ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY PROJECT This research is supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation: Developing a Research-based Learning Progression for the Role of Carbon in Environmental Systems (REC ) and Learning Progression on Carbon-Transforming Processes in Socio-Ecological Systems (NSF ), and Targeted Partnership. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY Berkeley Evaluation & Assessment Research Center Interviews with Chinese and American Students about Carbon Cycling in Socio-ecological Systems Poster Presentation 2009 NARST Written by: Hui Jin, Li Zhan, and Charles W. Anderson (Michigan State University) Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy Long Term Ecological Research Math Science Partnership April 2009 Disclaimer: This research is supported by a grant from the National Science Foundation: Targeted Partnership: Culturally relevant ecology, learning progressions and environmental literacy (NSF ). Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.

ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY PROJECT This research is supported in part by grants from the National Science Foundation: Developing a Research-based Learning Progression for the Role of Carbon in Environmental Systems (REC ) and Learning Progression on Carbon-Transforming Processes in Socio-Ecological Systems (NSF ), and Targeted Partnership. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY Berkeley Evaluation & Assessment Research Center Interviews with Chinese and American Students about Carbon Cycling in Socio-ecological Systems Hui Jin, Li Zhan, and Charles W. Anderson RESEARCH OVERVIEW RESEARCH METHOD INTERVIEW PROTOCOL (I - Investigator; A - American student; C - Chinese student) Level 4. Scientific model-based understanding Naming Performances: State molecules of all reactants and products, all relevant energy forms, and chemical processes Explaining Performances: Explain macroscopic events in terms of chemical reactions constrained by the three principles of matter and energy and indicate a discourse of scientific constraints I: When candle is burning, heat is released. Where does the heat come from? C7: The candle has chemical energy. When it is burning, the chemical energy transforms into heat and light energy. I: What changes when the tree decays? A6: Carbon in the tree is been broken down into smaller and smaller molecules. It needs oxygen for cellular respiration. The tree energy goes into the organisms that decaying the tree. It then goes into the air. The products of cellular respiration go to the air. Level 3. Processes with unsuccessful constraints Naming Performances : State specific molecules, energy forms, or chemical changes. Explaining Performances : Explain macroscopic events in terms of processes involving molecules and energy forms; indicate awareness of conservation laws without using them successfully I: What will cause the dead tree to decay? C4: Microbes and oxygen. I: How does this change happen? C4: I don’t know. I: Your dad drove you to Yangzhou after you finished the final. When you arrived there, your dad found that most gasoline was gone. Where did the gasoline go? C5: The gasoline changed into kinetic energy to move the car. I: Can you identify any of the substances or materials that are changing [when a person loses weight]? What are they? A5: The fat or lipids are broken down because energy is breaking down these. The fat breaks down into energy. Level 2. Macroscopic changes explained by hidden mechanisms involving Power Naming Performances : State relevant hidden processes such as making food, familiar substances, and familiar energy evidences. Explaining Performances : Explain macroscopic events in terms of hidden processes powered by materials/energy and abilities or powers of actors I: You said that people need oxygen. How do people’s bodies use oxygen? C1: People have lungs. Their biological activities require oxygen. Oxygen helps activities. Without oxygen, they feel tired and cannot do things. Oxygen goes to lungs and then bloods to facilitate the movement of blood. I: How does the food you eat help you to move your little finger? C3: Foods change into energy to move your finger. Level 1 Macroscopic changes explained by force-dynamics causation ･ Naming Performances : State science facts about body/machine parts, organism needs, or life story. ･ Explaining Performances : Explain macroscopic events in terms of macroscopic causes; rely on force-dynamics discourse I: How about water? What happens to the water inside the tree? A1: It sucks into the roots and then it [water] goes up, so it can make the leaves and the branches grow. Interviewer: How does the tree use sunlight for energy? … … A1: I’m pretty sure with the leaves, the leaves attract the sunlight and it’s like food to them, so that’s how they grow. And I think it’s the same with the tree. 1. Iterative process: Results of data analysis provide information for revising the LP and interview protocol. 2. American and Chinese students’ responses reflected similar patterns in two aspects of performances--naming and explaining. Hence, we developed 12 exemplar worksheets to represent students’ characteristic naming or explaining performances in the six focal events. Each exemplar worksheet contains level description--the characteristic performances at each level--and representative responses selected from the interview data. Step 3. Code responses & represent distribution of responses along the LP We collected 56 interview transcripts. Each transcript is divided into six units of analysis. Each unit of analysis contains all the questions and responses about one focal event. Then we used the exemplar worksheets to code each unit of analysis. This work generated two tables that represent the alignment of naming and performing performances for American and Chinese students. COMPARISON US : 31 secondary students & 2 elementary students Seven 7th graders and seven 6th graders from two public schools in California Six 9th graders from one rural high school in Michigan; eleven 10th graders from the math and science center in Michigan Two elementary students from one suburban school in Michigan China : 23 secondary students Four 7th Graders, five 8th graders, and four 9th graders from two rural schools Three 10th graders, four 11th graders, and three 12th graders from an urban school PATTERNS CARBON CYCLING LP (LEVEL DESCRIPTION & EXAMPLES) To Do List American and Chinese data indicate similar patterns in two aspects of performance-- naming and explaining: Naming: the performances of naming the relevant science statements, principles, concepts, and facts. Explaining: the performances of constructing qualitative explanations based on different ways of reasoning. Focal Events: Plant Growth; Animal/People Growth; (Animal/People) Body Movement; Tree Decaying; Flame Burning; Car Running Interview Questions: General Questions (Questions for students from all levels): 1. What does the tree need in order to grow? 2. How does each of the things you mentioned helps the tree to grow? What happens to it inside the tree? Does the tree use it for energy? How does that work? 3. The tree gets heavier as it grows. How does that happen? 4. Does the growing tree change the air? How does that happen? High-level Questions (Questions for students who indicate some understanding of matter and energy when responding to general questions): 5. If the increased weight comes from outside the tree, where does it come from? How do these things change into the tree’s body structure? 6. Does tree growth require energy? What are the energy sources for the tree? 7. Do you think the energy of sunlight will change its form when it goes into the tree’s body? How? Where does the tree store energy? In cells? In molecules? PARTICIPANTS 1.Interview more American and Chinese elementary students to develop the lower anchor. 2.Use written assessments to collect a larger sample of responses and examine students’ developmental patterns. Research Questions: 1. How do American and Chinese students account for events about global warming? What are the possible learning trajectories for them to reach the goal of scientific reasoning about environmental events? 2. As American students and Chinese students are from different educational contexts, do they experience different learning trajectories? How are their learning trajectories similar or different? Research Background: This research is conducted within the scope of Environmental Literacy Research Project. It builds on our previous studies of developing a matter learning progression (LP) and an energy LP and intends to bridge the gaps of the previous studies. 1. The matter LP and energy LP provide information for developing the initial hypothetical levels of the carbon cycling LP. 2. A major gap of the previous studies is that the LP’s are developed mainly based on written assessment data, which did not reveal details of students’ intuitive accounts. In this research we used interview to elicit students’ accounts. Goals of the Research: 1. To develop an interview protocol that effectively reveals students’ accounts about environmental events. 2. To develop a carbon cycling LP with two learning trajectories to represent how American students and Chinese students progress from their typical informal reasoning towards scientific reasoning about environmental events. A small tree was planted in a meadow After 20 years, it has grown into a big tree, weighing 500 lb more than when it was planted Step 1. Develop hypothetical levels of the LP. We developed the hypothetical levels for the carbon cycling LP based on the matter and energy LP’s. It only reflects American students’ reasoning. As an start point, we used this LP to analyze data from Chinese students. Step 2. Identify patterns of performance & develop the LP 1. Develop/Revise the LP 2. Develop/Revise Interview Protocol 3. Conduct Interview & Collect Data 4. Use the LP (6 Exemplar worksheets) to analyze data Tree Growth Comparison of the Alignment of Naming Performances and Explaining Performances for American and Chinese Students: 1.American and Chinese students’ explaining performances were very similar, with a majority of each group at level 2 -- relying primarily on hidden mechanism reasoning. This indicates that the currently school science learning in both countries is not effective enough to help students to construct scientific reasoning. As the result, students still rely on their intuitive reasoning to make accounts. 2.Naming performances were aligned differently for American and Chinese students. Students in both groups showed more level 3 and 4 naming performances than explaining performances, but the difference was much larger for Chinese students. This indicates that although Chinese students learned to repeat more scientific facts and definitions, they still relied on the hidden mechanisms reasoning to explain the events. LOWER ANCHOR UPPER ANCHOR INTERMEDIATE LEVELS Level 1 Explaining Performances: Macroscopic changes explained by force- dynamics causation Explain macroscopic events in terms of macroscopic causes; rely on force-dynamics discourse Level 1 Naming Performances: Observable and Perceptive Characteristics State science facts about body/machine parts, organism needs, or life story Level 2 Explaining Performances: Macroscopic changes explained by hidden mechanisms involving Power Explain macroscopic events in terms of hidden processes powered by materials/energy and abilities or powers of actors Level 2 Naming Performances: Hidden processes, familiar substances and obvious energy evidences State hidden processes such as plants making foods, familiar substances such as sugar, oxygen, and carbon dioxide, and obvious energy evidences Level 3 Explaining Performances: Processes with unsuccessful constraints Explain macroscopic events in terms of processes involving molecules and energy forms; indicate awareness of conservation laws without using them successfully Level 3 Naming Performances: Familiar molecules, energy forms, or chemical changes State specific molecules, energy forms, or chemical changes Level 4 Explaining Performances: Scientific model-based understanding Explain macroscopic events in terms of chemical reactions constrained by the three principles of matter and energy and indicate a discourse of scientific constraints Level 4 Naming Performances: All relevant Molecules, energy forms, & Chemical processes State molecules of all reactants and products, all relevant energy forms, and chemical processes