How People Learn in the Science Classroom

I have just finished reading chapter 11, Guided Inquiry in the Science Classroom by James Minstrell and Pamela Kraus. This science lessons in this chapter take place in a high school physics class. Mr. Minstrell discusses how students learn and how important it is to listen to our students. At the beginning of the chapter, James Minstrell talks about how he had taught a concept, asked questions, and came to the conclusion that the students understood the concept. Then the next day, he received a rude awakening. The students hadn’t really understood what had been taught. I think most teachers have been there. I know that I have. That is why teachers, including Mr. Minstrell, needed to change the way they taught their students. We can’t just teach the curriculum and move on. We need to listen to our students in order to understand what they already know. This applies to elementary school children, too. Elementary school is where students are introduced to science concepts. They will carry this knowledge, even the misconceptions, with them through high school. That is why it is so important for teachers take the time to listen to their students and guide them through their misconceptions. Mr. Minstrell states that “Teachers need to know students’ initial and developing conceptions. Students need to have their initial ideas brought to the conscious level.” This begins in elementary school and is the reason why student discourse is so important. Children need to learn how to talk to each other about what they know. Also, they need to feel confident that they can share their ideas and thinking and that their ideas and thinking will be respected by their classmates. As my students are doing an inquiry based investigation, I can listen to their group discussions as I walk around the classroom. Then I can acknowledge their attempts to make sense of their investigation and address their misconceptions. This is why inquiry based science is so important in all grades. I know that elementary school teachers don’t always feel that they have enough time for science. This makes it difficult for teachers to find out what their students already know, address their misconceptions, and have group discussions. I feel it is more important for students to understand the concept then rush through the curriculum and have the students come away with little understanding. However, this can be impossible in the elementary classroom where you have a timeline for each concept that is taught. Mr. Minstrell spent a lot of time learning what the students already knew, having them participate in inquiry based investigations, and then assessing their knowledge. I realize that since Mr. Minstrell is a high school teacher he has more time with his students. However, that shouldn’t discourage elementary teachers from having inquiry based lessons.

Link

https://myelms.umd.edu/courses/1010422/discussion_topics/1942634

On page 405 Donovan and Bransford state “Instead, students learn the content by actively engaging in processes of scientific inquiry…But this is different from typical textbook exercises…”

How does providing scientific inquiry to elementary students help them understand science and prevent the development of misconceptions?

Learning & Inquiry & STEM

It is important to understand how students learn if they are going to be successful in your classroom and in the future. According to M. Suzanne Donavan and John D. Bransford, there are three principles of learning. I feel that the first two principles overlap. The first principle is centered on the student’s prior understandings and experiences and the second principle centers on the kinds of factual and conceptual knowledge the student already possesses. It is important for the teacher to find out what the student already knows and understands. Students may possess conceptual knowledge but may have different experiences and may not be able to demonstrate that they understand the concept. This reminds me of a story my son’s kindergarten teacher told me. She was telling the students that forks, spoons and knives were silverware. She told me that my son was arguing with her because forks, spoons, and knives weren’t silverware. They were utensils. Donovan and Bransford’s third principle centers on a student’s ability to self-monitor their learning. I feel this is the most difficult of the three principles. For example in my afterschool science club the students were building wind turbines for the Kidwind Wind Turbine Challenge. One of students understood that the blades of the wind turbine could not be straight or at a ninety degree angle. Her prior knowledge of windmills told her that the wind turbine blades wouldn’t turn if they were straight or at a ninety degree angle. The problem with this engineering challenge came next. She didn’t know how to use a protractor so she could measure the angle of the blades so each blade was at the same angle. Her difficulty came with self monitoring. She didn’t realize the connection between using a protractor to measure angles and being able to solve this problem. If she had been able to self-monitor, she would have realized the difficulty she would encounter when it came to using a protractor, even though she had conceptual knowledge how the angles of the wind turbine should be positioned to be successful in completing this challenge. As teachers it is important that we teach students how to self monitor and not give up when they don’t understand a concept. Donovan and Bransford explain that is the one of the most important principles. If we don’t teach students to self monitor and take control of their own learning then we will fail as teachers. We can’t assume that students know how to monitor their learning and that they will ask questions when they don’t understand. Using inquiry in science helps to foster mastery of Principle #3. As students engage in inquiry and work in teams to solve real world problems they talk to each other. This discourse helps them gain a deeper understanding of concepts and allows teachers to detect any misconceptions about a particular concept. When teachers monitor student discourse it helps them gain an understanding of the students’ background knowledge and concepts. It is easy to sit with groups of students and have conversations with them to make sure that they do not have any misconceptions and that they comprehend what is being taught. This format makes it easier to teach students how to self monitor. They need to be taught to be advocates for their own learning. They need to have confidence in themselves and be able to explain what they know. The new NGSS standards are based on student performance expectations, not curriculum. This makes sense. Once students know and understand the concepts they can successfully demonstrate their understanding.

Why STEM Education?

STEM education means different things to different people. According to the Maryland State Department of Education, “STEM education is an approach to teaching and learning that integrates the content and skills of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics…” I believe that STEM education gives students opportunities to explore real world issues and create solutions to real problems. As a STEM lab teacher at a Title1elementary school, I get the opportunity to see students use their background knowledge while working in teams to solve real world problems. After reading many articles on STEM education, I agree with Maryland’s Department of Education statement, “STEM proficient students are able to answer complex questions, investigate global issues, and develop solutions for challenges and real-world problems while applying the rigor of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics content. STEM proficient students are logical thinkers who are technologically, scientifically, and mathematically literate.” I have noticed that students who struggle in the traditional classroom setting are successful in the STEM lab. They are able to discuss their ideas with their teammates and to test various solutions without the fear of “being wrong”, because if a solution doesn’t work they are able to improve it. This helps them develop a deeper understanding of the problem and the solution.  For example, during the first week of school, my fifth graders learned about hovercrafts before they were given their engineering challenge. They worked together to complete a NASA challenge similar to one that I participated in at a NSTA National Conference. They worked in teams of  three to build a weight system, using only the materials that I gave them, and had to attach it to a helium balloon so it would hover about 3 feet above the ground. They could use some or all of the materials given to them. They were allowed to change the size and shape of the materials. This was a difficult challenge; however, the students were eager to embark on this challenge. Listening to the students discuss how they were going to accomplish this task was amazing. Also, hearing them discuss the problems they encountered and watching them continue with the challenge was fantastic. At the end of class the students came together for a class discussion. They shared their thinking, how they improve their weight systems so that it would work better next time. I couldn’t help laughing when one student asked me why they didn’t use math to solve the problem. His classmates pointed out that they had to add or subtract objects from the weight system in order for the balloon to hover. His response to this made me really think. He said, “I was able to work with my team to do this challenge, but I usually can’t do math.” Wow! This is what STEM is all about. Teaching and integrating the content areas so students can excel in these academic areas. If these children are to compete in the work force when they get older they need to develop the skills now. Plus they need to get experience using science, technology, engineering, and math to solve problems. I believe in giving all students the opportunity to succeed in school. STEM just isn’t the future, it is now!