeration. Many of the most important science concepts are cross-curricular. They require integration of social studies, reading, mathematics, language arts, and the expressive arts. Excellent opportunities await teachers who seek ways to supplement science lessons through trips to museums and preserves and who may seek out

T a b l e 2

Comparison of Number of Minutes Per Week Spent in Teaching Sr in Elementary Schools

Grade Level 1 2 3 4 5 6

Blackwood (1961-62)

Weiss (1977-78)

Anderson (1979-80)

Norton (1987)

53 59 72 85 100 110

( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 85 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ) ( . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 ................. )

44 51 66 101 106 115

65 73 95 110 148 156

Note: Anderson (1980, p. 60); Backwood (1965, p. 180); Norton (1987, p, 62); Weiss (1978, p. 51)

19


community resources which provide concrete associated examples. Local experts such as wildlife specialists, extension agents, and senior citizens who have interests and hobbies can be utilized to provide enrichment for students. There should be a recognition of the value of play, especially in the early grades, and students should be encouraged and allowed to explore mate¡ before beginning instruction. On the other hand, there is a need to differentiate between novelty and creativity; lessons shoutd develop accurate concepts and understandings.

5. Evaluation. Current evaluation practices do not measure how welt students formulate generalizations about their external world, do not assess process skill acquisition, and do not determine how well students manipulate materials (Hein, 1987). Hein states three reasons for this. First, the multiple choice format of most tests requires the choice of one rŸ answer to ah explicitly formulated question. It prohibits the possibility of alternative interpretations. Secondly, available tests are generally not very good, questions often tend to be ambiguous, and focus on knowledge rather than understanding. Finally, tests generally do not examine the abilities that are of most interest to educators. Studies of students have shown that at least some of the time students misunderstand or reinterpret test questions and therefore come up with wrong answers, although the reasoning may be excellent. More effective methods should include observing students at work, evaluating science-related writing and drawing, examining the results of their investigations and interviewing students individually or in small groups. Teachers shouid use a format of free response which enables students to express themselves verbally or through drawings.

Summary Students need to be presented with challenging problems and given

the opportunity to investigate these problems with guidance and encouragement. Teachers must provide cooperative learning experiences which involve observing, communicating, experimenting, examining results, and formulating hypotheses. Most importantly, concepts, process skills, and att]tudes which are desired must be identified. Assessments that support behaviors which reflect these outcomes must be developed. Desired student behaviors should be supported through encouragement, conferences and appropriate evaluation practices. Through active exploration and experimentation with an abundance of hands-on learning opportunities, teachers have the

20


ability to meet the challenge of superior student performance by the end of the decade.

REFERENCES

Anderson, J. (1980) A survey of elementarygrades in towa. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, lA.

Blackwood, P. (1965). Science teaching in the elementary school: A survey of practices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching 3, 177-197.

Bredderman, T. (1982). Activity science--the evidence shows ir matters. Science and Children 20, 39-41.

Carnegie Council on Adotescent Development. (1989). Turning points: Preparing American youth for the 21st century, Washington, D.C. : Author.

Chenoweth, K. (1990). Science museums let teachers use the "hands-on" approach. Education Digest 55, 48-50.

Fraser, B., & Tobin, K. (1988). A study of exemplary young science teachers. Research in Science and Technologicat Education, 6(1), 25-38.

Goodlad, J. I. (1983). A study of schooling: Some implications for school development. Phi Delta Kappan, 64(18), 522-558.

Hein, G. (1987). The right test for hands-on learning? Science and Children, 25, 8- 12.

Hoffman, J. (1988). The importance of teach]ng hands-on science to children. Science Ac~'vities, 25, 12-13.

Moore, R. (1990). What's wrong with science education and how do we fix it? The American Biology Teacher, 52(6), 330-337.

Norton, M. (1987). A comprehensive review and survey of efementary science and environmentaf education in Iowa. Unpublished master's thesis, University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, lA.

Renner, J. W., & Marek, E. A. (1988). The learning cycfe and efementary schoof science teaching. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Shymansky, J. A. (1989). What research says: . . , about ESS, SCIS, and SAPA. Science and Children, 26, 33-35.

Toepfer, C. (1990). Implementing turning points: Major issues to be faced. Middle School Journal, 21(5), 18-21.

Van Horne, J., 8, Strahan, D. (1988) Young adofescent development and school pracfices promoting harmony. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

Walton, E., & Butler J. (1990). Teacher training for hands-on science. Phi Delta Kappan, 71, 738-39.

21


Weiss, I. (1978). Report of the 1977 nationat survey of science, mathematics, and social studies education. Center for Educational Research and Evaluation, Research Triangle Institute, North Carolina.

Yager, R. E. (1983). Elementary science teachers--take a bowt Science and Chitdren, 20, 20-22 . . . . . .

Dr. Greg P. Stefanich is a professor of science education and Coordinator of Doctoral Studies in Curriculum and Instruction at the University of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa 50614-0606,

22

Documents

Reflections on elementary school science