-
LEARNING PROGRESSIONS TOWARD ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY
Charles W. Anderson, Ajay Sharma, Lindsey Mohan, In-Young Cho,
Hui Jin, Christopher D. Wilson, John Lockhart, Blakely
Tsurusaki
Richard Duschl, DiscussantMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
-
Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for
Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, April 3-6, 2006This
research is supported in part by three grants from the National
Science Foundation: Developing a research-based learning
progression for the role of carbon in environmental systems (REC
0529636), the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science
(ESI-0227557) and Long-term Ecological Research in Row-crop
Agriculture (DEB 0423627. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions
or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the
author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National
Science Foundation.CCMS
-
PARTNERSMark Wilson, Karen Draney, University of California,
BerkeleyJoe Krajcik. Phil Piety, University of MichiganBrian
Reiser, Northwestern UniversityJo Ellen Roseman, AAAS Project
2061Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) NetworkAlan Berkowitz,
Baltimore Ecosystem StudyAli Whitmer, Santa Barbara CoastalJohn
Moore, Shortgrass Steppe
-
ORDER OF PAPERSIntroduction and overview: Charles W. Anderson
Paper 1: Understanding of matter transformations in physical and
chemical changes, By In-Young Cho and Charles W. AndersonPaper 2:
Developing a Carbon Cycle Learning Progression for K-12, By Lindsey
Mohan, Ajay Sharma, In-Young Cho, Hui Jin, and Charles W.
AndersonPaper 3: Diversity and Evolution in Environmental Systems,
By Chris Wilson, John Lockhart, and Charles W. AndersonPaper 4:
Connecting Personal Actions to Environmental Systems, By Blakely K.
Tsurusaki and Charles W. Anderson Common Themes and Implications:
Charles W. AndersonDiscussion: Richard Duschl, Rutgers
University
Website: http://edr1.educ.msu.edu/EnvironmentalLit/index.htm
-
INTRODUCTION and OVERVIEW
Charles W. AndersonMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
-
CONVERGING TRENDSScience education policy: Critiques of
standards Science: Interdisciplinary Research on Coupled Human and
Natural Systems Citizenship: Increasing environmental
responsibility Science education research: Learning Progressions as
an Approach to Research Synthesis
-
CRITIQUES OF STANDARDSTraditionalist critique (e.g., Fordham
Foundation, California standards)Too much philosophy, psychology,
inquiryNot enough rigorous science content
Science education critique (e.g., us)Need to consider changing
needs for citizens knowledgeToo many benchmarks: Need to reduce and
reorganize around Big IdeasNeed to consider advances in educational
research (including learning progressions)
-
SCIENCE: Interdisciplinary Research on Coupled Human and Natural
SystemsShift from individual disciplines (ecology, geology,
atmospheric science, meteorology) to interdisciplinary fields
(environmental science, earth systems science) Shift from focus on
natural systems to coupled human and natural systems Shift from
retrospective (reconstructing the past) to prospective (projecting
the future)
-
RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP and ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE LITERACYThe
world is changing as human impacts on the environment
increaseCitizens need to consider environmental consequences or
sustainability in concert with other democratic values: freedom,
opportunity, justice Actions and decisions in multiple roles that
all citizens play: learners, consumers, voters, workers,
volunteers, and advocates Environmental science literacy is the
ability toEnact personal agency with respect to environmental
issuesUnderstand and evaluate arguments among expertsReconcile
actions or policies with values
-
PRACTICES for ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE LITERACY1. Inquiry: Learning
from experience (not addressed in these papers)Practical and
scientific inquiryDeveloping arguments from evidence2 and 3.
Scientific accounts and applications: Learning from
authoritiesApplying fundamental principles to processes in
systemsUsing scientific models and patterns to explain and
predict4. Using scientific reasoning in responsible citizenship:
Reconciling experience, authority, and valuesEnacting personal
agency on environmental issues Reconciling actions or policies with
valuesUnderstanding and evaluating arguments among experts
-
ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ACCOUNTS and APPLICATIONSApplying
fundamental principlesStructure of systems: nanoscopic,
microscopic, macroscopic, large scaleConstraints on processes:
tracing matter, energy, informationChange over time: evolution,
multiple causes, feedback loopsto processes in coupled human and
natural systemsEarth systems: Geosphere, hydrosphere,
atmosphereLiving systems: Producers, consumers,
decomposersEngineered systems: Food, water, energy, transportation,
housing
-
RESEARCH GOALSLEARNING PROGRESSIONS as an APPROACH to RESEARCH
SYNTHESIS
Synthesizing research around key practices and themes or Big
Ideas
Using short-term studies to investigate long-term learning
Connecting research, policy, and practice
-
RESEARCH PRODUCTSA research-based learning progression for
environmental literacy topics. This learning progression will
include:A review of research on student learning relevant to that
topicResults of our research on student learning, including what we
have learned from pretests and posttests A suggested successional
description of students learning: a series of steps by which
elementary, middle, and high school students can work toward
mastery of the learning goals for high school graduates.Assessment
tests for K-12 students
-
METHODSData sourcesVolunteer teachers in working groupsTests
administered to upper elementary, middle, and high school students
(available on website)Data analysisDeveloping rubrics for
open-response questionsSearching for patterns and common themes
within and across testsPatterns in accounts of environmental
systems (Practices 2 and 3)Patterns in reconciling experience,
authority, and values (Practice 4)Looking for developmental
trends
-
STUDENTS IDEAS OF MATTER TRANSFORMATION IN PHYSICAL AND
CHEMICICAL CHANGES: ECOLOGICAL THINKING
In-Young Cho and Charles W. AndersonMICHIGAN STATE
UNIVERSITY
-
DATA and ANALYSISData Sources40 students in grade 10 - general
and AP chemistry 40 students in grade 10 - International
Baccalaureate programPhysical and Chemical Change assessment of 12
written questionnaires development of rubric and working paper
Data AnalysisMatter transformations in physical & chemical
changesConcept relations in students ecological thinking of
scientific principles of environmental systemsPhenomenological
categories for concept relationsConstruction of issues in students
ecological thinking about matter transformations in environmental
systems
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSApplying fundamental
principlesStructure of systems: Atomic-molecular and
macroscopicConstraints on processes: -Tracing matter: mass,
substances, elements, molecules, atoms-Tracing energyto processes
in coupled human and natural systemsSublimating iodineBurning
woodLosing weight
-
SUBLIMATING IODINE1. A 1-gram sample of solid iodine is placed
in a tube and the tube is sealed after all of the air is removed.
The tube and the solid iodine together weigh 27 grams.
The tube is then heated until all of the iodine evaporates and
the tube is filled with iodine gas. Will the weight after heating
be:a.less than 26 grams.b.26 grams.c.between 26 and 27 grams.d.27
grams.e.more than 27 grams.
2. What is the reason for your answer to question 1?
-
CHANGE OF STATE Because going from a solid to a gas, it weighs
less Because of the law of conservation of mass
Chart2
0
52.5
47.5
% of students
Sublimating iodine question
match
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Burning match question
iodine
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
iodine
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating iodine question
match2
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
destroys mattersconverted into energyphase changeconservation of
massashes and smokesunspecified gasestracing CO2 and H2O
8.752.57.536.2537.551.25
match2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Burning Match question
iodine2
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
weigh moreweigh lessthe same
052.547.5
iodine2
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating Iodine question
weight loss 2
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
othersimple subtractionconservation of masswater and waste
materialsconversion to energy
23.7526.257.56.2535.5
weight loss 2
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Weight Loss question
weight loss
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
weight loss
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Person losing weight question
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSIn physical change, more than
half of the students didnt conserve the mass of gas.
Even in a closed system, gas is thought to weigh less than a
solid.
-
BURING WOODTrue or false? When a piece of wood burns, some of
the matter is destroyed. What is the reason for your answer?True:
17.5% False: 82.5%
Isnt there a law that says matter is neither lost nor created?
So Im thinking its just transfer into gas and ash (unspecified
gas)it is changed to other states/forms such as ash and smoke
(ashes and smoke)when youre burning, youre chemically destroying.
