An innovative integrated science curriculum and its impact on stakeholder perceptions, collaboration, and

achievement.

NORTH MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Carnell A. White, PrincipalAnnette Y. Burks, Assistant Principal

Luis B. Solano, Teacher LeaderMs. Willa Young, Professional Partner

Superintendent’s Urban Principal Initiative

June 2008

Abstract of the Study

The processes and factors that influenced the initiation and implementation of an integrated science curriculum with 11th grade students at North Miami Senior High School were studied in this action research effort.

Along with Regional Center II support, teachers developed and implemented an innovative integrated science curriculum that capitalized on best practices, teacher collaboration, hands-on labs, and assessments tools and methods that engaged students in the study of science.

Results of teacher and student interviews, course related artifacts, stakeholder surveys, and the themes extracted from focus group sessions were analyzed to assess the impact of teacher involvement in this effort and its impact on student achievement.

Introduction, Background, and

Research Questions

Introduction/Background Because of the recognition for our students to graduate from high school with a high level of general science literacy, a curriculum was designed and implemented to increase science literacy and competency that will enable students to compete in the global marketplace.

The results of the 2007 state mandated standardized science assessment indicates that 85% of our students in grade eleven did not meet the state standards. A detailed analysis of clustered scores in the state mandated standardized science assessment revealed that students in grade eleven were weakest in general Scientific Thinking, and strongest in Life and Environmental Science.

In this action research study, the eleventh grade science curriculum was restructured to integrate biology, chemistry, earth/space science, and physics around central themes, with moderate integration of reading strategies, mathematics, and technology.

The goal for restructuring the science curriculum was to unify disciplines in the science classroom, making content and process more meaningful to students. This required that teachers demonstrate the connections between the different areas of science that are assessed and also ask teachers to consider connections to other subjects.

Introduction/Background

• INSTRUCTIONAL OBJECTIVE: Given instruction focused on the Sunshine State Standards, 11th grade students will improve their science skills as evidenced by 39% scoring at or above Level 3 on the 2008 administration of the state mandated standardized science assessment.

• INSTRUCTIONAL APPROACH: A teacher developed integrated science curriculum supported by Regional Center II.

Research Questions

1. HOW will the infusion of a teacher developed integrated science curriculum in the 11th grade increase student achievement, and performance in targeted integrated science strands?

2. WHAT will happen to students’ attitudes and perceptions when targeted 11th grade students are provided instruction through a teacher developed integrated science curriculum?

3. WHAT will happen to teachers’ attitudes and perceptions when targeted 11th grade students are provided instruction through a teacher developed integrated science curriculum?

Literature Review

Literature Review

• The term integrate suggests an attempt to unite various features or components. The National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993) extends that the basic subject matter of physical, life, and Earth sciences within the contexts of inquiry, technology, personal and social perspectives, and the history and nature of science. The need is to go deeper than combining disciplines.

• Perhaps the most fundamental reason for introducing an integrated approach in school curricula is that it provides students some opportunities to learn science in contexts close to what they will experience in life beyond school (Bybee, 2006).

Literature ReviewPowell, Short, Landes (2002), provide some guidance for designing an integrated science curriculum:

Literature Review• There is a small body of research related to the impact of an integrated

curriculum on student attitudes. MacIver (1990) found that integrated program students developed team spirit and improved their attitudes and work habits. This was attributed, in part, to the fact that teachers met in teams and were able to quickly recognize and deal with a student's problem.

• Vars (1987) also reports that motivation for learning is increased when students work on "real" problems-a common element in integrated programs. When students are actively involved in planning their learning and in making choices, they are more motivated, reducing behavior problems.

• Jacobs (1989) also reports that an integrated curriculum is associated with better student self-direction, higher attendance, higher levels of homework completion, and better attitudes toward school. Students are engaged in their learning as they make connections across disciplines and with the world outside the classroom.

Literature Review• Students are not the only ones who respond favorably to the learning

experiences that are part of an integrated curriculum. In a study of an integrated mathematics curriculum, Edgerton (1990) found that after one year 83 percent of the teachers involved preferred to continue with the integrated program rather than return to the traditional curriculum. MacIver (1990) found that teachers appreciate the social support of working together and feel that they are able to teach more effectively when they integrate across subjects and courses. They discover new interests and teaching techniques that revitalize their teaching.

• When teachers who participated in the Mid-California Science Improvement Program were interviewed by an independent evaluator, the findings indicated a dramatic increase in science instruction time and comfort with science teaching. The teachers involved in this program taught year-long themes, with a blend of science, language arts, social studies, mathematics, and fine arts. Improvements were noted in student attitudes, teacher attitudes, and student achievement. These findings were consistent for both gifted and "educationally disadvantaged" students (Greene 1991).

