Hands-On Learning Is Critical for Science Achievement

Linda Heidenrich SED 625

Hands-on learning is critical for science achievement

“Only after they have experienced ideas on a concrete level do children progress toward an understanding of symbols and concepts (Northwest Regional Educational

Laboratory, 1997, p.15).” As stated in the publication “Science and Math for All

Students: It’s Just Good Teaching”, students need to participate in hands-on activities to be successful in science classrooms. Further evidence to support this idea is provided by

Michael Gurian in the book, Boys and Girls Learn Differently and by the National

Research Council in the book, How People Learn. In addition, personal interviews with several staff members at my school, ranging from the department chair to a third-year teacher emphasize the need and success with involving hands-on learning in the science classroom.

The publication, “Science and Math for All Students: It’s Just Good Teaching”, was published by the Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory in Portland, Oregon in

April 1997 in an effort to support all learners in the math and science classroom. The

Laboratory worked with various educators from the Northwestern United States as well as the Center for National Origin, Race, and Sex Equity to devise a document explaining how to best ensure scientific and mathematical achievement for all students with a focus on increased achievement for minority students, including females. This comprehensive document examined many effective teaching strategies such as ability grouping, hands-on activities, cooperative learning groups, single-sex learning groups and mentors/role models in an effort to determine how effective these strategies are for minority learners in math and science classes. Hands-on activities in cooperative learning groups were highlighted because the skills required for these activities occur naturally in many of the home environments of our students. For example, discussing ideas in a group is similar to a conversation in a large group of family members (Northwest Regional Educational

Laboratory, 1997, p. 14). In addition, students whose native language is not English feel more successful in the classroom because they can get a grasp on the concept by speaking their native language in a small group and then use English during whole class discussion

(Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory, 1997, p. 14). The researchers also noted how the use of manipulatives in small groups utilizes three of the major modalities involved in learning: auditory, visual and kinesthetic (Northwest Regional Educational

Laboratory, 1997, p. 15). Students must listen to each other, see what is being developed and physically rearrange the manipulative to get that result. By using hands-on activities in the science classroom, the teacher is ensuring the student will have access to the content.

Several years after the publication by the Northwest Regional Educational

Laboratory, Michael Gurian published a book, Boys and Girls Learn Differently, explaining how neurobiology can be applied to the classroom to maximize learning.

Gurian worked with several school districts in Kansas and Missouri and applied research from the brain differences in boys and girls in an effort to increase learning for both boys and girls by catering to each of the needs and bridging their differences. In his research,

Gurian became a strong supporter of hands-on activities because they are necessary for both boys and girls, but for different reasons. Gurian discovered boys are better at abstract reasoning and girls are better at concrete reasoning suggesting girls need manipulatives and hands-on activities to understand abstract scientific concepts (Gurian, 2001, p. 45). On the other hand, boys need manipulatives and hands-on activities because they have a strong need for movement and become easily bored. Gurian suggests boys should have something in their hands to manipulate to stimulate their brain, allow for consistent (and appropriate) movement and decrease boredom (Gurian, 2001, p.46-47). If this object becomes part of the lesson, the boys have the movement they need and the girls have an object to make abstract science concepts more concrete. In addition, Gurian reviews Gardner’s intelligences and explains how many boys have strong predispositions toward spatial and kinesthetic modes of learning (Gurian, 2001, p.53). This need can be met through hands-on activities and manipulatives. Yet, Gurian suggests, boys need to work in cooperative groups with girls so they may develop appropriate spatial and kinesthetic learning styles instead of having a spatial learning style that violates the space of his entire group (Gurian, 2001, p. 53).

As Gurian was examining how children learn, the National Research Council was examining How People Learn. The researchers involved in this project ranged from educators in the primary and secondary grades through chairs of the department of education at major universities. In their research, the National Research Council (2000) also discovered hands-on learning was a valuable resource in teaching science because hands-on learning effectively challenges any misconceptions students has about science as well as providing a significant example to demonstrate an underlying concept. The researchers demonstrated the importance of hands-on learning in Chapter 7 when discussing a physics experiment in a college physics course. The teacher asked the students to predict which car has a greater force in a collision between a large, heavy cart and a small, light cart on a track. Students, recalling crash sites between large trucks and small cars and the damage to the small cars, hypothesized the large cart would have the greater force. Yet, when the teacher demonstrated the activity using force probes attached to each cart, the students discovered Newton’s third law regarding equal and opposite forces. The researchers, in light of this experiment, cited additional research suggesting “delays of as little as 20-30 minutes in displaying graphic data of an event occurring in real-time significantly inhibits the learning of an underlying concept

(National Research Council, 2000, p.180).” In other words, students need to see in graphic representation the evidence of an event within half-hour from completing the event or they will not understand the underlying concepts. This research reminds educators the event is not the most critical component to hands-on learning; the analysis of the event is what will allow the students to grasp a concept and overcome misconceptions.

From a linguistics perspective, hands-on learning is an effective way to learn science. The Center for Applied Linguistics (www.cal.org), a non-profit organization headquartered in Washington D.C. whose goal is to improve bilingual education, complied a list of “10 Principles of Effective Instruction” based on their research projects

(Walqui, 2000). The list is intended to help teachers of second language learners make the language more accessible, especially in vocabulary rich content areas like science.

Yet, the strategies useful with second language learners are effective with native speakers as well. Two principles of particular note in the area of science are principle five and principle seven. Principle five states, “Embedding language of textbook in a meaningful way using manipulatives, pictures, a few minutes of film and other realia can make language comprehensible.” CAL suggests taking the textbook and providing real-life, relevant activities for the students to understand the complex language of science.

Principle Seven has a similar premise by stating educators need to make sure “tasks are relevant, meaningful, engaging and varied.” Students need hands-on activities that are relevant and engaging in an effort to access complex scientific vocabulary and concepts.

Personal interviews and interactions with staff members at my school have also demonstrated the need for hands-on activities. Our district implemented district-wide benchmarks for biology and freshmen integrated science last year in effort to make sure all school sites are providing standards-based instruction. As a component of this plan, teachers must provide effective lessons to our department chairs after each benchmark.

Every effective lesson has a hands-on component. The students learn the standards best when they have completed a lab and subsequent lab report. As a result, our department chair has required we all devote 40% of our instructional time to hands-on activities

(Science Department Meeting Notes, October 2006). In addition, during collaboration periods, teachers must meet with teachers in the same subject, i.e. all biology teachers collaborate, and provide each other with feedback regarding lessons that work. One lesson suggested by a teacher was “Life in a Bottle” for an ecology unit, an idea received during her student teaching (C. Gathman, personal communication, August 2006). In lieu of the usual book, notes, lab, test, etc. routine, students had a project-based learning assignment in which they had to design a closed, self-sustaining ecosystem. Two months after the assignment, students are still discussing how their ecosystem is working and why their ecosystem is still working. They have kept this assignment for over two months and still reference it on a daily basis. Hands-on activities allow students to gain access to the curriculum and improve mastery of standards. References:

Bransford, J., Brown, A., & Cocking, R. (Eds.). (2000). How People Learn. Washington D.C. National Academy Press.

Gurian, M. (2001). Boys and Girls Learn Differently. San Francisco. Jossey-Bass.

Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. (1997). Science and Math for All Students: It’s Just Good Teaching. Portland, OR: Author.

Science Department Meeting Notes. October 9, 2006.

Walqui, Aida. (2000, June). “Strategies for Success: Engaging Immigrant Students in Secondary Schools”. (Report No. EDO-FL-00-03). Washington D.C.: Office of Educational Research and Improvement.