Featured speaker Sam Dyson invited attendees to join his personal hive in Chicago last month at NSTA’s National Conference on Science Education. Sponsored by the Shell Corporation, Dyson focused on connected learning and emerging contexts for deeper engagement. Set against the backdrop of a three-act play, Dyson modeled the importance of “connectedness” with a community of learners. Dyson’s first teaching experiences transpired in Johannesburg, Africa, where he admitted he did not know much about teaching, but picked up a few things while teaching in Chicago. Working now for the Mozilla Foundation in youth programming, Dyson brought a well-rounded perspective to his session; I was immediately engaged.

From “Oh No” to “Aha”

In Act I, Dyson revealed his first “Aha” moment in teaching, which interestingly came through his first “important failure.” He was facilitating a classroom demonstration about momentum, mass, and inelastic collisions. In the demonstration, the carts “stick together” when they collide as the approaching car overtakes the slower lead cart. Dyson thought his students had an adequate background to predict the outcome (that the carts moving along the same path would collide and stick together as they continued down the track). To Sam’s surprise, as the demonstration unfolded, one of his students refused to believe what he physically observed. Why? Because the student had no background knowledge, reference point, or tangible observations of this phenomenon occurring in his everyday life. Sam eloquently described this as a failed demonstration, but also as the one that created his “aha” moment. For the first time, he saw and understood deeply that the internal thinking and experiences that students bring to the learning environment undergirds future understanding. This discrepant event did not match the student’s sense making of his world. Dyson realized that teaching was not about what we know, but what we believe.

I wonder how many of us also think about our first “aha” moments early in our careers. Sam’s insight early into his career resonated with me, and I suspect many of you, too! We know that a student is not a tabula rasa, or blank slate, onto which we dump knowledge. As demonstrated by research in cognitive learning sciences about how people learn, we live in a dynamic world with rich interactions of science phenomena and engineering design solutions. We seek to make sense of these observations and form personal working theories and reasons for how these things occur in nature or are made by humankind. We form many of these known preconceptions internally, as part of our own “sense-making,” and as research shows, these preconceptions are deeply seated, resistant to change, and hard to overturn. But fear not, there are also research-based strategies to help learners challenge their own internal logic, face it head on, test it, wrestle with it, and see if it holds up! NSTA has several publications that may assist you across the K–12 spectrum. For example, author Page Keeley’s Uncovering Student’s Ideas in Science series draws upon this research and provides formative assessment questions (or probes) to make this internal student thinking visible. Working with teachers and classrooms, she has developed probes for elementary science, as well as physical, life, and Earth/space science. Page also partnered with Richard Konicek-Moran in an upcoming book titled Teaching for Conceptual Understanding in Science (coming off the NSTA Press any day now) that brings field-tested strategies teachers can use immediately in the classroom to empower students’ learning.

Dyson learned early on that Aha moments are not necessarily when we figure out a solution, but when we gain insight into the problems with which students are wrestling. In his presentation, he stressed that such insight is necessary to provide the kind of learning experiences that really allow students to “connect” new information to what they already believe, and that it is important to understand the difference between knowing and understanding. So, while we continually acquire new information from the world around us (knowing), it is critical for students to be able to apply this knowledge in situ, acquiring a deeper understanding (for instance through challenging “discrepant events”). Students progress until they cannot continue with their internal “sense-making” theories and are forced to reshape and change their understanding, thus allowing them to grow again, pushing through these conceptual “sense-making” barriers. Dyson’s ideas for the arc of student understanding reveal an initial upward arc, but then a “trough” as deeper learning becomes more challenging, a larger investment of time, and a commitment is needed to reach the higher deeper learning arc. Dyson contrasted this against the notion of “superficial learning,” which some might equate to mere recall and recognition of facts versus deeper more flexible learning where understanding is applied across multiple areas, such as the cross-cutting concepts espoused in three-dimensional teaching and learning in K–12 Framework for Science Education and the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS), concepts such as patterns, cause and effect, systems and systems models, and stability and change to name a few. Indeed what Dyson shared reflects the work of the National Academies and the NGSS, which stresses that deeper learning of the disciplinary core ideas in science occurs as students engage in authentic science and engineering practices, while recognizing cross-cutting concepts like those above. As I was focused on what Sam was sharing, I scanned the room, seeing a sea of heads nod in affirmation. Check out the NSTA NGSS Hub for tools, resources and learning opportunities around the NGSS.

