1. LEARNING PROGRESSIONS TOWARD ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY Charles W. Anderson, Ajay Sharma, Lindsey Mohan, In-Young Cho, Hui Jin, Christopher D. Wilson, John Lockhart, Blakely Tsurusaki Richard Duschl, Discussant MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

2. Presented at the annual meeting of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, San Francisco, April 3-6, 2006 This research is supported in part by three grants from the National Science Foundation: Developing a research-based learning progression for the role of carbon in environmental systems (REC 0529636), the Center for Curriculum Materials in Science (ESI-0227557) and Long-term Ecological Research in Row-crop Agriculture (DEB 0423627. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation. CCMS

3. PARTNERS  Mark Wilson, Karen Draney, University of California, Berkeley  Joe Krajcik. Phil Piety, University of Michigan  Brian Reiser, Northwestern University  Jo Ellen Roseman, AAAS Project 2061  Long Term Ecological Research (LTER) Network  Alan Berkowitz, Baltimore Ecosystem Study  Ali Whitmer, Santa Barbara Coastal  John Moore, Shortgrass Steppe Environmental Literacy Research Group

4. ORDER OF PAPERS Introduction and overview: Charles W. Anderson Paper 1: Understanding of matter transformations in physical and chemical changes, By In-Young Cho and Charles W. Anderson Paper 2: Developing a Carbon Cycle Learning Progression for K-12, By Lindsey Mohan, Ajay Sharma, In-Young Cho, Hui Jin, and Charles W. Anderson Paper 3: Diversity and Evolution in Environmental Systems, By Chris Wilson, John Lockhart, and Charles W. Anderson Paper 4: Connecting Personal Actions to Environmental Systems, By Blakely K. Tsurusaki and Charles W. Anderson Common Themes and Implications: Charles W. Anderson Discussion: Richard Duschl, Rutgers University Website: http://edr1.educ.msu.edu/EnvironmentalLit/index.htm Environmental Literacy Research Group

5. INTRODUCTION and OVERVIEW Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

6. CONVERGING TRENDS  Science education policy: Critiques of standards  Science: Interdisciplinary Research on Coupled Human and Natural Systems  Citizenship: Increasing environmental responsibility  Science education research: Learning Progressions as an Approach to Research Synthesis Environmental Literacy Research Group

7. CRITIQUES OF STANDARDS  Traditionalist critique (e.g., Fordham Foundation, California standards)  Too much philosophy, psychology, inquiry  Not enough rigorous science content  Science education critique (e.g., us)  Need to consider changing needs for citizens’ knowledge  Too many benchmarks: Need to reduce and reorganize around Big Ideas  Need to consider advances in educational research (including learning progressions) Environmental Literacy Research Group

8. SCIENCE: Interdisciplinary Research on Coupled Human and Natural Systems  Shift from individual disciplines (ecology, geology, atmospheric science, meteorology) to interdisciplinary fields (environmental science, earth systems science)  Shift from focus on natural systems to coupled human and natural systems  Shift from retrospective (reconstructing the past) to prospective (projecting the future) Environmental Literacy Research Group

9. RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP and ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE LITERACY  The world is changing as human impacts on the environment increase  Citizens need to consider environmental consequences or sustainability in concert with other democratic values: freedom, opportunity, justice  Actions and decisions in multiple roles that all citizens play: learners, consumers, voters, workers, volunteers, and advocates  Environmental science literacy is the ability to  Enact personal agency with respect to environmental issues  Understand and evaluate arguments among experts  Reconcile actions or policies with values Environmental Literacy Research Group

10. PRACTICES for ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE LITERACY 1. Inquiry: Learning from experience (not addressed in these papers)  Practical and scientific inquiry  Developing arguments from evidence 2 and 3. Scientific accounts and applications: Learning from authorities  Applying fundamental principles to processes in systems  Using scientific models and patterns to explain and predict 4. Using scientific reasoning in responsible citizenship: Reconciling experience, authority, and values  Enacting personal agency on environmental issues  Reconciling actions or policies with values  Understanding and evaluating arguments among experts Environmental Literacy Research Group

11. ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE ACCOUNTS and APPLICATIONS Applying fundamental principles…  Structure of systems: nanoscopic, microscopic, macroscopic, large scale  Constraints on processes: tracing matter, energy, information  Change over time: evolution, multiple causes, feedback loops …to processes in coupled human and natural systems  Earth systems: Geosphere, hydrosphere, atmosphere  Living systems: Producers, consumers, decomposers  Engineered systems: Food, water, energy, transportation, housing

