sce 5740 final

Slide 1: 

Writing in the Science Classroom: An Action Research Project Looking at the effects of writing inclusion on student learning SCE 5740: Dr. Nancy Davis Elizabeth Button April 28, 2010

Slide 2: 

Background Information Leeanne Gleim completed her masters research in my classroom. Her inclusion of writing in the student activities inspired this action research project.

Slide 3: 

Question Does integrating writing into the science lesson increase student performance on an assessment?

Slide 4: 

Independent Variable The presence of a writing activity in the science lesson

Slide 5: 

Dependent Variable Student achievement measured by post assessment

Slide 6: 

Controls Teacher, environment, notes given to students, activities used to teach concepts, student groups

Slide 7: 

Overview Two classes were taught natural selection concepts using the same teachers, notes, and activities. Both classes were composed of 9th and 10th grade students. Both classes are honors, meaning that they students scored a 4 or higher on FCAT reading.

Slide 8: 

Overview One class had writing requirements incorporated in the lessons and assessments. The other class had no writing questions incorporated.

Slide 9: 

Overview Both classes were given the same pretest and posttest to evaluate student learning.

Slide 10: 

Literature Review Dlugokienski, A. and Sampson, V. (2008). Learning to write and writing to learn in science: Refutational texts and analytical rubrics. The Science Scope, 32(3), 14-19.

Slide 11: 

Literature Review McDermott, M. (2010). More than Writing to Learn. Science Teacher, 77(1), 32 – 36.

Slide 12: 

Literature Review Fingon, J. andFingon S. (2008). Using Science Journals to Encourage All Students to Write. The Science Scope, 32(3), 41 – 45.

Slide 13: 

Null Hypothesis The inclusion of writing in the science classroom will result in no difference on the post assessment.

Slide 14: 

Directional Research Hypothesis Students who write as a part of the science curriculum will show improvement in their learning gains as measured by the post assessment versus students who did not use writing.

Slide 15: 

Pre / Post Test The Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection was used as the pretest and posttest for both the writing group and the class that did not write.

Slide 16: 

Example Writing Activity Texas Blind Salamander The Texas Blind Salamander is a sightless, cave-dwelling salamander that reaches a mature length of about 13 centimeters (5 inches). It is a slender, frail-legged amphibian that is white or pinkish in color with translucent skin. The head and snout are flattened.  These salamanders spend their entire life in complete darkness. On a separate sheet of paper, provide an explanation for the origin of this species of salamander. If you’re having trouble…. Think about this! 1. How are the characteristics of this salamander so different from salamanders whose habitat (where they live) is drastically different than the dark caves of the blind salamander? 2. How did these adaptations or differing characteristics come about (originate)?

Slide 17: 

Example Writing Activity In the Sporks & Beans lab, how did each available prey (marshmallows and Skittles) influence which organisms were fittest in the population? Using the terms mutation, evolution, and natural selection to describe how the spork population changed.

Slide 18: 

Example Writing Rubric Section 1: Is it ‘Fitter’? (3 points total) Did the author choose the correct definition of ‘fitness’ in evolutionary terms, being more apt to reproduce (Lance)? 1 pt    Did the author include a well-articulated explanation about how fitness (as far as natural selection is concerned) is the ability to survive and reproduce? 1 pt    Did the author identify how the sporks (and possibly forks) were more ‘fit’ for the marshmallow prey than the spoon organisms?    Did the author identify how the spoons and sporks were more ‘fit’ for the Skittle prey than the fork  organisms?    Explain why you rated any of the criteria “No” in the space below… feel free to include constructive advice and suggestions    Section 3: Writing Conventions (1 point total) Did the author use key terms correctly?   Was the author’s explanation coherent and free from contradiction?   Clarity: Did the author convey their thoughts and understanding about the topic clearly and completely?   Conventions: Did the author use appropriate grammar, spelling, punctuation, paragraphing and capitalization?   Any additional feedback or advice you would give the author?   Total _______/ 3 Final Decision:               _____________ Accept                             _______________ Revise and Resubmit

Slide 19: 

Methodology Students were given the Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection as a pretest. Students were then given notes and led through a variety of activities to teach natural selection concepts.

Slide 20: 

Methodology Students not in the writing group had follow up questions to aid students in group discussion. Students in the writing group wrote the answers to the activity follow up questions after group discussion.

Slide 21: 

Methodology Students were given the Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection as a post test.

Slide 22: 

Data Considerations I was very pregnant during the implementation of this action research project. While I completed it prior to my maternity leave, I know the pregnancy affected my energy level and enthusiasm.

Slide 23: 

Pre Test Mean Non-writing Group: 55.64 Writing Group: 64.5925

Slide 24: 

Post Test Mean Non-writing Group: 78.2 Writing Group: 86.185

Slide 25: 

Statistical Significance Using a t value of difference test, at a 95 % confidence the statistical difference between the two means in learning gains was 0.969. This is statistically significant.

Slide 26: 

Conclusion Writing as a part of the science curriculum increased learning gains as measured by a post test, but more importantly, it gave me, the teacher, a very accurate view of my students’ misconceptions and points of confusion.

Slide 27: 

Revisit Null Hypothesis The null hypothesis was INVALID. The inclusion of writing in the science classroom did result in student learning gains as measured by the post test.

Slide 28: 

Revisit Directional Research Hypothesis The directional research hypothesis was VALID. Students who write as a part of the science curriculum will show improvement in their learning gains as measured by the post test versus students who did not use writing.

Slide 29: 

Qualitative Analysis Discussions with teachers during and following the incorporation included comments about: the ease of discovering student misconceptions student dislike of writing Increased student understanding as a result of incorporating writing

Slide 30: 

Reflection I would like to complete more trials with different groups of students and differ concepts.

Slide 31: 

References Anderson, D.L., Fisher, Fisher K. M., and Norman, G. J. (2002).  Development and Evaluation of the Conceptual Inventory of Natural Selection.  Journal of Research in Science Teaching, vol. 39 no. 10.  Pp. 952-978.    D’avanzo, C. (2008).  Biology Concept Inventories: 0verview, Status, and Next Steps. BioScience, vol. 58 no. 11.  Pp. 1079 – 1085. Eisner, E. W. (1998). Enlightened eye qualitative inquiry and the enhancement of educational practice. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Merrill.