Literature Review• The subject of curriculum integration has been under discussion off

and on for the last half-century, with a resurgence occurring over the past decade. The "explosion" of knowledge, the increase of state mandates related to myriad issues, fragmented teaching schedules, concerns about curriculum relevancy, and a lack of connections and relationships among disciplines have all been cited as reasons for a move towards an integrated curriculum (Jacobs 1989).

• The findings support the positive effects of curriculum integration. Lipson et. al. (1993) summarized the following findings: – Integrated curriculum helps students apply skills. – An integrated knowledge base leads to faster retrieval of information. – Multiple perspectives lead to a more integrated knowledge base. – Integrated curriculum encourages depth and breadth in learning. – Integrated curriculum promotes positive attitudes in students. – Integrated curriculum provides for more quality time for curriculum

exploration.

Intervention

Intervention TimelineJUNE JULY AUG SEPT OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR MAY

Pre-Planning

Assistance and Monitoring

IS EOY Program Review

Classroom Walkthroughs

Progress Checks (QUANT SOURCE)

Survey Data (QUAL. SOURCE)

Intervention Implementation

Focus Groups Students & Teachers (QUAL. SOURCE)

Professional Learning Community Sessions

IS Mid Year Program Review

Program Reviews

InterventionThis purpose of this 36 week intervention was to provide opportunities for 11th grade students to investigate the theories and ideas associated with the biological, earth, and physical sciences in a way that is relevant and usable.

– Integrated science course sections met every other day for a ninety minute instructional block. A total of 90 meetings took place over said 36 week intervention period.

– Students constructed science knowledge by formulating questions, making predictions, planning experiments, making observations, classifying, interpreting and analyzing data, drawing conclusions, and communicating.

InterventionThe teacher** designed and implemented integrated science course:

• covered all principles required for meeting integrated science state frameworks and district pacing guides;

• a guided inquiry, project based integrated science course that was designed to work with students at all learning levels;

• was designed to engage all students in the learning of science;• promoted positive student attitudes towards science and positive

perceptions of the student as a learner;• engaged students through the use of real world contexts and

provided a deeper understanding of the role of science and technology in the global marketplace;

• was developed using an instructional strategy that combined guided inquiry and whole class instruction with appropriate content;

• weaved all activities and binder content to build a strong grasp of the science concepts so that students could transfer their understanding to relevant real world projects (it is about having more than isolated activities and content).

** with Region Center II support

Intervention• The intervention curriculum addressed the

following “best practice” recommendations: – Scenario-Driven– Flexibly Formatted– Multiple Exposure Curriculum – Constructivist Approach– Varied Methods of Assessment were used– Cooperative Grouping Strategies– Math and Reading Skills Development– Use of Educational Technologies– Problem Solving– Challenging Learning Extensions

Data Collection

Integrated Science (IS) Course DemographicsTeachers: 13Teachers Trained: 13Students: 634

Black (Non-Hispanic) 514White (Non-Hispanic) 13Hispanic 101Asian/American Indian 6Male 340Female 294

IS Course Sections: 23Classrooms: 13Average IS Class Size: 28.5

Data Tools—Quantitative DataAssessment Schedule “Progress Checks”

Group Data Source

1

Data Source

2

Data Source

3

Data Source

4

Data Source

5**

Total Group

Integrated Science

Pre-Test

Progress

Test 1

Progress Test 2

Progress Test 3

State Mandated Science Assessment

Date:

09/18/07

Date:

11/ 13/07

Date:

01/28/2008

Date:

04/22/08

Date:

03/13/08

**awaiting results

Data Tools—Quantitative Data“Progress Checks” Results

Mastery Data Source

1

Data Source

2

Data Source

3

Data Source

4

% Mastery

1% 1% 4% 3%

%

Non-Mastery

99% 99% 96% 97%

Integrated Science Couse Intervention DataStudent performance Data Disaggregated by Teacher

Percentage of Students Displaying Mastery

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

DS1 DS2 DS3 DS4

Alphonse

Brice

Brown

Casimir

Duignan

Etienne

Golaub

Hatchett

Hylton

Morgan-Rose

Pellerano

Pichardo

Quddus

Average

Linear (Average)

Integrated Science Curriculum Intervention DataStudent Performance Data Disaggregated by Teacher

