This week in education news, President Trump proposes merging the Education Department with the U.S. Department of Labor; new report found that a Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded initiative did not improve student performance; teacher shortage becoming a growing concern in Hawaii; Career and Technical Education Bill approved by the Senate education committee; Mattel unveils new Robotics Engineer Barbie; California budget allocates nearly $400 million for science and math education, but not teacher training; NCTM issues a call to action to drastically change the way math is taught so that students can learn more easily; and a new study shows that eighth-grade science teachers without an educational background in science are less likely to practice inquiry-oriented science instruction.

How Maker Education Supports English Languages Learners In STEM

What is the best way to teach STEM to students who haven’t mastered English? Some educators believe the answer lies in maker education, the latest pedagogical movement that embraces hands-on learning through making, building, creating and collaborating. Read the article featured on Gettingsmart.com.

Trump Officially Proposes Merging U.S. Departments of Education, Labor

President Donald Trump wants to combine the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Department of Labor into a single agency focused on workforce readiness and career development. But the plan, which was announced during a cabinet meeting last week, will need congressional approval. That’s likely to be a tough lift. Similar efforts to scrap the nearly 40-year-old education department or combine it with another agency have fallen flat. Read the article featured in Education Week.

Gates-Funded Initiative Fell Short Of Improving Student Performance

A Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation-funded initiative designed to improve student achievement by strengthening teaching did lead to using measures of effectiveness in personnel decisions, but did not improve student performance, particularly that of low-income minority students, according to a new report from the RAND Corporation. Read the article featured in Education DIVE.

Teacher Shortage Becoming A Growing Concern In Hawaii

The number of Hawaii teachers quitting their jobs and leaving the state is becoming a growing concern. The state’s high cost of living and low salaries are among the factors driving away Hawaii teachers. Department of Education employment reports show that 411 teacher resigned and left the state in 2016-17, up from 223 in 2010. Read the article featured in Education Week.

Bipartisan Career And Technical Education Bill Approved By Key Senate Committee

The Senate education committee agreed unanimously via voice vote Tuesday to favorably report a bill reauthorizing the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act to the full Senate. The Senate version, the Strengthening Career and Technical Education for the 21st Century Act, would revamp the Perkins law, which Congress last reauthorized in 2006, by allowing states to establish certain goals for CTE programs without getting them cleared by the secretary of education first. However, it requires “meaningful progress” to be made towards meeting goals on key indicators. Read the article featured in Education Week.

Tiger Woods Wants To Level The Playing Field In Education One Child At A Time

Opened in 2006, the Learning Lab is the backbone of Tiger Woods’ goal to provide kids a safe place to learn, explore and grow. The Lab offers students from low-income households and underfunded schools a variety of classes in STEM (science, technology, engineering and math). Read the article featured in USA Today.

Barbie Can Now Add ‘Engineer’ To Her Resume

Mattel launched Robotics Engineer Barbie on Tuesday, a doll designed to pique girls’ interest in STEM and shine a light on an underrepresented career field for women, the company announced. The new doll joins a lineup of more than 200 careers held by Barbie, “all of which reinforce the brand’s purpose to inspire the limitless potential in every girl,” Mattel said in a statement. Read the article featured in NBC Los Angeles.

State Budget Has Nearly $400 Million For Science, Math Education – But Not Teacher Training

Science education got a boost in the 2018-19 state budget, but the plan stops short of funding training for teachers in California’s ambitious new science standards — something education leaders had been pushing for. The budget, which the Legislature approved this month and Gov. Brown signed Wednesday, includes a $6.1 billion increase in funding for K-12 schools. It calls for nearly $400 million for programs promoting science, technology, engineering and math education, ranging from STEM teacher recruitment to after-school coding classes to tech internships for high school students. Read the article featured in Ed Source.

Education Bill That Omits Trump Merger Plan, Boosts Spending Advances In Senate

Legislation that would provide a funding boost for disadvantaged students and special education was approved by the Senate appropriations committee on Thursday. The fiscal 2019 spending bill also does not include the Trump administration’s proposal, unveiled last week, to merge the Education and Labor Departments into a single agency called the Department of Education and the Workforce. Read the article featured in Education Week.

Teachers Test New Approach To High School Math

Math understanding at the elementary and middle school levels has increased over the last 30 years, but has stagnated in high school. In its 2018 report “Catalyzing Change in High School Mathematics,” The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics has issued a call to action to drastically change the way math is taught so that students can learn more easily. Read the article featured in District Administration.