12. RESEARCH GOALS LEARNING PROGRESSIONS as an APPROACH to RESEARCH SYNTHESIS  Synthesizing research around key practices and themes or Big Ideas  Using short-term studies to investigate long-term learning  Connecting research, policy, and practice Environmental Literacy Research Group

13. RESEARCH PRODUCTS  A research-based learning progression for environmental literacy topics. This learning progression will include: –A review of research on student learning relevant to that topic –Results of our research on student learning, including what we have learned from pretests and posttests –A suggested successional description of students’ learning: a series of steps by which elementary, middle, and high school students can work toward mastery of the learning goals for high school graduates.  Assessment tests for K-12 students Environmental Literacy Research Group

14. METHODS  Data sources –Volunteer teachers in working groups –Tests administered to upper elementary, middle, and high school students (available on website)  Data analysis –Developing rubrics for open-response questions –Searching for patterns and common themes within and across tests  Patterns in accounts of environmental systems (Practices 2 and 3)  Patterns in reconciling experience, authority, and values (Practice 4) –Looking for developmental trends Environmental Literacy Research Group

15. STUDENTS’ IDEAS OF MATTER TRANSFORMATION IN PHYSICAL AND CHEMICICAL CHANGES: ECOLOGICAL THINKING In-Young Cho and Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

16. DATA and ANALYSIS Data Sources  40 students in grade 10 - general and AP chemistry  40 students in grade 10 - International Baccalaureate program  “Physical and Chemical Change” assessment of 12 written questionnaires  development of rubric and working paper Data Analysis  Matter transformations in physical & chemical changes  Concept relations in students’ ecological thinking of scientific principles of environmental systems  Phenomenological categories for concept relations  Construction of issues in students’ ecological thinking about matter transformations in environmental systems Environmental Literacy Research Group

17. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS Applying fundamental principles…  Structure of systems: Atomic- molecular and macroscopic  Constraints on processes: -Tracing matter: mass, substances, elements, molecules, atoms -Tracing energy …to processes in coupled human and natural systems  Sublimating iodine  Burning wood  Losing weight

18. SUBLIMATING IODINE 1. A 1-gram sample of solid iodine is placed in a tube and the tube is sealed after all of the air is removed. The tube and the solid iodine together weigh 27 grams. The tube is then heated until all of the iodine evaporates and the tube is filled with iodine gas. Will the weight after heating be: a.less than 26 grams. b.26 grams. c.between 26 and 27 grams. d.27 grams. e.more than 27 grams. 2. What is the reason for your answer to question 1? Environmental Literacy Research Group Iodine Solid

19. CHANGE OF STATE  “Because going from a solid to a gas, it weighs less”  “Because of the law of conservation of mass” Environmental Literacy Research Group

20. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS  In physical change, more than half of the students didn’t conserve the mass of gas.  Even in a closed system, gas is thought to weigh less than a solid. Environmental Literacy Research Group

21. BURING WOOD True or false? When a piece of wood burns, some of the matter is destroyed. What is the reason for your answer? True: 17.5% False: 82.5%  “Isn’t there a law that says matter is neither lost nor created? So I’m thinking it’s just transfer into gas and ash” (unspecified gas)  “it is changed to other states/forms such as ash and smoke” (ashes and smoke)  “when you’re burning, you’re chemically destroying. So some matter must be destroyed” (destroys matter)  “the wood isn’t changing chemically, just physically” (phase change) Environmental Literacy Research Group

22. COMBUSTION Environmental Literacy Research Group

23. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS  When a gas is involved in a chemical change as a reactant/product in open systems, added/emitted mass of gas is ignored  In open systems, students often failed to trace the pathway of gases and failed to give them chemical identities  Asserting the law of conservation of mass without accompanying explanation  Chemical change is not considered as a process of atomic rearrangement but as a simple change of matter form  Atomic-molecular reasoning is limited and heavily context-dependent (e.g. compare to losing weight question) Environmental Literacy Research Group

24. LOSING WEIGHT A person on a diet lost 20 pounds. Some of his fat is gone. What happened to the mass of the fat?  “It was used for energy” (conversion to energy)  “It was transferred elsewhere and released from the body, sweat, etc.” (water and waste materials)  “It was burned away, it went away” (simple subtraction)  “The mass of the fat stayed the same” (conservation of mass)  “The fat cells in the person’s body shrank” (other) Environmental Literacy Research Group

