BELFAST, Maine — Last year, Jordan Dunlap of Belfast didn’t really like learning about science.
But this year, things are different, conceded the 15-year-old from Belfast, a student at Troy Howard Middle School.
“I understand a lot of it,” he said last week in his science class while measuring the results of an experiment on thermal energy. “It’s just fun.”
Jordan is one of about 1,300 middle school students in the state who are participating in a pilot program that aims to change the way Maine youngsters are taught science. The Maine Physical Sciences Partnership has brought together nearly 50 rural Maine middle schools, the University of Maine and the Maine Department of Education for a five-year study that was funded through a $12.3 million grant from the National Science Foundation.
Susan McKay is a University of Maine physics professor and director of the Maine Center for Research in STEM Education, or RiSE. She said that in the first year of the partnership, a task force made up of science and math teachers investigated ways to improve science classes in the state. This year, the second year, students across the state are designing their own science experiments as they dive into what she described as “project-based inquiry science.” The university has provided materials to help the students do these science labs.
All of this, experts believe, will help Maine students look at science in a different way — and become more likely to choose science- and math-based careers later on. And if Maine has a work force that is well-educated in the sciences, it could help entice more companies to the state, she said.
“There’s definitely concern around the country. It doesn’t matter what test you look at — our students don’t match up to international standards,” McKay said. “In Maine, it’s almost more of a concern that students are not choosing to go into science or math or engineering-related fields. And yet, this is an area where there’s job growth.”
She said she has enjoyed visiting participating schools this year and watching the science classes at work while she has evaluated the teaching techniques.
“There’s such a feeling of excitement and authenticity about what the students are doing — the scientific process,” she said. “They’re learning how to think and figure things out.”
Last week, three sixth graders at the Troy Howard School were so excited about an upcoming experiment to watch and sketch the phases of the moon, their words tumbled over each other as they described it.
“We’re going to look at the moon every single night!” exclaimed Eliot Ripley, 11, of Belfast.
Opening the door
Middle school is a perfect age for this kind of research effort, according to McKay.
“A lot of students in middle school might just close that door on math and science, saying, ‘I’m not good at this. I’m just not going to apply myself in these areas,’” she said. “But those subjects build on each other. It’s hard to catch up later on.”
The pilot program also will pay particular attention to attracting girls to science.
“We’ll be breaking down all of the data we collect by gender, to make sure that everybody gets something out of this,” she said.
Eliot Ripley and two of her friends certainly seemed to be getting something out of their science studies. The girls were delighted to talk about the volcanoes, wind, erosion, weather, soil, plate tectonics, rocks and minerals they’ve been learning about so far.
Allison DeFeo, 11, of Belmont, said her favorite subjects were “a tie” between language arts and science.
Carrie Walker, 12, of Searsmont said she has been enjoying the year.
“It’s a lot better than in the past. It’s a lot more fun,” she said. “I think people get a lot more out of it.”
Jen Curtis, a science teacher at Troy Howard Middle School, said it is exhilarating to have her students learn through designing and following through with their own experiments.
“The students don’t need to open a textbook daily,” she said. “They’re not reading science. They’re doing science.”
Her classroom was a focused, busy place the week before April vacation, as her seventh and eighth grade students began work on a thermal energy unit. They broke up into small groups and gathered bags of ice, hot water, beakers and thermometers as they prepared to begin by testing how ice affects the heat of water.
“Groups are not all going to be successful,” Curtis warned. “Science doesn’t work every single time you do it. You’re going to see some frustration, which is fine.”
As the students in her classroom made predictions, weighed the mass in the bags of ice and otherwise buckled down to work, the teacher said she has been enjoying being part of the pilot program.
“I think that what’s going on is the process of science,” she said. “What you’re seeing is social learning that’s hands-on.”
The students aren’t the only participants who have been busy collaborating this year, she said. Teachers have been sharing their knowledge and experiences also.
“The university is saying that we want science teachers to talk to each other. We want science teachers to collaborate,” Curtis said. “I can talk to other teachers in Bar Harbor or in Hampden. My collaboration’s not just in this building. There’s a wealth of knowledge. And none of us are working in isolation.”
According to McKay, having teachers around the state work closely together is positive.
“The idea of districts working together and using the same instructional resources is really powerful,” she said.
Some students might move from one district to another — and if the schools had similar science curricula, they likely would keep their momentum going.
Hunter Merchant, a 13-year-old from Belfast, said she has been enjoying all the experiments.
“I like science a lot better this year,” she said. “Last year, all we really did was worksheets.”
For McKay, this is a hopeful kind of feedback.
“It’s really all about working with the schools,” she said of the partnership. “Helping students learn science — and also love science.”
