TEACHER  LEARNING  FROM  GIRLS’  INFORMAL  SCIENCE  EXPERIENCES   By   Daniel  J  Birmingham                   A  DISSERTATION   Submitted  to   Michigan  State  University   in  partial  fulfillment  of  the  requirements   for  the  degree  of     Curriculum,  Instruction  and  Teacher  Education  –  Doctor  of  Philosophy   2013 ABSTRACT   TEACHER  LEARNING  FROM  GIRLS’  INFORMAL  SCIENCE  EXPERIENCES   By   Daniel  J  Birmingham   School  science  continues  to  fail  to  engage  youth  from  non-­‐dominant   communities  (Carlone,  Huan-­‐Frank  &  Webb,  2011).    However,  recent  research   demonstrates  that  informal  science  learning  settings  support  both  knowledge  gains   and  increased  participation  in  science  among  youth  from  non-­‐dominant   communities  (Dierking,  2007;  Falk  et  al.,  2007;  HFRP,  2010).    Despite  the  success,   little  is  known  about  how  teachers  can  learn  from  informal  science  practices  to   support  student  engagement  in  science.   In  this  study,  I  examine  the  impact  informal  science  experiences  has  for  the   teaching  and  learning  of  science  in  school  contexts.  This  study  is  focused  on  eliciting   girls’  stories  of  informal  science  learning  experiences  and  sharing  these  stories  with   science  teachers  to  examine  what  they  notice  and  make  meaning  of  in  connection   with  their  classroom  practices  (van  Es  &  Sherin,  2002).    I  co-­‐constructed  cases  of   informal  science  experiences  with  middle  school  females  who  participate  in  an  after   school  science  program  in  an  urban  area.    These  cases  consisted  of  the  girls’  written   stories,  their  explicit  messages  to  science  teachers,  examples  of  actions  taken  when   investigating  community  based  science  issues  and  transcripts  of  conversations   between  the  girls  and  researchers.    These  cases  were  shared  with  local  science   teachers  in  order  to  investigate  what  they  “notice”  (van  Es  &  Sherin,  2002)   regarding  girls’  participation  in  informal  science  learning,  how  they make  meaning  of  youths’  stories  and  whether  the  stories  influence  their  classroom   practices.       I  found  that  the  girls’  use  their  cases  to  share  experiences  of  how,  where  and   why  science  matters,  to  express  hope  for  school  science  and  to  critique  stereotypical   views  that  young,  female,  students  of  color  from  lower  SES  backgrounds  are  not   interested  or  capable  of  making  contributions  to  scientific  investigations.   Additionally,  I  found  that  teachers  noticed  powerful  messages  within  and  across  the   girls’  cases.    The  messages  include;  1)  students’  desire  to  be  active  participants  in   science  investigations,  2)  the  need  to  provide  spaces  for  students  to  leverage  their   strengths  when  learning  and  doing  science,  3)  the  importance  of  building   connections  between  science  and  community,  and  4)  expanding  the  outcomes  of   scientific  investigations  beyond  traditional  school  measures.    However,  their   individual  meaning  making  was  influenced  by  tensions  between  what  they  found   powerful  in  the  cases,  the  institutional  narratives  that  often  guide  practice  in   schools  and  the  societal  and  personal  narratives  connected  to  participation  of  girls   from  non  dominant  communities  in  science.      Thus,  each  of  the  three  teachers  took   different  pathways  as  they  implemented  new  science  learning  experiences  based   upon  what  each  found  most  salient  in  the  girls’  stories  as  well  as  the  influence  of   institutional,  societal  and  personal  narratives,  resulting  in  varied  learning   experiences  for  their  students.                                         Copyright  by   DANIEL  J  BIRMINGHAM   2013   ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS       I  am  keenly  aware  that  this  dissertation  would  never  have  come  to  fruition   without  the  guidance,  support,  care  and  love  bestowed  on  me  by  so  many.    I  am   forever  indebted  to  the  following  people.     First,  to  the  four  incredible  young  women  who  agreed  to  assume  a  central   role  in  this  project.    I  am  so  thankful  for  the  trust  they  placed  in  me  when   communicating  their  stories  and  allowing  me  to  share  them  with  others.    I  remain   inspired  by  their  desire  to  work  to  make  a  difference  in  their  community.  I  am   thankful  for  what  these  incredible  young  women  taught  me  about  teaching,  learning,   listening  and  what  is  really  important.       I  am  grateful  for  the  three  teachers  who  opened  their  classrooms  and  shared   their  experiences  with  me.    I  am  inspired  by  their  desire  to  grow  as  educators  and   their  willingness  to  listen,  engage  with  and  learn  from  the  youths’  stories.    I  am   thankful  for  the  thoughtfulness  in  the  ways  they  approached  this  project  and  their   willingness  to  share  the  intimate  details  of  their  work  with  children  in  science   classrooms.     I  am  grateful  for  the  guidance,  support,  time  and  care  invested  into  this   project  by  my  dissertation  committee.    Specifically,  I  am  thankful  for  Dr.  Kyle   Greenwalt’s  and  Dr.  Amelia  Gotwals’  willingness  to  leverage  their  expertise  to   strengthen  the  design  and  eventual  outcomes  of  this  dissertation.    I  am  particularly   indebted  to  the  co-­‐directors  of  this  dissertation,  Dr.  Angela  Calabrese  Barton  and  Dr.     v   Anne-­‐Lise  Halvorsen.    I  am  thankful  for  the  guidance  Dr.  Halvorsen  provided  me   over  the  past  five  years  by  supporting  my  passions  and  opening  avenues  to  pursue   them.    I  am  thankful  to  Dr.  Calabrese  Barton  for  teaching/showing  me  that  quality   research  comes  from  working  with  people  you  care  for  on  issues  you  are  passionate   about.     Finally,  I  am  very  blessed  to  have  an  incredibly  supportive  family.     Particularly,  I  am  indebted  to  my  father,  John  Birmingham,  for  being  my  first  teacher   and  sharing  his  an  insatiable  curiosity  about  the  world  and  a  desire  to  understand   how  others  experience(d)  life.    I  am  thankful  for  my  mother,  Anna  Birmingham,  who   taught  me  that  responsibility  accompanies  privilege  by  consistently  modeling  what   it  means  to  care  for  people.    I  would  like  to  thank  my  son  Sean  for  being  my   inspiration  and  providing  much  needed  infusion  of  perspective  throughout  this   project.    Finally,  I  would  like  to  thank  my  incredible  wife  Katie  Birmingham.    Simply   put,  without  her,  none  of  this  would  have  been  possible.                           vi   TABLE  OF  CONTENTS       LIST  OF  TABLES  ........................................................................................................................................  xi     LIST  OF  FIGURES   ......................................................................................................................................  xii     CHAPTER  ONE   FLIPPING  THE  QUESTION:  TEACHER  LEARNING  FROM  GIRLS’  VOICES  .........................  1   Introduction  .............................................................................................................................................  1   Sourcing  the  disconnect  .....................................................................................................................  6   Flipping  the  Informal/Formal  Question   .....................................................................................  8   Bringing  Youth  Voices’  Into  Teacher  Learning  ....................................................................  10   Research  Questions  ............................................................................................................................  11   Significance  ............................................................................................................................................  12   Theoretical  Framework  ...................................................................................................................  13   Social  Practice  Theory  ......................................................................................................................  14   A  Sense  of  Place  ...................................................................................................................................  17   Relevant  Literature  ............................................................................................................................  19   Science  Literacy  ...................................................................................................................................  20   Science  Education   ...............................................................................................................................  23     Formal  science  learning  ..........................................................................................  23     Informal  science  learning   .......................................................................................  28     Connecting  the  sources  of  learning   ....................................................................  30     Connecting  to  this  study  .........................................................................................  31   Providing  a  Roadmap  ....................................................................................................................  31     CHAPTER  TWO   METHODOLOGY  AND  METHODS  .....................................................................................................  35   Laying  Out  My  Commitments  ........................................................................................................  35   Co-­‐Constructing  Cases  of  Informal  Science  Learning  .........................................................  38   Professional  Development  Design   ...............................................................................................  41   Context  ....................................................................................................................................................  46   A  Site  of  Afterschool  Learning  ...................................................................................................  47   GET  City   ...............................................................................................................................................  47   School  Context   ..................................................................................................................................  49   Participants  ...........................................................................................................................................  51                  The  Girls  .............................................................................................................................................  51   Nicole  ................................................................................................................................  52   Hannah  .............................................................................................................................  53   Caitlyn   ...............................................................................................................................  54   Maya  ..................................................................................................................................  55     vii   Teacher  Participants  ....................................................................................................................  56   Mr.  Greene  ......................................................................................................................  57   Mr.  Roberts  .....................................................................................................................  57   Mr.  Jones  ..........................................................................................................................  58   Teacher,  Researcher  and  Collaborator  .................................................................................  59   Data  Sources  ..........................................................................................................................................  60   Youth  Conversation  Groups  ......................................................................................................  62   Girls’  Artifacts  ..................................................................................................................................  62   One-­‐On-­‐One  Conversations  .......................................................................................................  63   Professional  Development  Meetings  .....................................................................................  63   Individual  Teacher  Interviews  .................................................................................................  64   Classroom  Observations  .............................................................................................................  64   Data  Analysis  .........................................................................................................................................  65   Limitations  .............................................................................................................................................  68     CHAPTER  THREE   “BUT  THE  SCIENCE  WE  DO  HERE  MATTERS”  ...........................................................................  69   The  Cases  ................................................................................................................................................  71   Nicole  ..................................................................................................................................................  72   Getting  to  know  Nicole  ..............................................................................................  73   Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers  ................................................................  73   Conversations  and  artifacts  ....................................................................................  74   Hannah  ...............................................................................................................................................  78   Getting  to  know  Hannah  ...........................................................................................  78   Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers  ................................................................  79   Conversations  and  artifacts  ....................................................................................  80   Caitlyn  ......................................................................................................................................................   84   Getting  to  know  Caitlyn  ............................................................................................  84   Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers  ................................................................  86   Conversations  and  artifacts  ....................................................................................  87   Maya  .........................................................................................................................................................  90   Getting  to  know  Maya  ................................................................................................  90   Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers  ................................................................  91   Conversations  and  artifacts  ....................................................................................  91   Looking  Across  the  Cases  ................................................................................................................  98   Science  That  Matters  ....................................................................................................................  99   Girls  Challenging  Narratives  of  Who  Can  Do  Science  ...................................................  104   Expressing  Hope  for  School  Science  ....................................................................................  107   Significance  ..........................................................................................................................................  111   Looking  Ahead  ....................................................................................................................................  112     CHAPTER  FOUR   “THAT  IS  WHAT  TRUE  EDUCATION  IS  SUPPOSED  TO  LOOK  LIKE  ................................  