Improving Labs (from cookbook to inquiry)

1. Improving Labs (from cookbook to inquiry) Karen Kortz Early Career Workshop 2014 Teaching Strategies: Concurrent Sessions

2. Nature of Science www.understandingscience.org The University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, and the Regents of the University of California

3. Nature of Science Carpi and Eggar (2010) The process of science, p. 216; Cited in Surpless et al. (2014) Developing Scientific Literacy in Intro Lab Courses, JGE 62, 244-263.

4. Some Characteristics of Good Labs • Pre-lab activity • Prepare students, address common challenges, introduce a skill (e.g. Excel), provide context within course and scientific process framework • Clearly stated learning objectives • Hands-on with little to no lecture • Variety of activities and opportunities for interaction • Emphasis on scientific process • Connections with familiar real world phenomena (personal experience, previous labs, campus, human influence) • Instrumentation if possible • Various levels of inquiry • Student participation in scientific process is explicit • Reflection questions • Post-lab assessment

5. Levels of Inquiry • Not all hands-on experiences are equal Buck, Lowery Bretz and Towns, Journal of College Science Teaching, Sept/Oct, 2008, p.52-58. Cited in McConnell and Ryker (2013) (Re)Designing intro geo labs to promote inquiry webinar (http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/careerdev/AcademicCareerTeach2013/feb.html)

6. Levels of Inquiry • Level 0: Confirmation - The problem, procedure, analysis and correct interpretations of the data are obvious from the statements and questions in the lab. • Level ½ : Structured Inquiry - The lab provides the problem, procedures, and analysis by which students discover relationships or reach conclusions not already known. • Level 1: Guided Inquiry - The lab provides the problem and procedures, but the methods of analysis, communication, and conclusions are for the student to design. • Level 2: Open Inquiry - The problem and background are provided, but the procedures/design/methodology are for the student to design, as are the analysis and conclusions.

7. Minerals Lab: Introduction to cleavage - Take a magnifying glass and compare common table salt (a mineral) to pepper (a ground seed). Sketch and describe what you see. Examine the maps to determine: a) If similar earthquakes occurred today, what differences would you expect in the resulting damage in Raleigh, Asheville, and Charlotte? b) If the state was going to give one of the cities $5,000,000 to protect key buildings from collapse, which city would you award the funds to? Rank the Level for Each Example McConnell and Ryker (2013) (Re)Designing intro geo labs to promote inquiry webinar (http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/careerdev/AcademicCareerTeach2013/feb.html)

8. Weathering Lab: Record the following data for each marble tombstone: a) Date on the stone; b) Visual weathering class for inscriptions; c) Average thickness of the stone at the top and bottom Earthquake Lab: During each modeled “earthquake”, the brick made a rapid change in position. Three hypotheses for fault movements are described. Design an experiment to determine which best represents the movements that occur with the earthquake machine model. Rank the Level for Each Example McConnell and Ryker (2013) (Re)Designing intro geo labs to promote inquiry webinar (http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/careerdev/AcademicCareerTeach2013/feb.html)

9. You Don’t Have to Change Everything! • Labs will have a combination of levels of inquiry McConnell and Ryker (2013) (Re)Designing intro geo labs to promote inquiry webinar (http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/careerdev/AcademicCareerTeach2013/feb.html)

10. Example Steps to Lab Design and Revision • Outline student learning goals • Determine how students will demonstrate their achievement of learning goals • Develop longitudinal assessments with frequent feedback using a variety of tools • Strive for open inquiry but use a variety of levels • Incorporate hands-on participation in the gathering and interpretation of data for most student activities • Repeat skills and conceptual materials multiple times • Explicitly relate all learning to the scientific process • Integrate critical thinking and student reflection • Involve the use of research-grade instrumentation, if possible Surpless et al. (2014) Developing Scientific Literacy in Intro Lab Courses, JGE 62, 244-263.

11. TA Training and Support • New TA orientation • Lab coordinator/head TA • Weekly meetings • Suggestion Sheets: • Lab management • Illustrations • Sample divergent questions • Real world examples • Common misconceptions • Connections to other labs TA using information from the Suggestion Sheet to cover key concepts at the beginning of lab McConnell and Ryker (2013) (Re)Designing intro geo labs to promote inquiry webinar (http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/careerdev/AcademicCareerTeach2013/feb.html)

12. Does This Rock Lab Look Familiar? How can it be turned into open inquiry emphasizing the scientific process?