January/February 2018 – Vol. 31 No. 2

A Perfect and Completely Accurate Prediction About the Future of Science Education

Posted: Thursday, December 1st, 2011

by Peter A’Hearn

(updated December 14, 2011)

What will science education look in 5, 10, 20 years? I think we are in for a period of reinvention and experimentation. Technology is creating big changes in some schools and classrooms where the pioneers and the early adopters are finding out what is possible. But soon, technology is going to start to change the way we learn science in every classroom, at every school.

Two things got me thinking about this. One was a reading assignment for a technology training. This was the New Media Consortium 2011 Horizon report on technology in education.  Read it at: www.cosn.org/horizon. In discussing the key challenges to developing the full potential of technology in education there is this, “A key challenge is the fundamental structure of the K-12 education establishment — aka “the system.” As long as maintaining the basic elements of the existing system remains the focus of efforts to support education, there will be resistance to any profound change in practice.”

The other was a meeting I was at where the Next Generation Science Standards were discussed.  The Common Core Standards in Math and English will start to be tested in 2014 using the SMARTER Balanced test that will replace the current CST. The Next Generation Science Standards will not be far behind and they will represent a major change from the current standards.  They emphasize that science “practices” (what we have been calling Investigation and Experimentation in California) be integrated with the teaching of content instead of being placed at the back of the standards with no explanation. At the meeting someone asked, “Are we going to be tested on new standards before we have the curriculum to teach to those new standards?” At that moment I realized that in the current budget environment, it will be difficult to find the money to adopt new textbooks, but there will be a pressing need for teachers to have new curriculum materials that give guidance to teaching the new standards. Now we all know that the end of the paper textbook is coming eventually, but this seems to push thus change into high gear.

What will textbooks be replaced with? Many districts have already figured out that giving each student a tablet reader is cheaper than buying five textbooks.  But if the new curriculum is just textbooks on readers, then it will be a failure of imagination and vision.  And as the horizon report says,” Students can take advantage of learning material online, through games and programs they may have on systems at home, and through their extensive — and constantly available — social networks.”

So my completely accurate prediction is that science education will change in significant ways. Other than that, here are some wild predictions, questions, and concerns. I am interested in hearing your questions, predictions, and concerns.

Wild Predictions:

  • The best curricula will link students to real data sources and allow for students in different schools in different parts of the country and the world to work together to gather data and analyze results.
  • Some curricula will constantly adapt as new technologies become available. In a 7 year adoption, the basic framework will stay the same, but the methods of delivery, interaction, and assessment will change over the life of the adoption as technology introduces new possibilities.
  • The structure of the school day and the classroom will fundamentally change. Much more of happens will happen independently and in small group structures. This will be the most difficult change, will take the longest time to happen, and will face the most resistance.

Questions:

  • Can open source textbooks, where many people edit and contribute have the conceptual coherency and “tightness”, that the best curricula have?
  • With too many contributors and too many possibilities and sources of information, will they inevitably become too bloated to really give teachers guidance?

Concerns:

  • I think there is great value in face to face discussion and problem solving.
  • I worry that we will move too much collaboration and discussion into virtual environments. For example, there will be likely be a discussion thread of people responding to this article. I will over-think my replies and the process will drain my energy. I would much rather get together and brainstorm over a few beers.

The real world is located in the real world. Science is the study of nature- not of simulations of nature. It is tempting to replace the cost and management of real labs with computer simulations. I think this is a huge mistake. A simulation is a model and all models simplify the real thing. Looking through a real microscope is both much more difficult and also much more exciting than looking through a digital one. Students need to know that real science is messy, frustrating, unpredictable, and very rewarding.

Peter A’Hearn is the K-12 science specialist in the Palm Springs Unified School District and is region 4 director for CSTA.

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Peter AHearn

Peter AHearn

Peter A’Hearn is the Region 4 Director for CSTA.

2 Responses

  1. Peter is exactly correct on several points. One comment will not hold everything I could say here. I’ll begin with textbooks, a serious issue that I have spoken on repeatedly.

    TEXTBOOKS

    Textbooks are passive. Period. Textbooks online are no different. Our students don’t relate well to passive materials because they’re becoming very used to much more interaction with their various digital devices.

