This research is supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation: Developing a Research-based Learning Progression for the Role of Carbon in Environmental Systems (REC 0529636), the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science (ESI-0227557), Learning Progression on Carbon-Transforming Processes in Socio-Ecological Systems (NSF 0815993), and Targeted Partnership: Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy (NSF-0832173). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY

A comparison study on American and Chinese secondary students’ learning progression for carbon cycling in socio-ecological systemsAmerican and Chinese Secondary Students’ Written Accounts of Carbon Cycling in Socio-ecological Systems

2009 AERA Poster PresentationWritten by: Jing Chen, Charles W. Anderson (Michigan State University) and Xinghua Jin (Shanghai College of

Business)Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy

Long Term Ecological Research Math Science PartnershipApril 2009

Disclaimer: This research is supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation: Targeted Partnership: Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy (NSF-0832173). Any opinions, findings, and

conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

This research is supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation: Developing a Research-based Learning Progression for the Role of Carbon in Environmental Systems (REC 0529636), the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science (ESI-0227557), Learning Progression on Carbon-Transforming Processes in Socio-Ecological Systems (NSF 0815993), and Targeted Partnership: Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy (NSF-0832173). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY

American and Chinese Secondary Students’ Written Accounts of Carbon Cycling in Socio-ecological Systems

American and Chinese Secondary Students’ Written Accounts of Carbon Cycling in Socio-ecological Systems

Jing Chen1, Charles, W. Anderson1, & Xinghua Jin2 1Michigan State University, 2Shanghai College of BusinessJing Chen1, Charles, W. Anderson1, & Xinghua Jin2 1Michigan State University, 2Shanghai College of Business

Research Purpose & QuestionThe United States and China currently account for 40% of the world’s emissions. It is urgent for their citizens to be more environmentally literate. We investigate American and Chinese students’ learning progression of carbon cycle as a first step to find out ways to improve science education in these countries to help more students to be environmentally literate. In addition, we explore whether students in other countries under different science education systems and cultures still share similar patterns in their development of scientific knowledge and practice.

Our research questions are:

1)How do American and Chinese students compare in terms of the accounts they give for carbon transforming processes and for fundamental matter/energy conservation principles?

2) What are the implications for the validity of learning progression levels for the two groups? How do difficulties of a set of items developed by our research project compare for American and Chinese students?

3) How do general achievement levels compare for American students and Chinese students?

Research Methods

Participants 600 American and Chinese students in total (300 American; 300 Chinese; 150 at middle

school level and 150 at high school level for each country) American students are from 2 middle and 3 high Michigan public schools (rural/suburban;

the average ACT science scores for these schools are close to the state average) Chinese students are from 2 middle and 2 high non-key public schools in Shanghai

(urban schools, ranked around the middle of all schools in districts according to their admission scores)

Assessment items The assessment items are basically the same for both

groups (developed in English, then translated into Chinese)

The translated items were tried out first 31 Items in total; each item measures one process 3 test forms, items for each process and for each principle

appear evenly on each form the majority of middle and high school items overlap One student answer one test form (10~12 items) For each item, we collected 100~200 student responses

from each country.

Matter Energy Total

Photosynthesis 2 3 5

Transformation 2 2 4

Cellular respiration

5 4 9

Combustion 3 2 5

Large-scale 4 4 8

Total 16 15 31

Data analysis: Code a small sample of Chinese responses first using previously developed Levels of

Achievement and Exemplar Workbook Code the rest of responses, keeping track of whether the achievement levels could

distinguish all Chinese responses among levels The American data were coded using the same coding rubrics Use partial credit model to analyze American and Chinese students’ data separately

Empirical Validation of Learning progression levels using Chinese data Whether Levels have predictive power? (Students should show similar Levels of

Achievement for Learning Performances associated with different Progress Variable.)

Results: 1. American and Chinese students’ accounts for tracing matter and tracing energyLevels Characteristics Cellular respiration

When a person loses weight, where does the matter of the person’s fat go?

Large-ScaleHow can using fluorescent light bulb instead of incandescent light bulb help to slow down global warming?

4: Model-based accounts

--Understand atomic-molecular scale--Distinguish matter from energy--Identify and conserve key organic and inorganic materials-Accounts connect atomic-molecular and macroscopic and/or large scales

CH: Fat provides the energy that body needs. Under the catalyses of enzyme, fat gradually hydrolyze into glycerin and fatty acid. Then it oxidizes and produces CO2, H2O and energy. AM: His fat was lost when the bonds of the glucose were broken down into H2O, CO2 by cellular respiration.

CH: If people save electricity, power plant will generate less electricity. Therefore, fewer coals will be burned, and less CO2 release. So global warming will be slowed down.AM: Most of the energy used for electricity in the U.S. comes from the combustion of coal, which produces green house gases that promote global warming. If less energy was needed because of the use of f. bulbs, the amount of gas-producing combustion will be decreased.

