State-By-State Grades on Teaching Evolution

In The Missing Link, I took the stand that all students need to learn about evolution and that creationism/ID is not appropriate for teaching in public schools. That continues to be my stand. All students need to understand the piles and piles of evidence for evolution and how scientists explain evolution limiting themselves to natural processes. In The Link, though, I focused on how to do that in a way that is sensitive to and honors students who come to evolution with deep religious objections.

My UAB colleague, Rob Angus, just passed along to me a recently published analysis of how each U.S. state scored on the teaching of evolution. The title is Why Science Standards are Important to a Strong Science
Curriculum and How States Measure Up, and it's available free on-line. The graphic here is from that article, and the image gives the quick-view of the results. There's progress here with several Southern states improving their ratings. But, children in many states still don't appear to be getting the opportunity to even examine evolution at all.

Coming Soon: What I Wish I Had Said in The Missing Link

I guess every author has those things that, after the book comes out, he or she realizes, "Oh, dang, I should have said __________ ." I've had a few of those thoughts, and I'm hoping to post about them soon.

ASTA Follow-Up

It was great seeing so many old friends at ASTA yesterday. Thanks to all of you who attended my sessions or who came by my book signing table. Remember to use the Labels and the Links on the left-hand side of this page to help you find any follow-up information you need. If you can't find what you're looking for, or if you have any other questions, feel free to post it as a comment here or to e-mail me at lmeadows@uab.edu.

Interview on The Missing Link

Via the great folks at UAB Media Relations, here's a 2-minute overview of the UNBelieving Evolution approach.

Teaching Evolution Without Offending Religious Students from uabnews on Vimeo.

Learning about Whale Evolution from National Geographic

In The Missing Link, I laid out an inquiry on whale evolution that uses data from a written article. This is a different style of inquiry than many people think of, since the students don't collect the data themselves. That would be kind of hard for them to do, right, since they're not paleontologists! So, this style of inquiry has them looking at, thinking through, and explaining data that other scientists have collected and published.

The article is "The Evolution of Whales" from November, 2001, of National Geographic. I could not find an electronic version of the article anywhere, however. Probably, it's easily accessible to teachers, though, since most school media centers carry National Geographic. A work-around is Edward Babinski's web-based summary of the article, which also includes some nice drawings.

I like the article because of how it traces whale evolution in a broad sweep, rather than bogging down in the details. Although this 50,000-feet level will be helpful to middle- and high-schoolers who read the article, it will also probably cause them to trip up over some of the details. That's why I've created the graphic organizer that appears here for students' use when reading the article. The graphic organizer scaffolds the students' reading of the article by focusing them on the most important information. In The Missing Link, I proposed a fairly generic graphic organizer. I've been looking for this opportunity to develop one that is more specific, in case teachers need tighter scaffolding for the article.

Teachers can use this graphic organizer as a base for thinking about how much scaffolding their student need. Older students, or those who are adept at inquiry, need less scaffolding as they approach a complex data source. Teachers can remove some of the scaffolding by taking away the species names in the left-most column and thereby require students to decide as they read the article which species of the ones mentioned are the most important. By keeping the scientists' names in the graphic organizer, as shown in the version here, the students still have some guidance as they work. To remove almost all of the scaffolding, teachers would remove the scientist names as well.

Teachers can also scaffold the activity more tightly for younger students and students new to inquiry by filling in more information and thereby providing more guidance for the students as they work. The image shows a version I created by leaving the text for the cell on each line that I thought was the most difficult to extract from the article. This is the least obvious information, and by providing it to the students, I prevent frustration from impeding their process on the inquiry.

I created the last graphic organizer from a completely filled out one that is my version which I completed as I dug into the article. As I teach the inquiry, I'll have that version with me for my own reference if students get stuck. Since it was already filled out, removing information from some of the cells made creating the most structured version of the graphic organizer a 3-minute process.

Resources for a Lesson on the Evolution of HIV

In writing the Missing Link, I put together an outline for a lesson on using HIV resistance to help students better understand evolution. I'm starting now to flesh out that outline and find resources that teachers can tap in using an inquiry-based approach to teaching evolution.

In developing an inquiry, I always have to keep in mind my purpose. Maybe it's just me, but I always have to fight the tendency to drift to related science or to get lost in the evidence, forgetting my overall goal. So, I kept the following in mind as I worked:

• Lesson Purpose: Students examine evidence of the evolution of HIV in response to antiviral drugs as an example of evolution occurring in their lives right now
• Focus Question: What does the theory of evolution say?

In understanding the evidence, you and your students will probably need a big-picture understanding of HIV's genetic sequence. This one that I found is from the HIV database mentioned below, and it was a rosetta stone for me in understanding the rest of the evidence.

The source of evidence I worked with while writing the Missing Link was the research article "Mutations in Retroviral Genes Associated with Drug Resistance." The article summarizes the actual research detailing the evidence of HIV evolution at the codon level, but it is pretty technical, especially for use by secondary students. The site on which the article is posted gives other potentially good sources of evidence and resources that can be tapped for helping students understand the summary of mutations in the article.

I'm interested in the HIV Drug Resistance Database housed at Stanford University, and I'm focusing now on the portion of the site giving summaries of drug resistance. There, you and your students will find a section giving "Antiretriviral drug summaries." This seems to be a productive source for giving your students access to a high-level understanding of the clear evidence for HIV's constant and rapid mutation when it encounters drug therapy. Each of the links under that section takes you to a table giving the key mutations associated with a specific class of drug, and students can clearly see below the table the list of scientific publications from which the tables are constructed.

In the process, I stumbled on some other possibilities:

• The Geography Search Interface from HIV Databases Site gives a pretty amazing tool by which students can examine the evidence for geographical distribution of different strains of HIV worldwide. Great for visual and kinetic learners!
• If you or your students need to brush up on understanding HIV's basic structure or life cycle, a simple Google Images search gives a lot of quality images. I searched "HIV structure" and then looked at the web addresses for a sense of which ones were coming from reputable science sources. (Ok, I'll admit. Sometimes I also went for the easy stuff.)
• I just started playing with the TRIP database. I've been working at UAB's medical school for a couple of years now, and they are focusing students on evidence-based medicine (the science behind good practice). TRIP is a database of evidence-based medicine, and I got several good hits when I initially searched on HIV there. An interesting feature is that it give patient information leaflets, which might help students who are asking, "Why do we need to know this?"

My next step is to address how I would scaffold these resources differently for middle schoolers in a life science course and high schoolers in general biology. That may have to wait a couple of weeks, however. Next week looks pretty busy.

Hey, Dr. Jackson's students!

Welcome to my blog, and I'm looking forward to being with you next week (and to being back at Science Ed at UGA). Make sure you notice the labels on my blog:

• The Inquiry label lets you focus on posts I've made about inquiry itself.
• The Unbelieving Evolution label shows posts about my work on teaching evolution to religious students. (Dr. Jackson got me started on this!)
• It's not a label, but another special feature is the Links section. They're all related to inquiry, and many teachers have reported them to me as helpful.

You can post questions that you have for me here as comments, if you'd like, and you can do so anonymously.

Enjoying Lesson Development

I'm realizing how much I enjoy developing inquiry lessons. That's much of the work that I did in writing The Missing Link, but now that I'm developing other inquiries since then, I'm realizing how rewarding and meaningful the process itself is.

