PROMOTING K-12 COMMUNITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE … · because of the recent focus on environmental issues in the geology ... fundamental groundwater ... institute is placed on the

ABSTRACT

K-12 educators teaching earth science presently face aunique opportunity to engage students incommunity-based studies of environmental problemsbecause of the recent focus on environmental issues inthe geology profession and new national educationstandards encouraging inquiry-based learning andcommunity outreach. The Washington Earth ScienceInitiative, a K-12 teacher enhancement program inWashington State, is providing teachers the backgroundknowledge, human and material resources, and time todevelop community-based studies on flooding, salmonhabitat restoration, groundwater resources, earthquakes,volcanic hazards, and other environmental issues facingthe citizens of Washington. During an intensivethree-week summer institute teachers learn how to useand acquire a range of research resources such astopographic maps, aerial photographs, surveyequipment, and computers so they are able to conductlong-term research projects with their students. Teachersalso employ a number of pedagogical techniquesmodeled during the institute to create a series ofinquiry-based activities that provide their students withthe background knowledge and skills necessary toconduct the research. A number of communityrepresentatives give presentations and lead field tripsearly in the institute to demonstrate to teachers the rangeof organizations involved in environmental studies andtheir willingness to work with teachers. This motivatesthe teachers to contact other organizations near theirschools later in the institute and the teachers are oftensurprised to find how willing these groups are to workwith them in developing long-term projects. While thecommunity-based K-12 projects are of great value toteachers, students, and the community, the collection ofauthentic research results useful to community leadershas been limited by numerous school district constraintsand the lack of existing data collection efforts bycommunity leaders that could benefit from student andteacher participation.

Key Words: K-12 teacher enhancement, communityoutreach, inquiry-based learning, environment,summer institute

INTRODUCTION

The major focus of geology during the past two decadeshas shifted away from mineral and petroleumexploration towards environmental management(Eaton, 1995; Skinner, 1998). As a result, geoscienceeducators across the country are emphasizing the needfor K-12 earth-science education focused onenvironmental concepts (Adams, 1995; Donath, 1995;Geary, 1995). These changes in the earth sciences haveoccurred at the same time national science educationreform movements have recommended that hands-on,

inquiry-based instruction with a community focusreplace teacher-directed instruction (AmericanAssociation for the Advancement of Science, 1993;National Research Council, 1996). An outgrowth of thesereforms has been a growing effort to developinquiry-based earth-science curricula that focus oncommunity issues and reflect recent trends in theprofession towards environmental topics (Smith, 2000).An emphasis on studying community issues inearth-science education is mirrored in the geologicalprofession where national leaders are calling forgeologists to interact more directly with the publicthrough public policy makers, teachers, and mediaoutlets (Mosher, 2002).

Earth-science education is particularly important inWashington State where much of the populationcontends with issues of flooding, salmon habitatrestoration, groundwater contamination, earthquakes,and volcanic hazards. While national science-educationreform efforts for the first time give earth science anequal billing with the physical and life sciences (Geary,1995), few teachers are adequately prepared to teach aninquiry-based earth-science course, especially a coursereflective of recent trends in environmentalmanagement. In Washington State, 50 percent of theearth- and environmental-science teachers devote morethan 14 weeks of instructional time to watershedmanagement, groundwater resources, and naturalhazards but only 15 percent of these teachers have acollege degree or concentration in geology or the earthsciences (Field, 1995). Additionally, Washington’s earth-and environmental-science teachers are in need ofpedagogical training if they are to fulfill therequirements of national (National Research Council,1996) and state (Commission on Student Learning, 1997)science-education reform efforts. Although state andnational standards endorse an inquiry approach toscience education, the state’s earth- andenvironmental-science classrooms are dominated bytextbook and lecture oriented instruction. Over 25percent of the state’s earth- and environmental-scienceteachers lecture or assign textbook work on a daily basis,with over 75 percent lecturing on a weekly basis (Field,1995).

Extensive surveys, dialogues, and meetings withK-12 teachers and administrators throughoutWashington State convinced us that the state’s teachersare eager to adopt environmental curricula utilizingpedagogies reflective of national and state sciencestandards. The main challenges facing teachers are theirlack of knowledge on environmental issues, resources todevelop inquiry investigations, and time to developcontacts with community agencies addressingenvironmental problems. To address these teacher needsand to assist teachers in meeting national and statescience standards, we began the Washington EarthScience Initiative, an intensive three-week teacherenhancement institute, in 1997. The institute runs all dayfor three consecutive weeks during the summer at

54 Journal of Geoscience Education, v. 51, n. 1, January, 2003, p. 54-63

PROMOTING K-12 COMMUNITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE

THROUGH THE WASHINGTON EARTH SCIENCE INITIATIVE

John Field Natural Sciences Department, University of Maine at Farmington, Farmington, ME 04938

Susan DeBari Geology Department, Western Washington University, Bellingham, WA 98225

Michael Gallagher Oakland ISD, 2100 Pontiac Lake Rd., Waterford, MI 48328

Western Washington University and after four years hasserved almost 100 K-12 teachers throughout WashingtonState. The major goals of the Washington Earth ScienceInitiative are to: 1) enhance disciplinary knowledge ofconcepts related to flooding, salmon habitat restoration,groundwater resources, volcano hazards, andearthquakes; 2) provide training in pedagogy and the useof instructional resources to prepare teachers to conductextended community-based scientific investigationswith their students; and 3) involve members of the localscientific and engineering community willing to supportthe professional development of teachers. A specialeffort is also made with elementary teachers to integrateall subject disciplines into the investigation ofenvironmental issues in their communities. The three-week institute consists of three components: backgroundknowledge and skills acquisition, educational tech-nology integration, and development of community-based projects. A calendar of events for a typical instituteis shown in Table 1 and illustrates how the threecomponents are integrated into the three-week institute.In this paper, we describe in detail the three institutecomponents, provide examples of community- basedprojects developed by the teachers, and discuss the

benefits these projects have had for teacher instructionand the communities involved.

BACKGROUND KNOWLEDGE AND SKILLSACQUISITION

The first week of the summer institute is designed toprovide teachers with background knowledge on fiveenvironmental issues of growing importance inWashington State: flooding, salmon habitat enhance-ment, groundwater contamination, earthquakes, andvolcanic hazards. The major concepts related to thesetopics are presented to the participating teachers using avariety of pedagogical techniques consistent witheducational theory and national and state science-education standards (Table 2). While the focus duringthe first week is on improving teacher understanding ofthe environmental issues, time is also devoted todiscussing the effectiveness of the pedagogicaltechniques modeled and encouraging teachers to use thesame techniques in their classrooms.

The format for the background knowledge and skillsacquisition phase of the institute is similar to previouslysuccessful teacher training programs in the earthsciences (Carlson, 1990; Carpenter, 1996; DeBari et al.,

Field et al. - Promoting K-12 Community Research 55

Week 1

Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday

Morning- Introduction/

Registration- Meeting each other

activities

Morning- Why do

earthquakesoccur? The platetectonic paradigm

Morning- Volcanoes - the

inevitable result ofplate tectonics

Morning- Flooding - Inquiry

into differencesalong braided andmeanderingstreams w/ maps,photos, and streamtables All Day

- Field trip - tour offlood preventionprojects w/ guestspeakers includinglandownersAfternoon

- Science processactivities

- Earthquakes

Afternoon- Earthquakes - what

makes a sturdy/unsturdy structureduring anearthquake

- Field trip -Bellingham’s bestand worstbuildings

Afternoon- Volcanic hazards

and theirmitigation - mapactivities andguest speaker

Afternoon- Flood control

methods and theirimpact on ecologyand morphologyof rivers

- Alternative floodcontrol methods -guest speaker

Evening- Cookout/campout

Week 2

Morning- Computer skills -

using the internet


earth sciencesoftware


images anddatabases


data from theinternet


making web pages

Afternoon- Salmon habitat -

guest speaker andfield trip

Afternoon- Groundwater issues

- demonstrations/models

- Groundwater fieldtrip

Afternoon- Identifying topic of

community-basedresearch project

Afternoon- Project

development

Afternoon- Project

development

Week 3All Day

- Projectdevelopment

Morning- Project

development

All Day- Project

development

All Day- Project

development

Morning- Presentation and

discussion ofcommunity-basedresearch projects

Afternoon- Field trip -

practicing fieldresearch methods

Afternoon- Presentation and

discussion ofcommunity-basedprojects

- Program evaluation

Table 1. A typical calandar of events for a Washington Earth Science Initiative summer institute.

1996). Each topic covered during the institute ispresented in a three-step learning cycle: 1) introductionof a problem through a focusing activity; 2) developmentof concepts in order to understand and investigate theproblem in a more meaningful way; and 3) application ofthe concepts to reinforce learning of the topic. Forexample, groundwater contamination issues areintroduced by pouring water over a colorful powdereddrink mix that sits on top of sand placed in an invertedplastic two-liter soda bottle resting in a glass beaker (seeField, 1998 for a more detailed explanation). As thedissolved drink mix begins to drip into the beaker below,the teachers are shown a quart of motor oil to emphasizethe point that groundwater can be easily and rapidlycontaminated by harmful compounds. Groundwaterconcepts are developed more fully through the use ofgroundwater models that allow the teachers to observefundamental groundwater principles and experimentwith various groundwater remediation methods. Thisinformation is later reinforced and applied on a field tripto the heavily agricultural Sumas region in northwesternWashington where teachers measure the water tabledepth and nitrate levels in a well with a groundwaterhydrologist from the Geology Department at WesternWashington University (Figure 1). We arrange forseveral local professionals and landowners to givepresentations and lead field trips during the first week ofthe institute to effectively communicate to the teachersthe relevance of the environmental topics to the localcommunity (Table 3).

