Global Encounters : Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices [1 ed.] 9781443830126, 9781443829557

Citation preview

Global Encounters

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices

Edited by

Bruce C. Swaffield and Iris Guske

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices, Edited by Bruce C. Swaffield and Iris Guske This book first published 2011 Cambridge Scholars Publishing 12 Back Chapman Street, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE6 2XX, UK British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Copyright © 2011 by Bruce C. Swaffield and Iris Guske and contributors All rights for this book reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording or otherwise, without the prior permission of the copyright owner. ISBN (10): 1-4438-2955-2, ISBN (13): 978-1-4438-2955-7

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Foreword .................................................................................................... ix The Virtuous Cycle of Cultural Diversity and Intercultural Dialogue: A New Pedagogical Paradigm from UNESCO’s Perspective Dr. Katérina Stenou Preface ..................................................................................................... xvii Bruce C. Swaffield and Iris Guske Acknowledgements .................................................................................. xix Chapter One: From the 3Rs to iScience Improving the Teaching of Reading through Teacher Leadership and Professional Learning in ELL Middle School Classrooms ................... 2 Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada Writing Skills: A Case Study on the Writing Process, Skills, and Experience of Mechanical Engineering Students at N. Mandela Metropolitan University ............................................................................ 20 Hilda Israel iScience And General Education: Science Literacy for All Students ........ 34 Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies among Teacher Candidates to Enhance Understanding of the Impact of Cultural Diversity on Learning................................................................................ 48 Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd Their Voices, Our Ears: Looking for Ways to Encourage Student Success ...................................................................................................... 63 Joanne Bakker, Jocelyne Briggs, and Donna Putman

vi

Table of Contents

Chapter Two: Mint not as in “Pepper” and Other Cross-cultural Linguistic Foci Globalization, the English Language, and International Universities: The Case of Japan...................................................................................... 80 Al Lehner Language Learning through Content: What Can Help University Students Develop Their Communicative Competence in a Professional Field? ...... 93 Inna Atamanova and Sergey Bogomaz The Relationship between Communication Apprehension and the Willingness to Communicate in Polish Adolescents Learning English ..................................................................................... 106 Ewa Piechurska-Kuciel Learner Autonomy and its Indispensability in Second Language Acquisition in Albania............................................................................. 127 Bledar Toska Italian-Canadian, Italian-Australian, and Italian Adolescent Speech: A Contemporary Analysis ....................................................................... 144 Biagio Aulino and Roberto Bergami Spanish in the United States: Demographic Changes, Language Attitudes, and Pedagogical Implications .................................................................. 160 Lucia Buttaro Chapter Three: Empowering Teachers and Students at Home and Abroad A Political Analysis of Teacher Professional Development: Insights from a Teacher Institute in Hong Kong ..................................... 176 Mingyue Gu Intellectual and Leadership Development of McNair Scholars ............... 194 Kim Sanborn, Jade Stanley, and Angela Vidal-Rodriguez Great Teachers Go with the Flow: Nurturing Self-Determined Behavior, Motivation, and Optimal Performance.................................... 211 Penelope Ann-Scott Murdock

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices

vii

Transforming Our Worldview into a Universalview ............................... 234 Bruce C. Swaffield Assessment of Intercultural Competency Development of Employees of Multinational Corporations through Company-Sponsored Programs and Business Schools............................................................................... 248 Christian Wolf Building Bridges through Industry Placements: Perceptions from Malaysian Academics.................................................. 258 Roberto Bergami, Annamarie Schüller, and Jason Cheok Student Mobility as a Way of Uniting Cultures: A Case Study of an ERASMUS Student ................................................. 275 Danuta GabryĞ-Barker International Student Parliaments – Empowerment through Engagement ....................................................... 290 Niklas Guske and Iris Guske Chapter Four: Cultural and Cultured Learning— Circling the Square for a Change Analyzing Design to Understand Culture: A Methodology into Practice .. 306 Sheila Alves Gies and Tracy Cassidy Learning to Read a Painting—The Artist as Ethnographer ..................... 325 Lorie A. Annarella Deliberate Cultural Curriculum: A Case Study in Online Discourse for Race and Gender Issues in Media ...................................................... 338 Lorene Wales Invisible Enclosures: Cultural Discourses at a Modern American Zoo— The Emergence of an Environmental Hyperreality ................................. 350 Howard D. Walters On Oppositism: A Rhetorical Approach to Teaching Innovation and Critical Thinking to Scientists and Engineers................................... 368 Robert Danisch and Jessica Mudry

viii

Table of Contents

Lines, Angles, and Squares: Some Consequences of Linear Epistemology in American English Idiom............................................... 386 Beth Jorgensen Contributors............................................................................................. 407

FOREWORD THE VIRTUOUS CYCLE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY AND INTERCULTURAL DIALOGUE: A NEW PEDAGOGICAL PARADIGM FROM UNESCO’S PERSPECTIVE DR. KATÉRINA STENOU1

UNESCO has been created “for the purpose of advancing, through the educational and scientific and cultural relations of the peoples of the world, the objectives of international peace and of the common welfare of mankind”. In this regard, the Organization’s Constitution (1945) affirms that “ignorance of each other’s ways and lives has been a common cause, throughout the history of mankind, of that suspicion and mistrust between the peoples of the world through which their differences have all too often broken into war”. Thus, the main task for the international community is to turn that process around in order “to build peace in the minds of men” founded “upon the intellectual and moral solidarity of mankind”. To fulfill this mandate, the Organization’s vision, policy, strategies, and operational frameworks as well as the vocabulary used to instill the 1

Dr. Katérina Stenou is the Director of the Division of Cultural Policies and Intercultural Dialogue at the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization. Her long exposure to the challenges of multilateral cultural cooperation, such as high-level negotiations at an international scale, notably the elaboration and the adoption of the UNESCO Universal Declaration on Cultural Diversity (2001), has given Dr. Stenou extensive experience in developing strategic planning and effective implementation of policies. Her academic background in the relevant fields of philosophy and human and social sciences has helped her to carry out her various responsibilities, dealing with cultural diversity, intercultural dialogue, and sustainable development in order to foster global mutual understanding—in line with UNESCO’s mandate. Dr. Stenou has been published widely on policy responses to the challenges of today’s multicultural societies.

x

Foreword

values of mutual understanding, respect, and appreciation have evolved alongside the challenges and the concrete requirements of the political agenda that appeared in the changing international landscape. Several phases can be identified to highlight this commitment in the service of peace thanks to a strengthened cooperation in the fields of education, the sciences, culture, and communication. Each of these phases has used different notions to describe humanity’s aspiration to seek unity while nurturing diversity, an enduring and central cause for the whole United Nations system. This is particularly true for UNESCO, entrusted with the mandate to ensure the preservation and promotion of the “fruitful diversity of cultures”, which implies the quest for dialogue among civilizations, cultures, and peoples as one of the best guarantees of global peace. Today, new global challenges and threats are multiplying and undermining humankind’s cohesion. The constant question remains as to how we may best approach the unity-in-diversity, or to learn how to “live together” by fully participating in the infinite wealth of the cultures of the world and by averting the fear reflex when confronted with “otherness”. Since words are the natural support to our thoughts, which ones should we choose to build, appropriate, and extend this common aspiration of humankind, which draws upon its rich cultural diversity? Not to dwell on semantics, it should nevertheless be recalled that the United Nations, and UNESCO in particular, have always used the terms “tolerance”, “culture of peace”, “dialogue among civilizations”, “dialogue among cultures”, and, more recently, “rapprochement of cultures”, to describe this conceptual, political, and programmatic approach in suitable and convincing language. In this new, turbulent international landscape, greater account must be taken of the close links between cultural diversity, dialogue, development, security, and peace. These five interdependent notions should be rethought to inform a new approach for sustained peace. Two questions persist: firstly, in the age of globalization, what are the new arguments in favor of a strong commitment by states and civil society to development and mutual understanding from the standpoint of cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue? Secondly, what are the new choices and strategies needed in terms of public policies encouraging citizens to rethink the new plural reality of our societies linked to the scale of the fastmoving, far-reaching changes the world is currently experiencing? From the very beginning, UNESCO’s mandate has been based on the conviction that education is one of the most powerful tools for eliminating ignorance and prejudice and building peace in order to create a knowledgebased, enabling environment for harmonious interaction and free exchange of ideas among peoples from diverse cultural backgrounds. This is a

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices

xi

lifelong exercise, encompassing all sections of society: schools, faithbased and secular civil-society organizations, the media, governments, and NGOs—all of which can nurture the fundamental values of pluralism, peace, justice, and human solidarity. According to its mission statement, UNESCO contributes to the building of peace, the alleviation of poverty, sustainable development, and intercultural dialogue through its five fields of competence: education, the sciences (natural sciences as well as social and human sciences), culture, communication, and information. Hence, intercultural dialogue, more than mere dialogue, involves not only our cognitive capacities but also all senses and our imagination which allows us to develop the ability to understand various and complex milieus. Intercultural dialogue is becoming a challenging enterprise which can help to shed misconceptions, dispel misunderstandings, ignorance, and stereotypes, as well as reveal differences and diversity, and generate confidence and trust. Nevertheless, attention has to be paid to the fact that dialogue can be efficient only if basic prerequisites are ensured: equality, justice, poverty alleviation, respect for dignity, and human rights. UNESCO considers interfaith dialogue an essential component of intercultural dialogue and defends the view that all faiths convey a message of peace, justice, and human solidarity. It follows that all religious and spiritual leaders have the potential to exercise moral and positive influence over the manner in which people understand each other and interact. They must avoid by all available means the danger that culture and religion are exploited to mask deeper causes of political, economic or social malaise, and disrupt social cohesion. The main goals and challenges would be to provide more accurate frameworks, practical orientations, and tools to overcome the “crisis of coexistence” experienced by human cultures in the era of globalization: • to make an appropriate, inventive, and innovative response to the hardening of inward-looking attitudes that lead to incomprehension and possible future confrontations; • to combat the flawed “clash of civilizations” theory that generally encouraged that which it purportedly merely described; • to highlight the new questions raised by key concepts linked to issues relating to the intercultural dialogue in order to clarify ambiguities and dispel misconceptions; • to address the question of collective representations of others and oneself by measuring the role of emotions and the irrational in such cultural imagination;

xii

Foreword

• to reflect on new fundamentals/basics for humanity in order to meet the challenges of diversity in a concomitantly globalized and fragmented world; • to comprehend the interactions between those differing levels in order to propose concrete actions to mainstream cultural diversity and intercultural dialogue in sustainable development policies. Let me illustrate how UNESCO addresses this. The EFA Global Monitoring Report 2010 emphasizes that failure to reach the marginalized has denied many people their right to education. While much has been achieved since the international community adopted the six Dakar goals in 2000, many of the world’s poorest countries are not on track to meet the 2015 Millennium Development Goals targets. Education is at risk and countries must develop more inclusive approaches, linked to wider strategies for protecting vulnerable populations and overcoming inequality. The growing recognition that education is never a culturally neutral process also calls for renewed investment in inclusive and equitable education systems that foster peace, non-violence, and respect for human rights, including gender equality, along with efforts to develop related capacities in Member States. Quality education must also be pursued and improved as education infused with the values of peace, tolerance, and reconciliation contributes to the elimination of cultural stereotypes and building understanding and mutual respect for all religions and cultures. Curriculum reform is another essential action line in which UNESCO has been successfully engaged for years. To be effective, such reform must be combined with national book policies that provide equitable access to textbooks and reading materials as well as international leadership in orchestrating the bi- and multilateral revision of such materials. Quality education for all is a pre-requisite for dialogue. It can eliminate stereotypes and build understanding and respect, and develop a capacity for critical judgement. Achieving the international development goal of education for all by 2015 will take us a long way towards that objective, but this needs to be supported by curricula, teacher training, and teaching materials designed to enable students from all cultures, faiths, and traditions to learn to live together. For example, UNESCO works with its Member States to develop educational materials based, inter alia, on the UNESCO General and Regional Histories series. In this regard, close cooperation between European countries and Arab States is established for a revision of history and social studies textbooks which should not only ensure more accurate representation of their respective cultures and beliefs, but also provide a platform for discussing

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices

xiii

sensitive points of common history openly and constructively—including through local as well as national languages. The building of “intercultural competencies” also lies at the core of the matter at hand. The success or failure of dialogue depends to a large extent on such competencies. They consist of a complex of abilities needed to perform effectively and appropriately when interacting with people who are linguistically and culturally different from oneself. They also involve the “reconfiguring” of our perspectives and understandings of the world. These competencies are at the core of a needed shift towards human qualities like humility and receptiveness, and towards dialogue which requires cognitive flexibility, empathy, anxiety reduction, and—perhaps most of all—the capacity to shift between different frames of reference. The ability to express one’s aspirations for a better future of humankind and the planet is particularly important because it aims at promoting sustainability of all forms of life. Acquiring intercultural competence is a thrilling challenge since we are not, naturally, required to understand the values of others as we do the values encountered in our family context, circle of friends, school, religion, or society. Intercultural competence aims at abandoning one’s own logic and cultural systems in order to engage towards others and listen to their cultural idioms. These idioms include the desire of belonging to one or more social groups, particularly if those are not valued or recognized in a given cultural context. Intercultural dialogue could be considered as a means to acquire “intercultural competence”. However, success of such an acquisition depends on the aptitude of different partners in rediscovering the past and the present, starting from a different cultural perspective. It also results from the ability to critically analyze values and knowledge systems to correct erroneous collective representations. More precisely, with respect to the culture of peace, UNESCO’s efforts comprise actions relating to intercultural dialogue and education for peace, human rights, and citizenship; the contribution of both social and human sciences and natural sciences to peace; the mobilization of researchers through the organization of debates in, and between, civil societies on the new human and societal challenges of peace-building; and the contribution of the communication and information media in the furtherance of peace. The culture of peace is above all a culture of peace-building, conflict prevention and resolution, education for non-violence, tolerance, mutual respect, and dialogue. It helps people to cope with social, ethical, cultural, political, environmental, and other societal transformations, and is closely

xiv

Foreword

linked to a new humanism that puts human beings at the core of all development processes. In fact, contemporary multicultural societies benefit from the sharing of knowledge and values, and in some respects are a challenge of today’s increasingly globalized world. Formal and non-formal education, exchange, and dialogue are important means to counteract ethnic, cultural, and religious prejudices, to foster tolerance and respect, especially in multi-ethnic and multi-religious contexts, and to fight against all forms of discrimination, racism, and xenophobia. New educational, cultural, and scientific contents should foster the acceptance and recognition of cultural diversity and the capacity to engage in dialogue. Exchanges between youth constitute one of the most effective ways to overcome cultural barriers and to emphasize the value of intercultural awareness in order to achieve a more satisfactory intellectual, emotional, moral, and spiritual existence. Programs promoting student exchanges, sports, cultural, and artistic activities, as well as civic commitment are conducive to the promotion of intercultural understanding and respect for diversity. Creation of discussion forums for intercultural dialogue among youth that use the media and Internet in particular, with a view to achieving a better understanding of diverse cultural expressions. The active participation of public authorities, non-governmental organizations, religious communities, and other opinion makers, as well as civil society, is indispensable and should be boosted nationally and internationally. At this stage, it is worthwhile recalling Dewey’s definition of education, according to which its intercultural character prevails as it is in constant redefinition, provided it is centered on the learner: “Education is that reconstruction or reorganization of experience which increases ability to direct the course of subsequent experience”. Thus, the concept of development in educational terms means “that the educational process has no end beyond itself. It is its own end; and that the educational process is one continual reorganizing, reconstructing, transforming”. “Educare”: nourishing and raising, and “educere”: drag out of …, lead to …—two concepts, which should be complementary, but often become contradictory as answering the following questions requires their contextualization: Who knows and where from? What and how does one know? What do we know about and what for? An undertaking as ambitious as the one of formal and non-formal education can never be considered completed. It continuously brings new challenges, prompting us to reconsider the fundamental principles of humanity by highlighting “that which binds” cultures and societies to each other and from within. In the process, a true ethic of rapprochement is

Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices

xv

taking shape. It is to be hoped that a common language—the language of intercultural dialogue—will be spoken more fluently by all.

