This past Wednesday, I hosted my annual science symposium at my school.  The students who conduct year-long applied research projects participate by presenting a 10 to 15-minute oral with PowerPoint related to their topic. I try to make the experience as authentic as possible.  Students send a written invitation to their parents, and I always ask them to select a teacher in the building and send them an invitation as well.  One teacher attended, and provided me with the following email.  My response to her follows.  I think this written discussion we had indicates the nature of the power of authentic learning and its ability to affect student achievement:

Hi there,

I really was so impressed with you and your students last night.  What a successful event!  It’s astounding to see what our kids are working on, Frank.  And my goodness, you have taught them well in terms of presenting themselves, creating sound powerpoints, and articulating their projects.  I kept thinking about the millions of questions you must be asked on a daily basis.  I was incredibly impressed! 

What I especially enjoyed was the practicality of the applications.  That is something that isn’t lacking necessarily, but isn’t so evident in English.  So that was incredible for me.  Certainly, I had difficulty understanding much of what they were doing, but truly remarkable nonetheless. 

You are an asset to this building (any building) and I just wanted to congratulate you.

Corey

 Corey,

Thanks for your kind words.

 About 12 years ago I realized that to really, really improve student achievement there had to be a sense of authenticity to the work that students do. It couldn’t be “LIKE REAL LIFE,” it had to be “REAL LIFE.” It couldn’t be learning for the sake of learning only, but rather inquiry learning in context, with applicable value. There had to be a real audience (in my case, practicing scientists and engineers) that would evaluate their work – not just me as the teacher. This made my role very different – the teacher as the facilitator instead of the didactic knowledge disseminator. Ultimately the students are going to be evaluated (judged) outside of the building, so it is in our collective best interest to work collaboratively, with me assuming the role of the mentor.

 I started doing research with students, primarily because I found that a problem/project-based learning strategy was a method that worked very well for me as a learner. I also realized that in education we often scenarioize-to-death our perceived authentic assessments and projects, which I think takes away value. We also primarily use visual/auditory teaching and learning strategies with students, which often doesn’t meet the learning styles of all students. Some students are more global and tactile with their successful learning strategies.

 I also believe in concept-based learning – “big ideas” as the focus of learning objectives – and teaching students to making connections between their knowledge. Project-based learning is inherently concept-based. If we improve the 21st-century skills of students (problem finding and solving, creativity, oral and written communication) using the content or project as the vehicle for skill development, then I think we really develop the learning potential and achievement in students.

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

shaneevans.com

The tyranny of the bell:  the industrial model we use in secondary education to promote student learning and achievement.  The bell schedule consists of 45-minute periods where students engage in learning a discipline, then compartmentalize and move on to the next discipline.  It is an honored tradition in the educational institution, yet some are looking to move to alternative methods for promoting student learning.

The most noticable format is the block schedule.  Instead of a traditional 7 or 8-period day, the teaching and learning occurs in approximately 4 1.5-hour blocks.  The block model is often credited for promoting greater depth (although not necessarily bredth) of understanding.  In a well-planned block, students can often deeply engage in their learning and become more authentic producers of information.  I have often heard a description that I would consider a failed use of the purpose of the block:  “I gave a test for the first half and then lectured the second half.”  This is really no different than 2 45-minute blocks.  If X=45 minutes of learning and Y=45 minutes of learning, then using X+Y as a block, surely wasn’t what was intended.  Nonetheless, I am getting off track of what I wanted to write about .  .  .

I teach an applied science research class, where students develop and carry out their own projects over the course of a year.  What I am finding, is that both a 45-minute or a 1.5-hour timeframe are not enough.  I want, (I need) 3+hour blocks.  Yesterday, during February vacation, I had my lab open for students to work.  Some arrived at 9:30, some thereafter, some stayed for 4 hours, some for 8, some for 10.  One worked at Yale in the morning on an SEM, and then came to the school midafternoon and stayed until 7:30.  It was all about FLEXIBILITY.

Flexibility to learn as appropriate for the individual student.  Some were conducting experiments, some were using the computer lab to work on a poster, some were mounting posters, some were conferencing with me, some were organizing binders of research reports, some were conducting statistical analyses like ANOVAs, some were on their cell phones making arrangements for data collection at a different lab.  Each was doing what they needed to do to be successful.  Each was motivated – much of it was internal, but the external pressures of completing an assignment and presenting it for an audience of practicing scientists and engineers that weekend.

I was the principal investigator running my lab.  My students, the project managers, were engaged in behaviors of the scientific and engineering researchers.  We were THE community of practice.  We weren’t trying to be like scientists (“like real life”).  We were DOING it. 