So some matter must be destroyed (destroys matter)the wood isnt
changing chemically, just physically (phase change)
-
COMBUSTION
Chart4
8.75
7.5
2.5
36.25
37.5
5
1.25
% of students
Burning wood question
match
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Burning match question
iodine
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
iodine
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating iodine question
match2
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
destroys matterphase changeconverted into energyconservation of
massashes and smokeunspecified gasestracing CO2 and H2O
8.757.52.536.2537.551.25
match2
% of students
Burning Wood question
iodine2
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
weigh moreweigh lessthe same
052.547.5
iodine2
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating Iodine question
weight loss 2
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
othersimple subtractionconservation of masswater and waste
materialsconversion to energy
23.7526.257.56.2535.5
weight loss 2
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Weight Loss question
weight loss
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
weight loss
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Person losing weight question
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSWhen a gas is involved in a
chemical change as a reactant/product in open systems,
added/emitted mass of gas is ignored In open systems, students
often failed to trace the pathway of gases and failed to give them
chemical identitiesAsserting the law of conservation of mass
without accompanying explanationChemical change is not considered
as a process of atomic rearrangement but as a simple change of
matter formAtomic-molecular reasoning is limited and heavily
context-dependent (e.g. compare to losing weight question)
-
LOSING WEIGHTA person on a diet lost 20 pounds. Some of his fat
is gone. What happened to the mass of the fat?
It was used for energy (conversion to energy)It was transferred
elsewhere and released from the body, sweat, etc. (water and waste
materials)It was burned away, it went away (simple subtraction)The
mass of the fat stayed the same (conservation of mass)The fat cells
in the persons body shrank (other)
-
CELLULAR RESPIRATION
Chart3
23.75
26.25
7.5
6.25
35.5
% of students
Weight Loss question
match
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
match
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Burning match question
iodine
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
iodine
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating iodine question
match2
tracing CO2 and H2Ounspecified gasesases and smokesconservation
of massphase changeconverted into energydestroys matters
1.25537.536.257.52.58.75
destroys mattersconverted into energyphase changeconservation of
massashes and smokesunspecified gasestracing CO2 and H2O
8.752.57.536.2537.551.25
match2
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Burning Match question
iodine2
the sameweigh lessweigh more
47.552.50
weigh moreweigh lessthe same
052.547.5
iodine2
0
0
0
% of students
Sublimating Iodine question
weight loss 2
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
othersimple subtractionconservation of masswater and waste
materialsconversion to energy
23.7526.257.56.2535.5
weight loss 2
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Weight Loss question
weight loss
energysubtractionwater and waste materialsconservation of
massother
35.526.256.257.523.75
weight loss
0
0
0
0
0
% of students
Person losing weight question
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSThe gas products in the
chemical reactions of cellular respiration are not traced; the
conservation of mass is only stated technically. The context of fat
burning gives the idea of energy production, the process of
chemical reactions of cellular respiration was not traced. Students
knew fat burning is a breaking down of fat, but didnt trace it to a
chemical process of oxidation into CO2 and H2O
-
MATTER TRANSFORMATIONS in ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMSAbout half of the
students had no commitment to conservation of mass in changes
involving gasesThe other half of the students showed a commitment
to the principle, but were unable to apply it to more complex
chemical changesThey had problems with understanding systems:-
difficulties in identifying reactants and products- matter-energy
conversions- inability to use atomic-molecular models
-
DEVELOPING A CARBON CYCLE LEARNING PROGRESSION FOR K-12
Lindsey Mohan, Ajay Sharma, In-Young Cho, Hui Jin, and Charles
W. Anderson
MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
-
DATA SOURCES and ANALYSISData Sources120 total assessments- 40
elementary school (3rd & 4th grade) - 40 middle school (6th
& 8th grade)- 40 high school (biology classes)Items focused on
the role of carbon in:producers, consumers, decomposers,
human-energy systems, physical & chemical change, and carbon
pools & fluxes
Data AnalysisRubrics developed to capture patterns in responses-
Reliability checks and revision of rubrics
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSApplying fundamental
principlesStructure of systems: atomic-molecular (CO2 and organic
materials), single-celled and multicellular organisms (producers,
consumers, decomposers), ecosystemsConstraints on processes:
Tracing matter: inorganic to organic formsto processes in coupled
human and natural systemsAmazon tree growthDecomposition of
appleFood chainPreserving forests
-
On March 10, 2004, National Public Radio reported that forests
in a remote part of the Amazon are suddenly growing like teenagers
in a growth spurt. Scientists have speculated that our actions may
have caused this phenomenon. What do you think could be the
scientific basis behind such a speculation?
-
CONNECTING AMAZON GROWTH to FOSSIL FUELSMicroscopic and Large
Scale accounts25% focused on microscopic scale (maybe there are
more minerals for the trees to grow)12.5% focused on large scale
(lack of pollution from business)Tracing carbon across from
inorganic to organic forms0%-related to elevated level of CO2 in
atmosphere (combustion to photosynthesis)Direct versus indirect
influences from humans38%-humans are directly influencing
growthNaturally, trees would not suddenly have grown an incredibly
drastic amount in just a yearyou must believe that man-made
influences caused it. Possibilities are controlled burns, soil that
has been removed or changed to stimulate crop rotation, or even
particles in rainwater or chemical substances.
