Brad Whaley - Action Research Proposal

Introduction
I’m a brand new teacher at Battle Creek Central High School (BCCHS). I was

assigned to the 9th Grade Academy and am happy to be teaching Earth Science.

Partnered with two other 9th grade science teachers who also teach Earth Science, we

have a number of challenges facing us this year.

First, the Earth Science class is new to the school. They haven’t taught the subject

as a required or elective course for many years. Second, both of my partners are

experienced teachers, but we all have biology backgrounds, so earth science is new

content to us. Third, this is the first year that BCCHS elected to implement the Next

Generation Science Standards. So, not only do we have new content to digest, but we

also have new performance expectations and overall standards language we are trying

to master. Lastly, we are designing the curriculum as we go. One of my teaching

partners and an administrator looked at the science standards in the spring of 2017 and

selected some basic content and performance standards to target, but they did not

create a full plan for this school year. At the start of the 2017/18 school year we had no

pacing guide, no textbook, no unit plans, no assessment tools, and no daily lesson

plans.

With these challenges, the daily teaching this year has been a struggle and we are

not meeting our own expectations for high quality science instruction. Although we are

implementing active learning strategies, we’ve each acknowledged that we have relied

too much on direct instruction techniques (PowerPoint and notes, readings with
comprehension questions, etc.). Science is often described by students, adults, and

practitioners as both a body of collected knowledge and the pursuit of knowledge in

specialized and standardized ways. Even students know that there are facts to learn but

also that you “do science” by investigating things. This year, we have only focused on

teaching the content of earth science. We have missed effectively teaching the basic

scientific inquiry process portion. We have not done many labs, collected much data, or

taught students to develop their own models.

In a world where we are surrounded daily by the accumulated products of science,

scientific literacy is a necessity for everyone (National Research Council 1996). The

1996 National Science Education Standards specifically recognized the importance of

not just science content but inquiry-based science programs. Even back then the

National Research Council (1996) suggested that science as inquiry is “basic to science

education and a controlling principle in the ultimate organization and selection of

student’s activities.” Subsequently, the current Next Generation Science Standards

(2013) took integration of science inquiry methods even a step further, putting it on

equal footing with science content when the performance expectations were written.

The expectations are a pairing of the main ideas of each subject with the science and

engineering practices by which we do science. In my own teacher training program at

Michigan State University, we focused our efforts on what were termed “high-leverage

student inquiry practices” (planning investigations, collecting data, developing and

testing models).

My intention for the summer of 2018 is to rewrite our Earth Science curriculum so

that at least 40% is inquiry-based. I won’t be satisfied with my job as a teacher until
we’ve implemented significant changes for next school year. This change is made to

better meet our standards.

My research question is how will shifting our ninth grade earth science curriculum

from direct instruction methodologies to at least forty percent inquiry based

methodologies affect student summative assessment scores? I want to know, if I’m

putting in the time and effort, if it will have a positive effect. At the end of the 2018-2019

school year I’ll compare all of our summative assessment results with the 2017-2018

results from this year. Currently the mean score percentages on Unit tests 1 through 6

have been (respectively): 62.4, 63.0, 62.3, 73.5, 64.0, and 60.6.

Literature Review

In traditional teaching methods, the teacher does most of the talking and

demonstrating (National Research Council 2000). Students are asked questions and

respond directly to the teacher, typically not interacting with each other unless the

teacher mediates. Students might display their knowledge by filling in answers on a

worksheet.

So if the current and past national science education standards now have been

based on the idea that science should be taught through inquiry-based processes, then

we need to have understanding of what the terms inquiry-based truly mean. The

National Science Education Standards of 1996 used the word inquiry in two ways: first

they referred to the skills students should master to be able to conduct investigations

and control variables; second they referred to teaching techniques that enable students

to learn though investigations (National Research Council, 2000).

 Barrow (2006) found that use of the term inquiry had produced confusion in the

science education community because of multiple meanings. In this paper we take a

broad view of the term, since our effort is simply to move away from instructor

dominated instruction. Any methods that help students make their own meaning, find

evidence, build connections, problem solve and think critically will be considered in our

curriculum revision. This statement is made with the knowledge that Krishner et. al.

(2010) found that inquiry lessons can go too far and be ineffective. Sometimes teachers

idealize a situation in which the instructor provides the framework of the lesson or

question and then gives students minimal guidance. They found that “minimally guided

instruction is less effective and less efficient” than teaching that emphasizes guidance.

