Karen E. Stine, Ph.D., Dept. of Biology/Toxicology, Ashland University, Ashland, OH 44805, kstine@ashland.edu
Deborah K. Martin, B.S., Dept. of Biology/Toxicology, Ashland University, Ashland, OH 44805, dkmartin@ashland.edu
Barbara Lakey-McTaggart, Ph.D. *,Dept. of Chemistry/Geology, Ashland University, Ashland, OH 44805
* Current address: 111 W. South Ave. Houghton, MI 49931
The current emphasis in science education in the elementary classroom is towards concept-based, "hands-on" science (Ohio State Board of Education, 1994; AAAS, 1993). The development of a shared Science Resource Room can solve some of the problems inherent in this move towards a more hands-on, experiment-based approach. In this paper we describe the development and implementation of a Science Resource Room at Montgomery Elementary School in Ashland, OH. We also present results of a survey of Montgomery teachers measuring their use of and attitudes toward the Science Resource Room.
The current emphasis in science education in the elementary classroom is towards concept-based, "hands-on" science (Ohio State Board of Education, 1994; AAAS, 1993). However, the move from the more passive textbook-based instruction to more hands-on activities is not always easy to implement. Such a change frequently involves requiring teachers to develop many new classroom activities, often without adequate access to informational resources. Also, many elementary schools are not structured either physically or administratively for the school-wide sharing of (often expensive) science resources, This is, however, the most cost-efficient strategy for acquisition of equipment. Finally, some teachers may be reluctant to set up and run particularly "messy" experiments or demonstrations in their own classrooms.
We felt that elimination of these barriers would encourage move towards the more hands-on approach to science in the elementary classroom. We worked with the administrators, teachers, and parents at one elementary school and developed a shared Science Resource room designed to solve some of these problems for teachers and to stimulate create interest and excitement about science among students. This paper describes our steps in setting up the Science Resource Room, some uses of the room, and the results of a teacher survey conducted after the room had been in operation for half a year.
Montgomery Elementary School is part of the Ashland City School system in Ashland, Ohio. It has approximately 410 students in grades K-6, with 2 classes at each grade level K-5 and 4 sixth grade classes. The concept of a Science Resource Room had been discussed by the Montgomery Parent Advisory Council (which two of us were members of during the 1994-5 academic year) and when recent district-wide renovation and building opened up a small room at the elementary school , Montgomery principal James Fetzer approved the initiation of the project. We envisioned a room that could be used: 1) to store and display shared science equipment, 2) as a location for classes to conduct demonstrations and experiments, and, possibly , 3) as a parent volunteer-staffed site for setting up simple activities for independent study by interested students a few days a month.
Our first job was to renovate the room, which was too small at 16' x 24' to serve as a regular classroom but was at least initially sufficient for our needs. A modest budget allowed us to purchase paint as well as a large (17' x 10') wallpaper mural of the space shuttle which served as a focal point for interest. Painting and papering was carried out with the assistance of parent volunteers over a 3 day time period. This activity, which took place primarily during school hours, stimulated much interest on the part of many of the students in the building, who would frequently stop in to assess progress, or to point out the shuttle mural to other students. Existing tables and chairs were used to provide working space in the center of the room. Finally, although budget and other constraints served to delay it, the installation of a sink was planned for the following year.
Additional purchases for the room included several sets of metal shelving. Previously, science equipment was stacked in a closet upstairs or in teachers' individual classrooms. We attempted to improve accessibility by sorting out equipment by general category (for example biological materials, rocks, glassware, microscopes and other observational aids, etc.) and placing it on the shelves in easy view of teachers and students. Many teachers also brought in materials which had been stored in their own classrooms, greatly enlarging the pool of shared equipment. Again, this process generated a great deal of interest, as both teachers and students often stopped in to browse and discover equipment they were not previously aware of. As we were sorting equipment onto shelves, we also discarded broken and unusable equipment, and with the assistance of teachers, developed a "wish list" of materials that would enhance science teaching capabilities.
Another important purchase for the room was a four drawer filing cabinet. In this filing cabinet we set up folders which corresponded to content areas within science. The purpose of the cabinet was to encourage teachers to share information, plans for activities, etc. Thus, for example, a teacher with an idea for an activity in the area of magnetism could file instructions for the activity in the "Magnetism" folder where it could be located and used by other teachers with a need for activities in that area.
The official opening of the Science Resource Room was scheduled for one of Montgomery's "Family Fun Nights". These evening events are held once or twice a year, and offer games, prizes, refreshments, and other assorted activities to Montgomery students and their families. Several simple activities were set up in the Science Resource Center, including pH testing, seed planting, microscope slide displays and coloring activities. In addition, a baking soda and vinegar "volcano" was erupted at regularly scheduled times throughout the evening, an event which proved to be quite popular. We also passed out stickers which read "I visited the Montgomery School Science Resource Room" to children and copies of the "wish list" to parents. Both children and their parents seemed enthusiastic about the room and activities.
Following the official opening of the Science Resource Room, teachers began to use the room to browse and borrow equipment from to take back to their own classrooms. Also, some teachers began to use the room as a convenient space to set up and carry out their own science activities. The room proved to be particularly useful, however, for setting up and carrying out school-wide demonstrations and activities. Materials were set up in the morning, and teachers signed up for 20-30 minute time slots during which they would bring their classes down to the Resource Room. To kick this process off, several programs were presented by us including short demonstrations and activities on topics such as anatomy and physiology, physical science, geology and paleontology, and zoology.
At the end of the spring, we sent a survey out to teachers assessing use of and attitudes toward the Science Resource Room . Response to the survey was excellent, with 14 out of 15 teachers replying. Patterns of use of the Science Resource Room are shown in Table 1. All classes attended demonstrations at least once, with most classes attending 3-4 times. Fewer classes used the room to set up their own activities, but all but one class had borrowed equipment from the Science Room for use in their own room.
Attitudes toward the Science room were measured by the second set of questions on the survey. Results are shown in Table 2. Positive attitudes overall were found across the board, with only two out of the fourteen respondents replying with "disagree" or "strongly disagree" to any of the statements and with seven of the fourteen respondents replying only with "strongly agree" or "agree" to all statements. The strongest positive attitude was found at the K-2 grade level, followed closely by the 5-6 grade level.
The third portion of the survey form gave teachers the opportunity to make both positive and negative comments about the Science Resource Room in an open format. Among the positive comments that were received were the following:
Most of the negative comments received were related more to the limitations of the room and the content of some of the demonstrations, rather than criticism of the concept itself:
As science professionals and parents of grade school age children, we strongly support science education, and welcomed the opportunity to develop and implement a model program promoting the hands on science approach in the elementary schools. With the relatively modest requirements of a room or other space to dedicate to the purpose, a small budget for paint, shelves, filing cabinets, etc., and administrators, teachers, and parents who are willing to support the project with their time and energies, the Montgomery Science Resource Room was created. This room has proven to be a positive addition to Montgomery elementary school, with both teachers and students responding well to having a central location in which to store and display science equipment and to conduct demonstrations and experiments. The Science Resource Room model certainly should be considered for adoption by other elementary schools.
American Association for the Advancement of Science (1993). Benchmarks for Science Literacy. Oxford University Press, NY.
Ohio State Board of Education (1994). Science: Ohio's Model Competency-Based Program. Ohio State Board of Education, Columbus, OH.
return to K.E. Stine home page