PROJECT-BASED EDUCATION IN FRESHMAN CHEM

PROJECT-BASED EDUCATION IN FRESHMAN CHEM./PHYSICS

ACTION RESEARCH LAB

A Theoretical Framework for Assessing Student Performance in the Freshman Chem/Physics course

(sludge unit adapted and revised)

McDaniel, 1996

INTRODUCTION

The aim of the Action Research Lab (ARL) is to improve student learning through professional development opportunities. The team which consists of Joe Senese, Robin Rogus, Bryan Ott and myself investigated project-based learning and planned activities during the first semester and then implemented the plan during the second semester. We worked collaboratively to develop new laboratory approaches in the following areas: science, social studies, and math, all level two courses. In this paper, I will discuss my findings in the Freshman Lab Chemistry/Physics course and share my ideas for further growth in this area.

A DESCRIPTION OF THE FRESHMAN LAB CHEMISTRY/PHYSICS COURSE:

The main focus of the course is on making the student a more critical reader, a more careful observer and a sharper thinker. As the course comes to an end, a student may ask themselves, "What have I learned this year in science?" They should think of several things, some specific and some of a more general nature. They should also be able to make comparisons and attempt to explain basic scientific phenomena. "Science does not deal with absolute truths. The measurements that students make are limited to the instruments that they use, just as the scientific laws are useful generalizations based on these measurements." (Haber-Schaim 1987) They all have their limitations. This course centers on student learning and discovery of scientific principles, students design their own lab reports and then test their designs. They keep a lab notebook and record data in their notebook. They share their results with other classmates and their partner and then draw conclusions. The teachers assumes the role of facilitator and helps the students with guided questioning. One of the major goals of the course is for students to develop the skills to be better, more critical thinkers about their world.

From the main goal of the course comes a natural connection with laboratory based science. In the course, as with any course, there are many possible outcomes. The final outcome is assessed when students are given a mixture of various unidentified chemicals and asked to separate, purify, and identify the substances. In our high school, the test is known to freshman as the "SLUDGE." This name is well earned because it is the ominous name that the freshman science students give to the bottle of dark, frothy, gooey and pungent mixture of chemicals that they are expected to separate, purify and identify using the skills and knowledge that they have developed in lab during the year.

For the Action Research Lab, I chose to focus my efforts on the sludge and the assessment of students completing the sludge. I had always felt that this unit was very worthwhile. But as I continually explored and learned more about various assessment and portfolio strategies, my own ideas about the sludge and the evaluation of it began to evolve, and I began to see how standard test measures do not meet the assessment needs for all students and that the ways in which students can be assessed are as diverse as the students. I began to turn my focus towards my own assessment measures and started asking questions such as..." How can I ask questions in assessments that really test the objectives and outcomes and goals that I want my students to master?" I also began to question the validity and reliability of my assessment measures. Specifically, I began to think of ways that I could change the "sludge" and my course to better meet the needs of my students.

In the past, I have graded the student on the lab report that they submit, and a multiple choice test. That grading process has now evolved. In what follows, I will attempt to explain how I plan to assess not only the final portfolio but also the "Sludge".

BACKGROUND

Typically, this unit is taught to students in the ninth grade, level standard track. It is taught as part of a freshman chemistry/physics course. During the year, students conduct labs that teach the following skills and concepts. The list below is only a partial list for the second semester.

• Fractional Distillation

• Industrial Distillation

• The Separation of Insoluble Solids

• The Separation of a Mixture of Solids

• The Separation of a Mixture of Soluble Solids

• Fractional Crystallization

• Paper Chromatography

• Mixtures of Gases: Nitrogen and Oxygen

• Mixtures and Pure Substances

THE SLUDGE

After mastering the above skills, concepts, and objectives, the students are given a baby food jar that has been filled with a mixture of various substances and are then given two weeks to separate, purify, and identify the substances, a intensive lab report explains every test, separation, etc. that the student employs during the course of the separation. The report is usually a series of approximately 20-30 student designed labs. During the sludge test, students must rely on previously designed and conducted lab experiments and are not given any further instruction by the instructor or school support personnel.

In the past, in my class the student had been given a score on the final product, the submitted lab report. Students had not been given credit for lab technique, accuracy while using instruments, and the process required to complete the sludge task. They had in the past been given points only for the proper identification of the unknowns. This year, I have revised this unit, so that the student is graded on process, and product. In order to do this, I have developed many materials to make this unit fit the needs of my students. I hope that, by using various teaching methods, I could alleviate some of the some of the stress that the sludge test causes my students, so that they could focus on their own learning during a meaningful and rewarding sludge experience.

