March/April 2017 – Vol. 29 No. 6

Professional Development in 4-H: A Case for Reform

Posted: Tuesday, October 7th, 2014

by Martin Smith, Lynn Schmitt-McQuitty, Andrea Ambrose, and Steven Worker

There is a recognized need to improve the levels of scientific literacy among K-12 youth in the United States (Fleischman, Hopstock, Pelczar, & Shelley 2010; National Center for Education Statistics 2011). To accomplish this will require effective classroom-based science instruction and high quality science programs for youth in out-of-school time settings (Bell, Lewenstein, Shouse, & Feder 2009). Specifically, out-of-school time programs can help advance youth scientific literacy, ignite youths’ interest in science, and reinforce classroom learning by expanding curriculum offerings and complementing formal science instruction (Kahler and Valentine 2011; Mørch and du Bois-Reymond 2006).

Two of the factors that contribute to the low levels of youth scientific literacy in the U.S. are the use of didactic teaching strategies (Jorgenson & Vanosdall, 2002) and ineffective approaches to professional development of science educators (Loucks-Horsley et al., 1998; Loucks-Horsley, Love, Stiles, Mundry, & Hewson, 2003). Didactic teaching strategies – lectures and presentations – emphasize the direct delivery of information and memorization of known facts (Jorgenson and Vanosdall 2002). These methods do not provide learners with an in-depth understanding of science content and do little to contribute to their abilities to use scientific thinking (Cole et al., 2002; Minner, Levy, & Century, 2010). Conversely, constructivist-based teaching strategies like inquiry are learner-centered, foster knowledge and skills development, and hold promise for improving youth scientific literacy (Beerer & Bodzin, 2004; Minner, Levy, & Century, 2010).

Most professional development opportunities in science involve a highly skilled professional demonstrating knowledge and skills to less experienced individuals who are in the role of being passive recipients of information. Described by Lambert et al. (2002) as the “traditional approach” to professional development, this strategy perpetuates the use of didactic teaching methods and is viewed broadly as being ineffective (e.g., Garet et al., 2001; Loucks-Horsley et al. 2003; Penuel et al. 2007). Furthermore, because science educators teach most commonly using methods by which they were taught (Loucks-Horsley et al., 1998), to modify their practice “they must encounter multiple experiences with [effective pedagogical strategies] as learners” in order to use them effectively (Dantonio & Beisenherz, 2001, p. 14). Therefore, to become proficient at using effective pedagogical strategies to teach science, science educators require access to and participation in professional development opportunities that model constructivist-based, learner-centered methods (Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003; Smith & Schmitt-McQuitty, 2013).

The California 4-H Youth Development Program is part of a national community-based youth development organization. With a 100-year legacy of science programming, California 4-H offers a wide range of learning opportunities in out-of-school time settings through county-based offices throughout the state . Pedagogically, 4-H science programs and associated curriculum materials utilize experiential learning and inquiry (Worker & Smith, in press). To implement programs, the 4-H Youth Development Program relies heavily on volunteers – adults and teens – as non-formal educators who facilitate educational activities with youth (Boyd, 2004; Stedman & Rudd, 2006). However, as is true with most educators in other community-based programs that offer science programming, the majority of 4-H volunteers lack sufficient professional development to be successful (Chi, Freeman, & Lee, 2008; Smith & Schmitt-McQuitty, 2013). Thus, with youth learner outcomes associated with scientific literacy in mind, California 4-H is giving careful consideration to the design and implementation of professional development opportunities for 4-H volunteers (Smith & Schmitt-McQuitty, 2013).

Historically, professional development opportunities in 4-H have utilized mainly “traditional” methods: one-time, in-person workshops or seminars of short duration (Kaslon, Lodl, & Greve, 2005). However, such episodic strategies do not produce significant change in educators’ practice (Garet et al., 2001; Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003; Guskey & Yoon, 2009). In contrast, “reform-based” professional development strategies that take place over an extended period of time, utilize active learning strategies that provide educators direct experience using constructivist-based methods, occur within authentic contexts, and emphasize subject matter and pedagogical knowledge have been shown to be effective (Garet et al., 2001; Guskey, 2003; Guskey & Yoon, 2009; Loucks-Horsley et al., 2003; Penuel, Fishman, Yamaguchi, & Gallagher, 2007; Supovitz & Turner, 2000).

To this end, the California 4-H Science, Engineering, and Technology (SET) Leadership Team, academic and program staff that provide statewide leadership in science education, has advocated for wider use of “reform-based” professional development strategies for 4-H volunteers. Specifically, the SET Leadership Team has promoted methods such as action research and lesson study that utilize communities of practice (CoPs) (Smith & Schmitt-McQuitty, 2013). Communities of practice are organized networks of peers working toward shared learning goals that arise through authentic practice whereby participants co-construct knowledge through social interactions (Buysse et al., 2003; Lave & Wenger, 1991). A recent pilot study using lesson study with 4-H volunteers who implemented a science curriculum with 4-H youth in club settings revealed that the model has excellent potential for broader use (Smith, 2013). Further investigation of lesson study and other professional development models utilizing CoPs within the context of 4-H science programming has been recommended (Smith & Schmitt-McQuitty, 2013).

The California 4-H Youth Development Program endeavors to help advance the levels of scientific literacy among K-12 youth in the state. To accomplish this, the 4-H Program is seeking to improve the professional development of 4-H volunteer educators in order to increase their capacity to utilize effective science pedagogy in their work with youth audiences. Specifically, California 4-H strives to utilize “reform-based” professional development strategies as a means to provide science-learning opportunities for their volunteers that model best practices, provide direct experience, and occur in authentic settings.

For more information about 4-H and to access 4-H SET curriculum materials, please click here.

Steven Worker, Martin Smith, Andrea Ambrose, Lynn Schmitt-McQuitty are with the California State 4-H Office at the University of California’s Division of Agricultural and Natural Resources. Steven, Martin, and Lynn are members of CSTA.

References

Bell, P., Lewenstein, B., Shouse, A., & Feder, M. (eds.). (2009). Learning Science in Informal Environments: People, Places, and Pursuits. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Boyd, B. L. (2004). Extension agents as administrators of volunteers: Competencies needed for the future. Journal of Extension, 42(2).

Buysse, V., Sparkman, K., Wesley, P. W. (2003). Communities of practice in educational research: Connecting what we know with what we do. Exceptional Children, 69(3), 263–77.

Chi, B.S., Freeman, J., & Lee S. (2008). Science in afterschool market research study. A study commission by the S.D. Bechtel, Jr. Foundation. Berkeley, CA: Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California, Berkeley.

Cole, D.J., Mahaffey, G., Ramey, L., et al. (2002). Preparing quality science educators: A successful tripartite partnership. Paper presented at Ann Meeting of Association of Teacher Educators, Feb 2, 2002. Denver, CO. ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED461658.

Dantonio, M., & Beisenherz, P. C. (2001). Learning to Question, Questioning to Learn. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Fleischman, H.L., Hopstock, P.J., Pelczar, M.P., and Shelley, B.E. (2010). Highlights from PISA 2009: Performance of U.S. 15-Year-Old Students in Reading, Mathematics, and Science Literacy in an International Context (NCES 2011-004). U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.

Garet, M. S, Porter, A. C., Desimone L, et al. (2001). What makes professional development effective? Results from a national sample of teachers. American Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 915-945.

Guskey, T. R. (2003). Professional development that works: What makes professional development effective? Phi Delta Kappan, 84(10), 748–50.

Guskey, T. R., & Yoon, K. S. (2009). What works in professional development? Phi Delta Kappan 90(7), 495–500.

Jorgenson, O., & Vanosdall, R. (2002). The death of science? What we risk in our rush toward standardized testing and the three R’s. Phi Delta Kappan 83(8), 601-605.

Kahler, J., & Valentine, N. (2011). Stemming the gap. Education Digest 76(6), 54-55.

Kaslon, L., Lodl, K., & Greve, V. (2005). Online leader training for 4-H volunteers: A case study of action research. Journal of Extension, 43(2).

Lambert, L., Walker, D., Zimmerman, D. P., et al. (2002). The Constructivist Leader (2nd ed.). New York: Teachers College Press.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated Learning: Legitimate Peripheral Participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P., Love, N., & Stiles K. (1998). Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Love, N., Stiles, K., Mundry, S., & Hewson, P. (2003). Designing Professional Development for Teachers of Science and Mathematics (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Minner, D. D, Levy, A. J, & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction – What is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496.

Mørch, S., & du Bois-Reymond, M. (2006). Young Europeans in a changing world. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 113, 23-35.

National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The Nation’s Report Card: Science 2009. NCES 2011-451. Institute of Education Sciences, US Department of Education.Washington, D.C. Retrieved from: http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/main2009/2011451.pdf

Penuel, W. R., Fishman, B. J., Yamaguchi, R., & Gallagher, L. P. (2007). What makes professional development effective? Strategies that foster curriculum implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 44(4), 921-958.

Smith, M. H. (2013). Investigating Lesson Study as a Professional Development Model for 4-H Volunteers. California Agriculture, 67(1), 54-61.

Smith, M. H., & Schmitt-McQuitty, L. (2013). More effective professional development can help 4-H volunteers address need for youth scientific literacy. California Agriculture, 67(1), 47-53.