I think this realization began to hit when I was working on the HIV lessons that I did in July and August. Several things about the process were really good for me:

• Learning science: Inquiry often puts me in the learner mode because I'm having to think deeply about my understanding of the science involved as I try to represent it for my learners.
• Reflecting on standards: I have to often circle back to meaningful standards to make sure that I'm focusing my students on science that is meaningful to them. (Atlas for Science Literacy is my go-to set of standards.)
• Creative teaching: I love the creativity in developing good lessons. Don't all good teachers? I'm now working at a new level of creativity because I'm working to engage & sustain my students in rigorous inquiry.
• Lots of reflection: I'm always having to think deeply, either in lesson development or in teaching the lesson, about, "How is this going? Is it working? How do I know?" I enjoy that process.

Theory Supporting Inquiry

I'm leading a session this week on the topic of learning tools for a group of UAB faculty who are interested in teaching better. I wanted to refer them to some of the big ideas that support modern approaches to teaching, and as I was thinking about that, I realized that lining these approaches out for inquiry teachers would be a good as well.

(GEC Participants: Please see some comments I'm starting to post that will give you resources for specific learning tools we discussed.)

Resource	For Inquiry Teachers	For GEC Participants
How People Learn	Key Research Supporting Inquiry’s Focus on addressing student misconceptions, facts aligned with big ideas, and use of conceptual change strategies.	This is the research that framed our face-to-face session. Start at the page linked here for the key research findings, but back up to the entire document (especially chapters 2 & 5) if you want to know more.
The Private Universe and Minds of Our Own	Private Universe is a seminal video in science education because of how it communicated the prevalence and persistence of scientific misconceptions. Minds of Our Own took the same methodology and presentation style to content other than astronomy.	Assessing prior knowledge is the first step in authentic teaching and learning. These resources help you see more the power of student misconceptions by examining the blocks K-12 students face.
The 5 Elements of Cooperative Learning	Inquiry is difficult, if not impossible to accomplish, if teachers can’t manage effectively student work in small groups. Cooperative Learning, as described by the 5 Elements, defines true cooperative learning, which is very different from typical group work.	A first move many teachers make when beginning to implement authentic teaching is breaking large classes into small groups. The 5 Elements of Cooperative Learning give you a powerful way to think about how to do this successfully..
Atlas of Science Literacy (Original Version and Complete Version)	Why spend hours and hours trying to find the big ideas of science when this stellar work from Project 2061 has already done that. These maps show 100 grand ideas of science and how they should be developed across a students’ K-12 learning.	These big ideas from K-12 education give you strong examples of how big ideas can be used as a conceptual framework for learning the facts. For a different example, you may want to review UAB School of Education’s Conceptual Framework to see how we structured assessment of professional program around 11 big ideas (click the links there for rubrics).
Educating the Net Generation	Today’s K-12 students grew up with the Internet. They have no idea what life and learning are without it. This resource helps teachers understand how today’s students are different, not deficient.	Traditional-age undergrads and grads are used to learning with the WWW at their fingertips. The Introduction from this resources gives you powerful ways to understand these students, the challenges they face, and the strengths they bring to the learning environment.
Other Inquiry Resources	I’m always collecting inquiry resources and posting them to this page. The first part of the page gives curriculum resources; the second give more general resources.	Inquiry is a model of authentic learning specific to science instruction. If you’re interested in learning more, start with the 5 Essential Features of Inquiry.

It's Here!

One of the cool things about working with Heinemann press is how well they care for their authors. One of those is their neat tradition of overnighting one of the first books of the press to the author. I got mine on Tuesday! (See more book details at Heinemann's site or on Amazon.)

"Managing the Conflict..." online

Just found out that an earlier paper I had written on evolution is available on-line. It's "Managing the Conflict Between Evolution & Religion," and it appeared in 2000 in the American Biology Teacher. David Jackson and Liz Doster were my co-authors on the paper.

615 network forum: Details for 7/28

Below are the details on our next networking forum. Please let me know any questions or comments you have. You know how bad I am with details; so, watch for a "Final Details" post that clarifies any issues I've missed.

Date: Tuesday, July 28
Time: 9:00 a.m. - 3:00 p.m.
Location: The Oak Mountain Interpretive Center at Oak Mountain State Park
Cost: $3 (to cover your park admission)

Topic: Starting the Year Off with Inquiry

What to bring:

• Lunch
• Drinks for the day
• paper & pen
• USB drive (optional)

What to expect:

• A nice preview of the Oak Mountain Interpretive Center and information on how you can tap this resource in your teaching.
• Good, practical tips that will help you get your school year started right.
• A chance to connect with old friends from UAB. A chance to make new friends from some of the area's best science teachers.
• Help in improving your teaching, including professional development that moves you closer to achieving National Boards in science.

What do I need to do in advance:

• RSVP, if at all possible, just so PLM knows a general sense of how many are coming. Making a quick comment here is all you need to do, or you can send him an e-mail.
• Check in with your UAB friends to make sure that they've gotten the information about this session. (Many of them have disappeared from PLM's list.)
• Let PLM know if you want to bring a teacher who isn't part of the 615 network. They're welcome, as long as there's enough room.

Special notes about getting to the Interpretive Center:

• You can enter the park from the main gate or from the back gate (off Highway 119 just west of Oak Mountain Middle School).
• Don't speed in the park! They'll pull you over.
• Signs clearly lead you to the Interpretive Center. It's located by the Alabama Wildlife Center across from the main lake in the center of the park.

My Sabbatical Story

I sometimes have teachers ask me about the year I spent back in the classroom learning to teach inquiry first-hand. I had the privilege of writing the lead-off chapter in a new book from NSTA Press entitled Reforming Secondary Science Instruction, and the chapter itself is currently available from NSTA free of charge. Clicking the title of the post should take you to the chapter download, or go to the NSTA store and search "reforming secondary science". The title of my chapter is "Change in Secondary Science Settings: A Voice from the Field." Please let me know what you think.

Starting the Year with Inquiry

In June, I had the privilege of working with teachers in my father's home town of Lexington, TN. They were a privilege to work with as they were trying to wrap their heads around all of the issues involved in getting started with inquiry. Toward the end of the day, I walked them through the key issues involved with starting the school year off with inquiry, and since this topic has been on my mind, I snapped some pictures of the white board with my iPhone, and I wanted to post the discussion here.


We were focusing on their potential use of FOSS kits, and of course, we had to talk about how to prep before the year starts. The image shows several of the items that we came up with. They seemed a little overwhelmed with the list, but as I drove home I realized that any teachers has to do some sort of unpacking and poking around in a new curriculum. Inquiry adds the dimension, though, of materials management and the need to work through labs. I focused them on doing this for the first kit only, though. For any teacher, I would think they'd only want to look at the first unit of instruction, reserving prep on the later units (or kits) for after the first one is finished. You learn so much while you teach your first inquiry-based unit that I'm afraid that prepping the other units before the school year starts might be a waste of time.