In practice then, Dr. Robyn Gillies (2018) describes inquiry-based science as:

“an investigative approach to teaching and learning where students are provided

with opportunities to investigate a problem, search for possible solutions, make

observations, ask questions, test out ideas, and think creatively and use their

intuition. In this sense, inquiry-based science involves students doing science

where they have opportunities to explore possible solutions, develop

explanations for the phenomena under investigation, elaborate on concepts and

processes, and evaluate or assess their understandings in the light of available

evidence.”
 Overall Minner’s (2009) analysis of 138 studies conducted between 1984 and 2002

found an overall “positive trend favoring inquiry-based instructional practices.” Digging

deeper, evidence of significant academic improvement based on adoption of inquiry-

based methodology can be sporadic. Schwartz et.al. (2002) found that after a teacher’s

participation in a scientific inquiry professional development program, their students

were only minimally able to improve. Teacher views and practices were seen to have

significant impact on student progress.

Description of Research Context

Setting: Battle Creek Central High School is considered an urban school as part of

the Battle Creek Public Schools (BCPS). Central High School is the only high school in

the BCPS district and is served by two middle schools and six elementary buildings. In a

relatively unique circumstance, the city of Battle Creek, Michigan is also served by the

separate school districts of Lakeview, Pennfield, and Harper Creek (each with its own

high school).

Incorporated in 1859, Battle Creek began as an agricultural town, and then

developed into a major industrial center. The most familiar of its historical businesses

are the breakfast cereal companies Kellogg and Post. According to Wikipedia the 2010

census shows a population of 52,347 people on an effectively declining trend since the

1950’s. The racial makeup is 71.7% White, 18.2% African American, 0.7% Native

American, 2.4% Asian, 2.7% from other races, and 4.3% from two or more races.

Hispanic or Latino people of any race were 6.7% of the population. Battle Creek is in

Calhoun County whose total population is listed at 136,146. The current largest 10
employers in the community are (in decreasing order): Kellogg Company, Denso

(automotive), Hart-Dole-Inouye Federal Center, Bronson Methodist Hospital, Veterans

Administration Medical Center, Michigan Air National Guard, BCPS, Kellogg Community

College, I I Stanley (automotive), Family Fare (grocery), and Duncan Aviation

(Wikipedia 2018).

As of September 2017, Central High School had 1,119 students in grades 9-12. The

racial makeup of the school is 34% White, 42% African American, <1% American

Indian/Alaskan Native, 5% Asian, 7% two or more races, and, 1% Hawaiian

Native/Pacific Islander. Hispanic people were 12% of the student population (Great

Schools.org 2017). According to the website ProPublica (2016) at Central High School,

68% of students qualify for free / reduced price lunch.

Participants and student demographics: The participants in this proposal are the

entire freshman class that is enrolled in ninth grade Earth Science at Battle Creek

Central High School (BCCHS). The participants then will all be enrolled in Earth Science

taught by either me or one of the two other ninth grade science teachers. We are

sharing weekly lesson plans (but are not scripted) and using common summative

assessments. In the 2017-18 school year there are approximately 290 ninth graders.

The gender ratio is typical, at roughly 49% to 51%. The age range for ninth graders is

14 to 15 years of age. This study will look at the academic and behavioral performance

of the entire freshman class. We will be comparing results of the 2017-18 school year to

the 2018-19 school year after switching to a more inquiry-based lesson methodology

designed by the three BCCHS Earth Science teachers. We do not currently know the

demographics of next year’s incoming freshman class.

 According to the Great Schools website, Central High School is not meeting state

averages in multiple categories. Battle Creek Central High School’s (BCCHS) average

SAT score 927 and the Michigan average is 1001. BCCHS average ACT Score was 16

compares to the state average of 20. BCCHS students scored lower than state

averages on standardized tests for social studies and science. Total graduation rates

and rates among different racial/ethnic groups however are on par with the rest of the

state.

Timeframe: This project will encompass the current school year and continue

through next year and into the summer of 2019 for data analysis. In the 2017-18 school

year, Battle Creek Central High School switched their science curriculum sequence and

started teaching Earth Science to ninth grade students. In this first year offering Earth

Science, the daily and weekly lessons have been predominately taught with direct

instructional methods employing active learning strategies. This study will look at

academic data collected during the 2017-18 school year. After the action steps are

implemented during the 2018-19 school year, we will again look at academic data

collected in that school year.

Classroom environment: Battle Creek Central High School had major renovations

completed in 2009. The science classrooms were updated at that time. Although they

differ in total square footage, each includes significant storage space and is equipped

with document cameras and LCD projectors. All three science classrooms are part of

the 9th Grade Academy on the 3rd floor. In 2017 BCCHS purchased each classroom a

set of 30 new Next Generation Science Standards aligned textbooks (90 books total).

At this time, paper copying is available from the school on an unlimited basis.
Consumable supplies however are completely the responsibility of each classroom

teacher. This can be an obstacle for inquiry based teaching. Limited departmental grant

funding is available for special material requests.

Study Methods

Battle Creek Central High School ninth grade students are divided approximately

evenly between three teams (but administered as part of one full Ninth Grade

Academy). Each team is made up of a group of four core classes including English,

Math, Social Studies, and Earth Science and their special education teacher. By

Science Department policy, each earth science class uses shared summative

assessments. BCPS uses the educational system platform Illuminate Education (v10.0)

for assessment data. In this first year of the Earth Science class, we created eight units

with summative tests. The summative tests were primarily multiple choice format but

also included 2-4 short answer questions. The Illuminate system lets us create a test

form that matches to individual students, quickly score tests, and collect ongoing data

about students, classes, and courses. In this project we will compare student unit test

results in 2017-2018 with the student unit test results in the 2018-2019 school year.

During the summer of 2018 and throughout the 2018-2019 school year, the other

earth science teachers and I will be working on major revisions to the earth science

curriculum so that we can create weekly lesson plans that are at least forty percent

inquiry-based. If time is available, also over the summer break of 2018, the other earth

science teachers and I will be working to link each of our test questions from the student
unit tests to the appropriate Next Generation Science Standards. If completed, this

would allow us a new comparison methodology.

Data Analysis

Because we want to look at the impact of the change in curriculum to a more inquiry-

based approach, we are trying to describe the collective level of performance of the

entire BCCHS ninth grade Earth Science class. Mertler (2016) suggests that a measure

of central tendency such as a mean is most commonly used in this situation. Using the

mean is appropriate because we anticipate the possibility of finding both full point

(100%) scores and zero point scores.

The Illuminate Education system can provide the student unit test mean scores. In

the simplest analysis we will use an independent measures t-test to compare the 9 th

grade Earth Science student’s mean Unit One test score from 2017/18 school year to

the same measure in school year 2018/2019. In this case, the students in the 2017/18

school year are treated as the control group and the students in 2018/2019 are

considered as the treatment group because of the new inquiry curriculum

enhancements. If the p-value is less than 0.05 the difference in test results will be

considered statistically significant. Because we have eight earth science unit tests, we

will have eight independent measures t-tests to look for significance.

Action Plan

We do not need to wait until the conclusion of the 2018-2019 school year to do data

analysis. It is simple enough to be completed within the school year. In the 2017-2018

school year we completed 4 major units during semester one. If we are finding
statistically significant unit test score improvements, it would be reasonable to

accelerate (to the extent possible) our shift to inquiry-based teaching methods during

the second semester of the 2018/2019 school year.

References

Barrow, L.H. (2006). A Brief History of Inquiry: From Dewey to Standards. Journal of

Science Teacher Education. 17: 265. doi.org/10.1007/s10972-006-9008-5

Battle Creek Central High School. (2016). In ProPublica: The Opportunity Gap.

Retrieved: https://projects.propublica.org/schools/schools/260000503830

Battle Creek Central High School. (2018, March 8). In Great!Schools.org. Retrieved

from: https://www.greatschools.org/michigan/battle-creek/7-Battle-Creek-Central-

High-School/

Battle Creek, Michigan, (n.d.), Retrieved February 2, 2018 from Wiki:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_Creek,_Michigan

Bulba, D. (2018, Jan 27). What is Inquiry Based Science? [Web log article]. Retrieved

from: https://ssec.si.edu/stemvisions-blog/what-inquiry-based-science

Kirschner, P.A., Sweller, J, & Clark, R.E. (2010). Why Minimal Guidance During

Instruction Does Not Work: An Analysis of the Failure of Constructivist,

Discovery, Problem-Based, Experiential, and Inquiry-Based

Teaching, Educational Psychologist, 41:2, 75-

86, DOI: 10.1207/s15326985ep4102_1

Mertler, C.A. (2016). Action Research: Improving Schools and Empowering Educators.

(5th edition). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.

Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J. and Century, J. (2010), Inquiry‐based science instruction—

what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to

2002. J. Res. Sci. Teach., 47: 474-496. doi:10.1002/tea.20347

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the National Science Education

Standards: A Guide for Teaching and Learning. Washington, D.C. The National

Academy Press. DOI.org/10.17226/9596

National Research Council (U.S.). (1996). National Science Education Standards:

Observe, interact, change, learn. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Retrieved from: https://books.google.com/books?

hl=en&lr=&id=WprSjvDW0dAC&oi=fnd&pg=PA1&dq=national+science+education+stan

dards+1996&ots=a2XHx5wMbP&sig=Qq4-

Rsykiv46mpUDfwlIUG42rxc#v=onepage&q=national%20science%20education

%20standards%201996&f=false

NGSS Lead States. (2013). Next Generation Science Standards: For States, By States.

Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/

Schwartz, R. S., Lederman, N. G., Khishfe, R., Lederman, J. S., Matthews, L., & Liu, S.

Y. (2002). Explicit/Reflective Instructional Attention to Nature of Science and

Scientific Inquiry: Impact on Student Learning. Proceedings of the Annual

International Conference of the Association for the Education of Teachers in

Science (Charlotte, NC, January 10-13, 2002); see SE 066 324. Retrieved from:

https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED465622.pdf