putting the pieces together: learning to use inquiry approaching ...

1. Putting the Pieces Together: Learning to Use Inquiry Approaching in Elementary Science Teaching Multiple perspectives on science lessons Science educator Scientists School district curriculum adm Adult education/transfer of training expert Let them observe and share what they saw Multiple perspectives on science lessons Science educator Scientists School district curriculum adm Adult education/transfer of training expert Let them observe and share what they saw

2. 5 year Teacher Professional Continuum grant part of DRK-12 at NSF Examining many aspects by themselves and, ultimately putting them together Preservice--science methods Sp 07 Cooperating teachers F 07 Student teachers Sp 08 Induction teachers Sp 09, 10, 11 Maybe start a new cohort in Sp 095 year Teacher Professional Continuum grant part of DRK-12 at NSF Examining many aspects by themselves and, ultimately putting them together Preservice--science methods Sp 07 Cooperating teachers F 07 Student teachers Sp 08 Induction teachers Sp 09, 10, 11 Maybe start a new cohort in Sp 09

3. Purpose Present 3 contrasting cases of elementary preservice teachers learning to teach elementary science. Compare teaching practices during their science methods course with other indicators: attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge. Invite you to discuss ways to consider the multiple factors in relation to one another. Inquiry-that troublesome term Focus on how PRESERVICE TEACHER DESIGNS AND ENACTS LESSON Informed by Barrows (2006) in Jrl of Science Tch Ed. Operationalization of NSES (1996) characteristics Engaging science questions Collection of evidence that allows explanations based on evidence Consideration of alternative explanations that reflect scientific understanding Communication and justification/argument of their explanations consideration of who decides of questions, procedure, & recording format How teacher advances the lesson�telling,listening, questioning, summarizing Inquiry-that troublesome term Focus on how PRESERVICE TEACHER DESIGNS AND ENACTS LESSON Informed by Barrows (2006) in Jrl of Science Tch Ed. Operationalization of NSES (1996) characteristics Engaging science questions Collection of evidence that allows explanations based on evidence Consideration of alternative explanations that reflect scientific understanding Communication and justification/argument of their explanations consideration of who decides of questions, procedure, & recording format How teacher advances the lesson�telling,listening, questioning, summarizing

4. Methodology: Participants 27 juniors in a selective teacher education program Enrolled in science methods course Emphasis on inquiry pedagogy Capstone assignment is to teach a lesson that includes exploration and a high degree of openness in an elementary classroom Consented to participate in longitudinal CAREERS study Methods course--2 credits Co-designed and taught with TIRs from GEMSNET Models open-ended and guided investigations Greatly influenced by IFI Mini-lessons first; then lesson in field placementMethods course--2 credits Co-designed and taught with TIRs from GEMSNET Models open-ended and guided investigations Greatly influenced by IFI Mini-lessons first; then lesson in field placement

5. Data Sources Background Science Autobiography �What is science?� QuickWrite College level science courses/grades Efficacy in Science Teaching (STEBI) Nature of Science Beliefs (SUSSI) Elementary Science Content Test Developed by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statementDeveloped by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statement

6. Data Sources Videotaped Science Lesson Inquiry Instructional Components Content Accuracy Depth of Science Questions & Teacher Talk Reflective Interview (post student teaching) Developed by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statementDeveloped by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statement

7. Student Attitudes

8. Developed by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statementDeveloped by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statement

9. Jacob: What is Science?Attitudes about teaching science

10. Josephine: What is Science?Attitudes about teaching science

11. Ariane: What is Science?Attitudes about teaching science

12. Methodology:Coding Video analysis using StudioCode software Development of Code Input Windows Establishing inter-rater reliability Development of rubric to rate quality of elements For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)

13. Methodology:Sample Code Input Window For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)

14. Methodology:Sample Timeline For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)For coding we looked at Carol Stuesse�s lesson analysis RTOP OTOP (now used with cooperating teachers and continuing lessons) Last summer developed the code input windows�. Wanted the group of multiperspective coders to discuss and formulate the input window and rubric (their idea)

15. Instructional Rubric Opening Exploration Closing

16. Developed by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statementDeveloped by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statement

17. Video Clips!!

18. Analysis of Questioning & Teacher Talk Percentage of Lesson Depth of Knowledge

19. Strongest area is exploration part (would look stronger if without the demo rubric as many did not do demos) Weakest area is closingStrongest area is exploration part (would look stronger if without the demo rubric as many did not do demos) Weakest area is closing

20. Percentage of Science Questions Corresponding to Webb�s Depth of Knowledge Levels Strongest area is exploration part (would look stronger if without the demo rubric as many did not do demos) Weakest area is closingStrongest area is exploration part (would look stronger if without the demo rubric as many did not do demos) Weakest area is closing

21. Inquiry Questions

22. Science Content Knowledge

23. Content Test

24. GPA--Overall & in Science

25. Developed by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statementDeveloped by coders after identifying the incidences of the first 5 tapes using StudioCode and the code input windows Opening: Prior knowledge/everyday experience Content intro Setting purpose Predictions Set research/focus question Determine research design Determine data recording design Exploration: Observations, Data recording, hands-on exploration, Teacher tells/guides, Ask for evidence, Provides evidence Closing: Provide reflection time Make connections Content Blast Interpret results Compare results to predictions Support conclusions with evidence Summary statement

26. Accuracy of Lesson Science

27. Accuracy Examples

28. Other Indicators Nature of Science Science Teaching Efficacy

29. Nature of Science

30. Personal Science Teaching Efficacy

31. Science Teaching Outcomes Expectancy

32. Jacob Lesson Reflection

33. Post Student Teaching Interview: Jacob

34. Ariane�s Post Student Teaching Interview Q: What are some important things you learned in science methods ? �The questioning - learning how to restate questions for the children instead of just answering them, trying to further their investigation. All learning is becoming questions.�

35. Josephine�s Post Student Teaching Interview Q: If you compare the lesson you did this semester in science with the one you did last year, how is it different or how have you grown? �Um it's different in the fact where I think it's more inquiry, where I think last year I THOUGHT it was inquiry and it might have been in a little way but I don't think it was as inquiry as it should have been or could have been.�

36. Implications for Practice Importance of lesson closure Experience alone is not enough�reflection is needed Teachers can underestimate complexity of content

37. Conclusions & Challenges No one variable tells the whole story. How can we consider the pieces of the puzzle in a multivariate manner to reach some conclusions about teacher education at preservice level and beyond? Which variables (or combinations) contribute more/less to successful inquiry science teaching?

38. Discussion

39. Overall Conclusions Preservice teachers had the most difficulty with the �making meaning� or summary parts of the lesson. They used many of the inquiry instructional components �mechanically.� Often the placement or follow-through related to the inquiry methods were inappropriate or missing. Some of the preservice teachers misjudged the complexity of the topics they selected. As students� responses to open-ended questions emerged, some teachers struggled with content. Did trust students to make conclusions (or just ran out of time�.pacing problem in long lessons) Used many important instructional elements, but used them mechanically�.sometimes in the wrong place or without follow-up Misjudged complexity..got nervous when students came up with unexpected responses and, at times, made up an explanation that was not accurate Did trust students to make conclusions (or just ran out of time�.pacing problem in long lessons) Used many important instructional elements, but used them mechanically�.sometimes in the wrong place or without follow-up Misjudged complexity..got nervous when students came up with unexpected responses and, at times, made up an explanation that was not accurate

40. Next Steps�. Examine changes over time (5 years) http://www.uri.edu/hss/education/careersweb/index.htm