We then focused a lot on the first days of instruction. The image talks about the first day, but really these are issues to be addressed during the first week. A lot of key issues need to be addressed in the first weeks as teachers help their students learn how to learn in an inquiry-centered classroom. The more we talked about all of these issues, the more I began to realize again how important training is for the students. They really often don't know how to work during inquiry, and one of my key mistakes at Spain Park High was not guiding my students well at the beginning of the school year. Instead, I just through them in and expected them to be able to learn. They were really frustrated!


We then talked about what happens in the next 3 weeks of inquiry. The kids have gotten started, but they still need a lot of training if they're going to be get off to a good start as they head into a year of learning from inquiry. That's what the "requires time" note in brown marker at the top indicates. Teachers need to take the time to continue training students in the key aspects of inquiry, and at times, this will feel like time away from teaching the actual content. Think of it as an investments, though. The time you invest at this point in training the students will be returned back to you richly as your students know how to learn in later months and are not frustrated, confused, or disengaged.


The rest of the first kit or unit continues with the teachers holding students to their expectations, as indicated in the image above. As this unit wraps up, the students should know your expectations and how to function correctly in the classroom. You also have the other systems that support inquiry functioning, especially materials management and assessment. By the end of the first unit, the classroom should be in order.



Now, you've finished the first unit (or kit). As the image shows, one of the key things you need to do is to breathe! Youv'e learned a lot about teaching by inquiry, and your students have learned a lot about being inquiry students. Everyone is probably a little weary of all the change! Don't be afraid to take a few class days off from inquiry before going into the next unit. This is a good time to address any standards that you know you won't cover in your inquiry-centered curriculum doesn't cover. It's also a good time to retrain or reteach students on your expectations so that they're crystal clear as you go into your next unit.


The final issue is areas to focus on while teaching the second unit. The image gives several, including having students working in new groups. The key issue to me is improving student understanding of the science itself. Don't let all of the action and process of inquiry steal focus from students actually building strong, deep content knowledge. Also, don't forget to keep communicating with parents. Throughout your start-up of inquiry, keeping clear communication lines open with them will help them understand what's going on in your science class and how it truly is a benefit to their children.

Book Update

Just in case you've missed the Twitter feed updates, I just finished the copy edits. The next step is the page edits in June, and then I'm finished with my work. The Missing Link: An Inquiry Based Approach for Teaching All Students About Evolution should be out in September.

Inquiry Follow-Up from NSTA

If you attended my session on the Evidence for Inquiry, make sure to explore the links to the left. The "Evidence 4 Inquiry" link takes you to the website I showed during the presentation, but the other two links may be interesting to you as well. Please let me know any questions or comments you have. You can e-mail by clicking on my picture and then on the e-mail link under the Contact section. You can make a comment (including an anonymous one) here by clicking the word "comments" directly below. I look forward to hearing from you.

NSTA Evolution Follow-up

Thanks to all of you brave souls who came out at 5:00 p.m. on Saturday afternoon for us to put our heads together on teaching evolution to religious students. I appreciated so much how we were able to talk, but not argue, about this tough issue. You can find additional information about the topic here on my blog, and the easiest way to do so is to click "UNBelieving Evolution" on the left under the Labels heading. Then, the blog will display only the posts associated with teaching evolution.

Please let me know any questions or comments you have. You can e-mail by clicking on my picture and then on the e-mail link under the Contact section. You can make a comment (including an anonymous one) here by clicking the word "comments" directly below. I look forward to hearing from you.

New Orleans Bound!

Please let me know if you'll be in New Orleans for NSTA. I'm planning to arrive on Thursday.

Manuscript submitted!

Got the manuscript on the book submitted on Friday. I'm really excited! I had no idea, though, how consuming the last month of work would be.

Here's the basic outline, by chapter title.

Introduction
Framing the Issues
Deciding the Focus of Your Unit
Engaging Students in Studying Evolution
Guiding Students to Examine the Evidence for Evolution
Guiding Students to Examine Evolution Itself
Deepening Student Understanding & Addressing Objections
Using Project-Based Learning to Solidify Student Understanding
Conclusion
Help! I’m a Biology Teacher, and I Don’t Think I Understand Evolution Myself! (Appendix)

I'm hoping, after a couple of week of decompressing, to start blogging on the UNBelieve approach again. Lots has gone on in my head as I've finalized the manuscript.

(The picture is my favorite Caffeine Delivery System when writing. The red gizmo is a moka, which is an Italian stovetop espresso maker.)

(Oh yeah, my brain is numb!)

Book Update

I've been swamped with UAB work since Thanksgiving, and I haven't been able to get any work on the book done. I'm sitting down today to write, though, and I'm glad to be getting back into it.

I've finished the first draft of the core 7 chapters; so, here's the plan:


-Work back through chapters 1-7, tightening them up and making sure the message is coherent. I've been working on these chapters across a full year now; so, I know some of the things that I wrote in the earlier chapters isn't consistent with my message now.

-Write the introductory chapter and the concluding chapter.

-Finalize Appendix 1, which is chiefly the resources I'm pointing teachers to.

-If time, write a new Appendix 2, which will be on the pedagogy model I'm employing in the book. I'm calling that the Spain Park Model, and it's the graphic included here in the post. Click the title of this post to take you to a PDF of the graphic.

-Submit the manuscript by my deadline of Feb 1. Heinemann says it will be out by this time next year.

Peculiar Comfort

When people find out I'm writing a book, they of course ask, "What's it on?". Almost every time I tell them the topic, there's this really awkward pause. Then, I fumble out some even more awkward explanation of what I'm trying to do and why. Usually, the more I say the worse it gets. Often during those times, I wonder why I'm doing it. A couple of weeks ago, though, the voice of Martin Luther of all people really helped me.

Charlie and Ruth Jones are actors who perform at our church regularly. They make up the group Peculiar People. They came the Sunday after Reformation Day and performed their show on the life of Martin Luther. Of course, Luther's experiences leading the Reformation caught the attention of this reformer. But, the climax of the show was what helped me make some sense of why I'm writing this book. As Luther stood before the court, being asked to recant his life's work, he said, "Here I stand; I can do no other. God help me."

That's really where I am with writing this book. I can do no other. I may be so off track with what I'm doing, and I may be deeply in sin. If so, then may God have mercy on my soul. I can do no other, though. Children are leaving their faith because of how evolution is being taught, and it doesn't have to be that way. Evolution doesn't tell us that there is no God and that all things spiritual are foolish. Some look a the evidence and see that, but many, many scientists look at the evidence and see the supernatural at work.

Thanks, Charlie and Ruth. You brought Luther to life in such a way that he has encouraged me to simply stand, as he did. I have no idea what will come of this book I'm writing; it may end up making no difference at all. But, I'm encouraged again to "never give in, never, never, never, never," as Mr. Churchill said.

Orlando High School Follow-Up

Orlando High School Science Teachers:

It was great being with you on Wednesday, and I hope the What and the Why of Inquiry was helpful to you as you think about how to strengthen the use of inquiry in your classes. Many of you seemed to be interested in the connections between inquiry and improved ACT scores. Click the title of this post to see the ACT's College Readiness Standards; you'll see the document that I popped up on the LCD.

Use the comment button below to let me know any questions or comments you have about our time together, and I look forward to the next time we get a chance to work on inquiry again.

plm

Elsewhere

I'm still working on the book, but I've had to focus elsewhere for a couple of weeks. I'm going up from promotion to full professor this year, and the first set of my review materials was due this week. I'm in the home stretch, though, of the book, and plan to get back to writing in the week ahead and having the first draft of the main chapters done by Thanksgiving.

#1 in Google???

I was looking for something, and of course did a Google search. My search query was "nsta presentation." I was a little discombobulated when one of my own blog posts got returned by Google as top on the search list. And oddly, it was one of my obscure blog posts too, the one from March 28, 2007, when I was simply letting people know when my NSTA presentations were.

Makes me wonder how Google does its magic???

A little housekeeping

If you're following my blogs on the book I'm writing, you'll see that I've changed the label on those posts from "Hearts&Minds" to "UNBelieve". I've been looking for a new way to refer to my work on this because I want to honor David Jackson's leadership on the original "Hearts & Minds" article by leaving that phrase to his use. I haven't really found a key word for my focus, though, until UNBelieve just came into focus. I'll probably tweak that term some in the weeks and months ahead, but it seems to represent well what I'm trying to do.

UNBelieve Reflections

I've been pondering the session I lead on teaching evolution this week at ASTA. In writing this book, I find that I have to think a lot about my message, both what it is and how I can communicate it effectively. Live presentations are good opportunities to test out that message.

One thing that I blatantly tried to do this time was to push forward my central message about students understanding, but not believing, evolution. I think I've mentioned earlier here how in writing that message has become my focus. The ASTA session seemed to work well with consistently bringing everything back to this message and making it the chief take-away for my participants. Science teachers must teach evolution, and they should teach it in a way that all students, even religious students, understand evolution. They should not teach evolution, however, with a goal of getting religious students to believe that evolution really happened.

Am I on thin ice here? Can students really understand evolution without believing it? I'm thinking they can. For some religious students, I would think that it's major progress if they simply had a basic knowledge of what evolution is and a sense that clear scientific evidence exists for it working around them and in the history of the earth. I'd be OK even if they didn't believe in evolution itself or even believe in the evidence that they saw. I also know that students from some religions, such as Christian fundamentalism, would encounter significant difficulties learning about evolution at even that basic level. 

Believing that evolution occurred at any level beyond natural selection is going to be a major stretch for many religious students. They've been taught to believe in creation, and they just will not believe that life evolved. They won't believe that it evolved by itself, because of their belief in supernatural creation, but I'm beginning to see that they won't even believe that evolution was the mechanism of special creation (i.e., that God created by evolution). Their faith tells differently, and believing the scientific worldview in this instance is going to be pretty much impossible for them.

So, we're back to understanding evolution, but not believing it occurred, as the goal of evolution education. And, I'm OK with that goal. I don't think it's undercutting science education because it at least lets students enter into the study of evolution at some level without creating a science classroom where they feel like they can't learn about evolution at all. As the teacher blatantly says, "I don't expect you to believe this," the students know that their faith isn't threatened. I'm hoping that having that security gives them the freedom to look more at the evidence for evolution and the way the theory explains the evidence.

Please let me know any thoughts you have on that message, especially holes that you see in it. More and more I'm focusing on "Understanding Not Believing." So, I guess I'm pitching the idea that we need to U.N.Believe (un-believe) the evolution curriculum.

ASTA Evolution Follow-Up

Thanks to all of you who attended the session on teaching evolution to religious students. I hope the message of guiding theistic students to understand, but not believe, evolution was helpful to you. 

The handout I promised is linked to the title of this post. Click the title and it will take you to my public website, where you'll see the handout that you can download. If you're a PC user, please see the note there about possible needing to right-click the file to get it to download.

Please let me know any questions or comments you have about the session. You can click on the word "comments" below to reply back here. Also, if you want to see previous posts here about teaching evolution, you can click on the word "heartsNminds" under the Labels section to the left of this post, and the site will show you only blog posts related to the topic.

ASTA Inquiry Follow-Up

Thanks to all of you who attended Inquiry: What & Why. I look forward to hearing from you any questions or comments you have on the session. To reply, just click on the word "comments" directly below. 

ASTA

I'm looking forward to seeing the Alabama crew at ASTA this week. I'll be there on Wednesday, and I'll be presenting 2 sessions:

• At 10:30, I'll be presenting on teaching evolution to religious kids. This is the session I've done in the past on the topic, but I've updated it some to include the big ideas that I'm covering in the book.
  
• At 2:00, I'll present on the what and the why of inquiry. This is the same session on inquiry I've done several times, and if you heard it before, there's not a lot that's new. Feel free to come, though, especially if you want to share what's working on inquiry in your classroom.

Other than that, I'll just be hanging out and looking forward to catching up with you.  

Science Notebook Tips, á la Susie Q

Susie Quillan is a science teacher extraordinaire in the Orlando area, and she has posted some really top-notch tips about science notebooking. She's new to blogging, but I betcha her blog is one to watch. (Thanks, Leyla, for the lead on Susie's blog.)

A Dialogue on Genesis

A few weeks back, I posted a Facebook note explaining the basic idea of my book. Some people there had asked about it, and I wanted to have a summary available for them. A guy I know named Dave saw the note, made a comment, and that turned into a back-and-forth dialogue between him and me. With Dave's permission, I'm posting our conversation. One of the commentators here, Chris, also joins in the dialogue. (If you're a Facebook user, you should be able to click the title of this post and go to the original conversation.)

Dave: 

Chris Morrow has told me a lot about your book, and on a recent trip to North Carolina, the two of us had a very long discussion about evolution vs. creation (or to be more specific, perhaps I should say theistic evolution vs. spontaneous creation).

The difficulty I keep coming back to is twofold--one are the events of Genesis, which I just can't see how they would ever be meant to be taken metaphorically--and the other is the soul. I just don't see how a soul could evolve.

At this point, I'm afraid that if I became convinced that evolution was real, I would end up being an atheist, or at best, an agnostic.

Can you help me out here?

Lee:

I think I understand completely your confusion and questions. The kind of concerns that you express are ones that so many people face when they think about evolution, and in my book I hope to help science teachers address evolution with grace so that students who feel your concerns aren't afraid of evolution.

I do think that Genesis 1-3 is not literal, but it is true. The Song of Solomon is clearly poetic, not literal, and Genesis 1-3 read to me more like an artistic perspective than a scientific one. An obvious indicator of that is how the creation story is told 3 different times and in 3 different ways in those chapters.

I don't believe, though, that the soul evolved. God breathed life into us to make us human, whether he created our bodies with a zap from dust or via millions of years of evolution, like the fossil evidence seems to say.

P.S. Accepting evolution as God's mechanism for creating life doesn't force someone into atheism. I'm becoming more and more convinced that the scientific evidence is piling up about how life evolved, but that in no way convinces me that life evolved on its on. I just don't think the amazing wonder and beauty we see around us was a cosmic accident.

Dave:

What's the whole point of the Adam and Eve story, though? If it's meant to be metaphorical, are we to assume that Adam and Eve never really existed? And if so, then why is Adam included in the geneeology? What's the meaning of their story? These are the things I can't get past. I might be able to accept that God created the rest of the world through evolution but then spontaneously created Adam and Eve. But if Adam and Eve are a myth, I don't know that I can take any of the Bible at face value.

Lee:

I think Adam & Eve were real people.