Connected Learning Equals Flexible Learning!

For Act 2, Dyson asked small groups to discuss what they thought the term Connected Learning meant. Interestingly, I informally asked session attendees this question before Sam started his talk, given it was in the title. I asked why attendees selected this session; what did they want to get from the session? The answers might surprise you! Some acknowledged that Shell-sponsored presentations were always informative and came knowing that, by reputation, the talk would be engaging and worthwhile. Others cited the importance of multicultural diversity in our featured sessions and appreciated the diversity of opinion and expertise represented by the selected speaker. Interestingly, several conflated the notion of “connected learning” with the US Department of Education project called “Connected Educators” and had come wanting to learn how to build successful online communities. Many, though, understood the emphasis of the talk on discussing a pedagogical point of view stressing the importance on connecting students’ local environment and the world in which they live to the science concepts we are presenting to help them better understanding the world in which they live. To make connections and be critical thinkers, challenging their internal views and the importance of teachers on structuring these types of experiences.

Dyson shared what many agree with, the importance of a constructivist learning cycle for teaching, and referenced the 5E model developed by BSCS, where students cycle through (not necessarily linearly or within a single period) engagement, exploration, explanation, elaboration, and evaluation as a methodology for deeper learning. Sam stressed again the need for locally relevant and tangible activities. This reminded me of the tenants of situated cognition, where similarly, learning occurs not in isolation but within the local context and environment of our learners. NSTA has a wealth of resources on inquiry-based learning if desired.

Dyson touted the ultimate potential and power of technology, proclaiming that it may enable the kinds of experiences that are powerful enough to engage what students are really thinking, and maybe even powerful enough to change what they believe. Linking this with the notion of connected learning, we need to make sure the experiences we structure make young people want to come back and keep learning. Stronger and more powerful words could not be proffered here. We’ve all heard the term that students need to power-down when coming to school, and all too often our classrooms still resemble the industrial models of the last century where the teacher is at a chalk board performing a lecture demo, and students sit quietly as they complete fill-in-the-blank worksheets. This is not the vision for three-dimensional teaching and learning espoused in the new standards, and with a focus on these strategies being shared at NSTA Conferences, and with speakers like Sam Dyson, they will not be the norm in the years to come. Sam cited one example of Alex S., a student he met through a summer program called “STEAM Studio” in downtown Chicago. Steam Studio is a portable maker studio, with a wall of glass on one side, where outsiders feel “invited” to see and make sense of the experiences as those inside fueled by their intrinsic motivation, create, produce, and inspire. The maker movement indeed exemplifies STEM experiences that ignite student learning. Alex was given the experience of personalized learning that was important to him—fashioning a piece of clothing into something other than its intended purpose.

NSTA has position statements on the Next Generation Science Standards, scientific inquiry, and the role of e-learning in science education; each statement provides easy-to-read, powerful statements about the importance of these topics in teaching and learning.

Connected learning has six learning and design principles, all of which address the need to move to deeper understanding through connections: 1) Interest powered-locally and personally relevant; 2) Peer-supported—not done in isolation; 3) Academically oriented—providing career and civil payoffs, such as badge efforts to recognize achievement; 4) Production-centered—it’s about doing and learning by doing, showcasing, and voting on each others’ accomplishments; 5) Openly networked—many contributors building a gestalt experience including libraries, art institutes, universities, and corporations, all working in concert; and 6) shared purpose.

Dyson shared several examples, and one salient one is the HIVE in Chicago—whose mission is to transform the learning landscape by empowering youth and educators to enact connected learning through a diverse network of civic and cultural institutions. The Hive offers a growing portfolio of programs within a network of more than 65 organizations currently involved (cultural museums, non-profits, and schools). The Hive offers two grant cycles per year to help schools figure out how to create new learning experiences for young folks using technology and media. Be sure to check it out! It’s about “geeking out” and messing around with technology in fun and innovative ways for just-in-time learning on-demand. That said, he also shared the notion of “Techquity,” where just having access to open resources or technology doesn’t mean all have equitable skills to use it effectively.

