science FEAT - FSU Chemistry - Florida State University

Science For Early Adolescence Teachers (Science FEAT): A Program for Research and Learning Samuel A. Spiegel Florida State University

Angelo Collins VanderbiIt University

Penny J. Gilmer Florida State University

This article is based on a paper which received the "Innovations in Teaching Science Teachers" award at the 1995 meeting of the Association f o r the Education o f Teachers in Science. The award is made possible by Delta Education. The inspiration and challenges I experienced in the Science FEATprogram have changedme totally in the classroom. I am taking risks this year; I am challenging the students and receiving verypositive results form students and parents. I have given a workshop on cooperative learning and I have gotten lots o f positive resultsfrom our peers. I can ~zardly wait until next summer. Fhe Science F E A T program has given me :onfidence and encouragement to move awayfrom traditional methods of teaching and venture out to ~ew strategies. I have come to know it's all right to !et my students take more responsibility for their 'earning. The teaching o f simple machines as part )f a unit on inventions came alive in my classroom •"orthefirst timewhen the class constructeda giant irst class lever and gave their thoughts on what lifferent combinations of force and distance vould have. What is Science FEAT? :cience FEAT (Science For Early Adolescence :hers) was a 3-year teacher enhancement program for lie grades teachers of science based at the Florida University and supported by the National Science ldation. Sixty-four middle grades teachers from h Florida and South Georgia completed the program. he goal of Science FEAT was to improve local

middle school science education, and the program concentrated on solutions to four common problems: 1. Science teaching in the middle schools of North Florida and South Georgia is mainly grounded in textbooks which present science as facts and terms to be memorized and as a rhetoric of conclusions. 2. Middle school science instruction does not provide a significant portion of African-American, Hispanic, and female students with opportunities to enjoy and succeed in science. 3. Middle school teachers in many school districts are isolated from one another and have limited resources available to assist them in improving science teaching. 4. Many middle school science teachers do not have the necessary knowledge and skills to implement a science program that is both consistent with the learning needs and interests of their students and represents science as an engaging, contemporary, and social activity. While the program provided experiences to enable middle grades science teachers to address these problems, it also was designed so that those who completed Science FEAT were eligible to eam a master's degree in science education. For three consecutive summers (1993-1995), the teachers engaged in intensive 5-week academic sessions at Florida State University. These sessions included course work, seminars, research in both science and education, and experiences in the use of instructional technology. There were also required activities during the academic year. These activities were designed to enable teachers to understand the nature of science; design and

his material is based upon work supported in part by a grant from the National Science Foundation (Grant No. 9253170). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this article are those of uthors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

aal of Science Teacher Education • Fall 1995 ne 6, Number 4, Pages 165-174 right © The Association for the Education of Teachers in Science

Correspondence regarding this article should be sent to: Samuel A. Spiegel, 209 MCH-3032, Florida State University, Tallahassee, Florida 32306-3032