THE ROLE OF THE TEACHER AND THE STUDENT

The teacher in this course plays the role of facilitator, the "guide on the side." Students are challenged daily to think about their world and to devise experiments to test their hypothesis. The teacher employs a problem posing approach, in which students are expected to reflect, investigate, and express themselves. This course is designed so that students are not taught the laws of science, rather they are guided in the discovery of them. Typically, students will be given a problem and asked to find a way to test the answer in the lab. This is a difficult process to learn. It is not easy to design a lab that will test what you want it to test. Students are constantly writing, and re-writing, thinking and then reflecting. Most of the time in class is spent pre-labbing a report, doing an experiment, or post-labbing (discussing with the partner or as a class) the results of the experiment. Students develop thought processes necessary to design their own successful science experiments.

THE ASSESSMENT TASKS

Assessing the thought processes that students have developed is difficult because more than one modality is needed to be certain that students are competently thinking about science. For the assessment tasks, I have carefully considered primary and secondary sources of evidence in student evaluation. I have also tried to devise a structure to grade both the process and the product. The assessment tasks are attached, and I will refer to them as needed.

Modalities of Assessment

The students were assessed in the following areas:

experiments
the long term project... the lab book
problem solving that they do at the end of each report, ( there is a section for this) Usually this is the conclusion in the lab write-up.
Interviews ( by teachers, principals, support staff)
Self Assessment Rubrics (where students evaluate their own performance)
Peer Assessment Rubrics
Teacher Graded Rubrics
Techniques Checklists
Title Page (similar to table of contents)
Skills Checklist ( self assessment)

Students are given criteria for success, rubrics etc., before the task is completed.

DOCUMENTATION OF LEARNING

To document learning, I used student-and-teacher designed rubrics, interviews from staff in the building, checklists and the Newton (Apple Message Pad 120) that is programmed with the Learner Profile Inventory.

1. Lab Skills ( i.e. lab set up, cooperation with lab partner, technique, pre-lab and post lab activities.) With the Newton, I can simply check each time a student does something and award points or documentation of the skill, item or process. The Newton is an area of growth for me next year. This year, as far as the Newton was concerned, I spent a great deal of time and thought problem solving, designing and trouble shooting the assessment tasks to use on the Newton. Monique Muldrow was instrumental in helping me with the use and set-up of the Newton.

2. Interview (see attached interview sheet) I owe a great deal to the people who took time out of their already busy schedules to come into my classroom to interview students. Without the help of my colleagues, the interview process would not have been successful. They were eager to help me with my project and I was pleasedwith the helpful response of the many people who interviewed for me, because of their efforts the students had the opportunity to be evaluated by an outside assessor. Students were sporadically interviewed during the duration of the sludge by administrators, teachers, and teacher aides who dropped into the classroom. The interviewers asked questions and the students responded. The interviewers then scored the students 4,3,2,1 by determining where the student was cognitively in the interview rubric. The students followed the interview with thank you notes to the people who interviewed them. Several people volunteered their time to come into my class and interview students that were performing the sludge, they are listed below:

3. Lab Report (see attached page for lab report) Students completed a report for the sludge.

4. Lab Book Portfolio

The lab book portfolio is in its embryonic stages. It has been revised many times and currently consists of the following parts:

• student created lab reports

• student created title page

• student created substance sheet

• student created technique checklist

• student background information

• multiple media, illustrations, samples of substances, and photos

In developing the assessments, I asked for student input. The students told me what they thought a "good" lab book would contain, and I had them work in cooperative groups to develop their ideal grading scenario. We then took the various scenarios from all classes, and condensed and summarized until we had the main parts listed above. Then the students began to discuss and plan how they wanted the points awarded for their portfolios. I was impressed with the way that they thoroughly thought about the various aspects of the portfolio. When they were comfortable with their suggestions I proceeded to type the information. Together, we created the following:

• LAB RUBRIC (many varieties)

• TITLE PAGE RUBRIC (for lab book)

• SUBSTANCE SHEET RUBRIC (for lab book)

• TITLE PAGE RUBRIC (for lab book)

• INTERVIEW QUESTIONS (asked during sludge)

• A GOOD HISTOGRAM (one of the first attempts at empowering students in self assessment)

(SEE ATTACHED PAGES AT END OF DOCUMENT FOR DETAILS.)

In developing the tasks, I considered the process versus product learning aspect, the problem solving and higher level thinking skills, multiple learning styles, and the type of methods that I would use to help the students be successful.

TEACHING STAGE

In this course, questions are proposed for the students to solve. Lab techniques and safety for newly learned techniques are discussed. Students receive instruction, which at the beginning of the year is very structured and guided; during the course the focus shifts from teacher guided instruction to student centered learning and discovery. As the year progresses, students work as teams to problem solve and discover complex principles. The students are actively engaged in hands-on experiential learning. While they are designing experiments, I typically check for understanding, guide their ideas, model new procedures, and give feedback and support to their questions. They work in teams and groups to create and implement their labs. When labs do not turn out, the students are given the opportunity analyze the results and to attempt the lab from a different perspective.

