1. How will providing single-sex science classes affect achievement in science for females and males at our school?
2. How will single-sex science classes affect achievement in our school’s Economically Disadvantaged population?
3. How will single-sex science classes affect achievement in our school’s African-American population?
4. How will single-sex science classes affect achievement in our school’s Hispanic population?
Rationale for my action research questions come from a variety of sources, including personal observation, interviews with a mentor teacher, District Science coach, and my District Science Curriculum Coordinator, and an article from the American Educational Research Journal written by Jennifer Shapka and Daniel P. Keating. Another source of inspiration for this project is my pursuit to provide equitable education to all learners. A program put on by Exxon Mobile called “Introduce a Girl to Engineering Day” was hosted by several female engineers, female engineering students and professors that indicated to our middle school females that dramatically fewer females pursue degrees in Science programs and obtain jobs in the high paying field of science than males. The fact that females are limiting their choices of degree plans and career choices to non-science related fields, seriously limits their future earning potential. This is not equitable!
I have taught middle school science for more than ten years; I have witnessed female students act disgusted when dissection is announced in a class and refuse to touch the specimen, but in private tutoring or tutoring with one or two other girls, readily do the work. I have also seen females act as if they do not know how to operate lab equipment in front of male students and then use it correctly when the classroom contains just female learners.
In 1997 during one of my Pre-Internships, I observed two, 7th grade, single-sex, science classrooms, under my cooperating teacher, Lisa Monroe. She informed me she got the idea to try single-sex classrooms through conversations with colleagues and her experience observing middle school student behavior. We discussed that both female and male students seemed more focused and asked more questions in the single-sex classes than in her co-ed classes. I would like to see data collected regarding science achievement tests and data regarding future enrollment in post secondary science programs of these groups.
In August, I discussed the dramatic difference in achievement for males and females on the 2010 Science TAKS test and suggested that we try single-sex science classes for a variety of our populations to see if it would improve achievement for females and males with my District Science Coach and District Science Curriculum Coordinator. The coordinator said that she has seen both positive and negative research regarding this idea and that one of the high schools in our district is trying single-sex Physics classes this year (Debra Hill, 2010). My Science coach said that she would be very interested to see if single-sex science classes would improve achievement for both genders and said that she would actually like to try to get another school in the district that she coaches to engage in the same project and gather their data as well (Jana Echols, 2010). This was exciting for me because the other school has different demographics than our school and it would increase our data sample to make it more reliable.
An article entitled “Effects of a Girls-Only Curriculum During Adolescence: Performance, Persistence, and Engagement in Mathematics and Science” written by Jennifer D. Shapka and Daniel P. Keating in the American Educational Research Journal, Winter 2003, Vol. 40, No. 4, pp. 929-960 contains information that shows “strong evidence that girls who were taught math and science in single-sex classrooms excelled at a higher level in subsequent math and science courses and that they took more courses in those domains” (Shapka & Keating, 2003, p. 947).
The difference in the research that Shapka and Keating performed and what I hope to accomplish, is they compared single-sex and coeducational schools and my data will be focused on a wide variety of populations within coeducational schools. One huge difference in the data I collect is the schools will have a wider variety of demographics. Shapka and Keating had to admit that their data on single-sex schools was data retrieved from private schools, which means that, although they had a sample from various ethnic backgrounds, they did not have a large sample of economically disadvantaged students (Shapka & Keating, 2003). My school has an economically disadvantaged population of 71% and the second school that my science coach is going to encourage to participate in my research has an economically disadvantaged population of less than 20%.
Whether the inequitable educating is occurring for females, males, Hispanics, African-Americans, Economically Disadvantaged, or any other population, my Guardian temperament can not ignore it. Several times, on Google and Ask.com, I have typed in “What are the highest paying jobs?” and every time I conduct this search, I see that at least seven of the ten responses involve degrees and careers in Science. If most earning power is realized through degrees and careers in Science, then we most empower and educate all populations in a way that is conducive to them seizing the opportunities to achieve in these areas if they so desire, regardless of their gender, ethnicity, or socioeconomic status. The reason I have chosen to focus on improving science education for females, economically disadvantaged, Hispanic, and African-Americans is that these are populations that historically, are at a disadvantage on my campus.
Shapka, J.D. & Keating, D.P. (2003). Effects of a Girls-Only Curriculum During Adolescence: Performance, Persistence, and Engagement in Mathematics and Science. American Educational Research Journal, 40 (4), 929-960.
L. Monroe, personal communication, October 1997.
J. Echols, personal communication, August 26, 2010.
D. Hill, personal communication, August 26, 2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment