Reports from the NSF, NRC, AAAS, and others urge over and over that we must teach "science as science is done," that "science is a way of knowing," that our goal should be to impart "scientific habits of mind," and that learning must be learner-centered and oriented toward process. Fine. But what does this really mean for science education, and especially laboratory education?
In case studies of two first-year elementary classroom teachers, we explored the influence of informal science education (ISE) they experienced in their teacher education program. Our theoretical lens was identity development, delimited to classroom science teaching. We used complementary data collection methods and analysis, including interviews, electronic communications, and drawing prompts. We found that our two participants referenced as important the ISE experiences in their development of classroom science identities that included resilience, excitement and engagement in science
This paper from Phi Delta Kappan describes how growing inequality threatens American education. One of the leading indicators is the amout of resources spent on young people during their out-of-school time.
This case study reveals how one community-based youth development organization in the northeastern United States advocated for social and educational equity for the low-income families it served by challenging the local school district’s practice of referring low-income children of color to special education in disproportionate numbers. Because this community-based organization (CBO) is typical of many such youth-serving organizations, the case study shows how the assets CBOs bring to their communities can help them negotiate with schools to achieve greater social and educational equity for
The study aims to characterize contextual learning during class visits to science and natural history museums. Based on previous studies, we assumed that “outdoor” learning is different from classroom-based learning, and free choice learning in the museums enhances the expression of learning in personal context. We studied about 750 students participating in class visits at four museums, focusing on the levels of choice provided through the activity. The museums were of different sizes, locations, visitor number, and foci. A descriptive-interpretative approach was adopted, with data sources
The article offers tips for early childhood educators on planning and implementing field experiences for young learners in natural history museums. It cites that providing children with access to nature could build their science literacy. Moreover, it emphasizes the importance of intrinsic motivation and recommends that teachers should focus on children's interests and provide them the time to relax. Teachers should also encourage active learning and ensure to make the visit memorable.
The purpose of this study was to describe and understand the range of outcomes of class visits to natural history museums. The theoretical framework is based on the multifaceted process of learning in free choice learning environments, and emphasizes the unique and individual learning experience in museum settings. The study’s significance is in highlighting several possible cognitive as well as non-cognitive learning effects in museums class visits, by providing the student’s point of view. Data was collected by semi-structured interviews with 50 students in grades 6–8 on the day following
This article describes an initial attempt to find out students’ perceptions of class visits to natural history museums, with regard to the museum’s role as a place for intellectual and social experience. The study followed up approximately 500 Grades 6–8 students who visited four museums of different sizes, locations and foci. Data sources included the Museum Constructivist Learning Environment Survey (M-CLES), which was adapted from Constructivist Learning Environment Survey, an open-ended question and semi-structured interviews with 50 students. The three instruments highlighted some
Research Universities and the Future of America presents critically important strategies for ensuring that our nation's research universities contribute strongly to America's prosperity, security, and national goals. Widely considered the best in the world, our nation's research universities today confront significant financial pressures, important advances in technology, a changing demographic landscape, and increased international competition. This report provides a course of action for ensuring our universities continue to produce the knowledge, ideas, and talent the United States needs to
American Chemical Society President Bassam Z. Shakhashiri appointed and charged this Commission to undertake a wholesale review of graduate education in the chemical sciences over a yearlong period. This document is a compact rendition of the Commission's final report, emphasizing only main conclusions and recommendations. The Commission judges that the sate of graduate education in the chemical sciences is healthy in many respects, but has not kept pace with the significant changes in the world's economic, social, and political environment since the end of World War II, when the current
This award continues funding of a Center to conduct research and education on the interactions of nanomaterials with living systems and with the abiotic environment. The goals of this Center are to develop a predictive understanding of biological and ecological toxicology for nanomaterials, and of their transport and transformation in the environment. This Center engages a highly interdisciplinary, multi-institutional team in an integrated research program to determine how the physical and chemical properties of nanomaterials determine their environmental impacts from the cellular scale to that of entire ecosystems. The research approach promises to be transformative to the science of ecotoxicology by combining high throughput screening assays with computational and physiological modeling to predict impacts at higher levels of biological organization. The Center will unite the fields of engineering, chemistry, physics, materials science, cell biology, ecology, toxicology, computer modeling, and risk assessment to establish the foundations of a new scientific discipline: environmental nanotoxicology. Research on nanomaterials and development of nanotechnology is expanding rapidly and producing discoveries that promise to benefit the nation?s economy, and improve our ability to live sustainably on earth. There is now a critical need to reduce uncertainty about the possible negative consequences of nanomaterials in the environment, while at the same time providing guidelines for their safe design to prevent environmental and toxicological hazards. This Center addresses this societal need by developing a scientific framework of risk prediction that is paradigm-shifting in its potential to keep pace with the commercial expansion of nanotechnology. Another impact of the Center will be development of human resources for the academic community, industry and government by training the next generation of nano-scale scientists, engineers, and regulators to anticipate and mitigate potential future environmental hazards of nanotechnology. Partnerships with other centers will act as powerful portals for the dissemination and integration of research findings to the scientific, educational, and industrial communities, both nationally and internationally. This Center will contribute to a network of nanotechnology centers that serve the national needs and expand representation and access to this research and knowledge network through programs directed at California colleges serving underrepresented groups. Outreach activities, including a journalist-scientist communication program, will serve to inform both experts and the public at large about the safety issues surrounding nanotechnology and how to safely produce, use, and dispose of nanomaterials.
DATE:
-
TEAM MEMBERS:
Andre NelYoram CohenHilary GodwinArturo KellerPatricia Holden
resourceresearchProfessional Development, Conferences, and Networks
This report addressed a request from the President in 2009 to develop specific recommendations concerning the most important actions that the administration should take to ensure that the United States is a leader in STEM education in the coming decades. The report focuses primarily on the K-12 level, and lists two main conclusions: that we must focus on preparation and inspiration to improve STEM education, and that the federal government has historically lacked a coherent strategy and sufficient leadership capacity for K-12 STEM education. Additionally, the report includes seven policy
DATE:
TEAM MEMBERS:
President’s Council of Advisors on Science and TechnologyPresident’s Council of Advisors on Science and Technology