Edmund A. Marek

Development of an informal learning opportunities assay

Learning that takes place outside the formal classroom, called informal learning, has been a difficult parameter to assess due to the heterogeneous nature of the subjects and everyday learning situations. To date, no instrument has been developed to effectively examine the wide variety of informal experiences a child may encounter. Central to this study was the development and field testing of such an instrument, the Informal Learning Opportunities Assay (ILOA). The ILOA was administered to a total of 2128 middle and high school students and was found to be ethnically neutral, easily scored, and flexible in design to accommodate practitioners and researchers. The instrument was found to provide a reliable assessment of informal learning opportunities.

Why the Learning Cycle

The learning cycle is a way to structure inquiry in school science and occurs in several sequential phases. A learning cycle moves children through a scientific investigation by having them first explore materials, then construct a concept, and finally apply or extend the concept to other situations. Why the learning cycle? Because it is a theory-based design for inquiry that works when implemented well.

Eliciting students' understandings of chemical reactions using two forms of essay questions during a learning cycle

We examined ninth-grade students’ explanations of chemical reactions using two forms of an open-ended essay question during a learning cycle. One form provided students with key terms to be used as ‘anchors’ upon which to base their essay, whereas the second form did not. The essays were administered at three points: pre-learning cycle, post-concept application, and after additional concept application activities. Students’ explanations were qualitatively examined and grouped according to common patterns representing their understandings or misunderstandings. Findings indicated that more misunderstandings were elicited by the use of key terms as compared to the non-use of key terms in the pre-test. Misunderstandings in the key term essay responses generally involved the misuse of these terms and their association with the concept. Findings also indicated significant positive shifts in students’ understanding over the learning cycle. No perceptible increase in understanding occurred after additional application activities. Differences in gender were observed, with females showing equal or greater understanding compared to males, contradicting reports that males typically outperform females in the physical sciences and supporting the need to reconstruct assessment techniques to better reveal the conceptual understandings of all students.

Teachers teaching misconceptions: a study of factors contributing to high school biology students’ acquisition of biological evolution-related misconceptions

BackgroundResearch has revealed that high school students matriculate to college holding misconceptions related to biological evolution. These misconceptions interfere with students’ abilities to grasp accurate scientific explanations and serve as fundamental barriers to understanding evolution. Because the scientific community regards evolution as a vital part of science education, it is imperative that students’ misconceptions are identified and their sources revealed. The purpose of this study was to identify the types and prevalence of biological evolution-related misconceptions held by high school biology teachers and their students, and to identify those factors that contribute to student acquisition of such misconceptions, with particular emphasis given to the role of the teacher.MethodsThirty-five teachers who taught at least one section of Biology I during the 2010 to 2011 academic year in one of 32 Oklahoma public high schools and their respective 536 students served as this study’s unit of analysis. The Biological Evolution Literacy Survey, which possesses 23 biological evolution misconception statements grouped into five categories, served as the research tool for identifying teachers’ misconceptions prior to student instruction and students’ misconceptions both prior to and following instruction in biological evolution concepts, calculating conception index scores, and collecting demographic data. Multiple statistical analyses were performed to identify statistically significant (p < .05) relationships between variables related to student’s acquisition of biological evolution-related misconceptions.ResultsAnalyses revealed that students typically exit the Biology I classroom more confident in their biological evolution knowledge but holding greater numbers of misconceptions than they initially possessed upon entering the course. Significant relationships between student acquisition of misconceptions and teachers’ bachelor’s degree field, terminal degree, and hours dedicated to evolution instruction were also revealed. In addition, the probabilities that specific biological evolution-related misconceptions were being transmitted from teachers to their students were also identified.ConclusionsThis study reveals some problematic issues concerning the teaching of biological evolution in Oklahoma’s public high school introductory biology course. No doubt, multiple factors contribute in varying degrees to the acquisition and retention of student misconceptions of biological evolution. However, based on this study’s results, there is little doubt that teachers may serve as sources of biological evolution-related misconceptions or, at the very least, propagators of existing misconceptions. It is imperative that we as educators identify sources of student biological evolution-related misconceptions, identify or develop strategies to reduce or eliminate such misconceptions, and implement these strategies at the appropriate junctures in students’ cognitive development.