-
WHEN AN APPLE IS LEFT OUTSIDE FOR A LONG TIME, IT ROTS. WHAT
CAUSES THE APPLE TO ROT?Students become increasingly more aware
that decomposers are involved, but do not trace matter through the
process.
-
EXPLAIN HOW THE FOLLOWING LIVING THINGS CONNECT WITH EACH OTHER:
GRASS, COWS, HUMAN BEINGS, DECOMPOSING BACTERIAStudent Response:
the grass is eaten by the cow and becomes energy and the cow is
eaten by humans and all these things die and are decomposed.
-
EXPLAIN WHY IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE OUR FORESTS Middle
school students more often mention connection between humans and O2
from plants and less explanations including animals Limited
understanding of the role of plants in the ecological carbon
cycle
-
KEY FINDINGSStudents primarily reason at macroscopic level;
Reasoning at microscopic scale and large scale is more common in
explanations from older students, but very limited.
Students do not trace matter from organic to inorganic forms
(e.g., decomposition).
Students view living systems as connected by having things in
common or being part of a food chain, but not by tracing matter and
energy.
Students make environmental decisions based on needs of humans
and animals.
-
DIVERSITY AND EVOLUTION IN ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
Christopher D. Wilson, John Lockhart and Charles W.
AndersonMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
-
DATA SOURCESTwo high school classes (n=30)Biology and
Zoology
One middle school class (n=30)
Two elementary classes (n=30)
-
EVOLUTION, DIVERSITY and ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACYDiversity in
natural systems at different levels
Natural systems change over time in response to environmental
conditions.
Human impact on the environment is increasingly directing the
way systems change.Sex and Mutation:
Diversity Selection:
Diversity
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSApplying fundamental
principlesStructure of systems: Alleles, genes, traits, organisms,
populations, species, communities and ecosystemsDiversity at
multiple levelsConstraints on processes: Connections between
systemsTracing information: individual life cycles, population
structuresChange over time:Modeling the mechanisms governing the
connectionsEvolution as changes in population size and
structureHuman effects on biodiversityto processes in coupled human
and natural systemsStructure of strawberry populationsStructure of
fish populationsEvolutionary change in cheetahsSurvival of elephant
populations
-
STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMSMUSICAL INSTRUMENTS
String Instruments Wind Instruments Percussion
Woodwind BrassPlucked Bowed Metallic Skinned Flutes
ClarinetsHarps Guitars Cymbals Bells Violins Cellos Trumpets
Saxophones Drums TambourinesStarting with All Living Things . .
.
-
STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMSMusical Instruments Item
-
STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMSMusical Instruments Item% of students
Chart1
28
21
21
30
Chart2
55
3
17
25
Chart3
3
28
48
21
Chart4
14
17
48
21
Chart5
7
35
10
48
Chart6
331623
18710
29167
104560
10160
Elementary
Middle
High
Chart7
390100
1048100
1058100
Decomposers
Producers
Comsumers
Chart8
243
530
637
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Chart9
026
1357
Lamarckian misconceptions
Teleological misconceptions
Chart10
1400
53470
505914
They have the same parents
They have the same genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Similar
Chart11
905
17307
336728
Genes from different parents
Different genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Different
Chart12
9797
7753
5733
3010
573
4027
303
313
Elementary
Middle
Chart13
4083
333
2713
Middle
High
Chart14
55
3
17
25
How did the different beak types first arise in the Galapagos
finches?
Chart15
7
35
10
48
Populations of finches are made up of hundreds of individual
birds. Which statement describes how similar they are likely to be
to each other?