A special emphasis during the first week of theinstitute is placed on the use and management of seveninstructional resources that teachers can incorporate intothe long-term projects they develop later in the institute:

computers, maps, historical aerial photographs, fieldstudies, rock and ash samples, laboratory experiments,and scientific literature. For example, to learn more aboutflooding and how the character of flooding can varyalong the same river teachers investigate with severalresources the question, “Why do some streams braid andothers meander?”. While investigating this question,teachers use topographic maps to compare the slopes ofdifferent rivers, design stream table experiments to testthe importance of bank material and other factors onstream morphology, visit rivers in the field to measurethe width:depth ratios of the two stream types, observehistorical aerial photographs to document changes inriver patterns through time, and read scientific journalarticles to better appreciate the multiple causes forbraiding and meandering rivers (Figure 2). Inexpensiveand simple field techniques teachers can use with theirstudents to investigate a variety of issues related toflooding, salmon habitat restoration, groundwateranalysis, and earthquake preparedness are illustratedand practiced on several field trips early in the institute(Figure 3; Tables 1 and 4). Teachers are providedinformation on how to make or acquire these resourcescheaply so they can incorporate them into theircommunity-based scientific investigations.

EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGYINTEGRATION

Each morning of the second week of the institute isdevoted to educational technology integration (Table 1).The primary mission of this portion of the institute is tofoster the perspective that technology in earth-scienceeducation should primarily be employed as a tool to be


Issue Concepts Pedagogical Techniques Research Skills

Earthquakes

- Cause of earthquakes- Earthquake preparedness- Seismic risk in Washington- Rock/soil type and damage- Earthquake engineering

- Cooperative groups- Demonstrations- Field trip- Interactive software

- Earthquake rating of buildingsafety

Volcanic Hazards

- Plate tectonic setting ofWashington

- Magma formation- Eruptive styles- Types of hazards

- Video footage- Cooperative groups- Computer presentations- Community involvement

- Map reading- Internet research

Flooding

- Causes forbraiding/meandering

- Types of flood damage- Methods and impacts of flood

control- Alternative methods of flood

control

- Slide presentations- ”Jigsaw” method- Problem-based learning- Community involvement- Think-pair share- Field trip

- Topographic maps- Historical aerial photographs- Experimentation- Reading scientific literature- Field techniques- Internet research

Salmon Habitat Restoration

- Elements of good salmonhabitat

- Salmon life cycle- Causes for habitat decline- Techniques for restoring habitat

- Slide presentation- Demonstrations- Community involvement- Field trip

- Field techniques- Internet research

Groundwater Resources

- Importance of groundwater- Aquifers, aquicludes, and water

table- Groundwater movement

- Demonstrations- Problem-based learning- Cooperative groups

- Experimentation- Field techniques

Table 2. Background concepts discussed, pedagogical techniques modeled, and research skills practiced

with each environmental issue covered during Washington Earth Science Initiative summer institute.

Pedagogical techniques shown not necessarily aligned with concepts they appear adjacent to.

put in the hands of students for exploration, analysis anddecision making. While we use the morning sessions topromote and model strategies for integratingeducational technology, we also encourage the teachersto integrate technology into the development of theircommunity-based projects in a way reflective of the skillsand perspectives we promote in the institute. To achievethis, the morning technology sessions have four goals: 1)develop teacher confidence with software that can beused to develop student centered activities; 2) conveyconcepts and strategies to promote numeric and visualliteracy; 3) share on-line and CD-based image andnumeric data sets; and 4) build core technology andtechnology integration skills.

The mornings of the second week are organized intoseven learning modules designed to first build core skillsand then into strategies for technology integration usinginquiry- and problem-based learning methods. Throughthe use of interactive software, the middle modulesguide teachers in investigations that promote visual andnumeric literacy (e.g., image processors and utility tools,spreadsheets, and web browsing software). After athorough survey of and practice with rich instructionalresources and skills, the teachers finish with a module onbasic web authoring (Table 5). The modules aremaintained as an active web site (www.smate.wwu.edu/teched/wesi-hm.html) through WesternWashington University’s Science, Math, and TechnologyEducation Center so teachers can continue to refer tothem after the institute is over.

The seven learning modules are designed withseveral activities for teachers to work through each

morning. The activities engage teachers in groupproblem solving and cooperative learning rather thanindividualized or teacher-directed instruction. Offeringteachers personal experience with student-centeredstrategies will more likely translate into an expandedrepertoire of teaching strategies they will use with theirstudents. For example, to demonstrate the value ofvarious software programs in supporting aninquiry-oriented science curriculum, groups of teacherscreate an interactive activity using Seismic/Eruptionsoftware. Each group splits up to join members of othergroups to share and critique the created lessons. By usingthis abbreviated rendition of the “jigsaw” format(Tewksbury, 1995), teachers end the morning sessionwith five or six lessons prepared for the classroomutilizing inexpensive and free interactive computersoftware.