165

The purpose of this article is to describe the Science implement student-centered science curricula, materials, and instruction in local-contexts; and enhance the teachers' FEAT program and the insights it provides. The events theoretical and practical knowledge of the teaching and relating to the teacher-participants are described first in leaming of science. The program design matched m any of chronological order and then followed by a brief the r e c o m m e n d a t i o n s for effective professional description of the activities with the administrators. The development, such as: (a) continuing over a sufficient article ends with a brief summary of what we learned. period of time for teachers to have multiple opportunities to observe and share new ideas, (b) including adequate Getting Started intensity and practice, (c) enlisting the support of In late Fall 1992, when we knew that Science FEAT administrators, (d) encouraging the teachers to support each other, and (e) providing the teachers with time to was going to be funded, we contacted the Departments of Education forFlorida and Georgia and created a database reflect (Loucks-Horsley & Roody, 1990). Science FEAT also included activities for school of all science teachers in grades 5-9, science supervisors, administrators and for university instructors. An and principals in the Panhandle and Crown regions of administrator from each participating school was required Florida and in the contiguous counties in Georgia. to attend a 1-day meeting each year. These meetings (Information was sent to contiguous counties in Alabama provided guidance for the administrators to assist the but only one application was received. That teacher was teachers in implementing new approaches to teaching not accepted because she was unable to make a science. University instructors participated in planning commitment for the entire three years of the program.) In January, 1993, a brochure announcing the program sessions during the academic years. During the summers, the instructors participated in weekly faculty meetings to was sent to over 1,000 persons listed in the database who discuss issues related to teaching and learning. The were involved in science education at the middle school instructors reported that these activities helped them level, as well as to all school secretaries in the target examine their teaching, especially the instructors from the region. In addition, the program was announced through press releases, through an interview segment on the local College of Arts and Sciences. Finally, although the primary efforts of the Science National Public Radio station, and on the Florida FEAT staff concentrated on the education of teachers, Informati on Reso u rce Network, an elec troni c mail system being researchers at heart, they documented every event for teachers in Florida. From over 300 inquiries, we and activity by collecting copies of all written materials, as received 122 complete applications consisting of well as participant work samples, videotapes, audiotapes, transcripts of undergraduate andgraduate work, apersonal and written questionnaire. This documentation is the essay, some sample of teaching, and letters of source of the many quotations in this article that describe recommendation. Through a rigorous, 3-round selection the events of Science FEAT and give some indication of process based on criteria we had written with the help of our advisory board, 72 participants were .,elected. Over their effect. This article is written in the first person to reflect the the course of the program, six participants withdrew for personal nature of the program. The first person is also personal reasons before the beginning of the second used to remind the reader that this is a descriptive article summer, and two additional persons withdrew forpersonal based on our, the authors', understandings and meanings reasons prior to the start of the third summer. The of the program. Although we do include some of the participants came from elementary, K-8, K-12, middle, impressions from the participants, this article is ultimately junior high, and senior high schools in rural and urban based on our interpretation of the program. The limited communities in the target region. In Florida, Science literature citations is not representative ofalackofinfluence FEAT participants came from 58% of the districts in the on the design of the program or our understanding as they Panhandle and Crown regions. Once the participants were selected, we arranged site are presented in this article. There are many good articles and books on professional development, reform in science visits to their schools before the start of the first summer education, action research, and the other areas touched on session. The site visits were designed to get a feel for the in this article, such as Brown and Campione (in press), context of each teacher, observe the teacher in action, and Cochran-Smith and Lytle (1990), Grossman (1990), begin to work with each teacher and administrator to identify their concems and local curricular needs. These Noffke (1992), and Shulman (1987). i

166

Journal of Science Teacher Education • Fall 1995

visits were also important in establishing a relationship in which teachers not only travel to the university, but the university travels to the schools. Additionally, some of the Arts and Sciences faculty joined us on our site visits which helped to orient them to the practices and context of middle school classrooms. S u m m e r Session 1993 One of the most challenging aspects of the first summer session concerned the transition o f the teachers' perceptions ofthemselves and the program. Most of the teachers came to Science FEAT with a workshop metaphor. They believed they would attend sessions where they could pick and choose activities or approaches that appealed to them and then bring those back to their schools. The teachers' visions of their role in the program was passive, even though we had made a strong effort prior to the summer to orient them into a degree-seeking program in which they would be responsible for making decisions about what and how to teach as they developed their theoretical framework for these decisions. Bell and Gilbert (1994) found similar trends in other programs. Concurrently, many of them were not in the habit of thinking of themselves as having the power or ability to make fundamental decisions about themselves, their students, or what happens in theirclassrooms. Early in the summer, the most common comment from the teachers was something like, "Just tell me exactly what you want me to do, and I'I1 do it." In a survey given at the end of the summer, many teachers indicated that the most important thing they had leamed was that they hold answers to improved teaching in their classroom. As one teacher stated: I hold many of the answers 1 came here seeking. Science FEAT didn't give me a recipe for "good science teaching." The program challenged me to examine my beliefs, my experiences, my theoreticalfoundation. This examinationprovided information on which I can now base curricular and pedagogical decisions. Science FEAT was empowering. The first summer session consisted of four academic courses (described below), each taught by aprofessor and one or more teaching assistants; a technology inservice component; and seminar/social events. Teachers were assigned to groups. These groups were selected by the

