Summer Physical Science Institute for Middle School Teachers

Title of Project: Summer Physical Science Institute for Middle School Teachers

Project Directors: Dr. Meera Chandrasekhar, Professors of Physics, University of Missouri-Columbia, Dr. Bruce McClure, Associate Professor of Biochemistry, University of Missouri-Columbia, Dr. Steve Keller, Associate Professor of Chemistry, University of Missouri-Columbia, Dr. Mark J. Volkmann, Associate Professor of Science Education, University of Missouri-Columbia

Lead Institution: University of Missouri-Columbia

Grade level focus: Middle and High School

Credit hours to be provided: 3.0 Graduate Credits

PROJECT Narrative

Understanding in Physics and Chemistry emerges from examining phenomena associated with tangible objects. Phenomena can then be related mathematically to physical laws, which helps connect to the ?big ideas? behind the concept. Following this philosophy, the proposed Physical Science Institute brings together concepts and experiential learning activities in Physics and Chemistry. The institute will be taught by faculty in Physics, Chemistry, Biochemistry, and Science Education, aided by two teaching assistants from the science disciplines. It is designed and planned in collaboration with two teachers, a principal, and a science coordinator. The integrated lecture-lab style uses hands-on activities that model inquiry methods, quantitative analysis, problem solving, and experimental design. Content and pedagogy will be enhanced through take-home kits that allow teachers to perform all the activities with their students immediately. These kits are invaluable, especially to rural schools, and will be split-funded by the grant and the participants' school districts.

A. ESTABLISHING DATA DRIVEN NEEDS

We solicited participants through an e-mail listserv network of K-12 teachers/schools that are partnered with the University of Missouri College of Education [Missouri Partnership for Educational Renewal (MPER)]. To participate in our Institute, middle level (5-9) teachers must demonstrate a need for improved subject matter expertise and pedagogical competence in the physical sciences. Our highest priority is to recruit teachers in schools with low MAP scores (>40% combined Step 1 and Progressing on the 7th grade science battery) and high poverty (>30% Free/Reduced Lunch). Of the 30 responding teachers, approximately 70% work in schools that meet both of these criteria. None of the responding schools indicated difficulty with the recruitment or retention of qualified science teachers.

B. PROJECT GOALS AND MEASURABLE OBJECTIVES

Goal 1: Increase participants' understanding of physical science concepts and content, explicitly coupled with quantitative analysis integrated with algebraic and logical thinking for in-depth understanding. Concepts addressed are forces, motion, energy, matter, and chemical properties.
Objective 1: Participants will manifest gains in understanding Physics and Chemistry concepts.
Goal 2: Advance participants' knowledge of new hands-on activities with a focus on inquiry and problem solving, supported by materials kits for immediate implementation of activities.
Objective 2: Participants will demonstrate knowledge and application of inquiry and experimental design in teaching Physics and Chemistry concepts.
Goal 3: Promote self-confidence in conceptual and quantitative aspects of physical science.
Objective 3: Participants will report increased self-confidence with physical science concepts, particularly in the quantitative aspects.
Goal 4: Enhance understanding of physical science concepts among students of participants.
Objective 4: Student scores on unit tests will improve compared to school scores on the MAP for these objectives.

These objectives are linked to the following DESE initiatives : Scientific Inquiry, Matter and Energy in the Missouri Science Frameworks. K-16 initiatives addressed are: Development of mathematical thinking for students; parents (in our case, teachers) should not "pass on" negative attitudes, experiences, or anxieties about mathematics to their children; active participation of arts and sciences departments in the design and implementation of teacher preparation programs; middle school programs incorporating the knowledge and skills, particularly algebraic thinking, necessary for high school classes; alignment between MAP and new curriculum expectations.

Competencies to be acquired and shared by participants include enhanced understanding of Physics and Chemistry concepts, quantitative skills, inquiry and problem-solving skills, and an immediately applicable set of hands-on activities to support the knowledge learned.

C. DESCRIPTION OF ACTIVITIES

1. Proposed project activities and how they fulfill the project objectives:

This Institute is designed to be the first of a three-year cycle and will focus on the content areas of forces, motion, energy, properties of matter, and chemical properties. The second year will include electricity, magnetism, elements, atoms, molecules, and bonding. The third year will include heat, optics, astronomy, materials science, and biochemistry . The topics in each year's Institute are carefully chosen to integrate Physics and Chemistry and to address a broad spectrum of physical science topics that are aligned with state and national standards.

The Institute addresses the need for middle level (5-9) teachers to be well prepared in the physical sciences. The Institute will consist of 15 six-hour days of summer institute, three follow-up Saturdays during the academic year, and one-day visits to school sites.

Objective 1: Participants will take part in three kinds of learning activities. First, working in teams, they will learn Physics and Chemistry through carefully sequenced hands-on activities that promote conceptual and quantitative learning. Second, they will deepen their quantitative understanding through five afternoon sessions specifically designed to assist teachers analyze and solve problems. Third, they will develop projects (in pairs) where they explore everyday experiences that serve as a basis for understanding modern technological applications. The content is expressly chosen so that macroscopic concepts discussed in the Physics segment (e.g., density of liquids) mesh with microscopic concepts in the Chemistry segment (chemical properties and solutions), continually connecting specific phenomena to big ideas in science.

Objective 2: Participants will investigate Physics and Chemistry phenomena through inquiry. In keeping with the constructivist learning-cycle pedagogy, the content is arranged in modules designed so that a concept begins with an everyday experience and develops to its application in modern day technology. As they progress through the modules, participants will engage scientifically oriented questions; give priority to evidence, develop and evaluate explanations; formulate explanations from evidence; evaluate explanations in light of alternate explanations; and communicate and justify their proposed explanations¹. Evidence of participants' ability to conduct inquiry will be demonstrated as they perform investigations in the summer institute. Evidence of their ability to teach through inquiry will be demonstrated as they share their individual projects on the last day of the institute and during school visits.

Objective 3: Elementary and middle school teachers are familiar with concepts in life and earth sciences. However, many of them have not taken a course in Physics or Chemistry, and often feel intimidated by the material. Their lack of self-confidence transfers to students. Through this Institute, teachers' confidence is enhanced through their increased knowledge base, multiple-step problem-solving ability, and understanding of technological applications.

Objective 4: Follow-up activities during the academic year will require that participants teach chosen activities, and model related pedagogy. In addition to the kits teachers will receive, they will have access to more sophisticated kits and access to instructors for content-related advice. Teachers will document student achievement in multiple ways (see evaluation plan).

2. Subject content and pedagogical skills covered

The Physical Science content areas are: forces, motion, energy, properties of matter, and chemical properties (Table I). Each content area is divided into modules with three to ten sequenced activities to investigate the concept in depth. The sequence within a module is based on the 5-E learning cycle² (illustrated in Table II). Quantitative, problem solving, and assessment activities are woven into each module.

