Development and Evaluation of Innovative Teaching and Learning Models that Prepare, Support, and Sustain K-12 Science Educators
Researchers affiliated with the Nebraska Center for Research on Children, Youth, Families and Schools and representing the Departments of Educational Psychology and Geosciences, received funding through the Learning and Teaching Seed Grant Program at the University of Nebraska-Lincoln to support evaluation of a recently designed field-based course (Geology 107) in comparison with the current Geology 101 lecture/lab course. The purpose of the evaluation was to make data driven decisions for continuing and improving the field-based course.
The U.S. is currently in dire need of well-prepared science students. However, data show that the majority of our students do not demonstrate competence in basic elementary science knowledge and skills. In addition, interest in becoming scientists is declining. Science courses for education majors are typically taught as lecture classes with static facts. Novel approaches to bridging the gap between field-based science and classroom-based science instruction are needed to ensure that our future educators understand the practice of science and are able to implement scientific practice in their classrooms. The newly developed geoscience course was first conducted in Summer 2004 at UNL and repeated in Summer 2005 in an attempt to bridge the gap between classroom instruction and field-based learning (i.e., Geology 107).
The purpose of this study was to determine the effects of a field-based, inquiry-focused geoscience course designed to provide preservice teachers with opportunities for active, hands-on scientific investigation and for gaining skills in inquiry pedagogy. Impact on student learning, attitudes, and teaching/learning strategies were measured through (a) dependent t-tests comparing pre- and post- measures for students enrolled in the new course (n = 12) and (b) analysis of covariance comparisons between field course students and education students in the traditional, classroom-based course (n = 12). Results showed that students in the field course scored significantly higher than students in the traditional course on measures of inquiry, confidence for teaching science courses, knowledge building, self-directed learning, and cooperative learning. There was no significant difference between the two instructional groups on content knowledge, indicating that students in the two courses gained an equivalent amount of knowledge. Additionally, although there was no difference in students' use of low level questions, the field class scored significantly higher in high level questioning.
For additional information on this investigation, please contact:
Project Key Investigators: Gina M. Kunz (PI), Deborah Carlson (PI), Gwen Nugent, Richard Levy, David Harwood
Research Assistants: Jody Lieske, Stephanie Sic