Some of UNESCO’s fields of intervention: (i)

(ii) (iii)

(iv)

(v) (vi)

(vii) (viii) (ix)

Revision of school textbooks and production of educational materials with a view to preventing school violence, promoting peace, understanding, and learning to live together, based, inter alia, on the UNESCO General and Regional Histories series. Dissemination of UNESCO Guidelines on Intercultural Education, including through the effective use of ICTs. Establishment of inter-regional observatories on textbook policies, practices, and research activities; Development of teacher training on intercultural capacities to address challenges raised by the diversity of cultures, religions, faiths, and traditions; Establishment of “centers of excellence”, including the expansion of UNESCO Chairs on human rights education, intercultural peace education, intercultural and interreligious dialogue, as well as the development of exchange programmes between universities and research institutions, involving students, professors, and scientists from different cultural backgrounds; Promotion of a collaborative advancement of global scientific knowledge, through, inter alia, the development of pedagogical materials and exhibitions that demonstrate that contemporary knowledge is constructed through a cross-cultural exchange of ideas and experiences; Elaboration of culturally-sensitive pedagogical materials that introduce local/traditional knowledge and vernacular languages into curricula; Development of awareness-raising material based on UNESCO’s “Routes” programs (e.g., the Slave Route) in cooperation with the appropriate networks and partners established in the framework of these programs. This may include best practices collected through clearing houses, databases, and specific regional mappings related to intercultural and/or interfaith dialogue; Development of clearing houses on best practices in the abovementioned areas; Expansion of youth networks to mobilize new participants and audiences in order to supplement existing knowledge and practice in promoting intercultural and interfaith dialogue; and, Expansion of education networks, development of student exchanges at all levels, and sharing of best practices that foster inter-personal understanding.

xvi

Foreword

Some examples promoting education for human rights, tolerance, and non discrimination (UNESCO—Education Sector): •

•

•

•

•

Stopping violence in schools: A guide for teachers—with a particular focus on stereotyping and discrimination This guide (in English, French, Spanish, and Arabic) proposes 10 action areas followed by corresponding practical examples that teachers can adapt to address and prevent violence in classrooms and schools. The Action No. 10 deals with violence and discrimination against students with disabilities and those from indigenous, minority, and other marginalized communities. The publication has been widely diffused among Member States, ASPnet schools, etc. Short film on “Education for human rights … Young People Talking”: In cooperation with the National Commissions and national coordinators of the ASPnet of 10 countries (Albania, Azerbaijan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Canada, Dominican Republic, France, Indonesia, Lebanon, Uganda), a short film was developed to deal with the key concerns for schools today and how to cope with the challenges from the human rights education perspective. Schoolchildren/youth (11-13 years old) express their views on the issues related to gender, violence, peace, diversity, participation of children, etc. Development of guidelines for educators on combating intolerance and discrimination against Muslims: In 2010, under the initiative of OSCE/ODIHR, OSCE, UNESCO, and the Council of Europe have jointly developed guidelines for educators for combating intolerance and discrimination against Muslims. The guidelines will be launched in May 2011 on the occasion of the 121st Meeting of the Committee of Ministers of the COE. UNESCO Associated Schools Project Network (ASPnet): Founded in 1953, this project is a global network of more than 9,000 educational institutions in 180 countries. Member institutions—ranging from pre-schools, primary, secondary, and vocational schools to teacher training institutions— work, among other things, to promote international understanding, peace, intercultural dialogue, sustainable development, and quality education in practice. The UNITWIN/UNESCO Chairs Programme: Established in 1992, it seeks to advance research, training, and program development in higher education by building university networks and encouraging inter-university cooperation through transfer of knowledge across borders. Today, 695 UNESCO Chairs and 68 UNITWIN Networks exist within the Programme, involving over 812 institutions in 128 countries, and covering 70 disciplines, most of which directly or indirectly address the issue of living together harmoniously.

PREFACE BRUCE C. SWAFFIELD AND IRIS GUSKE

When the Worldwide Forum on Education and Culture began at the start of the new millennium and hosted its first conference at John Cabot University in Rome, Italy, little did anyone realize that before long an enthusiastic academic community of some 100 scholars from all over the world would meet annually to discuss the results of relevant educational research and hands-on projects, and would produce a progressive collection of articles as the ones presented in this book. With contributions from professors and practitioners in the combined disciplines of education, language, and (inter-) cultural studies from all five continents, this volume reflects current academic debates and discourse and introduces a wide range of teaching and learning environments to the reader, be it reading or writing classes for EFL learners or mechanical engineering students in the United Arab Emirates or South Africa, respectively; industry placements as evaluated by Malaysian business students; or American zoos as locations for cultural learning. By reflecting engaged experiences from pre-school to postgraduate levels, these articles examine a multitude of approaches to, and applications of, cutting-edge theories in the fields of language-learning, such as learner autonomy, communication apprehension, or communicative competence; technology-based instruction; and worldview philosophy to name but a few. Since pedagogical paradigms often are anchored in, and constrained by, national policies and international politics alike, our aim is to enable teachers and students to cross borders and traverse boundaries—and become richer for it. All that is required is the interest to ponder and discover the importance of flow in the classroom, the renaissance of rhetorical theory in the sciences, or consequences of linear epistemology in American English idiom. Firmly grounded on a concrete educational foundation, most of the papers are characterized by their applicability across a variety of educational settings throughout the world. Reading how Brazilian design reflects the country’s culture, how Italian youth slang differs in Italian and migrant

xviii

Preface

communities in Canada and Australia, or how international, Englishspeaking universities work in Japan will, hopefully, invite similarly stimulating multidisciplinary and intercultural debates as those that have attracted several hundred scholars and practitioners from more than three dozen nations—as well as a variety of academic, professional, ethnic, religious, socio-economic, and cultural backgrounds—to the Worldwide Forum’s annual congress in Rome, where the organization was founded in 2002. These renowned conferences and the present book are meant to highlight the need for culturally sensitive education that combines face-toface teaching methods, when imparting knowledge of how to read a painting, for example, with online forms of instruction, when administering i-science projects or designing an online course on race and gender in the movies. Added to this is a further dimension that takes the form of educational practices meant to enable students to find and assert their place in a world where neither geographical distance nor socio-economic or political barriers impede the exchange of information and meaningful dialogue. Student empowerment through inclusion in the “McNair Program” in the U.S., in the European university exchange program “Erasmus”, or in international youth parliaments is thus at the heart of a number of papers in this topical compilation, as it facilitates active participation in the discourse that will shape the next few decades of our young millennium. In today’s global community, technology is taking us new places at the speed of light. Nothing is farther away than the nearest computer. Yet, for all the advances in networking, engineering, and connecting, the basic exchange of ideas remains a purely human capacity. As we move ahead, let us not leave ourselves behind. May we remember that the future depends on us—on what we teach and train the next generation of explorers. The many Global Encounters: Pedagogical Paradigms and Educational Practices that are contained here will enable practitioners and professors alike to navigate the new and changing universe of education well into the future.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the hundreds of people who have helped through the years to script this book—those who attended the annual congress of the Worldwide Forum on Education and Culture since 2002, the keynote speakers who came from several NGOs and government agencies; the authors of the diverse presentations on these pages; and the editors at Cambridge Scholars Press who graciously agreed to publish a second volume of our work. There are several individuals we would like to acknowledge personally as well: Holly Combs for copyediting; Peter Ganslmayr for special editorial assistance; President Franco Pavoncello and John Cabot University for their continued support; Silvia Ammary for acting as our official liaison in Rome; Director Katérina Stenou of the Division of Cultural Policies and Intercultural Dialogue, UNESCO, for her participation in 2009; Regent University in Virginia, USA, and Kempten School of Translation & Interpreting Studies in Germany for endorsing our scholarship; Roberto Bergami, Annamarie Schuller, and Sandra Liliana Pucci for heading the journal editorial committee; Gian Carlo D’Ascenzi for his artistic contributions to our official program each year; and Rose Lee Hayden for her encouragement more than a decade ago to start a new organization focused specifically on global education and culture.

CHAPTER ONE: FROM THE 3RS TO ISCIENCE

IMPROVING THE TEACHING OF READING THROUGH TEACHER LEADERSHIP AND PROFESSIONAL LEARNING IN ELL MIDDLE SCHOOL CLASSROOMS LAUREN STEPHENSON, BARBARA HAROLD, AND ROBIN DADA

Abstract For several years now the College of Education at Zayed University has been involved in teacher professional development and research into teaching practice in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). Our teacher education students are introduced to a variety of ways to teach reading within the language curriculum. However, evidence from the practicum indicates that the teaching of reading is problematic in UAE schools. Not only the students, but also many classroom teachers struggle with the implementation and assessment of effective reading strategies. Reasons for this appear to include teacher insecurity about the teaching of reading, structural constraints within the classroom program, and lack of understanding about the nature of reading resulting in an inability to teach reading as effectively as they could. With this in mind, this paper reports on an ongoing longitudinal case study which aims to systematically evaluate current reading techniques used in middle school (grades 6 and 7) in two government schools. The study identifies local issues in the teaching of reading including reading and assessment methods, variation in student motivation, teacher resistance to student-centered practice, and teacher professional learning needs. A professional learning program that is site-based, co-constructed, collaborative in nature, and that emphasizes action research is proposed. Relatively little evidence exists, particularly in the Middle East, of the actual processes involved in a sustained program based on such a model, or on collaborative research between educational researchers and teachers using such approaches.

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

3

Introduction The UAE are embarking on a wide-ranging reform of their education system that aims to move classroom practice from a predominantly teacher-directed and exam-driven system to a more learner-centered one based on varied methodologies, forms of assessment, and integrated with modern technology. Many teachers in government schools in the UAE struggle with the implementation and assessment of effective reading strategies. Evidence from internships suggests that the teaching of reading is particularly problematic among older students who are not confident readers by grade 6. The following questions guided the study: 1. 2. 3. 4.

What reading approaches are currently in practice? What are the outcomes of these approaches in the context of students’ development of fluency and confidence in reading comprehension? What are the teachers’ perceptions of their professional development needs for the teaching of reading? What are the implications of the above three items for professional development programs?

Background to the program The Madares al Ghad (MAG) ‘Schools of the Future’ program emerged as a joint project between the UAE’s Ministry of Education and the Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research in response to the numbers of students (over 80%) who leave grade 12 in need of remediation in English language, Arabic language, quantitative reasoning, and technology prior to entry into the country’s universities and technical colleges. There are 50 single gender government schools (some of which are multilevel) in the MAG program (18 elementary, 13 middle, and 22 secondary schools). The purpose of MAG is to support systemic change through use of research on effective schools and educational change, identification, and adaptation of the most promising curriculum resources that facilitate student development of knowledge, skills, and habits of mind in alignment with the newly adopted Ministry of Education (MOE) standards, and development of teacher leadership capacity at the school level. Professional development of teachers is a major component of the MAG program and the building of capacity to support sustainability. One or two experienced master teachers are placed in a school and may mentor six to 10 teachers

4

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

each to develop professional practices, learning strategies, and sound assessment. The underlying approach to professional learning was a mentoring/coaching approach with a focus on action inquiry and collaborative problem solving to promote student learning.

Literature review Reading instruction in the UAE has largely focused on the early years. However, as the International Reading Association and the U.S. National Middle School Association (IRANMSA, 2001) remind us, “a good start is critical, but not sufficient”. Given that reading is a part of the way we use language in daily life for enjoyment, to gather information and communicate with others (Tompkins, 2005), continued and systematic reading instruction is essential in the middle school years because it is in these years that the ground work is laid for lifelong reading habits and preferences. In becoming readers, we are socialized into different kinds of literacy practices within our cultural, social, and educational communities depending on the role that literacy plays in those communities. In the UAE, apart from the emphasis on the Holy Qu’ran, oral communication has historically assumed a more important role than written communication and, as such, less emphasis may have been placed on the use of written text, especially in the home. Current research tells us that reading is a complex cognitive process dependent on an interaction between information- processing/decoding skills (bottom-up skills) and background knowledge (top-down skills) combined with social experiences. Thus, the reading process involves much more than decoding from print to sound. It also involves cultural, social, and personal knowledge, and the ability to map this knowledge to our understanding of a text. Bottom-up approaches to the teaching of reading take the view that readers learn to read by decoding. Taking this view then, difficulties can be remedied through development of phonic skills and skills development at the level of word recognition, with little connection to context or readers’ background knowledge. Top-down approaches place less emphasis on decoding. Reading is viewed as a process of guessing meaning from context with background knowledge support. Teachers supporting this view believe reading difficulties can be remedied by focusing on better reading strategies. Interactive approaches view reading as a process of interaction between top-down and bottom-up skills. Taking this view then, difficulties can be remedied through a combination of language development, decoding and strategy development. More recent literacy approaches emphasize situating reading within a broader social

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

5

and cultural context. In this view reading difficulties stem from a person’s inability to access meaning of texts and can be remedied by focusing on a combination of decoding skills, cognitive processes, and social experiences. Recent research findings (Coltheart, 2005; Krashen, 2004; Lahoud, 2000) indicate that the foundations of literacy are laid in the early years and that reading programs should be student-centered and individually appropriate for all adolescents with ample opportunities to read and discuss texts. Reading for meaning is paramount and reading should be rewarding for the reader. Students learn to read by reading meaningful and motivating texts, and the best approach to teaching reading is a systematic and integrated approach (Ivey & Broaddus, 2001). The International Reading Association and the U.S. National Middle School Association’s position paper (2001) advocates continuous reading instruction that is individually appropriate for all young adolescents; ample opportunities to read and discuss reading with others and assessment that informs instruction. The Australian Government’s Teaching Reading Report (2005) also advocates early, systematic, integrated, and explicit teaching of reading as the most effective way of teaching all children to read, including phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, text comprehension, and fluency. An integrated approach to teaching reading is a process that should involve collaboration with school communities and parents and should teach the following: • • • • •

Phonemic awareness: the ability to hear and manipulate sounds in oral language; Phonics: the relationships between letters and sounds; Vocabulary: new words and what they mean; Text comprehension: understanding what is being read and developing higher-order thinking skills; and, Fluency: the ability to read quickly and naturally, recognize words automatically, and group words quickly (Teaching Reading, 2005; Nagy, Berninger & Abott, 2006).

Burns and de Silva’s (2000, xi) four related roles of a reader provide a useful typology for middle school reading teachers. They suggest that throughout the reading process effective readers are code breakers (How can I make meaning of this?), text participants (What does this text mean?), text users (What do I do within this text?), and text analysts (What does all this do to me?) (See Appendix A). The related roles of reading suggest that teachers need to help their students develop strategies for approaching the reading process. This

6

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

involves helping students to understand that reading is an active process involving comprehension of meaning, appreciate that reading involves evaluating and confirming predictions using our social knowledge, and recognize that we use different reading strategies depending on the text type and our purpose for reading, identify different text structures, sections of text and the kinds of language used (Hood, Solomon & Burns, 2002). Effective support for teaching reading requires collaboration between the whole school and the wider community. Recent research suggests that important support features include coordinated efforts and systematic procedures for identification, planning, teaching, and monitoring progress for improved literacy learning that is integrative and interdisciplinary. The interpretation of assessment data needs to be made available to other teachers and school-based educators. Experienced and qualified staff need to be available to coordinate whole school support and community involvement that includes parent-family programs, parent-classroom helpers, and peer tutoring or buddy systems accessible to create a school culture of cooperation and acceptance. Creative use of resources in terms of flexible use of staff to provide a range of regular classroom and withdrawal teaching contexts that are appropriate for individual student needs is important. Ongoing professional development for teachers in the form of on-site professional learning programs include classroom-based inquiry, modeling, and coaching to introduce new instructional strategies for integrating reading instruction across all subjects and the development of professional learning communities support implementation of newly developed strategies. Teacher education programs must prepare student teachers to teach reading and that the content of course work in literacy education needs to focus on best practice understandings of evidencebased findings and an integrated approach to the teaching of reading, as well as child and adolescent development, and inclusive approaches to literacy teaching. Teaching quality has strong positive effects on students’ experiences of language learning and schooling. Students want teachers who care and encourage them; know and understand their subject; treat each student as an individual; make learning the core of what happens in the classroom; and manage distractions that disrupt and prevent learning (Ramsey, 2000; Slade, 2002). Teachers who believe that all students can learn to read and write well and who engage in collaborative professional learning are already well placed to teach students to read.

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

7

Methodology The project was an ongoing longitudinal study of grade 6 and 7 reading instruction in English in two government grade 6-9 schools in the second year of the MAG educational reform program. The girls’ school (with approximately 600 students and 50 teachers) serviced grades 6-9 in an established upper middle class neighborhood and the boys’ school (with similar student and teacher numbers) was situated in a newly developing middle class home neighborhood. Teachers in both schools came from the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Palestine, and Syria. The two principals were very supportive of the MAG program and the girls’ school had an excellent and well established professional development program of workshops for teachers. Using case study techniques, in-depth analysis of the process of ongoing teacher professional learning was carried out. Data were collected through observations of teachers providing reading instruction, document analysis of curriculum and teaching materials, and focus group interviews with teachers and instructional leaders in the two schools and the MAG program about their reading program. We also conducted further interviews with key leaders from the research sample to build upon data collected. Data analysis was based on the identification of relevant categories using an inductive process in order to determine the categories. Referring to Miles and Huberman’s (1994, p. 9) set of “analytic moves”, we used a cyclical process to analyze the data comprising of reading and rereading the data and highlighting significant categories; identifying commonalities and differences in the data; developing concepts; categorizing for interpreting the data and reviewing literature in the areas of teaching reading; and collaborative professional learning. The following categories emerged: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Reading and assessment methods used Motivation Curriculum and resources Professional learning Professional development needs

8

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

Findings Current reading and assessment methods used in two MAG schools Participants reported that reading is taught from once a week to every lesson in both schools. Student’s preferences for texts were stated unanimously as short story with the boys’ school adding “pictures to support the text”. A range of strategies, either psychological or pedagogical in nature, were suggested to develop students’ reading skills. Psychological support mechanisms included reducing pressure on students, encouraging, and providing a safe environment for them to read. Teachers at the boys’ school claimed to use strategies such as modeling, echo reading, practice reading of sentences and paragraphs, developing micro-skills, and the use of organizers. Teachers at the girls’ school also used these strategies plus additional, more specific strategies such as comprehension questions, guided reading prediction, brainstorming, and retelling. However, during observation the researchers saw a much narrower range of strategies which emphasized pre-reading, duringreading, and post-reading techniques. The researchers only observed one instance of a teacher reading aloud. Instead, the stronger students were frequently asked to read aloud. For the most part the observed lessons were teacher-centered. Active participation and discussion about the texts being read was limited to a more traditional approach where the teacher asked comprehension questions and children responded individually. Group and pair work involved silently scanning for answers and sharing individual answers rather than meaningful discussion about the new information in the text. When asked to comment on the main reading challenges students faced, the boys’ teachers focused on the influence of Arabic and the lack of knowledge of the English alphabet, whereas in the girls’ school the focus was on weak grammar and pronunciation. The challenges faced by teachers at the boys’ school were related to proficiency level, lack of suitable resources, and behavior management. Proficiency level also was mentioned as a significant challenge at the girls’ school, along with lack of participation. In dealing with these challenges, teachers at the boys’ school focused more on the feelings, emotions, and support for the boys than teachers at the girls’ school and in both cases they mentioned the creation of different questions and activities, simplifying the content. Teachers at the girls’ school claimed to use group work; however, observations indicated that this was in the form

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

9

of seating arrangements rather than collaborative discussion and negotiation around text. Teachers at both schools claimed to differentiate their instruction through different types of questions, different reading texts, grading material, and calling on better readers to model text. However, apart from calling on the better readers, we did not see evidence of this. Comments from the boys’ teachers tended to relate to the typical pre-text, text, and post-text reading stages of assessment within a lesson. One stated that he identified expectations and tried to raise students’ willingness “to have a go” and to believe in themselves as readers. Teachers at the girls’ school claimed to use a wider range of more specific assessment strategies approaches than at the boys’ school (e.g., quizzes, peer evaluation, group assessment, and ‘ongoing’ assessment). Again these strategies were not observed by the researchers.

Motivation At the boys’ school teachers reported that a small number were motivated, a larger group were reluctant but able to be encouraged as their confidence grew, and a majority feared reading and lacked skills and confidence. The girls’ school reported that the majority of students liked reading. Observations indicated that at both schools the children were lively and that many had an air of purpose during the lesson. In one class at the boys’ school, there were some children who appeared disengaged and disinterested in the topic, texts, and tasks, and who either ignored the teacher or engaged in inappropriate behavior. In this and some other cases language proficiency impacted the level of engagement in the class. Although behavioral issues were apparent in the boys’ classrooms, the teachers were using some effective strategies to contain these. There were also some managerial issues around the kind of tasks that were being chosen. In one case group activities seemed to have fewer instances of children off task. Motivation strategies were largely extrinsic, such as praise, encouragement, and rewards/gifts. The boys’ teachers commented that some of the boys feared speaking and reading in English and two commented that parents should be more involved. Most teachers acknowledged that exposure to a greater range of text types would foster a greater love of reading, but we did not see evidence of this in the classroom. There did not seem to be much encouragement for students to read for pleasure. We were told of one teacher who had scanned an appropriate text and introduced it to the boys in his class, but such

10

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

instances were uncommon. Teachers not only maintained control of text choice but also task design and interaction, and there seemed few opportunities for students to take initiative in text choice. The classrooms observed had some charts, vocabulary lists, and rules on the walls, but were not print rich and had no areas to promote reading for pleasure.

Curriculum and resources The researchers observed a perceived helplessness on the part of some teachers who felt that they could not have any impact on the relentless external expectations and drive of the curriculum and assessment. There was a tension between the amount of material to be covered in the syllabus and the speed at which the boys, in particular, could process this, raising the frustration level of teachers and students. Teachers at the girls’ school commented that the primary curriculum needed to provide a better foundation for the teaching and learning of reading because, by the time many of the students reached preparatory level, they had developed negative attitudes about reading in English. As a counter some teachers commented on the importance of parental involvement, but this was also problematic because some of the parents do not use English themselves. Teachers were well aware of the limitations of the current resources. While teachers at both schools commented on the use of texts, PowerPoint, and the Web and supplementary reading materials (as provided by MAG), the researchers only observed material taken directly from the limited text range of the Harcourt course book and, in some cases, from student made texts within the classroom. Teachers in both schools had mixed perceptions about the effectiveness of course book material ranging from concerns about the vocabulary level to cultural applicability. Both groups also commented on the need for opportunities for reading for pleasure where students are not being “tested”.

Professional learning Schools in the MAG program were asked to schedule time for teacher professional learning. Interestingly, teachers did not explicitly recognize the underlying philosophy of professional learning in the MAG structure and most thought time for professional learning meant workshops “done to you” by outside “experts”. To counter this, the teacher mentor in the girls’ school began by encouraging weekly English department and grade level meetings for teachers to share together ways of improving student reading

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

11

proficiency. Such meetings were a novel approach in the school as prior to the MAG program teachers had largely planned individually and taught behind closed doors and observers were definitely not welcome. As such, at the beginning of the program the teaching teams struggled to work effectively as teams because of an existing culture of individual performance, competition, and lack of sharing. However, this attitude had changed considerably by the time the researchers entered the schools. Initially, the teachers had expected the mentors to create lesson plans for them so some initial time was spent in clarifying the mentors’ role. The mentors adopted a scaffolded approach and began by writing lesson plans and activities. Later, as the teachers’ confidence improved, mentors encouraged teachers to become more autonomous and plan independently as a team. As a result, both schools had built teams of teachers who were becoming more comfortable with sharing ideas and task distribution to create common lesson plans that enabled students to meet the reading standards, allowed reflection on their own practice, and permit peer observations. Observations supported the mentors’ reports that informal learning in communities of professional practice was becoming more of the norm. The teachers at the girls’ school themselves commented on how much “more rewarding the reading teaching had become” as a result of the developing collegiality. The boys’ teachers saw themselves as a “culture within a culture”. In the focus group interview at their school, a developing community of practice was evident where the teachers generated a range of possible strategies that if pursued could impact student learning (e.g., working with computer teachers to help students generate their own stories for reading, differentiating material more effectively, and scanning suitable texts to encourage student discussion before reading).

Professional development needs The teacher mentor in the girls’ school noticed that teachers were both unwilling and unable to articulate their own professional development needs at the start of the MAG program. She believed this stemmed from a fear of losing their jobs if they admitted they did not know how to teach and assess reading. When the researchers asked about professional development needs, teachers in both schools identified observations, communication with friends, accessing good resources, workshops on “new” strategies, with time given to experiment with a range of strategies. Teachers at the boys’ school also articulated specific program needs based

12

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

on their assessment of the boys’ reading progress, including a need for strategies to deal with curriculum coverage and ways to engage students in more authentic texts and language. Some teachers in the girls’ school faced English proficiency/pronunciation challenges in which poor teacher modeling of written text was the most common. This was a sensitive matter that required careful handling by mentors to avoid raising teacher anxiety levels. In addition, most teachers in the girls’ school had not used technology before. On the other hand, the male teachers were observed competently using projectors and computer technology in the classroom as part of the lesson. Teachers at the girls’ school were not comfortable being observed and tended to view observations with suspicion and concern.

Discussion What was evident in our observations and interviews was that teachers were operating from a bottom-up perspective and the approach to reading did not utilize the “integrated” methodology suggested in recent research (e.g., Coltheart, 2005). In both schools teachers appeared to focus on the micro-skills of reading rather than comprehension and the approach emphasized the mechanics of reading. They were typically reading at the “code breaker” level of Burns and de Silva’s (2000) typology with some tentative forays into the “text participant” level. Rather than applying a wide range of strategies to comprehend, interpret, evaluate, and appreciate texts, students were asked to focus on pre-text, text and post-text activities for reading. However, there was no apparent focus on learning how skillful readers manage cognitive strategies before, during and after reading. According to IRANMSA (2001), adolescents need opportunities to read material they choose and should be read to each school day. The findings indicate that students at both schools had limited reading experience during the week. The classrooms were not sufficiently literature rich to provide students with many opportunities to interact with texts of all types including fiction and non-fiction. Students were exposed to a narrow range of text types and genres. There were limited opportunities for students to listen to stories, read accessible and predictable books, enact dialogues, or write texts. Free, voluntary, independent, and sustained reading were not evident, a practice which is strongly linked with gains in reading achievement (Krashen, 2004). Routman (2003) notes that reading aloud provides children with opportunities to hear language that they cannot yet read independently.

