Forums

What do you feel are the most pressing challenges facing science educaiton today? Where are there opportunities?

Hi Joanna, I would have to say that from what I am "hearing" from my preservice teachers, schools are putting science (and social studies) "on hold" in order to provide more time for instruction in reading and math. I find that very disturbing and a challenge for those teachers of elementary students trying to find ways to fit science and technology into their day. Carolyn

Teaching math and reading through science just makes teaching more efficient and relevant. At my son's school they seem to compartmentalize learning. For instance, reading and writing will take place between 8:00 am - 9:00 am. Science 9:05-9:25 am. Then between 9:30am and 11:00 they learn math....etc. I get bored just sharing this schedule with you all, I can't imagine being a student in such classrooms.

I agree with what has been posted here so far regarding the lack of science instruction due to increased pressure to meet reading and math AYP scores. We need stronger pre-service and in-service PD on incorporating science and social studies into the reading and math curriculum. Science and social studies provide the "meaning" and connections to why reading and math matter. I would also add that another challenge is finding meaningful ways to present science instruction as an area of concern. Too many of our students are turned off by the rote memorization and textbook-focused instruction in many science classrooms. Science is dynamic and should be taught that way - as a process ~ not as a list of things to be memorized for a test. The remembering will come with "doing" - if the doing is done right. Sadly, again I believe it is the high stakes testing focus on the "details" that has created "this mess" - the disconnect of science concepts from the process of science. There is more information/facts and "things to know" discovered everyday - and these things potentially can change the science we require students to memorize/know for high stake tests. The focus should be on the process - the rest will follow, as they practice the process. Thoughts?

I agree with you Susanne. “Traditional” science instruction may [u]not[/u] be the most effective way helping students to understand science. There is value in memorization yet unless these terms/concepts are used/or applied there is little chance that this information will materialize into innovative thought or execution. I also agree there needs to be more focus on science process yet this takes time & commitment from the teacher. I teach 11th grade biology. Prior to enrolling in my I give a small assessment on science process. In the last 4 years, my data shows that only 3% of students [total 680] meet standards associated with science inquiry/process skills. The courses [conceptual physics and chemistry], which my students take prior to enrolling in my course, are content rich and the instructors spend very little time in teaching science process skills. The other factor is administration [u]tolerates[/u] these practices because there is more focus on math and reading. D[b]oes a teaching science process skills impact performance on high stake assessments[/b] [we take NWEA MAP-science]? Based on my data, I do not see much of an effect. The main reason is because NWEA MAP doesn’t provide enough questions on my content. Out of 64 questions, 6 questions may be related to my content [biology]. Yet this result doesn’t really matter to me because my students can design and execute a science investigation. By the end of the school year, more than 95% of my students can achieve this goal because all the investigations are authentic in nature and based on solving “real world” problems. Yet [b]how many of us are consumers of kit based science products[/b]? We are switching from MAP this year to ACT-subject tests. If we want to change the way science education is taught, we must begin with our personal [i]education philosophy[/i]. Our value system will dictate how and what we teach. In my opinion, I think high stake testing is just becoming a national excuse in not delivering quality science education

Hi Mario,
I agree that it is all too easy for teachers to teach to the test rather than to really stretch their students with inquiry. NSTA Reports has an article on the NSTA website that asks this very question. You can check out the results of their survey in which teachers overwhelmingly say that NCLB has had a negative impact on the quality of science instruction occurring in classrooms.

As far as kits go, I believe many elementary teachers do not have a large background in science; using kits make it easy for them provided they use the kits as intended. I would think that the hands-on approach motivate students and help them to make connections better than simply reading in a book. Even with kits, money is an issue, however. Unless science is a tested subject many districts will be hesitant to purchase kits. I would hope that with the adoption of the Common Core standards that elementary students will be exposed to more nonfiction literature (although not a substitute for inquiry).