Sheet1
CINS Items
%Raw
All members of a population change288
Correct - Proportions of traits in population change216
Lamarckian misconception216
Teological misconception309
The changes in the finches beak size and shape occurred because
of their need to be able to eat different kinds of food to
survive5516
Changes in the finches beaks occurred by chance, and when there
was a good match between beak structure and available food, those
birds had more offspring.31
The changes in the finches beaks occurred because the
environment induced the desired genetic changes175
The finches beaks changed a little bit in size arid shape with
each successive generation, some getting larger and some getting
smaller257
Lamarckian misconception31
Non-beneficial mutations are not inherited288
Correct - All genetic variation is heritable4814
Lamarckian misconception216
Correct - Variations best suited to the environment provide a
reproductive advantage144
Speciation in hypothetical175
Teological misconception4814
Teological misconception216
The finches share all of the same characteristics and are
identical to each other72
The finches share all of the essential characteristics of the
species: the minor variations they display dont affect
survival3510
The finches are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance103
The finches share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features4814
Fish%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
The fish are all identical to each other331623957
The fish are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance18710523
The fish are all identical in appearance, but are all different
on the inside29167852
*The fish share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features10456031418
The fish are all completely unique and share no features with
other fish10160350
Musical Instruments%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
Producers904858271514
Comsumers100100100303124
Decomposers31010112
Strawberry%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation307
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic
variation245363
Cheetah%
MiddleHigh
Lamarckian misconceptions01304
Teleological misconceptions2657717
Sisters
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
They have the same parents14535041611
They have the same genes0475901413
Environmental reasons0014003
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genes from different parents91733256
Different genes030670912
Environmental reasons5728125
Porcupine Fish
ElementaryMiddleRaw
Spines97972929
Fins77532316
Eyes57331710
Gills301093
Mouth573171
Color4027128
Body Shape30391
Size31314
Elephants
MiddleHighRaw
Population A (Diverse)40831225
Population B (Not Diverse)333101
Equal Chance of Surviving271384
-
STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMSFish Item
Structure of individuals within a population
From Elementary:Fish are all Identical
To Secondary:Significant Differences (but no mechanism)
e.g. It is a proven fact that no two organisms look exactly
alike and act the same
-
PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMSStrawberry Item A. Why dont the
strawberries look identical?
-
PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMSStrawberry Item A. Why dont the
strawberries look identical?
% of students
Chart1
28
21
21
30
Chart2
55
3
17
25
Chart3
3
28
48
21
Chart4
14
17
48
21
Chart5
7
35
10
48
Chart6
331623
18710
29167
104560
10160
Elementary
Middle
High
Chart7
390100
1048100
1058100
Decomposers
Producers
Comsumers
Chart8
243
530
637
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Chart9
026
1357
Lamarckian misconceptions
Teleological misconceptions
Chart10
1400
53470
505914
They have the same parents
They have the same genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Similar
Chart11
905
17307
336728
Genes from different parents
Different genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Different
Chart12
9797
7753
5733
3010
573
4027
303
313
Elementary
Middle
Chart13
4083
333
2713
Middle
High
Chart14
55
3
17
25
How did the different beak types first arise in the Galapagos
finches?
Chart15
7
35
10
48
Populations of finches are made up of hundreds of individual
birds. Which statement describes how similar they are likely to be
to each other?
Sheet1
CINS Items
%Raw
All members of a population change288
Correct - Proportions of traits in population change216
Lamarckian misconception216
Teological misconception309
The changes in the finches beak size and shape occurred because
of their need to be able to eat different kinds of food to
survive5516
Changes in the finches beaks occurred by chance, and when there
was a good match between beak structure and available food, those
birds had more offspring.31
The changes in the finches beaks occurred because the
environment induced the desired genetic changes175
The finches beaks changed a little bit in size arid shape with
each successive generation, some getting larger and some getting
smaller257
Lamarckian misconception31
Non-beneficial mutations are not inherited288
Correct - All genetic variation is heritable4814
Lamarckian misconception216
Correct - Variations best suited to the environment provide a
reproductive advantage144
Speciation in hypothetical175
Teological misconception4814
Teological misconception216
The finches share all of the same characteristics and are
identical to each other72
The finches share all of the essential characteristics of the
species: the minor variations they display dont affect
survival3510
The finches are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance103
The finches share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features4814
Fish%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
The fish are all identical to each other331623957
The fish are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance18710523
The fish are all identical in appearance, but are all different
on the inside29167852
*The fish share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features10456031418
The fish are all completely unique and share no features with
other fish10160350
Musical Instruments%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
Producers904858271514
Comsumers100100100303124
Decomposers31010112
Strawberry%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation307
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic
variation245363
Cheetah%
MiddleHigh
Lamarckian misconceptions01304
Teleological misconceptions2657717
Sisters
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
They have the same parents14535041611
They have the same genes0475901413
Environmental reasons0014003
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genes from different parents91733256
Different genes030670912
Environmental reasons5728125
Porcupine Fish
ElementaryMiddleRaw
Spines97972929
Fins77532316
Eyes57331710
Gills301093
Mouth573171
Color4027128
Body Shape30391
Size31314
Elephants
MiddleHighRaw
Population A (Diverse)40831225
Population B (Not Diverse)333101
Equal Chance of Surviving271384
-
PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMSStrawberry Item B. Explaining the
difference in diversity between wild and supermarket strawberries
(connecting human and natural systems).
~50% of students mentioned some sort of human influence. Vague
perceptions of what that influence was. Lacking understanding of
the mechanisms of how humans influence diversity. Invisible
connections between human and natural systems.
-
CHANGE OVER TIMECheetah Item20mph60mphModel-Based Reasoning
Individuals in a population are not identical, but vary in many
characteristics. Survival is not random, certain traits provide an
advantage. Populations change over time as the frequency of
advantageous alleles / traits increases.
-
CHANGE OVER TIMECheetah Item No students used the rules of the
model in constructing their explanation instead they focused on
narratives. High School students saw the need for a mechanism, but
because part of the model was invisible to them (genetic variation
in populations), like Lamarck, they picked the wrong one.
-
CHANGE OVER TIMEElephant Item2 populations of elephants.
Elephants in Population A are all slightly different, Population B
are all identical.
Which of the two populations do you think is most likely to
survive if there was a severe drought?
Rules of the model: Individuals in a population are not
identical, but vary in many characteristics. Survival is not
random, certain traits provide an advantage. Population level
genetic variation is the raw material of natural selection.
-
CHANGE OVER TIMEElephant Item Although most students chose Popn
A, very few used scientific models. Students reasoned in ways that
made sense to them, but which were incompatible with scientific
thought. Reliance on narratives, often anthropomorphic and human
society-based.% of students
Chart1
28
21
21
30
Chart2
55
3
17
25
Chart3
3
28
48
21
Chart4
14
17
48
21
Chart5
7
35
10
48
Chart6
331623
18710
29167
104560
10160
Elementary
Middle
High
Chart7
390100
1048100
1058100
Decomposers
Producers
Comsumers
Chart8
243
530
637
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation
Chart9
026
1357
Lamarckian misconceptions
Teleological misconceptions
Chart10
1400
53470
505914
They have the same parents
They have the same genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Similar
Chart11
905
17307
336728
Genes from different parents
Different genes
Environmental reasons
Why They Look Different
Chart12
9797
7753
5733
3010
573
4027
303
313
Elementary
Middle
Chart13
4083
333
2713
Middle
High
Chart14
55
3
17
25
How did the different beak types first arise in the Galapagos
finches?
Chart15
7
35
10
48
Populations of finches are made up of hundreds of individual
birds. Which statement describes how similar they are likely to be
to each other?
Sheet1
CINS Items
%Raw
All members of a population change288
Correct - Proportions of traits in population change216
Lamarckian misconception216
Teological misconception309
The changes in the finches beak size and shape occurred because
of their need to be able to eat different kinds of food to
survive5516
Changes in the finches beaks occurred by chance, and when there
was a good match between beak structure and available food, those
birds had more offspring.31
The changes in the finches beaks occurred because the
environment induced the desired genetic changes175
The finches beaks changed a little bit in size arid shape with
each successive generation, some getting larger and some getting
smaller257
Lamarckian misconception31
Non-beneficial mutations are not inherited288
Correct - All genetic variation is heritable4814
Lamarckian misconception216
Correct - Variations best suited to the environment provide a
reproductive advantage144
Speciation in hypothetical175
Teological misconception4814
Teological misconception216
The finches share all of the same characteristics and are
identical to each other72
The finches share all of the essential characteristics of the
species: the minor variations they display dont affect
survival3510
The finches are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance103
The finches share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features4814
Fish%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
The fish are all identical to each other331623957
The fish are all identical on the inside, but have many
differences in appearance18710523
The fish are all identical in appearance, but are all different
on the inside29167852
*The fish share many characteristics, but also vary in many
features10456031418
The fish are all completely unique and share no features with
other fish10160350
Musical Instruments%
ElementaryMiddleHighRaw
Producers904858271514
Comsumers100100100303124
Decomposers31010112
Strawberry%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genetic variation as the cause of phenotypic variation307
Environmental variation as the cause of phenotypic
variation245363
Cheetah%
MiddleHigh
Lamarckian misconceptions01304
Teleological misconceptions2657717
Sisters
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
They have the same parents14535041611
They have the same genes0475901413
Environmental reasons0014003
%
ElementaryMiddleHigh
Genes from different parents91733256
Different genes030670912
Environmental reasons5728125
Porcupine Fish
ElementaryMiddleRaw
Spines97972929
Fins77532316
Eyes57331710
Gills301093
Mouth573171
Color4027128
Body Shape30391
Size31314
Elephants
MiddleHighRaw
Population A (Diverse)40831225
Population B (Not Diverse)333101
Equal Chance of Surviving271384
-
DIMENSIONS of the LEARNING PROGRESSION From Disconnected Systems
to Coupled Human and Natural systems.