Is Oklahoma really OK? A regional study of the prevalence of biological evolution-related misconceptions held by introductory biology teachers

BackgroundBiological evolutionary explanations pervade all biological fields and bring them together under one theoretical umbrella. Whereas the scientific community embraces the theory of biological evolution, the general public largely lacks an understanding, with many adhering to misconceptions. Because teachers are functioning components of the general public and most teachers experience the same levels of science education as does the general public, teachers too are likely to hold biological evolution misconceptions. The focus of this study was to identify the types and prevalence of biological evolution misconceptions held by Oklahoma high school introductory biology teachers and to correlate those findings with demographic variables.MethodsSeventy-six teachers who taught at least one section of Biology I during the 2010 to 2011 academic year in one of 71 Oklahoma public high schools served as this study’s unit of analysis. The Biological Evolution Literacy Survey, which possesses 23 biological misconception statements grouped into five categories, served as the research tool for identifying participants’ misconceptions, calculating conception index scores, and collecting demographic data.ResultsAnalysis of survey results revealed participants’ knowledge of biological evolution concepts to be lacking as indicated by a mean 72.9% rate of understanding coupled with a 23.0% misconception rate. Results also indicated significant differences in participants’ mean index scores related to biological evolution knowledge self-rating and hours dedicated to teaching evolution.ConclusionsBiological evolution-related misconceptions are prevalent within Oklahoma’s introductory biology teachers. Implications associated with the study’s results are explained, including that of teachers serving as sources of student misconceptions.

Exploring Native American Students' Perceptions of Scientists.

The purpose of this descriptive study was to explore Native American (NA) students’ perceptions of scientists by using the Draw-A-Scientist Test and to determine if differences in these perceptions exist between grade level, gender, and level of cultural tradition. Data were collected for students in Grades 9–12 within a NA grant off-reservation boarding school. A total of 133 NA students were asked to draw a picture of a scientist at work and to provide a written explanation as to what the scientist was doing. A content analysis of the drawings indicated that the level of stereotype differed between all NA subgroups, but analysis of variance revealed that these differences were not significant between groups except for students who practised native cultural tradition at home compared to students who did not practise native cultural tradition at home (p < 0.05). The results suggest that NA students who practise cultural traditions at home are more able to function fluidly between indigenous knowledge and modern western science than their non-practising counterparts. Overall, these NA students do not see themselves as scientists, which may influence their educational and career science, technology, engineering, and mathematics paths in the future. The educational implication is that once initial perceptions are identified, researchers and teachers can provide meaningful experiences to combat the stereotypes.

The Learning Cycle: A Reintroduction

The learning cycle is an inquiry approach to instruction that continues to demonstrate significant effectiveness in the classroom.1–3 Rooted in Piagets theory of intellectual development, learning cycles provide a structured means for students to construct concepts from direct experiences with science phenomena. Learning cycles have been the subject of numerous articles in science practitioner periodicals as well as the focus of much research in science education journals.4 This paper reintroduces the learning cycle by giving a brief description, followed by an example suitable for a range of physics classrooms.

Assessing Understanding of the Learning Cycle: The ULC.

An 18-item, multiple choice, 2-tiered instrument designed to measure understanding of the learning cycle (ULC) was developed and field-tested from the learning cycle test (LCT) of Odom and Settlage (Journal of Science Teacher Education, 7, 123–142, 1996). All question sets of the LCT were modified to some degree and 5 new sets were added, resulting in the ULC. The ULC measures (a) understandings and misunderstandings of the learning cycle, (b) the learning cycle’s association with Piaget’s (Biology and knowledge theory: An essay on the relations between organic regulations and cognitive processes, 1975) theory of mental functioning, and (c) applications of the learning cycle. The resulting ULC instrument was evaluated for internal consistency with Cronbach’s alpha, yielding a coefficient of .791.

Designing Research-Based Professional Development for Elementary School Science and Mathematics

A partnership including 11 school districts, a university, service agency, and private nonprofit education organization formed a collaborative partnership to improve teaching and learning in elementary school science and mathematics. The partnership designed research-based professional development for 150 teachers of grades 3–5. The professional development resulted in statistically significant increases for those elementary school teachers on math and science competency tests over a two-year period. The professional development was the vehicle for providing teachers with professional development so that they could (a) increase their content background in science and mathematics and (b) apply newly learned inquiry practices in their math and science instruction.

Conceptual Understandings Resulting from Interactive Science Exhibits.

This study is an investigation of relationships among students’ free exploration of interactive science museum exhibits, conceptual understandings, and cognitive developmental levels. Forty-five subjects, ages 5 to 13, were classified as preoperational, concrete operational (empirical-inductive), or formal operational (hypothetical-deductive). Subjects interacted with science exhibits requiring empirical-deductive (EI) or hypothetical-deductive (HD) reasoning to understand the inherent science concepts. Ninety-five percent of the subjects demonstrated complete or partial understanding of the exhibits’ concepts that necessitated EI, or concrete reasoning. In contrast, 94% of the subjects that interacted with exhibits requiring HD, or formal, reasoning demonstrated misconceptions or no understanding of the associated concepts. Students within each developmental level demonstrated significantly greater understanding of the concepts from exhibits requiring EI reasoning than from exhibits requiring HD reasoning.