    Therefore, online textbooks will not work — at all. Their replacement, which ought to have a clever name, will be interactive (really, not just pretend as in simulations), adaptive, self-paced, and inexpensive. Adding animations, videos, slide shows, simulations, and any other “multi-media” just won’t cut it. Without real interactivity, it all fails to realize the promise of new technology, especially online technology. I should hastily add that those multimedia materials are just fine as long as they aren’t too long, are focused on the current topic, and don’t interfere with interactive learning. They’re just supplements in the new world, however.

    Every student should have an online account in which all online learning is tracked. Excellent teacher overview software will let teachers know if any student has encountered difficulties as soon as it happens. Teachers will also know if any student moves ahead much more rapidly than the others. Also, students’ online accounts allow for group (or social) learning by providing interaction among groups. They’re used to that sort of interaction and will do it anyway.

    SCIENCE “LABS”

    I’ll include just one more topic in this comment, the science “lab.” Because “lab” is such a loaded term and doesn’t have a very precise meaning for many, I’d prefer to call it a science investigation experience. But, lab is shorter. The National Research Council has defined the word for us (in 2005): “Laboratory experiences provide opportunities for students to interact directly with the material world (or with data drawn from the material world), using the tools, data collection techniques, models, and theories of science.”

    The domination of “hands-on” labs in science curricula will go the same way as printed textbooks. That’s my confident prediction. Oh, they won’t vanish entirely. Most will be subsumed into extended projects where the hands-on aspect makes real sense. For those of you who recall “America’s Lab Report,” you’ll remember that the most headline-grabbing part was the labeling of the typical high school science lab experience as “poor.”

    Many excellent reasons sit behind that conclusion. Many teachers seek to fill up lab time with anything that will do. it must be safe, inexpensive, and quick — typically 30 minutes of real “experiment” time. Some fuss over whether their students will learn proper technique for whatever, lighting a bunsen burner, manipulating a microscope, using a pipet, dissecting a frog, or some other activity that will serve no future purpose for essentially all students. Others believe strongly that labs reinforce the latest lecture or textbook chapter, even though “reinforce” means knowing the result before entering the lab and therefore obviating any interest students may have had in the lab experience.

    The essence of lab experience: Inquire, explore, discover.

    As a part of that experience, students make predictions, take data from the real world, look at those data in different ways, compare data with predictions, explain any discrepancies, and interact with others doing similar work. They use a variety of the tools of scientific thinking. As a result, they become more and more expert at scientific thinking. They also begin to understand the true nature of science and what it’s like to deal with ambiguous and complex data.

    You can do all of that online! I hear the groans, hisses, and curses right now, but don’t try to hold back progress. If the “lab” experiences meet the above definitions, then students will be engaged and learning rather than turned off and memorizing. And you can do it online. I have proven it possible in at least one way. I don’t claim that this is the only way, but it’s the only one I’ve encountered to date.

    Use a video and image recording devices to film real experiments, lots of them. Put those real experiment videos online. Create a means for students to interact with those videos to collect data interactively — their own personal data determined by their own care and judgment. What you have is an authentic science investigation experience online using real experiments and interactive data collection.

    This approach costs less than typical hands-on labs. It’s safer. It’s more efficient because students can perform a dozen experiments in the time it would have taken to do just one in class. This is the future. But, the future is in the future. What about now?

    Such online “labs” can be used as preparation for hands-on labs. They can be used to extend a hands-on lab in which online one or two experiments could be completed. They can be used as homework. The can be used for remediation and test preparation.

    Until the UCOP changes its “a-g” requirements, that’s where we are today. In the future, hands-on experiences will be limited to projects and special situations. Hands-on uses time, space, and money inefficiently for the most part. It should be used only where it shines and really makes a difference. Until recently, it was the only option. Simulations do not meet the NRC definition of a lab. They may assist in learning but do not provide a true science investigation experience. They help with content but not with process.

    Once textbooks are mostly gone (remaining only for reference purposes) and hands-on labs are mostly gone (except for projects and other special situations), the world of learning science will be changed forever.

    The above relates only to K-12 learning and mostly to middle and high schools. Colleges are another story but with similar themes. Early elementary school should have pre-science activities, and grades 3-5 should start doing science. Elementary school science should be primarily hands-on with only a smattering of online.