114   Getting  to  Know  the  Teachers  .....................................................................................................  116   Mr.  Greene   .......................................................................................................................................  117   Mr.  Roberts  .....................................................................................................................................  119     viii   Mr.  Jones  ..........................................................................................................................................  121   Participating  with  the  Girls’  Stories  ..........................................................................................  123   Noticing  and  Making  Meaning  of  Girls’  Cases  ..................................................................  124   Active  participants  ....................................................................................................  126   Leveraging  strengths  when  learning  and  doing  science  ..........................  129   Community  ...................................................................................................................  135   Expanded  outcomes  .................................................................................................  140   The  Consistency  of  the  Messages  ..........................................................................................  142   The  Tensions  of  the  Informal/Formal  Relationship  ..........................................................  143   Mr.  Greene   .......................................................................................................................................  146   Institutional  .................................................................................................................  146   Societal/personal  ......................................................................................................  149   Salient  noticings  .........................................................................................................  150   Mr.  Roberts  .....................................................................................................................................  152   Institutional  .................................................................................................................  152   Societal/personal  ......................................................................................................  154   Salient  noticings  .........................................................................................................  155   Mr.  Jones  ...........................................................................................................................................  156   Institutional  .................................................................................................................  156   Societal/personal  ......................................................................................................  158   Salient  noticings  .........................................................................................................  159   The  Influences  on  Teacher  Learning  ........................................................................................  160   Next  Step  ...............................................................................................................................................  162     CHAPTER  FIVE   “LOOKING  THROUGH  THE  KIDS’  PERSEPCTIVES  MADE  ME  CHANGE  .........................  163   Mr.  Greene:  Interest  Activities  ....................................................................................................  165   The  Inventions  Project  ..............................................................................................................  166   Linking  Back  to  Noticing/Meaning  Making  ......................................................................  171   Examining  the  Tensions  ............................................................................................................  175   Administrative  pressure   .........................................................................................  176   The  role  of  the  teacher  ............................................................................................  177   Teacher  learning  ........................................................................................................  179   Mr.  Roberts:  Space  to  Leverage  Student  Strengths?  ..........................................................  181   Choice  Project  ................................................................................................................................  182   Linking  Back  to  Meaning  Making  and  Noticing  ..............................................................  186   Examining  the  Tensions  ............................................................................................................  187   Teacher  learning  ........................................................................................................  192   Mr.  Jones:  Transforming  Practice  ..............................................................................................  193   Solar  System  Project  ...................................................................................................................  194   Linking  Back  to  Noticing/Meaning  Making  ......................................................................  198   Examining  the  Tensions  ............................................................................................................  200   Teacher  learning  ........................................................................................................  202   Looking  Across  Teacher  Pathways  ............................................................................................  203   Implications  for  Professional  Development  ..........................................................................  207       ix   CHAPTER  SIX   WHAT  DOES  IT  ALL  MEAN?  REFLECTING  ON  THE  PROCESS,   THE  OUTCOMES  AND  WHERE  WE  GO  FROM  HERE  .............................................................  211   Reflecting  on  the  Phases  of  the  Investigation  .......................................................................  212   Contributions  to  the  Literature  ..................................................................................................  217   Shifting  What  Science  Teachers  Learn  ...............................................................................  218   Shifting  How  Science  Teachers  Learn  .................................................................................  222   Girls  Authoring  Their  Own  Challenges  ...............................................................................  225   The  Urgency  of  Their  Messages  .............................................................................................  231   Limitations  and  Next  Steps  ...........................................................................................................  234   Implications  .........................................................................................................................................  236   Spaces  for  Youth  in  Current  Reform  Movements  ...........................................................  236   Shifting  Professional  Development  .......................................................................................  238   Youth  Voice  in  Teacher  Education  ........................................................................................  240   Conclusion  ............................................................................................................................................  243     REFERENCES  ..........................................................................................................................................  245                                 x   LIST  OF  TABLES       Table  1.    Professional  development  meeting  details………………………………………  …42   Table  2.    School  demographic  data  (%)………………….……………………………………......50   Table  3.    Female  participants……………….………………………………………………………....52   Table  4.    Teacher  participants………………………………………………..……………………….57   Table  5.    Connecting  research  question  with  theoretical  framework  and  data   sources…………………………………………………………………………………………………………60     Table  6.  Teacher  participants……………………………………………………………………….  117     Table  7.  Active  participants………………………………………………………………………….  129     Table  8.  Leveraging  strengths………………………………………………………………………  134   Table  9.  Community…………………………………………………………………………………….  139   Table  10.  Expanded  outcomes……………………………………………………………………...  142                           xi   LIST  OF  FIGURES       Figure  1.  Hannah  handing  out  CFL’s………………………………………………………………...79   Figure  2.  Hannah’s  teaching  video…………………………………………………………………...81   Figure  3.  Caitlyn’s  drawing  of  today  and  future……………………………………..…………87     Figure  4.  Caitlyn  explaining  how  many  pounds  of  CO2  and  money  changing   technologies  at  the  school  could  save………………………………………………………….......89     Figure  5:  Sources  of  tension……….………………………………………………………………   144         Figure  6:  Mr.  Greene’s  tensions………………………………………………………………….   146   Figure  7:  Mr.  Roberts’  tensions…………………………………………………………………..   156   Figure  8:  Mr.  Jones’  tensions……………………………………………………………………                   xii   159   CHAPTER  ONE   FLIPPING  THE  QUESTION:  TEACHER  LEARNING  FROM  GIRLS’  VOICES   Introduction   This  study  is  about  helping  science  teachers  learn  from  student  experiences   with  science  outside  of  school.  My  desire  to  carry  out  this  study  rests  on  the  belief   that  youth,  regardless  of  where  they  are  from,  have  valuable  contributions  to  make   to  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  through  sharing  experiences  of  how  and   where  learning  and  doing  science  is  meaningful.    The  study  is  inspired  by  my  work   with  youth  who  are  involved  in  an  informal  science  program  where  they  use  science   to  “make  a  difference”  in  and  for  their  community.    Their  stories  of  “discovering”   and  using  science,  despite  societal  barriers  regarding  their  abilities  and  interests  in   science  due  to  their  race,  gender,  age  and  class,  are  successes  to  be  learned  from  and   shared.   However,  we  know  that  not  all  students  experience  science  in  this  way.     Recent  research  shows  school  science  continues  to  fail  to  engage  youth  from  non-­‐ dominant  communities  (Carlone,  Huan-­‐Frank  &  Webb.,  2011).  Even  when  reforms   result  in  achievement  gains,  they  do  not  reach  all  students  equally.    Many  students,   despite  academic  gains,  express  decreased  interest  in  pursuing  science  beyond   secondary  schooling.    At  the  same  time,  research  demonstrates  that  informal  science   learning  settings  support  both  knowledge  gains  and  increasing  interest  to   participate  in  science  among  youth  from  non-­‐dominant  communities  (Dierking,   2007;  Falk,  Storksdieck  &  Dierking,  2007;  HFRP,  2010).  Despite  the  successes,  little   is  known  about  how  science  teachers  can  learn  from  informal  science  practices  to     1   support  student  engagement  in  science.   The  purpose  of  this  study  is  to  examine  the  potential  impact  the  stories  youth   tell  about  their  informal  science  experiences  hold  for  the  teaching  and  learning  of   science  in  school  contexts.  In  order  to  examine  this  potential  impact,  this  study   focused  on  eliciting  four  girls’  stories  of  participation  in  informal  science  learning   experiences  and  sharing  these  stories  with  three  science  teachers  to  examine  what   they  notice  and  make  meaning  of  in  connection  with  classroom  practices  (van  Es  &   Sherin,  2002).    This  chapter  provides  the  foundation  for  this  work  by  defining  the   problem  space,  laying  out  the  central  questions  investigated,  detailing  the   theoretical  framework  guiding  the  study  and  discussing  important  literature   connected  to  teaching  and  learning  science  in  both  informal  and  formal  contexts.     Before  delving  into  these  important  foundational  aspects,  I  begin  with  two  vignettes   that  shed  light  on  the  inspiration  for  this  study  and  my  work  with  middle  school   youth.       “But,  I  don’t  like  anything  about  science.”    This  statement  was  made  by  Maya,   a  sixth  grade  African  American  female  involved  in  an  after-­‐school  science  program   called  GET  City  (Green  Energy  Technologies  in  the  City),  as  she  constructed  web   pages  that  would  eventually  be  displayed  on  our  program’s  web  site.    The  youth  in   GET  City  were  asked  to  introduce  themselves  and  then  write  brief  responses  to  the   following  questions:  What  do  you  like  about  science?    And,  Why  do  you  participate   in  GET  City?    Maya,  a  bright,  committed  and  academically  successful  young  woman,   called  me  over  for  what  I  assumed  was  going  to  be  a  technology  related  question.     However,  I  found  what  had  stopped  her  and  the  three  others  working  at  her  table     2   was  an  issue  of  a  different  kind.    They  claimed  to  not  like  anything  about  science.     These  are  youth  who  voluntarily  come  to  GET  City  up  to  three  days  a  week  to   investigate  energy  issues  in  their  local  community.    I  personally  witnessed  the  effort   these  young  women  had  put  into  not  only  learning  about  energy  related  science,  but   also  communicating  it  to  members  of  their  community  through  various  mediums.   Two  of  these  youth,  Nicole  and  Maya,  had  expressed  on  several  occasions  their   desire  to  someday  become  science  teachers.    Yet,  there  we  were  trying  to  find   something,  anything,  they  liked  about  science.      I  eventually  asked,  “Well,  why  do   you  come  to  GET  City  then?    Aren’t  we  doing  science  here?”  Maya  thought  for  a   moment,  looked  back  and  said,  “Yeah,  but  the  science  we  do  here  matters.”     There  were  two  ideas  that  really  stuck  out  for  me  about  this  conversation.     First,  these  youth  did  not  associate  science  with  participation  in  GET  City.    Initially,   it  appeared  to  not  even  occur  to  them  when  posed  with  the  question  about  science.   Second,  when  the  question  was  rephrased,  they  agreed  we  were  doing  science  in   GET  City,  but  qualified  it  as  something  that  “mattered.”       A  few  days  later,  I  met  with  these  youth  again  during  a  regularly  held   conversation  group.  I  wanted  to  know  more  about  when,  where  and  why  science   mattered.    It  quickly  became  apparent  that  part  of  the  disconnect  between  what  I   had  observed  and  what  these  youth  reported  regarding  their  interest  in  science  was   due  to  an  association  with  where  science  learning  took  place.    The  term  “science”   immediately  brought  up  associations  with  school  science  and  these  youth  were   having  a  hard  time  finding  anything  they  liked  about  science  in  that  context.    It   wasn’t  that  school  science  didn’t  matter,  but  how  it  mattered  and  to  whom  it     3   mattered  was  vastly  different  than  the  other  spaces  where  they  interacted  with   science.  Caitlyn,  a  seventh  grader,  explained,  “Science  in  school  matters  because  I   want  to  get  into  a  good  college  and  eventually  a  good  job  and  I  need  to  do  good  in   science  for  that.”    While  Maya  agreed  with  Caitlyn,  she  offered  a  contrasting  view  of   the  science  she  and  the  others  participated  with  outside  of  school.  “The  science  in   GET  City  matters  because  it  matters  to  our  community  and  to  our  Earth.”       I  found  this  conversation  honest,  insightful  and  frankly  somewhat   depressing.    These  were  fifth,  sixth  and  seventh  graders  who  already  held  a  view  of   school  science  as  box  to  check  off  in  order  to  move  onto  other  things.    School  science   mattered  as  a  credential  to  be  obtained  and  not  as  ideas,  practices  or  ways  of   questioning  to  be  applied  for  the  good  of  their  “community  or  Earth.”    For  these   youth,  there  was  a  striking  disconnect  between  the  science  they  learned  during  the   school  day  and  their  science  experiences  outside  of  school.    As  a  former  middle   school  science  teacher,  these  conversations  caused  me  to  reflect  upon  the  way  I   positioned  science  in  my  classroom  and  the  ways  in  which  students  either  did  or  did   not  find  it  meaningful  in  connection  with  their  lived  experiences.    