Showing posts with label Inquiry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inquiry. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

The Science/Math Education Shift from Teaching to Learning

Some blog followers might be interested in a discussion-list post “The Science/Math Education Shift from Teaching to Learning” [Hake (2011)].

The abstract reads:

*******************************************
ABSTRACT: This post is a slight expansion and improvement of an earlier post “Anatomy Education.” The revision was stimulated by the interesting 11-post POD thread “Re: Open inquiry is bad? (in some intro tech courses)” at http://bit.ly/miR63T, especially Anton Tolman’s (2011) emphasis on John Tagg’s (2003) important book The Learning Paradigm College.

Robin Hopkins in a POD post “SHIFT IN THE TEACHING OF SCIENCE” wrote: “I'm interested in the shift that is required of traditional anatomists as the medical school moves toward a curriculum that requires anatomy to be taught/learned in ways that are more aligned with the clinical application of anatomy than simply ‘knowing’ anatomy (usually for tests).”

If the tests are of the usual classroom type then they require only the regurgitation of memorized material rather than higher-order learning such as the understanding of scientific concepts. I suspect that that higher-order learning is required for the effective clinical application of anatomy just as it is for the successful pursuit of science/math professions generally.

In my opinion, THE MAJOR SHIFT IN SCIENCE/MATH EDUCATION IS THE SHIFT “FROM TEACHING TO LEARNING: A NEW PARADIGM FOR UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION” [Barr & Tagg (1995), Tagg (2003)].

But unknown to most of academia, education researchers have developed “Concept Inventories” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concept_inventory that can be used in formative pre/post testing to gauge the impact of courses on students' learning and understanding of scientific concepts. At least in physics such testing demonstrates that “Interactive Engagement” (IE) courses result in course-averaged normalized learning gains g(ave) that are about two-standard deviations above those of “Traditional” (T) passive-student lecture courses [Hake (1998a,b; 2008)].

I give 31 hot-linked references to some of the relevant literature.
*******************************************

To access the complete 24 kB post please click on http://bit.ly/ijJeCm.

Richard Hake, Emeritus Professor of Physics, Indiana University
Honorary Member, Curmudgeon Lodge of Deventer, The Netherlands
President, PEdants for Definitive Academic References which Recognize the Invention of the Internet (PEDARRII)

rrhake@earthlink.net
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake
http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~sdi
http://HakesEdStuff.blogspot.com
http://iub.academia.edu/RichardHake

“…I point to the following unwelcome truth: much as we might dislike the implications, research is showing that didactic exposition of abstract ideas and lines of reasoning (however engaging and lucid we might try to make them) to passive listeners yields pathetically thin results in learning and understanding - except in the very small percentage of students who are specially gifted in the field.”
Arnold Arons in Teaching Introductory Physics (p. vii, 1997)


REFERENCES [URL’s shortened by http://bit.ly/ and accessed on 22 June 2011.]

Arons, A.B. 1997. Teaching Introductory Physics. Wiley. Amazon.com information at http://amzn.to/bBPfop. Note the searchable “Look Inside” feature.

Hake, R.R. 2011. “The Science/Math Education Shift from Teaching to Learning” online on the OPEN! AERA-L archives at http://bit.ly/ijJeCm. Post of 22 Jun 2011 08:13:15-0700 to AERA-L and NetGold. The abstract and link to the complete 24 kB post are being transmitted to various discussion lists.

Friday, February 5, 2010

Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12 - Response to Wurman

Some blog followers might be interested in a recent discussion-list post of the above title. The abstract reads:


*************************************************

ABSTRACT: In the abstract of a previous post “Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12” [Hake (2010)], I wrote: “Joe Bellina (2010), in a post 'Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12' ALERTED subscribers to ‘Inquiry-Based Science Instruction - What Is It and Does It Matter? Results from a Research Synthesis Years 1984 to 2002’ [Minner, Levy, & Century (2009)].”


Ze'ev Wurman (2010), evidently misunderstanding the above, responded (paraphrasing) “Would Hake care to speculate as to the reasons Joe BELLINA RESTRICTED HIS RESEARCH to 1984-2002 and ignored the last 7 years of rather fruitful studies in this area?”


Ze'ev apparently did not scan the abstract of Minner et al. (2009) in which the authors give the following reasons for restricting their research (not Bellina's) to data from 1984 to 2002 (paraphrasing): “[That timeframe] was selected to continue a line of synthesis work last completed in 1983 by Bredderman (1983) and by Shymansky et al. (1983), and to accommodate a practicable cutoff date given the research project timeline, which ran from 2001 to 2006.”


If Ze'ev and others suspect that Minner et al. may have cherry picked 1984-2002 so as to “focus on data from periods that suited their theses,” then to make a case they would need to provide data outside the 1984-2002 period that conflicts with Minner et al.'s indication of “a clear, positive trend favoring inquiry-based instructional practices.”


