Search

Science teacher educators from 205 colleges/universities completed a questionnaire concerning the nature and extent of microcomputer offerings in their secondary science teacher preparation programs. These data are reported and compared to a similar sample surveyed in 1984. Seventy-seven percent of reporting institutions now require either a microcomputer course or completion of a microcomputer competency within their secondary science certification program. The most common applications in these courses are simulations, word processing, databases, and spreadsheet use. Chi-square analysis revealed that more institutions in 1992 were requiring a microcomputer course than in 1984. However, only 23.4% of the institutions offered a microcomputer course designed solely for secondary science majors, and 10.6% of the institutions offered such a course taught by a science teacher educator. Preservice science teachers were also more likely in 1992 than in 1984 to be using microcomputers in instruction during supervised field experiences in secondary schools. Finally, college/university science teacher educators perceived that microcomputer use in secondary science classrooms has increased during the past five years.

One hundred seventy-nine secondary science department chairs answered a 20-item questionnaire concerning the nature and extent of microcomputer use in science instruction in their respective schools. The national sample represented schools in rural, urban, and suburban settings, as well as all geographic regions of the country. Analyses of data revealed that 47% of the secondary science teachers did not use microcomputers during instruction, 40% used them occasionally, and 13% used them in one or more lessons each week. The most frequent applications were simulations (70%), graphing packages (63%), and probes for collecting laboratory data (56%). In addition, 76% of the respondents indicated that microcomputers have had an impact on science laboratory activities in their schools. The department chairs also listed their perceived reasons as to why teachers in their departments did or did not integrate microcomputer use into their science instruction.

Principals from 80 elementary schools, in predominantly rural Western Pennsylvania, completed and returned a 22-item questionnaire designed to assess the nature and extent of technology use for the teaching of elementary mathematics and science within their buildings. Technologies included calculators, microcomputers, overhead projection panels, videotape, and interactive video. Microcomputers were being used in at least some elementary grade levels for mathematics or science instruction in 84% of the schools. Teachers used microcomputers more frequently in mathematics (82.5%) than in science instruction (55%). Principals reported a lower frequency of calculator use with 63.3% of the schools having some grade levels where calculators were used in mathematics lessons, and 21.5% of schools in science lessons. Further analyses of data suggest that microcomputer and calculator use is more common in the intermediate grades (3–6) than in the primary grades (K-2).

One hundred and sixty-one undergraduate elementary education majors and sixty elementary teachers completed an eight-item questionnaire designed to assess their perceptions toward integrating science and mathematics in the elementary grades. The two groups of subjects differed significantly on their responses to five of the eight items. Chi square analyses suggest that practicing elementary teachers felt they had more background in mathematics and science, were more aware of curriculum materials in this area, did not think that integration was currently a common practice, and were more likely to indicate that there was not sufficient time in the school day to integrate the subjects. Preservice teachers were more likely to indicate that integrating the disciplines was preferred to teaching them separately. In addition to the analyses of data, a list of recommendations are provided for teachers, curriculum developers, and policy makers interested in advancing the concept of integrating science and mathematics in instruction.

Twenty-eight seventh and eighth grade students were randomly assigned to two treatments and a control as they entered the Florida State Museum. All subjects were given set induction materials saying in effect: (1) Treatment-Study the wall panel which is part of the cave exhibit and describes the many biologic relationships and organisms in the cave at the cave entrance. Continue into the cave and study the habitat. When you exit the cave you will be given a test to see how much you learned; (2) Treatment II-Enter the cave and study that habitat. When you exit at the other end, study the wall panel which is part of the cave exit and describes the many biologic relationships and organisms in the cave. After studying this panel you will be given a test to see how much you learned; (3) Control-You will take a walk through exhibits depicting a variety of Florida Habitats and later see a film on the Habitats of Florida that are represented in the museum. Then you will be given a test to determine how much you know about one type of habitat. Both treatments and the control spent equivalent time at their tasks and were confronted with either the cave exhibit as described or the equivalent control experiences. A 25 item criterion test was designed to measure the acquisition of conceptual and factual knowledge and specific attentional factors relative to both the cave and the instructional panel. A Kr-20 indicated that this instrument had a reliability coefficient of 0.80. It was anticipated that the panel, used as an attention directing and controlling device prior to entering the cave (Treatment I) or upon exiting the cave (Treatment II), would function as a forward-shaping or backward review prompting adjunct, hence both should be significantly more effective than the control. This was confirmed (df 2,28; F 8.09) p < 0.01. It was also expected that the forward shaping panel would be more effective than the backward review panel in the tradition of inserted questions in prose research. Although the differences were in this direction, they were not significant (p≤ 0.10).

This study was designed to explore the effects on learning of: (1) structural modifications to the periodic table, (2) the location of a periodic table within instructional materials, and (3) the presence of a two-page schema showing relationships between the topics explained in the written materials and the periodic table. One hundred and sixty high school students were randomly assigned to one of eight treatments. A 28-item posttest (KR –; 21 = 0.72), consisting of multiple choice and constructed answer items, was designed to measure subjects' ability to use their periodic tables to obtain factual information and to solve qualitative chemistry problems. Regression analyses using the multiple choice portion of the posttest as a dependent variable and table type as an independent variable revealed that for subjects with minimal experience with the periodic table, those who received the table with added visual data performed significantly better than subjects who received either of the other two tables (df 3,93; F = 2.72; p < 0.05). For subjects familiar with the periodic table, significant vocabulary X table (df 3,49; F = 3.22; p < 0.05) and vocabulary X location (df 1,49; F = 4.46; p < 0.05) interactions were detected. Subjects high in verbal comprehension tended to take advantage of the modified tables, while those low in verbal comprehension processed the traditional table with less information most effectively. These latter students also benefited more from having the periodic table alongside their written materials.

Fifty-five undergraduate education majors were randomly assigned to one of three treatment conditions as they entered the “walk-through” cave exhibit at The Florida State Museum. Subjects in treatment I received set induction materials directing them to enter the cave, to observe the cave carefully, and finally to read the information in five case exhibits after exiting the cave. Subjects in treatment II observed the cave exhibit, read the information in the five case exhibits, and answered two experimenter generated questions about each case exhibit immediately after reading the information in it. Subjects in treatment III observed the cave exhibit, read the information in the five case exhibits, and generated two questions about each case exhibit and answered them immediately after reading the information in each exhibit. All subjects received an immediate 20-item posttest. Seven of these items focused on observations from the “walk-through” portion of the cave exhibit. The remaining 13 items covered the information in the case exhibits. Analysis of variance indicated no significant differences between groups on the observation questions; however, a significant difference was detected for the case exhibit questions (p < 0.02). Follow up analyses indicated that subjects who answered the experimenter generated questions performed significantly better than subjects who did not answer any questions. Although no other differences were detected at the 0.05 level, the trend of results indicated that subjects who answered experimenter generated questions performed better than subjects who generated their own questions. These latter subjects performed better than subjects who read the case exhibits without answering any questions.

Two hundred and thirty-four museum visitors of all ages were observed as they entered the Object Gallery area of the Florida State Museum. Visitors were observed under conditions where objects were available for close inspection but could not be manipulated (baseline data) and later when the same objects were placed on tables and were available for visitors to touch, move, and use a variety of senses to inspect them (intervention data). Data were recorded on the sex, age, and number of subjects in these areas under each of the above conditions. The results obtained show a significant increase in the number of visitors entering this section of the museum when manipulatable objects were available. Baseline data showed that 58.5% of the people who entered the Object Gallery went into the drawer section. However, when manipulatable objects were made available this increased to 82.3%. Chi-square analysis was used to determine whether the presence of manipulatable objects in the area increased the number of people who entered the area. It did (p < 0.05). Chi-square analysis was also used to determine whether entering the drawer section depended on age or sex. It was found that more children entered the drawer section than adults (p < 0.05) and significantly more female children and female adults entered as a result of intervention (p < 0.05). At the same time, more male children than adults entered after intervention (p < 0.05) than before. These data are supported by considerable curiosity research indicating that both children and adults are attracted to novel as well as complex stimuli which can be manipulated in both formal and free-choice environments. The data also support the growing movement to hands-on exhibits in natural history museums and science centers around the country, as well as hands-on classroom activities from the perspective of their attention attracting and holding power and their curiosity evoking characteristics. Whether these positive factors also lead to increased knowledge or skill development is a question yet to be explored.

61. Bits and pieces, 24. Fifteen computer programming assignments of various levels of difficulty involving important principles of chemistry.