Maggie reads to the class

Today I had the opportunity to visit my daughter’s school for her Kindergarten Author’s Tea.  I LOVE when teachers give their students the opportunity to present their work in an authentic setting.  It doesn’t matter what grade, K-12 – giving students the opportunity to share their work with the community increases the value and quality for the child.  I’ve included a few pictures and embedded a video of her reading the story.  Be sure to leave a comment for Maggie below!

Maggie shows us her book

Maggie is joined by her sister Anna

As I constantly straddle the realms of educational research and the role of a practitioner, I find myself trying to define my interests.  Today I describe my research interests in somewhat of a mission statement. I am doing it in plural form as, although I operate as an autonomous researcher, I have collaborators and someday hope to be directing my own social science lab.  I currently direct a high school natural science and engineering lab, and there is much more diversity in my interests and their interests:

Mission:

We try to relate analytic thinking with creative thinking, which calls for multi-focused domain and divergent thinking. We are trying to promote synergic relationships between analytically and creative-oriented minds. Our research tries to bridge analytical with creative-oriented efforts, convergent with divergent thinking, to develop domain-specific expertise from non-focused or multi-focused generalism.

Research Interests:

By using appropriate qualitative and quantitative methods, we seek to better understand what promotes scientific thinking in young adults.

 Threads for study:  

• The examination of problem finding and problem solving in authentic settings
• Habits of mind for open inquiry
• The impact of authentic inquiry opportunities on teaching and learning
• The intersection of creative and logical/analytical behaviors in a situated cognitive learning setting
• The development of 21^st-century skills in conjunction with scientific content acquisition
• The development of higher order thinking skills in science classrooms
• The role of Web 2.0 interactive technology to improve critical, creative, and reflective thinking

I recently gave an assignment to my academic and honors biology classes.  I asked them to create stop-motion movies of the cell cycle, including the mitotic process.  Some students elected to add music and some even posted to YouTube.  Mitosis is often taught as a series of drawings and students need to “imagine” what happens from step to step.  In the case of the stop-motion video, the students must take “mini steps” to make the motion occur.  What I have found is that there really must be continuity to the images – they can’t just jump and thus I know if students really understand the process and the RELATIONSHIPS.  The critical thinking involved to make sure that the process makes sense allows students to truly construct their understanding. 

When we watched the videos in class, I was most impressed with the following example.  The students were a bit reluctant at first to share, because they thought it was “too short.”  I dismissed this because of the evidence of understanding.  They clearly got it and made my favorite product.  And the Oscar goes to . . .

The Kennedy Center Teaching Artists define arts integration as:

an APPROACH to TEACHING in which students construct and demonstrate UNDERSTANDING through an ART FORM. Students engage in a CREATIVE PROCESS which CONNECTS an art form and another subject area and meets EVOLVING OBJECTIVES in both.

 We should review this statement carefully, because I really think it integrates concepts of 21st-century learning very well.  It also seems so relevant to science education as well.  Too often, I think students think they learn science, but infer that “they’ll never use this in real life,” unless they become an engineer or scientist.  What I try to stress with students is that the skills we teach in science are what is critical. The content is the medium to advance those skills.  I want students to be self-directed, motivated, critical thinkers who are capable of problem finding and solving.  The Kennedy Center definition also implies constructivist learning theory in their definition. 

from: http://www.ade.state.az.us/

To that end, and as a springboard point for me, I am going to modify this definition for science education integration.  What amazes me, is that it really doesn’t change very much from the art definition:

An APPROACH to TEACHING in which students construct and demonstrate UNDERSTANDING through INQUIRY-BASED QUESTIONS AND INVESTIGATION. Students engage in CREATIVE AND LOGICAL/ANALYTICAL PROCESSES which CONNECTS SCIENCE and another subject or skill domain and meets EVOLVING OBJECTIVES in both.

from: MS Clip Art

I have had the good fortune to both participate in and read my good friend Dr. Krista Ritchie’s Ph.D. dissertation.  In the document she argues that problem finding is a special case of problem solving (information processing) theory.  It was an intriguing argument to me, so I decided to go right to the source, which was Newell, A., & Simon, H.A. (1972). Human Problem Solving. Prentice-Hall: Englewood Cliffs, NJ. The book is much denser than anticipated, especially at 920 pages.  But, my attention was caught on page 6:

As it will become clear, a theory of the psychology of problem solving requires not only good task analyses but also an inventory of possible problem solving mechanisms from which one can surmise what actual mechanisms are being used by humans. 

This struck me as interesting, because I have long argued that good problem finding requires expertise – knowing which bags of tricks you can utilize to better understand what makes a creative and exciting problem to study.  This is also extremely situated (e.g., Brown,  Collins, Duguid) in nature because there is an authentic framework that justifies making problem finding and solving appropriate and relevant.

from www.babygadget.net

I am a strong advocate for authentic inquiry where we allow students to pursue interesting problems and determine innovative, creative solutions.  In order for a student to build a strong repertoire of problem finding and solving skills, they must develop the necessary prerequisite skills and have a positive disposition to learning.  I often think back to the expertise literature from the creativity domain.  (Below, from LaBanca, 2008):

Experts of a domain structure their knowledge differently from novices (Chase & Simon, 1973; Chi, Glaser, & Rees, 1982; Feldhusen , 2005; Larken, McDermott, Simon, & Simon, 1980; Sternberg, 2001). Expert knowledge is centered on conceptual understanding, with the use of specific domain-based strategies (Driscoll, 2005). Expert problem finding and solving, therefore, is a utilization of pattern recognition based on previous experience and matching those patterns to corresponding aspects of a problem. Novices generally do not possess the same understanding, and, in turn, utilize more general, non-domain specific, problem finding and solving strategies (Driscoll, 2005).

In an instructional setting, some teaching practices lead to the conveying of decontexualized information, whereby students are unable to transfer what they have learned to relevant situations (Brown, Collins, and Duguid, 1989). Students, as novices, have difficulty solving complex, authentic problems because they “tend to memorize rules and algorithms” (Driscoll, 2005, p. 161). Experts would tend to use situational cues to solve problems. Because they have greater domain-specific content knowledge, experts approach finding and solving problems by recognizing and applying previously experienced patterns.

Simply put:

• Experience matters.
• Experience promotes higher levels of creativity.
• Experience makes better problem finders and solvers.

from newenglandsite.com

As a parent, I feel that part of my responsibility is to provide opportunities for my children to have diverse experiences which expose them to authentic problem solving experiences.  Today was one of those days.  As I was cleaning out the back of my car, I came across several kites.  I enjoy flying kites, but have never done this with my children.  Spontaneously, I packed them up, took a drive to Seaside Park in Bridgeport (probably the nicest beach on the Connecticut coast), and we set up shop.

Although my younger daughter Maggie (5) was not as impressed, my older daughter Anna (7) really got into it.  She was trying to figure out how to get the kite to stay in the air without crashing back to the sand on the beach.  Once the thing was about 100 feet in the air, I asked her how she got it so high.  She was able to give me a detailed explanation of how it works and some of the tricks that were necessary to work the kite.  This was without really any advice from me.  She tackled the problem and devised a solution using a trial and error strategy.

I think sometimes in science education, some get stuck in the mess of using only a hypothesis-based problem solving strategy.  That’s a shame because there are so many other ways to solve problems.  For example (from Wikipedia:)

