I think scientific literacy is our primary purpose as science teachers. I have always felt that more than content alone we have to help our students be able to be somewhat literate in science in order to, paraphrasing Freire, shape the course of their lives—to read a paper, magazine, climate change debate, and be able to make some sense out of it. To be able to ask and hopefully answer—does it make sense? Do the numbers add up? Is this plausible? How can I apply this to my life?
The article by Thier, Literacy Tools for Life, is geared to middle schoolers and the Common Content Standards are K12. However, I think they apply just as well to my Community College students. For example, I try to have my students begin to read peer reviewed journal articles. The Common Content Standards give me some great ideas about constructing a guide for students to use as they read basic research articles. The guide might include at least the following:
• What is the central idea and conclusion
• Outline the major steps in the experiment
• Compare and contrast other findings
• What is the evidence to support their conclusions
There were several points in Thier’s article that stood out for me. First of all relevancy is so important. If students find the information relevant to their lives they will be much more interested in reading, writing, and talking about it. In my microbiology class I’ve had students do short presentations about how they can relate microbiology to their jobs. I’ve had students volunteer to do this—they’ve talked about working at the pool over the summer, the food safety training at El Pollo Loco, etc. No arm twisting needed! (I’m definitely thinking of how I might use some of the new web tools to help them in presenting.)
I also agree with Thier’s idea of “writing while you read”. I do a short demo I call “How DO I read this textbook?” It is based on few reading strategies I have learned over time and is basically how to take notes to help understand the text. However, though Thier’s guidelines are good, if students followed them they would have the entire text highlighted, circled, or underlined (and K12 students can’t normally write in them!). So I think some streamlining is in order.
Finally, I think that teaching/using reflective, metacognitive thought, is very poorly done in the science classroom. Most other disciplines seem to have their students reflect often about what they are learning. This is another area I would like to develop specific strategies for. I think the What and How questions Thier gives are a good starting point. I think that this could also be a great motivating tool. Students want to realize that they have learned something! We know the sense of accomplishment they feel—how can we help them see this incrementally during the course, not just at the end?
KC
ReplyDeleteI agree that having students develop critical thinking and problem solving skills should be the number one goal in science education. The hard part is that in order for students to successfully do inquiry based labs they have to have a really strong background in the content area. I’m not sure you can answer the questions you bring up at the beginning of your post without a strong fundamental background in the subject.
Finally I completely agree with you that most science classes (my self included) don’t ask their students to reflect on their learning enough.
Absolutely I agree, I think that is our challenge and what we often get bogged down in. I just think we need to get beyond the basic facts and show them how they really apply to their lives. Bringing relevant activities helps bridge the gap. How do you cover content and move beyond?
ReplyDeleteOne of the things I've messed around with in reading is having three columns for notetaking:
ReplyDeletewith *, !, and ? as column headers. In the "*" column, my students write what they think are the main/key points of the reading. In the "!" they record the things they kind of knew already, but were enlightened by the reading. In the "?" column, they write any lingering questions. We then pair and share with the group, and compile their group lists. I don't do this with every reading, because it is very time consuming, but for the most important readings it seems to highlight the important points, as well as get them thinking about their reading and thought processes.
That reminds me of the KWL method. K-what you know, W-what you want to know, and L-what you learned. We used this a lot when I taught middle school.
ReplyDelete