Opportunities for Enhancing Equity in Classrooms through Use of Modeling and Visualization

Gypsy Abbott

School of Education

University of Alabama at Birmingham

October 2000

 

 

“Women, minorities, and persons with disabilities- groups that are chronically under-represented in SET careers- constitute more than two-thirds of the overall workforce.  In the near future there will {be}… a need to fill 5.3 million new jobs…. with the fastest growing fields being computer related. ”   Commission on Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development (p. 9, 2000)

 

This report also stated that there is a need to “boost the supply of skilled American workers to ensure that every American has a chance to rise with the economic tide” (p. 10). This is a national mandate for equity in the workforce. These alarming findings provided in the recent report by the Commission on Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development (CAWMSET) emphasize the need to find ways to enhance the participation of these under-served groups. These findings, coupled with repeated reports indicating that girls find using computers and technology “boring,” raise concerns about how this trend can be reversed (American Association of University Women (AAUW), 2000). Participation to and positive experiences in such programs must begin in the early years of the educational process for under-served students.

There are a number of programs that have reported success in engaging K-12 females and minorities in one or more of Science, Engineering, and Technology (SET) programs (CAWMSET, 2000). More recently, Tech Savvy, published by the American Association of University Women (2000), has offered some specific suggestions for addressing increased use of technology by females. Few programs have attempted to integrate the use of both technology and SET in a systematic way in the pre-service curriculum. The purpose of this paper is to examine ways to delineate strategies that promote equity in teaching modeling and visualization to pre-service teachers. It is anticipated that this will result in promoting opportunities to learn modeling and visualization for all K-12 students.

Instruction in a modeling and visualization, a curriculum model using science, math, and technology, is provided in a problem-based format. Use of a problem-based format offers some unique opportunities to provide instruction that promotes equity in classrooms. However, a review of research literature yielded few studies describing the use of strategies to promote equity in this content area. Only two sources were located, both of which were evaluation reports describing the impact of teacher professional development programs in computational science on students. These were program evaluation reports for Adventures in Supercomputing (AiS) and the Alabama Supercomputing Program to inspire Research in Education (ASPIRE). It is of note that, although these programs were designed to target under-represented groups of students, direct instruction in promoting equity was not initially a component of the programs. However, disaggregating of evaluation data has yielded descriptions of the differential levels of participation and patterns of achievement for males and females in these programs. Findings indicated very positive outcomes for females in both participation and achievement. However, information about the participation of minority students, information was limited in scope (Abbott, 1995, 1996, 1997; Center for Children and Technology, 1996). The conclusions made in the evaluation reports were primarily based on findings from the gender equity literature and less frequently from multicultural research literature.

Strategies that Promote Equity

Specific strategies noted in the gender equity research literature are: 1) use of a collaborative approach to learning and problem solving, 2) enhanced students’ performance to meet high expectations by teachers and peers, 3) equitable feedback (AAUW, 1992, 1997, 2000; Linn, 1994; Sadker and Sadker, 1994) and 4) participation in cross-discipline activities using technology by all students (AAUW, 2000; National Commission on Teaching, 2000). In addition, Linn has suggested that respect for students’ ideas and encouragement to test their ideas and hypotheses is an important element in achieving equitable classrooms. She also suggested the importance of extending their view of science from a stagnant to a dynamic perspective as being a key feature in promoting equity in science classrooms.

Descriptions of Strategies to Promote Equity Observed in ASPIRE Classrooms

The statement that good instruction for girls is also good instruction for boys has been clearly demonstrated in ASPIRE classrooms (Sadker & Sadker, 1994). Students in the ASPIRE program, currently being implemented in 39 counties in the State of Alabama, have been observed working successfully in this program in rural, high poverty areas, in suburban schools, and in urban schools. Project evaluation reports have documented that the participation level of females has typically been similar to or slightly less than that of males at both the high school and middle school levels. Females have been recognized for outstanding projects at the state EXPO, a statewide computational science fair, in approximately the same proportion as have males. Black students as well as other minority students have also demonstrated success in their program participation and performance.   Results of scores on evaluator-developed, content-based tests have indicated no statistically significant differences in achievement related to either gender or race (Abbott, 1996, 1997, 2000)

These ASPIRE results are similar to those reported in a national evaluation of computational science students in the AiS program. In the AiS evaluation report, it was noted that race and gender were not predictors in students’ success in the computational science program. The implication is that the instructional processes used in the program supported the achievement of diverse students.  However, students who had computers with Internet access at home were reported to have spent a greater amount of time on projects and this was related, to some extent, to the quality of students’ computational science projects (Center for Children and Technology, 1996). Although students from high poverty and rural communities have experienced success in AiS and ASPIRE, it should be noted that the issue of the Digital Divide, domestic availability of the Internet access, could become a factor that affects the future success of these students.

