A Qualitative AND Quantitative Analysis Of Physical Science Accessibility In High Needs Schools

1. A Qualitative AND Quantitative Analysis Of Physical Science Accessibility In High Needs Schools Keith Sheppard & Angela Kelly Stony Brook University May 30, 2013

2. Advanced organizer • Rationale and role of research institution • Data … data …. data • Lessons learned from districts with high physics/chemistry enrollments

3. Rationale • Physical sciences are important for post-secondary STEM study and careers and for scientific literacy development. • Stony Brook’s NOYCE II targets physics and chemistry teachers. • Research  Policy  Practice Role of Research University in Teacher Preparation

4. Data sources • 2000 & 2010 USA Census • New York State School Report cards 2010-11, 2011-12 • BEDS School Data • NCES • Historical Resources from NYS Archives

5. New york state

6. New York State • 4thmost populous state (19.5 M) {56% white, 16% Black,7% Asian, 18% Hispanic} • School population (2.7 M) {49% White, 19% Black, 8% Asian, 22% Hispanic} • 62 counties • New York City (8.2 M) • Population not evenly distributed ~70% in downstate

7. New york schools • School population (2.7M) • 49% free/reduced lunch • 54% of students in high needs schools

8. NYS Graduation reqs • 6 “credits” of MST • De facto 3 years of science • 1 Living Environment, 1 Physical Setting • Pass 1 Regents science exam • Pass 2 Regents science exams for Advanced Diploma • Physics and Chemistry not required

9. Low Need Average Need HN Smaller Urban/Suburban HN Rural Other Large Cities

10. Who takes which science?New york state 2012

11. Inequities in Physical Science Enrollments • Participation rates and scores are correlated to socioeconomic status (free/reduced lunch). • Noyce teachers have been placed in high needs schools with low physics/chemistry enrollments. • How can they encourage access to the physical sciences?

12. Who takes which science?Bronx 2012

13. bronx school demographics 2012

16. Reasons for limited participation in physics • Fear of failure • Reputation of course/teacher • Limited resources • Other elective course options • Physics last in curricular sequence • No curricular differentiation among physics classes • “Creaming”

17. Physics Teacher as champion • Partnering with research university  transforming research into practice and providing support • Belief that all students can learn physics • Creating physics “buzz” • Expanding differentiated physics options • Reducing physics teacher isolation • Support of parents and administration

18. External partnerships • Informal science institutions have resources to assist in formal learning, and are often underutilized. • Schools partnered with informal science institutions have increased physics enrollment. • Interactions with scientists, astronauts, museum educators are critically important. • How can advantages of these partnerships include all students?

19. Reducing science electives • Taking away marine sciences, forensics, forensic chemistry, etc. boosts enrollment in physics and chemistry. • Belief that all students can succeed in physical sciences… culture of valuing science. • Differentiating physical science course offerings.

20. Parental involvement • Pressure on school boards and administration. • Need to be informed about value of participating in physical sciences. • Should be actively engaged with school counselors regarding science electives.