Stedman, N. L. P., & Rudd, R. (2006). Leadership styles and volunteer administration competence: Perceptions of 4-H county faculty in the United States. Journal of Extension, 44(1).

Supovitz, J. A., Turner, H. M. (2000). The effects of professional development on science teaching practices and classroom culture. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 37(9), 963-980.

Worker, S. M., & Smith, M. H. (In press). Promising practices for science education in out-of-school time: Lessons learned from California 4-H in curriculum and professional development. Afterschool Matters.

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.

Leave a Reply

LATEST POST

California Science Curriculum Framework Now Available

Posted: Tuesday, March 14th, 2017

The pre-publication version of the new California Science Curriculum Framework is now available for download. This publication incorporates all the edits that were approved by the State Board of Education in November 2016 and was many months in the making. Our sincere thanks to the dozens of CSTA members were involved in its development. Our appreciation is also extended to the California Department of Education, the State Board of Education, the Instructional Quality Commission, and the Science Curriculum Framework and Evaluation Criteria Committee and their staff for their hard work and dedication to produce this document and for their commitment to the public input process. To the many writers and contributors to the Framework CSTA thanks you for your many hours of work to produce a world-class document.

For tips on how to approach this document see our article from December 2016: California Has Adopted a New Science Curriculum Framework – Now What …? If you would like to learn more about the Framework, consider participating in one of the Framework Launch events (a.k.a. Rollout #4) scheduled throughout 2017.

The final publication version (formatted for printing) will be available in July 2017. This document will not be available in printed format, only electronically.

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.

Call for CSTA Awards Nominations

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

The 2017 Award Season is now open! One of the benefits of being a CSTA member is your eligibility for awards as well as your eligibility to nominate someone for an award. CSTA offers several awards and members may nominate individuals and organizations for the Future Science Teacher Award, the prestigious Margaret Nicholson Distinguished Service Award, and the CSTA Distinguished Contributions Award (organizational award). May 9, 2017 is the deadline for nominations for these awards. CSTA believes that the importance of science education cannot be overstated. Given the essential presence of the sciences in understanding the past and planning for the future, science education remains, and will increasingly be one of the most important disciplines in education. CSTA is committed to recognizing and encouraging excellence in science teaching through the presentation of awards to science educators and organizations who have made outstanding contributions in science education in the state and who are poised to continue the momentum of providing high quality, relevant science education into the future. 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.

Call for Volunteers – CSTA Committees

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

Volunteer

CSTA is now accepting applications from regular, preservice, and retired members to serve on our volunteer committees! CSTA’s all-volunteer board of directors invites you to consider maximizing your member experience by volunteering for CSTA. CSTA committee service offers you the opportunity to share your expertise, learn a new skill, or do something you love to do but never have the opportunity to do in your regular day. CSTA committee volunteers do some pretty amazing things: 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.

A Friend in CA Science Education Now at CSTA Region 1 Science Center

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

by Marian Murphy-Shaw

If you attended an NGSS Rollout phase 1-3 or CDE workshops at CSTA’s annual conference you may recall hearing from Chris Breazeale when he was working with the CDE. Chris has relocated professionally, with his passion for science education, and is now the Executive Director at the Explorit Science Center, a hands-on exploration museum featuring interactive STEM exhibits located at the beautiful Mace Ranch, 3141 5th St. in Davis, CA. Visitors can “think it, try it, and explorit” with a variety of displays that allow visitors to “do science.” To preview the museum, or schedule a classroom visit, see www.explorit.org. Learn More…

Written by Marian Murphy-Shaw

Marian Murphy-Shaw

Marian Murphy-Shaw is the student services director at Siskiyou County Office of Education and is CSTA’s Region 1 Director and chair of CSTA’s Policy Committee.

Learning to Teach in 3D

Posted: Monday, March 13th, 2017

by Joseph Calmer

Probably like you, NGSS has been at the forefront of many department meetings, lunch conversations, and solitary lesson planning sessions. Despite reading the original NRC Framework, the Ca Draft Frameworks, and many CSTA writings, I am still left with the question: “what does it actually mean for my classroom?”

I had an eye-opening experience that helped me with that question. It came out of a conversation that I had with a student teacher. It turns out that I’ve found the secret to learning how to teach with NGSS: I need to engage in dialogue about teaching with novice teachers. I’ve had the pleasure of teaching science in some capacity for 12 years. During that time pedagogy and student learning become sort of a “hidden curriculum.” It is difficult to plan a lesson for the hidden curriculum; the best way is to just have two or more professionals talk and see what emerges. I was surprised it took me so long to realize this epiphany. 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.