EXPANSION AND EVALUATION STAGE

This course focuses on student self-directed inquiry. The students are constantly revising and improving their work. The lab book that they create is full of experiments that they have completed throughout the year. The students at the end of the sludge are evaluated on the purification of substances, (which they collect in tiny vials) lab skills and technique, and the processed lab report.

This course leads to future science learning. The skills that the students learn and the techniques that they master are basic skills that will allow them to be successful in any science or research lab. They will develop not only these skills, but also a lifelong appreciation for learning and science.

EVALUATION OF THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE OUTCOMES HAVE BEEN MET

Outcome 1: Given an unknown mixture of several substances, the student will be able to separate, purify, and identify the individual substances.

The student will be given several rubrics and will be assessed by self assessment, peer assessment, and teacher assessment. The student will be expected to submit a final report for evaluation, and the lab rubric will be used to assess the task. The student will complete checklists for the substances that are identified, and the processes used to identify the substances.

Outcome 2: The student will be able to document the experiments and reasoning for them in a comprehensive series of self designed lab reports and experiments.

The student will be able to use the lab rubric to assess handwritten labs within the lab book portfolio.

Outcome 3: The student will be able to explain and recognize the reason for doing the experiment and apply this knowledge to his/her view of the world.

The student will be able to write about the reasoning for the labs, and will be able to discuss the labs in an interview setting. The student will also have ample opportunity to write in a log about his/her own development.

RELIABILITY AND VALIDITY

I believe that the lab book portfolio and the materials that my students and I have developed will provide a good deal of both reliability and validity. I am aware that the assessment measures will be constantly evolving; I can't even begin to estimate how many times I have revised my rubrics already.

Validity: As far as validity is concerned, I think that the assessment measures that I have developed are a better way to assess my students. I am aware that they are by no means perfect and that the rubrics, etc., will be constantly in a state of change, but I am comfortable with them, I feel that they better meets the needs of my students, and that the content, predictive, concurrence, construct, and ecological parts of the validity have been at least attempted.

Reliability: this is the biggest criticism of alternative assessment. I hope that through self-assessment, student designed assessment tasks, peer and other assessments, that reliability is improved. I revised my sludge recipes for that very reason. I was aware that some sludge separations were more difficult than others. I feel fairly certain that with my new recipes, that the stakes are more even. Each recipe has the same numbers of unknowns. Each has a soluble and insoluble substance. Each has a substance with a density less than one. Each has a liquid mixture that can be separated by distillation. I know that these new recipes may have some potential trouble spots. Each recipe also contains a specific quantity of each substance, for example, it might contain 5 grams of sucrose.

LIMITATIONS THAT I HAVE ENCOUNTERED

The biggest limitation that I have been able to recognize so far is the incredible amount of time that it takes to create assessment measures, i.e. rubrics at the secondary level. In a science lab, where there is a nearly infinite number of materials and chemicals needed and where the lab must be set-up the teacher struggles to find time to design and grade hundreds of pages of lab reports. It takes enormous amounts of time to mix the substances for lab experiments. In order for portfolios to be successful and provide a worthwhile example of student performance, preparatory time to set-up labs, design rubrics and collaborate with colleagues are extremely important.

THE ARL EXPERIENCE

The ARL experience this year has been very rewarding for me as a growth tool. There are four factors that stand out as primary reasons that the ARL experience was such a positive one.

First, Joe Senese was extremely supportive of the teachers in the team. He made ARL a priority in his schedule. He frequently visited my classrooms to interview students and observe the class in action. He set agendas, worked with the budget, applied for grants and was a "critical friend." Joe was always available to meet with me to discuss any variable that had entered into the realm of the Action Research Lab. His contributions to the team were exemplary and the central reason that the team was able to carry out the expectations and assume the risks involved with this type of professional growth.

Second, the collaborative efforts on the part of the team were integral in the growth of the teachers. It was beneficial to have the opportunity to work closely with members of various departments within the school. I was pleased at the number of times we noticed natural integration between math, science, and history. The team of teachers that worked together were "critical friends" as well. Our team developed synergy and mutual respect for each of our programs and areas of growth. Brian and Robin were supportive and helpful in all that I did. They were an excellent source of ideas for me.

Third, the release time from our duties and the science aide that I had for one period a day was another primary reason that I was able to dedicate more time to the Action Research Lab. The aide tended to what I would categorize as "necessary busy" work, and I was able to focus my attention to the development of the rubrics and Newton research.

Lastly, Don Enns was extremely supportive of my efforts to pioneer the Newton. He was instrumental in the ordering and purchasing of the equipment. Monique Muldrow experimented with the programs for the Newton and was incredibly helpful and competent. She would come to my office at a moments notice to help with any crisis that was presenting itself with the Newton. Their help along with the support of the ARL team was a central focus for the success of the growth process.

Top