Advanced Theory and Practice of Science Teaching and Learning (EDUC 465) was a course I took in the Winter 2015 quarter with Professor Margaret Lucero. I took this course and the Advanced Theory and Practice of Mathematics Teaching and Learning (EDUC 466) simultaneously. I felt that this was a particularly good pairing of courses to take in the same quarter. Mathematics and science are subjects that are often thought of as interconnected; people talk about math and science “abilities” as if strength in math must be positively correlated with strength in sciences – this was never the case for me. I had always done well in mathematics, but frequently struggled through science courses. In high school, I took the lowest levels of chemistry and physics; in college, I took the minimum three required science courses for the College of Arts and Sciences: two semesters of a chemistry course that was titled “Contemporary Science for Nonscience Majors” and one semester of physical geology, which I personally subtitled “101 Ways the World Will End.” The things I remember the most from the geology course were the kinds of natural disasters that would affect many of us – asteroids, ocean levels rising, a geomagnetic reversal, among other events I would not wish to see in my own lifetime. I cannot say I remember the names or characteristics of any of the twenty or so rocks that we had to memorize and identify for our lab midterm – essentially, going into this EDUC 465, it had been eight years since I had taken any science course, and I did not believe I was at an “advanced” level of knowledge when it came to teaching and learning science.

Many of the other students in EDUC 465 were current or former science teachers, which added to my initial concern that I would not have much to bring to the table. However, I know that some of the most challenging courses can also be the most rewarding courses. My limited background in sciences meant that there was a lot I could actually learn in the class: I definitely had room to grow in this area. My peers often took to recounting their experiences, as students and then as teachers, and from them I was able to see different sides of teaching and learning science that I hadn’t seen before. There are many parallels between the “issues” in mathematics and science education today. There is a push, in both subjects, for more problem- and project-based learning, inquiry, real-world applications and authentic experiences in schools, doing math and science, learning constructively, de-emphasizing direct instruction in favor of more holistic, student-centered teaching with more collaboration among peers. Math and science standards emphasize developing critical thinking skills and deep conceptual understandings. The days of one right answer and one way to get it, we hope, are being put behind us. Educators want students to understand how these disciplines work and engage in discovery learning. The depth vs. breadth, or coverage vs. un-coverage debate, exists in both science and mathematics education. I led a Learning through Discussion session on a reading about supporting English Language Learners in science classes, and had done a Literature Circle on a similar article in the Quantitative Reasoning course the previous quarter. Both math and science are discourse-intensive, despite the fact that they are traditionally viewed as “universal,” without language and literacy barriers for students learning English. Teachers and educators in both articles found that supporting students in their primary language was important for developing students’ conceptual understandings.

I was able to see sciences like biology, chemistry, and physics as broader studies of the natural world around us. I began to reflect on the fact that I personally experienced science as a series of fragmented, isolated facts and overly structured laboratory exercises. In reality, Earth is not as perfectly laid out as my textbooks made it seem, it is much more dynamic, imperfect, and fascinating. I could have benefitted a great deal from having any one of my peers as a science teacher – their passions for the science disciplines and their dedication to teaching students to appreciate the many wonders of the world was evident in every class discussion.

The final project for this course was the Science Concept Study. For this project, we were asked to select a concept in science that we found difficult to teach or hard for students to learn. First, I decided to find a mathematical concept that was applicable in sciences, as I knew that if I would be teaching this concept, I needed to understand it well myself. Then, I made the decision to write the lesson as a mathematics lesson, but showing how mathematics applies to other subjects. My concept was Dimensional Analysis, which is unique in the Quantway curriculum in that it is the only specific mathematical problem solving method that is taught and encouraged. The instructors involved in the design of Quantway felt it was important enough to write an entirely new dimensional analysis lesson for the third module, explaining that students should learn the method first, and then they could use different problem solving methods for conversions if they would like. Dimensional analysis is an important technique in chemistry, so I titled the lesson “Math in Chemistry.” The first part of the project was implementing a pre-test. I administered this to my classmates and professor, since I was one of the students who did not have his or her own classroom, in which case we were to demonstrate the lesson in class. The two mathematics teachers in the class scored the highest, indicating to me that it was, indeed, a mathematical concept that could be difficult for students in science courses to learn. Following the principles of Pathways courses – math being embedded in contextual problem situations – the lesson I wrote explored a few familiar or compelling contexts: understanding the magnitude of Avogadro’s number, 6.0221415 × 1023, by comparing to astronomical measurements; investigating the composition of TUMS® antacids and U.S. nickels, and finally, balancing a chemical equation for a combustion reaction.

This project reflects the Lumina Foundation's M.A. Degree Qualification in Applied Learning: I created a lesson that integrated the focus of my current work (in math curriculum) and focus of the course (science teaching and learning), then wrote an analysis and reflection on the blending of Algebra and Chemistry. I have long thought that Pathways courses could benefit from including more applications to other subject areas, sciences included, as most, if not all of our students major in fields other than mathematics. For me, this project and the EDUC 465 course exemplified the MA-IDE program, how education is interdisciplinary. I engaged with this class by finding intersections between two subjects. I think that the more they are integrated, the more students will see the meaning and usefulness of what they are learning; understanding how interconnected science, technology, environmental education, and mathematics are provides a more complete view of our natural world and human creations.