Interestingly, we couldn’t do what we were doing – such deep learning, such authentic learning, if we were under the tyranny of the bell.  Vacation from school afforded us the opportunity to learn (in the case of this class) better than we could under normal “educational” circumstances.  I don’t know how we can operationalize this kind of learning strategy in a systemic way, and honestly don’t know if I want to all of the time . . .

www.kyb.mpg.de

What I do walk away knowing, is that education MUST take place in a variety of places and formats.  What I do know is that when the teacher assumes the role of the facilitator rather than the disseminator of knowledge, students certainly construct their knowledge better.  Better learning . . . isn’t that what we’re all seek?

from: www.bath.ac.uk

My good friend and colleague, Krista Ritchie, recently defended her dissertation at McGill University.  I was able to attend via distance using Skype.  During her defense, I had the opportunty to hear about her research on problem finding.  She conducted her study longitudinally, observing students over the course of a year from various Connecticut high school science sites.  Each site she studied had students in a “traditional” course (e.g., biology, chemistry, physics) and an applied science research course. Both the traditional and research courses were taught by the same teacher at each site.

As she was presenting her data, one thing stood out to me as a practitioner.  She discussed the negative responses often associated with problem finding: anxiety, nervousness, fear.  These responses, she discussed, were often not found in the traditional science education classes, yet were prevalent in the applied research class.  This immediately got me thinking.

Of course, the proximate interpretation is for an applied science teacher to know that there is anxiety assocaited with the problem finding phase of research, and he or she should do whatever is in his or her power to support the students.  Yet, I wonder – what is the necessity of the anxiety to push the student forward to facing and conquering the challenges associated with creative problem finding?

For more of a holistic view of the educational enterprise, I am thinking more about the place of problem finding within educational structures.  While I am an advocate of problem finding, I am not so Pollyanna as to realize that creative behaviors like problem finding are often stifled and supressed in education.  As much as teachers say they want their students to be creative producers – so many really don’t.  I can hear the voices now . . . “Just do what I say.”    Or from the students, “Just tell me what to do and I’ll do it.”  There is TOO much culture of lock-step-do-as-the-teacher-says-and-don’t-push-the-creative-envelope culture prevalent in education.  I don’t even claim this to be a one-way street.  Teachers and students just want to do as told:  solve/teach well-known questions that have well-known answers.  I am often disgruntled about how few teachers and students are willing to take a risk and work with ill-defined problems.  I think that’s where really powerful learning takes place. My challenge as an instructional leader is to bring more students, parents, teachers, administrators – all the constituents – to this place.

A place where we transcend the logical and analytical processes of problem solving and challenge students to engage in creative problem finding behaviors.    And I’m not anxious about saying that one bit!

On Monday, I will be heading to San Diego to attend my first American Educational Research AssociationAnnual Meeting.  I have been priviledged to be selected to present my research on problem finding for student research.  I am excited to share the results of my research in a poster presentation.  I recently wrote about the process of constructing the poster, and now it sits in a tube ready to fly to San Deigo. 

I am excited to share my ideas with like-minded people and am hoping to have an experience where I can learn more about strategies to share with others on how to be more accepting of research-based practices in education.

I am regularly amazed that teachers that I work with do not pay any credence whatsoever to research-based instructional practices.  They like to do what “feels good,” or “the way they were taught.”  If we are to have  transformative changes in teaching behavior, teachers have to become, at least, consumers of educational research.  I would dare say that so many practitioners dismiss educational research.  Preservice institutes certainly play a role in this apathy.  However, in service teachers need to be challenged as well. 

Action research as a personnel evaulative tool can potentially begin to reform thinking.  Teachers thoughtfully evaluating their practice is the best tool to introduce the concept of evidence-based practice.  These types of studies don’t have to be magnificent.  They should just ask a meaningful question, have a method to collect data, and draw some conclusions.  However, without the necessary professional development, this won’t effectively happen.  I wonder most how to get buy-in from teachers.

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.

I will be giving a presentation on tools for research tomorrow at Western Connecticut State University.  I am going to do a little show-and-tell.  This picture represents the essential (and perhaps not-so-essential-but-boy-is-it-nice) gear for educational research.  The products I selected where what I deemed the “best” at the time. Best sometimes referred to price, sometimes quality, sometimes availability. 

I would be remiss to not recognize my wepage provider, BlueHost.  Some of the best prices, but more importantly, fantastic service and techical support:

I currenlty employ:  Two WordPress Blogs (http://appliedscienceresearch.labanca.net; http://problemfinding.labanca.net), LimeSurvey (http://surveys.labanca.net), MediaWiki (http://practicalstats.labanca.net), as well as my homepage (http://www.labanca.net) which I construct on DreamWeaver (part of the Adobe CS3 Suite).  Surveys for my dissertation were orgininally hand coded in HTML and PHP, but I wouldn’t now think of using anything but LimeSurvey.

Please leave a comment and let me know what you think.  Discourse is, of course, always welcome!

I’ve started a post-Ed.D. writing group with my colleagues for the purpose of generating articles for publication. We’ve all done significant research, and now is the opportunity to share this great, original knowledge with others. We invited Dr. Karen Burke as a guest speaker last night.  Karen spoke so eloquently on the topic and I am podcasting her presentation here.  Dr. Burke speaks about a wiki that is currently by invitation only.  Please contact me or leave a comment if you need further information.