SEEING THE FOREST THROUGH THE TREES:

TEACHERS’ SCIENCE LEARNING= IN AN ONLINE BIOLOGY COURSE[1]

Kathleen Davis, University of Massa= chusetts Amherst

Abstract

This paper investigates how the pedagogical approaches (project-based instruction) used in an online biology course influenced teachers’ learning of inquiry skills and biological= and ecological content knowledge. As teachers investigated their "driving questions" about the ecosystem of local maple trees, they made explicit their acquisition of biology/ecology-related concepts (e.g., populations, community, ecosystems, succession).

Introduction

&nb= sp; Betw= een 1995 and 2005, eighth grade students in the United States showed no impro= vement in science achievement. In addition, in 2005, only 29 percent of 4th- and 8th-graders were at or above proficient (Grigg, Lauko, & Brockway, 2006). Scores for underrepres= ented minorities were significantly lower (Livingston, 2006; National Science Boa= rd, 2006).

&nb= sp; Teac= her knowledge, experiences, and beliefs greatly impact what takes place within = the classroom. Druva and Anderson<= /st1:City> (as cited by Darling-Hammond, 2000) found that students' science achievement was positively related to the teachers' course taking background in both education and in science. The Gl= enn Commission report, “Before It’s Too Late” (Glenn, 2000), emphasizes the acute need for more and better-prepared science (and math) teachers. Teachers teaching science are often inadequately prepared, especi= ally in the middle grades. The 2000 Nati= onal Survey of Science and Mathematics Education (2002) reported that as man= y as 41% of middle school science teachers have fewer than 6 semesters of science coursework. Whereas up to 88% report taking an introductory biology course, approximately 1 in 5 have taken botany, zoology, ecology, or environmental science. Lastly, few hold undergraduate degrees in either science or science education. When asked to identify needs for professional development 67% of middle school teachers identified deepening their content knowledge as nece= ssary, 54% also identified assessing learning in science, 61% using investigative science strategies, 58% understanding student thinking, and 78% using technology in instruction.

Concep= tual Framework

Teacher Learning

&nb= sp; The accumulation of a specified number of credit hours in a particular discipli= ne is often considered as an indicator of content mastery. However, researchers have come to see that much more is needed for teachers to acquire a deep understanding of the discipline and its practices (Anderson & Mitchener, 1994).

&nb= sp; Much thought needs to be given to how teachers learn to teach; what teachers kno= w; how their knowledge is acquired; how it changes over time; and what process= es bring about change in individual teacher practices as well as deep and long= -lasting change in science classrooms. Teachers need continued opportunities to deep= en and expand their content knowledge (Borko & Putnam, 1996) so as to learn the strategies, models, and analogies needed to respond to students’ thinking and link new knowledge to everyday experiences. Researchers suggest that, just like student learning, teacher learning should be framed in constructivist learning theory and inquiry (Anderson et al., 1994; Borko and Putnam, 1996; Carter, 1990). Teachers should learn content – and concomitantly, pedagogy – through engagement in learning activities that “mirrors” the same kind of experiences that reformers hope teachers would provide the= ir students (Borko & Putnam, 1996; Loucks-Horsley et al., 1998; NRC, 1996). In addition, teachers = of science should have significant and substantial involvement in laboratory experiences where they actively investigate phenomena that can be studied. These teachers need to engage in inquiry and so devise research questions, design procedures, collect and process data, and report findings. Professio= nal development must also promote learning activities that address interesting = and significant problems or topics, provide opportunities to integrate science = in everyday contexts, and foster collaboration among teachers and scientists (= NRC, 1996). Lastly, making strong links between personal learning and the classr= oom context are important for teacher change in beliefs and practice (Anderson & Mitchener, 1994; Borko & Putnam, 1996).

Teacher Learning through Project-Based Instruction

= Housing inquiry within the frame of Project Based Instruction (PBI) seems useful as= we seek ways to adapt science to the needs of the learner (Krajcik, Czerniak, Berger, & Berger, 2002). PBI consists of engaging learners in "driving questions" around which they design explorations to answer their quest= ions and solve problems they identify. Learners, their instructors, experts, and citizen groups work together on the question or problem using technology to investigate and collect information. The result is a compilation of artifac= ts or products that provide answers, solutions, and/or more information about = the question or problem (Krajcik, Czerniak, Berger, & Berger, 2002). With P= BI, projects are open-ended, and science learning is situated in learners’ lived experiences.