Journal of Science Teacher Education • Fail 1995

geographical location of their schools. The reason for the grouping was 2-fold. First, we were trying to establish a collegial community and network of support among the teachers. An important feature of the network was that it could be easily maintained once they returned to their classrooms. Secondly, as teachers, we had to deal with the issue of 72 students in graduate-level classes conducted in a 5-week period. Establishing groups was one way to manage both our work load and the work load of the participants. The groups remained the same for all classes to help facilitate the group interactions. Although many teachers were using group work in their own classes, most had not been a member of a group in a formal learning experience before. Many of the teachers found this to be quite a challenge. Data Collection and Interpretation. This course was designed on the assumption that all of science includes making observations, collecting, and interpreting data. The teachers were expected to learn basic statistical concepts and tools using materials useful to middle school science. Constructing a living line graph of opinions about statistics.on the first day of class was an indicator of thingstocome. After the course, the statistician-instructor said, "I learned more about teaching the middle school teachers than I have learned about teaching in many years. It was a wonderful experience with many high-highs and some low-lows." Science, Technology, and Society. This course examined the organization of the scientific enterprise, the realities of scientific life compared with the portrayals of science in the media, how science is funded, peer review as quality control in science, science's intellectual and economic significance, dilemmas posed by progress in science and technology, and societal conditions under which science flourishes. The scientist-instructor said, "We modeled how to teach by doing it. Many teachers said that they had such rich conversations as a result of working in groups that it enhanced their own leaming and the quality of their written products." Curriculum Theory. This course was designed to provide teachers with an opportunity to examine issues associated with curriculum design, implementation, and evaluation in science classrooms through an examination o f philosophical and psychological principles of curriculum design. The focus was on the teacher's role as curriculum planner. The instructor from the science

167

education faculty said, "Initially, I was very concerned about conducting the type of discussion class that I believe is necessary for teachers to reflect on their own beliefs and practices with such a large group . . . . However, I was willing to try . . . . Working with this group of teachers this summer gave me a sense of optimism about the teaching profession as a whole. The Science FEAT teachers reflected a profession of intelligent, dedicated, and committed individuals who are willing to take risks and work long hours to improve student leaming." Teaching and Learning. This course was extended over the three summers to provide continuity across the program. The focus of the first summer was on answering four questions: 1. What did you learn in the other courses today? 2. How does what you learned change your views of science or science education? 3. How does your perception alter your view of what students should learn in your class? 4. What is your strategy to implement these new perceptions of science teaching and learning in your classes next year?. Each Friday, each group shared with the entire assembly something they had leamed that week. The instructor said, "The teachers' willingness to share their struggles to become professionals with theoretical frameworks guiding their decisions was overwhelmingly touching." Seminar Series. In the technology seminars, each teacher received an electronic account and leamed to use e-mail, which was used for communication in several courses as well as during the academic year. Each teacher was required to use a word processor and handed in all written assignments on disk as well as on paper. In other seminars, there were presentations on Science Vision, Full Option Science System (FOSS), Science forKids, StarLAB, and satellite imaging for weather tracking.

Science Days During the 1993-1994 academic year, each teacher was responsible for planning, implementing, documenting, and evaluating a Science Day. Science Day is a phrase we used to identify an event designed to promote science throughout the school community. The diversity and magnitude of the Science Days were inspiring. For some teachers, the event focused on a specific grade level; for others, the whole school was involved. Several teachers

168

organized their Science Day as a county-wide event. A number of teachers involved school board members, former students, local scientists, university personnel, parents, and students from the elementary feeder schools. Our estimates indicate that more than 16,000 students participated in these events. Science Day themes included, for example, an "Evening with the Stars," an evening when parents, teachers, and current and former students were able to participate in various astronomy activities and talk with an astronomer. In another Science Day, the entire school population circulated through a series of science activity centers and guest speaker presentations. Planning for one school-wide event entailed four teacher workshops led by the Science FEAT teacher. Although Science FEAT faculty and staff were unable to attend all the Science Days, they did visit and participate in many of them. Feedback on these Science Days has been encouraging. Some reactions from those who attended Science Days include: I lookforward to having many more Science Days like the one we had this year. What a great benefit for our students. (Administrator) I thought the Science Olympiad was a wonderful, fun, learning experience for all ajes, including myself. We are looking forward to participating next year. (Parent) l think Science Day was a good idea. lt opened up a lot of careers that I never knew dealt with science. I think we should have it next year. (Student) Analysis of the student surveys shows that we achieved our purpose of motivating interest in science and broadening student awareness of science in everyday life and careers in science. This is exemplified by the following statement added to one student's survey form, "Today I changed my mind about science, l think thatwhen I grow up I might want to be a chemist." As it turns out, this statement was made by an AfricanAmerican f e m a l e student--how gratifying. (Science FEAT teacher) Even though the Science Days were not required beyond the 1993-1994 school year, many of the teachers


