“Are we doing a practical today sir?”
Said every student ever. No doubt many of my colleagues will have been asked the same question many times before. Funnily, no student ever asks “are we going to be learning about how the thermal decomposition of limestone is used to manufacture glass and concrete today?”
A general approach to engagement
The subject of engagement is fraught with difficulties. Different people mean different things when they use the term, such that definitional needs are paramount here. In my experience, it has meant:
- Long term intellectual appreciation of a subject
- Short term attention in a lesson or on a task
However, whichever definition of engagement we use engagement is, in Coe’s pithy phrase “not a proxy for learning.” Just because a student appears to be utterly absorbed in the classroom activities surrounding them does not mean they are learning.
Taking that as a given, there is a further debate about the relationship between engagement and learning. Some propose that students need to be motivated to succeed in a subject before they can learn anything. Others argue that once students know a lot about a subject, they tend to be more engaged. In a blog I recently discovered Paul Kirschner discusses the evidence involved.
One of the best pieces I have read about the relationship between engagement and learning is Carl Hendrick’s post summarising the work of Graham Nuthall in The Hidden Lives of Learners (2007). Essentially the argument boils down to:
“Our research shows that students can be busiest and most involved with material they already know. In most of the classrooms we have studied, each student already knows about 40-50% of what the teacher is teaching.”
This makes sense. We tend to enjoy things we are comfortable with, and not enjoy things that we find difficult or taxing. So students love poster lessons – because they don’t really have to do much thinking during it. Humanity loves watching television – because we don’t have to do much thinking during it. Of course, teachers can – and should! – design tasks with a level of desirable difficulty. But at root, students who are busy and engaged are not necessarily learning anything.
Engagement in science practicals
To my mind, a science practical is the perfect opportunity for students to be busy, but not learning anything. As pointed out in the previous blogs, actually learning specific science content from a science practical is close to impossible. And yet students can follow the recipe with ease and seem utterly engrossed in the act of changing variables and collecting data.
There are those who would argue that it is the teacher’s responsibility to ensure that the students have a “brains-on” approach to their practical work to which I would probably respond, as per part 2, that this is close to impossible to achieve.
Ian Abrahams has written an article about the motivational impact of science practical work. Unfortunately I don’t have access to it and I can’t find a PDF version of it anywhere. In the abstract he writes that “whilst practical work generates short‐term engagement, it is relatively ineffective in generating motivation to study science post compulsion or longer‐term personal interest in the subject, although it is often claimed to do so. This suggests that those involved with science education need to develop a more realistic understanding of the limitations of practical work in the affective domain.” This does not surprise me in the slightest and Alom Shaha makes related points here (1).
To illustrate the point with an anecdotal example: when I start the GCSE topic of precipitates I always do a basic demonstration involving potassium iodide and lead nitrate. When you mix these two clear solutions together, the product is a vibrant yellow solid suspended in the solution around it – a precipitate. The students always respond in the same way with this demo (and many others). The second the yellow colour appears as though by magic, the students are awed and I get hit by a barrage of questions about how it works, what it is etc. It’s nowhere near the most spectacular chemistry demo, but it is still pretty cool if you’ve never seen it before.
And yet, I could count on the fingers of one hand the students that went on from seeing that practical to be actually excited about the next part of the lesson which involves students learning about precipitates, which ions form precipitates, how to separate precipitates and how to construct equations with suitable state symbols. The spark doesn’t really linger.
But I suppose this is true universally. We all find things that fascinate us but then we find ourselves reaching a certain point where we just lose interest. Planet Earth 2 and other documentaries would be a great example. We all become utterly absorbed in the vignettes of the animals as they go about their daily activities, but how many of us go on to read an article about extreme population divergence and conservation implications for the rare endangered Atlantic Forest sloth, Bradypus torquatus (Pilosa: Bradypodidae)? Probably not many.
We all have our point at which we lose interest. And even the most creative teachers will find that not all students are interested in everything all the time. I don’t think that’s the end of the world. My job is to do right by my students – and that means teaching them science and getting them their grades. If I can inspire them to have a love for and lifelong fascination with science and the natural world around them then all the better. But if I can’t then so be it.
Introduction: are we wasting our time? – part 1
The Cognitive Science of Practical Science – part 2
Thinking Scientifically – part 3
Do Science Practicals Boost Engagement? – part 4
Mary the Super Scientists – part 5
Teaching Practical Skills: If You Aren’t A Science Teacher, Leave Me Alone – part 6
(1) Many thanks to those in the comments and Joe on twitter for pointing me in the direction of the Abrahams piece which you can find here. It makes a lot of interesting points, especially about different types of interest/engagement which I think I need to spend more time thinking about. His main finding though is that even though students state they enjoy practicals, that tends to be in a relative sense i.e. they prefer it to any other kind of science lesson. I think this is completely in concordance with the argument I have tried to make above.
December 23, 2016 at 2:47 pm
“Unfortunately I don’t have access to it and I can’t find a PDF version of it anywhere.”
Try a PDF search such as http://www.pdfsearchengine.org
It’s available.
LikeLike
December 24, 2016 at 6:48 pm
You really are a helpful librarian 🙂
LikeLike
December 24, 2016 at 7:05 pm
I really am! It’s a pleasure.
LikeLike
December 23, 2016 at 6:02 pm
Alternatively, you may be able to join researchgate (for free) to access it. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/47550225_Does_Practical_Work_Really_Motivate_A_study_of_the_affective_value_of_practical_work_in_secondary_school_science
Alternatively, if you email the author they are usually able to send a copy.
LikeLike
December 24, 2016 at 6:48 pm
Thank you so much. Will give this a go
LikeLike
December 23, 2016 at 6:39 pm
This is interesting.
I think that my job is to help make curious citizens who are critical of the data they view.
If I teach them properly and they learn well, they should pass the exams.
I don’t think it’s our job to “get students their grades”. That is their job.
I also question the validity of exams course that don’t require practical, investigative and analytical skills (aka procedural knowledge) to pass. Unis don’t like them.
I suppose the question is actually “what should students get from a science education?”
LikeLike
December 24, 2016 at 6:54 pm
Hi – really powerful point. I completely agree with you that these are things we should be trying to do. I just think personally that my first duty is to enable them, once they have left school, to be self sufficient citizens. Part of that is their approach to data and general disposition. Part of that is having Hirschian “cultural currency.” But for all of that, if they don’t have the grades, our society is built such that they can’t get their foot in the door. So I get really hung up on that. And at A Level I certainly agree that their grades are more down to them than me. But at GCSE? These children are…you know…children. And for many of them without our constant encouragement and cajoling they will end up leaving school without the things they need the most. You know the types of student and classes I’m talking about. Everyone has them.
I care deeply about all the things you mentioned. I just think I care even more about their grades.
LikeLike