Teachers Doing Science: An Authentic Geology Research Experience for Teachers

Journal of Geoscience Education, Mar 2006 by Hemler, Deb, Repine, Tom

ABSTRACT

Fairmont State University (FSU) and the West Virginia Geological and Economic Survey (WVGES) provided a small pilot group of West Virginia science teachers with a professional development session designed to mimic experiences obtained by geology majors during a typical summer field camp. Called GEOTEACH, the program served as a research capstone event complimenting the participants' multi-year association with the RockCamp professional development program. GEOTEACH was funded through a Improving Teacher Quality Grant administered by the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission. Over the course of three weeks, eight GEOTEACH participants learned field measurement and field data collection techniques which they then applied to the construction of a surficial geologic map. The program exposed participants to authentic scientific processes by emphasizing the authentic scientific application of content knowledge. As a secondary product, it also enhanced their appreciation of the true nature of science in general and geology in particular. After the session, a new appreciation of the effort involved in making a geologic map emerged as tacit knowledge ready to be transferred to their students.

The program was assessed using pre/post instruments, group interviews, journals, artifacts (including geologic maps, field books, and described sections), performance assessments, and constructed response items. Evaluation of the accumulated data revealed an increase in participants demonstrated use of science content knowledge, an enhanced awareness and understanding of the processes and nature of geologic mapping, positive dispositions toward geologic research, and a high satisfaction rating for the program. These findings support the efficacy of the experience and document future programmatic enhancements.

INTRODUCTION

Experiential learning, authentic science, and "teacher as researcher" have been used to characterize K-12 educators engaged in the scientific process. The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) (1989), the National Science Teachers Association (NSTA) (Siebert and Mclntosh, 2001), the National Research Council (NRC) (1996), and more recently the American Geological Institute (AGI) (Barstow et al., 2002), have supported and promoted the use of inquiry in the classroom. These endorsements encompass student modeling of "real" science processes or "science learned as science is done." Consequently, having participated in science activities, students should develop "abilities necessary to do [science and develop] an understanding about scientific inquiry." Content Standard A of the National Science Education Standards (1996) recommends students not only do science but formulate an understanding of science and the nature of science. The nature of science entails "the values and assumptions inherent to science, scientific knowledge, and/ or development of scientific knowledge" (Lederman, 1992). Contrary to this highly promoted criterion, we have found many of the teachers interested in our professional development experiences are unable to document any prior efforts targeting their appreciation of the nature of the geologic scientific enterprise. Because they have not had a "down-to-earth" opportunity to modify their beliefs through experiences, their marginal understanding of the nature of science clouds their ability to identify, design, conduct, and engage in the type of inquiry-based geologic research that might significantly enhance their classroom discussions and lessons.

Lederman (1992) summarized teachers' experiences with the nature of science by stating:

(1) science teachers do not possess adequate conceptions of the nature of science, irrespective of the instrument used to assess understandings; (2) techniques to improve teachers' conceptions [of the nature of science] have met with some success when they have included either historical aspects of scientific knowledge or direct attention to the nature of science; (3) academic background variables are not significant related to teachers' conceptions of the nature of science.

Lederman, as well as others, recognized that the role of the teacher in the conveyance of the nature of science could not be ignored. The nature of science cannot be learned through text-based instruction. More importantly, the issues raised by Lederman began to be addressed in teacher education programs. By the mid 1990's, teacher enhancement programs responded to the need for improving science teaching (Jacob, et. al., 1991 and Saunders, et. al., 1994), the need for incorporating authentic assessments (Collins, 1994; Davis, 1990; Herr, et. al., 1995), and the need for increased reflective assessment (Rosenthal 1991; Spiegel, et. al., 1995; Davis 1990). As a result of these initiatives, teacher education programs have made advances in documenting science inquiry and the nature of science. However, deficiencies remain. The few science courses that elementary science or general science education candidates experience persist as survey or introductory courses focused on pure content transfer using a traditional lecture/lab format. Few would argue that the process of science is developed in the advanced course work of a major. However, elementary teachers rarely experience science beyond the introductory survey courses. In many areas, the unrecognized status of the geosciences means this situation also affects the training received by pre-service secondary science education majors. Within the last two decades, a limited number of teacher institutes have begun to speak to this deficiency by accentuating the understanding of scientific inquiry and the nature of science (Carpenter, et. al., 1993; Haakonsen, et. al., 1993; Hines and Mussington, 1996; Peterson, et. al., 1996; Spiegel, et. al., 1995). From such work has emerged the collaborative and apprentice (or facilitated) research professional development approach.