25. CELLULAR RESPIRATION Environmental Literacy Research Group

26. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS  The gas products in the chemical reactions of cellular respiration are not traced; the conservation of mass is only stated technically.  The context of fat burning gives the idea of energy production, the process of chemical reactions of cellular respiration was not traced.  Students knew fat burning is a breaking down of fat, but didn’t trace it to a chemical process of oxidation into CO 2 and H 2 O Environmental Literacy Research Group

27. MATTER TRANSFORMATIONS in ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS  About half of the students had no commitment to conservation of mass in changes involving gases  The other half of the students showed a commitment to the principle, but were unable to apply it to more complex chemical changes  They had problems with understanding systems: - difficulties in identifying reactants and products - matter-energy conversions - inability to use atomic-molecular models Environmental Literacy Research Group

28. DEVELOPING A CARBON CYCLE LEARNING PROGRESSION FOR K-12 Lindsey Mohan, Ajay Sharma, In-Young Cho, Hui Jin, and Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

29. DATA SOURCES and ANALYSIS Data Sources  120 total assessments - 40 elementary school (3rd & 4th grade) - 40 middle school (6th & 8th grade) - 40 high school (biology classes)  Items focused on the role of carbon in: producers, consumers, decomposers, human- energy systems, physical & chemical change, and carbon pools & fluxes Data Analysis  Rubrics developed to capture patterns in responses - Reliability checks and revision of rubrics Environmental Literacy Research Group

30. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS Applying fundamental principles…  Structure of systems: –atomic-molecular (CO 2 and organic materials), –single-celled and multicellular organisms (producers, consumers, decomposers), –ecosystems  Constraints on processes: –Tracing matter: inorganic to organic forms …to processes in coupled human and natural systems  Amazon tree growth  Decomposition of apple  Food chain  Preserving forests

31. On March 10, 2004, National Public Radio reported that “forests in a remote part of the Amazon are suddenly growing like teenagers in a growth spurt.” Scientists have speculated that our actions may have caused this phenomenon. What do you think could be the scientific basis behind such a speculation?

32. CONNECTING AMAZON GROWTH to FOSSIL FUELS Microscopic and Large Scale accounts  25% focused on microscopic scale (“maybe there are more minerals for the trees to grow”)  12.5% focused on large scale (“lack of pollution from business”) Tracing carbon across from inorganic to organic forms  0%-related to elevated level of CO 2 in atmosphere (combustion to photosynthesis) Direct versus indirect influences from humans  38%-humans are directly influencing growth  “ Naturally, trees would not suddenly have grown an incredibly drastic amount in just a year…you must believe that man-made influences caused it. Possibilities are controlled burns, soil that has been removed or changed to stimulate crop rotation, or even particles in rainwater or chemical substances.”

33. WHEN AN APPLE IS LEFT OUTSIDE FOR A LONG TIME, IT ROTS. WHAT CAUSES THE APPLE TO ROT? Students become increasingly more aware that decomposers are involved, but do not trace matter through the process.

34. EXPLAIN HOW THE FOLLOWING LIVING THINGS CONNECT WITH EACH OTHER: GRASS, COWS, HUMAN BEINGS, DECOMPOSING BACTERIA Student Response: “the grass is eaten by the cow and becomes energy and the cow is eaten by humans and all these things die and are decomposed.”

35. EXPLAIN WHY IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO PRESERVE OUR FORESTS  Middle school students more often mention connection between humans and O 2 from plants and less explanations including animals  Limited understanding of the role of plants in the ecological carbon cycle

36. KEY FINDINGS  Students primarily reason at macroscopic level; Reasoning at microscopic scale and large scale is more common in explanations from older students, but very limited.  Students do not trace matter from organic to inorganic forms (e.g., decomposition).  Students view living systems as connected by having things in common or being part of a food chain, but not by tracing matter and energy.  Students make environmental decisions based on needs of humans and animals. Environmental Literacy Research Group

37. DIVERSITY AND EVOLUTION IN ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS Christopher D. Wilson, John Lockhart and Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

38. DATA SOURCES  Two high school classes (n=30) -Biology and Zoology  One middle school class (n=30)  Two elementary classes (n=30) Environmental Literacy Research Group

