(NOTE: This file contains Part II of a detailed description of
the student research and publication process which is called
the Student Research Center approach to instruction.)
***************************************************************
Instructional Approach - Part II
***************************************************************
TABLE OF CONTENT
I. Integrated and Whole Language Curriculum
II. Authentic Learning Opportunities
III. Research Portfolios
IV. Performance Assessment
V. Student Centered Curriculum
VI. Cooperative Research Teams
VII. Teacher Role
VIII. High Standards and Expectations
IX. Student Action Committees
X. Teacher Development
XI. School and Community Relationship
XII. Constructivist Learning Environment
XIII. Rationale
***************************************************************
I. Integrated and Whole Language Curriculum:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction emphasizes
an integrated and holistic curriculum. All subject areas
across the curriculum are synthesized into a dynamic and
holistic field of learning for the scientific study of relevant
concepts, topics, issues, themes, and problems. This
interdisciplinary model of an integrated curriculum eliminates
the common practice of scheduling isolated time slots for each
subject area of the curriculum (Fogarty, 1991). Students use
language arts, math, science, and social studies skills in a
synergistic manner throughout the day as they apply them to the
research and publication process emphasized by the
instructional approach.
The Student Research Center instructional approach gives
students maximum opportunities to study and make sense of their
community and world through real research activities while
utilizing the whole language continuum of reading, writing, and
speaking skills (Goodman, 1986).
Each research project becomes the focus for the use of
language, quantitative, higher order thinking, and
technological skills in productive and relevant activities of
scientific inquiry and literary publication.
***************************************************************
II. Authentic Learning Opportunities:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction meets all
five standards for authentic instruction as explicated by
Newmann and Wehlage (1993). Their standards are based upon two
major tenets, which the NSRC's instructional approach also
embraces: that students use disciplined inquiry to construct
meaning and knowledge, and that they produce discourse,
products, and performances that have value beyond success in
school.
The five standards for authentic learning require that
instruction and the learning environment: a) encourage higher
order thinking directed towards the discovery of knowledge and
problem solving, b) encourages in depth, holistic, and
relatively complex understanding of concepts, topics, issues,
themes, and problems being studied, c) ensures that learning
has value and meaning beyond the classroom by being connected
to the larger social context of the students' world, d)
facilitates significant interaction, dialogue, and sharing of
ideas to promote a collective understanding of what is to be
learned, and e) provides pedagogical and social support for
high achievement by all students.
***************************************************************
III. Research Portfolios:
Each student maintains a work and exhibit portfolio in the
printed format. The majority of the contents in both
portfolios exist in an electronic format as well.
The work portfolio is required to contain all student work that
is in progress. Students may also choose to include the
following materials: the Scientific Research Contract, rough
or working drafts of each step in the scientific method, class
and research notes related to current research projects,
library research note cards for the Review of Literature
section of their research paper, teacher "Keep Up the Good
Work" notes, the Data Collection Sheet, and all data collected
during the research project.
The exhibit portfolio is a cumulative collection of
representative and ongoing student work which demonstrates
mastery of language, quantitative, science process, and higher
order thinking skills, as well as mastery of scientific
concepts over the entire school year. The largest portion of
the exhibit portfolio contains the final drafts of all work
which must be letter perfect, grammatically correct, and
scientifically sound.
The exhibit portfolio is required to contain a table of
contents, a continually updated written description of the
portfolio's content, the student's completed research projects,
the abstracts of those projects, the journals which each
student collaboratively published with peers, and the
videotapes of all presentations of their research projects.
Also required are the purpose or rationale of the portfolio,
the criteria for placing required and student selected content
in the portfolio, and the final drafts of each quarterly
reflective self-assessment of the portfolio's content.
Students may also choose to place anything of exemplary worth
that tells the reader who the student is and what they value
about themselves and their science work. In the past, such
work has included: test scores, grades, report cards, "Well
Done" notes from the teacher, standardized test scores,
academic evaluations of all kinds, visual arts projects,
science fair projects and the judges' evaluations, products of
hands-on and inquiry activities in the classroom, writing
samples, completed Student Research Contracts and Scientific
Time-Line Contracts, and school progress reports.
Work and exhibit portfolios in the printed medium are each
maintained in a large file box. Students place their work in
double pocket folders. The folders are kept in alphabetical
order in the Student Research Center of the classroom. The
work portfolios are always accessible to students for writing
and editing purposes. Work in progress may be taken home by
the student. Exhibit portfolios are taken home on a quarterly
basis for family perusal and returned to the classroom.
Work and exhibit portfolios in the electronic medium are stored
on 3.5 computer disks. Each student has one disk for both the
work and exhibit portfolios. The disks are maintained in a
plastic diskette case in the Student Research Center in the
classroom. The E-portfolios are always accessible to students
for word processing and desk-top publication purposes.
Students who have computers at home may take their disk home
overnight.
It is important that the teacher's portfolio and past students'
portfolios be available to students to serve as models and
provide examples of exemplary past work and guidelines for
future work.
***************************************************************
IV. Performance Assessment:
Student assessment is multi-model, student friendly, and
performance oriented (Feuer, 1993). Assessment includes: the
evaluation of each student's exhibit portfolio, observational
checklist data related to the quality and quantity of their
cooperative research team work, punctuality in meeting all
deadlines on their scientific method time-line learning
contract, the review of the videotape of the presentations of
their research projects throughout the school year, student's
self-assessments, and the formal evaluation of concept mastery
and growth in language, quantitative, and higher order thinking
skills during the year.
Assessment ensures success because it is based upon the
practice of assessment without failure. A formative assessment
process of content in the work portfolio is continuous and is
used to indicate mastery of learning and guide the teacher as
to what needs to be taught or retaught next. Failure to
demonstrate mastery by formative assessment does not lead to a
failing grade, but to reteaching and additional work by the
student. Summative assessment of the exhibit portfolio for
grades occurs only after mastery is demonstrated, thus ensuring
success and learning. Finally, all assessment is instructional
in that the process teaches something new to the student.
The final products in the exhibit portfolio are not graded in
the traditional subjective and somewhat arbitrary manner of
many contemporary grading procedures. Instead, the rough
drafts of students' science work in the working portfolio are
constantly assessed, evaluated, and edited as they are being
written. The student is provided continuous feedback about the
work until it is letter perfect, grammatically correct, and
scientifically sound, no matter how long that formative process
may take. So, if the final draft of a student's work is
submitted for approval for inclusion in the exhibit portfolio
and it is indeed letter perfect, grammatically correct, and
scientifically sound, then that product is graded as an A+
product. Therefore, all the work in the exhibit portfolio is
exemplary by the above standards and receives a letter grade of
A+. Consequently, portfolio assessment is without failure; in
fact, it assures success of the highest quality.
The end-of-the-year assessment procedure takes on something of
a pretest and posttest comparison. A student's growth from the
beginning of the school year to the end is highlighted. It is
always an enlightening experience for students to see the
significant increases in the complexity of their writing, the
depth of their thinking, their scientific literacy, their
science process skills, research skills, higher order thinking
skills, and their pro-social and communication skills.
Formal student self-assessment occurs at the end of each
quarter or grading period of the school year. Students must
complete a reflective self-assessment of their portfolio.
These self-assessments are personal in nature and are shared
only by the student author and teacher. The personal nature of
the self-assessment adds to the authenticity and objectivity of
the exercise. The structured self-assessment questionnaire
follows:
1) What do I like best about the work in my portfolio? Why?
2) What do I like least about the work in my portfolio? Why?
3) How can I make my portfolio even better next quarter?
4) How has the work in this portfolio affected me as a person?
As a student? As a scientific researcher? (Routman, 1991)
***************************************************************
V. Student-Centered Curriculum:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction also
provides students with choice, ownership, and relevance of
learning. The curriculum is not teacher-centered where students
are captive recipients of mostly irrelevant information from
teacher lecture related to the content of a prescribed
curriculum. While instruction of mandated curriculum content
must still be evident in the classroom, the Student Research
Center approach to instruction takes more of a student-centered
orientation to instruction. Students are encouraged to choose
topics of research which they are interested in. This freedom
of choice increases curriculum relevancy and instills a high
degree of motivation to learn.