This  reflection   immediately  brought  to  mind  a  specific  experience  teaching  eighth  grade  science  in   a  front-­‐range  town  in  Northern  Colorado.     I  used  to  start  the  science  classes  I  taught  each  year  with  a  challenge  to  the   students  who  entered  the  classroom  for  the  first  time.    “I  want  you  to  name   something  that  does  not  involve  science,”  I  would  say  to  them  after  initial   introductions.    Usually  the  responses  would  come  slowly  at  first  and  then  pick  up  in   frequency  and  vigor.    Ballet!  Basketball!  Video  Games!  Broccoli!    With  each  activity     4   or  object  shouted  out  by  students,  I  twisted  and  turned  the  conversation  back  to  an   explanation  rooted  in  an  aspect  of  science.    I  alluded  to  the  physics  involved  in  ballet   and  basketball,  the  nutritional  aspects  of  broccoli  and  the  technological  advances   video  game  developers  had  made  since  my  days  playing  Atari.    Each  year  I  felt  good   about  myself  after  this  activity.  I  began  to  learn  about  what  my  students  were   interested  in  outside  of  the  classroom  and  hoped  they  would  see  the  main  idea  of   the  activity  –  that  science  was  relevant  and  connected  to  their  interests,  activities   and  daily  lives.       I  continued  on  like  this  for  several  years  until  the  activity  I  once  thought  was   so  clever  was  turned  upside  down  by  one  of  my  students.    As  we  were  concluding   the  activity,  I  saw  a  hand  emerge  from  the  back  of  the  room.    A  young  woman  looked   at  me  and  in  her  shy,  yet  confident  eighth  grade  way  said,  “I  get  what  you  are  saying,   but  science  isn’t  in  any  of  those  things  for  me.”  I  believe  I  must  have  said  something   in  response  to  this,  but  I  can’t  be  sure.    This  moment  has  stayed  with  me.    Her   innocent  and  seemingly  simple  statement  shifted  the  way  I  thought  about  this   activity  and  the  way  I  thought  about  science  teaching.    Having  a  teacher  tell  her,  or   even  argue  with  her,  that  science  was  an  integral  part  of  her  life  wasn’t  good   enough.  She  wasn’t  going  to  accept  this.    It  didn’t  align  with  her  experiences  or  the   way  she  thought  about  the  world  in  which  she  lived  and  the  way  she  had   experienced  science.    The  idea  that  science  was  everywhere  and  in  everything  was   artificial  to  her  and  my  explanations  of  how  it  could  be  did  not  convince  her.       However,  that  didn’t  mean  this  student’s  -­‐  as  well  as  many  others’  -­‐  interests   didn’t  involve  science.  As  I  grew  to  know  these  students,  they  continually  showed     5   me  many  ways  in  which  science  was  involved  in  their  lives.    They  were  members  of   clubs  and  school  groups  where  they  were  having  rich  experiences  investigating  a   local  science  phenomenon  or  building  a  device  for  a  local  competition.    They   brought  with  them  questions  and  ideas  from  television  programs  they  watched  at   home,  experiences  with  family  or  friends  in  their  community  and  interactions  with   technology.    They  were  participating  in  the  study  of  various  aspects  of  science   outside  of  our  classroom  and  their  stories  were  filled  with  their  developing   interests,  motivations  and  desires  to  learn  more.  Yet,  these  experiences  and  stories   did  not  reveal  a  connection  with  the  science  we  were  examining  in  school  for  many   who  entered  our  classroom  each  year.    There  was  a  disconnect  between  what   science  looked  like  during  the  school  day  and  the  types  of  activities  they   participated  in  outside  of  our  classroom.       Sourcing  the  Disconnect   The  two  anecdotes  above  describe  experiences  with  science,  both  inside  and   outside  of  school,  that  point  to  two  ideas  that  are  central  to  this  study.    First,  the   learning  of  science  is  not  confined  to  the  classroom.    With  individuals  spending  as   little  as  9%  of  their  lives  in  schools  (Jackson,  1968;  Sosniak,  2001),  science  learning   opportunities  outside  of  school,  or  informal  science  learning  are  a  major  influence  in   the  way  people  participate  with  and  learn  science  (Falk,  Storksdieck  &  Dierking,   2007;  HFRP,  2009;  NRC,  2009).    The  National  Resource  Council  (2009)  argues   informal  science  learning  outcomes  “far  exceed(s)  the  typical  academic  emphasis  on   conceptual  knowledge.    Across  informal  settings,  learners  may  develop  awareness,   interest,  motivation,  social  competencies,  and  practices.    They  may  develop     6   incremental  knowledge,  habits  of  mind,  and  identities  that  set  them  on  a  trajectory   to  learn  more”  (p.  27).      These  experiences  hold  possibilities  for  scientific  knowledge   or  practices  to  be  considered  in  connection  with  a  contextual  issue,  problem  or  idea.             The  second  aspect  of  the  anecdotes  that  is  central  to  this  study  is  the  idea   that  school  science  frequently  does  not  connect  with  the  way  students  experience   science,  or  learning,  outside  of  the  classroom.    For  one,  school  science  is  often   focused  on  acquisition  of  transmitted  knowledge  and  the  general  processes  of   scientific  practice  (Lemke,  1992;  Newton,  Driver  &  Osborne,  1999;  NRC,  2007;   Rudolph,  2002).    Lee  and  Roth  (2003)  argue,  “Current  practices  of  science  education   focus  on  students’  conformity  to  authoritative  knowledge  and  scientific  discourse   that  are  relevant  to  research  scientists”  (p.  404).  The  lack  of  connection  to  the  world   in  which  individuals  live  and  interact  isolates  scientific  knowledge  and  practices   from  individuals’  lived  experiences  and  the  immediacy  of  community  life   (Gruenewald  &  Smith,  2008).         A  focus  on  acquisition  not  only  influences  the  way  knowledge  is  received  in   the  classroom,  but  also  the  intended  outcomes  of  learning  science.    School  learning   outcomes  often  focus  on  “narrow  measurements  and  performance  indicators”   (Luke,  Green  &  Kelly,  2010,  p.  xiv)  resulting  in  limiting  “potentially  powerful   constructions  of  what  it  means  to  learn  science”(Tan  &  Calabrese  Barton,  2008,  p.   44).    Outcomes  of  schools  focused  on  narrow  definitions  of  what  it  is  to  know  and  do   science  fail  to  align  with  learning  in  everyday  life  where  outcomes  are  defined   through  various  forms  of  participation  and  identity  formation,  in  addition  to   knowledge  and  practices  development  (NRC,  2009).  Narrowly  defined  school     7   outcomes  isolate  school  science  from  everyday  life  by  limiting  the  opportunities  for   the  development  of  hybrid  spaces,  or  places  in  which  science  and  everyday  life  come   together.   Flipping  the  Informal/Formal  Question     Greater  recognition  has  been  given  to  informal  science  learning   opportunities  and  the  possibilities  it  holds  to  develop  science  practices  and  interest   in  science  related  topics  (Falk  &  Dierking,  2002;  Fenichel,  2010;)  as  well  as  its   potential  impact  on  formal  science  learning  (HFRP,  2009).    Those  who  argue  for  the   power  of  informal  science  learning  attribute  the  success  to  aspects  such  as  choice   (both  of  topic  and  level  of  participation),  connections  to  real-­‐world  problems  and   introduction  to  science  related  careers  (CAISE,  2010;  Falk  &  Dierking,  2002;   Granger,  2008;  HFRP,  2009;  NRC,  2009;).    The  HFRP  (Harvard  Family  Research   Project,  2009)  argues  informal  science  learning  provides  “expanded  learning   opportunities  ”that  go  beyond  the  content,  bringing  in  the  learners’  interests  and   relationships  built  with  peers  and  adults  as  they  investigate  science  related  ideas.       CAISE  (Center  for  the  Advancement  of  Informal  Science,  2010)  argues  these  types  of   opportunities  “have  been  shown  to  spark  curiosity,  generate  questions,  and  lead  to  a   depth  of  understanding  and  commitment  in  ways  that  are  often  less  possible  when   the  same  material  is  encountered  in  books  or  on  screens”  (p.  11).       While  scholars  point  to  the  benefits  of  informal  science  learning   opportunities,  recent  research  focused  on  the  integration  of  formal  and  informal   science  learning  recommends  alignment  to  support  traditional  academic  outcomes.   The  HFRP  (2009)  argues  the  most  powerful  informal  opportunities  are  “continuous,     8   comprehensive  and  complimentary”  with  school  science  experiences.    This  is  an   approach  that  “links  school  and  out  of  school  supports”  by  aligning  curriculum  and   opening  lines  of  communication  to  provide  a  “range  of  learning  opportunities  they   need  to  meet  high  academic  standards  and  to  succeed  not  only  in  school,  but  in  the   21st  century  global  economy  and  society”  (HFRP,  2009,  p.  1).    In  other  words,   informal  science  best  serves  the  purpose  of  supporting  academic  achievement  in   science  classrooms.       This  study  aims  to  flip  the  formal/informal  question  instead  by  asking  what   school  science  can  learn  from  informal  science  experiences.  While  I  support  the   work  of  the  HFRP,  I  worry  positioning  informal  science  as  a  way  to  support   academic  outcomes  in  school  settings  neglects  the  power  of  informal  science   experiences  by  redefining  their  outcomes  to  align  with  narrowly  conceived  ways  of   knowing  and  doing  science.  I  argue  this  ignores  the  benefits  of  informal  science   learning  to  foster  hybridity,  or  align  science  learning  with  lived  experiences,   through  the  kinds  of  outcomes  supported  and  the  role  cultural  practices  assume   during  the  learning  and  doing  of  science.    If  the  purpose  of  science  education  is  to   develop  scientifically  literate  citizens  able  to  participate  in  society  (Anderson,   Holland  &  Palinscar,  1997;  NGSS,  2013),  than  the  outcomes  of  informal  science,   where  participants  create  hybrid  spaces  connecting  science  and  their  daily  lives,   should  be  investigated  to  examine  their  potential  impact  on  formal  learning  settings.   If,  as  the  NRC  and  others  have  argued,  the  benefits  of  participation  in  informal   learning  opportunities  transcends  school  science,  shouldn’t  there  be  an  effort  to   investigate  what  we  as  educators  can  learn  about  making  science  meaningful  to  our     9   students  from  these  informal  experiences?  Instead  of  designing  out  of  school   experiences  to  support  classroom  work,  shouldn’t  educators  be  exploring  out  of   school  experiences  as  a  tool  for  informing  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in   classrooms?  If  traditional  school  science  isolates  certain  groups  or  ways  of  knowing,   couldn’t  examining  the  ways  these  groups  participate  with  science  in  their   community  inform  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in  school  classrooms?   Bringing  Youth  Voices’  Into  Teacher  Learning   I  believe  the  answer  to  the  questions  above  is  a  resounding  “yes”  and  argue   the  way  to  gain  insight  into  the  power  of  informal  science  learning  experiences  is  to   open  spaces  for  youth  to  share  their  experiences  of  how  and  why  science  matters.    I   currently  work  with  a  group  of  youth  who  are  part  of  contexts,  as  Feinstein  (2010)   notes,  “where  few  people  expect  science  to  be  relevant”  (p.  176).    They  are  primarily   youth  of  color  from  low  socio-­‐economic  backgrounds  who  share  powerful  stories  of   participation  with  science.    These  stories,  which  are  discussed  in  great  detail  in   chapter  three,  inspired  me  to  think  about  my  practice  as  a  educator  and  reflect  upon   what  their  messages  say  about  teaching  and  learning  science.   As  a  result,  this  study  is  focused  on  bringing  out  youths’  stories  of   participation  in  informal  science  learning  experiences  and  sharing  these  stories  with   science  teachers  to  examine  what  they  notice  and  make  meaning  of  in  connection   with  classroom  practices  (van  Es  &  Sherin,  2002).    Cases  were  co-­‐constructed  with   middle  grades  females  who  participate  in  an  after  school  science  program  (GET   City)  in  an  urban  area.    These  cases  consisted  of  the  girls’  written  stories,  examples   of  actions  taken  when  investigating  community  based  science  issues  and  transcripts     10   of  conversations  between  youth  and  researchers.    These  cases  were  then  shared   with  local  science  teachers  to  investigate  what  they  “notice”  (van  Es  &  Sherin,  2002)   regarding  youths’  participation  in  informal  science  learning,  how  they  make   meaning  of  youth  stories  and  whether  the  stories  of  youth  participation  influence   their  classroom  practices.       Research  Questions   The  central  questions  and  sub  questions  in  this  study  focus  on  the  influence   informal  science  learning  opportunities  can  have  on  science  instruction  in  school   settings.    Thus,  the  study  examines:   1. What  stories  do  these  four  girls  tell  in  their  cases  about  what  they  gain   from  their  participation  in  a  year  round  green  energy  club?  How  is   science  learning  and  doing  represented  in  these  stories?   2. How  do  teachers  make  sense  of  the  stories  the  girls  tell  about  their   informal  learning  practices  in  support  of  powerful  learning  in  science   classrooms?     o What  do  teachers  notice  in  the  girls’  stories  and  what  meanings  do   they  make  from  these  observations?   o How  do  teachers  describe  how  they  might  draw  upon   interpretations  of  girls’  stories  for  making  curricular  change  in   their  classroom?     11   3.        How  do  teachers  draw  upon  interpretations  of  the  girls’  stories  in  their   classroom  practices?  What  role  does  instructional  context  play  in   implementing  science  learning  experiences?     These  questions  are  designed  to  examine  what  these  girls  are  telling  us  about  the   power  of  these  experiences  as  well  as  how  teachers  interpret  and  respond  to  these   stories.    I  am  interested  in  investigating  instances  where  youth  see  science  as   relevant  to  their  lived  experiences  and  how  these  experiences  help  educators  think   about  reforming  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in  the  classroom.    At  the  core   of  this  study  is  giving  voice  to  these  four  girls’  experiences  with  and  hopes  for   meaningful  science,  and  having  their  voices  contribute  to  ongoing  conversations   regarding  reforming  formal  science  education  experiences.       Significance     This  study  is  about  ways  in  which  participating  with  science  is  meaningful   for  individuals  and  what  educators  can  learn  from  these  experiences.      Feinstein   (2010)  argues,  “our  field  has  produced  little  evidence  that  any  science  taught  in   school,  from  Newton’s  laws  to  natural  selection,  helps  people  lead  happier,  more   successful  or  more  politically  savvy  lives”  (p.  169).    This  study  is  focused  on  the   disconnect  between  school  science  and  everyday  lived  experience  by  examining   instances  where  science  is  meaningful  to  youth  and  thinking  about  how  this  can   help  us  as  teachers  design  experiences  in  school.       I  operationalize  “meaningful  science  learning”  to  include  both  knowing  and   doing  science.    I  believe  meaningful  science  learning  occurs  in  the  intersection  of   science  knowledge  and  practices  with  the  everyday  lives  of  the  learners.  This     12   intersection  may  involve  relevance  to  the  learners’  communities,  issues  they  have   encountered  or  care  about  or  questions  learners  have  about  the  world  in  which  they   live.    Doing  science  in  this  intersection  is  not  viewed  as  traditional  laboratory  work,   but  instead  as  aspects  of  actions  taken  and  decisions  made  regarding  relevant  local,   national  or  global  issues  or  questions.    In  Taking  Science  to  School  (NRC,  2007),  the   National  Resource  Council  defines  meaningful  along  two  criteria:  1)  substantively  to   the  discipline  and  2)  connected  to  the  personal,  or  lives  of  learners.    I  draw  upon   this  definition  and  expand  upon  it  using  a  sociocultural  framework  considering  how   cultural  practices  mediate  the  merging  of  science  and  lived  experience  as  well  as   how  the  intended  outcomes  of  science  learning  impact  identities  youth  take  up   during  participation.       There  are  very  few  studies  that  address  a  connection  between  informal  and   school-­‐based  learning  opportunities  with  science  or  build  on  how  findings  from  one   venue  impact  the  other  (Dierking,  Falk,  Feher  &  Rennie,  2003;  NRC,  2009).    This   study  contributes  to  this  small  area  of  research  by  taking  a  critical  stance  toward  the   outcomes  and  purpose  of  school  science,  as  well  as  the  role  informal  science   experiences  can  assume  in  reforming  classroom  practices.    It  does  this  through   foregrounding  the  experiences  of  young  females  who  have  contributions  to  make  to   the  teaching,  learning  and  doing  of  science  in  both  informal  and  formal  contexts.       Theoretical  Framework     This  study  is  grounded  in  sociocultural  theories  of  learning  based  on  the   assumption  that  individuals  develop  through  their  involvement  in  cultural  practices   (Lemke,  2001).  That  is,  an  individual’s  development  of  skills  and  knowledge  is     13   influenced  by  his  or  her  involvement  in  valued  cultural  practices  of  the  communities   in  which  they  are  a  part  of  developed  over  time  in  relation  to  place.       This  study  examines  four  female  youths’  participation  with  science  in   informal  contexts  and  what  teachers  notice  and  make  meaning  of  in  these  girls’   stories.    The  work  of  all  of  these  participants  is  influenced  by  the  cultural  practices   they  draw  upon  as  well  as  other  narratives  that  influence  action  in  local  practices.     In  order  to  understand  participant  actions  and  sense  making,  I  draw  upon  two   theoretical  frameworks.    First,  Social  Practice  Theory  (Holland  &  Lave,  2009)   provides  insight  into  the  tensions  and  competing  narratives  that  influence  actions  in   local  practices.    This  framework  is  especially  salient  for  this  study  by  providing   insight  into  how  teachers  make  sense  of  the  girls’  stories  as  well  as  how  these  girls’   challenge  narratives  through  their  participation  with  science.    Second,  sense  of  place   provides  a  framework  to  examine  the  cultural  practices  and  personal  narratives   participants  bring  to  this  work  that  inform  actions  and  sense  making.     Social  Practice  Theory   I  draw  upon  Social  Practice  Theory  (Holland  &  Lave,  2009)  to  guide  this   study.    Drawing  on  the  work  of  Vygotsky  and  Bakhtin,  social  practice  theory   “integrates  the  study  of  persons,  local  practice  and  long  term  historically   institutionalized  struggles”  (Holland  &  Lave,  2009,  p.  1).  I  chose  this  theory  due  to   my  interest  in  not  only  “understanding  and  explaining  real,  everyday,  situated   activity  in  its  concrete,  material  detail”  (Roth,  2006,  p.  22),  but  also  the  formation  of   identities  influenced  by  the  historical  cultural  practices  situated  in  these  everyday   practices.    Thus,  social  practice  theory  expands  on  cultural  historical  activity  theory     14   (CHAT)  by  foregrounding  identity  formation,  or  as  Holland  and  Lave  (2009)  argue,   by  “emphasizing  historical  production  of  person  in  practice,  and  pay(ing)  particular   attention  to  differences  among  participants,  and  to  the  ongoing  struggles  that   develop  across  activities  around  those  differences”  (p.  1).    The  identities  youth  and   teachers  take  on  are  influenced  both  by  how  they  are  positioned  and  ways  in  which   they  position  themselves  in  the  valued  cultural  practices  of  their  communities.     Of  great  importance  to  this  study,  and  Social  Practice  Theory,  is  what  Holland   and  Lave  (2009)  refer  to  as  the  “two  forms  of  history,”  the  personal  and   institutional.    The  authors  argue  these  forms  of  history,  “history  in  person”  and   “history  in  institutionalized  struggles”,  are  always  present  and  in  relation  through   the  activities  individuals  participate  in.    Personal  experiences  carried  out  in  local   practice  are  enacted  against  the  broader  background  of  cultural  and  historical   narratives.    We  see  this  with  youth  in  GET  City  as  they  encounter  societal  narratives   about  what  it  means  to  learn  and  do  science  as  young,  females,  mostly  of  color  from   low  income  backgrounds  juxtaposed  with  their  personal  narratives  of  doing  science   in  and  for  their  local  communities.    This  often  plays  out  in  the  struggle  between  the   ways  in  which  school  positions  science  and  values  certain  ways  of  knowing  and   doing  science  and  the  cultural  meaning  making  practices  youth  bring  with  them   from  personal  experiences.  The  intersection  of  these  histories  impacts  conceptions   of  what  it  means  to  be  scientific,  who  can  do  science  and  where  science  is   meaningful.     The  struggle  between  the  two  forms  of  history  also  influences  teacher  actions   in  local  practices.    The  institutional  and  personal  narratives  experienced  or  brought     15   into  the  classroom  hold  specific  meanings  for  the  actors  in  this  space.  Holland  and   Lave  (2001)  argue  “cultural  genres”  that  “rule  in  social  life”  are:     associated  with  particular  persons  or  groups  of  people  identified  in  social   space  and  historical  time.    Practices  and  discourses  become  markers  of  their   owners  and  evoke  their  social  image.    They  carry  with  them  the  aura  or,  to   use  more  sensuous  metaphors,  the  images  and  the  odors  of  particular  others,   particular  professions,  particular  social  groups,  particular  individuals  with   which  they  are  associated.  (p.  16)       The  idea  there  are  certain  narratives  associated  with  certain  professions  or  social   interactions  matters  to  this  study,  because  I  asked  teachers  to  not  only  share  what   they  noticed  from  the  girls’  cases  but  also  to  describe  the  meaning  they  made.       In  this  study,  meaning-­‐making  describes  the  process  of  how  teachers  link   what  they  notice  in  the  girls’  cases  to  science  teaching  and  learning  practices  in   classroom  contexts.    As  such,  throughout  the  process,  the  teachers  brought   narratives  to  this  work  particular  to  working  in  schools.    In  this  study,  I  refer  to   these  as  institutional  narratives  and  expand  upon  the  idea  and  how  it  mattered  in   chapter  four.       Institutional  narratives  are  broader  cultural  and  historical  narratives  that   guide  practice  in  particular  places.    For  example,  in  schools  there  are  broader   narratives  around  a  rigid  curriculum,  standardized  assessments,  the  role  of  a   teacher  in  the  classroom  and  the  goals  of  school.    While  the  individual  takes  up  these   narratives,  they  are  formed  by  broader  local  and  national  discourses  about   schooling,  teaching  and  learning  and  influence  teachers  in  different  ways  as  they   take  action  in  their  classrooms.  These  institutional  narratives  influenced  how  these   teachers  participated  with  the  girls’  cases  and  the  possibilities  they  saw  for   reforming  classroom  practices.         16   A  Sense  of  Place     As  a  study  grounded  in  sociocultural  theory,  I  am  interested  in  the  cultural   practices  of  the  communities  in  which  youth  and  teachers  live  and  work  that  guide   the  development  of  skills  and  knowledge.    Lemke  (2001)  argues,  “our  individual   ways  of  living  and  making  meaning  are  different  according  not  only  to  which   communities  we  have  lived  in,  but  also  the  roles  we  chose  or  were  assigned  by   others  –  how  we  presented  ourselves  and  how  we  were  seen  and  treated  by  others”   (p.  297).  These  cultural  practices  are  influenced  by  spatial  and  temporal  dimensions   that  bound  experience,  influencing  what  actors  in  these  communities  value,  believe   and  bring  to  local  practices.    Falk  and  Dierking  (2002)  argue,  “the  primary  teacher  in   our  lives  is  the  world  in  which  we  live”  (pp.  47-­‐48).    The  teachings  are  influenced  by   the  people  and  places  we  interact  with,  the  way  we  as  individuals  or  groups  are   positioned  in  these  interactions  as  well  as  the  cultural  practices  valued  within  the   community.       I  define  “place”  to  extend  beyond  the  physical  spaces  of  the  community  to   include  the  social  dimensions  that  occur  in  the  interactions  among  people  and   places.  I  borrow  from  an  interdisciplinary  conception  of  place  that  includes   dimensions  of  the  biophysical,  personal,  sociocultural  and  political/economic   (Ardoin,  2006).    A  sense  of  place  is  thus  derived  from  multiple  simultaneously   occurring  factors  influencing  the  way  an  individual  experiences  the  world  in  which   they  live.    This  sense  of  place  is  constantly  contested  for  an  individual  through  the   formation  and  reformation  of  relationships  as  well  as  how  the  individual  is   positioned  in  these  relationships.    These  relationships  include  a  dialogue  between     17   one’s  self  and  the  world,  participation  with  overlapping  and  sometimes  competing   groups  and  temporal  or  historical  relationships  linking  past,  present  and  future   (Cogan,  Grossman  &  Liu,  2000).  Youth  are  positioned  differently  through  different   relationships,  be  it  historical  or  cultural,  that  are  often  based  on  structural   definitions  such  as  gender,  class  and  race.  How  an  individual  or  group  is  positioned   influences  the  way  the  relationship  plays  out  as  well  as  the  identity(ies)  an   individual  assumes.       Thus,  a  sense  of  place  is  ongoing  and  always  in  transition.  Dewey  (1938)   argued  there  is  an,  “organic  connection  between  education  and  personal   experiences”  (p.  25).    New  educative  experiences  are  juxtaposed  with  existing   personal  experiences,  requiring  the  individual  to  negotiate  new  understandings  in   connection  with  what  has  already  been  experienced.    A  person’s  sense  of  place  is  an   ongoing  negotiation  of  experiences  in  order  to  create  a  coherent  storyline  for  sense   making.    Thus,  examining  both  youths’  and  teachers’  sense  of  place  can  provide   insights  into  the  factors  that  inspire  individuals  to  participate  and  take  action   through  informal  science  learning  as  well  as  the  possibilities  that  are  imagined  for   reforming  science  practices  in  the  classroom.     The  places  in  which  this  study  plays  out  are  the  community  in  which  these   youth  live  and  school  in  which  these  teachers  work  (situated  within  that   community).    These  places  are  more  than  physical  spaces  for  these  participants.     These  are  places  in  which  they  interact  with  other  members  of  the  community  and   gain  expertise  in  cultural  practices.    These  are  also  the  spaces  in  which  institutional   and  personal  histories  collide  and  are  negotiated.    The  participants’  sense  of  place  is     18   derived  from  interactions  with  people  in  these  places  who  are  also  negotiating  the   intersection  of  histories.       I  argue  a  sense  of  place  is  central  to  the  ways  in  which  these  participants  take   up  experience,  form  and  reform  identities,  and  participate  with  science.    Social   Practice  Theory  provides  a  lens  to  investigate  sense  of  place  through  consideration   of  colliding  histories  and  identity  formation  as  youth  participate  in  science  related   activities.  As  youth  encounter  new  knowledge,  it  is  considered  alongside  narratives   they  bring  with  them  from  personal  and  collective  experiences  in  their  place.   Understanding  how  youth  leverage  a  sense  of  place  when  participating  in  science   activities,  how  their  sense  of  place  influences  their  interactions  with  science  and   how  they  are  motivated  by  investigations  through  place  is  vital  as  we  continue  to   examine  how  science  education  can  be  meaningful  in  their  lives.       Relevant  Literature   The  following  section  describes  the  relevant  literature  regarding  formal  and   informal  science  learning.  This  study  focuses  on  how  youths’  experiences  might   impact  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science.    As  such,  I  first  examine  different   approaches  regarding  the  goals  of  science  education  in  order  to  situate  these   experiences  within  established  purposes  of  learning  and  doing  science.    This  is   followed  by  a  discussion  of  the  literature  regarding  how  science  is  experienced  in   formal  and  informal  contexts  before  turning  to  the  idea  of  bridging  these  contexts.       The  purpose  of  this  section  is  to  define  the  problem  space  for  this  study.     More  specifically,  the  purpose  is  to  examine  why  flipping  the  informal/formal   question  by  asking  teachers  to  consider  youth  voice  is  important.  Throughout,  I     19   argue  if  a  scientifically  literate  citizenry  is  the  goal  of  education,  a  shift  in  the  way   science  education  is  carried  out  in  schools  is  required.     Science  Literacy   Many  scholars  point  to  developing  a  scientifically  literate  citizenry  as  the   purpose  of  science  education  (Anderson,  Holland  &  Palinscar,  1997;  Feinstein  2010;   Lee  &  Roth,  2003;  Liu,  2009).    Recent  reform  movements  such  as  the  Next   Generation  Science  Standards  (NGSS,  2013)  are  designed  to  prepare  students  for   future  citizenship  in  the  21st  century  in  terms  of  economic  viability  and  political   savvy  with  science.  However,  there  are  differing  opinions  and  approaches  on  how  to   develop  a  scientifically  literate  person.    Roberts  (2007)  splits  the  literature  into  two   separate  visions  –  one  promoting  the  “canon  of  orthodox  natural  science,  that  is,  the   products  and  processes  of  science  itself”  and  one  interested  in  “situations  with  a   scientific  component,  situations  that  students  are  likely  to  encounter  as  citizens”  (p.   730).    The  first  vision  focuses  on  the  knowledge  and  abilities  needed  to  be   scientifically  literate  leaving  the  application  largely  to  the  individual  or  group,   where  the  second  vision  is  focused  on  contextual  applications  of  this  knowledge  and   processes  (Feinstein,  2010).     Traditionally,  school  science  has  aligned  with  the  first  vision  of  science   literacy  by  providing  the  general  knowledge  and  processes,  thus  relying  on   individuals  to  apply  it  to  the  situations  of  their  daily  lives.    However,  traditional   ways  of  knowing  and  doing  do  not  always  align  with  cultural  practices  or  lived   experiences,  isolating  some  students  from  science  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Yang,  2000).     20   This  approach  can  define  who  is  and  who  isn’t  capable  of  science,  as  well  as  the   places  and  situations  where  scientific  knowledge  and  processes  are  relevant.     Anderson  (2007)  defines  science  literacy  as  “the  science-­‐related  knowledge,   practices  and  values  we  hope  students  will  acquire  as  they  learn  science”  (p.  5).    He   envisions  science  literacy  as  something  one  gains  over  time  and  splits  the   acquisition  into  two  types  of  agency  –  social  and  material.    Social  agency  involves  an   affect  toward  scientific  ways  of  knowing  and  doing,  allowing  an  individual  to   complete  meaningful  tasks,  as  well  as  “gain  access  to  communities  that  would   otherwise  be  closed  to  them”  (p.  5).    Agency  in  the  material  world  involves  using   scientific  tools  to  describe  and  explain  observed  phenomenon.    Thus,  scientifically   literate  people  are  able  to  both  make  sense  of  the  physical  world  around  them  and   use  scientific  knowledge  to  enter  certain  communities  of  practice.    However,   Anderson  argues  (or  laments)  that  our  nation’s  schools  have  not  been  successful  in   developing  these  agencies  in  students.    “Our  institutions  of  formal  education  do  not   help  most  students  to  learn  science  with  understanding”  (p.  5).  Without   understanding,  Anderson  argues  students  are  denied  access  to  communities,  are   unable  to  engage  in  meaningful  work  and  fail  to  consider  important  perspectives   when  making  decisions  and  taking  actions.     