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

13

However, the researchers did not observe an emphasis on this. Teachers at the girls’ school commented that their students lacked the ability to pronounce words in print with an emphasis on productive skills rather than the comprehension of written text. Several teachers also faced pronunciation challenges when reading aloud, thus presenting students with inaccurate models of English. There was an emphasis on assessment rather than encouraging a low risk environment. Readers need to take risks in a safe environment in order to develop their reading abilities. Success in reading builds reading power and fluency. Research suggests that quality teaching be learner-centered (Ramsey, 2000; Slade, 2002). The teachers we observed all appeared to care about their students and tried their best to foster learning in their classrooms, and the majority believed student learning was improving as a result of improved teaching strategies and there was less teacher resistance to change. However, some resistance to student-centered practice still existed because of the external curriculum and assessment requirements. Coverage of curriculum content and a concern that students were unable to handle learner-centered techniques remained causes of anxiety. The researchers observed some classes where significant ground work was needed before students could work effectively in groups. Among some teachers at the girls’ school there was a defeatist attitude about their ability to affect learning. This appeared to reflect a disposition about the way children learn and an underlying philosophy about teaching and learning. For example, one stated “They just can’t read so what can I do”? indicating a lack of recognition of the role played by the teacher. At the boys’ school, however, teachers were aware of the negative attitude towards books/reading of many students but spoke of potential strategies to overcome this (e.g., making their own books for reading). Although these teachers could identify possibilities that could impact successfully with the students, they appeared unsure about how to take the next step in operationalizing these ideas. In Ramsey’s (2000) and Slade’s (2002) terms the majority of teachers in the study wanted to provide their students with caring, supportive, meaningful, and well managed learning environments. The researchers in the current study observed less rigidity, greater attention to pre-text and post-text strategies; some teachers appeared to be much more open to more learner centered approaches; and several were willing to try new ideas. The mentor leaders clearly supported and encouraged the mentor teachers and worked together with them to create a culture of change in safe and positive ways. Ongoing feedback, praise and recognition of good work, and progress occurred in the researchers’ presence. Still, teachers

14

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

appeared to require statistical evidence of how certain approaches improve student reading. This may stem from the culture of the MOE where “hard” statistical evidence is frequently preferred and qualitative comments or research are not as easily understood and utilized. Another issue teachers and change agents face is the general impatience with giving time for an innovation to work. As a result, the UAE gets caught up in a similar challenge faced elsewhere in the world, of “rapid fire” introduction of innovation and high expectations for immediate change without allowing sufficient time for implementation to occur. What was evident was that teachers were at differing places on the change continuum according to their experience, knowledge self-efficacy, and confidence to try out new approaches. It was also interesting to note that while they could readily define professional development as workshops and presentations, most had not really reflected on their own current position in the MAG program as an ongoing professional learning context. The male teachers were aware of this, to a certain degree, when they spoke of being a “culture within a culture”. What they could see was that the new approaches they were using were impacting on the attitude of the boys towards engagement in the English classrooms. The extent to which they shared and reflected on this was not clear during the initial observations, but the school level team leader was instrumental in providing public feedback and positive commentary on classroom successes.

Recommendations The study has indicated that the approach to professional development used in these schools has led to some changes in pedagogy, and reading instruction in particular. It has also indicated some improvement in student attitude. However, it was obvious that some systemic factors were still influencing the timing and depth of change. The project findings highlight five areas where more professional development is needed. These are: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Developing cultures of learning Dealing with struggling readers Differentiating instruction Instructional leadership support Teacher professional learning support

Our recommendation is that the MOE provide funding for schools to implement high-quality literacy programs, ensuring that young adolescents

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

15

are surrounded in their classroom and school libraries by a range of new, interesting, and diverse reading materials, and implement a professional development program that will prepare teachers to integrate identified reading instruction strategies and measure success of these strategies in their students’ reading achievement across content areas and school settings. We further recommend that such a program builds on successful elements of the current MAG program and that it is site-based, coconstructed, and collaborative in nature where action research is emphasized as the professional learning approach. Within this safer environment teachers who at first may reject a new idea may yet assimilate that idea and make it their own (Scherer, 2009). This approach has proven a success in Emirati schools and institutions (Stephenson & Harold, 2007, 2009). In developing this model, our previous learnings suggest some inherent guiding principles: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Participants work in collaboration to foster individual and collective learning; Participants define the intended learning outcomes and learning activities; Participants engage in learning activities in their own work place; Participants are given resources to plan and implement inquiry, reflection, and evaluation; and, Participants recognize that professional learning is contextspecific, time-consuming, messy, and fluid (Harold & Stephenson, 2006).

In the content specific areas (dealing with struggling readers, differentiating content), we recommend that action research is used as a method of classroom inquiry where teachers can identify specific concerns, plan an intervention, and evaluate it through discussion with colleagues engaged in similar inquiry. This will allow for best practice approaches to be identified and further implemented. The current study has allowed for a brief but focused look at the teaching of reading inside English classrooms in two UAE schools. It has underscored the need for further ongoing research into a wider range of schools and for the urgent implementation of new approaches to professional learning and the development of effective communities of practice.

16

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

Conclusion During the last three years of the MAG project significant learning has occurred at student and teacher programmatic levels. In both the boys’ and girls’ schools in this study the principals demonstrated instructional leadership and promoted ongoing professional learning. As a result, these teachers are better able to teach reading. Individual teachers range across a continuum of knowledge in their understanding and use of particular reading strategies and in feelings of self efficacy and confidence. The focus is still predominantly on production skills rather than on reading comprehension and that schools face systemic difficulties relating to curriculum rigidity and lack of resources. Further, they struggle to overcome negative attitudes within the student body and a general reluctance to engage with English texts. What is also apparent, however, is the emergence from the MAG approach of the initial elements of professional learning communities which can be strengthened and built upon though the professional learning model suggested above. The project has enhanced individual and collective teacher professional learning and will continue to be of value as they continue in the profession. Educational reform continues in the UAE and the skills of collaborative planning and teaching will serve all teachers within the system. The authors advocate that principals continue to allocate collaborative time for planning and informal teacher learning through teaming, coaching, and mentoring activities. In addition, as policies are being reviewed principals need to ensure that time is given to collaborative planning, instructional design meetings, and reflection on reading instruction delivery.

References Burns, A. & de Silva J. (eds.) (2000). Changing Approaches to Investigating and Teaching Reading. In Teachers' Voices 5: A new look at reading practices, x-xv. Sydney: NCELTR. Coltheart, M. (2005). Quality Teaching and the Literacy Debate. Professional Educator, 4(1), 5. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (2005). Teaching Reading Report. National Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy. Australian Government. Retrieved January 2007: http://www.dest.gov.au/nitl/report.htm. Harold, B. & Stephenson, L. (2006). A New Model for Teacher Professional Learning: The co-construction of communities of practice. Paper

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

17

presented at the BERA Conference, University of Warwick, Coventry, UK (September). Hood, S., Solomon, N. & Burns, A. (2002). Focus on Reading. Sydney: NCELTR. International Reading Association and National Middle School Association (2001). Position paper titled Supporting Young Adolescents' Literacy Learning. Retrieved November 2009: http://www.nmsa.org/AboutNMSA/PositionStatements/ReadingInstruc tion/tabid/284/Default.aspx. Ivey, G. & Broaddus, K. (2001). Just Plain Reading: A survey of what makes students want to read in middle school classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 350-377. Krashen, S. (2004). The Power of Reading: Insights from the research. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Lahoud, H. (2000). Changing Approaches to Investigating and Teaching Reading. Burns, A. & de Silva, H. (eds.). Teachers' Voices 5: A new look at reading practices, x-xv. Sydney: NCELTR. Miles, M.B. & Huberman, M. (1994). Qualitative Data Analysis: An expanded sourcebook, (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks: Sage. Nagy, W., Berninger, V.W. & Abbott, R.D. (2006). Contributions of Morphology Beyond Phonology to Literacy Outcomes of Upper Elementary and Middle-School Students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 98(1), 134-147. Ramsey, G. (2000). Quality Matters—Revitalizing Teaching: Critical times, critical choices. Report of the Review of Teacher Education. Sydney: NSW Department of Education and Training. Routman, R. (2003). Reading Essentials: The specifics you need to teach reading well. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Scherer, M. (2009). Perspectives/All teachers can learn. Educational Leadership, 66(5), 7. Slade, M. (2002). Listening to the Boys: Issues and problems influencing school achievement and retention. Series: Flinders University Institute of International Education Research Collection, 5. Adelaide, SA: Shannon Research Press. Stephenson, L. & Harold, B. (2007). Creating a Culture of Action Research. Ticketed session presented by Dr. Stephenson at the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) Conference, Anaheim, CA, USA (March). —. The Impact of Action Research on Teacher Leadership and Professional Learning. Journal of Research in Education, 19. Retrieved May 2010: http://hied.uark.edu/8221.htm.

18

Improving the Teaching of Reading in ELL Middle School Classrooms

Tompkins, G. (2005). Literacy for the 21st Century. New Jersey: MerrillPrentice Hall.

APPENDIX A Teaching reading using four related roles of a reader Code breaker (How can I make meaning of this?) 1.

2.

3.

4.

Providing explicit instruction in code-breaking techniques which include phonological awareness, letter recognition, letter-sound correspondences, sight word recognition, punctuation, marking of paragraphs, etc. Encouraging invented spelling to help children develop understanding of phoneme identity, phonemic segmentation, and sound-spelling relationships, with strategies to facilitate the transition to conventional spelling. Using phonological awareness activities for blending and segmenting, initially with alliteration and rhyme, later with phonemes and, at appropriate stages, linked to the explicit teaching of phoneme identity and sound-letter knowledge. Combining visual/orthographic and phonological approaches.

Text participant (What does this text mean?) 1. 2. 3. 4. 5.

Focusing on comprehension of text (vocabulary and grammar) through teacher instruction and associated activities such as dramatic play. Teaching explicitly metacognitive strategies—such as, Does it sound right? Does it make sense?—and the integration of individual strategies. Adapting texts to help children cope with literacy demands. Focusing on fluency: understanding what is being read quickly and naturally. Practicing regularly to read aloud to an adult or older student to develop fluency.

Lauren Stephenson, Barbara Harold, and Robin Dada

19

Text user (What do I do within this text?) 1. 2. 3.

Focusing on student’s role in the text; that is, developing higher order thinking skills. Balancing between the explicit teaching of skills and reading and writing connected text at each child’s independent level. Providing a wide range of literacy activities, with particular emphasis on listening to stories that contain challenging ideas and language forms.

Text analyst (What does all this do to me?) 1. 2. 3.

Discovering the impact and effect of the text on the students themselves. Encouraging explicit discussion of the attitudes towards and value accorded to particular texts. Making sensitive and respectful cross-cultural comparisons of the significance of texts. (Adapted from Burns & de Silva, 2000)

WRITING SKILLS: A CASE STUDY ON THE WRITING PROCESS, SKILLS, AND EXPERIENCE OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING STUDENTS AT N. MANDELA METROPOLITAN UNIVERSITY HILDA ISRAEL

Abstract How important are writing skills to a mechanical engineer? Student views were surveyed on their experience of completing an essay assessing such skills through the writing process. They had to first watch the movie An Inconvenient Truth, dealing with climate change. They then wrote a personal reflections term paper on the question set, with guidelines providing time frames and an assessment grid. On completion of the task, they submitted feedback on their experience and skills learned, then again after receiving their assessment. This case study reviews their feedback on the challenges that students face in the writing process and suggests recommendations to address issues raised. One point became increasingly clear: writing skills of students are limited and stifle their ability to communicate effectively—warning of serious issues in their practice as engineers. This then is the inconvenient truth.

Introduction and context Writing is an integral part of an engineer’s daily duty, demanding being concise at all times. The engineering diploma qualifications offered at Nelson Mandela Metropolitan University (NMMU) do not include any language and writing modules. A communications module over one semester teaches how to communicate effectively both verbally and nonverbally, working on the assumption that the student is already somewhat proficient in writing, specifically in the English language.

Hilda Israel

21

With students having English as a first, second, and often third language, their writing ability in English is a problem confronting every lecturer. In an effort to address the resultant comprehension and learning problems, the writing of a term paper was introduced. Since climate change is an issue confronting every engineer, the movie An Inconvenient Truth was chosen as the basis for the paper. Students had to watch the movie initially as entertainment, then as a focus of study.

Methodology The written task assigned to the students was as follows: Global warming is a reality facing every individual today, more so if you are an engineer. Each decision you take will have some impact on the environment. Having seen the movie, discuss any four points from it that you deem to be important to your career as an engineer. Explain four strategies that engineers can use to limit the effects of global warming. The term paper is a personal reflections paper recording where students stand on the issue of climate change, and how this standpoint will shape their future. It is a research assignment recording one’s personal experiences/thoughts/consultations with relevant others. The length prescribed was four typed pages, single-spaced. The content had to show references and include graphs and pictures. Support to the student was provided as follows: • • • • • • • • • • •

Copies of the movie were available in the library and to borrow overnight; An outline of how the paper should be written was offered; Examples of how referencing should be done was provided; An example of a reference list was given; Web references to assist research were given; The lecturer introduced and reviewed the task over three lectures from the outset; Students had seven weeks to complete the task; Time management was addressed through an action plan on what had to be done and when; Students chose peer editors to review their paper; One lecture focused on the writing process and the role of the peer editor; and, The assessment grid outlined exactly how the paper would be evaluated.

22

Writing Skills

It should be noted that the module runs for 14 weeks, with other aspects of its contents giving integral support to the writing of the paper. These include writing skills: being concise; avoiding ambiguity; using parallel format; register; grammar rules; and punctuation. Paragraph and essay structure form part of the writing process. Textual analysis covers comprehension and reading skills. The problem of plagiarism is discussed, together with how to show references when used. Lectures were held over three, 45-minute periods on two days for a period of 14 weeks. The term paper was introduced and taught according to the following schedule: • • • • •

Week 1—Introduction to concept of a personal reflections paper. Students to see the film twice, first as entertainment, then as a focus of study. Week 2—The question and outline discussed. The writing process reviewed. Week 3—The peer editing procedure reviewed. Week 5—Peer editing of draft to be completed. Final paper to be completed. Week 7— Final Term Paper to be submitted.

Feedback was provided to the students after the papers were graded. The survey investigated the overall writing process through the questions listed below. 1. How did you find the process of writing the term paper? Underline one answer. a. Challenging b. Not too hard c. Easy to do d. I don’t know 2. In each of the following, list two points that you found challenging: a. About the content of the paper b. About your writing skills

The sample The survey was conducted on 34 voluntary participants from the mechanical engineering class enrolled for Communication Skills 1222 between July and October 2009. For demographics, see Table 1.