***************************************************************
VI. Cooperative Research Teams:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction emphasizes
a cooperative classroom environment. The instructional
approach ensures that all students have equal opportunity for
high quality educational experiences such as higher order
thinking instruction, computer assisted learning, and student
centered/driven curriculum through an emphasis upon
constituting heterogeneous cooperative research teams composed
of appropriate numbers of male, female, minority, handicapped,
disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged students working
collaboratively. In this manner, high science achieving
students can collaboratively work with underachieving students
who have traditionally lacked representation in the science
professions.
Johnson and Johnson (1986), in their Circles of Learning:
Cooperation in the Classroom, have clearly shown the benefit of
cooperative learning experiences for all students, but
especially for the underachieving student. The mastery and
enjoyment of learning engendered through cooperative hands-on
experiences have been repeatedly and clearly demonstrated to
significantly improve student learning and attitudes about
learning. This is especially germane to educational
initiatives, such as the National Student Research Center,
which attempt to increase scientific literacy in students and
improve student attitudes about the study of science and future
careers in the scientific professions.
Cooperative research teams can be composed of students from a
single classroom. Cooperative research teams can also be
composed of students from different schools located anywhere in
the world via the NSRC's Electronic School District. The teams
are rarely composed of more than four student researchers and
are usually composed of just two or three. As a general rule,
teachers should remember that larger numbers of student
researchers on a team will require more instruction in
cooperatively learning skills. It is recommended that the
emphasis in instruction be upon the research and publication
process. Consequently, research teams of three or less are
usually most productive.
Each student on the cooperative research team can be assigned a
role such as lead scientist, time-line monitor, data recorder,
typist/word processor, questionnaire distributor/scorer, noise
monitor, and question-asker, etc. It must be stressed, though,
that while everyone has a role, each student researcher on the
team must complete all steps of the research and publication
process. At the same time, students are encouraged to help
each other in the experimentation, composition, editing,
abstracting, and publishing of their collaborative research
project.
***************************************************************
VII. Teacher Role:
The teacher's role in the cooperative research and publication
process moves away from the "sage on the stage" to the "guide
by the side" (Marek, 1991). The teacher works on the periphery
of this student-centered and independent learning environment
rather than taking center stage. The teacher's purpose is to
provide all the necessary guidance and resources for conducting
the research project, manage the cooperative research teams,
monitor the daily progress and work completion on the
scientific method time-line contracts, identify misconceptions,
monitor conceptual change, assess for meaningful conceptual
understanding, and provide authentic opportunities for
application and transference of new knowledge to the world
outside the classroom or research center.
***************************************************************
VIII. High Standards and Expectations:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction establishes
high standards and expectations for achievement by requiring a
minimum of two scientific research projects from each student
per school year and by requiring that the projects be letter
perfect, grammatically correct, and scientifically sound before
acceptance by the teacher for publication in the scientific
journal of student research. Many students are capable of four
to eight research projects per year with the pride, excitement,
and enthusiasm engendered once they, and their parents, see
their names and research abstracts published in a scientific
journal that is circulated to a community-wide audience and
permanently catalogued into the reference sections of school
and public libraries. Abstracts of superior student research
may also be submitted to the National Student Research Center
for possible publication in its refereed journals (printed and
electronic formats) which have a national and international
circulation.
***************************************************************
IX. Student Action Committees:
Instruction is made more relevant to students by providing them
with problem solving activities within a societal context.
Students apply what they have learned from their research to
the world around them, becoming active agents for change as
they work to solve the science related issues and problems in
their communities which they have scientifically studied.
***************************************************************
X. Teacher Development:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction contributes
to teacher development by providing program development and
instructional materials in the areas of teaching the scientific
methods, using the inquiry method of instruction, conducting
the research and publication process, teaching higher order
thinking skills, managing cooperative learning teams, utilizing
the scientific method time-line learning contracts, and
developing proficiency in computer and telecommunication
skills. It is envisioned that current teacher training
activities will evolve into a national in-service training
program leading to the certification of teachers as Student
Research Center instructors.
***************************************************************
XI. School and Community Relationship:
The Student Research Center approach to instruction promotes
closer school and community ties and support in several ways.
First, parents at each participating school are strongly
encouraged to become involved in their child's research
projects. Parents are also instrumental in the distribution of
the scientific journals of student research throughout the
local community. Second, the business and professional
community expresses great pleasure in knowing that the children
of their community are being educated at such a high level.