From Informal / Metaphorical to Model Based Reasoning.
From Invisible to Visible systems and connections.
Evolution as Prescriptive, not just Descriptive.
Towards responsible citizenship
-
CONNECTING PERSONAL ACTIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS
Blakely K. Tsurusaki and Charles W. AndersonMICHIGAN STATE
UNIVERSITY
-
DATA SOURCESThree high school classes (n=44)- 9th and 10th
grade- Biology, Physical Science, Earth Science
One middle school class (n=26)- 6th grade
One elementary class (n=34)- 4th grade
-
PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMSApplying fundamental
principlesStructure of systems: Macroscopic (food, appliances,
plumbing in house, etc.) and large-scale (food, water, waste
disposal) engineered systemsConnections between engineered and
natural systemsConstraints on processes: Tracing matter through
supply chains and waste disposal chainsTracing energy through
engineered systemsto processes in coupled human and natural
systemsHamburger supply chainPaper cup waste disposal chainGlobal
warming
-
CONNECTING HUMAN ACTIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS Consumers of
essential goods and services, including food, clothing, shelter,
air, water, and transportation.
Goods and services in each of these categories pass through a
number of environmental systems on their way to us (the supply
chain) and go through additional systems after we are done with
them (waste disposal).
The human systems that supply all of our essential goods and
services begin and end in the earths natural systems.
-
PRETEST QUESTIONSSupply and waste disposal chains - hamburger
meat, paper cup, waterResources used and impact of resourcesGlobal
Warming/Global Climate ChangePreservation of
environmentBiodiversity and evolution
-
WHERE DOES YOUR HAMBURGER MEAT COME FROM?**No mention of
feedlots
Chart4
26.538.525
35.361.579.5
5.919.234.1
85.392.388.6
2.92.813.6
Elementary n=34
Middle n=26
High n=44
Student Response
Percentage of Students
Hamburger Supply Chain
Q1
Question 1
CodeElementary SchoolMiddle SchoolHigh SchoolTotal
n=34
n=26n=44n=104
Package14.723.122.720.2
Visible storage76.561.579.574
Transportation26.538.52528.8
Meat processing/butcher35.361.579.560.6
Slaughterhouse5.919.234.121.2
Farm29.45068.251
Cow85.392.388.688.5
Parent14.734.615.920.2
Growth29.446.227.332.7
Plants (i.e., food for cows)2.92.813.67.7
Other*14.77.722.716.3
CodeElementaryMiddleHighTotal
n=34
n=26n=44n=104
Transportation26.538.52528.8
Butcher35.361.579.560.6
Slaughterhouse5.919.234.121.2
Cow85.392.388.688.5
Plants2.92.813.67.7
-
NUMBER OF STEPS IN HAMBURGER SUPPLY CHAIN High school students
mention more steps than middle or elementary school students Same
results in paper cup waste disposal chain
Chart1
61.819.213.6
32.461.554.5
5.919.231.8
Elementary n=34
Middle n=26
High n=44
Number of Steps
Percentage of Students
Q1
Question 1
CodeElementary SchoolMiddle SchoolHigh SchoolTotal
n=34
n=26n=44n=104
Package14.723.122.720.2
Visible storage76.561.579.574
Transportation26.538.52528.8
Meat processing/butcher35.361.579.560.6
Slaughterhouse5.919.234.121.2
Farm29.45068.251
Cow85.392.388.688.5
Parent14.734.615.920.2
Growth29.446.227.332.7
Plants (i.e., food for cows)2.92.813.67.7
Other*14.77.722.716.3
CodeElementaryMiddleHighTotal
n=34
n=26n=44n=104
Transportation26.538.52528.8
Butcher35.361.579.560.6
Slaughterhouse5.919.234.121.2
Cow85.392.388.688.5
Plants2.92.813.67.7
-
CONNECTIONSMost high school and middle school students think
that there IS a connection between hamburger meat and a corn
fieldMost elementary students think that there IS NOT a connection
Almost all students think there IS a connection between a paper cup
and a tree
Could there be any connection between hamburger meat and a corn
field in Iowa?Could there be any connection between a paper cup and
a tree?