Hilda Israel

23

Table 1: Demographics

Personal Profile Age Group

Gender

Ethnicity

Language First

Second

Third

Descriptors

South African

International

Notes

17-20 21-25 26-30 31-35

17M 2F 06M 1F 00 1M

2M 5M

Female (F) Male (M)

Female Male

03 24

African Colored White Indian Chinese

10M 2F 06M 06M 1F 01M 01M

07M =

English isiXhosa Afrikaans Sepedi isiZulu Venda Portuguese French English Afrikaans Sotho isiZulu Urdu Greek French Kiswahili Eton English

12 09 03 01 01 01

02

13 08 01 01 01 01 01 02

07 3 Angola 2 Cameroon 1 Kenya 1 Zimbabwe

03 02 04

01 01 01 02

Responses Some 16 of 34 (47%) found writing the term paper challenging, while 17 of 34 (50%) found writing the term paper not too hard. Table 2 illustrates the details.

24

Writing Skills

Table 2: Responses to survey Quantitative Analysis Student response to their experience of the writing process

Grade scored

Descriptors Was challenging Not too hard

SA 12

International 04

Notes 16 = 47%

14

03

17 = 50%

Disagree

01

00

01 = 03%

I don’t know

00

00

35-50%

04

04

51-60%

08

03

61-70%

06

71-80%

09

Raw data from students The input from students was most revealing. What they shared follows, with common points loosely banded together. If a point was repeated three times, it is indicated as (x3).

Challenges identified on the content of the paper • Finding relevant information. Selecting specific material from Google search. Decreasing the content pages. I had too much information. There were too many things to write about. Finding the correct content to use. Choosing relevant material from movie (x3). • Avoiding repetition. Including all the relevant material in one paper. • It is not easy to give my opinion on something that is so big and overwhelming. You had to view things from an engineer’s view and that, too, is overwhelming. • Could not state possible solutions. I could not identify strategies that engineers could use. Limiting the effects of global warming (x2). • Content to be discussed from the movie was quite vast—as a learner I had to sift through the information to find the most appropriate in terms of an engineer’s view point. It was at times hard to distinguish this. The movie is for individuals, not engineers. Identifying important points for engineers (x2).

Hilda Israel

25

• I watched the movie three times. Many books had to be read. The planning and structure in writing the content was hard. I don’t know how to put all the points together, how to structure the paper. • The movie gave all the information needed—no need for more research. It was hard to distinguish between fact and Al Gore’s fantasy. • Writing a personal reflections paper was a new experience. Could not do personal reflection (x5). • Getting started. Translation of difficult words. Could not watch movie and write an essay on the same topic. The creativity needed was challenging—finding solutions, simplifying long topics and the discussion. • It was hard to use a computer—it was my first time to come across it. • Writing the bibliography. Remembering to quote. I can’t avoid plagiarism. Writing the references in the content (x2). • I don’t like the question. We should see another movie instead of this on global warming. Question was not easy to understand and interpret. I didn’t know how to answer the question. I couldn’t do the introduction and conclusion. • I did not find challenges—content was good and specific.

Challenges identified on the writing skills involved in completing the paper • I could not stick to the question. Keeping things scientific was difficult. • I need to improve my writing skills. Condensing all the information about the movie into the required number of pages was hard. I couldn’t follow the structure. I couldn’t keep on track without diverging off the topic. I deemed all the points to be important—so writing a summary was quite challenging. • I didn’t know how to use appropriate words for the topic. I must learn to write sensible information. My writing skills are bad. • My grammar and sentence construction is poor. Writing well structured sentences was hard. I had to write my personal reflections in my own words. It was not a review. That took a lot out of me. I couldn’t provide clear points. • To write concise paragraphs was a challenge for me. I learned to group my information. • The format was confusing. I have to be more concise. I learned how to be more concise (x2).

26

Writing Skills

• Editing is hard because the topic is so big you doubt everything you put on paper. Sentence flow is hard, conjunctions also. I had to learn to use big and long words. I had a problem to find the correct word for all types of audience. Grammar and spelling was a big challenge for me. • I finally know the correct way of referencing. My writing skills are improving.

Findings and summarized conclusions The findings and conclusions that follow are based on the responses made by students, and the percent grades that they scored. Recommendations suggested are aimed at addressing the challenges exposed.

Question 1 How did you find the process of writing the term paper? Underline one answer. a. Challenging b. Not too hard c. Easy to do d. I don’t know With only one student finding the task easy to do, it is no wonder that only 9 of 34 earned over 70%. There appears to be a discrepancy in answering the survey (17 of 34 said it was not too hard), but their qualitative responses suggest that they did find the process challenging. There is also a discrepancy in that 8 of 34 failed, yet 17 said that it was not too hard, implying that fewer than 8 should have failed if it was not too hard. A 50% is the pass mark. Some 17 (50%) scored between 51-70%, implying that passing is not too difficult. The quality of pass is the problem, i.e., the quality of the writing process in which the students were engaged.

Summary While it appears satisfactory that 26 (75%) students passed this writing assessment, the survey confirms that much needs to be done to improve the quality of pass to address the challenges facing the students in the completion of writing tasks in their practice as engineers. The concept of

Hilda Israel

27

writing being a process is the first issue— many did not identify with the need for revising, reflecting, rephrasing, and rewriting.

Recommendation Writing to learn is the norm that should cut across the engineering curriculum. This implies that the writing process should be an integral part of every module, and that every lecturer should also be familiar with its application and practice. Every student should therefore be taught the theory and application of the writing process right at the outset, and have revision lessons on it intermittently. Teaching for understanding should become the focus of the writing task set for the engineering student. The lecturer is in the informed and educated position of being able to translate the objectives of a course he/she has taught into his/her construction of the writing task—by linking the objectives with the tasks set. In constructing writing tasks, it is essential to have a defined curriculum or set body of knowledge from which lecturers determine what to test. The most important question to be asked of any writing task is “What is it measuring” (Alderson, 1983)? In research on teaching for understanding, Perkins and Blythe (1994) emphasize that to learn for understanding in a writing task students need criteria, feedback, and opportunities for reflection from the start through to the finish.

Question 2 In each of the following, list two points that you found challenging: 1. About the content of the paper 2. About your writing skills

Question 2.1: Content of the paper Analysis of the challenges identified by students on the content of the paper confirms that they were able to find more than enough information on the topic. They were not able to select information directly relevant to the question. Relevance to the question posed a problem. This prevented them from keeping to within the four pages required. Sifting through research material was daunting. The task proved overwhelming because they were unable to provide personal opinions, to think for themselves. The different requirements of the question posed barriers—personal, reflection, critical thinking, suggesting solutions. Creative thinking was hard. Planning and working on the structure of an argument was difficult.

28

Writing Skills

Logical presentation of thoughts within the parameters of the question appears difficult. Students do not know how to reflect on a topic, and on how they themselves think. Five students stated this. Academic writing skills were exposed as a major challenge—no referencing and plagiarism was common.

Summary Assimilation, analysis, classification, and categorization of data are foreign practices to students. Students should be given more practice on assimilation, analysis, classification, and categorization of data in smaller dosages, before they are given the term paper to do for a pass mark. The actual skills needed have to be practically taught. This implies that more teaching time is needed, preferably in smaller groups. Reflection on an issue, evaluating, and critically analyzing different variables were concepts that they had not done before.

Recommendation Reflection is a more difficult task, implying that the student first has to have the skills to engage in evaluation, critical thinking, drawing contrasts and comparisons. This basic knowledge has to be embedded in the student’s cognitive structure. To take a stand on an issue appears difficult; to substantiate why one holds a specific point of view—even if the person had the necessary content to argue the point. Timidity was evident in their approach. Debates in class can be used to demonstrate what taking a standpoint means, as well as to explain logic and coherence in presentation. Smaller class units would add meaning here. Academic writing skills are very difficult for most students. Intense reading and writing skills need to be taught in a very focused way. Commitment from both lecturer and student will have to be evident. Language and writing skills need to be slotted into the time table, and the curriculum has to be revised to focus on language across the curriculum.

Question 2.2: The writing skills involved Essay structure was hard for most students. They were not able to present a logical, written argument; unable to formulate relevant paragraphs, to take a standpoint. Language skills are limited: sentence structure; spelling; punctuation; paragraph structure; using one’s own words; being concise. Writing a summary was very challenging. Editing

Hilda Israel

29

was a new experience for many.

Summary With most engineers focusing on figures and graphs, the concept of writing an essay within basic academic norms proved a major problem. The paradigm shift required appears to have overwhelmed some of the students.

Recommendation It would help if lecturers could identify engineering content where such skills apply and use them as short exercises to confirm relevance of writing skills for engineers. This can then be the bridging time needed to enable that paradigm shift. Buy-in from lecturers also would be essential—they will have to visibly support the learning process taking place. Logic and coherence in one’s argument did not apply. As above— with the focus being these two skills during the same bridging exercise. Language usage was poor, preventing the scoring of better grades. Intense language usage teaching is essential. Rules have to be taught. Vygotsky (1987) holds that one cannot apply the rules if one does not know them. He states that grammar and writing help the learner to a higher level of language development. Every writing task assigned to the student of engineering is also a language learning task. The review lesson should be as important as the first lesson introducing necessary skills, with a focus on how the language used impacts on the meaning conveyed and, therefore, the assessment earned. With the extremely technical content covered in the engineering specific modules, accurate writing skills are much more important. Editing was a totally new task, making writing the paper appear bigger than it really was. Focused training on the writing process and peer editing will have to form part of the student’s contact time at university. Plumb and Scott (2002) confirm that students produce better writing if responding to a well structured assignment—one that challenges them to research the topic; provides evidence of research; has clear instructions; describes the audience; and specifies how it would be evaluated. The lecturer's role would be to facilitate the writing, to provide a plan for the learner's instruction. The purpose in writing must be the process through which growth takes place, rather than the finished product. Peer marking is recommended. Resenbrink (1987) observed the benefits of peer interaction among students with varied language abilities. When encouraged, peers

30

Writing Skills

taught one another, using co-operative strategies to allow each student to contribute according to his/her ability. Those competent in language can help those who are not through group discussion, presentations, and common projects. Students with lesser language abilities attained higher achievement, while those competent attained positive reinforcement through their instruction of others.

Discussion Engineering is a much needed profession around the world. At the NMMU, lecturers are identified as those with “scarce skills”. Marketing it is aggressive and many students view the profession as a number one career choice. In the South African (SA) social and economic context, such a career is also the gateway from poverty and oppression. In the education and training, teaching and learning context, such a career is limited by language barriers because the majority of students are African language mother tongue speakers. While SA is seen as a multilingual society, individuals are competent in mainly African languages—isiZulu, isiXhosa, isiNdebele, XiTsonga, Sepedi, Siswati, Sesotho, Setswana, Tshivenda—together with Afrikaans and English. English is a second language (ESL) usually learned at school. English is spoken by about 45% of South Africans (Gough, 1996), yet ranks fifth in distribution as a first language among all the official languages mentioned; 5.5% of school going children are EFL speakers; 10.1% are Afrikaans first language; 84.2% African first language (HEQC, Statistics SA, 2005). About 400 million people speak English as a first language; 600 million as a second language (English Language Facts, 2007). Research on language used in the teaching and learning context consistently points out that success is achieved when the student is competent in the language of instruction, and all that is embedded in it—as is confirmed by the survey on the NMMU mechanical engineering students. While the ESL students (16 of 34) appear to be competent in its use conversationally, they clearly encountered problems in the writing process. In similar contexts, Cummins (1991) argues that learning and achieving in the use of academic English proved a challenge. Limited ESL competency is a worldwide problem forming the root barrier confronting both students and lecturers when they are forced to interact in languages which are not their mother tongue. Clegghorn and Rollnick (2002) confirm that not interacting in one’s mother tongue deprives learners of active, in-depth engagement in the teaching and learning process. Ironically, at the NMMU, anecdotal evidence confirmed that the students in the sample preferred to use

Hilda Israel

31

English because they see it as the language of success, of the business and corporate world. Further, parents encourage their children to speak English because they see language as the defining factor bridging where they are to where they want their children to be. Research by Dagut (1999) reveals that it is only in Africa that black parents instruct their children to speak English, where its use symbolizes freedom, power, authority and success. However, Kapp (1995) argues that while this may be an important reason to learn English, research proves that adequate proficiency in English for academic purposes at university has still not been attained. Chimbganda (2001) confirmed this many years later—that even post-graduate ESL students are unable to reason and conceptualize in English. The results of the case study confirm that the absence of assimilation, classification, categorization, and analysis in academic tasks still contribute to low grades and, on long term projection, low through-put rates among our NMMU engineering students. Contributing to the above fact is that embedded within the English language is its own culture, so the ESL student does not only have to learn the rules of the language, but also a new culture— one totally different to his or her own. On discussing the need for reading and research as part of the writing process, students exposed some of their barriers—they didn’t have books at home, neither did they have newspapers and magazines; parents did not speak English and had little or no formal education; integration between the local schools and community was unheard of; a library was absent; and computers existed only on the NMMU campus. In addition, academic literacy was learned only through the second language, with students confirming that they lacked the necessary linguistic basis to enable them to transfer knowledge from their first language to their second. Those in the group who were English and Afrikaans first language speakers displayed confidence in concept formation, transfer, and assimilation—quite unlike the ESL students, many of whom spoke English functionally, but admitted that the challenges they identified were very real to them. The engineering lecturer now has to teach a generic student who does not have the culture required for success in an academic environment, who lacks the literacy which would enable such success. Such literacy should begin at home, but its lack is evident in the responses provided by students in the survey—almost every challenge listed is rooted in an inability to acquire the required English language culture. Clearly, it is vital that all role-players in the teaching and learning situation need to be competent in the language of instruction which, at NMMU, is English. Previous research has clarified that effective reading and writing skills

32

Writing Skills

are crucial for engineers, but that engineering programs struggle with how to prepare students for the writing they will do as professionals. For the term paper only the students were expected to do a fair amount of reading, but the impact of other modules, lack of time, the attitude towards the communication course (“it’s just an add-on”) and the language limitations facing them resulted in students admitting that they needed more language skills, but just could not find more time in the day. Saunders (1991) writes that all reading for such students is a form of drudgery, time is wasted, and they do not understand what they have read. Such poor reading habits obviously tell on the quality of their passing, and will affect the NMMU’s throughput rate. Education Minister Kader Asmal (2004) emphasized the teaching of English as a second language during his administration, citing poor academic performance as a direct result of lack of proficiency in the language of teaching and learning. The many English bridging modules, extended program courses and language integrated interventions confirm the fact that, at tertiary level, the lack of English proficiency is a major concern (Moodley, 2003). This was the original purpose of the term paper, to give students an opportunity to write in order to learn. That students are becoming aware of their limitations through it is confirmation that the task is a learning tool exposing individual challenges in academic writing. The task for both lecturer and student is to now address such limitations. The recommendations made in this paper are by no means complete, but will be a start towards the process.

