The Nebraska Earth Science Education Network Electronic Communication Project

Gosselin, David C.; Feurer, Robert; Frack, Susan; Musson, Alfred; Mayo, Lois; Karel, Cindy; Schafer, Ed; Snyder, Cathryn; Sarchett, James; Alfieri, Mary Lou

doi:10.5408/1089-9995-47.1.12

Cited by 3 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…While earth science (the school subject) has seen authentic and innovative research in the areas of technology-enhanced visualization and modeling (Edelson, Pea, & Gomez, 1995;Gosselin et al, 1999;Songer, 1996) and teacher preparation (Birnbaum, Morris, & McDavid, 1990;Sautter, Keener-Chavis, & Jessen, 1999), fewer projects have concentrated on geology, and even fewer on elementary geology education, long an area of concern (Casciato & Greenberg, 1976;Meyer & Armstrong, 1990). Geology education lags behind innovations in the geosciences; recent focus on earth systems science and the technological advances of earth science mean that science as practiced by geologists is very different than the "classical" geology that frames school geology (Duschl & Smith, 2001).…”

Section: Research On Students' Understanding Of Geological Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenges of observing geologically: Third graders' descriptions of rock and mineral properties

Ford

2005

Sci. Ed.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

ABSTRACT:The understandings of properties that children develop in the context of rock and mineral identification point to the challenges of observing in a manner authentic to the discipline of geology. The notebook entries of 34 third graders written during the enactment of a commercial unit on earth materials were investigated for their descriptions of rocks and minerals, and the extent to which these reflect understandings of properties in both generic and discipline-specific senses. While children were successful in observing minute details of rock and mineral samples, there were few opportunities within the curriculum for students to differentiate between geologically relevant and irrelevant properties, and there were no connections drawn between deeper geological concepts and these observations. In addition, the demands placed on young learners to write their observations in the form of descriptions raise issues of supporting students in their learning of authentic scientific writing. There are challenges faced in representing geological observation authentically, and moving children beyond simple description activities into more complex explanations. Suggestions for improvements that attend to issues of the discipline as well as the elementary context are provided.C 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Sci Ed 89: 276 -295, 2005

show abstract

Section: Research On Students' Understanding Of Geological Conceptsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The challenges of observing geologically: Third graders' descriptions of rock and mineral properties

Ford

2005

Sci. Ed.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This workshop is an integral part of the ongoing efforts of the Nebraska Earth Science Education Network (NESEN) to use a variety of strategies to improve science education (Gosselin, 1994;Gosselin and others, 1995aGosselin and others, ,b,c, 1996Gosselin and others, , 1997Gosselin and others, , 1998. To create a professionaldevelopment activity that would be useful to teachers, a two-day planning workshop was convened in September 1996.…”

Section: Workhop Developmentmentioning

confidence: 99%

Process-Oriented Environmental Change Curriculum-Development Workshops

Gosselin

Lowrey²,

Meyer

2000

Journal of Geoscience Education

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

To improve scientific literacy, K-12 educators need to: develop the ablility to use and analyze data, incorporate data into their curriculum, and interact with teachers from other disciplines to create interdisciplinary units. A Process-Oriented Environmental Change Education workshop was conducted for eleven interdisciplinary teams, consisting of 21 teachers, in 1997 and 1998. The National Science Standards provided the criteria for the organization of the workshop. Inquiry and interpretation exercises helped to expand scientific knowledge and skills as well as the teachers' use of technology. We explicitly discussed the uncertainty of science through group discussions and problem-solving activities. More than 85% of the teachers thought the goals and objectives of the workshop were clear, the instructional methods suitable for the stated goals, and the content understandable and logically presented. Our teachers were generally not confident in their ability to interpret data, which is not surprising considering that most teachers have not had the opportunity to do this type of analytical work. Clearly, the scientific community needs to find ways to boost teacher confidence in interpreting data using accepted scientific practice if we expect science education to improve.

show abstract