Vertex

Distance education has grown over the years into a thriving business for universities and colleges all over the world. With the advent of affordable computer technology and increasing Internet bandwidth, distance education has moved to the Web. Online courses, and even entire programs, are becoming common. With growing competition and the pressure to meet the increasing demand for online courses, there is often a race to develop and implement online courses, with little time spent systematically developing effective pedagogy in the online environment. Additionally, traditional higher education often "operates within a 'transmissive paradigm,' emphasizing the transfer of knowledge from lecturer to student." (Luca & Mclaughlin 2004) The combination of little development time and the tradition of didactic instruction often results in the repurposing of lecture material to an online environment, with little attention paid to research-based effective instruction. Now the "talking-head" is delivered over the Web via technologies such as video streaming or narrated PowerPoint slides.

The question is not whether video streaming, PowerPoint slides, or other technologically-enhanced instruction should be used, as these tools certainly have a positive role in distance education, but should these tools be the primary delivery method, thus limiting online learning to archaic didactic instruction. Shouldn't the focus of online course development be based on current and accepted learning theories and pedagogy? Petrides (2002) describes the problem: "Among faculty and administrators, discussions of distance education and distributed learning often focus on what it means as an instructor to teach in this type of environment. Interestingly enough, these conversations at colleges and universities center around how to best deliver instruction to students who are separated physically from their instructor and therefore tend to focus on the medium by which instruction is transmitted, as opposed to discussions of how students actually learn in this environment." There is a new learning environment. Can this environment reflect current theories of teaching and learning? Is it possible to conduct inquiry-based instruction in a learner- and community-centered online course that incorporates principles of good practice such as collaborative learning and mentoring, construction of knowledge, respect for prior knowledge and social/cultural exploration, learning by discovery and deliberate practice, meaningful and authentic assessment, and learning for understanding not memorization?

Bransford, Brown, & Cocking (2002) diagram (see Figure 1) defines the learning environment from four perspectives: learner-centered, knowledge-centered, assessment-centered, and community-centered. Learner-centered environments respect the prior knowledge of the learner and encourage the use of predictions in investigations to encourage the learner to construct knowledge from direct experience.

The focus is on involving the learner in her education. Knowledge-centered environments also focus on constructing knowledge and learning by doing, with an emphasis on the development of the learner's metacognitive skills. Assessment-centered environments emphasize the use of generous feedback, self-assessment, and revision opportunities. Collaborative groups are central to a community-based environment but also play a major role in all the learning environments. The author suggests that inquiry-based learning is a blending of these environments and lives in the intersection of these four learning environments, as suggested in Figure 1.

Herrington, Herrington, Oliver, Stoney, and Willis's (2001) checklist guides the design of an online course that facilitates the best learning opportunities. Their checklist has five main criteria: authentic tasks, opportunities for collaboration, learner-centered environments, engaging challenging tasks, and meaningful assessments. Although this list was developed for online courses, the criteria are the same criteria used to evaluate any quality face-to-face course and they are based on sound research-based learning theories and practice (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock 2001). Additionally, this checklist aligns with Bransford's (2002) assessment of the learning environment and the recommendations set forth by the National Academy of Sciences (1996) for professional development in the sciences. The underlying theme in the checklist is inquiry-based instruction, which is grounded in constructivism and centers on the learner, rather than the teacher. It involves the learner in her education, presenting problem-based instruction that guides, not instructs, the learner to acquire the skills and attitudes to solve problems and resolve issues. It respects the learner's prior knowledge, culture, and social setting, and it encourages the exchange of ideas, thoughts, and knowledge within a community of learners.

This paper presents a case study of an online graduate level science education course, Try Science. It discusses the systematic curricular adaptations within Try Science that exemplify best practice online teaching and learning through inquiry-based science instruction that is consistent with the Herrington et al (2001) checklist and Bransford et al's (2002) concept of the learning environment.

Try Science is an introductory course in an online Master's degree in science education, designed specifically for K-8 teachers. The course was a collaborative project between Lesley University and TERC (www.TERC.edu), an educational research and development organization in Cambridge, Massachusetts, with a grant from the U.S. Department of Education's Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education. The course also serves as a stand-alone course for teachers who are interested in developing a better understanding of science and inquiry-based education, and requires an alternative delivery form of education. The course has a dual focus: increasing teachers' understanding of science and improving inquiry-based teaching and learning skills. Try Science teaches inquiry-based science instruction by modeling, not telling. The instructional focus is on the student, incorporating modern learning theories and pedagogy within the online environment. Try Science is a model of the Chinese proverb, "Tell me and I forget, show me and I remember, involve me and I understand."

The course structure consists of thirteen weeks of instruction with two facilitators: a scientist and a science educator. The presence of two facilitators with differing roles provides the students very specific faculty resources and feedback opportunities. The scientist concentrates primarily on facilitating the acquisition of scientific knowledge, and the science educator facilitates the acquisition of pedagogical knowledge. There are no textbooks in the course, rather supplemental readings from peer-reviewed professional journals and primary resources are assigned to provide pedagogical support for inquiry-based instruction as practice in the classroom. The first six sessions focus on learning science through inquiry, with students conducting simple but stimulating investigations using materials easily found in the home or accessible in the classroom. The final seven sessions focus on pedagogy, curriculum, and assessment issues.

The goals of the course, as reported by Harlen and Altobello (2003), are to develop teachers':

1. understanding of inquiry through engaging in inquiry
2. understanding of strategies for supporting science inquiry in the classroom, and
3. ability to translate pedagogical knowledge into practice in the classroom.

During the first week , participants post in a special informal forum, Charlie's Café, which serves as an introduction as if the participants had just introduced themselves over "a virtual cup of coffee." Both the students and the facilitators create home pages, complete with photos, to encourage a better understanding of each participant and to extend the environment of camaraderie. Students also send personal introductory emails to their fellow peers, and the facilitators follow suit. Thus the first week sets the stage for collaboration and support, as well as providing a community of learners.

Try Science provides from the beginning two advanced organizers, called "Sessions-at-a-Glance" and a "Course Timeline", along with a suggested schedule for completion of each week's assignments. Using these tools students are able to plan ahead to fit their assignments into their busy schedules. Students may also easily review any previously discussed concept or assignment. Instructors also check in with any student who fails to "show up" in a discussion forum or fails to complete an assignment to offer assistance, support, and encouragement.

The structure for each week is composed of:

1. Investigative predictions (forming an hypothesis)
2. Hands-on scientific investigations
3. Supportive scientific and pedagogical journal articles
4. Analysis of results in personal journals
5. Discussion forums about the science and teaching of their investigations
6. Thought Experiments for extending concepts and further assessment

The science content focuses on a simple glass of water as a microenvironment that represents the earth's bodies of water. Each week a new activity builds on concepts that are easily demonstrated in this microenvironment, ensuring the material is easily attainable and the concepts relevant to the world around us. This simple glass of water also allows the students to experience direct and deliberate investigations without the need to purchase expensive kits or other materials. Investigations are easily transferable to an elementary or middle school classroom so they are also relevant to the students' own classrooms.

The prediction activities stimulate the learner's prior knowledge to forecast what might be the outcome of a given experiment. Once the students have completed their predictions, they move on to the inquiry-based investigation, where they record results and conclusions in personal journals and share with fellow classmates through online, threaded discussion referred to as the Science Forum.

An example of an investigation is the "Too Full Glass" experiment. The student is presented with a picture of a glass filled to the rim with ice and water and asked to form a hypothesis as to what will happen as the ice melts. The students are initially asked simple questions, such as, "What do you predict will happen as the ice melts? Explain the basis of your prediction and record your thoughts in your personal journal."

The students are then asked to conduct the investigation and report if their predictions came true and if not, why. They share and discuss their experiences in the Science Forum. The discussion forums are a very active area of the course. Students not only share their experiences but also provide feedback and extensions to the material to each other. There is no specific minimum or maximum number of contributions to the discussion forums. Rather students are provided a formative rubric that guides the expectations for student contributions to the discussions. Eliminating the focus on the quantity of postings allows the students to focus on the quality of their postings. Instructors participate in the discussion forums by providing short summaries of the points discussed by the students and asking probing questions to further the discussion into deeper levels of understanding without dominating the exchange of ideas. Thus instructors are facilitators, not lecturers, gently moving students along in their thought process. The carefully structured participation of the facilitators assures that the discussion remains primarily in the hands of the students so that they are drawing upon each other's ideas and epiphanies to reach their conclusions. It does not take long before the course transforms into an active community of learners that takes the form of a natural conversation.

Activities within each lesson relate to the activities in the previous lessons and weekly concepts are extended to real-world events through discussions, assigned readings that represent current research, theory, and pedagogy, and classroom application. Students are grouped in collaborative teams of 5-6 students to work together on projects to provide feedback and support to each other. Such team formation provides the scaffolding by which the students build understanding of the cultural and social differences that influence other team members' experiences, reactions, and teaching.

"Thought Experiments" are conducted during the first half of the course to assess students' application of their budding inquiry skills to new situations. For example, students are asked to consider what would happen if salty water was added to fresh water. "If you were to add a 'pinch of salt' to fresh water, it would dissolve readily without stirring. Would the 'salty water' also diffuse readily throughout the fresh water without stirring?"

Beginning in the seventh week, the course shifts focus to the practice of inquiry-based science instruction in the classroom. The pedagogical strategies chosen emphasize and exemplify:

1. teaching for understanding through inquiry
2. collaborative learning
3. reflection on their own and others' ideas and experiences prior to and during the course, and
4. participation in sustained learning communities for teachers (Harlen & Altobello, 2003)

At this time, the Model for Learning through Inquiry (Doubler & Harlen, 2000), is introduced (Figure 2), which exemplifies the systematic process of inquiry-based lesson development. As students advance through the course they often refer back to this model in the process of developing their own lesson plans that they implement in their classrooms as part of the course assessment. Using this model, students analyze and share experiences and impressions from their direct experience in the course and in their own classroom. The students also view video case studies from various grade levels and analyze them for inquiry modeling by the teacher and for student responses to inquiry-based instruction. The model provides a base from which the students can evaluate the thought process of the video subjects:

Assessment of the student's progress in the course is heavily weighted in participation and collaboration, both in the investigations and in the discussions. Self-evaluation is a major part of the process. Students are expected to examine their work throughout the course just as they would expect their own students to reflect on their contribution to class discussion and to consider if they are giving the activities thorough consideration by asking challenging questions and thinking how they might address those questions in an investigation. If they were their peers' teachers, they would want to ask the probing questions that would stimulate conversation and collaboration in the discussion forums, not simply give the answer. Self-assessment tools and rubrics are provided in the course to assist the students evaluating their progress and making adjustments in their understanding of the course concepts. These tools leave few questions about the expectations within the course.

Self-assessment tools and rubrics are provided in the course to assist the students evaluating their progress and making adjustments in their understanding of the course concepts. These tools leave few questions about the expectations within the course.

The final project requires the students to recast what was once a traditional lesson into an inquiry-based lesson, conduct the lesson, and then share their experiences and comments with their group. As the students develop their lesson plan, their step-by-step progress is monitored and supported through each phase of development using an online Investigation Planner. The Investigation Planner is a dynamic tool for interactivity among the students and between the student and the instructor. Within the planner the student may request specific feedback, which can be directly input into the planner, from both the instructors and fellow students. With feedback in place the student may revise her plan easily and once again share with others in the course. Multiple revisions are not uncommon and are encouraged.

Curricular Adaptations in Try Science

Table 1 maps the curricular adaptations implemented in Try Science to the criteria set forth by Herrington et al. and Bransford et al. As demonstrated in the table, Try Science aligns tightly with quality education that models inquiry-based learning and constructivist practices required for success in any science classroom.