Dave:

Do you think they were the only two people on Earth at the time, or do you think they were just two of many?

Lee:

Probably the only two on earth at the time (as far as really human, in the sense that God had breathed a soul into them), but I'm pretty murky on all of these details. I need to look into all of that more. The real push on all of this for Christians, though, is the wealth of scientific evidence about pre-human species. The fossil record is pretty clear about human-like species being on the earth.

Dave:

I see. So theoretically, there could be a scenario where we have a bunch of sub-human neanderthals running about, but Adam and Eve are the only truly human people? Interesting.

It would be a lot easier for me to deal with the "days" of Genesis one being eons and animal and plant life evolving on Earth. It's human evolution where everything breaks down for me.

Lee:

I think a lot of people are like you--human evolution is the biggest problem they have with evolution. I was the same way up until a few months ago when I started looking at the fossil evidence. (It all started with a chance/Providential visit to Lucy's bones at the Houston Museum of Natural Science. ) I begin to realize that there was a lot more fossil evidence for human evolution than I had ever realized.

Chris Morrow (adding his perspective):

Lee, this question about Adam and Eve is a tough one. I really don't have a problem with evolution when it comes to my faith. I think Genesis 1 reflects evolution metaphorically. Simpler forms of life come on the scene first followed more complex ones.

The hard part is the intersection point where scripture picks up the literal story humans, the lives of Adam and Eve. From the viewpoint of a Christian-theistic evolution person like me, our family tree bottlenecks at Adam and Eve. Now-a-days, that would cause a whole bunch of genetic defects for latter generations. Were genetic conditions different back then?

Although evolution sits well with my faith, the story of Adam and Eve in time and space does not.

Dave:

So now the question becomes, did Adam and Eve arrive on the scene via the evolutionary ladder, or did God create them spontaneously? I would tend towards the latter, as the Genesis account describes God creating them separately, making Eve out of Adam for a help-mate. Did God then plop them down in the middle of Eden, away from all the mindless neanderthals running about?

Lee:

Looks like we're ending this in questions, which is really where I am now. I don't have a nice, neat package for how it all fits together, but I think that's part of what it means to walk by faith and not by sight.

Understanding vs. Believing

A long time ago, my democratic/Yankee/agnostic/liberal good friend David Jackson talked about how he wanted fundamentalist kids to understand evolution but not believe it. I'm wondering if that should be my message to teachers, and I would appreciate feedback on the idea.

I've been searching for a central message. People ask me about my book, and after a couple of minutes of me talking, their eyes usually glaze over. I know that this is a tough topic, and I know it's threatening to a lot of people. That's one reason why I'm looking for a nice, terse message. I like elevator statements, and I've been trying different ones out when people ask about how the book is going. None of my messages have worked well thus far. Maybe this one will.

I've always admired David for how his goal of understanding, but not believing, didn't require religious students to change their core beliefs. He has always been very strong about how belief change is the wrong thing for a science teacher to target. Coming from someone who trained under Stephen J. Gould, his sensitivity on this point is something I really appreciate, and it's something that surprises people when I tell them about David's worldview. Until now, though, I've wanted more for religious students. I know that a disbelief in evolution will hamper future biologists and geologists; they have to be able to work within those fields where evolution is treated as fact. Although I still see that believing may be important for future scientists, I'm now realizing David's wisdom when we're talking about teaching all the students in a classroom.

I think this message could bring a lot of clarity to science teachers and to students studying evolution. What's the goal? Students need to see the evidence for evolution and understand where it came from and why it's reliable. Students need to understand how scientists explain the evidence using the theory of evolution as a natural explanation of how life on Earth came to be. If all students in a biology class understood those two things, the evidence for and the scientific explanation of evolution, I would think their teacher had worked a miracle!

They wouldn't have to believe that life evolved on Earth without supernatural intervention. They wouldn't have to believe in macroevolution. They wouldn't have to even believe all of the evidence they had seen in the unit. If they stayed engaged in learning, realized that evidence for evolution exists, and that scientists explain the evidence without using religious arguments, that would be very successful teaching of evolution in classes with religious kids. 

So, I'm really liking this message. "What's your book about, Lee?" Well, it's about teaching evolution so that religious kids understand it, but don't have to believe it.

HIV macroevolution?

I'm still thinking about the objection I wrote about in my recent T-Rex to Tweety post. It's the concern that many people, religious or not, raise along the lines of, "I don't buy evolution because I don't see it happening around me." As I was doing research for chapter 5 of the book, I began seeing the emergence of HIV as an example of macroevolution at work. I'm wondering, though, if I'm off base on this, and I would appreciate any input you can give.

From the research I've done, I've learned that HIV developed from SIV, a non-fatal disease affecting mainly chimps in Africa. In that part of Africa, humans eat chimps; so, that's the probable pathway of the virus into humans. But, the virus had to mutate so that it could infect humans, and in doing so, it also became lethal. Several descriptions of this process can be found on-line, but one I've been using recently is "The origin of AIDS and HIV and the first cases of AIDS". (It's posted by an advocacy organization, but I think they got the basic facts correct.) The thing I like about the page is how it is referenced with scientific articles; so, they're tying down their explanation with actual science.

But, is this a good example of macroscopic evolution? Am I ok in saying that this is evolution from one kind to another? As I look at it, it's an example right in front of our eyes of a virus becoming significantly different, but would people say that it's actually microevolution because it's still a virus, similar to Darwin's finches still being finches after thousands of years of evolution?

South Sound Laser Teachers--Look here!

Click the title of this post to get to the article giving the background of the Spain Park Model, or copy and paste the URL below into your browser:

http://homepage.mac.com/lmeadows/FileSharing14.html

From T-Rex to Tweety?

One objection to evolution that I hear among my friends (mostly white, mostly middle class, mostly Christian) runs something like this: "I don't have any problems with microevolution. The Creator would have to make animals so that they can adapt. What I do have problems with is evolution from one species to another. I mean, that's just impossible. Look around. You don't see birds turning into monkeys or dogs turning into elephants. It just doesn't happen."

I've been pondering that objection and how to answer it from the scientific evidence, and I've come up with an angle. I'll be interested in feedback on this approach, especially since I'm at the point in the book where I'm going to need to address this issue. My answer to that objection, however, has to do with the massive amounts of time involved in evolution. I know that's a mind-bender for many Christians who come from a young-earth viewpoint. I wonder if time causes the same issue for people form other religions.

To understand how new species develop, I had to look back to the past. You can't look around now. Our short lives (75 or so years) and our short human history (3000-4000 years) don't stretch long enough to see speciation occurring in any way that we will ever be able to say, "Oh, I see a new species over there." Instead, we have to look back over the fossil record to see large periods of time when new species are evolving.

An example of this would be to look back at the end of the dinosaur age to see how animals very different than the dinosaurs evolved from them. As best I understand, it goes something like this: During the time of the dinosaurs, they evolved until they were many kinds of dinosaurs roaming around. One group was the maniraptors, whose wrists were different than those of other dinosaurs. Over a long period of time, this group of dinosaurs got more varied. The fossil record shows that it included Velociraptors and their relatives (of Jurassic Park fame), Oviraptors (who took care of their eggs), the group called Troodontidae (thought to be pretty dang smart for a dinosaur), and birds. That last word, "birds," may be surprising to you. It was to me as I did the research to write this post. I didn't realize that birds were classified right there as members of the dinosaur family. (If you want to know more, take a look at the page on Coelurosauria in the Tree of Life project. That website can be a little tricky to learn how to move around. Make sure to see the "Containing Group" link below the list of species. It's what lets you go backwards, that is earlier along the fossil record.) And, if you look at Birds (technically Aves from the Latin), you'll see that they contain Archaeopteryx, which most people think of as a dinosaur.


So what? Well, back to the original objection. "I've never seen animals evolve!" If I'm reading the fossil record right, here's a time where we see one animal evolving into a very different one. A dinosaur became a bird!

But, the clever reader will realize that the statement I just made--dinosaurs becoming birds--is the wrong way to state it. That's not really what happened at all, according to the fossil record. During the millions and millions of years that dinosaurs were on the earth, they evolved into a huge variety. One small group out of this was what we think of as birds. And, natural selection kicked in here at the end of the age of dinosaurs. When whatever happened to wipe out the dinosaurs occurred, the early birds were different enough that they were able to survive under the new conditions and begin to evolve into the vast variety of birds we have today.

Does that make any sense? The way I see it is that we'll never actually see the macroevolution that many people object to because we live such short lives. But, if we look back over the fossil record, we can see species change into totally different kinds. I don't really expect religious kids to believe that this is how the Creator made birds, but I do want them to see how science explains the fossil record.

By the way, if you want a little challenge, try using the Tree of Life to trace Mammals (i.e. Mammalia) back to find out when they and the dinosaurs diverged from each other. I'll give you a hint--what fluid surrounds a baby during pregnancy? If you find the answer, you should also see where turtles and reptiles split off.

(The T-Rex skull is from the collection of the Lawrence Hall of Science. I took the picture.)

Moving slow

My wife and I have both been under the weather over the past couple of weeks; so, I'm moving slow on writing and blogging. I appreciate your patience, and I hope to pick the pace back up soon.

Stay Tuned...

This note gives the last of the Puerto Rico thoughts, but I'm brain-dead after 2 days of writing. I'll get back to this as soon as I can, but maybe you can make some sense of it on your own. (BTW, do people still know today what "Stay Tuned" means, or am I just a relic?)

A Heart Issue

I thought a lot about wonder and awe in Puerto Rico. The beaches of Vieques were truly beautiful, and each had a unique beauty that made them together almost a wonderland. Walking in the Il Yunque rainforest was just as amazing. The first picture here captures some of that majesty. Please don't miss the scale of these plants. They were huge! (The second picture may help you with the scale. If you look in the lower right hand corner, you'll see my wife just walking into view. And she wants to make sure that you all know she's not tall!)

Wonder and awe, for me, is a heart issue. The creation calls out to my heart, "There's a Creator." I know my Christian beliefs do impact what I hear, but it's really the other way around. One of my foundational reasons for being a Christian is because the wonder and awe of creation tells me that there must be a God. "He is here," as C.S. Lewis says. (The second part of Dr. Lewis's quote, the "and He has spoken" is something creation can't do fully.) 

I know, though, that many people who are not religious still sense the wonder and awe of creation. I hear it in things agonstic scientists write about the beauty of the world. I see it in the way non-religious people fight valiantly to preserve the environment. So many of us on both sides of the origins issue see the incredible beauty of this planet, and we're moved deeply by it.

To me, this is the problem with scientific materialism. Dawkins and others out on one end of the argument want to use evolution like a club to beat religion out of our brains. They talk about how science makes it perfectly obvious that the Earth evolved to its present state without a god intervening. But, scientific materialists are missing the heart issue of wonder and awe. Even many non-religious people lift their heads up, look at the beauty all around them, and think to themselves, "There's more." They may not be able to identify it, but they know there's something more than natural processes at work. This Earth is just too amazing! So, I think the question of "How?" just seamlessly morphs into "Who?" for many of us.

Ah...labels!

I just realized what labels are for in creating blog posts, and I'm starting to use them. The main labels I'll use right now are "heartsNminds" for posts about teaching evolution and "inquiry" for posts on that subject. I hope the labeling helps you find more easily the topics that you're interested in.

Oh yeah...gotta back it up!

Almost lost a day of writing. I started to work on the current chapter, and realized the last day of my writing was missing! Thankfully, I had made a second backup to a thumb drive. My original copy and first back up had failed.

Would it matter?

David and I were talking when we were in Puerto Rico, and we had walked passed the waterfall in the picture. A question he asked got me thinking about young earth creationism. I'd phrase the question as, "If God used evolution to create the earth, but in 6, 24-hour periods, how would we know? Would the scientific evidence show anything different than the 6 billion year history that science talks about?"

Unless I'm way out to lunch on that question, then I'm thinking that the process is the key issue, not the time involved. The real question is the mechanism of creation, not the time involved. So, did God create with a magical zap where things appeared out of thin air? That's the general gist of the way I viewed creation when I was young-earth in my thinking. Or, did he create via the process of developing life slowly and methodically via evolution, with steps indicated by scientific evidence?

If I'm on to anything here, then we should shift the discussion from "How long?" to "How?". "How long?" is a dead end discussion anyway. We've not gotten any closer to resolving that conflict over the past 160 years, and I don't see anything on the horizon that will make resolution any easier. But, the discussion of "How" might be more productive.

Please help me out here with your thoughts. I've got more thoughts from the Puerto Rico trip, including questions about the role of awe and wonder, but I'll hold off on those until we kick the current question around some.

Coming Soon

Been on vacation in Puerto Rico. The beauty of the island of Vieques and the rain forest on the main island have me thinking a lot about evolution. Watch for a post over the next week or so...

Hey, Orlando Teachers!!!

Click the link above to take you directly to the page at which you can download the Spain Park Model article. My internet connection is being kind of goofy right now; so, if the article doesn't appear there, please check back later. I'll try to have it up by 6:00 p.m.

Or, try the link below. (You may have to cut and paste it into your browser.)

http://homepage.mac.com/lmeadows/SpainParkModel.pdf

Ostriches and Flat-Earthers

I'm deep in the weeds of understanding the evidence for evolution, and there's a lot of it out there. (Actually, a lot of it is available on-line! Maybe I'll try to catalog what I'm finding somehow.) All the evidence has me thinking about how I have probably been an ostrich regarding all of the evidence. I've had my head stuck in the sand, and I'm beginning to realize why many non-religious scientists get so frustrated with Creationists. With all of the evidence for evolution out there, it's like we're a bunch of Flat Earthers.

My son passed me a link to the Flat Earth society. I'm not sure how he found it, but he's good with technology like that. He didn't even know I was thinking about ostriches and flat earthers. Click on the header of this post, if you have a moment, and take a look at what they say and believe. Honestly, they sound so wacko that I can't tell if it's a joke or not! Are there really people today who believe that the Earth is really flat?

We all look down on Flat Earthers. "How dumb?". "Who would believe that in this day and age?". "Don't they know anything about science!". Now, though, I'm really seeing Creationist views from the other side. People who know the evidence for evolution have to be just as dumfounded about the statement, "I don't believe in evolution," as we all are about, "The Earth is really flat."