My survey of data in “Direct Science Instruction Suffers a Setback in California - Or Does It?” [Hake (2004)] showed that ALL the data, including that outside the 1984-2002 period, was generally consistent with the pro-inquiry assessment of Minner et al. (2009).


Not surveyed was “Why Minimal Guidance During Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist, Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based Teaching” [Kirschner, Sweller, & Clark (2006)]. But that paper, despite its misleading title, does not counter the theses of Minner et al. (2009), as explained in e.g., “Language Ambiguities in Education Research” [Hake (2008b)].

*************************************************


To access the complete 26 kB post please click on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Net-Gold/message/31796 .


REFERENCES [Tiny URL's courtesy http://tinyurl.com/create.php.]


Hake, R.R. 2010. “Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12” online at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Net-Gold/message/31779. Post of 3 Feb 2010 8:40 am EST to AERA-L, Net-Gold, and PhysLrnR. The abstract was also transmitted to various discussion lists and appears at http://hakesedstuff.blogspot.com/2010/02/re-metastudy-on-impact-of-inquiry-in-k.html with a provision for comments.


Hake, R.R. 2008b. “Language Ambiguities in Education Research,” submitted to the Journal of Learning Sciences on 21 August but mindlessly rejected; online at http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake/LangAmbigEdResC.pdf (1.2 MB) and as ref. 54 at http://www.physics.indiana.edu/~hake. David Klahr http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Klahr wrote to me privately (quoted by permission): “I liked the paper. I think it's very thoughtful and nuanced. However it is tough going, even for someone as familiar with the issues (and as favorably cited by you) as I am. It's a shame that it was rejected, but I wonder if the reviewer just wasn't up to the very careful reading necessary to really follow your arguments all the way through. Even though I know this area quite well, obviously, I did have to really focus to fully understand the distinctions you were making.”


Minner, D.D. , A.J. Levy, & J. Century. 2009. “Inquiry-Based Science Instruction - What Is It and Does It Matter? Results from a Research Synthesis Years 1984 to 2002,” Journal of Research in Science Teaching, Early View (Articles online in advance of print); online to subscribers at http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/123205106/PDFSTART.


Wurman, Z. 2010. "Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12," post of 4 Feb 2010 13:23:52 -0800 to AP-Physics, Biopi-L, EvalTalk, Physhare, and Physoc; online on the PHYSOC archives at http://tinyurl.com/ycfzdlp. To access the archives of PHYSOC one needs to subscribe, but that takes only a few minutes by clicking on http://listserv.uark.edu/archives/physoc.html and then clicking on "Join or leave the list (or change settings)." If you're busy, then subscribe using the "NOMAIL" option under "Miscellaneous." Then, as a subscriber, you may access the archives and/or post messages at any time, while receiving NO MAIL from the list!

Wednesday, February 3, 2010

Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12

Some blog followers may be interested a post [Hake (2010)] of the above title. The abstract reads:


***************************************

ABSTRACT: Joe Bellina (2010), in a post "Metastudy on impact of in k-12" alerted subscribers to Inquiry-Based Science Instruction - What Is It and Does It Matter? Results from a Research Synthesis Years 1984 to 2002 [Minner, Levy, & Century (2009)]. Their abstract reads in part (slightly edited):


"The goal of the Inquiry Synthesis Project was to synthesize findings from research conducted between 1984 and 2002 to address the research question, "What Is The Impact Of Inquiry Science Instruction On K-12 Student Outcomes?". . . . . Various findings across 138 analyzed studies INDICATE A CLEAR, POSITIVE TREND FAVORING INQUIRY-BASED INSTRUCTIONAL PRACTICES [my CAPS], particularly instruction that emphasizes student active thinking and drawing conclusions from data. Teaching strategies that actively engage students in the learning process through scientific investigations are more likely to increase conceptual understanding than are strategies that rely on more passive techniques, which are often necessary in the current standardized-assessment laden educational environment."


Leaving aside my own niggling criticism of their monumental mixed-methods-research effort, Minner et al., even despite the "antipositivist vigilantes," rightfully add another voice to the chorus bemoaning the lack of operational definitions for various pedagogical approaches. Among other choristers are: Century (2004), Klahr & Li (2005), Anderson (2007), Hake (2008), Strand-Cary & Klahr (2008), and Klahr (2009).

***************************************


To access the complete 33 kB post please click on http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Net-Gold/message/31779 .


REFERENCES

Hake, R.R. 2010. “Re: Metastudy on impact of inquiry in k-12” online at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Net-Gold/message/31779. Post of 3 Feb 2010 8:40 am EST to AERA-L, Net-Gold, and PhysLrnR. The abstract only was transmitted to various discussion lists.