-
MAKING CONNECTIONS2B. Explain why you think hamburger and corn
could or could not be connected
-
SUPPLY and WASTE DISPOSAL CHAINSSequence of actors and places,
as opposed to transformation of matter and energySupply chain as
small-scale rural production on family farms rather than
large-scale industrial beef production High school students mention
more steps than middle or elementary school studentsHigh school
students give more detailed explanations for connections between
hamburger meat and corn fields and paper cups and trees (e.g., some
mention transformation of matter)
-
GLOBAL WARMINGMost middle and high school students HAVE heard of
global warmingMost elementary students HAVE NOT heard of global
warming
-
CAUSES OF GLOBAL WARMING*Mention origin/by-products, not
processes
-
WAYS TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING
-
KEY FINDINGSLearning progressionActors and locations - number
and type Tracing matter and energy - connectionsTransformation of
matter and energyInfrastructure and by-productsScientific reasoning
necessary for responsible citizenship
-
COMMON THEMES and IMPLICATIONS
Charles W. AndersonMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
-
PRACTICES 2 and 3: SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNTS and their
APPLICATIONSFrom stories to model-based accountsShift from why to
how--purposes to mechanisms BUT lack knowledge of critical parts of
systemsFrom macroscopic to hierarchy of systemsIncreased awareness
of atomic-molecular and large-scale systemsBUT little success in
connecting accounts at different levelsIncreasing awareness of
constraints on systemsIncreasing awareness of conservation lawsBUT
rarely successful in constraint-based reasoningIncreasing awareness
of invisible parts of systemsIncreasing detail and complexity BUT
gases, decomposers, connections between human and natural systems
remain invisible
-
PRACTICE 4: USING SCIENTIFIC REASONING for RESPONSIBLE
CITIZENSHIPEnacting personal agency on environmental issuesLimited
individual agency or responsibility Understanding and evaluating
arguments among expertsReliance on media and personal
experienceUnidirectional connections between human and natural
systemsLimited awareness of comparative scale of
processes.Reconciling actions or policies with valuesGeneralized
good and bad
-
TO DO LISTSystematic review of literatureBetter assessments -
for inquiry (Practice 1)- for applications to citizenship (Practice
4)- Psychometric quality (BEAR assessment system)Understanding
pre-model-based reasoning in elementary students (and all of us)-
Embodied reasoning and inquiry- Storytelling and scientific
accountsTeaching experiments at upper elementary, middle school,
and high school levels
-
MORE INFORMATIONPapers, Tests, and Other Materials are Available
on Our Website:
http://edr1.educ.msu.edu/EnvironmentalLit/index.htm
-
DISCUSSION
Richard Duschl, Rutgers UniversityMICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY
I have:--added a slide on reconsidering K-12 curriculum--shifted
the discussion of learning progressions to research goalsI
have:--added a slide on reconsidering K-12 curriculum--shifted the
discussion of learning progressions to research goalsIm not sure I
have the principles rightI think we could make the point about
decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Whereas 68.3% of all students
mentioned that there could be a connection between hamburger meat
and a corn field in Iowa, a higher percents of all students stated
that there could be a connection between a paper cup and tree
(97.1%) Im not sure I have the principles rightI think we could
make the point about decomposers being invisible in the carbon
presentation, so we wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the
question about development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in
this years test? Could we use it to make the same points as the
cheetah question? It would be nice to have a version that
emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have
the principles rightI think we could make the point about
decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.Im not sure I have the
principles rightI think we could make the point about decomposers
being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we wouldnt need it
here.Do we still have the question about development of antibiotic
resistance in bacteria in this years test? Could we use it to make
the same points as the cheetah question? It would be nice to have a
version that emphasizes evolution as a contemporary process.Im not
sure I have the principles rightI think we could make the point
about decomposers being invisible in the carbon presentation, so we
wouldnt need it here.Do we still have the question about
development of antibiotic resistance in bacteria in this years
test? Could we use it to make the same points as the cheetah
question? It would be nice to have a version that emphasizes
evolution as a contemporary process.