The findings describing the impact of the ASPIRE program for practicing teachers and for K-12 students have been documented in yearly evaluation reports since 1994.  Data collection tools such as classroom observations, interviews with teachers and students, and written feedback from teachers and students were used to obtain multiple sources of data regarding their experiences. Evidence of success in performance was measured by awards won at the state EXPO and by scores on evaluator-developed content-based tests (Abbott, 1996, 1997, 2000). The selected examples that have been described in the following sections are typical of classrooms observed by the project evaluator and ASPIRE teachers.

High Expectations for All Students.       ASPIRE students have consistently reported that their teachers’ beliefs that “ they can do it” and that teachers’ high level of encouragement have been major factors in completion of the complex projects submitted to the EXPO.  When asked to describe how high expectations have been communicated to students, teachers have reported that they “truly believed” that students could successfully complete their computational science projects. Teachers also indicated that they felt that sufficient guidance was provided early in the project development process to insure that students were adequately prepared to completing their projects (Abbott, 1995, 1996, 1997).

ASPIRE classrooms, using a team-based approach for teaching students to use modeling and visualization, have quite effectively created an environment in which high expectations are the norm. The role of teacher as facilitator, rather than as expert, provides opportunities for teachers to provide individual and group feedback that reinforces high expectations. Students reported that their teachers challenged them to find alternative solutions and to test their hypotheses. The opportunity to simulate data for use in hypothesis testing was observed to provide a ripe testing bed for enhancing students’ problem-solving and critical thinking skills. These classroom practices observed are congruent with recommendations by the Commission on the Advancement of Females and Minorities, Engineering, and Technology Development (2000) and research findings reported by Linn (1994).

A description of ASPIRE implementation in a rural, high poverty, all Black school has been excerpted from a Project Energy Evaluation report. Qualitative research methodology, using participant observation, was used in the data collection and analyses (Christensen, 2000).

Ms. Johnnie Delaine teaches high school mathematics and science in the small town of York, Alabama. York is located in Sumter County on the western Border of Alabama, about midway in the state. Sumter County High School is a rural, aging high school that houses a predominantly African American student body. Although the building is old, it is teaming with life. Ms. Delaine has taught at Sumter County High School for many years.

 

Roughly ten or so students came in during Ms. Delaine’  planning period to work  on their projects for the ASPIRE EXPO. The informal classroom atmosphere almost resembled a family interaction.

 

About ten minutes after I arrived, the bell rang and class formally began. The young-adult students were juniors and seniors. All entered the classroom and immediately and autonomously began working on their projects with minimal direction from Ms. Delaine. Some directly started work on word-processing the text for their displays at the computers stationed around the perimeter of the room. A few students worked on Power Point presentations that were being developed to accompany their Expo science projects. Two other students admired their slide shows. A few were painstakingly positioning their research models on the display panels while lying on the floor.

 

 

Ms. Delaine seemed to serve more as a guide for her busy students, helping them keep track of their diskettes and pieces of their science projects and offer advice. It was obvious that the science displays represented long hours of planning and research, and this was the final stage of distilling the scientific research about energy to present for the competition. For the visitor, it was easy to sense the air of respect that the students had for Ms. Delaine and how she freely reciprocated it in return.

 

At one point, Ms Delaine introduced me to Arquita. Ms. Delaine explained to me that earlier in the year Arquita came to her in a state of excitement holding a flyer from Science World.  “She wanted to do a computational science project on wind. So rather than do separate topics for both for the science fair and the EXPO, she chose to study and present, ‘Behold the Power of Wind, Maximizing the Efficiency of Wind Turbine.’” Furthermore, Ms. Delaine enlightened me on the fact that Arquita won first place in the region and second in the state science competition and was now headed for the ASPIRE EXPO to be held in Anniston, Alabama. A beaming Arquita piped in adding to the conversation, “I learned that the length of the blades affects the power it [the turbine] produces. Wind turbines with the fewest number of blades produce the most power.” Arquita went on to relate, “Ms. Delaine helped me do the mathematical equations and run my program so that I could learn about how the length of the blades affects energy.”

 

 

I was astonished at her {the teacher’s} level of motivation…Many of the juniors told me that they planned to enroll in computational science as seniors because they have enjoyed this course so much. A couple students voiced that they are “learning science through technology without using the textbook too much.”  The classroom/lab area where Ms. Delaine teaches her classes is open almost every night. She told me that students are here working with her most every night until she leaves the school at around 10 p.m.

 

While I was in her classroom, many students communicated their desire to pursue degrees in science once in college and even discussed scholarship possibilities. These were spontaneous discussions borne from their excitement in explaining their work to me. I wondered if six years ago Ms. Delaine’s students were this articulate and goal oriented about science {in particular computational science}.

 

 

Cooperative Learning Environments--Gender Configuration of Teams. Students in the ASPIRE program are encouraged to work in teams and to select their own teams. Composition of teams is comprised of students of the same gender, mixed gender, same race, and mixed race. As noted in the final evaluation report of AiS (Center for Children and Technology, 1996), females who participated in same gender teams were more successful in learning outcomes than were females who participated in mixed gender teams.

To further examine this phenomenon, three groups of ASPIRE students in the same classroom: one all-female, one all-male, and one mixed-gender- were observed on many occasions during the project development process. The all female group worked collaboratively on all aspects of the project. For example, if the task to be completed during the class period was computer programming, the entire group sat around the computer to complete the task. They discussed the possible solutions to programming problems and made decisions jointly as to the potential solutions. In contrast, in the all male group, the tasks to be completed were divided among members of the group, with each working independently to complete the task. This division of labor was the modus operendi for the entire project; i.e., one person was assigned to write the technical paper, one or possibly two males worked on the computer programming, and yet another team member worked on the display board. The mixed gender team functioned in much the same manner as did the all male team, exhibiting much lower levels of collaboration and shared experiences of learning that did the other teams (Abbott, Ziebarth, & Sullivan, 1995, 1996). Although this was a qualitative study and the results cannot be generalized to other groups, the finding is congruent with other research reports, most recently Tech Savvy (AAUW, 2000). In Tech Savvy, females were described as having a strong preference for learning environments and learning tasks that are relational. A team approach, especially when the team is all-female, for completing computational science projects, is compatible with that preference. In contrast, interviews with selected ASPIRE teachers over time indicated that females frequently took the lead in organizing the work plan in mixed gender groups. This finding is not congruent with the stereotype that females “sit back” and let the males do the science experiments.

Although a mixed gender work environment may not be the preference of some females, there appear to be important learning experiences for both genders of all races in the mixed gender teams. Females in ASPIRE classrooms experienced having influence and power in a technological environment that would be stereotypically viewed as male. This experience is likely to be beneficial as these females participate in the 21st century workforce. Males in mixed gender groups experienced negotiating the completion of tasks differently than was reported in all male groups since females brought the relational approach to the table. In fact, recent research in the area of decision-making has suggested that when the perspectives of males, females and minorities are not included in high-level business decision, companies stand to lose the benefit that could be gained by inclusion of these multiple perspectives (Knecht, 1999). The benefits of participation in mixed gender teams may have more long reaching implications for participation in the work force than has previously been considered. Thus, differential long-term benefits were hypothesized as a result of the gender configuration of the teams. Females may achieve at higher levels in same gender groups in a given situation. However, all students would appear to benefit in terms of confidence and quality of decision making from participation in various types of configurations

      Comments by an ASPIRE teacher describing use of modeling and visualization in the middle and high school settings provides further insight into the use of group configurations.

Middle school is an ideal place to introduce students to math modeling and visualization.  By 7th and 8th grade, students come to somewhat of a plateau in their education. These upper middle school grades have traditionally provided relatively few new challenges for students. Yet, students in 7th and 8th grades can still get excited about new challenges and opportunities. Teaching computational science in middle school seems to be an ideal time.

 

As a teacher, I enjoy watching the students learn to work together as a team in order to complete the many tasks.  It’s always interesting to watch the different teams interact.  Some of them seem to struggle more with the project process than do others.  Although I have only observed middle school students work in these teams for four years, a few characteristics stand out.

 

Most of the students tend to choose to work with other students of the same sex, but a few teams have been mixed.  When teams consist of both male and female, in all but one case, the females emerged as the leaders/organizers of the team.  When comparing same-sex teams, the all-female teams tended to be more cooperative, better organized, and were quite meticulous in all areas of their projects than did the all-male teams. 

 

In many instances, the all-male teams struggled with “who was responsible for what” and had problems staying focused. Regardless of the fact that some teams  tended to struggle more than others during the project process, once the projects were completed; all the students seemed to feel very accomplished. But I would have to say that the girls probably gained the most confidence In their own abilities.  They thrived in this course and were eager for more.

 

I also have taught the same type of course in high school for 8 years. Girls were also very successful, but the all-male teams tended to complete more technical projects. All-female teams still tended to be better organized and thrived on successfully completing their projects.  Maybe the reason that males tend to complete more challenging projects in high school than do the females is that by the time students reach high school, the gap (in terms of confidence in technical/scientific abilities) between males and females has widened.  After four years in middle school, I have not observed this difference between the all-male and all-female teams.  (Sullivan, 2000)

 

  Appropriate Wait Time for Development of Critical Thinking Skills. In the teacher’s role of facilitator of learning rather than expert, often described as being a “guide at the side,” teachers, using a project-based approach, were trained to ask questions that promote and require students to search for their own solutions. ASPIRE teachers were not observed to quickly answer questions asked by students. Rather, the most frequent response to students’ questions observed in ASPIRE classrooms was “Well, what do you think?” By demonstrating the confidence that all students can, for the most part, solve their problems, teachers reinforce the high level of expectations for student performance previously described.

Immediate Feedback. Immediate feedback has been described as an additional factor in promoting equity in classroom instruction (AAUW, 1992, 2000; Sadker & Sadker, 1994). Although teachers do not provide immediate feedback about answers to problems, students do receive immediate feedback from working with the computer. If a computer program has not been written using correct syntax, code, or logic, the fact that the program will not run is a form of immediate feedback. In general, students were observed to respond to the immediate negative feedback by finding other solutions or fixing the problem; responses to positive feedback were a sense of mastery of a successfully completed task (Abbott, Ziebarth, & Sullivan, 1996).

Additional Components of Classroom Practices Promoting Equity. Other features of the ASPIRE program have been described in research findings from other studies and reports as supporting equitable classroom experiences for under-served populations. These include: 1) instructional topics that are meaningful to students, 2) technology to solve real world problems, 3) role models to mentor these students, and 4) technology in “female friendly” environments.

When students were encouraged to study their own research questions, rather teacher-selected -topics, solving the computational science problem became much more meaningful. Students also had “staying power” because they were solving their own problems. Examples such as “The Optimum Model for Pizza Delivery” and “Is Advil or Tylenol More Effective in Reducing Headaches?” directly addressed students’ interests. Finding solutions to problems that are meaningful to students has been cited as serving as a powerful motivational strategy for encouraging achievement for all students (CAWMSET, 2000).

During the problem solution/project development process, students must learn to use of modeling and visualization as well as to use technology to solve real world problems. As a result, females and minorities have had positive experiences in computing/technology at early stages in their educational careers. Further, these experiences have occurred, for the most part, in classrooms in which the teacher was female. It is of note that female students have consistently described their female teachers as being important role models for them. It is also of note that, in a convenience a sample of female students interviewed in 1995, who had previously participated in ASPIRE, reported having selected college majors in SMET areas at twice the national average for that year. These students indicated that their ASPIRE experience had been a major factor in their selection of college major.  Similarly, predominantly Black classrooms taught by Black teachers have been described as providing important role models for their students, Since over 75% of ASPIRE teachers are female, excellent role models for a large number of female students have been provided. The availability of these role models appears to have been quite influential in subsequent academic decisions made by students (Abbott, 1996, 1997,1998; Abbott, Ziebarth, & Sullivan, 1995).

