I’ve been asked to chair a committee to look into using science “kits” for our elementary classes. We’re interested in this, but where do we start?
—Mariana, Manchester, New Hampshire
Science kits are published by many companies and individuals and address a variety of topics. They can be helpful for teachers who do not have a lot of background experience in science topics – either in the content itself or in designing and implementing inquiry-based activities. They can also be expensive. You’ll want to ask several questions:

• What do you hope to accomplish by using the kits? Is your school/district trying to get inquiry into elementary classes, to provide a complete set of materials and resources for studying a topic, or to ensure that all students have common experiences? Kits can provide these, but if you already are implementing a strong, inquiry-based curriculum, the kits may not be necessary.
• How do the kit topics align with your state standards and local curriculum? Using kits should be an integral part of your science program, not an add-on. Many also are designed to be appropriate at specific grade levels (e.g., K-2, 3-5, 6-8).
• What are the credentials of the publisher and the history of the publisher in developing and supporting the kits?
• What research does the publisher have to show the effectiveness of their particular kits?
• Do the kits provide background information and opportunities and resources for the inquiry process? The activities should promote processes such as observing, questioning, hypothesizing, predicting, investigating (including planning, conducting, measuring, gathering data, controlling variables, interpreting, and drawing conclusions), and communicating. Evaluate them carefully; some kits are just a collection of materials for demonstrations and/or replication activities.
• How will you implement the kits? I recommend providing the professional development offered by the publisher, even if it adds to the cost of the kits.
• Will it stifle creativity? I asked a colleague (one of the best elementary science teachers I know) about the kits in his school. He appreciates them for the way they guide teachers through the processes and provide the materials. He noted the ones they used were not tightly scripted so teachers had room to incorporate their own experiences and go beyond the basics if they felt comfortable doing so.
• Will you be able to cover the same amount of material? My colleague noted that the kits take time to implement fully, and therefore teachers may not “cover” as many topics as they did without them. However, he noted the kits provided opportunities for students to develop skills in the processes of science (a focus of many state standards as well as the National Science Education Standards). So you may wind up “covering” more about these processes.

There are some practical considerations, too. Where will the boxes be stored? Will the same kits be used by more than one class during the year? If so, what rotating schedule will you have? Who will be responsible for ensuring that all materials are in place for the next class? How will you budget for replacing consumables? Some kits sell replacement materials, but this can be expensive. Some teachers get funds from the school/district and have fun scouting local discount stores for the materials.
This can be a great opportunity to get inquiry science into your classrooms. Just remember that although inquiry-based science often involves hands-on activities, not all hands-on activities are inquiry-based. Good luck in your efforts and keep us posted!

It was Monday morning and a sharp corner on a large immovable object (left by another group sharing the space used by the preschool…sound familiar?) unexpectedly turned into a chance to assess the understanding of symbols by one three-year-old.
“Ricky” had stepped past the orange cones which surrounded the sharp-cornered plywood platform. I explained that the platform was not ours, the corners were sharp—something to stay away from—and that the orange cones were a symbol for “stop”, that they meant we were not to go past them. “Oh, there should be a sign,” he said, and in a minute he was back with the plastic STOP sign from the bike area.
He recognized that the cone represented another symbol he was familiar with, a STOP sign, and the command to stop. I wonder at what age he will be able to understand that a globe represents the a planet, Earth, and that the Moon is a sphere?

It’s interesting in this issue to see how teachers can incorporate inquiry learning into topics such as Bernoulli’s Principle, bridge design, photosynthesis, a beach clean-up program, rocks, paper airplanes, maple seeds, and ponds. The authors show how you don’t need elaborate materials to create learning experiences for students that go beyond cookbook demonstrations and focus on real inquiry and problem solving. The articles describe these investigations and also have advice for teachers who want to include more inquiry in their classes. The articles have lots of real-life classroom examples, and the author share their resources, rubrics, and diagrams.
I followed up on some of the suggested websites:

• Recognizing Inquiry compares three hands-on teaching techniques: guided activity, challenge activity, and an open exploration activity. The the comparison has activities that are on the same topic and use the same materials, but the student outcomes are different, based on which technique is used. This is a chapter from the book Inquiry: 
Thoughts, Views, and Strategies for the K-5 Classroom, published by the National Science Foundation.
• The Institute for Inquiry from the Exploratorium has ideas for professional development in inquiry and formative assessments. But you can click on Our Philosophy for a description of inquiry, a downloadable book Pathways to Learning, and Inquiry Structure, a graphic organizer that shows a process of inquiry.
• Doing Science: The Process of Scientific Inquiry is a set of lessons from the National Institute of Health. These lessons guide students (and teachers) through an inquiry process.
• A continuum from the National Research Council shows essential features of inquiry and how to vary activities to guide students through the process. Where do your classroom activities “fit”?