I'm a little scared of what I'm learning about evolution. It challenges my understanding of Genesis 1, and of course, that cracks the door to challenges to my understanding of all of Scripture. I don't want to be an ostrich, though. I really don't want to keep my head in the sand anymore. I want to know. My faith tells me that the truth really will make me free, and I don't want to be afraid anymore.

Scared of evolution?

I've been working on the appendix of my book, where I'll try to pose an answer to, "Help! I'm a biology teacher, and I really don't understand evolution myself!". I've spent the last couple of days searching out resources that show the actual evidence for evolution, and I've found a lot of great websites. (I'm excited about that so that I can point teachers to free, on-line resources.) A question keeps plaguing me in the back of my mind, though, as I've been working. What are we afraid of?

I keep seeing all of this evidence, and the amount of evidence just keeps piling up across the decades. I guess paleontology is like that, huh? The more they work, the more bones they have. I'm realizing how much I've been afraid of evolution and how I've looked away from the evidence. Now, in the strength of the gospel, I realize that I don't have to be afraid of what's buried in the ground and where the bones lead us. I'm also seeing how radiometric dating is good science, and when it says that Lucy was 3.2 million years ago, that's as trustworthy as pretty much any other scientific explanation. But, of course, pre-humans from 3.2 million years ago doesn't fit well with most sermons on Genesis 1!

So, as I do all this research, I'm wondering what we're scared of. ("We" means those of us who are religious and either intimidated by, skeptical of, or even antagonistic to evolution.) Of course, I know that there's this big war going on out there between the scientific materialists and the creationists, but I'm not really focusing on that. That war is much more political than it is about the facts. I'm talking about the deeper question of why we're scared that science says something that seems to contradict Scripture. So what? Why does that bother us so much? Why don't we simply say, "Oh, that's evolution. OK," and move on without getting in a tizzy. That's the kind of stance I'm taking in this research, but I guess I'm too close to the issue to know why it's so intimidating for other people. Maybe some of you can help me out in understanding what we're so afraid of.

Boston NSTA '08 Follow-Up (Teaching Evolution to Religious Students)

I appreciate the time those of you took to attend my session at NSTA's national convention in Boston. Please let me know any thoughts or questions you have on the session by making a comment here.

Believing Scientists?!?

So, I'm off on an new adventure, and I think I'll be blogging about it in the months ahead. I just got my first book contract! It's on teaching evolution to religious students. I know, I know, I'm always picking the easy battles, right? Why don't I take on some big, important controversy, huh?

In doing research for the book, I ran across "Science, Evolution, and Creationism" from the National Academy of Science, and I've linked it here. Page 15 from the document really caught my attention:

"Scientists, like people in other professions, hold a wide range of positions about religion and the role of supernatural forces or entities in the universe. Some adhere to a position known as scientism, which holds that the methods of science alone are sufficient for discovering everything there is to know about the universe. Others ascribe to an idea known as deism, which posits that God created all things and set the universe in motion but no longer actively directs physical phenomena. Others are theists, who believe that God actively intervenes in the world."

I don't think I've ever seen such a clear statement from such a reputable source that people like me, who believe that God is working in the world today, have a place in science. i wish more people understand this view, including scientists like Richard Dawkins, author of The God Delusion, who use the bully pulpit of science to make it seem like theists have no place in science.

Demo by video?

So, I'm having to do a presentation at a conference next week, and I don't have time to do the demo I wanted. (Also, I don't want to have to take equipment on the road.) I'm wondering if a video is as good as a live experiment. For example, does the video here grab you. It grabs me, but I've done a similar experiment for my students live, and I watched the impact. I can't imagine the video having the same impact.

Teaching Today's Students

One of the technology coordinators from Hoover City Schools showed me this video. It really has me pondering how today's students are aliens to traditional teaching.

NSTA Birmingham Follow-Up

Wow! I can't believe that it's been two weeks since the B'ham conference, and I'm just now getting a chance to post this follow-up thread. Please let me know any questions or comments you have, and thanks for coming by my session.

Birmingham: Be There!

I hope some of you are coming to my home town this week for the Regional NSTA convention. If you are, please look me up. I'll be presenting at the following times, and I would welcome you to attend or to catch me before or after so that we can visit for a bit.

Thursday, 12:30 p.m. Talking About Evolution so Fundamentalist Students Will Listen Sheraton Ballroom IX

Friday, 2:00 p.m. Inquiry: What & Why Sheraton Ballroom IX

(I also be doing a few presentations for It's About Time Publishing on Thursday afternoon in the East Meeting Room D of the Convention Center.) I look forward to catching up with old friends!

Teaching Evolution Follow-Up (NSTA Detroit)

Thanks to all of you who attended my session on teaching evolution to fundamentalists students. I was deeply impressed by the tone with which you approached the discussion. I'm always afraid that the discussion will become a fight, and to me, that's a total lost. I appreciated your questions and comments, and I look forward to hearing more.

I'll be happy to field here any questions that you have. Please simply post a comment and check back later for my response. Also, feel free to share any resources that you think others might find useful in their teaching. This is a tough topic, but I'm becoming more and more hopeful that it's something that we can do and do well.

Inquiry: What & Why Follow-Up (NSTA Detroit & Denver)

Thanks to all of you who joined me for the sessions on the What and Why of Inquiry. I hope the connection between the changes in today's workforce helped you see better the rationale for adopting inquiry so that your students are ready for life in work in a global economy. Also, I hope the 5 Essential Features of inquiry helped you better understand what inquiry is and how to begin adopting it in your classroom. (If you'll clink the link embedded in the title of this post, it will take you directly to the chapter that describes the 5 Essential Features. Hope that helps.)

Please let me know any questions or comments you have about the presentation. I look forward to hearing from you and providing any additional resources that I can.

NSTA folllow-up soon

Thanks to all of you who attended my presentations at NSTA. Like you probably, I'm trying to get back in the swing of things at work after being away. I hope to have those follow-up posts I promised up by Wednesday.

Detroit Bound!

Please let me know if you'll be at the NSTA Regional Convention in Detroit. I'll be there Thursday-Saturday, and I'd enjoy catching up with you. On Friday, I present "Talking About Evolution So Fundamentalist Students Will Listen" at 9:30 a.m. in Cobo Center W2-61. On Saturday at 8:00 a.m., I present "Inquiry: What & Why" in Cobo Center W2-66. Please let me know if you have questions on those sessions or if you're presenting. I'm looking for good sessions to attend.

Hearts & Minds

Many, many thanks to all of you who participated in the Friday, 12:30 p.m., session on teaching evolution to religious fundamentalists. I appreciate the sensitivity and honesty you brought to our discussion. (And, you didn't eat me! I'm not sure why I was so nervous, but I really was. Thanks for your kindness.)

Thanks to Don, one of the participants, for the information from AAAS that I've linked here. A couple of people mentioned other resources, but I didn't write those down. If you have them, please post them as a comment (or e-mail them to me).

I look forward to seeing any questions, concerns, or comments you post. Please let me know how the session helped you and any suggestions you have for improving the session in the future. I plan on giving it again at NSTA regionals and nationals, as long as I can find funding for travel. Watch this blog for updates as to when I'll be presenting, and please join me again or send a friend.

