Week_03_Learner-Centered

=Readings and Facilitators:=

=Chapter 11 of How Students Learn: Guided inquiry in the Science Classroom (Kruczek)=

===**(1) To paraphrase Donovan & Bransford (2005), being learning-centered entails being attentive to student academic backgrounds (ideas, knowledge, skills and attitudes), as well as their cultural values and abilities. Bransford et al. (2000) add that teachers must have an understanding of each individual student’s knowledge, skill levels and interests. What evidence regarding learning-centered teaching and learning, do Misntrell & Kraus provide in the “Guided Inquiry in the Science Classroom” chapter that is indicative of the statements above? **===

Minstrell and Kraus (2000) provide examples with regards to establishing, evaluating, monitoring and developing student understandings within the context of scientific inquiry. Throughout the article, it is established that learning is a process that must involve the students prior and new models of understandings. If the instructional process does not allow for this to occur, students will not be able to move past their prior misconceptions. It should be the goal of the learning process to ground students understandings in actual inquiry experiences. It is also important to note that diverse students bring disparate preconceptions based on their culture, lives and environments. Therefore every classroom of students brings a variety of preconceptions.

This is evidenced by a nice example of a quick activity that was used to identify students’ preconceptions. To introduce a unit on gravity, the teacher drew a diagram on the board and asked the students to predict what would happen to the weight of an object if it was placed in a vacuum. The teacher then used the students’ results to determine the preconceptions that the students held. By using this activity, not only did the teacher identify his students’ current thoughts about gravity, but he also made the students conscious of their own thoughts. Quick pre-assessments like this are extremely important in order to focus instruction in a way that is most beneficial to students.

Furthermore, it is suggested that once prior knowledge has been assessed and developed, students must have the chance to question new contexts (Minsrell & Kraus, 2000). Questioning becomes the “bridge from the known and unknown” (Minsrell & Kraus, 2000 p. 508). A learner’s ability to question a new context establishes the learner as a lifelong learner. Being a lifelong learner causes constant evaluation of academic background, prior knowledge, and interests.

===**(2) Within this Chapter, there are just over 40 rounded-rectangle shaped highlighted figures, with ideas regarding teaching and learning. The one at the bottom of page 479 for example is this: **=== ===**Please list (by typing it in and using the highlight feature) the one(s) you believe specifically relate to //__learning-centered learning and teaching environments__//, and add a one or two sentence comment which relates it specifically back to the Guided Inquiry chapter, or how it relates to your own personal classroom. **===
 * === Students need opportunities to explore the relationships among ideas. === ||

Incorporating many opportunities for students to investigate and "play" with mathematical ideas is a method used in many classrooms. Problem centered learning activites allow the students to find their own solutions to problems. This provides teachers an opportunity to see and hear the interesting and different ways students think about a problem. The variety of explantions the students give on how they solved, and even the teacher themselves, makes for a great conversation within the classroom. We, as teachers, need to allow our kids to find answers in their own way.
 * Allowing students freedom to explore may give teachers opportunities to learn. Teachers need to allow themselves to learn. **

This statement also states that if the teacher is not learning, then the teacher becomes stagnant and ineffective. Ultimately, it will be the students who suffer.

One practice that is incorporated on a regular basis in one middle school classroom was adminstering Anticipation Guides. These are a set of true/false statements (usually 5-7) regarding the topic about to be covered. The students were to respond to them both at the beginning and end of the chapter/unit. These would allow both the students and teacher to see what their thoughts were at the beginning of the chapter/unit and how those thoughts changed (if at all).
 * Teachers need to know students' initial and developing conceptions. Students need to have their initial ideas brought to a conscious level. **

Something that was incorporated in a science methods class, was a Science Beliefs Quiz (found online). This quiz asked specific questions about students' understanding of a variety of science content. The quiz provided both the students and teacher with content areas that needed more emphasis. Over the course of the semester, as the class discussed different science content, the teacher would highlight the quiz questions that addressed the content and the entire class would discuss their prior answers and if their understanding had changed.

By listening to students' arguments, the teacher can learn what related experiences make sense to them.

At the beginning of every new unit, teachers often attempt to determine what students preconceived understandings are. This knowledge helps determine how to address the topic, for it helps determine what the students already know about the topic. The students seem to enjoy these activities since they get to revisit their prior ideas at the end of the unit. Also every unit starts with a particular kind of activity, and ends the same way. Students expressed that they like the structure and really enjoy looking at their previous ideas. =Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom (Hammack)=


 * According to Driver et al. (1994), "the role of the science educator is to mediate scientific knowledge for learners, to help them make personal sense of the ways in which knowledge claims are generated and validated, rather than to organize individual sense-making about the natural world" (p. 6). In other words, teachers should be helping students discover "scientific ways of knowing" (Driver et al., 1994, p. 6), rather than just learning science facts. What strategies are presented in this week's readings that would help teachers take on this role as mediator?**

The authors state that student learning/constructing of science knowledge involves 2 processes, namely individual and social. With respect to a students' personal knowledge gain, teachers first "introduce new ideas or cultural tools where necessary and to provide support and guidance for students to make sense of these //themelves//" (p.11). The second part to this is the socialization process. "On the social plane the process involves being introduced to concepts, symbols and conventions of the scientific community" (p.8). The teacher mediates within and between the two. Individually, the students develop there own way of seeing/understanding a problem, phenomena or concept, afterwhich they bounce ideas off of the teacher, and then perhaps continue to privately reflect and re-think. Also teachers mediate during the sharing of ideas and the classroom discussions (socialization process), by interceding as necessary; such as clearing up misconceptions, leading discussions,or asking facilitating questions to name a few. The main purpose for all of these is to "listen and diagnose the ways in which the instructional activities are being interpreted to inform instruction" (p.11).

In How Students Learn (2005), Minstrell and Kraus share a guided inquiry science lesson on gravity. The authors describe a series of small scale lab and writing activities that help students bring forth misconceptions, clarify the properties of gravity, and reflect on their learning. Through the activities and specific teaching strategies presented throughout the paper, it is easy to observe the teacher’s role in guided inquiry. The teacher listens carefully and respectfully, while at the same time being critical and guiding students with appropriate questions (Minstrell and Kraus, 2005). Students in this environment are observed engaging in concrete learning experiences and questioning phenomena. Minstell and Kraus also stressed the importance of allowing students to answer questions such as “How do you know?” to help students understand the nature of scientific knowledge (2005, p. 502). By asking the students to explain how they know, the teacher can gain an understanding of the students’ understanding of the nature of scientific knowledge. This question also helps the student development metacognitive processes to monitor their own learning.

Grunel (2008) followed a high school Biology teacher as he attempted to move from a teacher-centered classroom to a more student-centered learning environment. Grunel focused his attention on two aspects of the science teacher's new appraoch to teaching: identifying and using students' prior knowledge, and the construction of quality questioning techniques. The teacher in this study, Bob, descsribed changing his questioning technique as one of the greatest challenges to implementing a student-centered learning environment, however, he understood how vital this was. Bob also recognized the importance of teaching his students' how to develop and use questioning strategies in their group discussions. Using questioning strategies that allow for rich class discussions helpd promote a non-threatening environment in which students feel comfortable interacting with the topic and taking risks to advance their learning.

Alsardary, et al. (2001) conducted a study involving college students enrolled in a discrete mathematics course. This course was conducted in alearner-centered environment. The instructor of the course only assisted with the new knowledge that was needed for the students to complete their projects. The instructor grouped the students in pairs to learn a topic fundamental to the course and the students must present their project to the class and to the regional Mathematical Association of America meeting. Teh course also consisted of other tasks and methods of assessment. The study hinged on the pre- and post-test given to the students. The test consisted of open-ended problems that did not necessarily have a correct answer. The students were assessed on their ability to communicate their thought process mathematically correct. All the students in the course improved. The only area that showed a weak improvement was the communicating mathematics effectively area. The study is interesting to read and will provide the reader with more innovative ways to incorporate problem-centered learning into the classroom.

Once a teacher is committed to creating a learning-centered environment for the students there remains the issue of how other teachers and adminstrators view the learner-centered instructor. If there is not a wide acceptance for this particular teaching stance administrators may not know how to observe or rate the instructor. Harris and Cullen's (2008) article addresses the issue of how to observe the learning-centered classroom. They outline specific items for administrator to focus on to determine the effectiveness of the instructor to include items such as - does the syllabus state learning through the teaching or learning through exploring with the teacher as a guide, is the teacher lecturing to the class or are the studnets involved in organized chaos of learning and teaching other students.

Marshall and Horton (2011) conducted research on how teachers’ use of inquiry-based teaching was related to a student’s higher-level thinking abilities. The researchers asserted that within science, teachers should focus on “unifying concepts and process” rather than memorization of facts (Marshall & Horton, 2011 p. 93). Inquiry-based instruction should present students with perturbing questions that causes them to evaluate existing and new information. Within the research model, the teachers used a four component model; Engage (when misconceptions and prior knowledge are exposed), Explore (when a learner actively and thoughtfully investigates a scientific question or concept), Explain (when prior knowledge is united with learning from the current investigation in an effort to resolve disequilibrium and generate conceptual understanding), and Extend (time when learning is depended and applied to new situations or previous concepts).

Marshall and Horton (2011) found that teachers who allowed their students to spend more time in the Exploration phase also allowed them to practice high cognitive thinking and learning. Students were more engaged in processes of verifying, justifying, developing, and facilitating their knowledge. It was also found that if students were given the ability to Explore the content before being provided or share an Explanation, student were able to think deeply about the content. Peters (2010) also studied the challenges and persistence required by teachers to initiate student-centered learning. The study found that teachers must be comfortable with the content knowledge, engage students’ prior knowledge, and be willing to relinquish teacher-centered authority and empower students in their own learning.

**How do Driver et al. (1994) address the construction of scientific knowledge as it relates to a learning-centered environment?**
Driver et al. (2004) states that, "Although learning science involves social interactions, in the sense that the cultural tools of science have to be introduced to learners, we have argued that individuals have to make personal sense of newly introduced ways of viewing the world" (p. 11). This statement demonstrates that in order for a student to truly understand what is happening in the scientific world, the student's discovery has to be meaningful to him or her. Additionally, they have to be able to translate that meaning that they have constructed to others in such a way that is easy for everyone else to understand.

Driver et al. (1994) discusses in detail how scientific knowledge in the science classroom is constructed by the student. Driver et al. (1994) reviews “various factors of personal experience, language, and socialization in the process of learning science” (p.5). The authors use a constructivist approach to view learning in the science classroom and present a review of the literature that addresses their topics of interest. Through the multiple studies analyzed, Driver et al. (1994) concludes that student’s everyday knowledge about science may be different than what is presented to them in the science classroom. The learner has to personally change their views, as stated above, but with the help of the teacher. To successfully do this, the teacher has to provide support and guidance, and create a scientific culture in the classroom. The teacher also takes on the role of learner, gaining knowledge about the student’s thoughts and preconceptions as the lesson progresses. Driver et al. (1994) explained that teachers should provide multiple opportunities for students to engage with scientific phenomenon and to critically analyze results that conflicted with their preconceptions. Driver et al. emphasized the importance of having learners “make personal sense of newly introduced ways of viewing the world” (1994, p. 11). The authors suggested that teachers should provide analogies between the scientific phenomenon and other situations of which the students are more familiar.

Interesting enough, Wu and Haung (2007) determined that low-achieving students perform better in a teacher-centered classrooms. However, medium and high achieving students performed better in a student-centered classrooms. According to Wu and Haung (2007) “the findings suggest that one instructional approach does not meet all students’ needs and that structured instruction might be more helpful for low-achieving students” (p. 747). These findings strongly suggest that low-achieving students may need more structure than some student-centered learning environments provide. However, I know from anecdotal evidence in my classroom that low-achieving students can be very successful in a student-centered classroom.

Contrasting Wu and Haung's results, Kang et. al (2012) compared the successes of less- and more-prepared students and found that in a problem-based inquiry learning program created by the Environmental Health Science Center and found that 68% of less-prepared students made significant gains as a result of the program while only 36% of the more-prepared students made significant gains. One could argue that there is less room for improvement of the more-prepared students, however I think it is safer to say that all students can show gains, and the improvements depend on the inquiry program. In this study, student groups were also compared from classes that received an alternative program of inquiry activities and classes that learned through the EHSC program, with more significant improvements made by those students from the EHSC program, showing that some inquiry programs are more successful than others.

=How People Learn - Chapter 8: Teacher Learning (Hulings)= ==On pages 191-192, Bransford, Brown, and Cocking (2000) list multiple ways that teachers can continue to learn about teaching. In your own experience as a teacher, which one of those ways has helped you learn the most about teaching?==

Learning outside of the school environment has the been the most helpful to me. I have found it difficult to learn from other teachers within my system because they come with their own stereotypes and personal judgements of how and when to teach what content. As the Hulings (thanks for giving me credit, but I did not state that--would you please cite your source here, thanks!) stated "teachers also learn about teaching in ways that are separate from their formal professional work." With regards to teaching I think my time in the military and my overseas travel has had the greatest affect on my personal teaching style. Though I have learned a tremendous amount of theory from formal education and a great deal of classroom management from fellow teachers and items such as the eight floor, it is the personal experiences that are the greatest advancement of my teaching method. Without this inner knowledge of where I come from and a strong acceptance of my own abilities and history I would not be able to interact in a meaningful manner with my students.

This past year was my first as an alternatively certified teacher. I had no direct background experience as a teacher and no formal teaching on the matter. I did begin a master’s program in Educational Psych. I also attended PLENTY of professional development workshops during the year. Despite all these things, the experiences that were most helpful were the individual interactions I had with other teachers. These teachers had the same students that I had. We would share what worked and what hadn’t. The information wasn’t overly decontextualized, it was focused, and concrete. These are the aspects that helped me the most on a day to day basis in my classroom.

==Without naming any institution in particular, do you think your preservice education program adequately prepared you for the classroom? What improvements would you recommend? If you were alternatively certified, do you think you were prepared to teach? How so?==

I am alternatively certified. However, I began teaching as an undergraduate and had I not had this opportunity, I absolutely //would not// have been prepared to teach, even with my alternative certification program. Thankfully, I was prepared to teach because of the nature of the course in which I learned to teach. The introductory biology course I taught is almost entirely inquiry based and I taught 2-4 lab sections a semester for three years prior to certification. i would not have even thought about going the alternative certification route had I not had the teaching/learning experiences I did. I hadn't really seriously considered teaching as a career until half way through my first semester as a teaching assistant. It had crossed my mind in passing, but the position I initially applied for was a lab prep position, so I thought I would be working with lab set up, not teaching. It turned out they needed more teaching assistants than lab assistants and I got shoved into teaching. I remember exactly the moment when I realized I wanted to teach though because I was explaining photosynthesis to a student while helping her with an assignment and she started jumping up and down yelling "I get it! I get it!" I remember thinking after she left how cool that was and that I might like to teach science. Two years later I earned my alternative certification and took a job teaching at a high school fifteen miles from where I lived!

The research presented by Bransford et al., (2000) found that teachers generally teach the way that they were taught and recommended several enhancements to teacher learning opportunities including the integration of teachers’ prior knowledge, development of deep understanding and the ability to apply knowledge, and development of metacognitive awareness. I agree with Bransford et al., statement and am fortunate to have participated in a pre-service teacher education program that modeled inquiry-based science instruction.

A resounding no is the answer to this question. No I was not prepared for introduction to the classroom, and no I do no think the preserve education was any where near adequate. What I have noticed throughout my education is the focusing on theories of education and theories of pedagogy instead of actual practical application and content knowledge specialization. When I initially walked into the classroom I had been given no ability to formulate class rules or routines, though I knew what theory I could utilize. The preservice education is severally lacking and needs to have at least a few classes on actual classroom material. i.e. This is how you create rules, this is how you deal with an unruly child, this is how you deal with administration and so forth. I learned more from a book that was given to me before I started teaching than I did from my entire undergraduate degree in education. Dewey vs Counts is important information, but stronger content focus and classroom management techniques should be a bigger part. =On Understanding the Nature of Scientific Knowledge (Richardson)=

What might a successful science curriculum look like, according to Carey and Smith (1993)? How was your understanding of a successful science curriculum changed by reading this piece, if at all?
Carey and Smith (1993) present evidence that teaching in a constructive manner may help students understand the nature of science better than traditional methods. Carey and Smith (1993) review literature to conclude that inquiry based instructional methods may provide the best learner-centered environment in which to teach about science. However, for the tests conducted and literature reviewed these authors were unable to draw sound conclusions about inquiry based lessons. Carey and Smith (1993) conclude that students were able to show progress in their understanding of the nature of science, but did not master the constructivist view of science. They were unsure if this was due to students’ development, their epistemological beliefs, or the instructional method. Personally, I don't think that this article would have made teachers change their teaching practices. Although, Carey and Smith (1993) have an extensive literary review, they don't show evidence of inquiry based learning being effective in their article. Their research most likely helped to bring inquiry into the spot light as a new instructional strategy that needed to be further investigated. Carey's previous work shows that she didn't think traditional instruction was working; "the standard curriculum is reinforcing students’ own common-sense views about the nature of scientific knowledge" (as cited in Toplis, 2012, p.533).

Toplis (2012) conducts a study with English secondary science students to assess their views on practical work in the science classroom. Toplis (2012) finds that students enjoy doing labs in their science classes and they often provide motivation and autonomy for the student. What Toplis (2012) finds surprising is that students view practical work as an alternative to doing "boring" assignments in their classes. More disturbing, Toplis (2012) concludes that students use these experiences as a way to help memorize information, but learning about the nature of science is often over looked and tie-ins to previous knowledge are often missed. Some students even participate in inquiry assignments and fail to see that they are making predictions and drawing conclusions. So a decade later questions still remain on the effectiveness of inquiry based instruction.

Inquiry alone is not an effective option. One way to help students learn, is to let //**them**// develop the learning experiences. In an article by Anjur (2011), the author/researcher studied effects of students shouldering the responsibility of designing experiments. Students still analyzed the data from the experiment and made conclusions as well. Through out one semester, the class transitioned from mostly teacher-centered to mostly student-centered learning. Lab report submissions increased and 3 of 4 tests scores increased when comparing the two types of instruction. Students also answered test questions over "transfer" type questions, at a higher percentage during the student-centerd experience. Psotive survey comments were numerous. Example: "We had so many hands-on inquiry based experiences in this class. I liked that we were allowed to decide what we were testing..." The author found that student-centered students were always enthusiastic and eager to learn, showing more interest than their counterparts.

=References= Alsardary, S., et al. (2011). Primary trait analysis to assess a learner-centered, upper level mathematics course. PRIMUS: Problems, resources, and issues in mathematics undergraduate studies, 21(4), 303-315.

Anjur, S.S. (2010). Student-centered physiology in high schools. //Advances in Physiology Education, 35//, 161-167.

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., & Cocking, R.R. (2000). //How people learn: Brain, mind, experience, and school//. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Carey, S., & Smith, C. (1993). On Understanding the Nature of Scientific Knowledge. //Educational Psychologist, 28//(3), 235-251.

Donovan, M.S.& Bransford, J.D. (2005). //How Students Learn: History, mathematics, and science in the classroom//. Washington D.C.: The National Academies Press.

Driver, R., Asoko, H., Leach, J., Mortimer, E., and Scott, P. (1994). Constructing scientific knowledge in the classroom. //Educational Researcher, 23//(7), 5-12.

Harris, M., and Cullen, R. (2008) Observing the learner-centered class. //Florida Journal of Educational Administration & Policy, 1//(2), 57-66.

Kang, N., DeChenne, S., & Smith, G. (2012). Inquiry Learning of High School Students Through a Problem-Based Environmental Health Science Curriculum. School Science and Mathematics, 112, 147-158. doi: 10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00128.x

Marshall, J. C., & Horton, R. M. (2011). The relationship of teacher-facilitated, inquiry-based instruction to student higher-order thinking. //School Science And Mathematics, 111(3),// 93-101.

Peters, E. E. (2010). Shifting to a student-centered science classroom: An exploration of teacher and student changes in perceptions and practices. //Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21//, 329-349. doi: 10.1007/z10972-009-9178-z

Toplis, R. (2012). Students’ views about secondary school science lessons: The role of practical work. Research in Science Education, 42, 531-549.

Wu, H., and Huang, Y. (2007). Ninth-grade student engagement in teacher-centered and student-centered technology-enhanced learning environments. //Science Education,// 91(5), 727-749.