Empirical; Contextual Research Strand; Title: Elementary Science Specialists and Classroom Generalists: Are There Differences in Science Instruction, Student Achievement, and Cost?

Education Development Center, Waltham MA

Investigators

Abstract

Abstract Intellectual Merit This proposal focuses on science instruction at the elementary level where few research studies exist about effective models for teaching science. The goal of this study is to determine the degree to which there are meaningful differences in the quantity and quality of science instruction provided by a generalist, specialist, or blended model for classroom instruction; whether differences in instruction are associated with student outcomes; and which model is the most cost-effective based on financial and human resources. The study will target 80 teachers of fourth and fifth grade students in 42 schools in the Boston Public School District. The guiding principles detailed in the Massachusetts Science and Technology Engineering Curriculum Framework will serve as the operating definition of high-quality science instruction and the theoretical framework to guide classroom observations. The four research questions that will guide this study include: 1. What are the characteristics of schools that do and do not employ science specialists? What are the characteristics of science specialists and classroom generalists? 2. How does the quality of science instruction provided by a science specialist, a classroom generalist, and a combination of specialist/generalist differ? How does the quantity of science instruction provided by a science specialist, a classroom generalist, and a combination of specialist/generalist differ? 3. If differences in instruction exist between the models, to what extent and in what ways are they associated with student learning? 4. What are the financial and human-resource costs associated with each model? A mixed methods approach will be used to collect data through surveys, three face-to face interviews and three classroom observations. Data will be collected from both principals and teachers over a 2.5 year period. The survey instruments and protocols were developed by Horizon Research, Inc., and will be modified to meet the specific needs of this study. Fourth and fifth grade student test scores from the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System, the state's assessment instrument, and kit-based tests will be used to determine the impact of the different models on student achievement. The study includes a well thought-out approach for analyzing data using an array of quantitative and qualitative methods (e.g. general descriptive statistics, hierarchical linear modeling, logistic regression models, one-way MANOVA estimations, coding and coding schemes, and atlas.it). Broader Impacts The boarder impacts of this study reside in the significance and importance of results to district policymakers. While less that 30% of elementary students in the United States receive science instruction from specialists or a science specialist in addition to their regular classroom teachers, few studies exist that describe the effect of this approach on science teaching and student achievement. The fundamental issue that might be resolved through this study include which of three models (generalist, specialist, or blended) is the better one for teaching and learning science and at what cost. This information will help policymakers make better decisions about science instruction at the elementary level. Ways to disseminate lessons-learned to key education stakeholders will be distributed through multiple channels and pathways relevant to policymakers. Thus, this project adds to the limited research in this area, advances knowledge about science instruction, highlights the impact on student achievement, sheds light on cost effectiveness, and provides a tool for measuring science instruction at the elementary level.