Evidence 4 Inquiry/Falling Through the Cracks

Thanks to all of you who joined me at NSTA for these two presentations. I didn't feel like I was on message well for the Evidence 4 Inquiry session (Thursday at 12:30). I hadn't given that talk in a year, and I felt like it was a little disjointed. I hope the message came through. If you came on Friday morning at 8:00 a.m., I felt much better about that one.

Please let me know any thought that you have on what I said. I'm curious to know what I could do to make the talk more beneficial to the average classroom teacher who is considering getting started with inquiry. I would appreciate any suggestions you have. Also, let me know any questions that you have about anything I said. I'll be happy do whatever I can, including pointing you to resources that might help you with your question or concern.

NSTA follow-up

I promised a follow-up post to my NSTA presentations, but it may be tomorrow before I get those posted. Re-entry was a bear yesterday, and today is going to be just as busy.

NSTA Presentations

Here's my presentation schedule for NSTA this week:

Evidence for Inquiry: Thursday, 12:30 p.m., America's Center, Rm 261
Falling through the Cracks (re: evidence for inquiry; Sponsored by It's About Time Publishing): Friday, 8:00 a.m., America's Center, Room 127
Hearts & Minds in the Classroom (re: teaching Evolution to religious students): Friday, 12:30 p.m., Adam's Mark, Promenade D

See you in St. Louis (NSTA)

I'll be at NSTA from noon on Thursday until noon on Saturday. Let me know if you're going to be there so that we can catch up. I have 3 presentations I'm doing; I'll post my schedule on those early next week.

ASTE vignette

You can get the vignette linking our 3 papers by clicking the title of this post or the word "Link".

ASTE follow-up

Thanks to all of you who attended the session that included the paper set by John Settlage, Meg Blanchard, and me. I'm sorry that we didn't have time to interact on the paper, but I look forward to any comments you want to make here. A link to the vignette appears in the post above this one. You can get my paper by clicking on the word "Link" or on the title of this post.

Those of you who weren't at ASTE may want to scan through the paper to see if it's interesting to you. It describes the model of science teaching that has finally percolated in my head after my sabbatical teaching at Spain Park High School.

SW Minnesota Science and Math Teachers

Thanks to all of you math and science teachers who gave up your evening for Monday's meeting. I was honored by the attention you gave me during my talk, and I look forward to fielding your comments and requests for further information.

Make sure to check out the links to the side for some of the information I mentioned:

For "Rising Above the Gathering Storm" and "The World is Flat", go to the Evidence 4 Inquiry link. Look there also if you want to go deeper regarding why inquiry should be used in our classrooms.

I mentioned several times the NSF curricula that has already been field-tested so that it works with students. To see those, use the Inquiry Resources link. Remember, don't make the mistake I did of trying to develop your own inquiry curriculum. Wow, that was hard!

For number talks, try Googling "number talks". (Use the quotation marks in your search string.) You should find a lot of good ideas that way.

I am very interested in any comments you want to post, and anonymous comments are absolutely fine. If you have any trouble making a comment, feel free to e-mail by clicking my picture to take you to my e-mail link.

Hoover AL Science & Math Reforms

On October 9, I presented a reform proposal to the Board of Education of Hoover City Schools. Ron Dodson helped me develop it. Click the link to see the proposal. If you're a Hoover community member, I'd especially like to hear your comments on the proposal.

The hyperlinks within the proposal probably don't work. If you'll shoot me a quick e-mail request, I'll send you the original Word document with working links.

Evidence 4 site back up

Don't know if you noticed that portions of the Evidence 4 Inquiry site were down. I just fixed the problem, and everything looks to be working again.

Alabama Science Teachers Association

It was great being with my home town crowd at ASTA. Unlucky spot for me--the dreaded 8:00 a.m. presentation, but I had a few noble souls fighting off the sleepies. I gave the Evidence 4 Inquiry talk, and I think it was helpful. If you attended, please let me know your feedback by posting a comment here. Also, see the link for information on "The World is Flat," the book I mentioned. I think all other resources are on the Evidence 4 Inquiry site.

ASTA Follow-up

Check back here later this week for follow-up from the Evidence 4 Inquiry session.

Revised Evidence4 Site

When you have a moment, please check out the revised Evidence 4 Inquiry site. I've updated the format significantly, and I've added content. Please let me know any comments that you have.

NAEP itself

Just had a chance to look through the 2005 NAEP results. They're laid out really nicely on the site (see link). You can really drill down into the data and see what's going on.

Washington State's NAEP Results: Me Too!

I wonder what's going on with NAEP and these LASER states! Check the link to see Washington State's strong showing on NAEP.

SC leads NAEP Gains

I was very interested to see my friends in South Carolina leading the nation in improvements on NAEP (see link). The most interesting thing to me was the SC is a LASER state. Most students in the state have access to learning via hands-on inquiry using NSF-developed curricula. To me, this may be the first national data showing how inquiry really does work.

Inquiry for College Prep

Thanks to my buddy Ron Dodson of Hoover City Schools for pointing out how the ACT has shifted so that it focuses squarely on inquiry. For those of you who teach in states where colleges accept the ACT (as the do throughout the South where I am) teaching by inquiry will help boost ACT scores. This means that inquiry will help some kids will get into college who wouldn't have via traditional science instruction. Inquiry will also help some students get into better colleges and earn scholarship money.

Check out the ACT science standards at the following site: http://www.act.org/standard/planact/science/index.html (or use the link below).

PD resources for inquiry!

At NSTA, I had the pleasure of meeting Lynn Rankin from the Institute for Inquiry at San Francisco's Exploratorium. She made me aware of a new resource they have published that looks really impressive. It's a website of some of their key resources for those of you who provide PD on inquiry:

http://www.exploratorium.edu/ifi/workshops/

Check it out when you have a chance. Please comment back with your thoughts about the resources you find there.

NSTA reflections

Thanks to those of you who came to my NSTA presentation in Anaheim. I was pleased with how it went, and I appreciated the comments that some of you said afterwards. This was a first run for me on this presentation about the evidence for inquiry (and against traditional instruction), and I wasn't sure how people would respond. Actually, I expected resistance and push back. There didn't seem to be any.

Are we beginning to turn the corner toward inquiry in this country? Someone I talked with at NSTA said that about half the presentations looked to be on inquiry. Maybe the momentum is beginning to build. I hope so. I'm really convinced now that it's the best things for kids.

Please see the following site for resources from my presentation. It's a quick webpage that I've thrown together for those of you who want to dig deeper on the evidence I reviewed. Let me know your thoughts via a comment to this post.

http://homepage.mac.com/lmeadows/evidence4inquiry.htm

See you in Anaheim (NSTA)?

I hope to see you in Anaheim at NSTA this week. I'll be presenting, but I have been given probably the worst presentation slot possible! I'll be presenting at 8:00 a.m. on Saturday morning in room 211B of the convention center. My topic will be the research base for traditional teaching vs. Inquiry. I'm going to have us look at the evidence from personal experience, from national and international comparisons, and from cognitive science. This presentation is part of an effort I'm making to try to line out how clear the research is that traditional instruction is bad for kids.

I have to attend NARST earlier in the week; so, I'll be at NSTA only on Friday and Saturday. Let me know if you want to try to get together.