    Put the phrase “prerecorded real experiments” into your search engine to learn more about the world to come.

  2. Thanks for the thoughtful feedback Harry. What you say about textbooks I completely agree with. On the question of science labs- I had included some predictions and concerns in my original editorial which was trimmed accidentally; here was what I said about labs:

    “The real world is located in the real world. Science is the study of nature- not of simulations of nature. It is tempting to replace the cost and management of real labs with computer simulations. I think this is a huge mistake. A simulation is a model and all models simplify the real thing. Looking through a real microscope is both much more difficult and also much more exciting than looking through a digital one. Students need to know that real science is messy, frustrating, unpredictable, and very rewarding.”

    In response to Harry- I think there will be great pressure to replace labs with simulations and online labs, and I think they are very useful for certain settings like alternative education, but I think that science educators will need to fight to keep a real lab experience part of basic science education.

    Here were some other things I had intended to include in the original editorial:

    Wild Predictions- The best curricula will link students to real data sources and allow for students in different schools in different parts of the country and the world to work together to gather data and analyze results.

    Some curricula will constantly adapt as new technologies become available. In a 7 year adoption, the basic framework will stay the same, but the methods of delivery, interaction, and assessment will change over the life of the adoption as technology introduces new possibilities.

    The structure of the school day and the classroom will fundamentally change. Much more of happens will happen independently and in small group structures. This will be the most difficult change, will take the longest time to happen, and will face the most resistance.

    Questions- Can open source textbooks, where many people edit and contribute have the conceptual coherency and “tightness” that the best curricula have. With too many contributors and too many possibilities and sources of information will they inevitably become too bloated to really give teachers guidance?

    Concerns- I think there is great value in face to face discussion and problem solving. I worry that we will move too much collaboration and discussion into virtual environments.For example, there will be likely be a discussion thread of people responding to this article. I will overthink my replies and the process will drain my energy. I would much rather get together and brainstorm over a few beers.

    The real world is located in the real world. Science is the study of nature- not of simulations of nature. It is tempting to replace the cost and management of real labs with computer simulations. I think this is a huge mistake. A simulation is a model and all models simplify the real thing. Looking through a real microscope is both much more difficult and also much more exciting than looking through a digital one. Students need to know that real science is messy, frustrating, unpredictable, and very rewarding.

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

Accelerating into NGSS – A Statewide Rollout Series Now Accepting Registrations

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

Are you feeling behind on the implementation of NGSS? Then Accelerating into NGSS – the Statewide Rollout event – is right for you!

WHO SHOULD ATTEND
If you have not experienced Phases 1-4 of the Statewide Rollout, or are feeling behind with the implementation of NGSS, the Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout will provide you with the greatest hits from Phases 1-4!

OVERVIEW
Accelerating Into NGSS Statewide Rollout is a two-day training geared toward grade K-12 academic coaches, administrators, curriculum leads, and teacher leaders. Check-in for the two-day rollout begins at 7:30 a.m., followed by a continental breakfast. Sessions run from 8:00 a.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Day One and from 8:00 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. on Day Two.

Cost of training is $250 per attendee. Fee includes all materials, continental breakfast, and lunch on both days. It is recommended that districts send teams of four to six, which include at least one administrator. Payment can be made by check or credit card. If paying by check, registration is NOT complete until payment has been received. All payments must be received prior to the Rollout location date you are attending. Paying by credit card secures your seat at time of registration. No purchase orders accepted. No participant cancellation refunds.

For questions or more information, please contact Amy Kennedy at akennedy@sjcoe.net or (209) 468-9027.

REGISTER

http://bit.ly/ACCELERATINGINTONGSS

DATES & LOCATIONS
MARCH 28-29, 2018
Host: San Mateo County Office of Education
Location: San Mateo County Office of Education, Redwood City

APRIL 10-11, 2018
Host: Orange County Office of Education
Location: Brandman University, Irvine

MAY 1-2, 2018
Host: Tulare County Office of Education
Location: Tulare County Office of Education, Visalia

MAY 3-4, 2018
Host: San Bernardino Superintendent of Schools
Location: West End Educational Service Center, Rancho Cucamonga

MAY 7-8, 2018
Host: Sacramento County Office of Education
Location: Sacramento County Office of Education Conference Center and David P. Meaney Education Center, Mather

JUNE 14-15, 2018
Host: Imperial County Office of Education
Location: Imperial Valley College, Imperial

Presented by the California Department of Education, California County Superintendents Educational Services Association/County Offices of Education, K-12 Alliance @WestEd, California Science Project, and the California Science Teachers Association.