The overriding goal of the educational technologyintegration portion of the institute is to promote a role fortechnology as an instructional tool. Just as the earthsciences lend themselves especially well to teaching thescientific process and the role of science in society, theearth sciences also are well suited to take advantage of amultitude of electronic resources relevant to theenvironmental themes of the institute. Whether com-puters are being employed to help students construct anunderstanding of concepts, aiding in the analysis ofstudent gathered data, or used as a production tool forcommunication, earth- and environmental-scienceeducators have a lot of resources to choose from when


Figure 1. Participating teacher lowering a water-level

meter into a well to measure water-table depth on a

groundwater fieldtrip. Other teachers and ground-

water hydrologist look on.

Figure 2. Teachers conducting stream-table exper-

iements (Top) and observing historic aerial photo-

graphs (Bottom) as part of an inquiry investigation of

braided and meandering streams.

developing an inquiry-based curriculum focused onenvironmental problems.

DEVELOPMENT OF COMMUNITY-BASEDPROJECTS

Teachers during the third phase of the institute design aproject and supporting activities that will involve theirstudents in a long-term study of a local environmentalissue. In some instances teachers from the same school orfrom the same area will work together on a project thatintegrates their disciplines. The projects the teachersprepare during the institute consist of an explanationand justification of the long-term community-basedstudy to be conducted, the methods and resources to beemployed during the study, and a list of conceptsstudents will master and activities the students willcomplete to adequately prepare the students toundertake the study. We alert teachers of the projectcomponents before the institute begins and remind themthroughout the first week so they are thinking of howthey can make use of the community leaders, hands-onactivities, and pedagogies introduced during thebackground knowledge and skills acquisition phase ofthe institute. Teachers actually begin work on theirprojects during the afternoons of the second week andcontinue throughout the third week (Table 1). Teachersshare their project ideas in presentations and receiveconstructive feedback from other teachers on the finalday of the institute (Figure 4). The large block of timemade available for developing these projects isextremely important because the teachers need ampletime to contact community groups and agencies neartheir schools, discover what environmental problemsthose community professionals are addressing in thearea, determine how their students can play a role inaddressing one or more of those problems, gather thenecessary research resources to conduct the study

designed to address the problem(s), and develop theactivities necessary to adequately prepare the students toundertake the community-based investigation. Thestructure for the project development phase of theinstitute is flexible enough to allow teachers to return totheir home schools so they can meet with communitycontacts and/or explore possible field sites where theymight conduct research. While teachers are encouragedto incorporate a long-term scientific data collectioncomponent into their projects, in many cases this is notpossible because of school constraints such as limitedbudgets for field trips or short class periods. Whereteachers are unable to develop a scientific investigation,we encourage teachers to develop a community-servicecomponent to the project addressing an environmentalissue.

Over four summers of the institute a range ofprojects have been developed and implementedthroughout the state covering flooding, salmon habitatrestoration, groundwater resources, volcanic hazards,earthquakes, and other issues (Table 6). The timeprovided during the second and third weeks of theinstitute to establish community contacts and developprojects around community issues is essential for projectsuccess. For example, one biology teacher fromBellingham High School learned that the city did notallocate funds for the monitoring of a wetland mitigationproject so she developed a project that would allow herstudents to measure water levels and chart plantsuccession in the wetland during future school years.The discovery of this community need motivated theteacher during the institute to develop the activities andgather the resources necessary to prepare their studentsto conduct the envisioned investigation.

To assist the teachers in developing a set of activitiesto support the envisioned community project, eachteacher receives, at the start of the institute, a coursenotebook and four hands-on activity books covering theinstitute’s environmental themes (Gartrell et al., 1992;International Office for Water Education, 1994; AmericanGeophysical Union, 1995; Murdoch and Cheo, 1996). Theinstitute leaders, consisting of geologists andexperienced earth-science teachers, are also availablethroughout the institute to help the teachers modifyactivities in the activity books or create new activities to


IssueParticipating CommunityRepresentatives

Earthquakes- Earthquake retrofitting

construction firm

Volcanic Hazards- USGS Cascade Volcanoe

Observatory

Flooding

- Whatcom County Engineering- Skagit County Public Works- Snohomish County Flood

Control- Whatcom County Flood

Control Advisory Board- Private landowners

Salmon HabitatRestoration

- US Forest Service- Washington Department of

Natural Resources- Lummi Nation Natural

Resources- Private landowners

Groundwater Resources

- Western WashingtonUniversity GeologyDepartment

- B & C Well Drilling, Inc.

Table 3. Individuals and organizations from the com-

munity that have participated in the presentation of

the various environmental issues during past Wash-

ington Earth Science Initiative summer institutes.

Issue Field Technique

Earthquakes - Building safety rating

Flooding/Salmon HabitatRestoration

- Repeat photography- Substrate size analysis/pebble

counts- Gravel tagging and tracing- Measuring stream discharge

and velocity- Establishing rating curves- Surveying cross sections and

profiles- Scour chains- Bank erosion pins

Groundwater Resources- Drilling piezometers- Measure water table depths- Three-point problem

Table 4. Inexpensive and easy field techniques teach-ers can use that are demonstrated and practiced atWashington Earth Science Initiative summer in-stitute.

meet the teachers’ specific needs. All of the resources atWestern Washington University’s Science Math andTechnology Education Center are available for teacheruse during the school year including survey equipment,groundwater models, and water quality testing kits.While teachers working close to the university obviouslytake advantage of these resources more frequently, someteachers have traveled from as much as four hours awayto borrow equipment for their projects.

The steps involved in developing acommunity-based project during the institute are bestillustrated through a true account of two teachers thatworked together on a project addressing flooding. Theaccount is based on discussions and interactions we havehad with the two teachers and the community leaderswith whom they interacted. The following vignettereflects the enthusiasm and creativity generated by theteachers’ collaboration during the institute but alsoreveals the hurdles and frustrations the teachers facedwhen attempting to implement their ideas during thesubsequent school year:

Two sixth grade middle school teachers fromConcrete and Sedro Wooley, respectively, decide toexplore how flooding on the Skagit River in northwestWashington has impacted and continues to impact theircommunities. Their idea is an outgrowth of apresentation earlier in the institute by the SnohomishCounty director of floodplain management whodiscussed a number of traditional and alternativemethods of flood control on the Skykomish River. Theteachers begin developing their project by visiting theSkagit County Flood Control Office where they are givenmultiple copies of a map showing flood prone areas andthe sites of historic levee breaks. Flood control engineersin the office also agree to make a presentation to theteachers’ classes and provide additional resources,including aerial photographs, to help develop studentactivities. The teachers spend the next afternoonsearching for news clips and other information on pastfloods at the Washington State Archives building locatednear Western Washington University’s campus. Havinglearned how to use and explore the internet during thetechnology phase of the institute, the teachers explore onthe third day of project development a U.S. Geological

Survey internet site where they find 50 or more years ofdischarge data for several river gauges on the SkagitRiver. Excited by this discovery, the teachers imaginehow their students can monitor discharges throughoutthe school year and share information between theirclasses on how different river levels impact theircommunities. The teachers further envision using thehistorical discharge information to study how the traveltime of floodwaters between Concrete and Sedro Wooleyhas changed through time because they realize thisinformation may be useful to the Flood Control officethat told them predicting flood crests on the lower end ofthe river depends on accurately defining the travel timeof flood waters. The next day the teachers developstream table experiments that test various levee designssuch as setback levees and overtopping levees that SkagitCounty hopes will decrease the number of levee breaksand amount of property damage along the river. Theteachers plan to have their students conduct the sameexperiments at the Cascade Mall near Sedro Wooleyduring Flood Awareness Week in October so thecommunity can see the benefits of alternative floodcontrol methods. The teachers measure the dimensionsof the stream tables at Western Washington Universityand make plans to build new ones for their classrooms(Figure 2). The teachers next spend time discussing howto integrate their project on flooding into other subjectareas. They plan to incorporate math skills whencalculating and graphing discharge data and languagearts skills when students write letters inviting the publicto their multimedia presentation at the Cascade Mall.The week of project development concludes with acompleted plan for an integrated inquiry investigationwith a community- service component that has thesupport of a local government agency.

Full implementation of the envisioned projectproves difficult for the teachers once the school yearbegins. A representative from the Skagit County FloodControl Office speaks in their classrooms as promised.However, the teachers soon realize that research on floodtravel times that would prove valuable for Skagit Countyrequires a level of statistical knowledge they do notpossess. The teacher from Sedro-Wooley near theCascade Mall plans her flood awareness week


Figure 3. Teachers practicing simple line-levelsurveying techniques to measure a cross sectionalong a small stream. The measuring tape, string,rebar, and line level needed for the survey can beeasily and cheaply acquired by teachers.

Figure 4. Two teachers describe the project theydeveloped while displaying some of the maps andother resources they received from communityagencies supporting their projects.

presentations only to find out one week before the eventthat the school superintendent refuses to grantpermission because of liability concerns. Despite thesesetbacks the teachers from Skagit County integrate theirfull curriculum in the fall around the issue of floodingand receive support, new maps, and other resourcesfrom the Skagit County Flood Control Office. While theoriginal vision of completing authentic research for thecounty does not come to fruition, the countyrepresentatives are grateful for the teachers’ assistance intheir annual efforts each fall to increase awareness aboutflood hazards in Skagit Valley.

DISCUSSION

The experience described above epitomizes the types ofsuccesses and difficulties experienced by many of theteachers in planning and implementing theircommunity-based research or service project. Theparticipating teachers have always expressed a greatdeal of satisfaction in the programs format and focus onlocal environmental issues. On the final day of thesummer institute we ask the teachers to complete aprogram evaluation that ranks 15 different componentsof the institute from 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent). Theaverage score for every component has exceeded 8.5 eachyear with teachers rating highest their exposure tocommunity leaders during the institute’s first week(Average = 9.8) and the time provided during theinstitute’s final week to contact and interact withagencies in their communities (Average = 9.7). Severalteachers have commented that the Washington EarthScience Initiative was the best in-service program theyhave attended and many others were extremely gratefulfor the opportunity to have in place by institute’s end awell prepared plan for engaging students in

community-based activities centered on anenvironmental theme.

Teacher satisfaction with a program and theenthusiasm developed from it may help motivate theteachers but does not necessarily translate into programsuccess. Documenting success in achieving the threemajor goals of the Washington Earth Science Initiative(see Introduction) has proven difficult. Each weekduring the academic year following the institute in 1999and 2000 the participating teachers completed a surveyquestionnaire asking them about the topics covered,resources consulted, and pedagogies used in theirclasses. Only ten teachers each year, or about 50 percent,consistently completed the surveys. From these, we wereable to document to what extent the teachers taught theenvironmental topics discussed at the institute,incorporated into their curriculum the course materialsprovided to them, used pedagogies modeled at theinstitute such as inquiry-based learning, and interactedwith community leaders (Table 7). Unfortunately, in theabsence of any pre-institute information on teacherpractice, we are unable to conclude to what degree theinstitute is responsible for the teacher’s utilization of thevarious topics, resources, and pedagogical techniques.Certain topics and resources presented at the institute,such as earthquakes and the internet, were more likelyused by teachers prior to the institute than others, such asgroundwater and aerial photographs, and thus use of thelatter in the classroom is more confidently ascribed toparticipation in the institute. The results do show thatteachers still rely heavily on lecture- andtextbook-oriented instruction but perhaps now as ameans for preparing students for later research ratherthan as an end in itself. The average number of days theteachers used the various institute themes, resources,and pedagogies reveals only a limited impact on teacherpractice, but the maximum number of days spent bycertain teachers suggests that the institute didsignificantly impact individual teachers during certainparts of the school year. Anecdotal evidence drawnfrom ongoing contact we have with some of the teacherscorroborates the importance the program has had inworking in the community, finding resources, and usingnew instructional techniques. One eighth-grade teacherfrom Bellingham wrote: “the Washington Earth ScienceInitiative was instrumental in providing teachingmodels, materials, technology support, and practice indelivering current real world topics in the classroomsetting. I was most successful in applying the conceptssurrounding watershed systems to our study of humanimpacts on the Lake Whatcom Watershed. The depth ofknowledge and motivation to observe issues on local,regional, national and global levels helped me toformulate lessons that were meaningful to students.They asked the questions and answered them withguidance. It was very exciting to experience theenthusiasm of the students as they explored their ownideas”.

The original goal of the Washington Earth ScienceInitiative to have teachers conduct authentic researchwith community partners appears to have met withsome limited success. Unfortunately, the post-instituteevaluation did not directly query teachers on time spentconducting research in the community nor was anattempt made to formally evaluate communityrepresentatives as to their perception of how helpful theteachers and students were. However, if the amount oftime spent on inquiry investigations is assumed to


Learning Module Computer Skills

Module 1 - Desktop Basics- File management- Navigating in Windows- Filing bookmarks

Module 2 - Curricular Resources

-Integrating computers into thecurriculum

- Using resources fromcurricular groups

Module 3 - Technology inScience Curricula

- Use of interactive software- Developing activities from

interactive software

Module 4 - Visual Literacy: ThePower of the Image

- Image formatting- Using image processing

software

Module 5 - Numerical Lieracy:Using Data

- Finding and acquiring data onthe internet

- Analyzing numerical data

Module 6 - Other AmazingTools

- Interactive software in supportof an environmental geologycurriculum

Module 7 - Authoring WebPages

- Creating web pages- Diagramming web sites- Using images in web sites

Table 5. Computer skills learned in each learningmodule during the computer technology phase of thesummer insitute.


IssueGradeLevel

Project Community or Organization

Earthquakes

10-12198

- Building laser-based seismograph- Earthquake awareness- Earthquake safety of buildings- Earthquake awareness and building safety

Lummi NationTacoma Public SchoolsWenatcheePullman

Volcanic Hazards 6 - Volcano hazard awareness and presentation Mt Baker and Bellingham Public Schhols

Flooding

9969

- Flow monitoring of streams- Erosion and flow monitoring- Flood Awareness Week outreach- Monitoring flooding of Skykomish River

Town of QuilceneCity of VancouverSkagit County Public WorksSnohomish County Flood Control

Salmon HabitatRestoration

89-12

411-12

26

- Repeat surveying of channel cross sections- Flow monitoring and stream restoration- Monitoring growth of riparian vegetation- Chimakum Creek watershed monitoring- Habitat awarenss and raising salmon- Application of physics to stream monitoring

Nooksack Salmon Enhancement AssociationWashington Department of Fish and WildlifeNooksack Slamon Enhancement AssocationChimakum High SchoolWashington Department of Fish and WildlifeMarysville

GroundwaterResources

186

- Monitoring groundwater levels- Monitoring sewer-filter traps- Monitoring groundwater levels in wetland

EdmondsSeattleGrapeview Middle School

Wetland Restoration9-12

66

- Monitoring plant succession and water depths- Monitoring water quality- Topographic survey of proposed wetland

City of BellinghamCity of BothellWhatcom Day Academy

Water Supply 6 - Monitoring reservoir levels City of Anacortes

Table 6. Examples of projects developed by teachers at past Washington Earth Science Initative summerinstitutes.

Topic, Resource, orPedagogy

School Year 1999-2000 (n=10) School Year 2000-2001 (n=10)

Mean # of DaysTaught

Maximum # of DaysTaught

Mean # of DaysTaught

Maximum # of DaysTaught

Topics -Flooding/riversSalmon habitatGroundwaterEarthquakesVolcanoes

1.96.83.34.82.3

732141612

4.610.26.99.34.9

2126412415

Instructional Resources -InternetMapsAerial photographsField studiesExperimentationLiterature/libraryArchivesGuest speaker

23.06.22.31.6

12.914.95.36.7

613611661821419

16.410.31.34.413.723.92.21.8

683682554166109

Pedagogy -LectureTextbooksCooperative groupsHands-on activitiesInquiry investigationsStudent presentations

37.732.827.038.513.56.7

11112451735314

23.825.340.457.718.211.5

69711201358350

Table 7. Summary of teacher survey results. Note: In all cases the minumum number of days spent is 0,meaning there was at least one teacher in each case that did not use the given topic, resource, or pedagogyduring the given school year.

reflect, at least to some extent, student engagement incommunity research, then up to an average of threeweeks was spent on research, with some classesspending more than ten weeks on such projects (Table 7).Our follow-up discussions with teachers reveal anumber of hurdles teachers face in interacting withcommunity members and conducting research withthem. Some recurring problems we heard about include:limited funding for field excursions, difficulties withscheduling large blocks of time for research activities,difficulty coordinating with community leaders,reassignment to a different school or grade level,vandalism of research, school or district curriculumchanges inconsistent with the focus of the developedproject, and lack of administrative support orpermission. When limitations to authentic research wererecognized prior to the institute we worked withteachers to develop projects that would engage studentsin research activities but generally partnerships withcommunity agencies were sacrificed in such instances. Inother cases the problems cannot be planned for inadvance. One teacher, very sadly, was unable to fullyimplement her groundwater monitoring project with herfirst graders in Everett because the piezometers placedon the school grounds by a local well drilling companywere vandalized by sixth graders. “My students weredevastated”, the teacher told us.

Despite the numerous problems that potentially faceteachers in implementing their projects, some persist intheir efforts. A ninth grade teacher from Burien whendescribing her difficulties with and solutions forscheduling community speakers and field researchwrote: “Some of my challenges are finding people whocan come to my classroom when I need them as speakers.Not everyone wants to come at 7:30 in the morning; it isalso a bad time for field trips. I have pretty much figuredout how to work around that problem though. A biggerone is how to take two classes at once, which I prettymuch have to do. I find that I have to break into smallergroups with multiple activities. I hope to add twospeakers this term. If I find two more the next I will feelvery successful”. The most successful projects appear tobe those that fill a need previously identified by thecommunity (as in the City of Bellingham example above)or evolve to fit the needs of the communityrepresentatives involved. For example, a ninth-gradeteacher near Vancouver began seasonal monitoring ofthe morphology and hydrology of a small stream nearher school through repeat surveying of cross sectionsand recording of water levels. The project now includeswater quality monitoring because of the interest of thelocal Natural Resources Conservation Service Officewhich provides materials for the research. In thisexample the research involves the long-term monitoringof an area where the data collected will become usefulover several years. Continued efforts by the teacher toovercome scheduling problems and the like are madeeasier through the support of the NRCS representativewho envisions utilizing the data in the future.

CONCLUSIONS

National science-education standards that call for anincreased role for earth sciences and teaching methodsinvolving community outreach and inquiry-basedlearning provide a unique opportunity for K-12 teachersto address environmental problems in their communityby developing an earth-science curriculum reflective of

recent trends in the geology profession. The WashingtonEarth Science Initiative provides teachers with trainingin content and pedagogy and provides ample time andresources for teachers to develop community contacts,identify environmental problems near their schools, anddesign a curriculum preparing students to investigatethat problem in detail. Teachers involved in theWashington Earth Science Initiative have revealed thenumerous difficulties in establishing school-communityauthentic research partnerships. Partnerships are mostsuccessful if incorporated into an existing communityresearch program or if there is an identifiable communityneed for research results. Widespread implementation ofsuch efforts state-wide in Washington has provendifficult because existing research efforts by communityagencies or clearly identified research needs areuncommon or inaccessible to K-12 students. Teachersattempting to establish partnerships in the absence of aclear research program or need in the community willsucceed with only great persistence, support, and time.Despite these obstacles, attempts to establish widespreadresearch partnerships should continue because somesuccesses do emerge and because of the benefits suchprograms provide teachers even when authenticresearch does not result. The importance of these benefitsis made clear in the remarks of a first grade teacher fromTacoma who participated in the Washington EarthScience Initiative during the summer of 2000: “Did myfirst-graders on Hilltop in urban Tacoma clear out anyrivers? No. Did their teacher become more aware ofecological issues surrounding salmon habitat, floodplains, water tables, lahars? Yes. And it was importantfor my career and for my future students that I becamemore educated because opportunities will arise to get aspeaker, go on a field trip, clarify a section of text, and mystudents will understand these things better because Iunderstand them better”. Making teachers aware of thepossibilities of school-community research partnershipsappears to hold tremendous advantage even in theabsence of cooperative research and data collection.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We would like to thank the numerous teachers,organizations, landowners, and undergraduate studentsthat have participated and assisted with the WashingtonEarth Science Initiative over the years. We regret that thelist is far too long to mention each individually butwithout their efforts the program would not have beensuccessful. Special thanks to Chris Ohana and KatriceSchuler for analyzing the survey data completed by theteachers. The Washington Office of Superintendent ofPublic Instruction has funded the summer institute eachyear with Eisenhower Professional Development Funds.

REFERENCES

Adams, S. S., 1995, Is it time yet?, Geotimes, v. 40, p. 5.American Association for the Advancement of Science,

1993, Benchmarks for science literacy, New York,Oxford University Press.

American Geophysical Union, 1995, Seismic sleuths,Washington, D.C., American Geophysical Union.

Carlson, G. R, 1990, A comprehensive earth-scienceteacher-education program, Journal of GeologicalEducation, v. 38, p. 311-314.


Carpenter, J. R., 1996, Environmental education for thewhole teacher, Journal of Geoscience Education, v.44, p. 38-44.

Commission on Student Learning, 1997, Essentialacademic learning requirements: technical manual,Olympia, WA, Commission on Student Learning.

DeBari, S.M., Metzger, E.P., and Sedlock, R., 1996, K-12teacher education in earth science: the Bay AreaEarth Science Institute (BAESI), Council onUndergraduate Research Quarterly, Septemberissue, p. 32-35.

Donath, F. A., 1995, The future lies behind us, GSAToday, v. 5, p. 9-10.

Eaton, G. S., 1995, Re-shaping America’s earth-sciencecurriculum, Geotimes, v. 40, p. 4.

Field, J. J., 1995, Washington state earth-scienceeducation survey, Washington Science Teachers’Journal, v. 35, p. 14-15.

Field, J., 1998, Investigating our groundwater resources,Connect, v. 12, p. 10-13.

Gartrell, J. E., Crowder, J., and Callister, J. C., 1992, Earth:the water planet, Arlington, VA, National ScienceTeachers Association.

Geary, E. E., 1995, SAGE tomorrow: virtual reality andsome thoughts on the emerging national scienceeducation standards, GSA Today, v. 5, p. 73.

International Office for Water Education, 1994, Thecomprehensive water education book, Logan, UT,Utah Water Research Laboratory.

Mosher, S., 2002, Plate boundaries to politics: pursuingpassions in science, GSA Today, v. 12, p. 4-10.

Murdoch, T., and Cheo, M., 1996, Streamkeeper’s fieldguide: watershed inventory and stream monitoringmethods, Everett, WA, The Adopt-A-Streamfoundation.

National Research Council, 1996, National scienceeducation standards, Washington, DC, NationalAcademy Press.

Skinner, H.C.W., 1998, Where are we going?, Geotimes,v. 43, p. 68.

Smith, M.J., 2000, Help for earth science teachers,Geotimes, v.45, p. 20-21.

Tewksbury, B.J., 1995, Specific strategies for using the“jigsaw” technique for working in groups innon-lecture-based courses, Journal of GeologicalEducation, v. 43, p. 322-326.


Documents

PROMOTING K-12 COMMUNITY RESEARCH AND SERVICE … · because of the recent focus on environmental issues in the geology ... fundamental groundwater ... institute is placed on the