When I analyzed the first set of surveys I gave my students, I was pleased as I noticed my students answered that they were generally motivated in the class, valued the content, and enjoyed the course. However, I was surprised by the 2.9 out of 5 rating for the degree of challenge. This was a significant difference in data. Interestingly, Tom and John got similar results. We knew that all of our students didn’t already know the concepts and certainly were not able to handle difficult ideas without support. We discussed this and checked the grades that the students were receiving in class. In my class, each letter grade A-E was represented. In fact, the grade distribution was almost a bell curve. We determined that the term “challenge” can be interpreted in many ways and we pursued other research to clarify that result. Maybe the students feel that the class is “doable;” not too hard and not too easy. The effect of language on my action research data seems to be significant. As I collected more data, I noticed this pattern again.
Fourth quarter was an excellent time to focus on my research about connections because my students were required to do more individual lab planning. By fourth quarter, most of the new concepts are learned and the focus is on applying the connections. The exit slip data was taken during the first lab of the 4th quarter. Since the beginning of the year, I observed the students struggling with organizing procedures and data tables and then analyzing data. However, as noted in the “anecdotal data,” many of the students knew to reference their previous labs as a resource. They were able to successfully complete their pre-labs and analysis when using their previous work. Again, the anecdotal data reinforced the effect of how a question is asked and interpreted. Most of the students immediately used their resources; however, when asked what they would do, only half of the students felt confident enough to share their ideas. As I collect more data, I am very conscious of the language I choose. The students are currently working on their Sludge projects. The "Sludge" lab test originated from the Haber-Schaim Introductory Physical Science curriculum. We have modified the test into a three week lab final assessment. The students separate and identify their own individual unknown mixtures based on various characteristic properties studied throughout the year. Because it encompasses the concepts of the year, the Sludge project serves as a wonderful assessment of content and process connections.
As I reflect and plan ahead, I hope to continue my progress by in incorporating even more ways that my students can learn to make connections within the curriculum. I am also interested in encouraging my students to make connections beyond the curriculum. Both Tom and John researched the effect of connecting concepts beyond the curriculum. Their research shows a positive correlation between "real-world" connections and increased student motivation. Our team discussions and their research inspire me to continue adapting the curriculum to include more "real-world" connections. One idea that the Chem/Phys III team is considering is teaching Power Point presentations as another way to process lab work. During that experience, the students could also research the common uses of some of the chemicals we study. I would also like to connect and reinforce the writing skills that the freshmen learn in English and History. Overall, I hope to facilitate an environment were students are challenged to make connections. Ideally, they will continue to develop these skills and transfer this knowledge to all aspects of their life.