Percentage of Students Displaying Mastery

DS1 DS2 DS3 DS4Alphonse 43.2 44.5 45 45.3Brice 43.2 40.1 44.8 45.6Brown 26.3 28.1 27.9 28.2Casimir 26.2 32.3 36.8 38.7Duignan 27.2 27.3 28.2 29.9Etienne 52.1 54.2 55.8 56.3Golaub 45.3 45.9 46.2 47.6Hatchett 33.8 33.4 34.4 34.1Hylton 40.1 42.1 41.8 43.8Morgan-Rose 21.7 25.1 25.3 26Pellerano 30.1 32.3 34.5 35.2Pichardo 31.6 32.7 33.1 33.6Quddus 34.9 34.5 35.2 35.4Average 35.1 36.3 37.6 38.4

Data Tools—Qualitative DataData Collection Schedule

Research Questions Data Source1

Pre-Intervention Survey

Data Source 2

Post-Intervention Survey

Students Fall 2007 Spring 2008

Teachers Fall 2007 Spring 2008

Administrators Fall 2007 Spring 2008

Findings, Results, Recommendations, Conclusions, and

Implications

Summary of Quantitative Data• SPED students demonstrated small gains from one progress

check to another, however, these students demonstrated the highest overall gains during the intervention period.

• ESOL students demonstrated significant progress, showing a 5% gain at the end of the intervention period.

• Students in Advanced Placement and IB course tracks did not perform as well expected; these students’ overall gains were small when compared to their counterparts.

• Students with high baseline performance scores did not display the same amount of growth as their low baseline peers; their growth was fractional throughout the intervention period.

• There was no significant difference between the results of experienced teachers and new teachers (1-3 years of inservice time).

Summary of FindingsTeacher Focus Group Data

What new strategies and activities are you implementing to support the Integrated Science program?– Reciprocal Teaching– School-wide Science Focus Calendar– Mini Lab Demonstrations– Integrated Science Professional Development– K-12 Comprehensive Science Plan– District’s Science Pacing Guides

Summary of FindingsTeachers Focus Group Data

Positive Comments– Students are more engaged than ever;– Teachers are comfortable and competent with

teaching the content;– Teachers are following the pacing guides and

Instructional FOCUS calendars;– Teacher and student awareness of science

benchmarks have increased;– Science classrooms are print rich and inviting;– Science teachers are working collaboratively and

sharing best practices;– New teachers are energetic;– Use of word walls are prevalent;– Bell to Bell Instruction is going on.

Summary of FindingsFocus Group Data

Areas in Need of Improvement:– Engage students in MORE hands-on

laboratory activities, appended to specific benchmarks;

– Engage students in more teacher/student data talks to increase and promote ownership of academic progress;

– Purchase more lab materials;– Differentiated Instruction Training– Data Analysis Training

Summary of Overall Findings and Recommendations Based on Classroom Walkthrough Data

Overview Findings Recommendations

Classroom Environment

Overall, conducive to instruction and engaging students with the exception of a few.

ALL teachers should create engaging scientific environments in their classrooms.

Materials Some teachers felt that they did not have all of the materials they needed for required labs as needed.

A scheduled rotation of materials for labs should be prepared by teachers during their common planning so that they will have the materials needed at a given time.

Teacher Instruction

Some teachers mostly focused on bookwork, paperwork, and lectures.

All teachers would benefit from professional development on differentiated instruction and support.

Whole Class Instruction

Observed in several classrooms during walkthroughs.

Attention should be given to delivering effective and rigorous whole class instruction where lectures are not the only instructional strategy used for any long period of time.

Overview Findings Recommendations

Small Group, Differentiated Instruction

Small groups were observed in several classes. Differentiated instruction was not observed in all classrooms. Guidelines for lab roles were evident in most rooms.

Teachers would benefit from professional development on differentiated instruction (DI) and or possibly a DI mentor.

Centers A few classrooms displayed clearly separated centers.

Effective use of centers should be encouraged.

Student Engagement

Various degrees of student engagement were observed. Most students appeared to be on task. Classroom management was not an issue.

Enhanced student engagement should be targeted with improved instructional strategies and more hands-on activities.

Summary of Overall Findings and Recommendations Based on Classroom Walkthrough Data

Overview Findings Recommendations

Hands-on Science Lab Activities

Half of the teachers had some evidence of hands-on-activities while the other half displayed no evidence. Teacher demonstrations were evident in some classrooms.

All science courses require a minimum of one lab/hands-on activity a week. All teachers should work together to implement an effective lab program using the Essential Labs developed by the district. Teachers should present demonstrations and have students engaged in labs. Demonstrations should replace lab activities.

Integrated Science Curriculum

Not all teachers followed the IS curriculum guide and materials as intended.

All teachers should follow the IS curriculum guide as intended.

Essential Questioning

Was not witnessed the MAJORITY of instructional time. Focus was on lower levels of questioning and minimal probing.

Teachers need to incorporate more essential questioning as a critical teaching strategy. Teachers will benefit from professional development in questioning and critical thinking techniques.

Summary of Overall Findings and Recommendations Based on Classroom Walkthrough Data

Overview Findings Recommendations

Real-world Applications

Not as many as expected. Teachers should assist students in making connections from their science concepts to the real world.

Reading and Writing in the Content Area

Little evidence of effective reading and writing strategies.

All teachers should use the Power Writing-Scientific Conclusions document to enhance their lab reports and they should incorporate CRISS strategies.

Science Word-Walls

Science word walls were observed in most classrooms.

Teachers should incorporate instructional strategies that support word walls.

Summary of Overall Findings and Recommendations Based on Classroom Walkthrough Data

Findings/Results

The major conclusion was that teachers, given the resources, time, motivation, and control, can develop an integrated science curriculum that is effective in being integrated, evolutionary, innovative and relevant for students. Teachers encountered problems in implementing such a curriculum, but were able to manage when adequately trained and prepared with the right levels of administrative support. Implementing a new curriculum does not guarantee its long-lasting success. It is an on-going process.

Lessons Learned

• Lesson one: Don’t worry about what you call it, worry about what students will learn.

• Lesson two: Regardless of what you integrate, coherence is the essential quality of an integrated science curriculum.

• Lesson three: The fundamental goal of any high school science program, including an integrated one, should be to increase students’ understanding of science concepts and their abilities to do science as articulated in the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996) and the Benchmarks for Science Literacy (AAAS, 1993).

Lessons Learned

• Lesson four: Although teachers are responsible for implementing an integrated science program, administrators must support and facilitate the program.

• Lesson five: Introducing an integrated science program requires a comprehensive implementation plan.

Overall Conclusion

This action research study adds to the MDCPS action research base as it relates to the implementation of progressive pedagogy and theory regarding student experiences in an integrated science course.

It will improve educational practice in MDCPS by helping educators make informed decisions regarding science curriculum reform, instructional practices, and classroom environment.

This action research study will also improve educational practice by increasing educators' understanding of student experiences in integrated science settings.

Implications• An integrated curriculum may not address a logical sequence within

a discipline such as science. Further research into the effect of this will be needed if teachers are to look at the role of sequence in curriculum selection decisions.

• When the curriculum is based on broad concepts linked in thematic units, students may acquire knowledge in very different ways, making the traditional sequence less meaningful. This is an area that has not been fully explored in the research on integrated curriculum.

• Another implication, revolves around assessment of student learning. If science themes are only guided by themes in the FCAT, there will be less consistency of experience than many teachers currently strive for.

• Teachers who are not provided with adequate inservice or time to implement a prescribed integrated curriculum may go to an unstructured, approach, rather than a truly integrated approach to learning. Best practices for initial and ongoing inservice training need to be explored more fully.

References• American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS). (1993). Benchmarks for

science literacy. Washington, DC: AAAS. • Bybee, R.W., (2006). Teaching and learning science: Reflections on integrated approaches to

the curriculum. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press. • Edgerton, R., (1990). Survey Feedback from Secondary School Teachers that are Finishing

their First Year Teaching from an Integrated Mathematics Curriculum. Washington, D. (ED 328 419)

• Greene, L., (1991). Science-Centered Curriculum in Elementary School." Educational Leadership 49/2: 48-51.

• Jacobs, H. ( Ed.) (1989). Interdisciplinary curriculum: Design and implementation. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

• Lipson, M.; Valencia, S.; Wixson, K.; and Peters, C., (1993). Integration and Thematic Teaching: Integration to Improve Teaching and Learning." Language Arts 70/4, 252-264.

• MacIver, D. Meeting the Need of Young Adolescents: Advisory Groups, Interdisciplinary Teaching Teams, and School Transition Programs. Phi Delta Kappan 71/6 (1990): 458-465.

• National Research Council (NRC). (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

• Powell, J., Short, J., & Landes, N. (2002). Curriculum reform, professional development, and powerful learning. In R. Bybee (Ed.), Learning science and the science of learning (pp. 121-136). Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

• Vars, G., (1987). Interdisciplinary Teaching in the Middle Grades: Why and How. Columbus, OH: National Middle School Association.

The initiation and implementationof an innovative integrated science curriculum and its

effect on stakeholder attitudes, perceptions, collaboration, and student achievement.

NORTH MIAMI SENIOR HIGH SCHOOL

Carnell A. White, PrincipalAnnette Y. Burks, Assistant Principal

Luis B. Solano, Teacher LeaderMs. Willa Young, Professional Partner

Superintendent’s Urban Principal Initiative

June 2008