Rationale for Integrating Environment-based Education into STEM

Presented on November 18, 2013First Annual California STEM Symposium

by Bill Andrews, Executive Director

California Environmental Education Foundation

WELCOME! • Thank you for participating today!• Purpose of this round table: provide a

persuasive rationale for integrating environment-based education into STEM

• Review structure and timing of today’s round table and, in a moment, I will ask you to give us your name and one priority “take-away” topic or question from this roundtable?

Structure of Todays’ Round Table

1. Welcome & Introductions: [Name? one priority “take-

away” topic or question?]-2 minutes

2. Intended outcomes of this round table session-1 minute

3. CEEF: mission; EE mandate; Teacher Institute-2 minutes

4. Environment-based strategies and Teacher Success in using inquiry and 5E Model -4 minutes

5. 2013 CEEF Institute and teacher’s student test results-2

6. CDE 2005 study: Effects of Environment-Based (EB) Education on Elementary Student Achievement- 2 min

7. CDE 2000 study: Effects of Environment-Based (EB) Education on Elementary Student Achievement- 1 min

8. Check priority take-away list/Key Findings- 1 minute

Intended Outcomes

1. Aware of 2005 CDE-sponsored research of paired California elementary schools which indicated that 96% of the time students’ standardized test scores, in schools using environment-based approaches, scored higher or equal to students in traditional programs for reading, math, language, and spelling.

2. Recognize environment-based strategies.

3. Familiarity with CEEF Institute on Best practices of EE and Stewardship; its use of inquiry-based pedagogy to enhance high-quality EB activities to improve academic achievement; and teacher’s pre/post assessment results.

CEEF: Mission & Support for EE Mandate

The mission of CEEF is to promote environmental stewardship in California students.

Environmental education is mandated to be taught from grades one through twelve in both social sciences and science [CA Ed Code Sections 51210 (c), (d) and 51220 (b), (e), respectively].

• Ed Code Sections 51210 (d) and 51220 (e): “science… instruction shall provide a foundation for understanding…the relations of persons to their human and natural environment”

CEEF Teacher Institute Features Best Practices

Institute Showcases “High Quality” Curricula• NCLB Act describes high quality as “research-

based”(e.g. rigorously tested for educational efficacy by university professors or professional curriculum evaluation specialists through action research)

• All EE activities in Institute are research-based and adapted from PLT, Project WILD, & Project WET

• Provides follow-up professional support for each Institute participant by CREEC Network Coordinator (www.creec.net) to complete one EB activity and a student-driven stewardship project.

Environment-based (EB) Education Strategies*

Integrated-interdisciplinary instruction-curriculum interconnects multiple subject matter areas

Community-based investigations- exploration of real-world and local issues, and direct involvement in service activities

Study of natural and social systems-explore interactions among natural and social systems that constitute the local community

Collaborative instruction-curricular planning and instruction involves interdisciplinary teams of teachers, community members and other formal and non-formal educational partners

*”CA Student Assessment Project: Phase Two-The Effects of Environment-based Education on Student Achievement” (2005)

Environment-based (EB) Education Strategies*

Cooperative and independent learning-student grouping fosters teamwork while developing individual knowledge and skills

Authentic assessment-evaluation of student’s standards-based knowledge and skills using a combination of performance-based and traditional methods

Learner centered, constructivist learning approaches-opportunities for students to capitalize on individual learning styles, and develop personal skills and abilities

*”CA Student Assessment Project: Phase Two-The Effects of Environment-based Education on Student Achievement” (2005)

Inquiry-focused/Constructivist Pedagogy

• The National Research Council’s Commission on Behavioral and Social Sciences synthesis of cognitive research, How People Learn (Bransford et al., 2000) indicates learning as a constructivist activity, where students must make sense of information and experiences by comparing it with what they already know and then make new connections to the information.

• The 5E instructional model (Bybee, 2006) incorporates constructivist pedagogy. It consists of the following five phases: engage, explore, explain, elaborate, and evaluate.

• CEEF Institute teachers received instruction and coaching from a pedagogy expert on applying the 5E model to an EE activity of their choosing.

Inquiry-focused Pedagogy: 5E Model

The following are mean scores of on-site observations of ten (10) CEEF Institute participants’ instructional practices made at their schools [5 point scale].

Engage= 4.6 {uncovered student’s current knowledge of topic/concept}

Explore= 4.7 {students experienced key concepts and processes, discovered new skills; worked together, observed, listened; participated in student-to-student/classroom discussions, asked questions/answered questions to puzzle through problems}

Inquiry-focused Pedagogy: 5E Model

Explain= 3.8 {students demonstrated their conceptual understanding, process skills, or behaviors; teachers used students’ previous experience as basis for explaining concepts; students offered definitions in their own words}

Extend= 4.0 {students applied their understanding of concepts and skills in new situations; challenged students’ preconceptions; encouraged reflection}

Evaluate= 4.6 {formally assessed students to judge quality of understanding through pre- and post-tests, rubrics, or performance-based assessment}

CEEF Institute: Teacher-reported Student Assessment Results

The 10 teachers conducted pre- and post-activity assessments to measure changes in student ecological knowledge. Below are the average percent changes in students’ correct pre/post responses from five of the 10 teachers:• HS Earth Science: N=62 ; Pre-test= 58%; Post-test= 97%; up 39%• JH Core [Eng. Lang Arts/History]: N=23 Pre=31.4%; Post=61.4%; up

30%• JH Science: N=80; Pre-test= 45.9%; Post-test= 71.8%; up 26%• 6th Grade [Multiple subject]: N=26; Pre-test= 12%; Post-test= 51%; up

39%• 3rd Grade [Multiple subject]: N=30; Pre-test= 60%; Post-test= 98%; up

38%

Average improvement = 34%

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

The CA Dept. of Education (CDE) Office of Environmental Education sponsored two studies completed in 2000* and in 2005 to determine the effects of environment-based (EB) education on student achievement.

The 2005 study* utilized CDE’s Parent Guide to the 2000 Similar School Ranks, based on API statewide ranking, to identify “control” schools to compare with the study schools (treatment).

Researchers used standardized test data from the CA STAR (Standardized Testing and Reporting) assessment system [Stanford Achievement Test, Form 9 + test for English learners] in content areas of English/language arts [Reading, Language, Spelling] and math at all grades

* http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAPII2005.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

In the 2005 study analysis was completed on STAR scores collected between 1998 and 2002 on four pairs of matched elementary schools; grades 2-5 in reading, math, language, & spelling

All test data reported in the CDE study were evaluated for statistical significance at the 5% level with a P value of <0.05. N=12,700 sets of student data from 8 study schools

* http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAPII2005.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

Summary of Combined Standardized Test Score Data

Students in grades 2-5 at the environment-based (EB) (treatment) schools, consistently (96%) outperformed their peers in the similarly-paired control schools!

In 100% of the reading assessments, students at the treatment schools scored as well or better than control schools

In 92.5 % of the math assessments, students at the treatment schools scored as well or better than control schools

* http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAPII2005.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

Summary of Combined Standardized Test Score Data

In 95% of the language assessments, students at the treatment schools scored as well or better than control schools

In 97.5% of the spelling assessments, students at the treatment schools scored as well or better than control schools

* http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAPII2005.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

The 2000 study consisted of eight paired comparisons of student achievement and attendance data collected between 1996 and 1999.

The 2000 study schools* [6 HS, 2 MS, 8ES] represented diverse student populations: urban, rural, and sub-urban settings; a range of socio-economic backgrounds, and large to small school populations.

Standardized test results were collected from the following norm-referenced achievement tests: Stanford Achievement Test (SAT); CA Test of Basic Skills (CTBS); and CA Achievement Test (CAT).

Attendance rates were compared using annual percentages of actual attendance.

* See http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAP2000.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

Summary of Standardized Test Results (2000 CDE study) *

When contrasted with the traditional student populations, students in environment-based (EB) programs scored: higher in 8 of 11 Social Studies assessments (73%) higher in 69 of 91 Language Arts comparisons (76%) higher in 17 of 27 Math assessments (63%) higher in 7 of 11 Science assessments (64%)

Compared to their peers in traditional programs, students in EB programs scored higher in 101 of 140 academic assessments using test scores from 1996-99= (72%)

* See http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAP2000.pdf

Research: Effects of EB Education on Student Achievement

Standardized Test Results in Science & Mathematics (2000 CDE study) *

Drake HS Integrated Studies Curriculum Program (Treatment) vs. Drake HS (Control)

9th grade Science: EB 12.0% higher than traditional

10th grade Science: EB 13.5% higher than traditional

11th grade Science: EB 3.0% higher than traditional

9th grade Mathematics: EB 7.5% higher than traditional

10th grade Mathematics: EB 7.0% higher than traditional

11th grade Mathematics: Traditional 6.5% higher than EB

Attendance rates were higher in all grades: 9, 10, 11, & 12 at 2.1%; 2.6%; 2.0%; 1.0% respectively* See http://www.seer.org/pages/research/CSAP2000.pdf

Check Priority List/Key Findings The standardized test scores of elementary students in

schools using environment-based approaches scored 96% of the time higher than, or equal to, student’s in traditional programs for reading, math, language, and spelling.[CDE-sponsored SEER study 2005]

2013 CEEF Institute teachers recorded an average of 34% improvement on student’s pre- and post-test scores after using EB activities that utilized an inquiry [5-E Model] lesson format. [CEEF]

Students in environment-based programs scored higher in 64% of standardized science tests in grades 3, 4, 5, 9,10, &11, and 63% of mathematics assessments in grades 2-11, than students in traditional programs. [CDE-sponsored SEER study, 2000]