Table I. Content Modules, Activities and Concepts (Concepts referenced to Missouri Frameworks; Initials refer to instructor responsible)
Air and Air Pressure (MC) The stubborn funnel Tissue paper challenge Making a submarine Amazing index card Does air have weight? Magdeburg hemispheres A blast with a vacuum pump Lego pneumatics Making water flow uphill Making a fountain Concepts: Air occupies space, has weight, produces pressure; Physical properties of substances (5-8);	Water / Liquids (MC) Let's make layers Layering salt solutions Egg and salt water-quantitative Floating blocks A box that barely floats Which wood to build a raft? The prince's pendant Is this easier to swim in? Puzzling scenarios Cartesian diver Concepts: Density; Sinking and Floating; Archimedes' Principle; Physical Properties of substances (5-8);	Properties of Matter (SK, BM) Turn on the heat! Build thermometer Heating substances Phase change Mass and melting Mass and freezing Density of air Concepts: Conservation of mass; Physical states of matter (atomic level); Physical properties of substances (5-8);
Motion in one dimension (MC) Motion is a ball Vectors in motion Walk and roll Motion challenges 1,2,3 Measure your reaction time Feather and rock demo Concepts: Types of motion (K-4); Force & motion (K-4); Speed-distance-time relation (5-8); Acceleration and gravity (5-8)	Introducing Forces (MC) Carnival of forces Force challenge Vectors in forces Designing / making mobiles Balancing forces Concepts Types and effects of forces in nature (K-4;) Push and pull forces (K-4); Directionality of forces (5-8); Net force (5-8);	Pure Substances, Mixtures and Solutions (SK, BM) Mix it up! Pure substances, mixtures and solutions Pure substance or mixture?? Adding water to substances Saturating a solution Determining solubility Mixing water and alcohol Concepts: Properties of mixtures and solutions (5-8) ____________________ Safety with Chemicals and using MSDS information (SK, BM)
Motion in two dimensions (MC) Bent barrel ballistics Tunnel trajectories Pancake catapult Monkey and hunter - demo Trace that trajectory Concepts: Describing motion in terms of velocity and acceleration ( 9-12); Representing motion with vectors (9-12); Motion equations (9-12); Trajectories	Simple machines (MC) Three kinds of levers -sort Building lego levers Gears and ratios Bicycle gears and mechanics Block and tackle Measure that force Lego pulley activities Concepts: Mechanical Advantage; Machines alter force used, speed, direction (5-8); Energy-efficiency-power (9-12)
Work and Energy (MC) That's the way a ball bounces Does heat change ball's energy? Just plane work Uhoo the U tube Design a roller coaster Concepts: F-d-work relation; Energy transformations; Energy conservation (5-8); Interactions of matter and energy (5-8) (9-12); Work and energy (5-8); Kinetic and potential energy (5-8) (9-12	Newton 's Laws, Momentum (MC) Crash test site Egg crash car Falling washers Newtonian demonstrator Recoil -happy, unhappy balls Kodak cannons Concepts: Momentum and force; Momentum conservation (9-12); Action and reaction (5-8); F-m-a relation (9-12)	Properties and Uses (SK, BM) What's this made of? Separations Removing a stain Filtering a solution Cleaning rock salt Analyzing inks Add salt to ice and boiling water Concept: Analyzing and separating compounds and solutions (5-8)

 

Steps in learning process	Table II: Illustration of the Five-E learning-cycle model to our activity sequence on density (floating and sinking).
	Purpose of step	Example of activity sequence
Engage	Student makes connection between past and present learning experiences; interest excited	Let's make layers- students layer oil, shampoo, corn syrup and soy sauce (different chemical properties and densities)
Explore	Student manipulates materials to actively explore concepts, processes or skills	Layering salt solutions ? students layer solutions with the same chemical properties but of different densities
Explain	Focus students' attention on previous activities; opportunities to develop explanations or hypotheses; introduction of formal labels or definitions.	Qualitative and quantitative analyses of previous activity ? introduction of the term ?density?, measurement of density of solutions
Elaborate	Extend conceptual understanding; practice desired skills; deepen understanding;	Egg and salt water- extension of liquid-floating-on-liquid idea to solids and liquids.
Evaluate	Encourage students to assess understanding and abilities; teacher evaluates learning	Floating Blocks and Box Barely Floats ? designing floating and sinking objects

Lessons begin with teachers' questions posted on a large tablet and discussed as modules progress. Through the questions, instructors can identify misconceptions and areas of curiosity. The questions offer an excellent forum for discussion and peer learning.

This multilevel sequential approach conveys the thrill of scientific investigation. Students and teachers will see that simple concepts can be logically evolved and quantified, used to understand complicated phenomena, and applied to build a gadget or solve a practical problem. These activities will familiarize teachers and students with simple scientific instrumentation (such as electronic balances) that they will use in high school or college laboratories.

3. Tentative activity schedule for summer institute ( July 7-25, 2003 ) and follow-up sessions:

Summer classes will meet for 15 days from 9 am-12:30 pm and 1:30-4 pm . Mornings are spent on hands-on activities, discussions for concept development, and quantification. Theoretical aspects and problem solving are integrated into the activities. Pedagogical discussions of inquiry, misconceptions, and experimental design are woven into the content framework.

Five afternoon sessions address problem solving. Two sessions review math/algebra. The other three will deal with problems related to Physics and Chemistry. Examples will be followed up with guided practice and homework assignments.