Patricia, thank you for sharing the link to the report. One of the survey results reflects that 67.8% of the respondents stated NCLB has 'hurt' their school. I wonder how much of the 'hurt' is linked to providing a quality education to all students?[i] I remember one of the intentions of NCLB was to hold schools accountable for providing a quality education to all students while reducing the gaps between the '[i]haves & have not' Prior to this legislation, accountability systems were not in place nationally. So when I look at this statistic, I wonder where the source of the hurt is? The other statistic that stands out is the one related to 64.5% of teachers feel that NCLB have shifted to teaching to the test. What was the focus of instruction prior to NCLB? Aren't test formed around learning goals/standards? How is this different than 'teaching' to the test/assessment? In relation to elementary teachers using kits to teach science, its one of many instructional strategies at their our disposal. How effective such strategies are is dependent on content knowledge and pedagogical ability of the teacher.

The state of Science education is dependent on several things. First I agree with all I have read, a lack of time, parity across the board in regard to NCLB and providing all students with a valuable education and policy makers being too far removed from the playing field. The variable factors as most of us know, include policy makers, administrators, our student demographics, parent participation and as was mentioned before, teacher training. Out of all of the factors mentioned there is only one we can control or depend on to manage the rest. Like it or not that is the reality. Any highly effective teachers (That is the Key) will become part of a learning circle and share the burden of teaching with little or no resources. The holistic approach to teacher is also nothing new. Many a theorists before us, identified that learning by experience (Dewey, 1938) and, integrating several subjects support a more realistic approach to how we learn (Maslow, 1971). Multi-modal approaches speak to managing conical connections, interpretations and imagery as it relates to how teachers and students communicate conceptually about science concepts (Klein et al., 2010; Prain et al., 2008). Seeing and doing activities connect our auditory and motor responses. Who can argue against Science as one of the subjects that can do this. Our innovations are a product of science. Within that reality is a history. A history that is froth with the decisions and culture of that time, covering almost every discipline. The research speaks for itself. Science is a good venue for holistic and experiential learning, not because we wish it so, but because in this present reality the evidence supports it. Policy makers have researchers and lobbyist. There is no way in this day and age that they are unable to figure this out. The question is what do we, the educators do in the mean time? Are we prepared to do more or less, or nothing at all? I feel empathy for all of us. It is not easy but it is possible to work in groups and share our experiences. The push for STEM education http://www.whitehouse.gov/issues/education/educate-innovate and 2016 standards http://www.project2061.org/publications/designs/about.htm both focus on exploration, problem solving and critical thinking skills. Though we may at times be overwhelmed, we know we have a task to educate the world as we provide the best education we possibly can. Our students represent the future policy makers in education. They are the leaders of tomorrow. Though it may be wishful to think so, perhaps with the seeds that we plant, they will change how we reform education for the better. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. The Kappa Delta Pi lecture series, [no. 10]. New York: Macmillan. Klein, P., & Kirkpatrick, L. (2010). Multimodal Literacies in Science: Currency, Coherence and Focus. Research In Science Education, 40(1), 87-92. doi:10.1007/s11165-009-9159-4 Maslow, A. H. (1971). The farther reaches of human nature. New York: Viking Press. Prain, V., & Waldrip, B. (2008). A Study of Teachers' Perspectives About Using Multimodal Representations of Concepts to Enhance Science Learning. Canadian Journal Of Science, Mathematics & Technology Education, 8(1), 5-24. doi:10.1080/14926150802152152 DW