Efforts to promote inquiry in science have been around for a long time (I remember the discussion in my methods courses eons ago, and it’s always at hot topic at NSTA conferences). So why are we still talking about it? What is keeping us from using more inquiry in K-12 science classes? The Science Scope article Engendering Inquiry discusses some of the perceived barriers to implementing inquiry instruction. Are there others? What do you think?

As a preschool teacher I try to be aware of how my work might introduce or reinforce misconceptions in my students’ understanding of concepts. In the Perspectives column in the September issue of Science and Children, Michele H. Lee and Deborah L. Hanuscin write about common misconceptions about astronomy, A (Mis)Understanding of Astronomical Proportions? (pg 60-61).
They report on studies that have found that elementary school age children

• often have difficulty interpreting two-dimensional diagrams which represent three-dimensional space
• may become confused by ambiguous terms, such as “round earth” which they may think means disk shaped rather than spherical
• when explaining astronomical phenomena—students who were allowed to manipulate concrete objects produced markedly different student responses from children relying on words alone.

So I will use the word “round” to refer to wheels and plates, and “spherical” to refer to balls and oranges, make 3-D models with playdough instead of drawing diagrams, and provide materials for manipulation when children are asked to tell what they know. It sounds like fun!
Blowing bubbles is an activity where using the word “spherical” comes naturally. The bubble wand opening is a circle and the bubble is a sphere. Children can point to a ball or a flat round disk to show what shape they see when they blow a bubble.
Peggy

At our inservice last month, we learned several strategies for writing in science classes.  But when I tried one in my classroom, it went over like a lead balloon. What was I doing wrong?
—Rosalind, Denver, Colorado
How many times have we heard “Well, I tried <fill-in-the-blank>, but it didn’t work”? And then the classroom instruction reverts to the tried and (not necessarily) true methods. This certainly happened to me when I tried a different instructional strategy, an alternative form of assessment, or a new classroom management routine. Students would roll their eyes or complain before we even started.
I’ve come to the conclusion that any type of change is difficult for some people (not an original thought on my part). We are such creatures of habit! By the time students are in the upper elementary grades, they have a definite idea of what school is “supposed to be.” Whenever teachers or administrators deviate from this comfort zone, the defenses go up.
Students are not the only ones who have comfort zones. Just try a different format for a faculty meeting, a new schedule for inservice days, or a strategy to get teachers out of their seats at a workshop. I had a graduate student in one of my classes who was incredulous that I expected them to work cooperatively and to participate in class discussions. “I didn’t know we were going to have to, like, DO anything!” she remarked with an angry look. I had obviously encroached on her comfort zone.
I’m not sure who invented the three-time rule, but it seems true: once is an event, twice is a coincidence, but after the third time a trend or pattern is established. If we try a new strategy once and it doesn’t fit the modus operandi, the students may assume that if they fuss or refuse, we’ll say “Well, that didn’t work” and classroom life will return to the-way-things-are-supposed-to-be.
But if we know that something is the right thing to do, that a research base is behind it, or that it will ultimately pay off in better learning or a better classroom environment, we should stick with it and explain why we are doing something new or different. We may need to model the activity or strategy, too.
This actually turned into several action research projects for me. As I was implementing something new, I noted what the responses were and by whom. I reflected on whether I was implementing the new strategy appropriately and how I had introduced it. After all, my students weren’t any different from others. Why would something work in many other classrooms across the country, but not in mine?
Being aware of the three-time rule (event, coincidence, pattern) and understanding that it often takes several attempts before a new practice is accepted – whether by students or teachers – worked for me. Just give yourself some time and keep at it. If it’s the right thing to do, the students will internalize it, and soon what was once a new idea becomes part of the-way-things-are-supposed-to-be.

The big fish died.  The constant silent presence of the plecostomus—now hiding in the cave, now sucking algae off the aquarium wall—is gone. Donated by a parent who has moved on to high school PTSA duties, the odd fish taught 10 years of preschoolers about its needs: warm water to live in, particular kinds of food, and a place that was quiet and still. Only then would it come out, quickly returning to the cave as children noticed it and the shout went up, “The Big Fish is out, the Big Fish is out!”
Not many children commented on the fish’s death, perhaps because school has just started and over the summer they had forgotten about the Big Fish. The tank needs an algae eater. It’s time to buy a new little “Big Fish.”
Do you have a fish tank in your classroom? How have you used it in teaching? Read more about these cool fish on The Ultimate Pleco Community page.
Peggy