SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING TESTIMONY

LENGTH: 1484 words

COMMITTEE: SENATE HEALTH, EDUCATION, LABOR AND PENSIONS

HEADLINE: NSF REAUTHORIZATION

TESTIMONY-BY: KEITH VERNER, CHIEF,

AFFILIATION: DIVISION OF PEDIATRICS

BODY:
Statement of Keith Verner, Ph.D. Chief, Division of Pediatrics

Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee

June 19, 2002

Mr. Chairman, and Members of the Committee:

I am pleased to be here to discuss with you the crucial challenge of improving basic science education. I will not cite references pointing out poor US student performance in international tests in math and science or the importance of being able to think "scientifically" in an increasingly technological economy and society. It is clear from recent legislation, from the involvement of the Department of Education and the National Science Foundation, and from this very hearing today, that we as a nation are adequately aware of the urgent need to improve science education. Therefore, I am here today not to point out the problem, but to suggest ways in which the scientific community must help to solve it. I will begin by describing two of our science education outreach programs as examples. Role of the Scientific Community in K-12 Science Education

Both educational experience and cognitive science tell us that science is best taught with a "hands-on" approach that blends the cognitive appeal of experiential activity with comprehensive, standards-based science instruction. But the ability to enable meaningful hands-on science while making sure there are no gaps in the curriculum requires that the curriculum developers themselves have a deep and comprehensive understanding of science (Verner, K., 2002). I suggest that this challenge is best approached through collaborations between practicing scientists and basic educators - What better way to interweave deep content expertise and reallife classroom practice? This was the vision that guided us to employ teams of scientists and public school educators at the College of Medicine at Penn State University, over the past several years, to create the LabLion elementary school science program. Its features include a dual emphasis on promoting interest in science and conveying knowledge; concise, complete, and grade appropriate inquiry-based lesson plans (Ruiz- Primo, M.A., et al, 2002; Wenglinsky, H., 2000); readily available supplies; very low maintenance costs following installation (Levitt, K., 2001); and a strong professional development component (van Driel, J. H., et al, 2001; Haney, J. J., et al, 1996; Levitt, K., 2000; Monk, D. H., 1994]-among others. This program is currently employed in many schools across Pennsylvania, reaching more than 25,000 elementary school students, and we continually work with the educational community to improve it. Such blends of theory and classroom activity are needed for every level and sub-discipline of science education.

For science teachers, thinking in terms of scientific concepts and principles that give meaning and context to scientific facts and formulae, is essential. Helping students to build scientific concepts requires an understanding of the relationships among their components. Teachers must see these relationships and understand the logic and organization of the relationships in order to teach the concepts to their students (National Academy of Sciences, 1999). Scientists can help by organizing content- rich educational experiences for teachers. To this end, we designed and implemented the Governor's Institute for Life Science Educators over the past several summers for K-12 teachers. The Life Science Institute is an intensive in-residence program at the College of Medicine for 100 teachers per summer. Mornings are spent in activity-based, scientific content-rich group lessons that begin on Monday morning with the dissection of a human cadaver and gradually become more molecular as the week progresses, with strong integration of biochemistry and biophysics (Appendix A). Afternoon and evening sessions are devoted to grade-level specific scientific content and lesson plans, as well as effective teaching strategies.

Such professional development programs are a direct and very important way for the scientific community to help improve basic science education. Based on an analysis of student NAEP (National Assessment of Educational Progress) scores and teacher professional development programs, Wenglinsky concluded, "in science, students whose teachers have received professional development in laboratory skills outperform their peers by more than 40% of a grade level." (Wenglinsky, H., 2000).

No Child Left Behind

Title II, Part B, Section 2002 of the No Child Left Behind Act gives guidance (and funding) for preparing science teachers to meet the challenge of improving student performance in science and is entirely consistent with what we have learned over the years in our K-12 science and health education outreach efforts. Perhaps most important, No Child Left Behind is resultsbased. For the evaluation of professional development programs, for example, it prescribes (section 2113 (c) (7)) that states measure the effectiveness of professional development programs through increases in teacher subject mastery and student academic gains.

I believe that this new law provides great promise for improving science education. Further, I believe that the National Science Foundation can and should play a major role in implementing this desperately needed change.

The National Science Foundation

The NSF is an ideal champion for K-12 science education because of its broad base of scientific expertise in a variety of disciplines, from molecular biology to oceanography and space exploration. Over the years NSF has supported important research that has been crucial to maintaining America's scientific leadership and demonstrated its growing dedication to improving basic science education.

The recent involvement of the NSF, in collaboration with the Department of Education, in the Math and Science Partnership (MSP) program, offers the single most encouraging development in a decade. The MSP program directly addresses the best ideas put forth in Title II of the No Child Left Behind Act and provides funding to begin making a meaningful impact. The MSP program inspires interactions between university science departments and basic science educators. It mandates approaches to science education that are based on research and verifiable analysis of student performance. It values teacher professional development and puts the scientific community in a more direct and proactive position. As a scientist and a strong supporter of basic science education reform, I most emphatically recommend developing the MSP program further.

Summary Recommendations

-Schools should offer hands-on, inquiry-based science curricula at all levels. These curricula should cover a range of "concepts" providing context for factual knowledge that is essential for the scientific literacy American citizens need.

-Teachers should train students, from elementary school on, to develop a conceptual framework of scientific principles. Each new concept should be linked to previous concepts within the framework so that its inclusion is logical and relevant to preexisting student knowledge.

-Teacher preparation and professional development are key. Without adequate scientific experience and a scientific factual knowledge base, teachers are left to rely on science textbooks and have difficulty facilitating the building of conceptual frameworks by their students.

-The scientific community can and should have a significant impact on improving K-12 science education. This involvement is now mandated by the No Child Left Behind Act. The scientific community should be proactive, and its contributions may include:

-Developing K-12 science curricula with basic science educators;

-Providing "scientific" experiences for teachers at university laboratories so that they can develop a feel for scientific thinking;

-Developing summer institutes on university and medical school campuses to immerse basic science educators in the latest trends in scientific thinking; oCollaborating with experienced, practicing educators to translate primary scientific research results from disciplines such as cognitive neuroscience and functional neuroimaging into innovative methodologies of classroom practice (Verner, K., 2001); -----Directing the scientific training of pre-service teachers in schools and colleges of education to ensure that their training has a direct grounding in science;

-Integrating directly into the system of basic science education, in both instructional and administrative capacities, and supporting alternative teacher and administrative certification programs that facilitate such career transitions; and

-Establishing deep intellectual collaborations with basic educators built upon mutual respect and guided by a shared commitment to improving student performance in, and enjoyment of, science.



LOAD-DATE: June 24, 2002