Foundations of Science: A Three Year Integrated High
School Science Curriculum
Madeline
Huebel-Drake, Mike Mouradian, & Elizabeth Stern
Science
Teachers
Community
High School
401 N.
Division
Ann
Arbor, MI 48104
(313)
994-2021
Liza
Finkel
Asst.
Professor, Science Education
The
University of Michigan
School
of Education
610 E.
University
Ann
Arbor, MI 48109-1259
(313)
747-0594
INTRODUCTION
Why would you eliminate earth science,
biology, and chemistry classes from your high school curriculum? Even more
importantly, what would you replace them with? Change is so hard, and takes so
much time, it's hard to imagine so drastically rewriting the curriculum.
Despite the daunting nature of the task, we changed the way we taught science
at Community High School.
WHY CHANGE?
"Why do we have to learn this?"
"What good is this going to do me?" These are familiar queries from
students. Our problem was that we had run out of good answers because we were
asking ourselves the same questions. What is the purpose of science education?
Are we teaching our students to think, work together, learn content for
relevant reasons, and use technology?
To eliminate tracking, integrate the
sciences, prepare students for the 21st century, and encourage more students to
continue in science, three high school science teachers jumped into the world
of change.
COMMUNITY HIGH SCHOOL
Community High School (CHS) is located in Ann
Arbor, Michigan and is part of the Ann Arbor public school system. It is an
alternative school with a student population of approximately 420 full-time
students, with 100 additional students who attend part-time. Currently, the
student body is 85% Caucasian and 15% African-American and Hispanic, and
includes special needs students and students at all ability levels.
A NEW WAY TO TEACH SCIENCE
Foundations of Science
We have now replaced the traditional earth
science - biology - chemistry with a project-based curriculum integrating
physical and biological sciences. This course, called Foundations of Science
(FOS), consists of three years of integrated science in which students learn
Tools of Science, Grand Themes of Science, and Advanced Applications of
Science.
The curriculum is based on four key ideas:
(1) integrating science disciplines; (2) project-based science; (3) inclusion
of authentic problems; and (4) routine uses of technology. Throughout FOS
students apply what they know to find solutions to questions they find
meaningful, and, if possible, to questions that do not already have answers.
Projects (long-term, authentic science investigations) are the driving force
behind course content, and the application of science in the community is an
important focus. Computers and technology are woven throughout the curriculum.
Assessment emphasizes application and
analysis rather than memorization, while meeting local, state, and Project 2061
objectives. Students produce artifacts including: designing and conducting
original experiments; writing formal research papers; building 3-dimensional
and computer-based models; and making presentations to the class and community.
AN INTEGRATED CURRICULUM
During the 1993-94 school year we piloted FOS
I with twenty-two ninth grade students. The first of many challenges we faced
that year was to develop meaningful projects that would meet process as well
content goals. Because we live near the Huron River, we decided to focus our
investigations on a previously unstudied local stream, a tributary of the Huron
River within walking distance of
the school. The science was real; the creek
feeds the river that serves as a drinking water source for our town, so the
data had an important and useful purpose for the community.
Our first project was to make a collection of
benthic macro invertebrates, identify them, and then use them as biological
indicators of stream health. Students calculated water quality indices and
wrote formal reports. Basic computer skills, such as word processing, cutting
and pasting, and using spreadsheets, were taught in conjunction with the
production of these reports. Science content included the role of animals in
the ecosystem, their habitat, and trophic relationships.
The second project was a physical assessment
of the creek. Here science content dealt with erosion, deposition, and
interpretation and construction of topographic maps. Process skills included
observation and analysis of data, graphing, as well as continued enhancement of
computer and writing skills.
The third project was a chemical analysis of
stream water. Students derived a water quality index value based on guidelines
provided by G.R.E.E.N. (Mitchell and Stapp, 1993). Once these assessments were
complete, students used the software program ClarisWorks to prepare multimedia
presentations which included photos, videos, and graphs.