Hurd (2000) refers to such instruct= ional practice as a “lived curriculum.” Such an approach to learning = is open to learners’ interests, needs, and voices. The curriculum allows them to engage in science practice: to describe what they want to know and understand and to engage in investigations and projects where they can reso= lve an issue. Learners and experts engage in conversations about questions, research design, findings, and implications. Such a pedagogical approach enables learners to make sense of science in their everyday lives. Thus, the nature of the curriculum is R= 20;active knowledge in that it brings science into the everyday life of the student and the real world” (Hu= rd, 2000, p. 55). In this sense, science is seen as a tool that enables citizens to investigate the problems= of everyday life and serve their communities.

Teacher Learning Online

Having access to such learning opportunities can be problematic for teachers, particularly in rural areas. With the closest training center sometimes several hours away, rural teache= rs must deal with significant time and travel constraints, which can be further exacerbated by budget pressures. Teachers in urban districts with large numbers of in-service days and increased classroom hours face similar time constraints (Pittinsky, 2005).<= span style=3D'mso-spacerun:yes'>

To address these issues, online cou= rses and programs can provide convenient alternatives for teachers who do not ha= ve access to traditional learning opportunities based on geographic remoteness, time, or both. In addition, asynchronous interactions may give students who generally stay quiet in traditional classrooms the opportunity to speak and= be heard; online courses can allow teachers to fit coursework into their sched= ules; and resources that may typically be available on a limited basis in a face-to-face class can be accessed at any time, from any place, in an online course (Brown & Green, 2003).

It is clear from the literature that courses can be successful in achieving educational goals (Baron & McKay, 2001; Harlen & Doubler, 2004, Lee, et al., 2004), but developing an effective online course involves much more than just putting lecture notes = and assignments onto a web site. It is imperative that courses address the poin= ts raised earlier and also follow the 7 basic principles of good teaching: encourages student-faculty contact; encourages cooperation (collaboration) among stude= nts; encourages active learning; provides prompt feedback; emphasizes time on ta= sk; communicates high expectations; and respects diverse talents and ways of learning (Zuniga & Pease, 1998). Building a community and avoiding isolation is critical (Whitworth, 2001). Teachers enrolled in online courses often report that they have more interactions with the instructor and with = the other students than in most traditional classes (Zuniga & Pease, 1998). Course assignments and deadlines must be very clear, while a standardized course format aids user friendliness and simplifies navigation.<= /span>

Purpose of the Study

This study investigates the science content and skills elementary and middle school science teachers learned in= an online biology course designed to provide K-8 teachers with increased scien= ce knowledge and skills. The study explores the ways in which the course activities using a PBI approach aided in teachers’ knowledge acquisit= ion.

Methodology

Study Context<= o:p>

This study explores= teacher learning in an online biology course offered to elementary and middle school teachers during the Fall 2004 and 2005 semesters. The course was one of sev= eral science and science education courses offered as part of a masters degree program at a large university in the Northeast United States. The program combined the expertise of science faculty = with science educators to develop science and science education courses based in inquiry with strong hands-on components and tied to state and national standards. Aided by kits of materials developed by course instructors, participants engage in a variety of guided and open-ended inquiries as the primary means of developing their understanding of the concepts. Threaded discussions, electronic journals, email, digital imaging and document-shari= ng options are used to facilitate interactions among participants and with the instructors. Course instructors seek to meet the professional development n= eeds of elementary and middle school science teachers by focusing on both science content and pedagogy and so teachers are asked to use the strategies presen= ted in each course to design learning experiences for their own classrooms.

= ; The biology course investigated in this study focused on biological and ecologi= cal topics such as populations, communities, ecosystems, and succession. The co= urse was designed around several projects: A Year in the Life of a Maple Tree: Observations and Reflections, Compost Column, Schoolyard Enhancement Plan, Final Project (Groups chose an existing ecology project or created their ow= n). Most of the projects were completed with teams and one was carried out individually. Two instructors taught the course—one was an assistant professor of biology at the university noted above and the other was an associate professor of biology from a neighboring state college. The course= was comprised of 11 teachers in the Fall of 2004 and 9 teachers in the Fall of 2005. Most of the teachers taught in rural hill towns of New England, though a few were urban teachers and located in cities along the coast. Half of the participants were middle school science teache= rs and half taught at the elementary level. Each course was comprised primaril= y of women—approximately 75% in 2004 and 66% in 2005.