Eight afternoons are reserved for participants (in pairs) to develop a project on a topic studied at the Institute. Teachers will choose project topics that are relevant to their students, develop a hands-on activity, present the theory behind it, including quantitative aspects, and relate it to the everyday world. Topic choices are particularly critical for those in high-poverty schools where students may not easily relate to the relevance of science in their lives. TAs and instructors will assist with project ideas and resources. Project reports will be placed on our website (see previous projects at http://www.missouri.edu/~wwwepic ) and disseminated (Sec E.)

Table III. Contact Hours
With primary instructors: Keller, McClure, Chandrasekhar
Classes (15 days)	52
Tests: (pre and post)	2
Problem review	11
Follow-up (3 Saturdays)	18
With Instructors / Assistants / Presenters
Gender Equity	2
Project presentations	4
Project preparation	20
On-site follow up	6
Total contact hours	115

 

The first and last afternoons will be spent in pre- and post- tests and project presentations (all part of course grade). One afternoon will be set aside for a gender equity presentation by an expert in the area, Dr. Martha Henry (this segment is short and will not be evaluated).

Follow-up activities include teaching selected concepts in their own classrooms, keeping a portfolio of lesson plans and student work samples, and returning to the University for three Saturdays during the academic year (once in fall and twice in winter). The morning of each follow-up visit will be spent on new activities related to the content area of the Institute. The afternoon is reserved for reporting on classroom implementation, sharing portfolios, misconceptions encountered (and how to dispel them), materials management, and teaching techniques. Teachers will also take a short content-based test to gauge retention.

The four PDs, evaluator and staff (J. Geib) will conduct site visits. Classes will be monitored for content accuracy and application of pedagogy, especially inquiry. Feedback will be provided.

4. Development of standards-based curriculum modules

The Physics segment of this Institute has enjoyed great success over the past ten years in the form of the Exploring Physics extra-curricular program and summer institutes. The hands-on materials are effective, robust, and inexpensive. We are currently revising the written materials to enhance inquiry, experimental design and problem-solving activities. They will be formatively reviewed by local teachers and field tested in Winter 2003 in a Physics class for pre-service teachers taught by Dr. Chandrasekhar. The eventual goal is to develop a CD of hands-on activities with a rich set of supporting links (i.e., content knowledge, problems, animations, etc.) similar to our Electricity and Magnetism CD (see www.exploringphysics.com for demo). Favorable reviews of this CD³ suggest that it is a successful model.

The Chemistry segment will use Lessons and Inquiries from the Science and Technology Concepts for Middle Schools^TM (STC/MS) Properties of Matter curriculum developed by the National Science Resource Center . Drs Keller and McClure have participated in an NSF funded project for two years and have used Properties of Matter for teacher development. As part of this project, they have met with middle school teachers and gained direct insight into classroom implementation of the curriculum. Where appropriate, the Inquiries will be modified to match the ?Five E' learning cycle (Table II).

D. EVALUATION PLAN

A multi-modal evaluation will be conducted to address project objectives and to examine its effect on student achievement in the physical science concepts taught at the Institute.

Objective 1: Pre- and post-tests of concept understanding will be administered to all participants on the first and last days and of the Institute. The tests will be instructor-constructed. Tests of retention will be given on follow-up Saturdays. These tests will parallel the original post-test and are designed by the instructors. During the on-site visits, observers will monitor for accuracy of concepts presented by the teachers. Scores will be analyzed for significant differences between pre/post tests, and subsequent tests taken during the three follow-up visits.

Objective 2: Teacher projects, journals, and sample lesson plans submitted during follow-up visits will be examined for frequency, demonstration, and application of the inquiry process. On-site observers will monitor inquiry strategies. The evaluator will train observers in using an observation instrument.

Objective 3: A modified version of the ?Exploring Physics? confidence survey will be administered pre-post institute. Responses will be assessed for significant differences in responses. During on-site observations, observers will interview the teacher regarding perceived self-confidence. Teacher journals will be examined for comments about self-confidence.

Objective 4: Achievement scores for unit tests will be compared to the mean score on the Missouri Achievement Program scores for the school from the previous year for the specific concepts studied in the Institute. This model, recommended by the National Science Foundation⁴, allows the school's mean achievement to be the baseline for past achievement for students in the school. A stratified sample of the students in each school will be used as the treatment group. Baseline and unit scores will be examined for significant differences.