and schools continued the events. At one school from which a Science FEAT teacher had transferred, the other teachers at the school found the Science Day so rewarding that they planned another Science Day without the direct influence of the Science FEAT program. S u m m e r Session 1994 There was a different feeling at the start of the second summer session than there had been at the start of the first summer. There was a feeling of empowerment and confidence. Being among the Science FEAT teachers, you could feel it. The change in the teachers since the start of the program was apparent. Teachers who had been quiet and unsure were now displaying high levels of selfconfidence and heightened analytical awareness. Rather than ask what we expected of them, they questioned the rationale behind the various activities or articulated possible reasons from both theoretical and practical frameworks. They began to tell us what we should do to help them. During the orientation, when we presented the plans for the coming summer which consisted of four academic courses including a placement in a science research site as well as seminar/social events, there was excitement in the air. The teachers were ready for a different type of summer with moreindividualized work. Many had never done scientific research, so they were eagerbut somewhat apprehensive of what to expect when they entered the culture of the research community. Science Research Placements. During the 19931994 academic year, we recruited science research placements for each of the participants. More and more frequently, teachers serve as the representatives of the scientific community in schools, and classrooms are often the first place where students encounter science; however, many middle school science teachers have never engaged in the practice of science nor fully understand what scientists do. This dichotomy accentuated the research placement as a critical event in helping science teachers understand the nature of science. Simultaneously, we were concerned about the development of the research placement opportunities after hearing and reading horror stories of unsuccessful prior attempts (Bazler, 1991). Acknowledging that no scientist begins and completes seeking the answer to a problem in five weeks, we still hoped that, by being at a research site, the teachers would engage in the practice of science and develop a greater


understanding of the culture and process of science. The experience in the laboratory or field would allow the teachers to recognize the differences between the general public/media's perceptions of science and the actual process. The recruitment of placements was initiated by contacting local university, state, and business research facilities and scientists. All facilities and individuals that expressed an interest in being involved were visited by the Program Director to clarify issues such as goals, requirements, evaluation, and time schedule; review the facility's resources; and negotiate an outline of responsibilities for the participants during the placement. We were able to establish placements with 15 research facilities, providing 25 research opportunities and supporting a possible 81 placements. Once the research placements were determined, the teachers were sent a description of them and their requirements and were asked to rank six choices based on their interests and skills. Based on the choices, the Science FEAT staff finalized decisions about the placements. Although individuals or groups of teachers were involved with different projects in many different science disciplines, there were some similarities in the placements. The teachers spent 75-100 hours during the five weeks engaged in some aspect of research at a level beyond that of a technician. Also, each group was required to produce a publishable quality abstract and present a poster of their research at the Research Day held at the end of the summer. Some of the things the teachers did during the summer included synthesizing ana analyzing transition metal complexes by electrochemical and spectroscopic methods, preparing metaUographic samples, completing short-term independent research on marine fauna, surveying rare plants in a forest area, developing a communication network on archeology, collecting data on the Tallahassee Area Sea Breeze Experiment (TASBEX), writing a paper and making recommendations to the park district about the preservation o fan historic site based on the analysis of flora and fauna collected from anthropology excavation, and tracking red-cockaded woodpeckers. One participant wrote: My meteorology placement provided me with firsthand experiences with a scientific researcher in action. The fact that we were able to disprove a proven theory was significant to me. Previously, my learning always had dealt with proving a given rather than developing a new theory. In thefuture,