Methods and Analysis

Qualitative, case-study methods wer= e used in this study (Merriam, 1998). Data was collected through the use of teacher and instructor interviews and online artifacts (teacher discussions, journa= ls, and portfolios) and course documents (assignments, readings, and syllabus). These data sources were examined for teachers’ demonstration of understanding of science content and inquiry.

Teacher Journals<= /u>

&= nbsp; Throughout the semester, teachers noted their project designs in their journals and recorded observations, measurements, conclusions there as well. Teachers recorded new questions that arose about their observations and findings in general. The teachers’ journals serve as a rich resource to describe what teachers’ understo= od and were able to do relative to the course projects.

Online Discussions

&= nbsp; Each week, teachers engaged in discussions about the science content presented in the course. Such topics as: Conceptual ecology, natural selection/evolution, trophic interactions, competition, population density, communities, and interactions were presented through questions posed by the instructors. For example, for the week on populations, students were asked:

Sugar maples don’t live by themselves, usually—they live among other sugar maples, in a populati= on that occupies a particular habitat or region. What are the kinds of interactions that sugar maples have with each other in a population?

Thus, the online discussions provided an important forum to further examine teachers’ content knowledge.

Course Documents<= /u>

&= nbsp; Several types of course documents were analyzed to enable the researchers to better understand the course structure and content. Noted on the course website we= re course assignments, including the project descriptions, readings from the t= wo required texts, and the course syllabus.

Interviews

&= nbsp; Course participants and instructors participated in a 60-minute interview to better ascertain the science knowledge and skills gleaned by teachers in the cours= e. Interviews were done face-to-face, audio-taped, and later transcribed. Questions included: XXXX Through these in person interviews, we looked for course participants to confirm and/or correct our data analysis and research findings.

Online Data Sources

As outlined by Merriam (1998), the researchers considered several issues critical to data collection in the on= line environment. First of all, there is no way to know if/when some data was lo= st either in private emails or in other conversations held outside of the cyber-environment. So, as researchers, we can make no assumptions about hav= ing a comprehensive collection of data. Secondly, the effect of the online sett= ing on the data must be considered. Importantly, participants were in a setting where they could mask much about themselves—emotions, learning strugg= les, commitment to learning, etc. In addition, the asynchronous context allowed participants time to reflection before they responded; and so, some course participants may have provided different commentary than they would in an atmosphere where the time for learning is shorter and more restrictive. Las= tly, the software used in the online environment may have curtailed or enhanced = what the user was able to communicate. With face-to-face interviews, we sought to counter balance some of these issues and ensure that our analysis of the on= line data “rang true” with course participants and instructors.

Analysis

&= nbsp; To glean teachers’ science understanding of content and inquiry through = the data sources, a table containing the K-8 content standards from the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) was constructed. The table was then trimmed down to address only those concepts that framed the projects of the course. The content standards table was revised several times to aid in its usability. (See Table 1.)

Table 1. National Science Educati= on Content Standards that Framed the Course Projects.
        &= nbsp;         &= nbsp;           &nbs= p;            &= nbsp;

PHYSIC= AL SCIENCE

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

PROPER= TIES OF OBJECTS AND MATERIALS

p1

p2

p3

p4

Object= s have many observable properties:

Color, temperature, solubili= ty and the ability to react with other substances. K-4, 5-8

X

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

•     Can be measured using tools, such as rulers, balances, and thermometers K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

A substance has characterist= ic properties, such as density, a boiling point, and solubility, all of which are independent of the amount of the sample. 5-8

X

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

A mixture of substances ofte= n can be separated into the original substances using one or more of the c= haracteristic properties. 5-8

X

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

Objects are made of one or m= ore materials, such as paper, wood, and metal. K-4

X

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

TRANSF= ER OF ENERGY

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

•    Energy is a property= of many substances and is associated with heat, light, electricity, mechanic= al motion, sound, nuclei, and the nature of a chemical. 5-8

X=

The sun is a major source of energy for changes on the earth's surface. 5-8

X

X=

&nb= sp;

LIFE S= CIENCE

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

THE CHARACTERISTICS OF ORGANISMS

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

Organi= sms have basic needs:

Animals need air, water, and= food K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    Plants require air, = water, nutrients, and light. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    Organisms can surviv= e only in environments in which their needs can be met. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    The world has many different environments, and distinct environments support the life of different types of organisms. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

Each p= lant or animal has different structures that serve different functions in: <= /o:p>

Growth
Survival <= /li>
Reproduction K-4 =

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

The be= havior of individual organisms is influenced by:

Internal cues (such as hunge= r) K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

•    External cues (such = as a change in the environment). K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

•    Humans and other org= anisms have senses that help them detect internal and external cues. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

Cells = carry on the many functions needed to sustain life, they:

     •    Take in nutrients us= ed to provide energy for the work that cells do and to make the materials that a cell or an organism needs. 5-8

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    Disease is a breakdo= wn in structures or functions of an organism. 5-8

X=

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

ORGANI= SMS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENTS

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

All an= imals depend on plants:

Some animals eat plants for = food.