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

The Teaching and Learning Collaborative, Reflections from an Administrator

Posted: Friday, January 19th, 2018

by Kelly Patchen

My name is Mrs. Kelly Patchen, and I am proud to be an elementary assistant principal working in the Tracy Unified School District (TUSD) at Louis Bohn and McKinley Elementary Schools. Each of the schools I support are Title I K-5 schools with about 450 students, a diverse student population, a high percentage of English Language Learners, and students living in poverty. We’re also lucky to be part of the CA NGSS K-8 Early Implementation Initiative with the K-12 Alliance. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by NGSS Early Implementer

NGSS Early Implementer

In 2015 CSTA began to publish a series of articles written by teachers participating in the California NGSS k-8 Early Implementation Initiative. This article was written by an educator(s) participating in the initiative. CSTA thanks them for their contributions and for sharing their experience with the science teaching community.

2018 CSTA Conference Call for Proposals

Posted: Wednesday, January 17th, 2018

CSTA is pleased to announce that we are now accepting proposals for 90-minute workshops and three- and six-hour short courses for the 2018 California Science Education Conference. Workshops and short courses make up the bulk of the content and professional learning opportunities available at the conference. In recognition of their contribution, members who present a workshop or short course receive 50% off of their registration fees. Click for more information regarding proposals, or submit one today by following the links below.

Short Course Proposal

Workshop Proposal Learn More…

Written by California Science Teachers Association

California Science Teachers Association

CSTA represents science educators statewide—in every science discipline at every grade level, Kindergarten through University.

CSTA’s New Administrator Facebook Group Page

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Holly Steele

The California Science Teachers Association’s mission is to promote high-quality science education, and one of the best practice’s we use to fulfill that mission is through the use of our Facebook group pages. CSTA hosts several closed and moderated Facebook group pages for specific grade levels, (Elementary, Middle, and High School), pages for district coaches and science education faculty, and the official CSTA Facebook page. These pages serve as an online resource for teachers and coaches to exchange teaching methods, materials, staying update on science events in California and asking questions. CSTA is happy to announce the creation of a 6th group page called, California Administrators Supporting Science. Learn More…

Written by Guest Contributor

From time to time CSTA receives contributions from guest contributors. The opinions and views expressed by these contributors are not necessarily those of CSTA. By publishing these articles CSTA does not make any endorsements or statements of support of the author or their contribution, either explicit or implicit. All links to outside sources are subject to CSTA’s Disclaimer Policy: http://www.classroomscience.org/disclaimer.

Find Your Reason to Engage

Posted: Monday, January 15th, 2018

by Jill Grace

I was recently reflecting on events in the news and remembered that several years ago, National Public Radio had a story about a man named Stéphane Hessel, a World War II French resistance fighter, Nazi concentration camp survivor, and contributor to the United Nation’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The story focused on a book he had published, Time for Outrage (2010).

In it, Hessel makes the argument that the worst attitude is indifference:

“Who is in charge; who are the decision makers? It’s not always easy to discern. We’re not dealing with a small elite anymore, whose actions we can clearly identify. We are dealing with a vast, interdependent world that is interconnected in unprecedented ways. But there are unbearable things all around us. You have to look for them; search carefully. Open your eyes and you will see. This is what I tell young people: If you spend a little time searching, you will find your reasons to engage. The worst attitude is indifference. ‘There’s nothing I can do; I get by’ – adopting this mindset will deprive you of one of the fundamental qualities of being human: outrage.  Our capacity for protest is indispensable, as is our freedom to engage.”

His words make me take pause when I think of the status of science in the United States. A general “mistrust” of science is increasingly pervasive, as outlined in a New Yorker article from the summer of 2016. Learn More…

Powered By DT Author Box

Written by Jill Grace

Jill Grace

Jill Grace is a Regional Director for the K-12 Alliance and is President of CSTA.