Professor Pauline Ross

School of Science and Health

National Teaching Fellow

What does Australian research say about STEM and what difference can we make?

It is easy to be overwhelmed by the number of reports

about

how and why we need to improve STEM education

Narrative of decline and economic consequence is ubiquitous

External measures – Australian students sliding in the rankings

Internal measures – declining secondary science enrolments

1. Biology

2. Chemistry

3. Physics

Entry Maths

Advanced Maths

Intermediate Maths

– shifts in Maths

Decline in student engagement - rise in boredom

Copying from textbooks

Cook-book practicals

Pre-determined outcomes

Remembering and recalling

78%

Decline in what we know -Unable to answer the most simplest of questions

How long does it take the Earth to go round the sun?

59% Australians say 1 year, 30% say 1 week (61% in 2010)

Think we lived at the same time as the dinosaurs

True or False: The earliest humans lived on the planet

at the same time as dinosaurs.

(30% 2010)

“The science curriculum’s focus on inquiry-based learning,

and the de-emphasis of knowledge would indicate that the

curriculum shaping process has been heavily influenced by

modern educational fads which are pushed on the

community largely by university education faculties”.

“Review of the Australian Curriculum”

(Donnelly and Wiltshire 2014 p.184)

Everyone is an expert on STEM education

Problem is the solution

“becoming more a deliverer

of facts, less a convener of

activity-based learning”

Better balance between a constructivist and an

explicit teaching pedagogical approach p.187

Risk is the narrative of decline………. Distracting

Knowledge based society

We know about STEM education

We have evidence from research

1. In the right direction, end at the beginning

2. Content, difficult concepts and critical thinking

3. Learning from failure

4. Assessing what we value

We have solutions

1. What are the best ways to teach science?

In the right direction

Do science – through inquiry and problem solving

• “greater emphasis on linking the teaching of STEM

elements together using inquiry-based and action-learning programs and pedagogies”

(Australian Industry Group p.19

March 2015)

Research across a century – repeatedly ignored inquiry

• Dewey 1910 critiqued learning of science

“science should be taught as a way of thinking and a process of knowing ”

• Bruner 1961 and Schwab 1962

Curriculum reform – fuelled with purpose• 1950’s based on inquiry –

• 1970’s based NOT on inquiry -• 1990’s based on inquiry

(Ross and Gill 2010, Ross and Poronnik 2015, Ross 2015)

failed

failed

We can’t ignore inquiry works

• Creating and testing hypotheses , collecting data and defending an explanation – deep engagement

• Understanding science is more than knowing facts

Exploration of a highly complex environment may

generate a heavy working memory cognitive load that is

detrimental to learning" (Kirschner, Sweller, Clark, 2006)

Need to keep in mind limitations

Inquiry allows

• Students to experience science directly generally through active practical and collaborative explorations

• Requires metacognition and draws out misconceptions

• Digital technologies provide significantly more opportunities

Challenge remains – logistics

Frequency and size of classes

Inquiry is the right direction

2. What about the body of knowledge?

Content, difficult concepts and critical thinking

Body of knowledge

• Amount and type of content –

• Which content? Big ideas, unifying concepts and threshold concepts

• Language

Type of Content

• Abstract – can’t be seen

• Expressed symbolically

• Involves calculations

Visualisations –making the microscopic

and molecular world accessible

How much and which content?

• The breath vs depth issue - deep understanding vs comprehensive covering (Gardner Project zero, Pellegrino 2006)

• Big or unifying ideas in the discipline• Biology – evolution, surface area (Ross et al., 2010)

• Chemistry e.g atoms, periodicity in organisation• Physics, uncertainty, matter cannot be created or destroyed• ALL – hypothesis testing

• Threshold concepts – the integrative “ah ah”

and the struggle (Meyer and Land 2005)

Greatest barrier to learning content is language

• Alienating

• Akin to learning a new language and taking on a new identity

• Powerful tool which creates a Mystic of science (Lemke 1990)