Other projects that first year included a
debate on groundwater pollution, a Museum-City Park exhibit on local
geology/glaciology, in which some students used computers to build
"virtual" tours of their park, while others constructed elaborate,
three dimensional topographic maps. When they finished these projects, students
made presentations to the city's park preservation officer.
The final project was a return to the stream.
Students investigated three different sites along the stream on the same day
and compared data from those three sites. In addition to written reports,
students used a computer modeling program called Model-It to examine the
relationships between environmental factors and water quality.
GOING BEYOND A PILOT COURSE
We are now in our second year and are
teaching FOS I with all ninth graders at CHS (approximately 100 students in
four sections). We found that students did not know how to work in groups, and
we've incorporated cooperative learning exercises, assigned specific roles
within groups, and used conflict resolution methods to help groups work
together. We found that we need to end each project with a class discussion,
time for rewrites, and a group evaluation process. We have also begun using
weekly quizzes and graded lab notebooks to add structure to the class.
Assessment is another area in which we
continue to develop new approaches. Primary assessment focuses on written
reports, oral and multi-media presentations, and conversations with students
during class. We found that the FOS I students' essays were far more
sophisticated with regard to interpreting data and reaching conclusions than
those of students in the regular Biology class, while answers on the multiple
choice items were about the same.
FOUNDATIONS OF SCIENCE II AND III
FOS II, “The Grand Themes of Science,”
introduces large unifying themes of science: evolution, matter and energy, and
heredity. We began by revisiting the stream, comparing new data with data from
the previous fall, and having students develop models to explain any changes.
Students used Model-It to develop models for improving stream quality, and
presented them to a representative of a local environmental computer modeling
firm. Students then developed projects dealing with cell theory, respiration,
and photosynthesis, and built living models using Bottle Biology (Ingram,
1993). Students will soon investigate the evolution of life and the earth with
help from the computer program SimEarth.
The third year, Advanced Applications Of
Science, will be designed to help students integrate the tools of science and
technology with the major themes of science, and apply these to major societal
issues.
TECHNOLOGY
We have mentioned the extensive use of
technology in FOS without discussing our reasons for including it. The average
high school student uses a computer 30 minutes a week, or about 19 hours a
year. Our students each used the ClarisWorks program alone for over 130 hours
during the pilot year. Students use computers for every facet of their work in
school -- collecting and analyzing data, developing science reports, writing
essays for their English class, and preparing presentations for community
organizations. After a year of FOS, our students are unafraid of technology; an
advantage as they continue their education and careers.
It was through a grant from the National
Science Foundation obtained by Dr. Elliot Soloway and other faculty at the
University of Michigan that the first set of computers were purchased. A team
of graduate students, researchers, and programmers developed and supported the
classroom network, tools (like the Xap Shot and video cameras), software
programs, and electronic mail. They have worked intensively with us, providing
innovative software solutions to problems that we pose, and making changes
recommended by our students and ourselves, often overnight. Without them, we
would not have been able to incorporate technology to the extent we have.
ADMINISTRATIVE AND PARENTAL SUPPORT
The only way curricular change can occur is
with support. Our former principal was an advocate with parents and upper level
administrators. After observing the success of our efforts, our school district
has purchased new computers for use with the ninth grade, and are
paying for wiring a second classroom. In
addition, we have collaborated with the English department and scheduled ninth
graders in back-to-back English and Science classes; an arrangement which gives
the flexibility to work with students for two hours in either English or
Science when needed. We have also turned to the business community for support,
both monetarily as well as through mentorships.
CONCLUSION
Educational researchers suggest we are on the
right track with the science curriculum and instruction we are exploring. We've
met with enough success in the first year that we are developing curriculum for
the second and third years. We believe that our students will be better
prepared for the world of the 21st century as a result of the work they are
doing in our classrooms.
As we meet other people developing
project-based or integrated science curricula, we continue to be encouraged and
rejuvenated in our efforts. We welcome a dialog with anyone pursuing this kind
of work so that we can continue to grow as educators and refine the curriculum
for our students.