169

I hope to apply this to my classroom by allowing the students to learn.to question rather than to automatically accept something as truth. In addition to the science research for this course, the participants were required to meet for 1.5 hours each week in a group to discuss what they were doing, what they were leaming, and how this experience was affecting their understanding of science and science teaching. The discussion groups were led by either a professor from the Chemistry Department or from the Science Education Program. Most meetings had different members each time, allowing the teachers to share their experiences and to leam from one another. The Research Day was held on July 21, 1994, at one of the local middle school libraries. This event served as a platform for teachers to professionally present the results of their research experiences to an audience of teachers, scientists,university faculty, and graduate students. Some of the abstract and poster titles were Synthesis and Characteristics of Vanadyl Complexes Containing Various Polydentate Ligands, Prey Size Difference in Blue Crab (Callinectus sapidus) and Crown Conch (Melongena corona), A Study of Age and Growth of Flathead Catfish in the Apalachicola River, Florida, and Taking a Turn With the Terns. After the poster session, one of the researchers wrote: Part of that [research] experience is having to present and defend your work. The poster session gave that important component to the projects. Preparing a poster or talk requires the student "to put it all together," and that is what I found happening to the teachers in my group. The teachers worked very hard on their posters. I set strict guidelines (1 could have taken any of these posters to a regional American Chemical Society meeting), and everyone worked hard to meet them. Since each poster had multiple authors, the teachers had to share and explain results with each other. Research in Science Education. The objective of this course was to introduce the leachers to science education research. They analyzed videotapes of their ownteaching, did literature reviews, and prepared a proposal for a classroom-based research project that they would conduct during the following Fall term. One of the teachers wrote about the course and her own Ieaming:

From viewing the videotape of a science lesson in my classroom, I realized that my teaching style did not allow for maximum student learning. I was leading the learning activities rather than allowing the students to self-discover the concepts. My research project next fall will give me the opportunity to implement a method of teaching which I feel is more conducive to student learning. Instructional Technoirgy. Because the teachers were working different hours at their research sites and because they have different equipment available at school and individual interests and skills in instructional technology, this was designed as a performance-based course. Each teacher set a personal learning goal in instructional technology which was discussed with one of the two instructors, worked toward that goal with regular consultation with the instructors, and presented evidence of the progress toward or achievement of the goal at the end of the tenn. The goals can be grouped around a few topics--telecommunications, HyperCard and HyperStudio, desktop publishing, optical media, and video production. Some of the products from the technology course appeared during the scienc ~ research poster session. One participant wrote: I have learned thatl should let my students select more o f their own goals . . . . When a student selects his or her own goal, they (sic) have genuine internal motivation to pursue that goal. It is something they want to do for their own personal reasons. If the drive is there, anything will be tackled.., even HyperStudio . . . . Now I feel that I, too, have something to offer my colleagues when I return in the fall. But the most important thing is that I have something that will be beneficial to my students. Teaching and Learning. The purpose of this course the second year was for each teacher to develop and articulate a personal learning theory. To stimulate discussions, teachers read about leaming theory, drafted their own, did a concept map of their personal learning theory, wrote another draft, critiqued another person's draft, and submitted a final paper. One teacher wrote: When you first described the assignment to us (to critique another's learning theory), I was very

1

170


apprehensive. I did not feel comfortable having another teacher read my theory nor did I feel comfortable reada'ng theirs. I did not think I could possibly have anything of value to comment on their paper. Yet when I was handed the paper and began to read it, I immediately felt more secure. I discovered that some of our thoughts were similar. l feel I was able to give some good suggestions to help clarify their theory and by reading theirs it helped clarify my own theory.