Conclusion Studies done by the Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering (ECE) at the University of Arizona show that engineering firms and ECE graduates ranked writing ability as the most important skill in determining an engineer’s success. Moreover, they ranked writing above the technical skills of the engineering curriculum (Ostheimer & White, 2005). The inconvenient truth is that students need more support than is being provided to meet their writing needs. The writing process appears to be a foreign concept to most students, with one lecture not adequate to instill the practice essential for the development of writing skills. It is also true that intervention is needed at primary and secondary school level for students to assimilate the writing process before they enter university and, subsequently for them to become effective in their careers as engineers. After all, writing skills form the core of academic success and should therefore be at the forefront of the institution’s vision.

Hilda Israel

33

References Alderson, C. (1983). Who Needs Jam? Current Developments in Language Testing. London: Academic Press. Chimbganda, A.B. (2001). Evaluating English for Academic Purposes: What students and staff say. SAALT Journal for Language Teaching, 35(2), 147-159. Clegghorn, A. & Rollnick, M. (2002). The Role of English in Individual and Societal Development: A view from African classrooms, TESOL Quarterly, 36, 347-372. Cummins, J. (1991). The Role of Primary Language Development in Promoting Educational Success for Language Minority Students. Evaluation and Assessment Center. Los Angeles: California State University. Dagut (1999). Eleven into One Won’t Go. Focus, Nov. 1999, 18-22. English Language Facts (2007). Retrieved November 2001 from http://www.english-language-school.biz/english2/facts.asp Gough, D.H. (1996). English in South Africa. Dictionary of South African English on Historical Principles. Oxford: Oxford University Press. HEQC (2005). Statistics South Africa Annual Report 2005/2006. Kapp, R. (1995). Entering the ‘Charmed Circle’: A case study of student literacies and literary practice. Unpublished manuscript. South Africa: University of Cape Town. Moodley, S. (2003). Inclusive Education: Challenges for lecturers, academic development practitioners and courseware designers in higher education institutions. Paper givent at the SAADA Conference, Cape Town, SA. Ostheimer, M.W. & White, E.M. (2005). Portfolio Assessment in an American Engineering College. Assessing Writing, 10, 61-73. Perkins, D. & Blythe, T. (1994) Putting Understanding Up Front. Educational Leadership. 51(5), 4-7. Plumb, C. & Scott, C. (2002). Outcome Assessment of Engineering Writing at the University of Washington. Journal of Engineering Education, 91(3), 333-338 Resenbrink, C. (1987). Writing as Play. Language Arts, 64(6), 59-60. Saunders, W. (1991). Poor English Reading is a Big Flaw in Black Education. REALITY: A Journal of Liberal and Racial Opinion, 6(23). Vygotsky, L. (1987). Thought and Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

ISCIENCE AND GENERAL EDUCATION: SCIENCE LITERACY FOR ALL STUDENTS

STASINOS STAVRIANEAS AND MARK STEWART

Abstract The report on Science in the National Interest established the important role of science (research and education) for all Americans (Executive Office of the President, 1994). The report identified five main objectives designed to promote scientific collaborations and communications; the first three objectives (maintain leadership across the frontiers of scientific knowledge, enhance connections between fundamental research and national goals, and stimulate partnerships that promote investments in fundamental science and engineering) deal with the need for continued investment in research and innovation. The last two objectives (produce the finest scientists and engineers for the 21st century, and raise the scientific and technological literacy of all Americans) were direct charges to all educators, from K-12 to graduate school. Around the same time several organizations presented their own recommendations for science education reform, and most are summarized very nicely in the influential Shaping the Future reports published by the National Science Foundation (Vol. I, 1996 and Vol. II, 1998) and the subsequent BIO 2010 report (National Academies Press, 2003). This report is an honest attempt to accurately assess the state of science education in the U.S., and to create a framework for implementation of science education reform. Since then, and in response to these reports, a growing body of “best practices” has been published in science education journals, all aiming at improving the science classroom and laboratory.

Is the charge met with results? Despite the progress to date, however, a recent National Assessment

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

35

for Educational Progress report (NAEP, 2006) showed a marked decline in science proficiency among our nation’s 12th graders. Not surprisingly, this prompted speculation from a variety of commentators on how and why establishing and maintaining science literacy remains such a challenge for science educators in this country. For example, New York Times op-ed columnist Brent Staples, in a piece titled Why American College Students Hate Science, generated heated debate among science educators by charging, Large numbers of aspiring science majors—perhaps as many as half—are turned off by unimaginative teaching and [as a result] migrate to other disciplines before graduating.

Regardless of whether the source of the problem is pedagogical, precollege, a shortfall in qualified teachers, or simply due to lack of interest among would-be undergraduate science students, university science educators must continue to develop innovative and effective ways for improving science literacy for all students, and do so in accordance with national science education initiatives (e.g., Project 2061). U.S. Census Report data from 2006 indicate that less than one-fourth of college degrees awarded in 2005 were in science/medicine (11%) and engineering (12%), while the majority of all college degrees were awarded in non-science areas such as business (25%), liberal arts (13%), education (13%), social science/law (8%), and “other” areas of inquiry (16%). Roughly speaking, this translates to the bulk of our nation’s future legislators, educators, and corporate leaders—all of whom vote or voice support for or against standards for science education and scientific research—are less likely to make informed decisions based on scientific information (i.e., global warming, stem cell research, evolution in the classroom). Indeed, one course in the undergraduate years is typically the only chance college educators have to reach students who might enjoy science as a career, or at the very least to create an informed citizenry able to debate, legislate, and appropriate intelligently with regard to matters of science. Thus, we fall very short of the fifth goal in the aforementioned Science in the National Interest report (raise the scientific and technological literacy of all Americans). Science educators must therefore continue to be creative and progressive in developing and implementing science curricula for all students, and in particular non-science students, especially if we are to achieve the goal of a scientifically literate society. Our own experiences described herein and those of others (e.g., Arwood, 2004) indicate that the educational methods commonly and successfully used to teach science students neither restore the enthusiasm for science nor improve the science

36

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

literacy of non-science students.

iScience: Science literacy for all students The starting point was our desire to raise the quality of the teaching of science at our institution, a four-year liberal arts education undergraduate university. Our decision to target primarily non-science students was directly influenced by the most current standards for science pedagogy for all undergraduates (i.e., Project 2061, PKAL Report on Reports II). Would non-science students connect labs to lectures as readily as those majoring in science? Not surprisingly non-science students come to science courses with a different set of expectations and abilities (i.e., Helms & Montague, 1980; Arwood, 2004). Cognizant of these various apprehensions and anxieties, we developed pedagogical strategies that allow us to come alongside non-science students in creative, effective ways to facilitate and promote science literacy. In the process, we engage our students at a level where they are best equipped to comprehend what they historically view as intimidating and overwhelming course content. We established the iScience framework with two specific goals in mind: provide all students with an engaging science education, and transform the science classroom into a student-centered learning environment using the most current standards for science education. The basic principles of iScience are summarized in Figure 1. This culmination of best practices in science pedagogy has allowed us to create vibrant courses, an example of which is presented below.

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

37

Figure 1. A schematic representation of the iScience pedagogical framework. Each individual component represents practices shown to be successful in science education.

Fundamentals of Neuroscience: A science course for non-science majors One hurdle to promoting science literacy among undergraduate nonscience students is that by the time they make their way to our classroom they have had ample pre-college time to convince themselves that they dislike science. Paradoxically, these are the same students who ultimately demonstrate impressive capacities to comprehend and analyze complex political discourse; digest intricate economic theory; and evaluate seemingly esoteric poetry. Four years ago when we first began crafting our sophomore-level Fundamentals of Neuroscience course, we were understandably reticent about targeting a predominantly non-science student audience only. Could we engage non-science students at each of the five core levels of neuroscience (e.g., molecular, cellular, systems, behavioral, and cognitive)? In our neuroscience course we confront this

38

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

mindset head-on, Week 1, by identifying it for what it is: namely, convoluted student-speak for “I’ve never seen any value to my learning all these terms and concepts”, or “Science is just something I’ve never been able to relate to”. The first day our class meets, and before any discussion of course content or details of the syllabus are given, we begin with a group activity titled “What does it mean to think scientifically”? Here students apply the tenets of scientific inquiry to critical evaluation of the “I hate science because…” hypothesis. Students are challenged to work through several of the logical fallacies that contribute to this perspective while at the same time gaining valuable insight into their own thought processes. Importantly, they also leave with a clearer understanding of the thrust and focus of the course material we plan to cover over the next 15 weeks of instruction. Unlike science majors, non-science students often fail to understand the relevance of investigative hands-on laboratory activities to the broader course context (Shan, 1990). To address this we have identified and developed several pedagogical strategies that make this relationship more obvious to non-science students.

Lab before lecture approach to course content The first element is our lab-led approach to introducing weekly course content. Simply put, whenever feasible we introduce lecture content by way of the preceding week’s laboratory meeting. We find non-science students are especially receptive to this format and believe that science educators would benefit from re-tooling their existing laboratory courses to better address this (Stewart & Stavrianeas, 2008). Given our specific curricular goals we crafted a framework that would better suit the needs of our target population. A critical element was our decision to introduce concepts using laboratory activities as opposed to the more traditional approach where laboratories follow initial discussion of subject matter in lecture. As a first step we scheduled the laboratory sections of our course later in the preceding week (e.g., Thursday), thus allowing us to introduce the following week’s topic during lab instead of lecture. This afforded us the additional benefit of an intervening weekend for any last minute changes to the following week’s lecture content that may have surfaced during laboratory discussion. Moreover, students report benefiting from their weekly textbook readings when ample time was allowed before discussing assigned material in lecture. A good example of our lab-led approach is the earthworm dissection we use to introduce students to the principles of nerve. This exercise is

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

39

designed to accomplish two goals. At a conceptual level, the following week’s lectures are foreshadowed through students engaging in a hands-on lab practical that illustrates each of the fundamental properties of saltatory conductance. Secondly, the activity itself eases students toward an elementary understanding and use of the Biopac data acquisition systems, which thereafter become integral to all subsequent lab activities. In addition to creating a more relaxed environment for questions regarding the following week’s lecture topic (vs. during lecture itself), our lab-led approach also retains all of the benefits of traditionally-taught labs (e.g., students exposed to the realities of actual data collection in the laboratory where trial and error are essential components of the investigative process).

Expose students to primary scientific literature A second element pivotal to engaging non-science students is the use of primary scientific literature both in lab and during lectures. Much has been written on the benefits of introducing students, early on, to primary source material as a means of promoting science literacy (e.g., Gillen et al., 2004), and we have realized the benefits of this directly. Providing access to and promoting a fundamental appreciation for primary scientific literature is a second key element of our course that allows us to promote scientific literacy in three ways. First, students gain confidence in their ability to both identify and understand empirical questions and their implications for the “real world”. Second, students are better able to articulate research questions and outcomes when journaling and in preparing increasingly more structured lab reports. Third, students learn what it means to design well-controlled experiments for purposes of testing hypotheses and drawing valid conclusions. A good example of how we incorporate primary scientific literature into laboratory exercises occurs during Week 1, when we assign a specific paper (Middlemist et al., 1976) that serves as the basis for a subsequent lab-based discussion and activity on IRB and ethics-related issues. Non-science students uniformly enjoy this activity because it helps them learn about the process of proposing scientific research while simultaneously helping to decrease their anxiety regarding reading and conducting empirical work. Students prepare for the lab via a homework assignment where they must first visit a website and make journal entries on learning how to read scientific literature (for example, see the Five Colleges in Ohio web site titled Reading Primary Literature in Biology at http://biology.kenyon.edu/Bio_ InfoLit/index.html). The lab activity itself involves a mock IRB review

40

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

panel in which students act in the capacity of would-be proposers or reviewers and role-play outcomes related to the Middlemist et al. reading.

Student journals The third element of our laboratory experience is the weekly student journal. Here students are given the opportunity to demonstrate not only their capacity to understand the information they encounter each week, but to report material in a way that is more familiar to them than the typical lab report format found in the majority of science-for-science-majors courses. The journal has become a useful tool for our students to express their thoughts on the course material (e.g., Etkina & Mestre, 2004). In essence, the journal is an electronic notebook in which students record formal and informal writings and reflections having to do with various lab activities. By asking students to write comments, express thoughts, and share observations stemming from lab activities in their journal we “meet” them at their comfort level. Reading journal entries enables us to calibrate the course to student needs as we start to guide them towards more structured and complete reports of scientific readings that are required as the semester progresses. These entries also provide us with useful assessment benchmarks that help us track students’ gradual progress towards scientific literacy (Schuh & Busey, 2001). Providing students with leading questions for each journal entry helps us direct their attention to various aspects of scientific discourse, such as framing the research question, experimental design, and data analysis. More broadly, the journal becomes a bridge to more formal scientific report-writing culminating in the student’s final research project. Student feedback indicates that this type of informal writing is less intimidating, less overwhelming, more personal, and thus more effective overall in moving them incrementally towards a better understanding of what it means to be scientifically literate. In making this decision we were, of course, conscious of the fact that we abandoned the strict rigidity of a scientific report in favor of a better understanding of the scientific investigative process on the part of the students.