Overall Project Evaluation: The project will be evaluated based on a model developed by Medina, et al.⁵. This model shows that when teachers are taught specific content, show content acquisition, teach that content to students, and students are tested on the content, there is a direct correlation between teacher training and student knowledge when all steps are completed. The evaluation process proposed will track all steps of this process.

E. DISSEMINATION

Teachers will be encouraged to present inservice institutes in their local school districts. Classroom sets of materials will be made available. Teachers will present activities and projects at NSTA and statewide meetings (STOM and Interface). Articles will be submitted to STOM, MCTM, NSTA, and NCTM publications. McREL, ENC, and Eisenhower Consortia networks will be activated to disseminate the results. We will offer teachers the opportunity of hosting the Exploring Physics extra-curricular program at their schools (based on summer institute content). Previous users include teachers from Columbia, Cairo, Hannibal, Prairie Home, and Iberia .

F. MANAGEMENT PLAN

Table IV: Timeline:	Pre-recruitment of participants by e-mail; (30 responses as of Nov 15, 2002 )(MV, MC, JG: Initials refer to persons responsible. See Personnel)
Oct-Nov 2002
Feb 2003	Brochures printed and distributed at Interface. Recruitment through MPER, previous contacts, and through RPDCs (MV, MC, JG)
Feb-April '03	Detailed planning of Institute content and schedule; Content reexamined for pedagogical links and consistency (MC, BM, SK, MV, MH, JG, RS, KK, BL)
Late May 2003	Application cutoff date
July 7-25, 2003	Summer Institute. (MC, BM, SK, MV, MH, KK, RS,BL JG)
Oct '03, Feb, May ?04	Follow up Saturdays (tentative) (MC, BM, SK, MV, MH, JG)
Nov ?03 ? May ?04	Follow-up visits at school sites. (MC, BM, SK, MV, MH, JG)

 

Structure: Sec. C includes several details. Thirty teachers will be accepted to the Institute; twelve will be housed in MU dormitories, and the rest will commute. Teachers will work in pairs. They will receive three graduate credits in Physics. We will recommend that at least two teachers from a given school district come to the Institute, to providing mutual support upon their return. We recognize that this may not be practical for some rural schools. Activity equipment is already available at the University of Missouri . The grant will fund participant stipends (see budget). Teachers will receive a kit of equipment worth $600 that includes one copy of almost all activities. This kit will be split-funded ($300 each) by CBHE and the teachers' schools.

Recruitment: Participants will be recruited from Missouri 's high-priority schools at state and local conferences, through mailings, personal contact, and with assistance from MPER.

Standards-based curricula : The Physics modules have been extensively tested and are currently being revised and keyed to Missouri Frameworks and the National Science Education Standards. The Chemistry modules that address properties of matter will use the STC/MS Properties of Matter Curriculum. The STC/MS curricula were developed with National Science Foundation funding specifically to create challenging, engaging, standards-based curricula for middle school. In the first year's Institute, we will use Lessons and Inquiries from Part 1: Characteristic Properties of Matter and Part 2: Mixtures and Solutions. The Lessons and Inquiries are explicitly linked to the National Science Education Standards⁶. Each Lesson contains a discussion of relevant student misconceptions.

Personnel: The collaborating team will contribute specific planning and teaching expertise: Dr. Chandrasekhar will be responsible for overall management and Physics content, Drs. McClure and Keller for Chemistry content, and Dr. Volkmann for inquiry, pedagogy, and recruitment. Materials management will be coordinated by Ms. Jennifer Geib (staff member, Physics). Teacher-consultants, Ms. Rebecca Stuart (Smithton Middle School science teacher) and Ms. Kory Kaufman (West Junior High School science teacher) and Mr. Thomas Schlimpert (principal, Lange Middle School ), will work in partnership to design level-appropriate content, inquiry-based pedagogy and management strategies. Dr. Rebecca Litherland (Science Coordinator) will provide guidance and coordinate activities within the Columbia School district . Two teaching assistants from the content departments will assist with the course, and will provide expertise and support for the participants' projects. Dr. Martha A. Henry will evaluate the project.