1. Divide and conquer
2. Hill-climbing strategy, (also called gradient descent/ascent, difference reduction, greedy algorithm)
3. Means-ends analysis
4. Trial-and-error
5. Brainstorming
6. Morphological analysis
7. Method of focal objects
8. Lateral thinking
9. George Pólya‘s techniques in How to Solve It
10. Research
11. Assumption reversal
12. Analogy
13. Reduction (complexity)
14. Hypothesis testing
15. Constraint examination
16. Incubation
17. Build (or write) one or more abstract models of the problem
18. Try to prove that the problem cannot be solved.
19. Get help from friends or online problem solving community
20. Delegation: delegating the problem to others.
21. Root Cause Analysis
22. Working Backwards
23. Forward-Looking Strategy
24. Simplification
25. Generalization
26. Specialization
27. Random Search
28. Split-Half Method
29. The GROW model
30. TRIZ
31. Eight Disciplines Problem Solving
32. Southbeach Notation
33. The WWXXD Method:

Let’s really strategize to provide students with DIVERSE opportunities for problem solving in our classroom.  If I can do it unplanned with my children on a sunny, chilly, fall day at a beautiful beach, we can certainly find ways to to it in our classrooms.

This past week, I have had the pleasure of staying on a 52,000-tree orange farm in the state of Sao Paulo in Brazil.  The farm is quite isolated, and has no means of communication with the “outside world.”  In fact, a 14-km dirt road car ride was necessary to get to the farm’s property.  The orange tree farm is surrounded by other farms, primarily that of sugar cane.  Each day I take my daughters for a hike around the farm and onto adjacent properties for some exercise and to appreciate the wonderful environment we are privileged to be in.

Today’s hike took us to a “reservoir”- three large terraced ponds connected by underground pipes. The reservoir is surrounded by a barbed-wire fence.  After crawling under the fence, we found that the top pond was connected to the second pond by a 4î PVC pipe running as a slough into a waterwheel that has some sort of turbine attached to it.  I asked the girls what they thought was happening and we discussed how the wheel worked.  We weren’t exactly sure that it was powering, but the girls made a few guesses.

Afterwards, we headed to a field of sugar cane and the girls asked if they could taste it.  I cut a stalk and cut off the outer husks to expose the cane.  They enjoyed sucking on the heart of the cane, and my older daughter Anna commented that it tasted like a lollipop, only that it was made by nature.   We meandered back to the villa we were staying in and they reiterated their adventures to my wife as I snuggled into a hammock for a rest.

While we were returning, I began thinking about some of the results of my research which suggests that students that are great, independent, self-directed student inquirers come from environments where parents nurture and promote the creative mind by offering their children unique opportunities to engage in varied different experiences throughout their young lives.  I have often heard others talk about problem finding and offer that, in fact, problem finding is not owned by the child but rather the parent.  As the subjects in my study demonstrated, parents need almost be absent during problem finding, but rather provide the culture that promotes the childís independence.

After all, perhaps one of the greatest gifts we can give our children is the sense of wonder in the natural world ñ one that they want to explore and learn about through direct experience and inquiry.

As part of the curriculum I developed for  Beacon Preservation’s Green Light Academy, students participated in a hands-on, minds-on activity to develop and build a small-scale solar still.  In true “guided inquiry” format, we gave the students some minor expository information about concepts of distillation for purifying salt water, and then asked them to design and build their own still using wood splints, plastic wrap, and different adhesives. 

I was absolutely amazed how engaged the students were.  They were building, asking questions, sketching, thinking, and really working hard.  They actually wound up working over an hour longer than we initially had planned.  No problems on my end.  When you are working with flexible time, and not confined to the “tyranny of the bell,” you can make great learning experiences occur.  Best of all, students were being creative, and NOT working under the traditional frameworks often associated with a science lab: 

• a clear, defined procedure,
• identifying variables, constants, and controls
• meticulous data collection

from: rael.berkeley.edu

I think science instruction often focuses on logical/analytical processes.  However, this was an engineering project – build, develop, deliver.   And although there were logical and analytical thoughts, there was more of an emphasis on creativity.  There was no one design that would work (the well-conceived (structured) question), but rather an unlimited number of possibilities (the ill-conceived (open-ended) question).  Many students were in awe that we, as teachers, did not have a “right” answer in mind.