Lecture component The conceptual framework of the lecture component of our course is premised on the Mind-Brain-Behavior (MBB) interfaculty initiative model of neuroscience education from Harvard University. The crux of the Harvard scheme is its emphasis on integrating connections across

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

41

traditional disciplinary boundaries, thus giving rise to unique crossdisciplinary pairings such as biological anthropology, cognitive neuroscience, computational neuroscience, neurobiology, linguistics, behavioral neuroscience, and philosophy. Our own adaptation of this highly successful model uses neuroscience—itself a de facto interdisciplinary topic—as a vehicle for exploring the biological and chemical sciences, behavior, cognition, and even mental disorders, thus allowing us to move beyond the traditional disciplinary boundaries and pedagogical practices that all too often result in distance between academic disciplines at small liberal arts institutions such as our own. For this reason our lecture content includes a rich mixture of classical topics (e.g., nerve structure and function, action potential/subsequent propagation, sensory processing), as well a number of interdisciplinary bridges to areas as diverse as the arts, genetics, motor control, and philosophy. As explained above, in most cases the lecture topics are introduced by the laboratory activities. The degree of complexity (in topic and learning objectives) introduced in the lab sessions is mirrored in the lecture, so that students are constantly guided in their journey towards achieving scientific literacy. Students advance from the elementary stages of learning how to read scientific literature, to intermediate stages that contain elements of student-initiated questions and experimentation, and culminating in an independent research project. This framework allows students to build upon their previous experiences as they ascend the learning path towards becoming more scientifically literate. Creating this comprehensive approach to the teaching of science to non-sciences students required a re-thinking of teaching paradigms, presentation of material, design of laboratory exercises, and assessment of student learning. Although the elements of our course are not unique in and by themselves, their combination is ambitious and comprehensive. Furthermore, by targeting non-sciences students for whom this may be their only science course we had to adapt existing strategies and create appropriate “meet them where they’re at” learning opportunities. The implementation of our work required significant re-tooling of our existing laboratory facilities, and support with assessment of the efficacy of this work. For this reason we applied for and secured funding from the National Science Foundation (DUE-CCLI 0837830) that allowed us to establish a truly unique and interdisciplinary introductory offering in the sciences. Our lab-led approach has generated considerable interest among colleagues within and beyond our institution, and is premised on the fact that in our daily lives we do not have the benefit of several lectures before we observe a natural phenomenon, but rather, the observation spurs an

42

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

investigation of the phenomenon itself. Thus, observation and formulation of hypotheses precedes experimentation and data analysis, and not the other way around as is commonly practiced in introductory science laboratories.

How can we know if our approach works? Our over-arching objective was to promote science literacy among non-science students. Yet, there is disagreement even among science educators on how best to define science literacy (i.e., Project 2061; Koppal & Caldwell, 2004; Liem, 2005; Roseman & Koppal, 2006). The National Science Education Standards (1996) indicate that, Scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity.

Thus far our practice has been to translate the NSES definition to mean that by the end of our one-semester Fundamentals of Neuroscience course, non-science students demonstrate proficiency in: • • • •

Identifying and discussing scientific research; Reading and understanding scientific information; Acquiring new scientific concepts and terms; and, Evaluating the quality of scientific information.

As scientists, it is imperative that we follow the rules we establish for our students: allow the data to speak as to the efficacy of our approach. Given our stated objective of improving science literacy for all students we collaborated with our colleague Professor Jim Friedrich (who served as consultant in our NSF award) and collectively developed a specific formative and summative evaluation plan. This plan included previously validated measures of self efficacy, a determinism scale, and other NSFfunded assessment instruments, such as the CAT (administered by the Tennessee Technological Institute). These evaluations include a combination of paper and pencil surveys (e.g., Scientific Interests Survey pre/post test; Laboratory Assessment Survey) and web-based resources that allow us to create online assessment tools specific to our course needs and Student Learning Objectives (SLOs) (Angelo & Cross, 1993). Such measures are easy to use, allow for creativity in generating and refining questions, and provide specific information regarding student progress towards educational

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

43

objectives. We learned from and adapted the experiences of others, including those discussed in the PKAL Roundtable on Assessment (PKAL, 2002), select elements from the final report on Using Data in Undergraduate Science Classrooms (NSDL, 2002), and various assessment principles of the American Association for Higher Education. In addition to administering our pre/post-semester interest inventory and selected evaluations of laboratory activities (Stewart & Stavrianeas, 2008), impact assessment of our three laboratory elements (lab-led, journaling, and primary scientific literature) on non-science students’ development in science literacy was indicated by the following SLOs: SLO 1—To determine whether students have acquired the ability to understand the nature and complexity of scientific problems, identify strengths and weaknesses associated with experimental design, and solve technical problems related to experimental protocols, students were assessed via a targeted, pre-constructed survey. In addition, students were asked to complete a self-evaluation that addresses the same educational goals at the beginning and end of the semester. SLO 2—Weekly lab team assessments, journal entries, and electronic data reports submitted as part of the lab work were collated and used to qualitatively determine the percentage of students who acquired introductory-level competency in computerized data acquisition. At the same time, we also evaluated the students’ skills at discussing and communicating science topics with each other and the instructors. SLO 3—We placed particular emphasis on the students’ abilities to identify strengths and weaknesses in experimental design, experimental procedures, and data collection and analysis. The quality and complexity of the independent student research project were evaluated using a rubric adapted from the list of resources already discussed. SLO 4—Our success in helping our non-science students establish connections between cell and organism, structure and function, and identifying the essential role of science in improving quality of life were assessed through 1) student responses in a special section of the final exam, and 2) student responses in a specific section of the aforementioned student self-assessment survey. SLO 5—The success of the lab-based approach to science education of those less interested in science as well as the students’ ability to understand and appreciate primary scientific literature were addressed through their submitted work and the self-assessment survey.

Having just completed the second cycle of this course, we compared student performance on these objective measures using two types of comparisons, the standard pre-/post-test for each student, as well as comparisons between different sections of introductory science courses

44

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

(our interdisciplinary course on neuroscience, an introductory course in biology, and an introductory course in environmental science).

Preliminary outcomes The considerable emphasis on standards for science education and the development of pedagogical strategies to achieve these goals on a national level have been met with some success, but such successes are limited to isolated efforts and not a systemic overhaul of science education and research. Our efforts were focused on the fact that an appreciation of the scientific investigative method comes through active participation in observation of phenomena, formulation of hypotheses, experimentation, data collection and analysis, and dissemination of results. Our preliminary results indicate that by transforming the introductory curriculum using the lab-led and student-centered approach we were successful in raising the scientific literacy for all students. One of the assessment measures we used for this educational approach involved a previously validated biological self-assessment scale (Baldwin et al., 1999) that included the following subset of questions known as the “application” subscale: • • •

•

•

How confident are you that after reading an article about a biology experiment, you could write a summary of its main points? How confident are you that after reading an article about a biology experiment, you could explain its main ideas to another person? How confident are you that after watching a television documentary dealing with some aspect of biology, you could explain its main ideas to another person? How confident are you that after listening to a public lecture regarding some biology topic, you could write a summary of its main points? How confident are you that after listening to a public lecture regarding some biology topic, you could explain its main ideas to another person?

The comparison of these preliminary data from the Fundamentals of Neuroscience course with two other introductory courses in Biology and Environmental Science indicated that the Fundamentals of Neuroscience students performed better that their peers (p=0.001) even though they “started behind” those who enrolled in the other two classes (3.77±0.47 vs. 4.24±0.60, respectively). By the end of the semester they had “caught up”

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

45

(4.30±0.46 vs. 4.34±0.77, main effect P=0.0181) with their peers in the science classes who showed no marked improvement in this measure throughout the semester. These data provide preliminary evidence that our approach may prove an effective means for improving students’ self efficacy on issues related to understanding and interpreting science.

Conclusion iScience is the comprehensive term we use to describe our introductive, innovative, interdisciplinary, and investigative science curriculum. The iScience curriculum and the newly established iScience laboratory are parts of a new interdisciplinary effort called the iHuman Sciences Initiative (iHSI). This new and exciting endeavor forms the framework for truly innovative and transformative changes in science education and collaborative research. Our preliminary data gives us reason to be optimistic about the impact our approach has on improving science literacy for all students, and we look forward to reporting on our progress in the future.

References 2003 Five Colleges in Ohio. (2003). Reading Primary Literature in Biology. Retrieved July 2009: http://biology.kenyon.edu/Bio_InfoLit/index.html. 2006 U.S. Census Report Data. Retrieved January 2010: http://www.census.gov. American Association for Higher Education. Retrieved December 2009: http://www.eric.ed.gov. American Association for the Advancement of Science. (1989). Project 2061: Science for all Americans. Retrieved March 2006: http://www.project2061.org/. Angelo, T.A. & Cross, K.P. (1993). Classroom Assessment Techniques: A handbook for college teachers, (2nd ed.). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass Publishers. Arwood, L. (2004). Teaching Cell Biology to Nonscience Majors through Forensics, or How to Design a Killer Course. Cell Biology Education, 3(2), 131-138. Baldwin, J.A., Ebert-May, D. & Burns, D.J. (1999). The Development of a College Biology Self-efficacy Instrument for Nonmajors. Science Education, 83, 397-408.

46

iScience And General Education: Science Literacy For All Students

Etkina, E. & Mestre, J.P. (2004). Implications of Learning Research for Teaching Science to Non-Science Majors. Retrieved December 2009: http://www.sencer.net/Assessment/assessmenttools.cfm#. Executive Office of the President. (1994). Office of Science and Technology Policy. Science in the National Interest (August). Field-tested Learning Assessment Guide. (2010). Retrieved February 2010: http://www.flaguide.org/index.php. Gillen, C.M., Vaughan, J. & Lye, B.R. (2004). An Online Tutorial for Helping Nonscience Majors Read Primary Research Literature in Biology. Advances in Physiology Education, 28, 95-99. Harvard University Mind-Brain-Behavior. Retrieved December 2009: http://mbb.harvard.edu/. Helms, S.J.S. & Montague, E.J. (1980). A Study of College Nonscience Majors’ Expectations of the Scientific Enterprise. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 17, 553-558. Koppal, M. & Caldwell, A. (2004). Meeting the Challenge of Science Literacy: Project 2061 efforts to improve science education. Cell Biology Education 3(1), 28-30. Liem, A. (2005). Promoting Science Literacy by Engaging the Public. PLoS Biology, 3(12), 427. Middlemist, R.D., Knowles, E.S. & Matter, C.F. (1976). Personal Space Invasion in the Lavatory: Suggestive evidence for arousal. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33, 541-546. National Academies of Science. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2006). Retrieved July 2009: http://nces.ed.gov/naep3/. National Research Council. (2003). BIO 2010: Transforming Undergraduate Education for Future Research Biologists. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. National Science Digital Library. (2002). Using Data in Undergraduate Science Classrooms. Retrieved December 2009: http://serc.carleton.edu/usingdata/. National Science Foundation. (1996). Shaping the Future: New expectations for undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (NSF 96-139). —. (1998). Shaping the Future: Perspectives on undergraduate education in science, mathematics, engineering, and technology (NSF 98-128). Project Kaleidoscope. (2006). Urgent Action. Retrieved July 2009: http://www.pkal.org/documents/ReportOnReportsII.cfm. —. (2002). PKAL Roundtable on Assessment. Retrieved July 2009:

Stasinos Stavrianeas and Mark Stewart

47

http://www.pkal.org/collections/2002RoundtableOnTheFuture.cfm. Roseman, J.E. & Koppal, M. (2006). Ensuring That College Graduates Are Science Literate. Mintzes, J.J. & Leonard, W.H. (eds.). In Handbook of College Science Teaching. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press. Schuh, K.L. & Busey, T.A. (2001). Implementation of a Problem-based Approach in an Undergraduate Cognitive Neuroscience Course. College Teaching, 49, 153-159. Shan, E. (1990). Foundations of Science: A lab course for nonscience majors. Retrieved January 2008: http://www.brooklyn.liu.edu/wac/workshops/Spring_06/Ezra%20Shah n_Foundations_of_Science.pdf. Staples, B. (2006, 25 May) Editorial Observer: Why American college students hate science. New York Times. Stewart, M. & Stavrianeas, S. (2008). Leading with Lab: A learning cycle approach to neuroscience labs for non-sciences students. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 6(2), A74-77. Student Assessment of their Learning Gains. (2010). Retrieved January 2010: http://www.salgsite.org.

IMPLEMENTING INNOVATIVE, INTERACTIVE TECHNOLOGIES AMONG TEACHER CANDIDATES TO ENHANCE UNDERSTANDING OF THE IMPACT OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY ON LEARNING INEZ A. HEATH AND DIANE L. JUDD

Abstract This study researches the results of the acquisition of content using two different technology-based approaches in a required course on culture and diversity for teacher-education majors. Test scores were compared between two groups using two distinct methodologies: traditional technology-based instruction, and interactive whiteboard instruction to determine the effectiveness between the groups. Results between pre- and post-tests indicated significant gains in test scores by the teacher candidates in the treatment group, who received instructions with the use of the interactive whiteboard, compared to the teacher candidates in the control group who received instruction using the more traditional technology-based strategies centered on PowerPoint lectures that are typically used in higher education. The research also examined how well teacher candidates related to what they had learned in the culture and diversity course, and their reflections of how this knowledge would impact their futures as teachers and citizens.

Introduction The debate among educational researchers continues over the value of multimedia in the classroom to increase student learning (Moss et al., 2007; Tate, 2002). New technology innovations to enhance teaching and learning over the past few years have been overwhelming and have often met with resistance from many educators. Additionally, the willingness of

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

49

faculty to make the transition from the more traditional, tried and true technology methods, that are centered on PowerPoint supported lectures, has been problematic (Weisman & Garza, 2002; Yun & Sinnappan, 2009) and there is a need for more research to provide educators with evidence of students’ gains in learning when comparing the traditional teachings with the enhanced teachings using the new technologies. Of the many innovations in educational technology, the interactive whiteboard has been one of the most exciting because of the many possibilities for presenting instruction that is inclusive and open to a variety of learning styles (Milner, 2010). For example, Valiente (2008) observed that English Language Learners from various Asian cultures in U.K. schools relied more on memorization as a tool for learning, while strategies that focused on learning through communication and collaboration were not as effective. Lee (2008) also emphasized the importance of teachers’ ability to address range of diversity within human cultural communities, and how cultural and linguistic diversity affects cognition, perceptions, and emotions that influence human learning and development. The question of how we learn and how diversity affects our attitudes about teaching and learning styles has been widely researched and continues to be a central issue (Landerholm, Gehrie & Hao, 2004; De Vita, 2001). Valiente (2008) noted that the literature on learning styles suggests that although the behavior of some students may appear different from what is defined as a high-quality learning process, their conduct does not demonstrate an inferior approach to learning. De Vita (2001) also points out that considerable research has been conducted on the classification and identification of learning styles, but many teachers who wish to use learning style theory for classroom application are overwhelmed by this vast body of literature. He stresses that little attention has been devoted to the investigation of cultural influences on the development of individual learning style preferences, and how educators can use this information to diversify the way they teach to engage all students. The need to explore a variety of ways to teach, especially given the increase in diversity in our student population, should be expanded to include courses in higher education. With new technologies come new opportunities to explore learning styles and strategies related to teaching and learning. Pursell (2009), for example, found many advantages in using cell phones in innovative ways to teach concepts in his course in organic chemistry. Students created flash cards using their cell phones, and said that they were more convenient and fun to look at than paper cards.