again in early Spring and in late Spring, drafts of the final research paper were submitted by the teachers to the staff for review. A last draft of the papers was due on the first day of the summer session. Maintaining a lively research community at a distance was a challenge for everyone. For example, the 1-800 phone number for teachers to call with research questions (and to receive answers) was well-used. There were several notable trends in the teachers responses to the action research. As has been noted by other researchers (Llorens, 1994), the 65 teachers were Classroom Research (Action Research) very apprehensive about beginning the action research. They were uncomfortable with the conception o fresearch In the Fall of 1994, each Science FEAT teacher that they held. Moving beyond this required many small conducted graduate-level science education research in steps. One of the most influential experiences the teachers his or her own classroom. Possibly Richardson (1994) reported in planning their research was the self-analysis best captured the spirit of this form of research when she of the videotapes of their classrooms. Many of the said that practical inquiry, a term for one variation of teachers were surprised by what they observed. This action research, "is conducted by practitioners to help surprise led them to question some aspect of their practice them understand their contexts, practices and, in the case which became the thrust of their research plan. Itprovided of teachers, their students. The outcome of the inquiry aconcreteplatform forthemto walkoutonto. Italsomade may be a change in practice or it may be an enhanced the research both personal and practical. understanding" (p. 7). Before beginning research, a As the teachers began their research, many felt as if researcher spends much time in preparation. This includes they were doing well until they had to try and articulate developing a foundation in the literature of the topic or what they were finding. Most were able to fol ow data topics of interest, identifying and articulating a theoretical generation plans once they were developed; however, framework, formulating an appropriate research question, they had difficulty in the analysis and interpretation of the devising a method to get data to answer that question, and data. They had to learn to think criticaily and systematically thinking extensively about the possible applicability of about their teaching practices. Additionally, they had to the research. be able to share this with others. Throughout the research and articulation phase, growth The Science FEAT teachers were asked to do all of these things in a research plan in less than five weeks in the teachers was apparent. Some of the growth was in during the summercourse in Science Education Research. obvious stages. For example, we found that it required at Despite this tall order, they developed research plans that least four drafts with feedback to get the teachers papers were well-grounded, insightful, appropriate, and to an acceptable level. In a few instances, the teachers applicable to their practice. Research plans were approved were not able to complete drafts on schedule so they were by the Science FEAT staff, and each teacher was assigned behind in the number of drafts. Given additional time, it a contact person. Using broad descriptor, the categories still required about fourdrafts. Ateach draft, the teachers of research were instructional techniques, questioning/ were given feedback by a graduate student or university communication, using instructional technology, faculty member and from a naive reader that the teacher cooperative learning, assessment, critical thinking, issues selected from their local community. This naive reader in exceptional education, student reflection, issues with may have been a fellow teacher, a spouse, an administrator, students from minority groups, student prior knowledge, or whomever. The graduate students and naive readers all reported impact on them. For example, one graduate and teacher beliefs. The teachers were encouraged to form research groups students noted a striking improvement in his writing which would meet on a regular basis and were required to which he attributed to critically reading the teachers' have regular conversations with their contact person. papers. When invited, members of the Science FEAT staff The final drafts of their papers were submitted during participated in research group meetings. In late Fall and the final summer session. We were generally impressed


171

with the quality of the research papers. The papers were well-written and insightful. We encouraged several of the teachers to submit their papers for possible publication in various journals. Additionally, in conjunction with the SouthEastern Regional Vision for Education (SERVE), we have published a monograph of nine of the teachers' papers. The monograph includes an introductory chapter introducing the papers and a concluding chapter, entitled "So You Want To Do Action Research," which provides a historical perspective of action research and provides insight on beginning action research. The monograph is available through SERVE. Summer Session 1995 The third summer had a completely different feeling than the other two summers. The teachers were familiar with what was expected and where things were located; however, they were apprehensive about the colloquium presentations where they would present their research and about the end of the program. We began to place more responsibility with the teachers in terms of planning events and program products, such as the newsletter, in an attempt to develop established links that could continue beyond the end of the funding period. For example, some of the teachers organized a means to rotate responsibility for generating the newsletter beyond the funding period. They were also successful at securing funding from the Florida Department of Education to support the printing and mailing of the newsletter. This enhanced empowerment was both invigorating and scary to the teachers. A few teachers reacted angrily, while others recognized the shift and assisted in the transition. As one teacher described, "It's like we are entering the 'end-of-the-year' phase. It is like when you start to pull away from the kids as the end of the year approaches to ease the separation anxiety." PhilosophyofScience. During the final summerofthe program, teachers enrolled in a course in the history and philosophy of science. Grounded in their own experiences, they studied what others have said about the nature of science, how the conception of science has changed over time, and the principles that have directed others to formulate definitions of science. The first half of the course was spent on major methodological issues in the philosophy of science illustrated by case studies of the work of Lavoisier in chemistry, Pasteur in biology, and Pauli in physics and was anchored by Gale's analysis of these in his Theory of Science (1979). The second half of

