Making Change With Elementary Teachers in Asymmetric Environments

• In Event: A New Generation of Goals for Scientific Modeling: Strategies and Lessons Learned for Reach and Impact

Abstract

Purpose/Significance. This study focuses on pedagogic, structural, and operational challenges teachers encountered through their participation in an NSF-funded effort to engage upper elementary grade students in the use of agent-based modeling to enhance their scientific thinking. A number of systemic asymmetries are identified between program design and realities on the ground, which proved to limit teacher growth and the scope of students’ learning opportunities, as well as the research team’s ability to draw broader conclusions about the efficacy of agent-based modeling in elementary classrooms.

Theoretical Framework. The learning environment in project classrooms is intended to be based on constructionist principles (Papert, 1993), wherein iterative design and construction of artifacts supports educational growth. In turn, the framing of growth draws from Dewey’s (1916/2018) delineation of experience as more than just activity. Rather, experience involves doing something and undergoing the results, with the expectation that future “doings” are informed by what is undergone. Thus, over time there is expected growth in capacity for making strategic choices. This constructionist/experiential framework, however, embeds certain assumptions which need to be brought to the surface regularly in the design and implementation of programs. These include: (1) alignment of teacher pedagogy and role definition with the program model; (2) provision for extended time frames as teachers assimilate innovative practices into their professional repertoire; and (3) consistency in systemic goals at different levels of schools’ administrative hierarchy.

Methods. The analysis builds from analytic authoethnography (Anderson, 2006) on the part of the principal investigator, drawing on participant observations in participating classrooms, teacher workshops, and summer camp programs. These information sources were triangulated with observations from program staff and evaluators, as well as focused discussions with participating teachers, principals and assistant principals, and district-level administrators. In addition, student and teacher work samples proved to be valuable information sources corroborating, challenging, and extending our understanding.

Findings/Conclusions. For many teachers, enacting a constructionist modeling environment proved to be problematic due to interlocking asymmetries in the three areas noted above: pedagogy (and implicit role definition), time support for change, and consistency in administrative reward structures. While some teachers were successful in making first steps toward change in their pedagogy, others were unable or unwilling to do this owing to personally held role beliefs and/or from an effort to work toward what they perceived to be expected of them by their principal. This difficulty in pedagogic change was amplified by the district’s practice of changing many teachers’ grade assignments from year to year. This served to undermine both individual teachers’ ability to develop their practice and grade-level teams’ ability to solidify as communities of practice. Finally, principals and the school board were under considerable political pressure to improve state test scores, which served to limit their enacted support for non-tested goals such as inquiry and autonomy. Together, these operational asymmetries contributed to uneven outcomes in teacher practice and student learning experiences.

Author

• Bob Coulter, Missouri Botanical Garden