Study Explores What Makes Strong Science Teachers

A new study shows that eighth-grade science teachers without an educational background in science are less likely to practice inquiry-oriented science instruction, a pedagogical approach that develops students’ understanding of scientific concepts and engages students in hands-on science projects. This research offers new evidence for why U.S. middle-grades students may lag behind their global peers in scientific literacy. Inquiry-oriented science instruction has been heralded by the National Research Council and other experts in science education as best practice for teaching students 21st-century scientific knowledge and skills. Read the article featured on Phys.org.

Stay tuned for next week’s top education news stories.

The Communication, Legislative & Public Affairs (CLPA) team strives to keep NSTA members, teachers, science education leaders, and the general public informed about NSTA programs, products, and services and key science education issues and legislation. In the association’s role as the national voice for science education, its CLPA team actively promotes NSTA’s positions on science education issues and communicates key NSTA messages to essential audiences.

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

Follow NSTA

When transitioning my classroom instruction to three dimensional learning, I decided to start with one or two areas in each unit or lesson set where I felt the most need. I was already purposeful in selecting activities that I carefully sequenced to support student learning of concepts and big ideas, but I expected students to make connections using crosscutting concepts without explicit instruction. In addition, I was not using phenomena as a vehicle for explanation, but assumed that once students learned the concepts, they would be able to apply them to explain the everyday phenomena that they encountered. I also knew that the way in which I used models in my classroom needed to be rethought. For that, there was no better place to start than my space science lessons.

I felt very comfortable with the activities I used in my space science instruction. Most of them were models that I had been using in my classroom and with girls at Girl Scout events for many years. Traditionally, teachers have used models in space science instruction to make the concepts and processes that are difficult more accessible to students. In my space science lessons, I used a variety of models – physical models, drawings, diagrams, and even kinesthetic models to illustrate science ideas for students. There is nothing wrong with these types of models and they are an important resource for classroom use; however, I was using them very narrowly thus missing important components for sense making. I was not effective at making sure that students were using the models to develop their ideas or make connections between their ideas and the phenomena. I realized that I needed to take a step back and analyze how students were using the practice of developing and using models in my classroom. How were they using models to connect their ideas to phenomenon and how was I going to better facilitate that?

I started with the lessons around the phenomenon of daily changes of length and direction of shadows created by objects and the sunlight. After eliciting student ideas about how their shadows changed or stayed the same at different times of day on the playground, as a class, we developed a method for testing these ideas. In partners, students used a golf tee on a large sheet of paper and traced shadows of the tee every hour during the school day. The next day, the partners discussed the patterns they observed in their shadow data. Then they did a gallery walk to view other groups’ shadow data to decide if there were similar patterns. As a class, we discussed that two patterns were observed. The shadows shortened until midday and then lengthened until we stopped collecting data. In addition, the shadows moved from west to east on their papers in a northerly direction (Fig. 1). I asked them if there were other ways we could represent the daily shadow lengths and directions to show the patterns. They determined that we could graph the lengths and the angles of the shadows. After doing that and writing about our observations, I asked them if this occurs every day and if so, why does this occurs? So we embarked on a quest for cause and effect.

I gave them the task of recreating their shadow data in the classroom with a flashlight and golf tee. They discovered that there was a pattern of light movement that occurs that coincides with the pattern of shadows. My questioning led them to a cause and effect relationship between the position of the light and the resulting shadow length and direction. Does that mean that the sun changes position in the sky during the day? So we set out to find out. This was done by observation outside and the use of Stellarium, a computer planetarium software, and led to the question of why the sun changes position in the sky in a pattern – another cause and effect relationship. Most of my students can tell you at this point that it is because the Earth is rotating; however, if I question them further for a more detailed explanation, they falter. At this point, I bring in the models – flashlights and inflatable globes, computer simulations, and one of my favorites, Kinesthetic Astronomy.