• Creates an authoritative and difficult style

• Students have a fundamental capacity to master complex languages e.g. sport symbols, specific language that players need

I believe

Solution: Understanding first

• Students who learn to understand phenomena in everyday terms prior to being taught scientific language will develop improved understanding of new concepts (Brown 2008, Brown and Ryoo 2008)

Uncoverage rather than coverage

Solution: Rigour not rigor mortis

• Multimodal representation

• Creativity

• Digital

• Stories (Ross 2015)

• STEAM movement

• Art in Science

• Children are naturally curious – keep rather than destroy

Summary: Research says content is accessible if we:

1. Start with what students understand

2. Draw on the misconception literature

3. Use multiple modal of representation of concepts i.e. make models, use role plays, tell stories, create cartoons, observe animations, use digital media –

4. Take an understanding first approach, avoid scientific language until understanding has been reached, then… use the language

5. Encourage metacognition

Challenge tension between understanding & rote learning

We understand more about how students learn

so for content…………….

3. How do we structure the learning environment?

Learning from failure?

The BIGGER question

If learning from failure is so intuitively compelling, why

wait for it to happen?

Why not deliberately design for it?

Productive Failure

Manu Kapur- Singapore

(Kapur, 2010, 2012, Kapur & Bielaczyc, 2012)

36

Year Mike

Arwen

Dave

Backhand

Ivan Right

1988 14 13 13

1989 9 9 18

1990 14 16 15

1991 10 14 10

1992 15 10 16

1993 11 11 10

1994 15 13 17

1995 11 14 10

1996 16 15 12

1997 12 19 14

1998 16 14 19

1999 12 12 14

2000 17 15 18

2001 13 14 9

2002 17 17 10

What to do?

Who’s the most consistent?

Mike, Dave or Ivan?

Standard Deviation

Study done with students in Singapore – Try 1

Study done with students in Singapore – Try 2

It’s Mike

What is Productive Failure?

Way of structuring learning to:

• Afford opportunities to activate and differentiate prior

knowledge (formal and intuitive)….to generate, explore,

critique, and refine representations and methods for solving

complex problems

• Such a process invariably, leads to failure…

• This may precisely be the locus of deep learning…provided

some form of instruction that builds upon student-generated

solutions follows

Summary of Key Findings

• Productive failure outperformed direct instruction on

conceptual understanding and transfer without

compromising procedural knowledge (Kapur, 2010, 2012, Kapur & Bielaczyc, 2012)

• PF teachers consistently report that they are stressed

and stretched to work with students’ ideas…

• BUT, they themselves understood the math better…

Challenge is time consuming nature, tell us the way we approach students mistakes is critical

Learning from failure?

4. What does our assessment say about what we value?

Assessing what we value?

Alot

• If we value rote memorisation then assessments will be geared to determining how much content has been understood

• If we value critical thinking and analysis then assessments need to provide opportunities for students to demonstrate this ability

• Pedagogy, curriculum, instruction and assessment need to be co-ordinated whole

Assessment is part of a triad and its integrated

Assessment

InstructionCurriculum

Theories

of

Learning

and

Knowing

Evidence Centered Design (Pellegrino 2015)

Exactly what

knowledge do

you want students

to have and how

do you want them

to know it?

What will you

accept as

evidence that a

student has the

desired

knowledge?

What task(s) will the

students perform to

communicate to

you their

knowledge?

It’s about monitoring progress – both student and teacher

Assessment drives so much of what students learn and what teachers value

Technology and analytics provides new affordances

Its about monitoring progress – both student and teacher

Assessment drives so much of what students learn and what teachers value

Technology provides new affordances

Solutions exist in our growing agreement

• “Australian STEM teachers from all levels from primary to tertiary need to be equipped to deliver inspirational course content and develop all students to their potential”

(Benchmarking Australian STEM 2015 p. 90 )

• Caution: inspirational can but doesn’t ≠ learning

Research

Education is transformational