Recommendations for Pre-Service Education

Recommendations for improving the status of equity in modeling and visualization instruction for pre-service education must be based on discussions about equity as well as use of computing and technology. Recommendations for improved practice that might be considered:

1.      Direct instruction in use of strategies that promote equity is infrequently provided for pre-service teachers (Campbell & Sanders, 1997). This may be due to teacher educators being unaware of use of these strategies themselves. Lack of instruction and lack of awareness on this topic can subsequently result in neither explicit nor implicit instruction related to promoting equity being provided for pre-service teachers. Even pre-service science education programs using some of the recommended reforms such inquiry and cooperative learning may not routinely provide experiences for students that are inclusive which promote higher levels of achievement for all students. The emphasis in equity must be on inclusive experiences for all students (Cruz-Jansen, 2000).

2.      Teacher education programs have gotten bad press regarding the ability of graduating teachers to use technology in classrooms (CEO Forum on Education and Technology Report-Year 2, 1999). Typically, pre-service teachers are required to know that mechanics of using selected computer programs although use of technology is infrequently infused in the pre-service curriculum. One reason cited has been lack of knowledge about how technology can best be used (AAUW, 2000) This presents at least two dilemmas for pre-service education. First, teacher educators need to be trained so that they are able to infuse technology in their specific curriculum in the most effective ways. It is critical that pre-service teachers achieve technology fluency, not just technology literacy (AAUW). It is unlikely that they will achieve this level of fluency unless instruction is provided in their pre-service program. Second, to promote equity in their classrooms, pre-service teachers must address issues that arise as a result of the Digital Divide as well as those that relate to gender and race.

3.      Educators of pre-service teachers must be informed of research findings that indicate the need for students to learn to work in teams (CEO Forum on Education  and Technology Report-Year 2, 1999). Further, pre-service teachers need to have worked in teams that are varied in gender and race composition. It is  recommended that, after working in teams of different gender configurations, pre-service teachers be provided opportunities to reflect on these experiences to    identify any possible stereotypic views that they may have as well as to learn to understand the perspectives of others who are different from them. Unless these    experiences are provided, neither pre-service teachers nor their future students are likely to understand the unique contributions that can be made through    consideration of diverse opinions.

4.      Infusion of modeling and visualization in the curriculum requires the use of technology. Thus, a higher comfort level with use of computers for all students will be a requisite for successful infusion of modeling and visualization in both the pre-service and K-12 arenas. Computing facilities and the physical areas in which technology equipment are housed in pre-service programs are often efficient and sterile rather than “female friendly” as recommended in Tech Savvy (AAUW, 2000). These facilities generally have computers in rows with computers located so closely together that any type of collaboration is difficult. This type of environment sets the stage for computing and technology to be the province of males whether in pre-service experiences or in the K-12 arena. Clearly, this type of environment is not inviting to females and is sometimes even quite intimidating. Since the majority of pre-service teachers are female, there appears to be great benefit from providing technology access that would encourage technology use rather than being “put off” by it. Some alternatives that might be considered are:

5.      Computers could be arranged in clusters rather than rows with enough space between them to allow for collaborative work.  The walls in technology facilities could be painted in appealing colors rather than institutional colors.  Computer facilities could be housed in other areas of the building, such as in classrooms and in common areas where students interact with each other. For example, in urban and suburban areas, Internet cafes could be constructed within already existing space to encourage use of computers. In rural areas, a popular community site could be emulated; i.e. a “Sonic Drive-in.”  By re-vamping the environments in which pre-service teachers interface with computing and technology, a more collaborative computing environment could be created. This type of environment could be one way to address the reported declining interest of females in computing (CAWMSET, 2000).

Recommendations for Future Research

1. Strategies that promote equity in classrooms with respect to race and ethnic background need to be studied in depth. While some aspects of effective teaching/learning processes have been provided in ASPIRE and AiS classrooms, much is not known. For example, are there differential results when students are placed in same race or mixed race groups? Since they are likely to encounter such situations in the work environment, what changes can be made at the pre-service and K-12 arenas to facilitate development of effective skills. What roles do students of varied races and genders assume when in teams reflecting this type of diversity. What types of group processes are used to accomplish tasks?

2. What “technology environment” is best suited to students from diverse ethnic backgrounds?

3. Does exposure to more “ female friendly” technology environments result in a higher comfort level and greater interest in using technology by females?