Kinesthetic Astronomy can be used as a model of Earth’s movements. In this model, students are the Earth and stand in a circle around a student Sun. In their left hand, they hold a stick with the letter E representing east and in their right hand they hold a stick with the letter W for west. Their arms are outstretched representing the horizon. With their arms outstretched, they are asked to rotate in a counterclockwise direction (Fig.2). If they look down their arm when their arms are pointing in the direction of the sun, they can see the sun along their arm or horizon. This is sunset or sunrise, depending on which arm is pointing in the direction of the sun. If the front of their body is facing the sun, it is midday and if the back of their body is facing the sun, it is midnight. We use the front of their body as their position on Earth. As they rotate during the day, I ask them to notice the change in the position of the sun – lower in the sky at sunrise and sunset, getting increasingly higher from sunrise to midday and then lower from midday to sunset. In years prior, I assumed this part was evident in the model and they could see this relationship. However, this time, in my effort to make sure students made connections to their ideas and the phenomenon, I asked them to turn to a partner and discuss how this related to the changing length and direction of shadows. As I walked around, it became clear to me in listening to their conversations, that students did not see the changing angle of the sun in their “Earth” rotation in this model. How could I help them with this?

The next day, I brought out a lamp without a lamp shade. We did the kinesthetic model again with the lamp as the sun instead of a student. This made the difference for some students and they could see the changing position of the sun (lamplight) and relate it to their observations outside or on Stellarium, but many were still not making those connections. After much thought, I came up with an idea that I hoped would help. I attached a protractor to a meter stick (Fig. 3).

The meter stick became the horizon and I attached the E and W to each end. There was a piece of string or yarn connected to the protractor. In partners, they used this model to note the changing angle of the sun during rotation. One person was the sun and held the end of the string. The other person was Earth and rotated from sunrise to sunset (Fig. 4).  The yarn then showed the changing angle of the sun which they could connect to their observations.

I then gave them a protractor attached to binder clips (as a stand) and a flashlight and asked them to create a model to show the changing light on a table or the floor connecting it to the meter stick model (Fig. 5).  We discussed as a class how we modified the model we were using to better explain daily shadow changes. This set the stage for revision of models as an explanation tool for phenomenon for the rest of the year.

Throughout this instruction when using models, I also made sure we were explicit in identifying the features that the models were highlighting, and also what features were either not accurate or left out of the models. In other words, what are a model’s limitations?

These changes and attention to how students were using the practices and crosscutting concepts vastly improved student learning in this set of lessons. This process of reflection about three dimensional learning is ongoing in all of my lessons and units. It is impossible to change everything at once. We need to be patient with ourselves and continually reflect and make changes in our practice to strengthen students’ ability to explain the phenomena around them. It will take time, but the change will be worth the effort.

Betsy O’Day is an elementary science specialist at Hallsville Intermediate in Hallsville, Missouri. 

This article was featured in the June issue of Next Gen Navigator, a monthly e-newsletter from NSTA delivering information, insights, resources, and professional learning opportunities for science educators by science educators on the Next Generation Science Standards and three-dimensional instruction.  Click here to sign up to receive the Navigator every month.

Visit NSTA’s NGSS@NSTA Hub for hundreds of vetted classroom resources, professional learning opportunities, publications, ebooks and more; connect with your teacher colleagues on the NGSS listservs (members can sign up here); and join us for discussions around NGSS at an upcoming conference.

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

Future NSTA Conferences

2018 STEM Forum & Expo

• Philadelphia July 11–13

Dive into Three-Dimensional Instruction Workshop

• Philadelphia, July 14–15

2018 Area Conferences

• Reno, October 11–13
• National Harbor (MD), November 15–17
• Charlotte, Nov. 29-Dec. 1

2019 National Conference

• St. Louis, April 11-14, 2019

Follow NSTA

Guest blogger Carrie Lynne Draper shares resources and discusses the use of digital technology in early childhood programs. Carrie Lynne Draper, M.Ed, is the Executive Director of Readiness Learning Associates, a STEM Readiness organization, in Pasadena, CA,  growing children’s learning processes using science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Focusing on the development of scientific dispositions through STEM and pedagogical design of equity-oriented STEM learning environments, Carrie has worked in early childhood STEM education for more than thirty years as a classroom teacher, program administrator and university instructor. As a long time NSTA member and past board member of NMLSTA, she  is frequently asked to present at national and state meetings on early learning STEM, NGSS and STEM Excellence. 

Welcome Carrie!

This summer, Fred Rogers’ family keeps the legacy of Mister Rogers Neighborhood alive with a new documentary. Fred believed that the foundation of every child’s healthy development is the power of human connection. “Whether we are parents, educators, media creators, or neighbors, each of us has the unique and enormous potential to nourish children’s lives with positive interactions,” a statement from the Fred Rogers Center. I believe this is certainly true for STEM curriculum writers and teachers.

 As I work in early childhood classrooms I frequently hear teachers ask, “What would Mr. Rogers think about the use of digital learning and how would I know if a child is really ready?” Some refer to today’s early childhood students as the “swipe and scroll generation.” In recent years children have experienced increased exposure to interactive technologies such as computers, tablets and smart phones.  With a vast increase in mobile devices, it is obvious that we need to think about our students as being technologically literate and confident about their future. Many have proposed that meaningful exposure to technology through mass media and other interactive platforms may help young children consequently leaving STEM education, cognitive and developmental psychology, computer science, and human development experts wonder, “What should be our digital technology philosophy in early childhood programs?” And how do we find the balance between children using 2-dimensional and 3-dimensional learning activities? How does a teacher know when a child is really ready to use digital devices in the classroom? And where does a teacher find trusted resources? There’s no question that children are fascinated about how things work and are made, and are ready to problem solve. And we know that children thrive when they can ask, imagine, plan, and create and interact with the world around them. 

As educators of young children we work to establish a community where there is student cohesiveness, and we look for activities where children can collaborate and, of course, communicate. They are designing and inventing all the time. We want to offer them a variety of environments that may foster those pathways so children may grow up to be innovators and inventors someday. But not every use of technology is appropriate or beneficial. Doug Clements and Julie Sarama talk about a learning trajectory that has three components that are important to remember: a goal, an understanding of the developmental progression of children’s learning, and instructional activities. To attain a certain confidence children should progress through several levels of thinking. That is the developmental progression in any science, technology, engineering, or math topic. And it is aided by tasks and experiences, those instructional activities that are designed to build the mental actions on objects that enable thinking on each level.

Dr. Gary Marcus, professor at New York University in a recent TED talk shared why toddlers are smarter than computers. He explains that the way a toddler learns and reasons really holds the key to making machines, robots, and artificial intelligences much more intelligent. Pretty amazing but if you think about it there is a lot of technology in early childhood. Children are experimenting with light and shadow, cause and effect, and other concepts such as patterns and sequencing—the foundations of coding and programing. Here are some resources for educators to review and make choices for their program, their  classroom, and their children. 

Zero To Three, an organization that “works to strengthen the critical roles of professionals, policymakers and parents in giving all children the best possible start,” produced research-based guidelines available to download: Screen Sense: Setting the Record Straight—Research-Based Guidelines for Screen Use for Children Under 3 Years Old (May 2, 2014). 

Other resources from Zero To Three include:

• Tips for Using Screen Media with Young Children on how best to introduce your child under 3 to screen media
• 5 Myths About Young Children and Screen Media Infographic (January 7, 2016)
• Zero to Three Screen Sense Guidelines

Author Lisa Guernsey wrote two books discussing digital technology:

• Screen Time: How Electronic Media-From Baby Videos to Educational Software-Affects Your Young Child (2007 Basic Books)  
• And with Michael H. Levine, Tap, Click, Read Growing Readers in a World of Screens (2015 Jossey-Bass/Wiley), a book about how digital technologies could be used to improve, instead of impede, early literacy. 

The Erikson Institute in Chicago, an independent institution of higher education, provides  graduate education, professional training, community programs, and policymaking using scientific knowledge and theories of children’s development and learning to serve the needs of children and families. The Technology in Early Childhood Center (TEC) at Erikson  seeks to empower early childhood educators to make informed decisions about the appropriate use of technology with children from birth to age 8. Resources include:

• Technology and Digital Media in the Early Years: Tools for Teaching and Learning (2015 Routledge), a guide “to effective, appropriate and intentional use of technology with young children,” edited by Chip Donohue, PhD, Dean of Distance Learning and Continuing Education and Director of the TEC Center with 25 contributing authors, 
• “Technology and Interactive Media in Early Childhood Programs” webinar by NAEYC (November 2017) 
• “Three Tips For Early Childhood Educators For Putting NAEYC/Fred Rogers Joint Tech Position Statement Into Practice” 

The National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) and the Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College 2012 joint position statement (page 4) asserts, “Digitally literate educators who are grounded in child development theory and developmentally appropriate practices have the knowledge, skills, and experience to select and use technology tools and interactive media that suit the ages and developmental levels of the children in their care, and they know when and how to integrate technology into the program effectively.” 

As Mr Rogers said, “We have to help give children tools, building blocks for active play.  And the computer is one of those building blocks.  No computer will ever take the place of wooden toys or building blocks.  But that doesn’t mean they have to be mutually exclusive” (1985). Join me in exploring this urgent question of how to effectively use the digital technology that is available for young children (frequently when they are not in school) in ways that are integrated with essential learning experiences.

Additional Resources on Digital Learning

Center on Technology and Disability. See resources for educators and families on instructional and assistive technology including many from the Technology Solutions for Early Childhood Symposium.

Math, Science, and Technology in the Early Grades by Douglas H. Clements and Julie Sarama. The Future of Children, Starting Early: Education from Pre Kindergarten to Third Grade (Fall 2016), 26(2) 75-94.

New America and the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop 

• How to Bring Family Engagement and Early Learning into the Digital Age by Lisa Guernsey and Michael H. Levine. April 25, 2017

Northwestern University Center on Media and Human Development

• Blackwell, C. K., Wartella, E., Lauricella, A., & Robb, M. (2015). Technology in the Lives of Educators and Early Childhood Programs: Trends in Access, Use, and Professional Development. Report for the Center on Media and Human Development School of Communication Northwestern University & The Fred Rogers Center.
• Using Educational DVDs to Enhance Preschoolers’ STEM Education. “This report highlights key points of discussion with the hope of catalyzing further discussion, inquiry, and research. Specifically, the principal collaborators were interested in eliciting conversation around two main themes: (1) determining the types of relationships that young children form with on-screen characters and (2) discovering how perceptions about these characters influence what children learn with regards to STEM content.”

University of Chicago, Center for Advancing  Research and Communication (ARC).

• Search this ARC database to see abstract summaries of the National Science Foundation funded research projects under the Research and Evaluation on Education in Science and Engineering (REESE) program.

Office of Early Learning & Office of Educational Technology, US Department of Education. Early Learning and Educational Technology Policy Brief. October 2016.

The purpose of this policy brief is to:

• • Provide guiding principles for early educators (including those in home settings), early learn- ing programs, schools, and families on the use of technology by young children to support them in making informed choices for all children.
  • Inform the public, families, and early educators on the evidence base used to support these guiding principles.
  • Issue a call to action to researchers, technology developers, and state and local leaders to ensure technology is advanced in ways that promote young children’s healthy development and learning. 

Dynamic Equilibrium. These two words represent what is essential in teaching Earth science: the idea that forces are constantly working against one another, but often do so in ways that nearly counteract one another.

In a river, deposition and erosion, as central concepts, can be used to explain a range of phenomena, such as meandering rivers and the richness of floodplain soils. For all of the crust being created at mid-ocean ridges, an almost equivalent amount is being destroyed in subduction zones. Stars are constantly affected by the equilibrium of a fusion reaction tearing them apart while gravity tries to shrink stars under its own immense mass.

In all of these situations, something approaching dynamic equilibrium is typical, but also some very interesting phenomena happen when equilibrium is no longer met. Indeed, Earth science offers so many examples of the NGSS Crosscutting Concept of Stability and Change, yet it is so easy to consider it as a law of averages: If the end result is close to zero, then why do the individual forces matter?

One instance of this idea occurs when teaching about Earth’s Energy Budget, the idea that our climate results from the balance of energy coming in from the Sun as shortwave radiation and escaping through a mix of long and shortwave radiation (shown in the chart above top). But this chart doesn’t tell the full story.

For shortwave radiation, the chart on the top gives a global average of 341.3 W/m². But is it the same all across Earth? How do any differences unfold seasonally?

Climate models from NOAA show a very different picture of incoming shortwave radiation across seasons, where the tilt of the Earth changes the position of maximum insolation. This combined with regional differences, such as the large amount of cloud cover over the Amazon rainforest and a lack of it over deserts, causes subtle differences in how much radiation enters. Two maps showing seasonal differences in January and July using one of NOAA’s modeling projects (data set pulled from Lamont Doherty’s Climate Library, found here) are shown below  the energy budget diagram. The question becomes this: Which chart should we use when teaching about climate? And if we choose the one on the bottom, how do we support students in constructing arguments and explanations for the differences they see?

As part of our recent collaboration between the American Museum of Natural History’s Seminars on Science and science teachers at Math for America (MƒA), we explored the use of discussion protocols through various charts covering different segments of the Earth’s Energy Budget (specifically longwave radiation, shortwave radiation, latent heat flow, and sensible heat flow). As we explored each chart individually, then in groups looking at the same map, and finally as a jigsaw using the discussion diamond, we realized the wealth of concepts that could be explored—seasonal differences, evapotranspiration, warm and cool ocean currents, specific heat, the water cycle—in a way that elicits a more global understanding of concepts that simply could not happen with the standard way of thinking about this work. (The two pictures below show this work in our classroom, and the set of materials can be found here.)

Afterward, we examined other resources, especially those from NASA’s Earth Observatory, in which global maps across a myriad of variables can be plotted month to month. (Think a connection exists between precipitation and primary productivity? Throw the two maps on the same screen and see them month to month!) What became apparent is not only the power of thinking of Stability and Change as more than a law of averages, but also how considering this data together, with a group of teachers, is incredibly important for engaging in this work in the classroom.

The idea of dynamic equilibrium is a powerful one in Earth science because it encourages us to explore how change comes not merely from one force, but how that force is positively or negatively reinforced throughout a system. The idea of dynamic equilibrium is important in our classrooms as well! Looking at rich content, such as that found in the Seminars on Science program, with a group of experienced science teachers, such as those in your school or in fellowship programs like MƒA, can be the positive reinforcement system that helps grow your classroom into a model for NGSS.

 If you have any thoughts on Stability and Change and how it can be deeply taught in Earth Science, or want to share a similar story of deepening your classroom by working on rich content with other teachers, please share below in the Comments section!

John Russell taught middle school science in New York City for 10 years, and is a program officer at Math for America, a New York City nonprofit that is building a community of accomplished mathematics and science teachers who make a lasting impact in their schools, their communities, and the profession at large, through collaboration and continued learning.

Dave Randle taught middle and high school science in New York City for 15 years, and is a senior manager of professional development at the American Museum of Natural History, working closely with the museum’s Seminars on Science online courses.

This article was featured in the June issue of Next Gen Navigator, a monthly e-newsletter from NSTA delivering information, insights, resources, and professional learning opportunities for science educators by science educators on the Next Generation Science Standards and three-dimensional instruction.  Click here to sign up to receive the Navigator every month.

Visit NSTA’s NGSS@NSTA Hub for hundreds of vetted classroom resources, professional learning opportunities, publications, ebooks and more; connect with your teacher colleagues on the NGSS listservs (members can sign up here); and join us for discussions around NGSS at an upcoming conference.

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

Future NSTA Conferences

2018 STEM Forum & Expo

• Philadelphia July 11–13

Dive into Three-Dimensional Instruction Workshop

• Philadelphia, July 14–15

2018 Area Conferences

• Reno, October 11–13
• National Harbor (MD), November 15–17
• Charlotte, Nov. 29-Dec. 1

2019 National Conference

• St. Louis, April 11-14, 2019

Follow NSTA

Stability and Change is one of the seven Crosscutting Concepts (CCs) that can be difficult to convey in a lesson. Other CCs like Patterns, Cause and Effect, and Systems and System Models can be easily incorporated in the structure of a lesson. With a little planning, Stability and Change can be frequently demonstrated in a lesson.

Science teachers must remember that Stability and Change is all about conditions and factors: what condition(s) and factors affect stability and lead to a change. This article will focus on weathering and deposition of rock during the rock cycle and how Stability and Change can be incorporated in class discussion following the lesson activities.

The rock cycle is a slow process, but it is all about Stability and Change. During the rock cycle, rocks are ever-changing, but because these changes happen slowly, it can be difficult for students to observe and understand them. To “speed up” geologic time, use household materials to simulate rocks to help students discover the factors and conditions affecting weathering of rock in the rock cycle. 

To give my students control of these factors and conditions, , I use breakfast cereal to simulate rock types. Cereal has a much faster “weathering” process, and using it allows students to apply their prior knowledge of cereal to develop questions to explore weathering as it relates to Stability and Change. 

In this simulation, students are given eight different cereals. The cereals should vary in the type of grain used, amount of sugar contained, and overall composition. This will allow students to make concrete predictions that can be tested and analyzed.

First, have students research the cereals and make their prediction. Their goal is to predict which cereal will have the lowest percentage loss of matter after the simulation. Students start by calculating the mass of a predetermined amount of cereal, which is then placed inside a PVC pipe and tumbled for a set amount of time or number of shakes. After the weathering simulation, students re-calculate the cereal’s mass to determine the percentage loss.

Stability and Change can be illustrated by having students examine the data. Which cereal had the smallest, or largest, percentage loss? What factors present in the cereal affected the amount of matter lost? What conditions contributed to the weathering of the cereal?

From there, students will generate additional questions.  Connecting the results to actual rock types is the final step. Students can make predictions about the activity of rocks based on the factors and conditions they discovered while working with cereal. (This activity could also be done with snack chips, cookies, or even pretzels of different shapes and types.)

One pitfall to avoid is becoming predictable in your lesson structure. In the lesson just described, the discussion about Stability and Change occurred at the end. In the next lesson, the discussion about CCs will occur at the beginning.

Creating and using stream tables allows students to test factors and conditions and focus on the Stability and Change of rocks and deposition. Begin by running a simple stream table so students can identify factors that can affect the amount of deposition in a stream. Students should be able to identify slope, speed of the water, shape of the river, or river materials as possible factors. It is important to allow students to test their ideas, even if you know the idea is not a valid factor.

Before testing, have a conversation about Stability and Change in relation to the factors to be tested. How will the variable change the river? As students test their ideas, they will be able to see, and evaluate, the Stability and Change their factors created. Revisiting their initial thoughts will help students deepen their understand deposition through Stability and Change. This discussion will also help students develop follow-up questions, new factors to test, or connections to previous activities.

How do you incorporate Stability and Change into your class activities and discussion? What innovative methods have you developed to engage your students in the CCs? If you would like to share your classroom activities through pictures and ideas, or get a copy of the lessons described in this article, connect with me on Twitter: @BKd204Sci or @ngssSfocus. The more we share, the more we all grow in our understanding of NGSS and ability to teach them.

Brian Klaft has taught middle school science for 27 years. He currently teaches at Francis Granger Middle School in Indian Prairie District (IPSD) 204 in Aurora, Illinois. Previously he taught in the Chicago Public Schools and South Berwyn District 100. Over the past five years, Klaft has served on IPSD’s science curriculum team, working with other district science staff to align the NGSS to district curriculum. As a member of NSTA’s physics curator team, Klaft curates content on waves and electromagnetic radiation at the middle school level.

Blog Link: https://brianklaft.wordpress.com/

This article was featured in the June issue of Next Gen Navigator, a monthly e-newsletter from NSTA delivering information, insights, resources, and professional learning opportunities for science educators by science educators on the Next Generation Science Standards and three-dimensional instruction.  Click here to sign up to receive the Navigator every month.

Visit NSTA’s NGSS@NSTA Hub for hundreds of vetted classroom resources, professional learning opportunities, publications, ebooks and more; connect with your teacher colleagues on the NGSS listservs (members can sign up here); and join us for discussions around NGSS at an upcoming conference.

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

Future NSTA Conferences

2018 STEM Forum & Expo

• Philadelphia July 11–13

Dive into Three-Dimensional Instruction Workshop

• Philadelphia, July 14–15

2018 Area Conferences

• Reno, October 11–13
• National Harbor (MD), November 15–17
• Charlotte, Nov. 29-Dec. 1

2019 National Conference

• St. Louis, April 11-14, 2019

Follow NSTA

Media literacy

“Dinosaurs aren’t alive anymore” is a statement that may be spoken by young children as both a statement and a question. Do they really know that dinosaurs are no longer alive? Do they use evidence to support this idea? I asked small number of educators and parents to discuss with their children and yes, the children are certain that dinosaurs are not alive any more and they learned this from trusted sources—at school, from a sibling, and from books. Children may see images of dinosaurs in books, cartoons and documentaries about dinosaurs. They may view large models at museums and play some of the many apps featuring dinosaurs on digital devices. (There were almost no apps when I searched for “isopod” or “pillbug,” one of my favorite animals!) Some children become dinosaur experts as they learn from many resources and remember information about specific species and time periods. How do adults help children figure out what information is based on scientific research and physical evidence and which aspects of what they view may be embellished for entertainment? 

Making sense of any kind of media resource means being able to understand what we want to get from it, and the intentions of those who created the resource among other goals. Many thanks to the Technology and Young Children interest forum of the National Association for the Education of Young Children for holding Quarterly Meet Ups online, and bringing resources and conversation about “media literacy” to the attention of early childhood educators. In the May/June meet-up and Q&A follow-up session, many aspects of media literacy were discussed based on a talk by Faith Rogow, PhD. Rogow, founding President of the National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE), and founder of Insighters Educational Consulting.

As a science educator I appreciate the focus on using evidence to support our claims, that is, telling why we think an idea is generally true. One of the basic understandings about the nature of science is “Scientific Knowledge is Based on Empirical Evidence.” See the overview matrix on page 5 of the APPENDIX H – Understanding the Scientific Enterprise: The Nature of Science in the Next Generation Science Standards NGSS.  We want children to be able to distinguish between statements that are not supported by data or are based on limited data (“worms have eyes because all animals have eyes”) and those that are based on observed and researched evidence (“I looked with a magnifier and didn’t see any eyes”).  We, and children, may still have some misconceptions but we have a path for learning that allows us to accept alternative explanations when we use critical thinking. Rogow talked about including discussion of the illustrations as well as the words while reading aloud to help children become media literate. She describes “the “ABC”s of media literacy—the foundational skills and knowledge that are the building blocks for the complex capabilities we want children to develop as they grow.” 

Read her description of what a media literate five-year-old can be expected to do and understand. These skills and understandings about asking questions and having evidence for ideas also support scientific learning.

I am just beginning to learn about “media literacy” and invite you to use the resources I list to learn along with me. Please list additional resources as comments!

Faith Rogow, PhD, Founder and Media Literacy Specialist, Insighters Educational Consulting

• Media Literacy in Action in the Early Years: Activity Ideas for Reasoning and Reflection, Webinar by Faith Rogow. October 28, 2015. Sponsored by the National Association for Media Literacy (NAMLE) and supported by the Pennsylvania Office of Child Development & Early Learning with Race to the Top Early Learning Challenge funds. See Key Questions matrix
• Chapter 7, “Media Literacy in Early Childhood Education: Inquiry-Based Technology Integration” in Technology and Digital Media in the Early Years: Tools for Teaching and Learning. 2015. NAEYC and Routledge 

National Association for Media Literacy Education (NAMLE)

• Definition of media literacy 
• Building Healthy Relationships with Media: A Parent’s Guide to Media Literacy 
• Friedman, Arielle (2016) “Three-Year-Old Photographers: Educational Mediation as a Basis for Visual Literacy via Digital Photography in Early Childhood,” Journal of Media Literacy Education, 8(1), 15 -31. 

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC)

• “Technology and Interactive Media as Tools in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8,” a joint position statement of the National Association for the Education of Young Children and the Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College. January 2012. 
• Webinar on Technology and Interactive Media in Early Childhood Programs presented by Chip Donohue (Erikson Institute), Roberta Schomburg (Fred Rogers Center, St. Vincent College), and Sabrina Burroughs (Erikson Institute) November 2017 
• Donohue, C. & Schomburg, R. (2017). Technology and Interactive Media in Early Childhood Programs: What We’ve Learned from Five Years of Research, Practice and Observing Children. Young Children, 72(4), pp. 72-78. 
• Technology and Digital Media in the Early Years: Tools for Teaching and Learning. Editied by Chip Donohue, PhD. 2015. NAEYC and Routledge. 

Technology and Young Children (TEC) Center at the Erikson Institute

• Media Literacy in Early Childhood: A Critical Conversation
• Technology and Interactive Media for Young Children: A Whole Child Approach Connecting the Vision of Fred Rogers with Research and Practice by Katie Paciga, PhD and Chip Donohue, PhD.
•  Three Tips For Early Childhood Educators For Putting NAEYC/Fred Rogers Joint Tech Position Statement Into Practice.  

Please add additional resources and your experiences as comments!

For me, an hour spent outdoors in an interesting and pleasant-if-somewhat-challenging environment is satisfying in a unique way and cannot be compared with an hour spent learning through any kind of media, including listening to a book being read aloud, reading a book, viewing photographs, participating in a webinar, watching a video, or listening to a music recording. But I really appreciate having access to all these experiences and would not want to give up any of them.