Hey! Where's the CHEM STEM?

photo credit: chrisfreeland2002 via photopin cc

A colleague on my personal learning network asked a fabulous question---How do we promote chemistry and chemical engineering in an age of STEM?   The question is well worth the time to consider.

As I look at the Iowa STEM initiatives, I see plenty of evidence of fun as well as learning.  Really.  It's a great thing to play with robots, build lego challenges, and design windmills.  As a physics teacher myself, I get excited by the energy efficiency technology that Pat Higby and the IEEE at UNI offer and ship to schools.

But...but....but.   When it comes to chemistry, we are failing.  Besides university-based summer or science camps like Camp Invention, where do we look? Besides Fizz-Bubble-Goo, an ISU Extension program for K-3, there aren't a lot of resources in the summer.  And that's only one season. Teachers need safe, reliable, easy chemistry programs available for kids to develop interest and passion for chemistry ALL year long.  That's a tall order.

Most of the resources that ARE out there are videos or demo-based, focused on the generosity of local colleges and universities.  Googling the term "chemistry engineering outreach" lists some great outreach, if you are in the right place:

http://depts.washington.edu/acesche/outreach/about-aces-outreach   (Seattle-based)

http://www.aiche-chicago.org/oldsite/Student_Outreach/index.html (Chicago-based)

http://www.eng.vt.edu/outreach/chemical (Virginia-tech)

http://www.che.utah.edu/community_and_outreach/k-12_outreach_program.php   (Utah)


On a more local level, you can check out Iowa State's Material Advantage Club, or the Univ. of Iowa Outreach, but again, these options are local, rather than state-wide, and are more demonstration-based than interactive. That is a problem.

=================
So, for my New Year's Resolution, let me challenge you to DO with your students.

DO chemistry.  Start with WATER, if you are uncomfortable about chemistry safety.  In particular, check out the water detective activities at the link.

COOK with kids.  It's one of the easiest ways to talk about reactions.

SHARE an activity with 4H extension that is chem-based but accessible to kids (the list on the website keeps saying,  "coming soon".

ASK your AEA to help organize a Maker Camp that includes chemistry.

INVITE Pella or 3M engineers into your classroom for a chemistry event.

EXPLORE nanoscales or ChemShorts.

RESIST efforts to cut science time from your class time.  Write about science, read about science current events, talk about science and history, count and measure for science experiments.   It IS a challenge with so much testing, and we know it, but our kids need this K-12.

Take Chem STEM to your 4H meetings, your scouting events, your planning for summer camps and after school groups.

SUBSCRIBE to the eGFI Newsletter and Blog to keep up-to-date on new opportunities.

DEVELOP a Maker-Faire with the regional STEM hub in your area, or within your community.  Let's involve Extension, and teachers, and kids, and communities.

I want my kids to love learning about chemistry.  I want them to model, and I want them to reflect.  Hobby Lobby sells ten dollar kids to make plastics and plaster of paris molds.   Why can't we do this for all kids?  I want students to have fun in a safe way that teaches them about the real world.   Why can't we do that?  Why aren't we?

photo credit: Old Shoe Woman  via photopin  cc  

The Pitfalls of Analyzing RTI Data

Here's a guilty little secret:  I like to know the ending of books ahead of time.   See, it's the one time during life that I can peek at the back page and know whether or not it will all turn out ok.  I don't look for details other than the quick answer of whether the main character lives or dies. And that's the problem with RTI.  We've set this system up, we're working on data, but I don't know how to say for certain that we've succeeded.  It's the worst part of action research for me.

A little background is probably needed.  My District has been part of the Iowa IRIS project, and we've been working on the process of learning and implementing RTI/IDM.  One of the first things we realized was that we needed a wide base of involvement for our teachers.   Over a quarter of our teachers were trained in the model initially, and we've used professional learning communities to help others get on-board, learning together in teacher-focused PD and from one another.  After long discussion, we identified a group of 24 students who we felt were struggling and got ready to pilot our model.  My administrator empowered our BLT to set up the structure of interventions, and another teacher and I set up the process and are running the pilot program.  We've been collecting data for two quarters.

When I first looked at the data, I simply counted up the numbers of D+, D, D-, and F for each grade and put it in a matrix.

	9	10	11	12	TRACKED
D+
D
D-
F

But this way of looking at data is not good enough.   Even though I tried to see patterns, the n(students) is not constant from grade to grade.   This makes comparisons ineffective, although trends may be seen, perhaps, from quarter to quarter.

Next, I tried a comparison of Ds and Fs in graphical form, but I decided that wasn't really the best usage of data for a myriad of reasons.  For one, we use a mastery system, so if a child passes all of the standard assessments, we feel that they have a minimum standard of knowledge in the coursework, even if they get a D-.   Grading scales are another discussion, but just for now, I decided to focus on Fs just for struggling learners, to see if the average number of Fs was decreasing over time.

This showed the data in a different light.   I can see that term 2 is worse than term 1 for most grades.   Perhaps it's because the newness of school has worn off, but it was a relief, I think, to see that term 2 is historically more difficult for kids.  But this was inadequate.  I was only looking at n(struggling students), and those numbers were not consistent from grade to grade.

At this point, my husband interjected a comment (perhaps seeing me tear at my hair was having an effect), suggesting that we take a look at the total population of each group, and then use a pareto study to normalize the numbers to account for the n(students) of each grade.    I'm so glad that his quality background lets him see the value of statistics!  So I ran the numbers.
          
So, in Term 2:

9th:  18/119 kids had a F for a 15% problem

10th: 10/132 kids had a F is a 7.5% problem

11th: 11/134 kids had a F is an 8.2% problem


Hey, that means we have something happening with our pilot kids in 10th grade (it also means we need to act, because our 9th graders need added to the pilot as quickly as possible).   Because of the analysis,  and the data shown to teachers, we have added another forty kids to our tracking procedures.

Finally, I looked at the pareto study. I tracked this year's 9-12 graders for 4 quarters---terms 1 and 2 of last year and terms 1 and 2 for this year.   My data is longitudinal, so the 9th graders for this year have no high school data for two of the four terms.  This is what resulted.

This also prompted some realizations for me.   Last year, even though we identified this year's 10th graders because we wanted three years of data, we really should have identified lots of this year's 11th graders.  And this year's data tells us, loudly, that the 9th graders need some help.   This is powerful information to share with our teachers, and by doing so, we continue to reform the way we do business

To summarize:

• Data-driven education is not just for administrators--it's for teachers, teacher-leaders, and for the effectiveness of students.  While I've done this for assessments, this is the first time I've applied statistics to the needs of a class.
• This is action research, and it's in-process.   I'll be taking the time to look at more data before I am confident with the patterns. I'll continue to look at the data in different ways
• Data doesn't always follow a perfect trend line.  In that case:  collect more data to get your answer.
• In the past, we've just noticed kids were struggling, but we weren't systematic in addressing the weaknesses. This data shows us exactly where we are headed, and who we need to target for intervention next.
• Teachers can use data to make decisions, and schools will benefit as a result.   That is what we hope to accomplish with RTI...a way to use data to make decisions.

I would be interested in your thoughts on what other data I should be collecting.  My husband, the quality guy, suggested a capability study, because it will tell us if our RTI program is having an effect on all students, pushing up the number of students with As or Bs over time (which would appear to be an indicator of being intrinsically motivated).

I'll talk about exactly WHAT we are doing for struggling learners in my next post.