4. When pre-service teachers have direct instruction in use of strategies that promote equity, do they provide classroom experiences for their students that also promote equity?

References

American Association for University Women. (1992). Short changing girls, short changing America. Washington, DC: AAUW.

American Association for University Women. (1998). Gender gaps: Where schools still fail our children. Washington, DC: AAUW.

American Association for University Women. (2000). Tech savvy. Washington, D.C.: AAUW.

Abbott, G. (1994, April). Women and Science.  Paper presented at the meeting of the Southeastern Association of the American Psychological Association, New Orleans, LA.

Abbott, G. (1994). Evaluation of the Alabama high performance computing in mathematics and science.

Abbott, G. (1995, November).  The Evaluation of the Alabama ASPIRE Program. Paper presented at Supercomputing ’95, San Diego, CA.

Abbott, G., Ziebarth, J. & Sullivan, G. (1995, April). Girls and Supercomputing. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco, CA.

Abbott, G. (1996) Gender equity: Evaluation of the Alabama supercomputing program to inspire research in education.

Abbott, G. (1997,April). Evaluation of the ASPIRE Program.  Paper presented at Supercomputing ’97, San Diego, CA.

Abbott, G. (1998). Evaluation of the Alabama supercomputing program to inspire research in education.

Abbott, G. (1999). Evaluation of the Alabama supercomputing program to inspire research in education.

Abbott, G. (2000). Evaluation of the Alabama supercomputing program to inspire research in education.

Campbell, P.B. & Sanders, J. (1997). Uniformed but interested: Findings of a national survey on gender equity in pre-service education. Journal of Teacher Education, 48(1), 69-75.

Cateb, L. (2000). Design technology learning: How girls learn best. Equity and Excellence in Education, 33, 22- 25.

CEO Forum on Education and Technology (1999, February).  Professional development: A link to better learning.  Retrieved September 26, 2000 on the World Wide Web:  http//:ceoforum.org/reports.cfm/downloads/99r.

Christensen, L. (2000, September). Unpublished manuscript, partial evaluation of Project Energy.

Commission on the Advancement of Women and Minorities on Science, Engineering, and Technology Development (2000a).  Land of Plenty: Diversity as America's Competitive Edge in Science, engineering, and Technology. Retrieved September 25, 2000 on the World Wide Web:  http//:www.nsf.gov/od/cawmset.

Commission for Advancement of Women and Minorities in Science, Engineering, and Technology Development (2000b). Best Practices - Increasing Woman's Participation in Science.   Retrieved September 25, 2000 on the World Wide Web: http//:www.nsf.gov/od/cawmset/meetings/ practices-examples.htm.

Cruz-Janzen, M. (2000). From our readers: Preparing preservice teacher candidates for leadership. Equity and Excellence in Education, 33 (1), 94-98.

Fatemi, E. (1999). Technology counts: Building the digital curriculum.   Retrieved September 25, 2000 from the World Wide Web:

htttp//: www.edweek.org/sreports/tc99/articles/summary.htm.

Knecht, R. D. (1999). Design engineering teams: Influence of gender composition on decision-making. National Science Foundation -Award Abstract 9979444FLAWS008. Retrieved September 29,2000 from the World Wide Web.

Linn, M. C. (1994). Gender and School Learning: Science.  In  Fusen, T. &  Posttenthwaite, T. (Eds.), The International Encyclopedia of Education, Vol. 14 (pp. 2436-2440) New York: Pergammon Press.

National Commission on Teaching and America’s Future (1996). What Matters Most: Teaching for America’s future. Retrieved September 25, 2000 on the World Wide Web http://www.tc.columbia.edu/teachcomm/distinv.html.

National Commission on Teaching Mathematics and Science for the 21st Century (2000). Before it’s too late.  Retrieved September 30, 2000 from the World Wide Web http://www.ed.gov/americacounts/glenn/toolate/exec-sum.html.

Papalewis, R., Abbott, G., Brown, G., & Irby, B. (1996). Achieving Gender Equity in Education.  Fifth Yearbook of the National Council of Professors of Educational Administration.  Lancaster: Technomic Publishing.

Sadker, D. & Sadker, M. (1994). Failing at fairness: How schools cheat girls. New York: Touch Stone.

G. Sullivan, (personal communication, October, 2000).