A r c h i v e d  I n f o r m a t i o n

As part of a major district wide reform--from junior high to middle schools--Fort Sheridan Middle School (FSMS) first field tested and then adopted the materials of a National Science Foundation (NSF) funded science curriculum development project at the instigation of a district administrator. Through this innovative science program, both the curriculum developers and the school district in this study sought to increase the participation and success of all students in science classes, including traditionally under-represented populations (i.e. minorities and girls). Teachers and administrators perceived this curriculum as a vehicle with which they could accomplish their goals of inclusion and curricular change.

The program seeks to 1) develop middle school students' understanding of basic concepts and skills related to science and technology, 2) increase the participation and success of under-represented populations (i.e. girls and minorities) in science classes, 3) improve students' understanding of how science and technology relate to their everyday lives, and 4) promote the development of higher-order thinking skills. To achieve these goals, the curriculum integrates earth, life and physical sciences through units that are developed around conceptual themes that are repeated, built upon and linked together throughout the curriculum. Additionally, students investigate the important elements of technology, such as the design process. The program utilizes an instructional model based on constructivist learning theory in which students reflect on prior knowledge, participate in hands-on investigations and use cooperative learning strategies to explore key concepts, solve problems, and construct new knowledge.

FSMS is located adjacent to a small city on a military base in the heart of an agricultural region. The school serves nearly 700 students, who are 48% white, 35% African-American, 9% Hispanic, 4% Asian or Pacific Islander and 1% American Indian or Alaskan Native. Nearly 92% of these children's parents are military personnel, primarily enlisted personnel, and nearly 88% of the students live on the military base. The school is part of a larger district with very similar demographics. The faculty members come primarily from agricultural backgrounds and have lived in the region for much of their lives. Some of the school's educators have spouses who are in the military.

Over the last four years, many pathways have been constructed at FSMS to facilitate the change to this reform curriculum. Concurrently, obstacles have also emerged.

Teacher knowledge, experiences and beliefs greatly impact what takes place within the classroom. Participants in this reform believe it is vital that teachers believe in and understand the reform curriculum and its instructional strategies in order to teach it successfully. Teachers, though, came to this reform with varying degrees of knowledge about and experience with the philosophy and instructional approaches of the curriculum. For some teachers the reform process was an opportunity to implement new approaches and strategies that reflected where they were and where they wanted to go. For other teachers, the reform was very different from what they normally did in their classrooms. These teachers felt they had been teaching successfully and saw little need to make changes in their teaching philosophy.

Teacher learning was key to the process of implementing this science reform curriculum which affects the daily science instruction in the classroom. Regular and frequent staff development institutes, in-service workshops and the creation of a sixth grade science team provided critical opportunities for interactions with colleagues and outside support personnel which contributed to teacher learning. The support of university site-coordinators and staff, program developers and administrators as well as the use of interactive forums diminished after the field test. This loss curtailed further development of teacher knowledge and of a common vision among teachers. It also failed to address the needs of teachers who, late in the reform process, came to question and struggle with their long-held, traditional ideas; they needed support. In addition, the retention of old decision-making structures within the district and school conflicted with this reform and seriously influenced its further development and that of teacher learning.

The field test process was difficult and frustrating. It limited the incorporation of teachers' prior knowledge and impacted teacher acquisition of new instructional strategies. Importantly, teachers were viewed as professionals and served as "co-developers" and provided the program developers with feedback that was incorporated into future versions of the field test materials.

As FSMS field-tested their new curriculum, the state established science standards that paralleled the features and goals of the reform. When creating new state assessments, state leaders, though, hesitated to move beyond objective testing. FSMS played an important role in the creation of new, authentic, state assessments that support the school's four-year endeavor for change.

This program requires students to think, questions, compare, contrast and connect ideas and information as they work in cooperative teams. They must make observations, draw conclusions, make predictions, design ways to test ideas and carry out their testing methods. Due to their new and active roles, the responsibility for learning shifts from the teacher to the student. Some students increasingly assume the designated roles and responsibilities of the cooperative team; they become more responsible for their learning. However, some teachers struggle with their new roles as coach and facilitator; they take on student cooperative team roles and responsibilities and, as a result, students assume them less and are less responsible for their own learning.

-###-

[Case Study of Mountainview High School Mathematics Department]

[Case Study of Fairview Middle School Science Department]