39. EVOLUTION, DIVERSITY and ENVIRONMENTAL LITERACY  Diversity in natural systems at different levels  Natural systems change over time in response to environmental conditions.  Human impact on the environment is increasingly directing the way systems change. Environmental Literacy Research Group Sex and Mutation: Diversity Selection: Diversity

40. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS Applying fundamental principles…  Structure of systems: –Alleles, genes, traits, organisms, populations, species, communities and ecosystems –Diversity at multiple levels  Constraints on processes: –Connections between systems –Tracing information: individual life cycles, population structures  Change over time: –Modeling the mechanisms governing the connections –Evolution as changes in population size and structure –Human effects on biodiversity …to processes in coupled human and natural systems  Structure of strawberry populations  Structure of fish populations  Evolutionary change in cheetahs  Survival of elephant populations

41. STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group MUSICAL INSTRUMENTS String Instruments Wind Instruments Percussion Woodwind Brass Plucked Bowed Metallic Skinned Flutes Clarinets Harps Guitars Cymbals Bells Violins Cellos Trumpets Saxophones Drums Tambourines Starting with “All Living Things...”

42. STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Producers ConsumersDecomposers Musical Instruments Item

43. STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Producers ConsumersDecomposers Musical Instruments Item % of students

44. STRUCTURE OF SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Fish Item Structure of individuals within a population From Elementary: Fish are all Identical To Secondary: Significant Differences (but no mechanism) e.g. “It is a proven fact that no two organisms look exactly alike and act the same”

45. PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Strawberry Item A. Why don’t the strawberries look identical?

46. PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Strawberry Item A. Why don’t the strawberries look identical? % of students

47. PROCESSES THAT CONNECT SYSTEMS Environmental Literacy Research Group Strawberry Item B. Explaining the difference in diversity between wild and supermarket strawberries (connecting human and natural systems).  ~50% of students mentioned some sort of human influence.  Vague perceptions of what that influence was.  Lacking understanding of the mechanisms of how humans influence diversity.  Invisible connections between human and natural systems.

48. CHANGE OVER TIME Environmental Literacy Research Group Cheetah Item 20mph60mph Model-Based Reasoning  Individuals in a population are not identical, but vary in many characteristics.  Survival is not random, certain traits provide an advantage.  Populations change over time as the frequency of advantageous alleles / traits increases.

49. % of students CHANGE OVER TIME Environmental Literacy Research Group Cheetah Item  No students used the rules of the model in constructing their explanation – instead they focused on narratives.  High School students saw the need for a mechanism, but because part of the model was invisible to them (genetic variation in populations), like Lamarck, they picked the wrong one.

50. CHANGE OVER TIME Environmental Literacy Research Group Elephant Item 2 populations of elephants. Elephants in Population A are all slightly different, Population B are all identical. Which of the two populations do you think is most likely to survive if there was a severe drought? Rules of the model:  Individuals in a population are not identical, but vary in many characteristics.  Survival is not random, certain traits provide an advantage.  Population level genetic variation is the raw material of natural selection.

51. CHANGE OVER TIME Environmental Literacy Research Group Elephant Item  Although most students chose Pop n A, very few used scientific models.  Students reasoned in ways that made sense to them, but which were incompatible with scientific thought.  Reliance on narratives, often anthropomorphic and human society-based. % of students

52. DIMENSIONS of the LEARNING PROGRESSION Environmental Literacy Research Group  From Disconnected Systems to Coupled Human and Natural systems.  From Informal / Metaphorical to Model Based Reasoning.  From Invisible to Visible systems and connections.  Evolution as Prescriptive, not just Descriptive.  Towards responsible citizenship

53. CONNECTING PERSONAL ACTIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS Blakely K. Tsurusaki and Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

54. DATA SOURCES Three high school classes (n=44) - 9th and 10th grade - Biology, Physical Science, Earth Science One middle school class (n=26) - 6th grade One elementary class (n=34) - 4th grade Environmental Literacy Research Group

55. PRINCIPLES, PROCESSES and SYSTEMS Applying fundamental principles…  Structure of systems: –Macroscopic (food, appliances, plumbing in house, etc.) and large- scale (food, water, waste disposal) engineered systems –Connections between engineered and natural systems  Constraints on processes: –Tracing matter through supply chains and waste disposal chains –Tracing energy through engineered systems …to processes in coupled human and natural systems  Hamburger supply chain  Paper cup waste disposal chain  Global warming

