1. The Effects of Teaching Materials and Teachers’ Approaches on Student Learning about Carbon- transforming Processes Li Zhan, Dante Cisterna, Jennifer Doherty, and Charles W. Anderson Michigan State University Yongsang Lee, Karen Draney University of California, Berkeley National Research in Science Teaching Conference Orlando, FL. April, 5, 2011

2. Overview Research Background Research questions Methods Results and findings Implications and suggestions for future work

3. Research Background Curriculum Developers & Educational Researchers Students Teaching Materials Learning progression Design Consider Force-dynamic reasoning Scientific reasoning AssessmentsAffordances

4. Students’ learning achievements (pre-post) Discrepancy Students of different teachers demonstrated different patterns of progress Similarity Students improved their achievement in each level

5. Research Background Curriculum Developers & Educational Researchers Students Teaching Materials Learning progression DesignConsider Force-dynamic reasoning Scientific reasoning AssessmentsAffordances Teachers Scaffold Strategy Understanding Implement Teaching MaterialsTeachers

6. Visible Thinking tools in Systems and Scales unit ------Process Tool Car Running Process: Scale: (Matter Input)(Matter Output) (Energy Output)(Energy Input) Chemical Energy Heat Motion Octane (CH 3 (CH 2 ) 6 CH 3 ) (liquid) Water (H 2 O) (gas) Oxygen (O 2 ) (gas)Carbon Dioxide (CO 2 ) (gas) Combustion Atomic-molecular  Matter conservation / transformation  Energy conservation / transformation / degradation

7.  Hierarchy of systems and scales: The world is organized into dynamic systems that have emergent properties at multiple scales. The systems are dynamic in that matter and energy are constantly flowing through them and being changed by them. Visible Thinking tools in Systems and Scales unit ------Powers of ten

8. Integration of Powers of 10and Process tool to analyzescientific events astransformations of matter andenergy in the same processat multiple scales Scale Large Macro Micro Atomic - molecular Upper Anchor of teaching materials’ affordance Scientific events

9. 1.How do teachers interpret teaching materials? Do teachers’ interpretations match with the affordances of teaching materials? 2.What patterns do teachers show for interpreting teaching materials? 3.What are the possible connections between teachers’ interpretation of teaching materials and students’ success in learning? Research Questions

10. Research methods  Procedures: Interviews (unit implementation) Stimulated recall  Participants: 12 Michigan teachers who implemented the unit “Systems and Scales” LevelNumberType of School Elementary42 rural public schools 1 suburban public school Middle43 rural public schools 1 suburban public school High42 rural public schools 1 regional math & science magnet school -Description of activities - Teachers’ appreciation of activities -Perception of student learning- Suggestions for improvement

11. Data analysis 1.Categorize teachers’ responses. 2.Develop coding rubric for scales performance and conservation & transformation performance based on teachers’ interpretation. 3.Coding teachers’ responses and reliability check. 4.Analyze coding results with students’ learning achievement. From pre and post-tests.

12. Findings

13. General coding rubric for interpretation of visible thinking tools General Description Level 4Process tools and Powers of ten are tools to analyze scientific events based on the integration of conservation/transformation and scales. Level 3Process tools and Powers of ten are separate dynamic models with connected components. They are used to distinguish and connect components that represent scientific principles. Level 2Process tools and Powers of ten are static models with separated components: different parts of systems and processes. They are used to differentiate components. Level 1VTTs are literally understood as a means to represent things: “pictures” of objects and processes. No scientific relationships among objects.

14. Examples of Powers of 10 Interpretation Teacher A: (level 1) “…I liked the video, and I think the students liked the video; and they understood, they had no problem putting the objects in the different categories…” “… I just don't think they really see the associations between the numbers, I mean, they understand that gas is matter, and they know it's very small…” Teacher B (level 3) “…I think that is definitely one of the challenges is making those connections. I mean they get the big scale, the large scale objects, small scale but that all the large scale objects are made up of the small scale objects. I think we build that connection…”

15. Teacher A: (level 2) “…I would use pictures or a drawing - a very crude drawing of what we were talking about; and then the kids would talk to us about what went in and what would come out…. it was pretty basic stuff, but I think the kids understood that when something comes in, something would go out then”. Teacher B (level 3) “…because when you have something on the left side and you have to move it to the right side, you can see that nothing is happening to those balls. They are simply just being moving … before kids thought that things just disappeared. It went away. This was the first time in their life when they had to say, had to be able to tell me where it went. Never before in their education had they had anybody talked about transformation, movement, whatever we have. You know, conservation of matter, so it was great….” Examples of Process Tool Interpretation

16. ElementaryMiddleHigh Teacher Scale Conservation and transformation TeacherScale Conservation and transformation TeacherScale Conservation and transformation E111M113H133 E232M232H222 E323M332H332 E422M433H432 Teachers’ coding results

17. Pattern 2 Elementary teachers’ interpretation tends to be lower than middle and high school teachers Pattern 1 None of the teachers’ interpretations reached the upper affordance of teaching materials Suggestive Patterns

18. Pattern 3 Teachers’ interpretation of visible thinking tools and students gains H2: And then, going into the process tools I thought is very beneficial for them, because it does separate the energy from the matter.. H3: Yes. Especially at this point where it's so easy to combine matter and energy,,,,, the process tool to separate that butane is the chemical compound that contains chemical energy that starts things going in the right direction.

19. Implications 1.Teachers’ interpretations of Tools for Reasoning influenced their classroom implementation 2.Teaching materials need to be scaffolded so that teachers can recognize and use the intended affordances of Tools for Reasoning 3.In order to help teachers to improve understanding and implementation of teaching materials, better support and professional development are needed To do list 1.Gather different types of evidences to connect teachers, teaching materials, and student learning. 2.Improve teaching materials to make their affordances more apparent to teachers and students. 3.Provide better support to teachers in teaching experiments.