3: “School Science” Narratives

--Extend understanding to cellular or atomic-molecular scale.--Recognize chemical identities of some materials --Insufficient knowledge at atomic-molecular scale.

CH: Fat is a good energy store substance. When people lose weight, the ATP in fat will break down to provide the energy that people need. The chemical bonds of ATP will break up and form water.AM: When you are exercising you are burning fat away. But instead of getting energy you lose energy. When it's going away it just comes out of your body as water and gas.

CH: The energy saved can be used for other purposes, for example, to drive automobiles. In this way, fewer CO2 will be released. So it helps to slow down global warming indirectly. AM: Doesn't release as much carbon as the incandescent light bulbs do.

2: Causal Sequences of Events with Hidden Mechanisms

-Recognize hidden structures and mechanisms (e.g. organs, decomposers, gases)--Do not trace matter and energy separately

CH: Fat is burned into energy. When there is extra energy in human’s body, energy is saved as fat. When fat burns, it provides energy for human to use. AM: Because the fat has to go somewhere so it probably burns up into energy like a fire.

CH: Fluorescent light bulb consumes less energy, which will help to slow down global warming.AM: Fluorescent light bulbs will slow down global warming because it uses less energy.

1: Separate Macroscopic Narratives

--View macroscopic events as results of different “natural tendencies.” --Confined at macroscopic scale

CH: People will sweat when they are doing exercise. Fat disappears with sweating. AM: I think when you exercise the fat disappears.

CH: The heat of the light will not influence global temperature.AM: I don't think this has anything to do with global warming.

Similar misconceptions: 1) confuse matter with energy; unable to trace matter

and energy separately2) confuse global warming with ozone depletion 3) energy is released when chemical bonds are broken

Differences: 1) For tracing matter items, Chinese students included

chemical equations more often (9% v.s. 2%). They used the term “organic” and “inorganic” much

more often than American students. 2) For tracing energy items, Chinese students included

names of energy forms and mentioned energy conservation principle commonly, but they generally did not successfully use the principle as a tool to reason about carbon transforming processes,

especially in photosynthesis and biosynthesis.

Results 2. Empirical Validation of levels for American and Chinese groups

Results 3. Distribution among levels

Conclusions and Implications Share similar general trends of learning progression from force-dynamic to scientific model-based

reasoning; perform differently for tracing matter and tracing energy principles. Similar general distribution of responses at each level for both groups; only small percentages of

responses reached level 4 in both groups. Chinese students may follow the learning progression differently compare to American students (Levels

of Achievement is less empirically valid for Chinese data than it is for American data) The order of item difficulties is different for these two groups.

Implications: It is urgent to improve science education in both nations to help more students shift to high-level

understanding. American science education could pay more attention to developing students’ chemical understanding and

mastery of fundamental principles. Chinese science education could place more emphasis on developing real understanding besides

knowledge memorizing. Chinese science education could develop students’ science interdisciplinary knowledge to help them

connect multiple carbon transforming processes though multiple scales.

American and Chinese students’ responses are distributed similarly across levelsBoth American and Chinese students shift toward higher levels from middle

school to high school For both groups, only a small proportion of students’ responses reach level 4More Chinese high school students gave level 3, level 4 responses, and more

American high school students gave level 1 responses. More American middle school students gave level 3 responses.

The percentages of American and Chinese high school students' responses at different levels

4

55

25

8

18

53

19

40

10

20

30

40

50

60

N= 150 American high and 150 Chinese high school students

Chinesehigh

Americanhigh

Chinese high 4 55 25 8

American high 18 53 19 4

level 1(%) level 2(%) level 3(%) level 4(%)

21

54

60.6

25

52

12

0.20

10

20

30

40

50

60

N=150 American middle and 150 Chinese middle school students

Chinesemiddle

Americanmiddle

Chinese middle 21 54 6 0.6

Americanmiddle

25 52 12 0.2

level 1(%) level 2(%) level 3(%) level 4(%)

The percentages of American and Chinese middle school students' responses at different levels

Level 4: Model-based accountsLevel 3: “School Science” NarrativesLevel 2: Causal Sequences of Events with Hidden MechanismsLevel 1: Separate Macroscopic Narratives

The level 3 and level 4 thresholds are more clustered together in the American Wright map than in the Chinese Wright map

This item is easier for Chinese students to reach level 4

These items are harder for Chinese students to reach level 1.

The level 1 and level 2 thresholds are more clustered together in the American Wright map than in the Chinese Wright map

The step difficulties from level 3 to level 4 are lower for Chinese students.

In general, the order of item difficulties is different for these two groups. American students perform better for photosynthesis, digestion & biosynthesis, and large-scale items; Chinese students perform better for cellular respiration and combustion items.