The Northwest Georgia Science Education Partnership

Mathematics and Science Partnership (MSP) Program

Project Objectives

The specific objectives of the project are to

1) provide teachers with intensive professional learning experiences that build science content knowledge

2) improve teacher attitudes and confidence in implementing inquiry-based science units

3) provide teachers with differentiation and multiple assessment strategies

4) establish a professional learning community that will immerse teachers in supportive, sustained, professional learning experiences

Partnering Institutions

Northwest Georgia Science Education Partnership: Partnering Institutions

Kennesaw State University

Georgia Highlands College

Chattooga County Schools

Cobb County Schools

Bartow County Schools

Polk County Schools Rome City Schools

Etowah GYSTC

Dalton State ETTC

Kennesaw State ETTC

CEISMC: Georgia Tech

Tiger Flight Foundation

Peach State Starbase

Project Management Team

Northwest Georgia Science Education Partnership: Project Management Team

Project Co-Directors: Tom Brown, Greg Rushton

Project Content Leaders

Greg Rushton: Science Content/

Pedagogy Expert

Tom McKlin: Project

Evaluator

Sally Creel:

Science Content/

PedagogyExpert

Karen Harris: Special Needs Expert

David Wright: Science Content/

PedagogyExpert

Sharon Collum: Bartow

Curriculum Expert

Emily Bolton:

Chattooga Curricullum

Expert

Lori Adkins :

Polk Curriculum

Expert

Mary Baldwin:

Rome City Curriculum

Expert

George Stickel: Cobb

Science Coordin.

Project Administrative

Leaders

Judy McEntyre: Education Technolgy

Expert

Virginia Carson: Georgia

Highlands College

Curriculum

Marlee Tierce: Science Content/

Pedagogy Expert

Tom Brown:

Science Content/

Pedagogy Expert

Institutes Description

Phase 1

Content-Focused Inquiry Institute: Curiosity and the Core Ideas of Science

Introduction to inquiry, core science ideas, learning cycle approach, and backward design.

Technology-Enhanced Professional Learning Communities: Using Technology to Improve Science Learning

Establish professional learning communities and communication frameworks, integrate technology into science instruction.

Our Professional Learning Initiative will take place in four developmental phases where participants complete eight interrelated (20 hour) science institutes. While each institute will have its own unique identity and objectives, their focus will converge on the overall goal of improving student achievement in science.

Overview of Action Plan: Four Phases, Eight Institutes

Target Schools and Students:Schools not making AYP and students showing greatest needs

Which students are neediest?

When the data is disaggregated, it indicates that high percentages of certain subgroups (Blacks, Hispanics, Students with Disabilities, Limited English Proficient Students, and Economically Disadvantaged Students) did not meet the basic standards for achievement in science

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

Max(D

oes N

ot M

eet A

vera

ge)

Asia

n

Bla

ck

His

panic

Native A

mer

White

Multiracia

l

Male

Fem

ale

Stu

d w

Dis

ab

Stu

d w

/o D

isab

Lim

Englis

h P

rof

Econ. D

isadv

No E

co D

isadv

Subgroups

What content is needed?

Least Comfortable Science Discipline to Teach

Self-assessment surveys point to a distinct area of need – physical science. Nearly two-thirds (63%) of our teachers reported that physical science was the discipline of science that they felt least confident in teaching.

0

25

50

75

Max(L

east C

om

fort

able

Teachin

g S

cie

nce P

erc

enta

ge )

Eart

h S

cie

nce

Life

Scie

nce

Physic

al S

cie

nce

Science Discipline

What content is being taught

The GPS’s and National Science Standards will serve as a guiding framework to focus science instruction on big ideas, enduring understandings, and essential questions.

Our content institutes will focus on building our teachers understanding of 4th physical science concepts – the area of science where student achievement is lowest and the area our teachers reported being the least comfortable in teaching.

Data used to for evidence of effectiveness of content institutes

Evaluation Question

Type of Data

1. Has student achievement improved?

Criterion Referenced Science Tests

(CRCT)

2. Has teacher content knowledge improved?

Pre and Post Content Tests

(MOSART)

Teacher reflections

3. Have teacher attitudes toward science improved?

Science Attitudes Inventory

Institute Evaluations

Northwest MSP Summer Institute 4th Grade North Cohort Evaluations

Averages 1 (strongly disagree)… 5 (strongly agree)

4.91

4.91

4.91

5.00

5.00

4.91

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

1. This workshop was effective at helpingme learn. (n=11)

2. I found the facilities to be comfortable atthis workshop. (n=11)

3. I found the resources to be adequate atthis workshop. (n=11)

4. I found the teachers to be effective at thisworkshop. (n=11)

5. The teaching meaterials were effective atthis workshop. (n=11)

6. The learning activities in this workshopwere effective. (n=11)

Northwest MSP Summer Institute 5th Grade South Cohort Evaluations

Averages 1 (strongly disagree)… 5 (strongly agree)

4.77

4.77

4.92

4.92

4.96

4.92

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

1. This workshop was effective at helpingme learn. (n=26)

2. I found the facilities to be comfortable atthis workshop. (n=26)

3. I found the resources to be adequate atthis workshop. (n=26)

4. I found the teachers to be effective at thisworkshop. (n=26)

5. The teaching meaterials were effective atthis workshop. (n=26)

6. The learning activities in this workshopwere effective. (n=26)

Northwest MSP Summer Institute 8th Grade South Cohort Evaluations

Averages 1 (strongly disagree)… 5 (strongly agree)

4.38

4.24

4.48

4.62

4.62

4.33

1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

1. This workshop was effective at helpingme learn. (n=21)

2. I found the facilities to be comfortable atthis workshop. (n=21)

3. I found the resources to be adequate atthis workshop. (n=21)

4. I found the teachers to be effective at thisworkshop. (n=21)

5. The teaching meaterials were effective atthis workshop. (n=21)

6. The learning activities in this workshopwere effective. (n=21)

Most Effective Portion of Institutes

Suggested Improvements

Challenges faced by project leaders when teaching core content

It is ineffective to separate the content from the pedagogy

It is a challenge to find enough effective teacher leaders during the academic year

It is difficult to find/develop 160 hours of quality training for each grade level

Lessons learned so far

The success of the project depends on the quality of your lead teachers.

The content must be embedded within hands-on lessons that are grade level specific and aligned with state performance standards

Teachers appreciate being treated professionally with care

Teachers need the time and materials to actually do and then discuss each lesson.

Support and professional development of STEM faculty

We need to value science education programs and innovations as much as we value pure science programs and innovations

We need to help STEM faculty adjust their teaching and materials to make them more effective for k-12 teachers

We need to pair STEM faculty with experienced classroom teachers so that they can co-plan, co-teach, and co-llaborate.

Sample student pre-test results

Q: Name the four seasons.

A: Salt, pepper, mustard, and vinegar

Q: Explain one of the processes by which water can be made safe to drink.

A: Flirtation makes the water safe to drink because it removes large pollutants like grit, sand, dead sheep, and canoeists.

Q. What does the word “benign” mean?

A. Benign is what you will be after you be eight.

DisclaimerThe instructional practices and assessments discussed or shown in these presentations are not intended as an endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education".