172

the course was devoted to reports by the teachers on the application of such materials to the teaching of science. At the beginning of the course, the teachers were very anxious. Most of them had not had previous work in philosophy and did not know what to expect. By the end of the course, most of the teachers were reporting that this was one of the most influential components of the program. Teaching and Learning. The course in Teaching and Learning focused on assessment this summer. Teachers brought samples of student assessments from the prior year to analyze, and they engaged in the full process of designing and developing an assessment procedure, administering the assessment, designing benchmarks and rubrics, and doing scoring with mediation. Special Topics. This course allowed a variety of presentations. One set of presentations centered on issues in middle school education including characteristit~3 of students at this age and the middle school model. Another set was on careers in science by a member of the National Academy of Science and by some scientists who are themselves of underrepresented populations. Another set of presentation was future directions in middle school science education using state and national science education standards. Colloquium. During colloquium, each teacher gave a formal presentation on his or her classroom research including time forquestions and answers. As mentioned earlier, many of the teachers were apprehensive of doing theirpresentation. The colloquium format was designed to mimic a professional meeting or conference. One of the Science FEAT staff members served as a presider. Each presenter had 15 minutes to present his or her research, three presenters per day. Following the presentations, there was a question and answer session. We had presented a model colloquium, including the question and answer stage, during the orientation. The teachers expressed concern about the question and answer session. Many did not feel confident in their ability to answer or ask questions; however, as one teacher stated, "This is my research, I did it, I planned it. I learned from it. Of course I can talk about it." As colloquium progressed, we were impressed with the quality of presentations and questions. By the third week, we became concemed that the level would diminish as the


summer session drew to a close, but the quality went up, not down. It was an impressive event. Exit Interviews. On the last two days of the summer session, we conducted 45-minute exit interviews with each teacher. The interviews were conducted by five teams of two, one serving as the interviewer and the other serving as an observer. The interviews followed scripted questions to elicit the teachers perception of the impact the program had on their teaching. Each interview was audiotaped, and we are in the process of transcribing the tapes and analyzing the data. General impressions from the interviews were that the program far exceeded our expectations. Many of the teachers reported that the program had a profound impact on their teaching.

Administrators Meetings It has become a truism that changes in science teaching cannot occur in isolation; therefore, a condition for a teacher's acceptance into the Science FEAT program was the commitment by an administrator from the school to attend one meeting a year. The first meeting for administrators took place in September, 1993, at Florida State University. Based on teacher and administrator feedback, the meeting was divided into three sections: (a) What is Science FEAT?., (b) reform in science education and constraints to change, and (c) improving science education at the school/community level. In a number of activities, the administrators worked cooperatively in small groups as the teachers had the previous summer. Some of the activities engaged the administrators in science leaming. Concerns that were expressed by both teachers and administrators during the original site visits were raised throughout this meeting. Many of the concerns focused on the integration of technology into instruction, the use of hands-on student-centered activities, and professional development. The second annual administrators meeting took place in June, 1994, at the National High Magnetic Field Laboratory in Tallahassee, Florida. In response to comments made by some administrators after the first meeting, this second meeting was scheduled during the summer session of the Science FEAT program so that the teachers could be present for portions of the meeting. There were four main objectives for the meeting: (a) reviewing the first year's activities and accomplishments, including Science Days; (b) explaining the second year of the program, especially the education research


component; (c) discussing the statewide education reform model and the role Science FEAT plays in enabling teachers to develop the thought processes and practices that the reform espouses; and (d) providing time for the administrators and teachers to meet in small groups to talk about both the teacher's and the administrator's visions for science education at their school and ways to implement those views. A questionnaire completed by the administrators indicated that they preferred the format of the meeting with the teachers present. For the final year, the administrators meeting was held on June 22, 1995, during the first week of the summer session. Teachers shared with the administrators the results of their research, and teachers and administrators together did some science education by taking part in a selection of Project WILD activities. There was time for discussion of science education issues. Each of the administrators indicated that he or she believes the quality of science education at his or her school was enhanced by the teacher's participation in Science FEAT. Some oftheir comments are: (The teacher) has created a renewed spiritf o r our staff and students in science. We are experiencing excitement and articulation between grade levels as never before andmore participation of students in our school/district science fairs. I feel, more importantly, that the utilization of technology is being promoted by our FEAT teacher f a r more than by any other source. The program has taken a good teacher and made her a great teacher. We have brought the teaching of science into the 21st century. The students relate to the technology very well and their interest is heightened. Our teacher has also encouraged other teachers, which has an effect on our whole program, not just science. Having a Science FEAT teacher on ourfaculty has exposed our students to innovative techniques... the Science Day she initiated is going to become an annual event. Talking with her and interacting in the administrators day has made me (her administrator) more aware of what she is trying to do and what is needed to improve our science department.