Convergence Academies are another model Dyson spoke to that engage participatory learning in digitally enriched classrooms. Chicago Public Schools is experimenting with convergence academies at both an elementary and high school, where fewer than 500 kids connect, consume, and create in a cavernous shell of a building exploiting technology and projects that transcend traditional models for student and teacher learning. Teachers design learning experiences with the goal to converge personal relevance, social interaction, personal interest, meaning and engagement, while simultaneously building academic knowledge.

This reminds me of another “mover” in this arena, Chris Edmin, who moves beyond what many do (just tell us what’s wrong with urban education), and instead shares examples such as creating a graffiti tag on a bridge hundreds of feet in the air and getting kids to think about the inverse square law in physics for spraying the paint. He coined the term and has a brief video on “reality pedagogy,” and it rings true here too I think. Basically, reality pedagogy is teaching and learning that is based on the reality of a young person’s experience. Edmin promotes five steps to help urban education: 1) the cipher (co-generative) dialog drawn from hip-hop discourse, 2) co-teaching by students, 3) cosmopolitanism—making those who are disenfranchised feel they play a critical team role in their learning, 4) context-locally relevant, and 5) content.

Finally, in Adler-hack days, Dyson shared how young people and technologists come together and look at things like food deserts in Chicago—where hotspots that is under-resourced partner with coders to create an app to help address problems, where you combine technical skills, civic issues, and youth concerns into meaning projects.

Act 3 and Epilogue: Bringing It Home

Dyson closed by challenging us to think how we might we minimize the transfer of information to shift our focus from consumption to that of creation and how we might seek innovative ways to make learning socially relevant. We struggle against the volume of knowledge we are charged to cover, and in fact, production-centered learning is hampered knowledge-centered learning. Emphasizing a shift from closed to open-ended thinking, how to make student thinking visible is also important. Dyson shared an example that I too observed at conference hosted by Chris Dede from Harvard on mobile-based learning. Audience impressions and shared-knowledge about presentation topic was visible to all in real-time via Twitter falls on screens that ran adjacent to the main screen that showcased the presenters’ content. As a group all were able to see audience reactions, suggested websites from the crowd in real-time, etc. These types of social media-based techniques, when coupled with the targeted probes for particular science concepts, and the real-time feedback from class polls and sharing digital samples of student work, seem worthy of investigation. Dyson gave another idea for consideration: Rather than turning in class papers for grades, could they be posted on a blog, so not only comments from teachers, but also from other students, generated and revealed for all to see?

Dyson closed by suggesting that absolutely, teaching is hard, and technology is not a panacea. We should desire to give kids an irrepressible desire to learn and grow. Let’s recognize this and design connected learning experiences that give hope, not as a means to an end, but a lifestyle. Learning is hard for teachers, too, Dyson expressed. It’s hard to be vulnerable and in that deep valley when struggling to learn new ways of teaching when teachers and students in urban areas also live in vulnerability of violent neighborhoods and poverty. Creating context conducive to learning must include supports and mentors. Creating spaces where it is safe to feel vulnerable for the first time ever. As quoted by John Dewey, from Democracy and Education in 1916: Education is not preparation for life, it is life!

Al Byers, Ph.D., is the Associate Executive Director, Services for the National Science Teachers Association

To see more from the 2015 National Conference on Science Education in Chicago, March 12–15, please view the #NSTA15 Facebook Album—and if you see yourself, please tag yourself!

The mission of NSTA is to promote excellence and innovation in science teaching and learning for all.

Future NSTA Conferences

2015 STEM Forum & Expo

• Minneapolis, May 20#8211;23

2015 Area Conferences

• Reno, October 22#8211;24
• Philadelphia, November 12#8211;14
• Kansas City, December 3#8211;5

Follow NSTA