What has bothered me, however, was the evidence.  I think I somewhat dropped the ball, because I didn’t plan well to document student learning.  Sure, I anecdotatly perceived student learning of concepts and creativity development, but how did I know it actually occurred?   I think it’s so important that we are able to show that students have, in fact, learned.  I have been thinking about ways to better document the concept learning and am curious about a good assessment method/mechanism for such a task.

As I continue to work with students striving to achieve independent research excellence, I often marvel at the level of specialized expertise that students develop and display.  Their ability to communicate sophisticated scientific content effectively and thoroughly is the true magic in conducting a research experience (for me).  So it gets me to thinking about this expertise and how situated it truly becomes.  Students won’t have this deep level of understanding without such an authentic experience.  Experiences that allow students to appreciate the tentative and creative perspectives of the nature of science with truth value allow for incredible growth.

These students are truly entering a community of practice and, as such, have an understanding and ability to communicate that goes beyond what gets taught in the traditional science classroom.  When they develop their curriculum there is more ownership, but more importantly, there is better understanding for what NEEDS TO BE known.  Students become better filterers and can better attack their information needs. 

The ironic part of this discussion is what really inspires it.  I run a Dilbert Comic feed on my Google Reader.  It’s a great distraction sometime during the day and usually brings a smile to my face.  A recent comic caught my attention:

I thought to myself, “Gee, you really have to know a bit of Star Wars history to be able to understand this one.” My experiences allow me to appreciate the humor of this cartoon. Here’s the scene upon which this comic was based:

I saw the original Star Wars in the theater with my dadin 1977 in the theaters.  Over the years, we’ve enjoyed many Sci Fi movies together.  These experiences, combined with my interests allow me to have a more sophisticated understanding of what that comic was trying to say.  I am thinking that it is very similar for students attempting to develop concept domain understandings.  The situated nature of learning allows for expertise to blossom when the student is task committed and open to creativity.  (Joe Renzulli, might also want me to identify above average ability to complete his 3-ring conceptionof giftedness.)  I think I buy into situated learning more and more every day.  The theory just seems to emerge so frequently from my practice.

Last week I heard about the amazing water landing of the US Airlines flight on the Hudson River in New York City.  I was in the midst of many projects and didn’t have a chance to truly appreciate the magnitude of what had happened until I viewed a slide show of pictures.  The images are breathtaking, and I hope the link I am providing to this event lasts a long time.

What amazes me most is, in less than one minute, the pilot identifies a problem, creates a strategy for solution with multiple options, selects the best option, and finally executes the option in a near-flawless fashion.  This is what creativity and 21st-century skills is all about! (Well, maybe we don’t need to teach students how to crash land a plane, but we do need to give them the skills, knowledge, and dispositions to successfully navigate the challenges that they will undoubtedly encounter in their future.)

This situation makes me really consider the creative mind, in this case, the pilot.  Preparedness certainly favored this mind, and the expertise displayed in the choices made were enhanced by previous experience.  Sandy Kay (1994) defined creativity (specifically problem finding) in terms of an individual finding, defining, or discovering an idea or problem “not predetermined by the situation.”. This definition is problematic because it assumes there are no underlying or situated factors that might influence decision making factors. There are boundaries and parameters that are required for individuals engaging in creative problem finding and solving behaviors that are established by the field of study and the domain-culture (i.e., Csikszentmihalyi, 1990). These predetermined factors must surely influence the nature of the problems individuals attempt to solve.

IMHO, the pilot was capable of such a creative and successful act because he had the necessary expertise, coupled with a situation that mandated immediate action.  Without his experiences as a pilot and a safety consultant he could NOT have been as creative as he was. 

In terms of education, the lesson seems to be that we need to engage students in authentic experiences that challenge them to develop skill sets that allow them to solve problems well.  From a situated cognitive framework, becoming members of a community of practice – practicing both the trade and the thinking of professionals – is a necessary tool to become a productive, contributing member of a 21st-century society.