But is it effective? Assessing the impact of a historically based unit David W. Rudge, Biological Sciences & The Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University Uric C. Geer, The Mallinson Institute for Science Education, Western Michigan University Eric M. Howe, Department of Education, Assumption College

Outline I.Introduction II.Method III.Results IV.Conclusions

I. Introduction The Phenomenon of Industrial Melanism Biston betularia f. typical Biston betularia f. carbonaria

I. Introduction The Phenomenon of Industrial Melanism Frequency of dark formCenters of air pollution

I. Introduction The Phenomenon of Industrial Melanism Photographs of light and dark forms on soot-darkened and lichen-covered tree trunks

I. Introduction History of Research on Industrial Melanism Mystery Phenomenon format Exploration from multiple theoretical perspectives Lamarckian Inheritance Natural Selection Mutation Theory

I. Introduction Did the Mystery Phenomenon unit improve student understandings of a targeted set of issues associated with the nature of science? If so, what was it about the unit that led to these changes? Research Questions

II. Method 1.Participants 2.Context 3.Intervention 4.Procedure 5.Data Analysis

1. Participants Conducted at large Midwestern university Spring 2007 Preservice elementary school teachers 13 participants (19 potential) 100% white, female, yrs. old

2. Context Based on Michigan Science Curriculum Framework, AAAS Project 2061, National Science Education Standards BIOS 1700 Life Science for Elementary Educators I –Taxonomy, Anatomy and Physiology, Ecology, Evolution Taught in lecture-lab (24 students) format Unit of interest takes place during lab

3. Intervention Open-ended problems from history of research on industrial melanism –Instructor provides information that historically led to discovery –Students are invited to identify problem, pose theories –Students are invited to come up with ways to test theories Instructor facilitates Explicit / Reflective † discussion: Explicit NOS is actively considered in relation to content Reflective Students construct their own insights † cf. Abd-El-Khalick & Lederman (2000)

4. Procedure Qualitative (Interpretive) Research 1.Pre/post test = open-ended VNOS-C survey 2.Semi-structured interviews †† - To establish validity of survey - To allow further probing of student responses †† Lederman & O’Malley, 1990

4. Procedure Pre- and Post- Survey NOS Topics 1.Definition of theories, how created 2.Whether theories change 3.Definition of experiments 4.Whether experiments are necessary 5.The subjective (theory laden) nature of science 6.Role of imagination and creativity

5. Data Analysis Characterize pre- and post- responses to questions into emergent themes –cross check consistency with rest of students answers To address whether change has occurred -analyze aggregate for evidence of change To address why change has occurred -analyze responses of interviewed individuals

III. Results Summary of Change in Student’s NOS Views (N=11) Presurvey Postsurvey NaïveMore informed NaïveMore informed 1. Nature of theoriesn = 2 18% n = 4 36% 2. Possibility of theory change n = 3 27% n = 0 0% 3. Necessity of experiments n = 0 0% n = 9 81% 6. Creativity and Imagination n = 4 36% n = 2 18%

III. Results Student Interview re. Necessity of Experiments

IV. Conclusions The Mystery Phenomenon Unit did cause some change in student understandings of a targeted set of NOS issues. Whether this is due to the use of history is somewhat unclear.

Acknowledgements This material is based on work supported by the National Science Foundation under Grant No Any opinions, findings and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation.