Prof Pauline Ross - University of Western Sydney - What does Australian research say about STEM and...
-
Upload
informa-australia -
Category
Education
-
view
94 -
download
1
Transcript of Prof Pauline Ross - University of Western Sydney - What does Australian research say about STEM and...
Professor Pauline Ross
School of Science and Health
National Teaching Fellow
What does Australian research say about STEM and what difference can we make?
Internal measures – declining secondary science enrolments
1. Biology
2. Chemistry
3. Physics
Entry Maths
Advanced Maths
Intermediate Maths
– shifts in Maths
Decline in student engagement - rise in boredom
Copying from textbooks
Cook-book practicals
Pre-determined outcomes
Remembering and recalling
78%
Decline in what we know -Unable to answer the most simplest of questions
How long does it take the Earth to go round the sun?
59% Australians say 1 year, 30% say 1 week (61% in 2010)
Think we lived at the same time as the dinosaurs
True or False: The earliest humans lived on the planet
at the same time as dinosaurs.
(30% 2010)
“The science curriculum’s focus on inquiry-based learning,
and the de-emphasis of knowledge would indicate that the
curriculum shaping process has been heavily influenced by
modern educational fads which are pushed on the
community largely by university education faculties”.
“Review of the Australian Curriculum”
(Donnelly and Wiltshire 2014 p.184)
Everyone is an expert on STEM education
Problem is the solution
“becoming more a deliverer
of facts, less a convener of
activity-based learning”
Better balance between a constructivist and an
explicit teaching pedagogical approach p.187
Risk is the narrative of decline………. Distracting
Knowledge based society
We know about STEM education
We have evidence from research
1. In the right direction, end at the beginning
2. Content, difficult concepts and critical thinking
3. Learning from failure
4. Assessing what we value
We have solutions
Do science – through inquiry and problem solving
• “greater emphasis on linking the teaching of STEM
elements together using inquiry-based and action-learning programs and pedagogies”
(Australian Industry Group p.19
March 2015)
Research across a century – repeatedly ignored inquiry
• Dewey 1910 critiqued learning of science
“science should be taught as a way of thinking and a process of knowing ”
• Bruner 1961 and Schwab 1962
Curriculum reform – fuelled with purpose• 1950’s based on inquiry –
• 1970’s based NOT on inquiry -• 1990’s based on inquiry
(Ross and Gill 2010, Ross and Poronnik 2015, Ross 2015)
failed
failed
We can’t ignore inquiry works
• Creating and testing hypotheses , collecting data and defending an explanation – deep engagement
• Understanding science is more than knowing facts
Exploration of a highly complex environment may
generate a heavy working memory cognitive load that is
detrimental to learning" (Kirschner, Sweller, Clark, 2006)
Need to keep in mind limitations
Inquiry allows
• Students to experience science directly generally through active practical and collaborative explorations
• Requires metacognition and draws out misconceptions
• Digital technologies provide significantly more opportunities
Body of knowledge
• Amount and type of content –
• Which content? Big ideas, unifying concepts and threshold concepts
• Language
Type of Content
• Abstract – can’t be seen
• Expressed symbolically
• Involves calculations
Visualisations –making the microscopic
and molecular world accessible
How much and which content?
• The breath vs depth issue - deep understanding vs comprehensive covering (Gardner Project zero, Pellegrino 2006)
• Big or unifying ideas in the discipline• Biology – evolution, surface area (Ross et al., 2010)
• Chemistry e.g atoms, periodicity in organisation• Physics, uncertainty, matter cannot be created or destroyed• ALL – hypothesis testing
• Threshold concepts – the integrative “ah ah”
and the struggle (Meyer and Land 2005)
Greatest barrier to learning content is language
• Alienating
• Akin to learning a new language and taking on a new identity
• Powerful tool which creates a Mystic of science (Lemke 1990)
• Creates an authoritative and difficult style
• Students have a fundamental capacity to master complex languages e.g. sport symbols, specific language that players need
I believe
Solution: Understanding first
• Students who learn to understand phenomena in everyday terms prior to being taught scientific language will develop improved understanding of new concepts (Brown 2008, Brown and Ryoo 2008)
Uncoverage rather than coverage
Solution: Rigour not rigor mortis
• Multimodal representation
• Creativity
• Digital
• Stories (Ross 2015)
• STEAM movement
• Art in Science
• Children are naturally curious – keep rather than destroy
Summary: Research says content is accessible if we:
1. Start with what students understand
2. Draw on the misconception literature
3. Use multiple modal of representation of concepts i.e. make models, use role plays, tell stories, create cartoons, observe animations, use digital media –
4. Take an understanding first approach, avoid scientific language until understanding has been reached, then… use the language
5. Encourage metacognition
Challenge tension between understanding & rote learning
We understand more about how students learn
so for content…………….
The BIGGER question
If learning from failure is so intuitively compelling, why
wait for it to happen?
Why not deliberately design for it?
36
Year Mike
Arwen
Dave
Backhand
Ivan Right
1988 14 13 13
1989 9 9 18
1990 14 16 15
1991 10 14 10
1992 15 10 16
1993 11 11 10
1994 15 13 17
1995 11 14 10
1996 16 15 12
1997 12 19 14
1998 16 14 19
1999 12 12 14
2000 17 15 18
2001 13 14 9
2002 17 17 10
What to do?
Who’s the most consistent?
Mike, Dave or Ivan?
Standard Deviation
What is Productive Failure?
Way of structuring learning to:
• Afford opportunities to activate and differentiate prior
knowledge (formal and intuitive)….to generate, explore,
critique, and refine representations and methods for solving
complex problems
• Such a process invariably, leads to failure…
• This may precisely be the locus of deep learning…provided
some form of instruction that builds upon student-generated
solutions follows
Summary of Key Findings
• Productive failure outperformed direct instruction on
conceptual understanding and transfer without
compromising procedural knowledge (Kapur, 2010, 2012, Kapur & Bielaczyc, 2012)
• PF teachers consistently report that they are stressed
and stretched to work with students’ ideas…
• BUT, they themselves understood the math better…
Challenge is time consuming nature, tell us the way we approach students mistakes is critical
Learning from failure?
Alot
• If we value rote memorisation then assessments will be geared to determining how much content has been understood
• If we value critical thinking and analysis then assessments need to provide opportunities for students to demonstrate this ability
• Pedagogy, curriculum, instruction and assessment need to be co-ordinated whole
Assessment is part of a triad and its integrated
Assessment
InstructionCurriculum
Theories
of
Learning
and
Knowing
Evidence Centered Design (Pellegrino 2015)
Exactly what
knowledge do
you want students
to have and how
do you want them
to know it?
What will you
accept as
evidence that a
student has the
desired
knowledge?
What task(s) will the
students perform to
communicate to
you their
knowledge?
It’s about monitoring progress – both student and teacher
Assessment drives so much of what students learn and what teachers value
Technology and analytics provides new affordances
Its about monitoring progress – both student and teacher
Assessment drives so much of what students learn and what teachers value
Technology provides new affordances
Solutions exist in our growing agreement
• “Australian STEM teachers from all levels from primary to tertiary need to be equipped to deliver inspirational course content and develop all students to their potential”
(Benchmarking Australian STEM 2015 p. 90 )
• Caution: inspirational can but doesn’t ≠ learning
Research
Education is transformational