A colleague of a couple years ago - an exceptional educator - had problems similar to those you mention. This was the teacher that helped develop an excellent simulation program that was nationally recognized, she did an incredible job of implementing a digital classroom environment, flipped the class room before it was a buzzword, and really understood the inquiry process. She incorporated reading into the science curriculum, and had the most engaged classes I have ever seen. She quit at the end of last year. Statewide teacher of the year. The district really didn't understand the nature of scientific investigation and the inquiry process. They saw a noisy classroom where kids were in all stages of projects, and sometimes failed. But there was so much learning going on - not only about science, but about relating to each other, and relating science to the real world. She got them excited about science. And now she is gone. She did not fit the mold any more, and the administration had no respect or understanding of the important work she was accomplishing. They pushed back at her until she left. Our students learn from what they see. If administrators behave badly, why should we expect our students to behave any better? The social climate in most schools is absolutely icy these days, and it is creating a stressful environment for learning. Our problems go way beyond not having any money for supplies and the lack of physical support. We need to figure out how to build supportive communities where people are respected for what they contribute to the classroom.

When Joanna first posed the question (what are the pressing challenges facing science education), I had not known about Classroom 2.0 and all the resources available at their website. They have a whole webpage devoted to webinars by notable speakers speaking on the 'state of education'. The webpage is called 'The Future of Education'.
There you will find dozens of webinars from January 2009 to the present. The most recent one was on August 28th, 2012: Tony Wagner on Creating Innovators: The Making of Young People Who Will Change the World. I shall have to check that one out!

I think one of the pressing challenges facing science education today is the speed at which our technology is advancing. Hmm - such a problem! Is it true? Didn't I just hear that teachers can download an app on their Ipads to make them interactive whiteboards? Teachers and administrators can't keep up with the technological innovations- students are the ones who get left out. I don't know about you, but it seems to me that a gigantic misappropriation of funds keeps occurring as school districts try to keep up with the newest 'gadgetry'. It was just 5 years ago that the school district near where I live (innocently) installed these gigantic white monsters on the classroom walls and then did not provide adequate teacher inservice for using them. There they sit (or stand) on the classroom wall...being used as regular white boards... Do we need to rethink what is essential and what might be frivolous technology? Do we need to show restraint in buying the first of anything techy?
What are others' thoughts? AND please, correct any misunderstandings I may have about the capabililities of the Ipad. But if it can't do it now, I am sure it will be able to tomorrow :-)
Carolyn

Arlene said, "What is frivolous is not providing all that is needed to make use of this and any technology." That is true, too, Arlene. Our district administrators are strapped with a heavy burden of weighing the cost of technology and training with the impact it will have on teaching and learning. This needs to be tempered with the common sense to NOT purchase technology for technology's sake. There are so many challenges facing science education today! Please do share more ideas here. For example, do you think that we can attribute some of the reasons for not having enough jobs for our young people graduating today to the fact that they have not been trained for the jobs now available? Jobs that didn't exist when they started high school or college? Technology has eliminated so many traditional jobs! (It reminds me personally of how I learned shorthand when I was in high school only to never need it. I can type faster than I can write -even in shorthand.) STEM careers are ever-evolving; how do teachers and the institutions that train them keep up? Carolyn

Wow! I am surprised that many teachers struggle with including enough time in class to teach science. In my class, I definitely carve out time to teach both science and social studies. I never feel as though my students are not getting enough of math or language arts because I try very hard to integrate when possible. I use science texts as a way to help improve students' reading comprehension. We really focus on things such as text structure and text features to help them move around a text more easily. We practice our note taking and summarizing skills constantly using details from our texts. I also look for ways to tie our math and science together. This past week we went over the scientific method in class. I really wanted students to move beyond the labels of each stage and instead realize that they use the scientific method everyday in their lives. I drew examples from things as simple as what to wear to school. As students get more familiar with the concepts and vocabulary, I make sure that I point out when we are using the scientific method in our math problem solving. Probability is a great fit with the scientific method. When we try to figure out the probability of an event we always have to look at what we already know (gathering data), we hypothesize what we think the outcome will be, we try it out, and sometimes we get it right. If we don't get it right, we form a new hypothesis and try it again. I hope that for those teachers who are struggling with finding time for science that they will look for those opportunities where they can integrate. Not only will more be accomplished but also the situations will be more realistic.