Herrington et al.	Bransford et al.	Try Science Curricular Adaptations
Opportunities for collaboration	Community-Centered Environment	Charlie's Café available for informal discussions; formal small group discussion science and teaching forums; peer feedback and collaboration during investigations and final project; interactive investigation planner provided to support interactive collaboration
Learner-Centered Environment	Learner-Centered Environment	Problem-based investigations that focus on the student's learning rather than teaching; direct and deliberate experiences with revisions and creative alterations encouraged; two specialized facilitators who guide but do not control learning or dominate interaction; small collaborative groups learning from each other
Authentic tasks reflecting real life settings; Engaging, challenging tasks and environment	Knowledge-Centered Environment	Prediction and inquiry-based investigation activities that develop metacognitive skills; activities reflect meaningful real life settings that are transferable to the students' own classroom; collaborative and engaging discussion forums that challenge students to reflect and provide supportive feedback
Authentic and meaningful assessments	Assessment-Centered Environment	Assessment is integrated with activities through peer and facilitator feedback and discussions; self-assessment continually supported throughout the course; final project representing an accumulation of content and pedagogical knowledge that is designed for and tested by a real classroom; an inquiry model, assessment rubrics and interactive planners are provided

Table 1: Try Science curricular adaptations are mapped to criteria required for developing quality learning environments

Concluding Thoughts

It is extremely important to the continued development of online courses that we, as researchers and developers, pay close attention to how well our online courses align with current best practices and that we build the courses on the foundation of effective learning theories. It is not enough to simply repurpose course work to an online environment and expect to see successful student learning.

A testament to the success of the Try Science course structure is the performance of online students as compared to face-to-face students taking Try Science; the online students significantly outperformed the traditional students by approximately 30 percent (Harlen & Altobello 2003). The fact that special curricular adaptations of Try Science has resulted in the successful development a learning community by exhibiting the same best practices expected of any quality course is evidence that Try Science is a model for future online courses.

References

Bransford, J.D., Brown, A. L., & Cocking, R.R. (Eds.). (2002). How People Learn: Brain, Mind, Experience, and School. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Doubler, S. & Harlen, W. (2000). The Role of Inquiry in Science Learning. Unpublished manuscript.

Harlen, W. & Altobello, C. (2003). An Investigation of "Try Science" Studied On-line and Face-to-Face. Cambridge, MA: TERC-CESSE and Lesley University, Department of Education.

Luca, J., & Mcloughlin, C. (2004). Using Online Forums to Support a Community of Learning. World Conference on Educational Multimedia. Hypermedia and Telecommunications 2004(1), 1468-1474. Retrieved December 25, 2004 from http://dl.acce.org/15600

Marzano, R.J., Pickering, D.J., & Pollock, J.E. (2001). Classroom Instruction that Works: Research-based Stategies for Increasing Student Achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Moore, M.G. & Kearsley, G. (1996). Distance Education: A Systems View. Boston: Wadsworth Publishing Company.

National Academy of Sciences (n.d.) 1996 National Science Education Standards for Professional Development: Standards for Professional Development for Teachers of Science. Retrieved October 30, 2003, from http://www.nap.edu/readingroom/books/nses/html/4.html#psa

Petrides, L.A. (2002). Web-based Technologies for Distributed (or Distance) Learning: Creating Learning-centered Educational Experiences in the Higher Education Classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(1), 69-77.

Acknowledgements

My gratitude is extended to the following co-developers of Try Science:

Susan Doubler, Ph.D., TERC, Co-Project Director

Linda Grisham, Ph.D., Lesley University, Co-Project Director

Deborah Munson, Online Learning and Technology Specialist

Discussion Question

Talvitie-Siple note that Herrington, Herrington, Oliver, Stoney, and Willis developed a checklist for the design of online courses that facilitate the best online learning opportunities: authentic tasks, opportunities for collaboration, learner-centered environments, engaging and challenging tasks, and meaningful assessments. How do you incorporate these criteria into your online courses?