Science professionals and businesses that rely upon science are
especially excited about the Student Research Center approach
to instruction. They see the curriculum as relevant to their
needs for an educated populace of future workers and consumers
of their products and services. Third, the business and
professional community and grant sources are quite generous in
support of a Student Research Center. For example, during the
past seven years, the NSRC has raised over $50,000 from the
following companies and organizations through school
partnership programs: United States Department of Education,
South Central Bell Telephone, American Petroleum Institute,
Intertel Foundation, Springhouse Publishing Corporation, Graham
Resources, Inc., Central Louisiana Electric Company, Louisiana
State Department of Education, National Science Foundation,
Mandeville Middle School Parent Teacher Association, Northern
Life Insurance Company, Gustav Ohaus Company, and Chevron Oil
Company.
***************************************************************
XII. The Constructivist Learning Environment:
In summary, the classroom in which the empirically validated
Student Research Center approach to instruction is fully
utilized is a constructivist learning environment (Yager, 1991)
with an integrated curriculum characterized by the highest
standards of performance. The Student Research Center provides
an enriched world-class pedagogical atmosphere of independent
self-directed learning and discovery enabling students to
conduct ongoing interschool cooperative research and
experimentation addressing socially relevant science related
concepts, topics, issues, themes, and problems impacting the
local, national, and international communities.
Student researchers actively engage in hands-on inquiry
activities that promote the concepts to be learned in depth by
exploring the concepts behaviorally and conceptually (Roth,
1989) as real-life scientists would. They conduct experimental
and survey research, and search and retrieve important
information from printed sources, electronic databases, and
professional mentors while collaborating with other student
researchers around the nation and world via telecomputing
networks. Student researchers continuously prolificate and
promulgate an ever growing body of knowledge by regularly
publishing their scientific scholarship in printed and
electronic journals of student research, presenting scientific
papers to audiences of peer researchers, and making
contributions to the national database of student research.
From their exploratory research utilizing the scientific
methods, they construct their own understanding of the concepts
being studied and assimilate that new understanding into the
prior knowledge and experiences they possess. Finally, the
students apply their new knowledge to the world around them as
they address the social problems and issues associated with the
science concepts being studied.
The Classroom-Based Student Research Center
In essence, the Student Research Center approach to instruction transforms the traditional teacher-centered classroom characterized by individualistic, competitive, hands-off and passive learning, memorization and recall of facts and figures, and reliance on textbooks and paper-and-pencil tests into a constructivist student-centered classroom characterized by interactive, cooperative, hands-on and active learning, conceptual change, and the full integration of instructional technology and alternative assessment into the curriculum. Significant increases in language, quantitative, scientific, higher order thinking, and technological abilities, as well as local and global awareness, are clearly evident in the products of the students' research and publication efforts. *************************************************************** XIII. Rationale: The National Student Research Center strongly believes that all students should possess the scientific, language, quantitative, higher order thinking, and technological skills learned via the extensive use of Student Research Center approach to instruction so as to better cope with the increasingly complexity of contemporary life. Also, if the United States of America is to remain a world leader in the science and technology based 21st Century, our elementary, middle, and secondary school students must be afforded scientific research and publication opportunities and technological experiences such as those offered by the National Student Research Center and the Student Research Center approach to instruction. ************************************************************** John I. Swang, Ph.D. Teacher/Director National Student Research Center Mandeville Middle School 2525 Soult St. Mandeville, Louisiana 70448 U.S.A. Tele: 1-504-626-5980 Tele: 1-504-626-8778 FAX: 1-504-626-1640 E-Mail: nsrcmms@aol.com This e-publication is made possible through grants provided by the United States Department of Education, South Central Bell Telephone, American Petroleum Institute, Intertel Foundation, Springhouse Publishing Corporation, Graham Resources, Inc., Central Louisiana Electric Company, Louisiana State Department of Education, National Science Foundation, Mandeville Middle School Parent Teacher Association, Northern Life Insurance Company, Gustav Ohaus Company, and Chevron Oil Company. The National Student Research Center thanks these organizations for their generous support of education. © 1998 John I. Swang, Ph.D.