50

Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies

The interactive whiteboard is unique in that it is a large touch-sensitive board that utilizes a computer and projector displaying subject matter in a way that involves students as active participants in “real-time” learning experiences. Whether the diverse student is more comfortable in a teachercentered learning environment, or in one that encourages a more constructivist approach, the interactive whiteboard allows the teacher to adapt lessons that engage all students in learning To date, the majority of the research on the use of the interactive whiteboards has focused on grades K-12. Gatlin (2004) researched the use of the interactive whiteboard and the evaluation of students’ performance in fourth, fifth, and sixth grades. His research pointed out that students who received instruction using the interactive whiteboard performed significantly better in a fourth grade mathematics class. He also found that sixth grade students in his study performed significantly better in their science classes. There is a growing interest in implementing the innovative technologies in higher education. Tate (2002) advocates the need for more research to focus on implementing innovative technology-based instruction with students at the college level. Although the evidence for expanding the interactive whiteboard technology to the college level classroom seems apparent, the transition has been slow in gaining acceptance (Georgina & Olson, 2008; Schneckenberg, 2009) because instructors must rethink innovative ways to present knowledge within an interactive framework.

Method In the two months prior to implementation of our research, we worked on various aspects of the project. We had informal interviews with college level instructors at our institution about their students’ behaviors as learners in classes. In conversation with colleagues from other institutions they also confirmed similar observations in their classes. Many instructors commented on the students’ obsessive dependence on cell phones and how the cell phone has become the extra appendage that students rely on for everything, including: finding maps and directions to places; searching for information on the Internet; being entertained through games, music and movies; and expanding their social network text messaging. We agreed that today’s students are technology savvy, and would probably prefer a more interactive learning environment that involves them directly in the course content being presented. Accordingly, our research questions were:

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

51

1.

Is there a difference between teacher candidates’ test-score gains in a course where instruction is enhanced by strategies that focus on integrating the interactive whiteboard, when compared to teacher candidates who receive the same instructional materials in more traditional media-supported lectures?

2.

How will teacher candidates relate what they have learned in the culture and diversity course, both personally as well as professionally in their course program, towards becoming teachers?

There were 93 subjects, teacher candidates, in this research. As noted earlier, the groups were randomly divided prior to the beginning of the semester and the two groups were based on the days they were taking the course in this study. The treatment group consisted of 48 students, and the control group of 45 students. All of the students were teacher candidates whose majors varied across grade levels (K-12) and in various disciplines including music, art, foreign languages, kinesiology, physical education, communication disorders, and deaf education. This study included: (a) comparison of the effectiveness of the two technology-based approaches; (b) ability to apply information about cultural diversity across contexts and disciplines that they would be teaching; and, (c) ability to demonstrate in-depth understanding of the impact that cultural diversity has on teaching and learning for success in a global society. The teacher candidates in the two groups were given a pre- and posttest and a questionnaire. The same test items were used for both the pretest and the post-test. The pre-test was given at the beginning of the course and the post-test was given upon completion of the learning modules developed for this study. Both groups followed the same schedule. The essay questionnaire was given toward the end of the semester. The collection of data was done using a classroom performance system (CPS), often referred to as “clickers”. The CPS system that we used in this study was the Student Response Systems by eInstruction. The CPS student response pads are handheld devices, clickers that allow students to respond to questions. Our training also included the use of the CPS and how to assist students in using the clickers to respond to the questions on the preand post-tests. The CPS software analyzed the data and provided statistics and feedback that we used in reporting the data for this research. A large part of our preparation for this research was the interactive whiteboard training and the development of the learning modules with

52

Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies

content information and activities. Our training involved the designing of the learning modules and learning how to implement the interactive whiteboard in our teaching. The interactive whiteboard used in this study was the SMART Board with the software and board by the SMART Technologies. The learning modules were developed using a variety of resources and texts. The materials for both groups covered the same content, except that the treatment group used the interactive whiteboard exclusively, while the control group learned via PowerPoint enhanced lectures; instructor-directed question and answer class discussions, and group activities that include jigsaw-style readings and brainstorming. Students in our study were randomly assigned to two groups prior to the beginning of the semester, according to the days their classes met. The students did not have any prior knowledge of the research before they registered for their classes. The class sizes were evenly distributed in both groups. The learning modules focused on introducing important concepts about diversity that would elicit reflection and discussion based on prior knowledge and experiences. We were interested in how student performance would compare according to the two contrasting approaches: the interactive whiteboard versus more traditional technology strategies typically used, as previously described. We emphasized the importance of establishing a comfortable learning environment for thinking and discussing topics that would encourage higher level understanding of how diversity affected and influenced them. To this end, both groups had opportunities for written reflection of the content as they progressed through the course. These reflections provided data for comparing student perceptions on how they valued the information they had acquired throughout the course.

Interactive whiteboard technology During the lessons presented in this study, the teacher candidates in the treatment group were involved using the interactive whiteboard through hands-on activities. An interactive whiteboard is a large display that connects a computer and projector. The projector projects the computer’s screen onto the board’s touch-sensitive surface. This enables the interactive whiteboard to be controlled by touch or used as a writing surface with a special pen. The hands-on activities can be developed for the interactive whiteboard with or without templates to incorporate the content. The activities, information, and Internet links can be saved and then implemented again with other students.

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

53

Description of the core course on diversity The course, Exploring Perspectives in Socio-Cultural Diversity, has been a recent addition to the education core curriculum that is required of all teacher candidates in Georgia. As a state mandated effort, it reflects the growing national consensus to include more “stand-alone” courses on diversity. The development of the course was supported by many proponents, including Morrier et al. (2007), who stressed the importance of focusing on meaningful multicultural education that examines a variety of issues and involves students in reflecting on their own experiences living in a diverse society. The goals of the course in this study reflect a wave of changes in attitudes about diversity across campuses that support reforms to expand pre-service teachers’ knowledge. Jetton and Savage-Davis (2005) and Banks (1999) agree that there are many diverse and confusing definitions of multicultural education, and they recommend that introductory courses consider Nilsen and Donelson’s (2003) broader definition that encompasses many facets of multicultural education. They view that it is important for students to glean from courses in multicultural education the philosophical concepts that are formed by the ideals of freedom, justice, equality equity, humanity, and dignity for all people, and that these principles are based on numerous historical documents that are widely known and accepted, and have influenced political and social attitudes over time. Policy decisions on core education courses are mandated by state education agencies; however, their effectiveness is often questioned in terms of how they impact future teachers. Many of the concerns revolve around the effectiveness of the course in laying a foundation that is meaningful to teacher candidates (Weisman & Garza, 2002; Lee, 2008). Studies have found that pre-service teachers’ attitudes towards multicultural education, especially those not exposed to other cultures, tend to be superficially positive and receptive towards multicultural education courses, however, their depth of knowledge and experiences are limited (Grace & DeCastro-Ambrosetti, 2006; Locke, 2005; Sleeter, 2001). A major obstacle in teacher preparation programs arising from this mismatch of teacher and student cultures is the ability to facilitate a critical consciousness (Hill-Jackson, 2007). Many students may complete courses successfully, but they lack an in-depth understanding of the issues presented in the course especially as it relates to their overall professional development. Moreover, the consensus among many instructors is that the majority of students who “get through” these courses seldom understand how diversity impacts not only their lives but, more importantly, they are

54

Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies

unable to extend their learning and understand the connection as it relates to our expanding global society. The primary goal of the course Exploring Perspectives in SocioCultural Diversity is to involve teacher candidates in discourse towards understanding the complex issues of teaching diverse learners. The challenges, for those students lacking prior experiences with ethnic minorities and diverse groups, lie in providing new experiences that encourage them to shed their preconceived ideas and prejudices, allowing them to reflect beyond a superficial level towards deeper understanding of the issues involved in the sociopolitical factors affecting subordinate groups. Weisman and Garza (2002) and Lee (2008) emphasized the importance of teachers’ ability to address range of diversity within human cultural communities, and how cultural and linguistic diversity affects cognition, perceptions, and emotions that influence human learning and development. The course content presented in our study reflects the national standards in education that included preparing teachers to work in classrooms with diverse groups—being able to value cultural differences and pluralism. Topics centered on teacher candidates exploring their own histories and the histories of others in gaining a more positive and multidimensional (Jetton, 2005) understanding of diverse groups. Students also examined learning to work with students from diverse cultural backgrounds who may be oppressed by the dominant culture because of their race, ethnicity, gender, class, language, religion, ability, or age (Gollnick & Chinn, 2002). Clearly, the challenge for colleges of education to prepare teacher candidates to work in diverse climates is a high priority. Jetton and Savage-Davis (2005) stress that teacher candidates will be facing many new challenges as teachers. As local school districts and society at large grow, their awareness of the uniqueness, differences, and similarities among their students will be important in shaping their own professional growth and development. In summary, our goal in developing the research for this study was not only on comparing the achievement gains of teacher candidates when taught by two distinct approaches to learning, but also on how well students demonstrated their ability to think analytically, solve problems about issues and, most importantly, reflect continuously on how they perceived what they learned as it related to them as educators.

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

55

Results The first research question: Is there a difference of teacher candidates’ test score gains in a course where instruction is enhanced with integrating the interactive whiteboard, when compared to teacher candidates taking a similar course in which traditional technology strategies are used? The data for the first question included comparing the pre-test scores and the post-test scores. On the pre-test, the control group scored an average of 48.67% and the treatment group scored an average of 42.29%. On the post-test, the control group average was 64.56% and the treatment group average was 68.75% (see Figure 1). Both groups increased their test score averages from the pre- to the post-test. The treatment group, however, increased their test score average by 26.46%, while the control group average only increased their test score average by 15.89%. Therefore, the treatment group had a test score average gain of 10.57% over the control group test score average gain (see Table 1). Figure 1: Pre- and post-tests data

56

Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies

Table 2: Test scores Treatment Group Averages Pre-test

42.29%

Control Group Averages 48.67%

Post-test

68.75%

64.56%

Test Scores Increase

26.46%

15.89%

Writing sample: Personal reflections on culture and diversity for teaching Towards the end of the semester, the teacher candidates were given time to review their notes, and respond to the following question: Reflect on the things you have learned in this course on culture and diversity. Emphasize how concepts of culture and diversity relate to you as an individual in your day-to-day life. Discuss how the things you learned have influenced your attitudes in your field experiences in the classroom and how you will approach teaching in diverse classroom settings in the future. Elaborate on your comments and focus on clarity in expressing your thoughts.

Teacher candidates were rated on a 10-point scale by three different evaluators. The three scores were averaged to determine a rating for each of the teacher candidate’s responses. Prior to evaluating the teacher candidates’ responses the three evaluators discussed the types of responses that would reflect higher ratings, and decided on the criteria that indicated depth of understanding. The most important was the ability to elaborate, interpret, and relate statements to personal experiences, as well as relating to others having similar situations within other contexts. The evidence supported by responses on the reflective writing sample that was used for the research and was given towards the end of the semester indicated the following: teacher candidates who received higher scores were more reflective and elaborated on their comments, demonstrating their understanding of the relevance of the course both in their personal and professional development. As indicated in Figure 2, the teacher candidates in the treatment group, whose scores averaged 7.6 overall, were more reflective, and demonstrated an ability to relate issues to their own experiences, as well as expressing consideration for how

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

57

others within different contexts or situations might be impacted or affected. For example: I never thought about how one would feel being of mixed race. The video of the B/W high school student who talked about his racial identity, made an impression on me. His comments about his identity dilemma and how he was never accepted by either white or blacks and even being labeled Latino, (which made him feel worse, since he was not Hispanic) made me realize how difficult his life had been. Going through life, not being accepted because of your race (especially when you represent two races) made me think more about levels of diversity, and the students that I hope to be coaching in high school. Our President seems to have overcome his identity conflict, but I’m sure he too went through many difficult moments in his own life with regard to belonging somewhere.

In contrast, students in the control group, whose overall scores averaged in the 6.5 range, tended to write comments that were more superficial, reflecting basic information from their notes, as seen in the following example: As teachers, we need to be aware of diversity in our classrooms. When I teach, I will be more aware of diversity and will try to treat all my students fairly, no matter what their intellectual levels or ethnic background may be.

Every two weeks throughout the course, the teacher candidates were given the option to use the last 10 minutes of a class to freely associate and reflect on topics presented previously. They were told that the writing assignment was for their own benefit and should be kept as part of their notes for future reference that could be used in responding to the writing sample assignment.

58

Implementing Innovative, Interactive Technologies

Figure 3: Writing sample 7.8 7.6

7.6 7.4 7.2 7 6.8 6.6

6.5

6.4 6.2 6 5.8 Treatment Group

Control Group Reflecting on Culture: Writing Sample

Student survey—interactive whiteboard influences on learning Additionally, teacher candidates were asked to respond to a survey about how the interactive whiteboard influenced their learning of the course content. We found the comments to be very encouraging. Some examples of the teacher candidates’ answers are listed below: • • • • • •

I was able to stay focused and get involved in the lesson. More hands-on and involvement. Being involved helped me stay attentive in class. Keeps you focused and entertained at the same time. I felt like I was part of the lesson instead of listening to it. I felt more involved and I could stay focused better.

Inez A. Heath and Diane L. Judd

59

Conclusion The hypothesis for this study was that the integration of the interactive whiteboard in the lessons for the treatment group would show greater gains compared to the gains of the teacher candidates’ test scores in the control group that did not have the use of the interactive whiteboard during their lessons. The results of the test scores did confirm the hypothesis for this study. The pre-post test score gains were significantly higher for the teacher candidates in the treatment group as compared to the pre-post test score gains of the control group. The 10.57% point difference was statistically significant (t=-3.2, df=91, p