Collaboration and Planning: Three key meetings (Nov 7-18) were used to finalize content, pedagogy, structure, and evaluation. Stuart, Kaufman, and Schlimpert pointed out areas that transcend content knowledge, e.g., the need for students to understand accuracy of measurements or for teachers to use a variety of assessments. Discussions with Dr. Henry hinged on feedback from participants after the Institute and the need for teacher journals and student work samples.

The four PDs have met several times and extensively discussed specific aspects of implementing the learning cycle and inquiry into various segments of the curriculum. We discussed recruitment extensively at our Oct 9 and 15 meetings with COE staff. Following these discussions, a decision was taken to send e-mail messages on statewide listservs in order to identify prospective participants, and ascertain teacher needs and analyze school data. E-mail with a short description of the Institute was sent out on Oct 17, 2002.

Needs of low-performing schools: As of Nov 15, thirty teachers have responded to our e-mail. The teachers who have responded are interested, enthusiastic, and have stated that they did not feel adequately prepared to teach Physics and Chemistry at the middle level. This data confirms the well-known need for better-educated teachers in the physical sciences. The need is particularly acute in rural areas where teachers may have multiple preparations per day. Fear of Physics and Chemistry is also well documented among elementary and middle level teachers.

Targeted Schools: The teachers/schools that responded fit three categories: urban schools (e.g., Central Middle School in Kansas City ), suburban schools (e.g., Lange Middle School in Columbia ), and rural schools (e.g., Macon R-1 Middle School in Macon ). These schools share the following challenges: high percentages (more than 30%) of students on free or reduced lunch and poor performance on the 7 th grade science MAP. Profiles of these selected schools are shown in Table V, and they match the target audience of this RFP. The full list of all responding schools is shown in Appendix.3 (e). Large percentages of these schools' 7 th grade population tested at Step 1 or Progressing in the Science MAP in 2001 and 2002, and many schools show an increase in this statistic from 2001 to 2002.

Table V. Sample Profile of schools	# Potential Participants	Free/Red Lunch	2001Step 1/ Progressing	2002Step 1/ Progressing	Teacher with Reg. Cert.
Central Middle School	2	74.44%	95.5%	96.9 %	79.5%
Lange Middle School	3	34.29%	66.3	71.9	93.7
Macon R-1 Middle School	1	34.88%	58.2%	58.8%	100%

Addressing needs with effective strategies: As participants investigate physics and chemistry phenomena, they develop evidence-based explanations and build confidence in their ability to think scientifically. Solving problems, conducting long-term projects, and developing lessons based on the 5E model provides teachers with new tools that improve science education.

If students are to be successful in science, they must feel that learning is meaningful. The Institute's use of the 5E instructional model guides teachers in the use of strategies that engage students from the start of a lesson sequence. Students will feel successful as they explore physical science phenomena and construct explanations that are consistent with their observations. Students will experience science as meaningful as they experience success.

A vital aspect of the project design is the take-home kit. They will allow teachers to help students connect everyday experiences to their understanding of Physics and Chemistry. The immediate availability of these kits will allow the teacher to impact students immediately. While the cost of the kits is significant, we believe they are key to the success of this program.

Value of standards-based curriculum: The 5-8 Missouri Science Frameworks (MSF) and parallel National Standards are addressed by this proposal. As teachers design and complete individual science studies, develop evidence-based explanations, and investigate properties of matter, forms and sources of energy, force, motion, and mechanical energy, they will address the standards on inquiry (I), properties of matter (III), and physical science (IV).

---

¹National Research Council, 2000.
²National Academy of Sciences (1998). Teaching about evolution and the nature of science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
³ Reviewed by NSTA Recommends, http://www.nsta.org/recommends/product.asp?id=13306
⁴ Frechtling, J. (2002). The 2002 user-friendly handbook for project evaluation. NSF, Washington DC.
⁵Medina, K., Pollard, J., Schneider, D., & Leonhardt, C. (2000). ?How do students understand the discipline of history as an outcome of teachers' professional development?? The results of a 3-year study: Every Teacher an Historian: A professional development research and documentation program. Available from Kathleen Medina, University of California-Davis . Funding: Spencer/MacArthur Foundation grant.
⁶http://search.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/