Other animals eat animals th= at eat the plants. K-4

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

An org= anism's patterns of behavior are related to the nature of that organism's environment:

The kinds and numbers of oth= er organisms present K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    The availability of = food and resources K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    The physical characteristics of the environment. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    When the environment changes:

      Some pla= nts and animals survive and reproduce K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

•    Others die or move t= o new locations. K-4

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

All or= ganisms cause changes in the environment where they live.

Some of these changes are detrimental to the organism or other organisms K-4=

Others are beneficial. K-4 <= o:p>

X=

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

Humans depend on their natur= al and constructed environments. K-4

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

X=

&= nbsp;

Humans change environments i= n ways that can be either beneficial or detrimental for themselves and other organisms. K-4

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

REGULA= TION AND BEHAVIOR

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

&= nbsp;

All or= ganisms must be able to:

Obtain and use resources 5-8=

X=

X=

X=

&= nbsp;

•

PHYSIC= AL SCIENCE	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
PROPER= TIES OF OBJECTS AND MATERIALS	p1	p2	p3	p4
Object= s have many observable properties: Color, temperature, solubili= ty and the ability to react with other substances. K-4, 5-8	X	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
• Can be measured using tools, such as rulers, balances, and thermometers K-4		X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
A substance has characterist= ic properties, such as density, a boiling point, and solubility, all of which are independent of the amount of the sample. 5-8	X	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
A mixture of substances ofte= n can be separated into the original substances using one or more of the c= haracteristic properties. 5-8	X	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
Objects are made of one or m= ore materials, such as paper, wood, and metal. K-4	X	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
TRANSF= ER OF ENERGY		&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
• Energy is a property= of many substances and is associated with heat, light, electricity, mechanic= al motion, sound, nuclei, and the nature of a chemical. 5-8		X=
The sun is a major source of energy for changes on the earth's surface. 5-8	X	X=

LIFE S= CIENCE	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
THE CHARACTERISTICS OF ORGANISMS	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
Organi= sms have basic needs: Animals need air, water, and= food K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• Plants require air, = water, nutrients, and light. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• Organisms can surviv= e only in environments in which their needs can be met. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• The world has many different environments, and distinct environments support the life of different types of organisms. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
Each p= lant or animal has different structures that serve different functions in: <= /o:p> Growth Survival <= /li> Reproduction K-4 =	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
The be= havior of individual organisms is influenced by: Internal cues (such as hunge= r) K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
• External cues (such = as a change in the environment). K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
• Humans and other org= anisms have senses that help them detect internal and external cues. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
Cells = carry on the many functions needed to sustain life, they: • Take in nutrients us= ed to provide energy for the work that cells do and to make the materials that a cell or an organism needs. 5-8	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• Disease is a breakdo= wn in structures or functions of an organism. 5-8	X=	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
ORGANI= SMS AND THEIR ENVIRONMENTS	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
All an= imals depend on plants: Some animals eat plants for = food. Other animals eat animals th= at eat the plants. K-4	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
An org= anism's patterns of behavior are related to the nature of that organism's environment: The kinds and numbers of oth= er organisms present K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• The availability of = food and resources K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• The physical characteristics of the environment. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• When the environment changes: Some pla= nts and animals survive and reproduce K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
• Others die or move t= o new locations. K-4	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
All or= ganisms cause changes in the environment where they live. Some of these changes are detrimental to the organism or other organisms K-4= Others are beneficial. K-4 <= o:p>	X=	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
Humans depend on their natur= al and constructed environments. K-4	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	X=	&= nbsp;
Humans change environments i= n ways that can be either beneficial or detrimental for themselves and other organisms. K-4	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
REGULA= TION AND BEHAVIOR	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;	&= nbsp;
All or= ganisms must be able to: Obtain and use resources 5-8=	X=	X=	X=	&= nbsp;
•