173

we have. The Science FEAT program was a rich research source providing opportunities to examine many aspects Reforming science education is complex because of the teaching and leaming of science, educational science education is a system with many interacting reform in science education, and teachers as researchers. We were also reminded of the importance of the components--individual teachers, administrators, students, and parents, to name a few. The Science FEAT staff was joumey as well as the destination. Although the process reminded that eachofthesecomponents is, in turn, complex of reform may be slow and require many years, the and dynamic in its own right. Individuals are influenced rewards o f beginning and being on ajourney can be great. and changed by their personal beliefs, understandings, On our journey, we saw many exciting things begin to experiences, actions, ethics, culture, and so forth. For happen in science education reform in North Florida and example, to change an individual teacheryou must consider South Georgia. her personal beliefs about science, students, education, leaming, teaching, assessment, school organization, rights References and responsibilities, culture of the school and community, higher education, curricular designs, outside support, and Bazler, J. A. (I991). A middle school teacher summer research project. School Science and Mathematics, so on. We were regularly reminded that change is a long and continuous process that is not completed in five weeks 91(7), 322-324. nor in three years; however, individuals can begin to Bell, B., & Gilbert, J. (1994). Teacher development as professional, personal, and social development. change and become comfortable with the process in that Teaching and Teacher Education, 10(5), 483-497. time. The reform of science education is a long process that must address many levels of complexity, but because Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (in press). Psychological learning theory and the design of innovative science education is a system, any change in any one environments: On procedures, principles, and systems. component produces consequent changes in the entire In L. Schauble, & R. Glaser (Eds)., Contributions of system. We worked with teachers to initiate changes within the science education system. instructional innovation to understanding learning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. We have leamed that the management of a large teacher enhancement project is complicated and requires Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (1990). Research on strong support and funding. To organize a degree-seeking teaching and teacher research: The issues that divide. program for a large number of individuals requires a Educational Researcher, 19(2), 2-11. substantial investment of time and effort navigating the Gale, G. (1979). Theory ofscience. New York: McGrawuniversity bureaucracy dealing with admissions, Hill. registration, program of study, and on and on. Other Grossman, P. L. (1990). The making of a teacher: Teacher knowledge and teacher education. New management concerns include housing, meals, meeting York: Teachers College Press. individual needs, and providing social activities. Some features that made Science FEAT special were Loucks-Horsley, S., & Roody, D. (1990). Using what is known about change to inform the regular education accomplished with funding beyond the NSF grant. The initiative. Remedial and Special Education, 11(3), awards luncheon for participants, instructors, persons from the science research sites, and helpful university 51-56. personnel is one example. These events strengthened the Llorens, M. B. (1994). Action research: Are teachers finding theirvoice? The Elementary SchooI Journal, community spirit of the program, contributed to the selfesteem of the teachers, and enhanced their status within 95(1), 3-10. Noflke, S. E. (1992). The work and workplace of their school communities. teachers in action research. Teaching and Teacher We were reminded that research takes time. Because we are researchers and pack-rats at heart, we collected Education, 8(1), 15-29. informationonevery aspect oftheprogram. Some aspects Richardson, V. (1994). Conducting research on practice. Educational Researcher, 23(5), 5-10. of the program, such as how the teachers' conceptions of science following their research placement influenced Shulman, L . S . (1987). Knowledge and teaching: Foundations of new reform. Harvard Education instruction, are being analyzed; however, we have not Review, 57(1), 1-21. found time nor funding to do an adequate analysis of what What Have We Learned?

174