Denise says, 'Wow! I am surprised that many teachers struggle with including enough time in class to teach science.' You shared many ways that work for you Denise. Thank you for all those suggestions.
In the article 'Teaching Teachers: Reaching the Reluctant Science Teacher'
the author discusses why teachers going into elementary education come with fears about teaching science. Perhaps those underlying fears contribute to some elementary teachers' reluctance to make time for science learning.
As teachers become more familiar with the common core standards, they will be able to create connections to science content and use it as the vehicle for teaching language arts and math CCSSI standards. For example, if one is honing in on the K-5 Reading Standards for Informational Text, teachers can direct students to determine main ideas and support the main ideas with key details using their science texts or other factual reading material.
Are there ways that teachers can share on how they are revamping their curricula to include the CCSSI/ELA/Math standards while embedding science content and scientific practices at the same time?

• I think that the use of the technology in the classroom is integral. Unlike most adults however, children have little difficulty exploring new forms of technology, which explains their embracement of its’ advancements. In their lifetime, the use of technology will not be an option, and teaching with it shouldn’t be either. However, I also see the argument that a large amount of money is spent on these fancy forms of technology without the necessary training/in-service days to use these. If districts spent time teaching their teachers how to benefit from these new forms of technology they could be better used in the classroom.

It seems to me schools are trying to lump science and technology together- that its some natural fit. My biggest challenge is the parental base my students come from. I cannot send homework home- or study sheets, or even surveys becasue parents have a hard time understanding them

It seems to me schools are trying to lump science and technology together- that its some natural fit. My biggest challenge is the parental base my students come from. I cannot send homework home- or study sheets, or even surveys becasue parents have a hard time understanding them

Hello Joanna, As a pre-service teacher, I agree with much of what has been said in the above comments. I find that even in the best schools, it is difficult to observe students learning science. Most teachers provide textbook readings, worksheets, or even vocabulary words to take home on index cards. These strategies are used if they even get to "teach" science. In the schools I have attended, the same teacher teaches math and science. Usually, the class is so behind on math that the teacher chooses to replace science time with math time due to the importance of math for standardized testing. Both, the method of instruction and the lack of instruction, are great issues in our science education curriculum.

The lack of political will to focus on science. Leaders usually harp on making us take global leadership in science and lament about PISA rankings. Then they go around and cut our budget. This lack of fundamental understanding of what it takes to have quality science education manifests itself in: 1. prioritizing Math and ELA over science 2. minimal or zero resources for many inner city schools I can only talk about myself. But I don't even have a sink in my room. I have my trusty plastic pail:) Having said that, my handicap in terms of infrastructure ( our school is a converted warehouse, apparently there is some building code that prevents major remodeling), has led me to become more innovative in coming up with hands-on and modeling experiments that cost close to nothing. The PDs that are relevant to me are the ones that are also low-cost(For the most part, I also pay for many materials out-of-pocket). But it presents a challenge since many of the PDs out there assume that resources are not an issue. It makes it more difficult for me to build up my personal content pedagogical knowledge. Beyond the external issues, as a new teacher at the high school level, what I need is to know in detail how to teach a particular topic. I have come to the conclusion that building this practical knowledge takes time and constant effort to learn best practices. This year, I focused on hard-to-understand concepts such as photosynthesis, Mendel's laws and active transport. Although I feel that this year's lessons were better than the past two, I am excited to see how I can teach these concepts more effectively. One other challenge is to give myself constant pep talks and positive encouragement that what I do matters. It is easy to become disheartened in a climate wherein I have to advocate that science matters.

I agree it is a challenge to teach science in class. We currently have only 30 minutes to teach either science or social studies in class. We alternate every 2 weeks and it is getting tougher to teach because the focus is on reading then math. There is still a glimmer of hope because we try to get the students to relate their science lessons to the world around them. We use interactive boards and a lot of hands-on things as well. If we can peak their interest early on in primary school, hopefully they will want to continue learning as they move up in the grades.