This is nothing new
Finally, you got it right, AGAIN. I taught physical science for 36
years. My approach was hands-on. This nothing new. I was doing this in
the 70’s. Many schools lost the initiative when “no child left behind”
became an annoyance. More bookwork, less experimenting. Every ten years
or so, someone in the State Dept. of Ed. feels they better change the
programs since the current one isn’t working. Well, they’ve done it
again. Glad to see this implemented in Maine’s curriculum.
I know students that are using this program, and find it full of issues. They liked their precious program much better, it was also hands on. For some schools that did not already have a hands-on program I would see this as a benefit, but for others it’s a step back.
If you don’t mind my asking, what kinds of issues are they experiencing?
“This program”? You don’t know what you’re talking about? The middle schools are all using the same curricular materials, “Project-Based Inquiry Science” that has been available for some years. The *difference* is, that all the schools, all the teachers, and all the students are using the same shared curriculum, instead of only a handful of students getting good hands-on instruction. Still waiting to hear what your issues are.
I think this is a wonderful program, but nothing new. My children were had a very hands-on science teacher in middle school. They learned more in the 6th grade from that teacher than they learned all the rest of their 12 years of school. It was amazing and we the parents even had fun watching them do their experiments and projects. However, I think it is important to remember that all children learn in different ways. My experience with school was that more should be done to accommodate a child’s individual learning needs. I know, a far cry given the state of the economy, but….wouldn’t it be nice if all children had the opportunity to learn in the best way suited for them?
The nun’s use to teach school.. All the kids would learn if they went to Catholic Schools with the nun’s… None of this crap about putting condoms on a banana
There probably aren’t enough nuns around to teach classes and, of course, that old-school nun from central casting is long gone. From what I have read in the news, there is a shortage priests, too. I’m sure there is a reason for the lack of Catholic primary schools (a few high-schools still exist). No doubt, it had something to do with money. Perhaps, there wasn’t enough profit in it, or they were running a loss. When I was a kid, these schools existed but they seemed to disappear. Not sure why.
Science should be fun and exciting. Sounds like a great program that utilizes a child’s natural curiosity.
Science???? ……….. Shhhhhhhh don’t tell the knuckle dragger’s that kids are getting interested in science. ‘member the earth is only 6,000 years old and Jesus rode on dino’s and Noah really really built that ark that carried those dino’s that Jesus rode on, while they dined on dino meat I am sure. LMAO!
Exactly. I grew up with the Space Race and my interest in science was piqued. It seems we do not have one of those “national projects” around which everyone rallies. It also seems to me that science is not being taught as much as we are regressing back into dogmatic religion and superstition. It is hard to believe that young people no longer seem to build stuff and investigate things. All we did as kids was buy kits and make stuff, have our own chemistry kit, erector sets, and all that. Radio Shack, Allied Electronics, and Lafayette catalogs were my “dream stuff.” I wanted to get the kits and build my own radio or TV. We learned so much from those times.
I see none of that these days. There seems to be a real lack of logic and reasoning being taught and understood. For me, I heard about all the supernatural stuff in religion and I thought – what an incredible bunch of hokum! It made no sense to me nor did I see any real reason for it. Today, it seems like some kids revert to the hocus-pocus because they are not taught the scientific method, or logic, or reasoning.
It is good to see this hands-on approach. I always wanted to do labs over lectures. What kid wouldn’t?
Thank you for showcasing to the entire world what a complete imbecile you are…
Science is not designed to be fun and exciting. It is a precise discipline which requires commitment and aptitude in other areas (e.g., mathematics). Student should be motivated by the challenge and accept the costs for gaining individual and societal benefits. Watering down a curriculum helps the teachers in gaining better reviews but it takes away from the objective of gaining a rigorous background in science. You might gain a few students but the dilution effect is troubling. Give us old time science.
Experiencing science doesn’t water it down- it enriches it. Today’s student is harder to engage, so anything that gets them not only involved in content acquisition, but also developing scientific processes that can lead to problem solving skills and community action.
“Today’s student is harder to engage”
really?
relative to what?
Science was once a solid part of the American curriculum. And the teachers were knowledgeable or tried hard to understand the topics. But why would science survive in a climate of hostility towards teachers and a National emphasis that for over twenty years de-emphasized science? Well the truth is that it didn’t. Doesn’t mean there aren’t great teachers out there, but our country (and our state) continue to fall farther and farther behind the rest of the advanced countries of the world when you look at science, technology, engineering and mathematics education (STEM). For those who have been continuously calling for improvements we are glad the state and the nation have picked up the banner and are starting to wave it high. But please don’t act like you’ve created the wheel for the first time.
Teach a child to learn, explore, and create and you’ve created someone who will use those skills for a lifetime. Fill a child with rote and simple facts for regurgitation on a test and you’ve wasted their time and failed to teach them to think.
Well said.