Looking at the effectiveness of an earth science unit designed using the Understanding by Design process

This report shares my efforts in developing a solid unit of instruction that has a clear focus on student outcomes. I have been a teacher for 20 years and have been writing and revising curricula for much of that time. However, most has been developed without the benefit of current research on how students learn and did not focus on what and how students are learning. My journey as a teacher has involved a lot of trial and error. My traditional method of teaching is to look at the benchmarks (now content expectations) to see what needs to be covered. My unit consists of having students read the appropriate sections in the textbook, complete work sheets, watch a video, and take some notes. I try to include at least one hands-on activity, one or more quizzes, and the traditional end-of-unit test consisting mostly of multiple choice questions I find in the textbook. I try to be engaging, make the lessons fun, and hope that at the end of the unit my students get whatever concepts I‘ve presented so that we can move on to the next topic. I want to increase students‘ understanding of science concepts and their ability to connect understanding to the real-world. However, sometimes I feel that my lessons are missing something. For a long time I have wanted to develop a unit of instruction that I know is an effective tool for the teaching and learning of science. In this report, I describe my efforts to reform my curricula using the “Understanding by Design” process. I want to see if this style of curriculum design will help me be a more effective teacher and if it will lead to an increase in student learning. My hypothesis is that this new (for me) approach to teaching will lead to increased understanding of science concepts among students because it is based on purposefully thinking about learning targets based on “big ideas” in science. For my reformed curricula I incorporate lessons from several outstanding programs I‘ve been involved with including EpiCenter (Purdue University), Incorporated Research Institutions for Seismology (IRIS), the Master of Science Program in Applied Science Education at Michigan Technological University, and the Michigan Association for Computer Users in Learning (MACUL). In this report, I present the methodology on how I developed a new unit of instruction based on the Understanding by Design process. I present several lessons and learning plans I‘ve developed for the unit that follow the 5E Learning Cycle as appendices at the end of this report. I also include the results of pilot testing of one of lessons. Although the lesson I pilot-tested was not as successful in increasing student learning outcomes as I had anticipated, the development process I followed was helpful in that it required me to focus on important concepts. Conducting the pilot test was also helpful to me because it led me to identify ways in which I could improve upon the lesson in the future.

MITEP: REFLECTIVE JOURNEY

This research looks at the use of the Interactive Student Notebook (ISN) in the math classroom and the impact on student achievement as part of the MiTEP program. A reflective critical analysis of the MiTEP program discusses impact on teacher pedagogy, leadership, and connections to people and resources. The purpose of the study stemmed from the lack of student retention, poor organizational skills, and the students’ inability to demonstrate college readiness skills such as how to study, completing homework, and thinking independently. Motivation also stemmed from teacher frustration. The research was conducted at Linden Grove Middle School in Kalamazoo Michigan in a strategic math class. Twenty-two sixth graders, thirty-two seventh graders, and forty eighth graders were part of the study.Students were given the Strategic Math Inventory (SMI) test in week 1 of the class and again at the end of a 12 week marking period. Students participated in an attitude survey to record their feelings about the use of the ISN in the strategic math classroom. The data compared the control group (the previous year’s [2012-2013] growth data) to the experimental group, the current year’s (2013-2014) growth data. Both groups were statistically similar in that the mean average was about a 4th grade level equivalency and the groups had similar numbers of grade level students. The significant findings were in the amount of growth made using the ISN. The control group started with a mean average of 586.6 and ended with a mean average of 697.1, making about one year’s growth from a 4th to a 5th grade level equivalency. The experimental group started with a mean average of 585.2 and ended with a mean average of 744.2, making about two years growth from a 4th to a 6th grade level equivalency. This is double the growth of the control group. The Cohen’s test resulted in a score of 0.311 which describes that the teaching method, the use of the ISN in the math classroom had a medium impact on student growth.