56. CONNECTING HUMAN ACTIONS TO ENVIRONMENTAL SYSTEMS  Consumers of essential goods and services, including food, clothing, shelter, air, water, and transportation.  Goods and services in each of these categories pass through a number of environmental systems on their way to us (the supply chain) and go through additional systems after we are done with them (waste disposal).  The human systems that supply all of our essential goods and services begin and end in the earth’s natural systems. Environmental Literacy Research Group

57. PRETEST QUESTIONS  Supply and waste disposal chains - hamburger meat, paper cup, water  Resources used and impact of resources  Global Warming/Global Climate Change  Preservation of environment  Biodiversity and evolution Environmental Literacy Research Group

58. WHERE DOES YOUR HAMBURGER MEAT COME FROM? **No mention of feedlots

59. NUMBER OF STEPS IN HAMBURGER SUPPLY CHAIN  High school students mention more steps than middle or elementary school students  Same results in paper cup waste disposal chain

60. CONNECTIONS Most high school and middle school students think that there IS a connection between hamburger meat and a corn field Most elementary students think that there IS NOT a connection Almost all students think there IS a connection between a paper cup and a tree Could there be any connection between hamburger meat and a corn field in Iowa? Could there be any connection between a paper cup and a tree? Student responses

61. MAKING CONNECTIONS 2A Response Characteristics of student answers Elem (%) n=34 Middle (%) n=26 High (%) n=44 YesMentions why cows might eat corn; specifically relate eating corn to growth of cow 03.84.5 YesCows eat corn2.9 46.252.3 YesCows and corn field on same farm 20.6 15.413.6 NoCorn and hamburger different 38.2 3.813.6 2B. Explain why you think hamburger and corn could or could not be connected Environmental Literacy Research Group

62. SUPPLY and WASTE DISPOSAL CHAINS  Sequence of actors and places, as opposed to transformation of matter and energy  Supply chain as small-scale rural production on family farms rather than large- scale industrial beef production  High school students mention more steps than middle or elementary school students  High school students give more detailed explanations for connections between hamburger meat and corn fields and paper cups and trees (e.g., some mention transformation of matter) Environmental Literacy Research Group

63. GLOBAL WARMING Most middle and high school students HAVE heard of global warming Most elementary students HAVE NOT heard of global warming Environmental Literacy Research Group Student responses

64. CAUSES OF GLOBAL WARMING Environmental Literacy Research Group *Mention origin/by-products, not processes Student responses

65. WAYS TO REDUCE GLOBAL WARMING

66. KEY FINDINGS Learning progression  Actors and locations - number and type  Tracing matter and energy - connections  Transformation of matter and energy  Infrastructure and by-products  Scientific reasoning necessary for responsible citizenship Environmental Literacy Research Group

67. COMMON THEMES and IMPLICATIONS Charles W. Anderson MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group

68. PRACTICES 2 and 3: SCIENTIFIC ACCOUNTS and their APPLICATIONS  From stories to model-based accounts –Shift from why to how--purposes to mechanisms –BUT lack knowledge of critical parts of systems  From macroscopic to hierarchy of systems –Increased awareness of atomic-molecular and large-scale systems –BUT little success in connecting accounts at different levels  Increasing awareness of constraints on systems –Increasing awareness of conservation laws –BUT rarely successful in constraint-based reasoning  Increasing awareness of “invisible” parts of systems –Increasing detail and complexity –BUT gases, decomposers, connections between human and natural systems remain “invisible”

69. PRACTICE 4: USING SCIENTIFIC REASONING for RESPONSIBLE CITIZENSHIP  Enacting personal agency on environmental issues –Limited individual agency or responsibility  Understanding and evaluating arguments among experts –Reliance on media and personal experience –Unidirectional connections between human and natural systems –Limited awareness of comparative scale of processes.  Reconciling actions or policies with values –Generalized good and bad

70. TO DO LIST  Systematic review of literature  Better assessments - for inquiry (Practice 1) - for applications to citizenship (Practice 4) - Psychometric quality (BEAR assessment system)  Understanding pre-model-based reasoning in elementary students (and all of us) - Embodied reasoning and inquiry - Storytelling and scientific accounts  Teaching experiments at upper elementary, middle school, and high school levels Environmental Literacy Research Group

71. MORE INFORMATION Papers, Tests, and Other Materials are Available on Our Website: http://edr1.educ.msu.edu/EnvironmentalLit/index.htm Environmental Literacy Research Group

72. DISCUSSION Richard Duschl, Rutgers University MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY Environmental Literacy Research Group