These  views  of  science  literacy  are  overlapping  in  many  areas,  asking   students  to  understand  scientific  principles  or  practices  in  order  to  facilitate   different  types  of  participation.    This  participation  may  involve  accessing   communities  that  are  otherwise  restricted  or  participating  in  debate  and   deliberation  over  relevant  issues,  i.e.  the  work  of  citizens.    Thus,  science  literacy     21   requires  individuals  or  groups  to  acquire  deep  science  understanding  and  rests  on   the  hopes  that  they  will  have  the  capacity  to  apply  principles  and  practices  to   situations  encountered  in  everyday  life  or  in  some  future  endeavor.       Feinstein  (2010)  argues  for  a  redefinition  of  the  idea  of  the  scientifically   literate  citizen  as  one  who  is  a  “competent  outsider  with  respect  to  science”  (p.  180).     In  this  view,  a  person  has  the  ability  to  identify  places  where  science  is  relevant  or   “useful”  to  the  question  or  issue  they  encounter.    Feinstein  (2010)  argues,  “science   literacy  is  not  incidentally  but  fundamentally  about  identifying  relevance:  learning   to  see  how  science  is  or  could  be  significant  to  the  things  you  care  about  most”  (p.   180).    In  this  view  of  science  literacy,  the  knowledge  and  capacities  that  go  along   with  being  scientifically  literate  not  only  align  with  traditional  places  of  science  (i.e.   laboratories,  classrooms)  but  also  in  the  communities  where  people  live  and  work.   Science  is  considered  alongside  other  ways  of  knowing  when  encountering   “personally  and  socially  meaningful”  issues.    Thus,  the  goal  of  science  literacy  is  not   a  goal  to  have  students  act  like  little  scientists,  but  rather  understand  when  to   leverage  science  understandings  and  practices  as  they  act  as  citizens  in  local,   national  or  global  contexts.     Although  I  worry  about  creating  a  binary  between  insider  and  outsiders  with   respect  to  science,  Feinstein’s  redefining  of  science  literacy  aligns  with  my  prior   definition  of  meaningful  science  learning.    In  this  conception  of  education  for  science   literacy,  youth  are  given  opportunities  to  merge  science  concepts  and  practices  with   their  lived  experiences  in  hopes  of  finding  relevance.      Instead  of  separating  content   and  context,  mind  and  body,  as  is  often  the  case  in  education,  this  view  of  science     22   literacy  envisions  a  person  who  leverages  science  when  it  is  relevant  to  questions  or   issues  connected  to  their  community.     Science  Education     Formal  science  learning.    If  science  literacy  or  having  a  scientifically   literate  citizenry  is  the  goal  of  science  education,  schools  are  often  envisioned  as  the   place  in  which  students  gain  the  understanding  and  practices  necessary  to  realize   this  goal.  How  often  are  students  given  the  opportunity  to  apply  scientific  principles   to  their  everyday  lives  in  a  formal  education  setting?  This  section  examines  the   literature  on  formal  science  learning  in  terms  how  students  participate  with   material,  the  impact  of  intended  outcomes  on  the  ways  in  which  students  participate   and  which  vision  of  science  literacy  is  taken  up  in  science  classrooms.       As  mentioned  above,  schools  are  also  often  critiqued  in  terms  of  students   gaining  understanding  and  skills  necessary  to  act  as  scientifically  literate  citizens  in   their  daily  lives.    Much  of  this  critique  is  due  to  school  science  being  traditionally   focused  on  acquisition  of  transmitted  knowledge  and  the  general  processes  of   scientific  practice  (Lemke,  1992;  Newton,  Driver  &  Osborne,  1999;  NRC,  2007;   Rudolph,  2002).       Science  education  as  a  transmission  of  “authoritative  knowledge”  serves  to   isolate  certain  cultural  practices  and  ways  of  knowing  from  being  seen  as  legitimate   (Bang  &  Medin,  2010)  asking  students  to  assimilate  to  dominant  practices  of  an   intellectual  elite  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Yang,  2000).      Calabrese  Barton  and  Yang   (2000)  argue  that  this  can  lead  to  “[s]tudents  learn(ing)  that  boundaries  exist  which   separate  who  is  and  who  is  not  capable  of  science”  (p.    876).      Rigid  definitions  of     23   what  knowledge  and  practices  are  accepted  as  well  as  a  neutral  view  of  the   discipline  in  science  education  serves  to  isolate  many  students  who  enter  science   classrooms  each  year.         A  focus  on  the  acquisition  not  only  influences  the  way  knowledge  is  received   in  the  classroom,  but  also  the  intended  outcomes  of  learning  science  (Luke,  Green  &   Kelly,  2010;  Tan  &  Calabrese  Barton,  2008).    Outcomes  of  school  focused  on  narrow   definitions  of  what  it  is  to  know  and  do  science  fail  to  align  with  learning  in   everyday  life  where  outcomes  might  be  defined  through  various  forms  of   participation  and  identity  formation,  in  addition  to  knowledge  and  practices   development  (NRC,  2009).  Instead,  school  science  often  leads  to  students  “acquiring   a  sufficient  number  of  facts  and  understandings  to  ensure  adequate  performance  on   exams,  both  classroom  and  standards-­‐based”  (Sadler,  2009,  p.  7).  Narrowly  defined   outcomes  isolate  school  science  from  everyday  life  by  limiting  the  opportunities  for   the  development  of  hybrid  spaces,  or  places  in  which  science  and  everyday  life  come   together.    As  Eisenhart  (1996)  argues,  “schools  and  teachers  are  to  be  held   accountable  for  knowledge  but  not  for  its  situated  or  future  use”  (p.  268).           Carlone,  et  al.  (2011)  investigated  the  impact  of  intended  outcomes  on   student  perceptions  of  science  and  identities  assumed  while  doing  science  in  their   study  of  two  fourth-­‐grade  reforms  based  science  classrooms.      Although  each   classroom  implemented  the  same  reform  based  pedagogy,  the  intended  outcomes  or   what  it  meant  to  be  scientific  were  much  different  in  each  space.    One  classroom  had   very  normative  school  outcomes  where  being  “science  people”  meant  that  one   “figured  things  out  for  themselves  and  did  not  necessarily  get  ideas  from  others  or     24   productively  share  ideas  with  others”  (p.  469).    Student  identities  were  valued  when   students  independently  investigated  and  came  up  with  the  right  answer  or  gained   the  correct  knowledge.    The  students  who  came  up  with  the  “right  answers  in  the   right  way”  were  viewed  by  peers  as  “scientific  people.”   In  contrast,  the  learning  outcomes  of  the  second  class  were  focused  on  the   social  process  of  “being  scientific.”    The  authors  argue,  “doing  science  in  this  class   meant,  in  part,  working  with,  sharing  ideas  with,  asking  question  of  and  listening  to   a  partner  or  group  mates”  (p.  473).    A  scientific  person  was  not  positioned  as  one   that  just  got  the  right  answers,  but  was  part  of  the  process  in  developing  ideas  and   asking  questions  that  led  the  class  to  develop  different  scientific  understandings  and   practices.     Carlone  et  al.  (2011)  found  that  although  students  in  both  classes  reported   an  overall  interest  in  science,  students  in  the  second  classroom  self  identified  as   “smart  science  people”  at  a  much  greater  frequency.    In  fact,  data  from  the  first   classroom  revealed  not  only  did  many  students  not  identify  themselves  as  one  of  the   smartest  science  students,  but  “46%  (all  students  of  color)  did  not  identify  any   characteristic  shared  with  smart  students”(p.  462).    It  is  a  striking  finding  that   almost  half  the  class  did  not  feel  they  had  any  characteristics  in  common  with  smart   science  people,  especially  in  contrast  to  the  second  class  where  all  students  reported   to  have  at  least  “some  characteristics  in  common  with  smart  science  people.”  The   normative  identity  influenced  by  the  intended  outcomes  of  the  first  class  served  to   isolate  many  students,  particularly  students  of  color,  from  taking  on  an  identity  of   “being  scientific”  even  though  their  performance  often  matched  students  seen  as     25   “smart  science  people.”    Carlone  et  al.  (2011)  study  reveals  how  the  outcomes  and   valued  identities  of  the  classroom  influence  the  ways  in  which  students  view  the   value  of  their  participation  and  divide  who  is  and  isn’t  capable  of  being  scientific.     When  only  traditional  outcomes  are  valued,  many  students  are  denied  access  and   unable  to  take  on  identities  of  the  “smart  science  student”  and  the  process  of  doing   science  takes  a  back  seat  to  the  displaying  the  right  answer  in  the  correct  form.     Once  again,  traditional  science  education  proceeds  with  the  canonical  vision   of  science  literacy.    This  vision  relies  on  the  belief  that  if  students  learn  the   knowledge  and  practices,  they  will  eventually  be  able  to  apply  it  to  issues  or   questions  confronted  in  their  own  lives.    Relevance  is  left  to  the  individual  or  group   whose  members  may  have  been  isolated  from  science  learning  during  their  formal   education.    However,  as  Anderson  (2007)  laments,  most  citizens  leave  formal   institutions  without  the  capacity  to  leverage  science  knowledge  and  practice  when   presented  with  sociocientific  issues.     Recent  science  curricular  reforms  have  aimed,  if  not  directly,  at  addressing  a   vision  of  science  education  as  both  knowing  and  doing.  The  Next  Generation  Science   Standards  (NGSS,  2013)  describe  science  practices,  cross  cutting  concepts  and  core   disciplinary  content  as  the  three  dimensions  for  organizing  science  education.    The   NGSS  names  some  of  these  practices  such  as  “asking  questions  and  defining   problems,  planning  and  carrying  out  investigations,  and  engaging  in  argument  from   evidence.”      These  practices  are  to  be  applied  to  “cross  cutting  concepts”  such  as   cause  and  effect  or  finding  patterns  to  explain  observations.    Finally,  youth   understand  the  core  concepts  of  the  four  disciplines  of  physical,  Earth,  life  and     26   technology/engineering  in  order  to  have  foundational  disciplinary  knowledge.    The   core  of  the  standards  document  focuses  on  students’  knowledge  of  science  concepts   and  processes  in  order  to  become  scientifically  literate.   However,  the  NGSS  also  argues,  as  one  of  their  core  ideas,  that  investigations   “relate  to  the  interest  and  life  experiences  of  students  or  to  be  connected  to  societal   or  personal  concerns  that  require  scientific  or  technical  knowledge.”  In  other  words,   the  investigations  must  be  relevant  or  meaningful  to  the  lives  of  those  who  carry  out   the  investigation.    In  addition,  although  scientific  knowledge  and  practices  are   applied  and  may  even  be  at  the  center  of  the  examination,  investigations  “connected   to  societal  or  personal  concerns”  are  interdisciplinary  in  nature,  requiring   individuals  or  groups  to  consider  multiple  factors  when  making  decisions  or  taking   actions.    Although  this  is  not  written  as  one  of  the  organizing  dimensions  of  the   standards,  the  authors  are  giving  a  nod  to  and  recommending  that  school  practices   include  investigations  that  are  relevant  to  students’  lived  experiences.  The  nod  is   given  to  making  science  relevant  to  the  learners,  but  it  remains  to  be  seen  how  this   idea  will  be  taken  up  in  science  classrooms  by  science  teachers  feeling  the  pressure   to  cover  core  ideas  and  ensure  students  perform  proficiently  on  standardized   assessments.  This  study  aims  to  inform  teachers,  administrators  and  others  charged   with  bringing  NGSS  to  classroom  spaces  about  the  possibilities  of  implementing   reforms  focused  on  science  content  and  practices  as  well  as  relevance  to  the  learner.     Lemke  (2001)  asked,  “For  all  the  factual  science  curriculum  is  teaching  them,   are  our  students  any  more  knowledgeable  about  the  economic,  sociological,   technical  and  political  role  of  science  in  the  modern  world?”  (p.  300).  This  question     27   gets  at  the  heart  of  this  study  through  investigating  how  science  is  or  can  be  a  part   of  the  world  in  which  youth  live.  To  be  clear,  I  am  not  arguing  for  an  either/or  type   of  situation.    I  understand  the  importance  of  youth  gaining  foundational  science   knowledge  and  ways  of  knowing.    However,  I  do  argue  providing  opportunities  for   youth  to  investigate  science  concepts  or  issues  that  are  relevant  to  their  lived   experiences  serves  to  make  science  more  accessible  to  a  greater  number  of  students,   helps  youth  see  how  science  can  be  connected  to  their  place  and  motivates  youth  to   learn  more  in  order  to  take  educated  action.   Informal  science  learning.  Classrooms  are  not  the  only  spaces  where   science  learning  is  occurring.    As  the  girls  in  this  study  show,  individuals  and  groups   are  finding  places  outside  of  school  where  science  is  meaningful  to  their  everyday   lives  motivating  them  to  build  deep  understandings  of  relevant  science  content.   Informal  science  learning,  or  lifelong  learning,  can  be  defined  as  the  activities   individuals  and  groups  participate  with  science  outside  of  the  institution  of  school   (Falk  &  Dierking,  2002;  NRC,  2009).    Recently,  more  attention  has  been  given  to  the   influence  of  informal  learning  opportunities  as  an  important  source  of  science   learning.    For  instance,  Falk,  Storksdieck  and  Dierking  (2007)  surveyed  residents  in   Los  Angeles  regarding  their  interest  in  science  and  sources  of  scientific  knowledge.     They  found  that  a  majority  of  participants  reported  a  “very  high  interest  in  science   and  technology”  and  a  “moderate  to  slightly  greater  than  moderate”  understanding   of  science  and  technology  (p.  459).  When  asked  about  the  sources  of  gaining   knowledge  of  science  and  technology,  43%  claimed  to  have  primarily  learned   through  “leisure”  or  informal  activities,  as  opposed  to  34%  through  formal  schooling     28   and  23%  through  work  related  training.    Although  school  was  still  an  important   source  of  science  learning,  these  findings  point  to  the  powerful  influence  informal   science  learning  has  on  individuals  as  well  as  multiple  contexts  in  which  science   learning  can  and  does  take  place.         The  power  of  these  experiences  goes  beyond  the  frequency  by  which  they   occur.  Informal  learning  experiences  can  foster  the  development  of  many  of  the   capacities  educators  hope  students  acquire  in  school  science  (Falk  &  Dierking,  2002;   Fenichel,  2010;  HFRC,  2009;  NRC,  2009).    The  Harvard  Family  Research  Council   argues  “participation  in  after-­‐school  and  summer  learning  programs  affords   children  and  youth  access  to  crucial  development  supports  and  opportunities  that   prepare  them  for  later  success  in  life”  (2009,  p.  9).    These  experiences  are  in   “designed  environments”  such  as  museums  or  zoos,  in  programs  after  school,  or   simply  in  the  process  of  everyday  living.    These  experiences  are  relevant  through   choice,  connection  to  place  or  lived  experiences  and  the  intrinsic  motivation  of   individuals  to  learn  more  about  something  they  are  interested  in.   The  NRC  (2009)  argues,  “For  all  these  pursuits,  the  range  of  learning   outcomes  far  exceeds  the  typical  academic  emphasis  on  conceptual  knowledge.     Across  informal  settings,  learners  may  develop  awareness,  interest,  motivation,   social  competencies,  and  practices.    They  may  develop  incremental  knowledge,   habits  of  mind,  and  identities  that  set  them  on  a  trajectory  to  learn  more”  (p.  27).       The  aptitudes  that  may  be  gained  go  beyond  the  canonical  view  of  science  literacy   and  enter  areas  of  motivation  and  social  action  through  experiences  with  science  in   the  informal  sector.    This  is  a  view  of  learning  science  that  incorporates  both     29   knowing  and  doing.  The  outcomes  are  broader  where  different  aspects  of   participation  as  well  as  ways  of  knowing  are  valued.    This  allows  learners  to  take  on   identities  that  otherwise  may  not  be  available  to  them  through  traditional   normative  science  education.     Connecting  the  sources  of  science  learning.    The  focus  of  this  dissertation   is  bringing  informal  and  formal  learning  together  by  thinking  about  what  teachers   can  learn  from  what  young  people  are  doing  with  science  outside  of  school.    As   mentioned  previously,  there  are  very  few  studies  that  address  a  connection  between   informal  and  school-­‐based  learning  opportunities  with  science  or  build  on  how   findings  from  one  venue  impact  the  other.  (Dierking,  Falk,  Feher  &  Rennie,  2003;   NRC,  2009;).      One  group  that  has  looked  into  the  connection  between  informal  and   formal  science  learning  is  the  Harvard  Family  Research  Council.    This  group  has   released  reports  urging  the  Federal  Government  to  fund  more  informal  science   learning  programs  as  well  as  arguing  for  curricular  connections  to  be  made  between   informal  (after-­‐school,  summer,  family)  and  formal  school  learning.    The  federal   investment  would  provide  youth  greater  opportunities  to  be  involved  with  science   learning,  especially  in  low  socio-­‐economic  areas  where  resources  are  often  lacking   (HFRC,  2009).    The  group  also  believes  greater  informal  science  learning   opportunities  can  “help  young  people  gain  the  skills  necessary  for  lifelong  learning   and  a  healthy  adulthood”,  “offer  a  seamless  learning  environment  that  can  help   promote  school  success  and  stem  summer  learning  loss”  and  “efficiently  use   resources  outside  of  school  to  help  close  the  achievement  gap”  (2011,  p.  i).    The   HFRC  believes  that  through  the  creation  of  a  “continuous,  comprehensive  and     30   complementary  learning  system”  across  formal  and  informal  settings,  greater   support  will  be  provided  for  youths’  science  learning  and  increased  possibilities  for   imagining  where  science  learning  can  take  place.       Although  I  support  much  of  what  the  HFRC  calls  for,  their  recommendations   are  directional  in  terms  of  informal  learning  aligning  themselves  to  support  formal   or  school  science  experiences  and  outcomes.  By  designing  these  experiences  to   increase  academic  achievement,  might  we  also  alter  what  youth  find  so  engaging   about  them  in  the  first  place?    If  we  are  to  “broaden  our  ideas  of  where,  when  and   how  learning  happens”  (HFRC,  2011,  p.  i)  or  re-­‐imagine  what  science  learning  looks   like,  should  we  be  making  sure  these  experiences  align  with  what  has  always  been?     Connecting  to  this  study.  I  am  interested  in  examining  youths’  stories  of   participation  with  informal  science  learning  and  thinking  about  how  this  can  impact   or  reform  what  classroom  science  can  look  like.  This  study  aims  to  share  with   teachers  the  powerful  stories  youth  tell  about  informal  learning  spaces  to  examine   how  they  make  sense  of  potential  implementations  into  their  classrooms.  This  sense   making  is  influenced  by  experiences  in  formal  learning  connected  to  how  the  goals   of  school  are  taken  up  and  which  elements  of  standards  documents  such  as  the   NGSS  are  prioritized.    Despite  the  potential  tensions  and  issues  with  flipping  the   informal/formal  questions,  I  hope  youths’  stories  of  participation  with  informal   science  learning  can  help  educators  think  about  the  possibilities  of  increasing  the   relevancy  of  science  instruction  for  youth  in  classroom  settings.     Providing  a  Roadmap     31     In  this  chapter,  I  aimed  to  provide  a  rationale  for  flipping  the   informal/formal  question  by  asking  what  can  schools  learn  from  what  youth  are   doing  with  science  in  informal  spaces.    Thus,  I  argued  for  inclusion  of  youth  voice   and  experiences  in  conversations  regarding  reforming  the  teaching  and  learning  of   science  in  classroom  spaces.    This  chapter  serves  to  lay  the  groundwork  for  what  is   to  come.         Chapter  two  outlines  the  methodology  and  methods  of  this  study,  paying   careful  attention  to  my  potential  influence  over  the  creation  of  the  girls’  cases  as   well  as  the  conversations  with  the  teachers.    I  discuss  my  commitments  to  the   participants  of  this  critical  ethnography  and  ways  in  which  the  study  was  designed   to  foreground  participant  ideas.    The  chapter  goes  on  to  provide  vital  information   regarding  context,  participants  and  study  design.    Finally,  I  discuss  data  sources  and   methods  of  analysis.     Chapter  three  is  the  first  of  three  findings  chapters  and  looks  closely  at  the   girls’  cases.    The  chapter  is  guided  by  the  following  questions;  what  are  the  stories   these  girls  tell  about  what  they  gain  from  their  participation  in  a  year  round  green   energy  club?  How  is  science  learning  and  doing  represented  in  these  stories?  I  argue   the  girls’  use  their  cases  to  share  experiences  of  how,  where  and  why  science   matters,  express  hope  for  school  science  and  push  back  against  traditional  notions   that  young,  female,  students  of  color  from  lower  SES  backgrounds  are  not  interested   or  capable  of  making  contributions  to  scientific  investigations.   Chapter  four  examines  how  teachers  participated  with  the  girls’  cases  during   professional  development  meetings.  The  guiding  question  is:  How  do  teachers  make     32   sense  of  the  girls’  stories  of  informal  science  learning  practices  in  support  of   powerful  learning  in  science  classrooms?  I  argue  teachers  notice  powerful  messages   within  and  across  the  girls’  cases,  but  their  individual  meaning  making  is  influenced   by  the  tensions  between  what  they  find  powerful  in  the  girls’  cases,  the  institutional   narratives  that  often  guide  practice  in  schools  and  the  societal  and  personal   narratives  connected  to  participation  of  girls  from  non-­‐dominant  communities  with   science.         Chapter  five  follows  the  teachers  into  their  science  classrooms  during  and   after  the  professional  development  meetings.    Through  this  chapter,  I  investigate  the   following  questions:  How  do  teachers  draw  upon  interpretations  of  the  girls’  cases   in  their  classroom  practices?  What  role  does  instructional  context  play  in   implementing  science  learning  experiences?  I  argue  all  three  of  these  teachers  took   different  pathways  when  implementing  science  learning  experiences  based  upon   the  meaning  they  made  of  the  girls’  informal  science  learning  cases  and  its  link  to   classroom  practices,  resulting  in  varied  learning  experiences  for  their  students.     These  pathways  to  implementation  were  influenced  by  how  each  teacher  made   sense  of  the  tensions  between  the  institutional  narratives  and  meaning  making  from   the  girls’  cases  each  found  most  salient.    Lastly,  student  and  teacher  experiences   during  implementation  were  linked  to  how  the  tensions  were  encountered  and   resolved  in  each  classroom     The  final  chapter  reflects  upon  what  was  learned  through  the  study  by   summarizing  my  findings  with  respect  to  my  research  questions.    Next,  I  use  those   findings  to  demonstrate  how  my  research  contributes  to  the  literature  on  science     33   teacher  learning  as  well  as  the  ways  in  which  youth  challenge  narratives  that  define   who  is  capable  of  doing  science  and  where  science  is  meaningful.    This  section  ends   with  a  discussion  of  limitations  of  this  study  and  next  steps  for  this  line  of  research.     Finally,  I  conclude  this  dissertation  with  a  discussion  of  implications  of  this  work.     More  specifically,  I  argue  for  the  inclusion  of  youth  voice  in  current  reform   movements  as  well  as  what  this  work  means  for  teacher  educators.                 34   CHAPTER  TWO   METHODOLOGY  AND  METHODS     This  dissertation  led  to  a  lot  of  sleepless  nights.    Insomnia  wasn’t  brought  on   due  to  worrying  about  finishing  or  having  a  compelling  story  to  tell  (although  these   worries  were  always  present).    Instead,  my  nights  were  spent  thinking  about  the   complexity  of  the  study  and  my  potential  influence  over  how  stories  were   constructed,  communicated  and  received.    I  played  a  central  role  in  collecting  the   stories  of  four  female  youth  and  bringing  them  to  three  male  teachers.    My   positionality,  as  a  white  male  who  had  taken  advantage  of  privileges  that  afforded   opportunities  not  available  to  many  of  the  participants  in  the  study,  was  a  constant   presence  in  this  work.  Thus,  the  complexity  of  this  study  was  layered  in  issues  of   gender,  race,  class,  age  and  life  experience.    The  sleepless  nights  were  a  result  of  the   tensions  between  my  commitments  to  these  participants  and  the  communities  in   which  they  live,  and  work,  and  the  knowledge  that  my  participation  would  be  part  of   the  final  story.    Even  as  I  write  this  chapter,  I  am  uncomfortable  knowing  how  much   of  it  will  be  focused  on  my  actions.     This  chapter  introduces  and  reflects  upon  the  complexity  of  this  study.    I   first  focus  on  how  and  why  this  study  was  conducted  before  turning  to  discussion  of   where  and  with  whom.    I  finish  with  a  discussion  regarding  the  sources  of  data,   analysis  of  data  and  limitations  of  the  study.       Laying  Out  My  Commitments   I  approached  this  study  with  certain  commitments  in  place  that  informed   how  and  why  I  carried  out  this  work.    These  commitments  are  reflected  in  the     35   choices  I  made  about  what  was  foregrounded  in  my  work  with  participants.    First,  I   wanted  to  carry  out  this  study  alongside  my  participants  in  terms  of  sharing  in  their   struggles,  successes  and  gaining  appreciations  for  their  experiences.    Second,  I  am   committed  to  opening  spaces  for  these  girls  (and  others)  to  share  their  stories  and   have  their  voices  included  in  conversations  where  they  are  rarely  present.    Third,  I   am  committed  to  working  with  teachers  to  understand  the  messiness  of  the  work   they  are  asked  to  undertake  while  still  valuing  their  commitments  to  the  teaching   and  learning  of  science.    Finally,  I  am  committed  to  understanding  the  complex   relationships  between  participants,  place  and  historical  narratives  that  influence   how  individuals  envision  who  is  capable  of  science  and  where  science  is  relevant.   I  begin  with  these  commitments  because  they  formed  the  foundation  for  how   and  why  I  designed  this  study.  These  commitments  led  me  to  carry  out  the  study  as   a  critical  ethnography  due  to  my  desire  to  conduct  research  “with”  participants,   rather  than  “on”  or  “for”  them  (Calabrese  Barton,  2001;  Thomas,  1993).    The   methodology  provides  an  analytic  lens  in  which  to  “politicize”  the  interaction   between  actors  and  the  social  structures  through  which  they  act,  grounded  in  the   belief  that  these  relationships  are  never  neutral.    Anderson  (1989)  argues  the   critical  ethnographer  is  concerned  with  the  “relationship  between  social  structural   constraints  on  human  actors  and  the  relative  autonomy  of  human  agency”  (p.  249).   This  analytic  lens  is  important  as  I  attempted  to  capture  the  stories  of  girls,  who  are   positioned  in  particular  ways  due  to  being  young,  female  students  (mostly  of  color)   from  predominately  low  socio-­‐economic  backgrounds  and  bring  them  to  a  group  of   male  teachers.         36   Murillo  (1999)  argues,  “ethnographic  inquiry  is  most  appropriate  when  it   places  events  and  people  in  the  social,  cultural  and  political  history  and  contexts  in   which  they  are  constituted”  (p.  7).    The  girls  and  teachers  in  this  study  provide   insight  into  the  various  layers  of  this  context  through  participation  in  conversations,   sharing  stories  and  taking  action  in  their  classrooms  or  communities.    My   participation  allows  me  to  understand  and  interpret  these  layers,  when  and  why   they  are  important,  as  part  of  the  group  as  opposed  to  observing  from  the   background.           Of  course,  this  intentionally  blurred  the  lines  of  the  traditional   researcher/researched  relationship  with  both  the  teachers  and  girls  as  I  assumed   multiple  roles  throughout  the  project  acting  as  teacher,  collaborator  and  researcher.   While  this  afforded  me  access  and  position  as  a  member  of  the  groups  (both  with   girls  and  teachers),  it  also  resulted  in  various  degrees  of  influence  on  the  direction   of  inquiry  as  the  investigation  progressed.    Lave  (2011)  argues:   Part  of  critical  ethnographic  practice  is  an  ongoing  commitment  to  rethinking   and  redoing  one’s  work  as  an  ethnographer  and  activist.    The  question  is  how   to  become  over  the  long  term  an  apprentice  to  one’s  changing  practice.  (p.  2)         Lave’s  work  helped  me  focus  my  reflections  regarding  my  role(s)  as  I  worked  with   participants.  I  was  continually  “rethinking”  how  I  participated  in  the  professional   development  groups  with  teachers  and  conversations  with  the  girls.  Lave  writes   that  critical  ethnography  is  “research  as  learning”,  which  helped  me  continually   “rethink”  that  my  purpose  was  to  learn  from  these  participants.    While  I  was  not   going  to  be  able  to  remove  my  influence,  I  wanted  this  study  to  be  about  these  girls’   stories  of  informal  science  learning  and  what  these  teachers  noticed  and  made     37   meaning  of  in  the  stories.    I  continually  reflected  individually  and  with  the  co-­‐ directors  of  this  dissertation  to  think  about  how  my  actions  influenced  participation.     I  also  designed  the  study  to  create  spaces  for  participants’  voice  to  be  foregrounded,   aiming  to  ensure  they  simply  weren’t  the  stories  I  wanted  the  girls  to  tell  or  the   meanings  I  wanted  the  teachers  to  make.       Co-­‐Constructing  Cases  of  Informal  Science  Learning   In  order  to  communicate  or  capture  some  of  the  experiences  of  informal   science  learning,  cases  of  the  girls’  participation  were  developed  and  shared  with   science  teachers.    By  cases,  I  mean  a  collection  of  explicit  messages  and  artifacts   authored  by  the  girls.    In  building  these  cases,  I  hoped  they  would  reveal   experiences  of  participants  as  they  were  lived  in  as  close  to  an  unedited  form  as   possible.  The  cases  included  a  section  introducing  the  girls  where  they  shared  a   website  and  pictures  they  drew  of  themselves,  a  section  where  they  shared  explicit   messages  to  science  teachers  and  a  section  of  artifacts  including  short  videos,   stories  and  transcripts  of  conversations.    The  cases  are  described  in  greater  detail  in   chapter  three.   In  an  attempt  to  stay  true  to  the  stories  of  the  four  girls  who  participated,  the   study  was  designed  so  that  the  cases  were  co-­‐constructed,  or  co-­‐authored,  with  the   girls.    I  met  with  all  four  girls  together  to  explicitly  talk  about  this  project  three   times  as  the  cases  were  created.    The  first  two  meetings  occurred  early  in  the   process  and  focused  on  providing  an  overview  of  the  project,  inquiring  about   participant  interest  in  the  project  and  brainstorming  ideas  for  sharing  experiences   with  teachers.    The  third  meeting,  which  occurred  after  the  cases  had  been     38   developed,  focused  on  positionality.  In  particular,  I  asked  these  girls  to  reflect  upon   who  was  sharing  these  stories  and  who  these  stories  were  being  shared  with  in   terms  of  differences  of  gender,  race  and  age.    I  asked  the  girls  to  consider  the  ways   in  which  those  differences  might  influence  how  the  cases  are  received.       In  addition  to  the  whole  group  meetings,  I  met  with  each  of  the  girls   individually  four  times  to  co-­‐construct  the  cases.    During  the  first  two  meetings  we   brainstormed  artifacts  they  would  want  to  include,  and  I  asked  them  what  they   wanted  their  teachers  to  know  about  their  informal  science  experiences.    This   formed  the  basis  for  the  “explicit  messages  to  science  teachers”  section  of  the  cases.     At  the  same  time  as  these  initial  meetings,  I  gave  each  of  the  girls  a  video  camera   and  asked  them  to  take  images  of  places  in  their  community  where  science  mattered   or  talk  to  people  in  their  community  about  how  science  mattered  to  them.     Additionally,  I  asked  each  of  the  girls  to  write  a  story  about  a  specific  time  when   science  outside  of  school  was  meaningful  to  them.    Some  of  these  creations  were   eventually  included  in  the  girls’  cases.      The  third  and  fourth  individual  meetings   were  spent  critically  examining  and  revising  the  cases.    I  took  what  each  had  told  me   they  wanted  included  in  their  case  and  organized  it  using  a  Wiki  page.    During  these   final  individual  meetings,  we  sat  together  examining  the  Wiki  page  thinking  about   what  was  missing  and  what  each  girl  hoped  the  teachers  would  do  with  the  stories   and  artifacts  included  in  the  cases.    The  cases  were  edited  several  times  through   these  meetings.    At  the  end  of  the  fourth  individual  meeting,  all  four  girls  decided  we   did  not  need  a  fifth  meeting  as  they  were  happy  with  the  cases  and  believed  they   were  ready  to  share  with  the  teachers.       39   While  the  design  of  the  study  put  some  of  my  fears  to  rest  regarding  staying   true  to  the  girls’  stories,  I  also  knew  that  I  had  a  history  with  these  girls.      I  had   known  and  worked  with  all  four  of  the  girls  in  an  informal  science  setting  (GET  City)   for  two  years:  this  history  brought  with  it  both  positives  and  potential  issues.    The   relationships  I  had  built  with  each  of  them  established  trust.    I  believe  this  trust   opened  spaces  for  the  girls  to  share  their  stories  and  take  authority  of  constructing   and  reconstructing  their  cases  in  ways  that  would  not  have  happened  if  the  research   was  carried  out  by  someone  they  were  unfamiliar  with.    However,  the  stories  they   told  also  focused  on  the  informal  science  we  all  experienced  together.    Originally,  I   hoped  the  cases  would  be  about  their  informal  science  experiences  in  general.     While  some  of  the  artifacts  were  not  connected  to  GET  City,  most  of  them  were.    This   is  evidence  of  my  influence  on  this  study.    While  it  may  be  that  their  experiences  in   GET  City  are  most  salient  to  them  in  terms  of  informal  science  learning,  I  can’t   ignore  that  I  was  asking  the  questions  and  the  stories  they  told  were  often   connected  to  our  experiences  together.    In  the  end,  I  was  explicit  with  the  teachers   who  eventually  viewed  these  cases  about  my  potential  influence  and  the  role  of  GET   City  throughout  the  girls’  cases.     While  I  had  a  history  with  the  girls,  I  also  understood  my  life  experiences   were  very  different  from  theirs.    I  am  a  thirty-­‐six  year  old  white  male  who  grew  up   in  an  upper  middle  class  family.    They  are  all  young,  female,  mostly  of  color  (three  of   four  are  African  American),  youth  who  are  growing  up  in  very  different  conditions   than  what  I  experienced  at  their  age  or  continue  to  experience.    This  is  not  to  say   that  our  differences  prevented  me  from  being  part  of  their  experience,  but  it  was     40   something  I  was  constantly  reflecting  upon.    I  worried  how  my  relative  position  of   power  in  relation  to  the  girls  influenced  how  the  cases  were  constructed  and  how   others  would  form  beliefs  about  who  authored  the  cases.     More  importantly,  I  worried  about  how  these  girls  saw  the  power  dynamics   playing  out  in  this  study.    These  ideas  are  what  I  tried  to  “get  at”  in  our  third  group   conversation.    I  asked  what  they  thought  about  differences  in  race,  gender,  age  and   SES  in  terms  of  my  participation  as  well  as  the  teachers.    At  first,  like  many  of  us,  the   girls  were  uncomfortable  talking  about  these  issues.  I  believe  it  wasn’t  that  these   ideas  didn’t  matter  to  them,  but  they  were  just  difficult  to  speak  about  in  connection   with  this  study.    In  the  end,  the  girls  weren’t  sure  how  race,  gender,  class  or  age   mattered  to  the  teachers  because  for  the  most  part,  they  did  not  know  these   teachers.    However,  they  believed  they  understood  my  position  relative  to  these   categories.    As  Caitlyn,  one  of  the  girls  involved  in  the  study,  said,  “We  wouldn’t  have   talked  to  you  if  we  didn’t  trust  you.”    This  statement  speaks  to  an  understanding  that   there  are  power  dynamics  at  play.    They  trust  that  I  will  represent  their  stories  and   their  emerging  identities,  but  they  also  recognize  that  my  position  affords  me  the   power  to  share  these  stories  with  teachers  in  ways  they  may  not  be  available  to   them  to  due  to  their  age,  race,  gender,  class  or  position  in  schools.    They  trusted  me   with  the  task  of  sharing  intimate  stories  of  their  lives  and  the  ways  they  saw  science   matter  to  the  people  and  places  that  are  most  important  to  them.    I  laid  awake  at   night  throughout  this  study  thinking  about  what  a  huge  responsibility  that  is.       Professional  Development  Design     41   After  the  cases  were  developed,  the  next  phase  was  to  bring  these  cases  to   the  three  science  teacher  participants.    I  designed  a  professional  development  model   to  facilitate  these  conversations  with  the  following  design  principles  in  mind:   1) Professional  development  meetings  foregrounded  the  girls’  narratives  of   informal  science  learning  experiences   2) Case  exploration  tools  were  developed  to  assist  teachers’  interaction  with   the  girls’  cases   3) Professional  development  meetings  asked  teachers  to  reflect  on  the   power  of  the  girls’  informal  science  learning  experiences  and  the  possible   implications  for  classroom  practice   First,  I  wanted  this  professional  development  experience  to  be  focused  on  the   girls’  experiences.    Foregrounding  youth  narratives  in  professional  development  is  a   departure  from  traditional  PD  models  that  most  often  focus  efforts  on  specific   instructional  strategies  or  curriculum  interventions.    In  this  study,  each  meeting  was   designed  around  examining  one  of  the  girls’  cases.    Thus,  I  met  with  the  teachers   four  times.    Each  meeting  was  scheduled  as  two  hours  long,  yet  all  four  of  them   lasted  at  least  three  hours.   Table  1:     Professional  development  meeting  details   Date     4/20/12   5/2/12     5/10/12   6/1/12        Youth  Focus   Nicole     Hannah   Caitlyn     Maya     Teacher  Attendees     Greene,  Roberts,  Jones     Greene,  Robert,  Jones     Roberts,  Jones       Roberts,  Jones       42   Location   Boys  and  Girls  Club   Boys  and  Girls  Club   Roberts’  Classroom   Boys  and  Girls  Club     Table  1  overviews  the  when,  where,  who  and  what  of  the  professional   development  meetings.    A  few  notes  of  interest  here.    First,  Mr.  Greene  was  only  able   to  attend  the  first  two  professional  development  meetings.    Unfortunately,  after  the   second  meeting,  he  was  injured  breaking  up  a  fight  in  front  of  the  school.    He  came   back  to  work  for  only  a  few  days  before  taking  leave  for  the  remainder  of  the  school   year  and  thus  was  unable  to  attend  professional  development  meetings.         Second,  I  intentionally  held  these  meetings  in  the  conference  room  at  the   Boys  and  Girls  Club.    I  intentionally  took  the  teachers  outside  of  the  school  to  discuss   these  cases  to  ensure  they  felt  uninhibited  about  discussing  various  aspects  of   reforming  school  science  practices.    The  conference  room  was  also  a  quiet  space   where  I  knew  we  would  have  few  interruptions  if  any  during  meetings  due  to  the   Boys  and  Girls  Club  being  closed  during  the  day.    We  did  hold  one  meeting  in  Mr.   Roberts’  classroom,  which  happened  to  be  a  portable  module  unit  at  the  back  of  the   school  that  afforded  us  a  similar  level  of  privacy.      This  meeting  was  held  there  due   to  the  conference  room  at  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  being  used  for  a  board  meeting.       Finally,  the  order  in  which  the  teachers  interacted  with  the  girls’  cases  was   also  intentional.    Below,  I  introduce  the  girls,  which  will  add  further  context  to  these   decisions.    I  started  with  Nicole  because  she  is  a  high  achieving  young  woman  who  I   believed  had  powerful  stories  to  tell  about  science  in  her  community.    Her  case  was   also  chosen  to  go  first  because  she  was  the  least  critical  of  her  schooling   experiences,  at  least  explicitly.    I  did  not  know  these  teachers  well  and  thought   Nicole’s  case  was  a  safe  place  to  start.    I  selected  Hannah’s  case  as  second  because   she  is  a  student  who  struggles  in  school,  yet  shares  experiences  where  she  finds     43   success  through  informal  science  practices.    I  thought  this  would  speak  to  potential   concerns  teachers  might  bring  that  informal  science  practices  only  benefit  high   achieving  students  like  Nicole.    I  ended  with  Caitlyn  and  Maya’s  cases  because  they   were  both  explicitly  critical  about  their  school  experiences  and  took  opportunities   to  contrast  informal  and  formal  science  learning.    I  felt  these  cases  brought  up   important  ideas  for  the  teachers  to  consider,  but  also  believed  the  establishment  of   group  norms  within  the  professional  development  meetings  would  help  to  facilitate   these  conversations.       The  second  design  principle  involved  the  creation  of  three  “case  exploration   tools”  to  accompany  three  of  the  girls’  cases.  The  case  exploration  tools  were  short   activities  teachers  engaged  with  in  preparation  of  or  while  participating  with  the   girls’  cases.    In  particular,  these  tools  asked  teachers  to  search  their  own  memories   and  share  their  own  experiences/perspectives  on  specific  aspects  of  teaching   and/or  learning  science.    The  tools  were  then  used  to  open  spaces  for  teachers  to   engage  with  big  ideas  in  youth  cases  (i.e.  science  and  community,  success/lack  of   success  with  science,  science  as  meaningful).    The  similarities,  differences  or   acknowledgement  of  common  experiences  teachers  noticed  between/among   themselves  and  the  girls  were  places  where  we  could  delve  deeper  into  what  these   youth  are  saying  about  learning  and  doing  science  through  their  cases,  eventually   leading  to  what  it  might  mean  for  teaching  and  learning  science  in  classroom  spaces.       The  case  exploration  tools  included  asking  teachers  to  describe  Great  Lakes   City  to  someone  who  had  never  been  there  before  as  well  as  describe  where  science   is  meaningful  in  Great  Lakes  City.    This  tool  accompanied  Nicole’s  case  where  she     44   shared  artifacts  responding  to  the  same  questions.    The  second  case  exploration  tool   asked  teachers  to  draw  their  high  and  low  moments  with  science.    This  accompanied   Hannah’s  case  and  the  inclusion  of  her  story  about  her  most  memorable  moment   with  science.    Finally,  I  asked  teachers  to  write  a  story  about  a  specific  student  in   their  current  classroom’s  and  a  specific  time  when  science  mattered  to  them  during   the  year.    This  case  exploration  tool  opened  insight  into  how  each  teacher  defined   science  that  matters.    I  asked  the  teachers  to  write  this  story  before  considering   Caitlyn’s  case,  but  the  stories  were  also  referenced  during  Maya’s  case.         Finally,  I  designed  the  professional  development  with  space  for  these   teachers  to  reflect  on  what  these  girls’  cases  led  them  to  think  about  in  reference  to   their  own  classrooms.    An  aspect  of  this  was  addressed  through  conversations  of  the   case  exploration  tools.    However,  there  was  always  time  left  toward  the  end  of  each   meeting  to  think  about  the  broader  implications  of  the  girls’  cases  for  the  teaching   and  learning  of  science.    As  we  progressed  through  the  cases,  these  conversations   often  looked  across  cases  revealing  messages  that  were  most  salient  to  teachers.         The  final  phase  of  my  work  with  the  teachers  involved  one  on  one   interviews  and  classroom  observations.    The  classroom  observations  were   conducted  before,  during  and  after  the  professional  development  meetings.    I   observe  Mr.  Greene’s  eighth  grade  science  class  six  times  1,  Mr.  Roberts’  seventh                                                                                                                   1  Greene  observation  dates  (1/17/12,  2/7/12,  3/19/12,  4/10/12,  4/24/12,   5/3/12)     45   grade  science  class  seven  times  2  and  Mr.  Jones  sixth  grade  science  room  seven   times  3.    I  interviewed  all  three  teachers  twice,  once  at  the  beginning  of  the   professional  development  meetings  and  once  after  the  meetings  were  complete.     Although  these  last  interviews  with  Mr.  Jones  and  Mr.  Roberts  occurred  in  June   before  the  end  of  the  school  year,  I  interviewed  Mr.  Greene  about  the  experience  in   the  fall  of  2013  due  to  him  being  injured  and  not  available  in  the  spring.     Context   The  study  takes  place  in  Great  Lakes,  MI  4,  an  urban  area  that  has   experienced  economic  decline  in  recent  decades.      Once  a  hub  of  the  automotive   industry,  the  city’s  population  decline  has  mirrored  the  dwindling  presence  of  the   auto  industry  with  a  13%  loss  from  1970  to  2010  (U.S.  Census,  2010).    The  loss  of   industry  has  hit  the  community  hard,  resulting  in  a  July,  2011  unemployment  rate  of   9.2%  (Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  2011).      You  can  easily  recognize  situations  of   urban  plight  as  you  drive  through  Great  Lakes  City  and  see  closed  automotive   factories,  boarded  up  houses  and  other  evidence  of  economic  decline  situated   among  fading  visions  of  what  the  city  used  to  be.     While  the  economy  of  Great  Lakes  City  has  seen  decline,  that  is  just  one   aspect  of  this  community.  Focusing  on  economic  issues  neglects  the  many  vibrant   aspects  of  the  place  and  its  people  that  the  girls  in  this  study  and  others  reveal                                                                                                                   2  Roberts  observation  dates  (12/14/11,  2/7/12,  3/21/12,  4/24/12,  5/3/12,   5/17/12,  6/4/12)     3  Jones  observation  dates  (12/14/11,  2/21/12,  3/2/12,  4/24/12,  5/8/12,  5/17/12,   6/6/12)   4  Pseudonym’s  are  used  for  all  places  and  participants  in  this  study     46   through  their  stories  and  actions.    One  example  of  this  community  vibrancy  is  found   at  one  of  the  sites  of  this  study,  the  local  Boys  and  Girls  Club.   A  Site  of  Afterschool  Learning    The  Boys  and  Girls  Club  of  Great  Lakes  City  has  been  serving  the  community   since  1964  and  welcomes  over  2,400  youth  annually  between  the  ages  of  7-­‐17  from   predominately  low  income  and  minority  backgrounds.  The  Club  provides  a  safe   place  for  youth  to  engage  in  many  activities,  allowing  opportunities  to  play,  learn   and  have  fun.  Many  of  the  activities  youth  participate  with  at  the  Club  are  informal   and  organized  in  the  moment.    However,  there  are  other  organized  programs  that   youth  can  join  focused  on  topics  such  as  leadership,  robotics  and  environmental   education.  One  of  the  programs  offered  to  members  of  the  club  is  GET  City  (Green   Energy  Technologies  in  the  City),  a  program  in  which  the  girls  involved  in  this  study   are  members  and  which  they  draw  upon  for  many  of  artifacts  and  explicit  messages   included  in  the  girls’  cases.     GET  City       GET  City  (Green  Energy  Technologies  in  the  City)  is  open  to  youth  ages  ten   through  fifteen  with  anywhere  between  fifteen  and  twenty  weekly  participants.    The   group  investigates  energy  and  ecological  issues  related  to  the  place  in  which  these   youth  live.  GET  City  provides  youth  with  sustained  opportunities  to  engage  in  green   energy  issues  in  ways  that  are  locally  relevant  and  of  global  importance,  supporting   them  in  developing  deep  understandings  of  science  while  also  leveraging  their   expertise  of  their  community  to  take  action.      These  youth  merge  science  and  their     47   everyday  lives  in  ways  that  are  meaningful  to  both  themselves  and  their  intended   audience.       The  official  mission  of  GET  City  is  to  bring  science  and  technological  learning   opportunities  to  urban  youth  in  hopes  of  inspiring  interest  in  STEM  related  careers.     While  this  mission  is  accurate  in  regards  to  our  goals  and  actions,  the  program  has   evolved  over  the  years  to  be  much  more.    GET  City  is  a  space  where  youth  and  adults   work  together  to  leverage  energy  related  science  understandings  in  order  to  try  to   enact  change  in  their  community.    The  change  might  come  in  the  form  of   participating  in  a  community  forum  regarding  the  proposed  building  of  a  new   power  plant,  creating  digital  public  service  announcements  about  observed  energy   behaviors  or  bringing  what  they  know  to  peers  in  their  schools  with  the  goal  of   inspiring  action.    The  youth  in  GET  City  take  up  the  idea  that  not  only  is  change   possible  in  their  community,  but  they  can  be  empowered  as  agents  for  this  change.     Each  Tuesday  and  Thursday  during  the  school  year,  GET  City  meets  in  a   modest  space  dubbed  the  “club  room”  in  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club.  In  order  to  access   this  space,  youth  pass  other  kids  playing  games,  doing  homework  or  hanging  out   with  their  friends.    On  Tuesdays,  GET  City  youth  participate  in  energy  related   investigations  that  include  working  to  gain  understandings  of  the  relevant  science   concepts  and  practices.    On  Thursdays,  GET  City  youth  work  with  technology  to   create  artifacts  to  share  with  peers  and  other  community  members  about  their   energy  related  investigations.       In  addition  to  these  regular  GET  City  meetings,  I  held  weekly  conversation   group  at  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  with  a  subset  of  GET  City  Youth  (4-­‐8)  during  the     48   2009-­‐2010  and  2010-­‐2011  school  years.    This  conversation  group  provided  a  space   where  youth  could  talk  about  issues  they  see  in  their  community,  the  GET  City   curriculum,  schools  and  other  aspect  of  their  lives.        This  program,  and  the  girls  who  are  a  part  of  it,  were  chosen  due  to  my   continued  involvement  as  well  as  the  types  of  reflection  my  interactions  with  GET   City  Youth  inspired  for  me  as  a  teacher  and  learner.    Whether  these  youth  are   planning  a  “Green  Carnival”  to  educate  their  community,  participating  in  public   discussion  about  the  building  of  a  new  power  plant  or  recommending  green  features   to  move  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  toward  LEED  certification,  their  words  and  actions   have  inspired  me  to  rethink  what  is  possible  for  science  education  and  the  potential   impact  of  youth  voice  on  these  possibilities   School  Context     Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts  sits  adjacent  to  the  Boys  and  Girls   Club.    The  majority  of  youth  who  attend  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club,  as  well  as  many   involved  who  are  involved  in  GET  City,  are  students  at  Bayside.    This  Great  Lakes   public  school  serves  550  students  in  kindergarten  through  eighth  grade  and  is   designated  as  a  school  for  visual  and  performing  arts.    The  teachers  in  this  study   attribute  the  focus  on  the  arts  to  the  higher  proportion  of  females  (59%)  in  the   school  population  (see  Table  2).  Grades  K-­‐5  are  run  as  an  elementary  school  with   self-­‐contained  classrooms.    In  grades  6-­‐8,  students  change  classes  but  have  the  same   teacher  for  math  and  science.  The  school  is  also  designated  as  a  Title  One  school   with  57%  of  students  qualifying  for  a  free  and  reduced  lunch  program.         49   Table  2   School  Demographic  Data  (%)   Female      African  American   Asian/Pacific    White          Hispanic                    Native   American        59%                            58%                                                  5%                                      26%                    10%                                        .9%       Of  interest  to  this  study  is  the  turnover  in  staff  assignments  from  year  to   year.    Due  to  the  loss  of  population  and  other  factors,  Great  Lakes  School  District   deals  with  staffing  issues  each  year  resulting  in  teachers  being  “displaced”  from   their  previous  assignment  and  left  in  limbo  until  a  new  assignment  can  be  found.     For  example,  of  the  three  teachers  involved  in  this  study,  only  one  (Mr.  Roberts)   taught  at  Bayside  the  year  before.      Although  Mr.  Roberts  was  familiar  with  the   context  of  the  school,  he  moved  from  eighth  grade  science  to  a  position  in  seventh   grade  science  during  the  2011-­‐2012  school  year.    Additionally,  all  three  of  these   teachers  did  not  receive  their  teaching  placements  until  early  October,  which  was   several  weeks  after  the  beginning  of  the  school  year.         To  provide  an  example  of  how  this  played  out,  when  the  school  year  began,   Mr.  Jones  (sixth  grade  teaching  participant)  did  not  have  a  teaching  assignment  and   spent  the  first  two  weeks  of  the  school  year  at  home.  The  phone  eventually  rang  and   he  was  presented  with  the  choice  of  teaching  either  kindergarten  or  elementary  art,   both  positions  he  felt  were  not  suited  to  his  strengths  or  experiences.    After   choosing  and  teaching  art  for  a  few  days,  he  met  with  a  former  colleague  who  had   been  given  the  sixth  grade  math/science  placement  at  Bayside.    During  this  meeting,   they  agreed  to  switch  placements  for  the  year,  a  move  that  according  to  the  teachers   in  this  study  was  not  uncommon  and  in  some  instances  organized  by  the  school     50   district.    Once  the  switch  was  agreed  upon,  three  and  a  half  weeks  after  the   beginning  of  the  school  year,  Mr.  Jones  took  over  as  the  sixth  grade  science/math   classroom  at  Bayside.     Teacher  turnover  and  displacement  provides  context  for  this  study  in   regards  to  how  these  teachers  came  to  be  in  their  classroom.    It  is  important  from   the  standpoint  of  a  working  environment  and  setting  roots  within  a  school.    It  is  also   important  in  terms  of  the  lack  of  time  these  teachers  had  to  prepare  and  get  to  know   the  curriculum  they  would  be  required  to  teach.    The  shifting  of  placement  was  not  a   new  phenomenon  for  the  three  teachers  involved  in  this  study  as  none  could   remember  having  the  same  placement  for  more  than  two  consecutive  years  over  the   course  of  their  career  in  Great  Lakes  School  District.       Participants     As  mentioned  previously,  this  study  included  four  female  youth  and  three   male  teachers.    I  briefly  describe  each  participant  below,  but  add  detail  for  each   throughout  the  dissertation.     The  Girls       I  chose  the  four  girls  who  participated  in  this  study  for  several  reasons.     First,  all  four  of  these  girls  were  regular  participants  in  GET  City  and  the  weekly   conversation  groups  mentioned  above.    Second,  the  girls  represented  diversity  in   life  experiences,  academic  achievements  and  interests.    Finally,  and  most   importantly,  these  four  expressed  a  desire  to  be  part  of  the  study.    I  initially   presented  an  overview  of  what  I  was  hoping  to  do  to  a  group  of  eight  GET  City   Youth,  but  these  four  expressed  the  highest  degree  of  interest  and  all  saw  the     51   project  through  to  the  end.    I  had  not  planned  on  only  including  female  youth   initially,  and  in  fact  one  male  youth  began  building  a  case.    Unfortunately,  other   obligations  prevented  him  from  continuing  with  the  project.  Below  I  briefly   introduce  each  of  the  four  girls.    The  girls  were  not  offered  any  compensation  for   being  part  of  this  study  but  were  given  a  gift  card  upon  completion.   Table  3     Female  participants     Name     Grade           Race       Years  in  GET  City Nicole     7th     African  American       2   Hannah   6th     Caucasian       2   Caitlyn     7th     African  American       3     6th   Maya       African  American       2       Nicole.  Nicole  is  an  African  American  female  who  is  a  highly  successful   student  by  traditional  measures  (grades,  standardized  test  scores)  and  routinely   finds  herself  on  the  honor  role  at  her  school.  She  was  a  thirteen  year-­‐old  seventh   grader  when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.  She  is  a  bright,  creative  and  talented  young   woman  who  has  shown,  through  her  participation  in  GET  City,  a  desire  to  seek  out   and  act  upon  opportunities  to  make  a  difference  in  her  community.    Nicole  is  shy  at   times,  especially  as  she  is  interacting  with  new  people  or  becoming  acclimated  to  a   new  context.    However,  once  trust  has  been  built  in  a  relationship,  Nicole  is  anything   but  shy  or  quiet.       In  our  time  together,  I  often  heard  Nicole  speak  about  how  important  her   family  is  to  her.    She  lives  most  of  the  time  with  her  mother,  but  spends  weekends   with  her  father,  who  also  lives  in  the  Great  Lakes  City  area.    Nicole  is  mature  beyond     52   what  most  would  normally  think  of  a  thirteen  year-­‐old  in  the  sense  that  she  has   gained  an  appreciation  for  the  sacrifices  those  closest  to  her  have  made  in  order  for   her  to  get  what  she  needs  to  be  successful  and  feel  safe.    This  recognition  extends  to   understanding  that  these  sacrifices  are  accompanied  by  struggle.    This  is  especially   salient  for  Nicole  in  the  way  she  talks  about  her  mother  and  how  hard  she  works  to   pay  the  bills  and  provide  for  her.    “It’s  (giving  back)  important  to  me  because  my   Mom  is  a  single  parent.    I  go  with  my  dad  too,  but  I’m  mostly  with  my  mom.    She’s  a   single  parent.    She’s  doing  whatever  she  can  to  take  care  of  me  and  her.    And  so  I  just   want  to  give  back  to  the  community  to  show  my  appreciation  to  my  mom  and  stuff.”   In  a  sense,  Nicole  understands  that  these  opportunities  afforded  to  her  through  the   hard  work  and  love  of  her  parents  may  not  have  been  available  to  them  when  they   were  her  age.  This  acknowledgement  drives  Nicole  to  not  only  succeed  in  school,  but   also  give  back  to  her  family  and  community  through  service.         Hannah.  Hannah  is  a  Caucasian  female  who  was  in  sixth  grade  and  thirteen   years  old  when  we  created  her  case.    Hannah  was  the  only  one  of  the  girls  who   attended  Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts  during  this  study.    In  fact,  Hannah   had  Mr.  Jones  as  her  science  and  math  teacher  during  this  study.     Hannah  is  not  considered  a  successful  student  by  traditional  measures  such   as  grades  and  test  scores.    She  reports  that  she  gets  “mostly  C’s  and  D’s”  and  is   pulled  out  during  math  class  for  small  group  help.  Earlier  in  her  academic  career,   she  was  held  back  resulting  in  her  being  one  year  older  than  most  of  the  students  in   her  class,  including  her  younger  brother  who  was  also  a  sixth  grader.    Hannah  is     53   quiet  when  asked  direct  questions  about  what  she  thinks  regarding  a  specific  topic   or  to  explain  a  scientific  phenomenon.     Hannah  lives  with  her  mother  and  father,  brother  and  an  older  sister.    Her   parents  attend  every  GET  City  event  and  many  others  at  her  school.    In  that  way,   they  are  very  supportive  of  Hannah.  However,  according  to  Mr.  Jones,  her  parents   establish  low  expectations  for  her  school  performance  representing,  on  some  level,  a   belief  that  she  is  not  capable  of  success  in  school.    Her  family  life  is  also  marked  with   severe  poverty.    There  have  been  instances  where  her  parents  have  asked  GET  City   staff  for  money  or  become  upset  when  at  events  that  promised  food,  all  of  the   children  were  served  before  the  adults.       I  describe  Hannah  this  way  to  reveal  past  academic  performance  and  an   aspect  of  her  life  outside  of  school.    However,  while  this  description  sheds  light  on   her  life  as  a  student  and  a  portion  of  her  life  outside  of  school,  it  falls  far  from   describing  Hannah’s  talents  or  what  she  is  capable  of  accomplishing.    While  her  case   reveals  much  about  these  aspects  of  Hannah,  I  would  be  remiss  if  I  did  not  describe   Hannah  as  I  have  come  to  know  her:  kind,  caring,  outgoing  when  part  of  a  group,   committed  to  her  friends  and  family  and  brave  enough  to  take  intellectual  and  social   risks.   Caitlyn.  Caitlyn  is  an  African  American  female  that  has  found  success  in   many  areas  of  her  life  including  being  an  honor  roll  student,  winning  first  place  in  a   statewide  competition  for  a  public  service  announcement  she  created  and  finishing   third  in  the  district  essay  contest  for  a  paper  she  wrote  on  Dr.  Martin  Luther  King  Jr.   Caitlyn  was  a  seventh  grader  who  had  been  a  regular  contributor  in  GET  City  since     54   the  fifth  grade  when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.    She  is  seen  as  a  leader  in  GET  City  by   both  adults  and  other  youth  due  to  the  work  she  puts  in  to  educate  her  community   as  well  as  the  history  she  has  in  the  program.    Caitlyn  is  often  called  upon  by  the   adult  leaders  of  GET  City  to  speak  about  projects  in  public  spaces  to  a  wide  array  of   audiences  including  local  politicians,  sustainability  scholars,  parents  and  community   members.       Caitlyn  is  also  guarded.    She  is  not  necessarily  quiet,  but  chooses  her  words   and  to  whom  those  words  are  spoken  carefully.    She  appears  to  have  little  fear  of   speaking  in  public  spaces,  but  in  our  small  group  conversations  often  listens  to   others  before  interjecting  her  own  opinions.  Caitlyn  is  the  daughter  of  the  president   of  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  and  also  has  an  older  sister  that  at  one  point  was  part  of   GET  City.  I  know  nothing  of  her  father  and  although  I  have  asked  about  her  family,   she  has  never  offered  up  any  information  about  him  and  I  have  never  asked  directly.       Maya.    Maya  is  a  highly  successful  African  American  female  who  attends  a   local  charter  school  in  Great  Lakes  City.    She  was  in  sixth  grade  and  twelve  years’  old   when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.    Although  academically  successful,  at  the  time  of  this   case,  Maya  was  not  enjoying  school  and  often  talked  about  her  plans  (or  hopes)  to   switch  to  a  different  school  the  following  year.    In  addition  to  GET  City,  Maya  was   involved  in  just  about  every  group  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  had  to  offer  as  well  as   many  through  her  church.    She  plays  sports  (basketball,  and  karate),  is  interested  in   robotics,  is  part  of  the  leadership  club,  is  a  member  of  the  abstinence  club  and  also   tried  to  start  a  recycling  club  at  her  school.         55   Maya  is  very  social  whether  she  finds  herself  in  a  comfortable  or   uncomfortable  situation.    During  GET  City  discussions,  she  is  often  the  first  one  to   share  an  answer,  idea  or  question.    She  is  playful  and  likes  to  have  fun  when  she  is  in   GET  City.    She  is  also  creative  and  a  leader  in  her  group  who  has  shown  how  hard   she  will  work  to  make  a  difference  in  her  community.    In  fact,  during  our  last   meeting  to  go  over  her  case,  Maya  added  the  statement  “I  like  to  put  effort  into  what   I  do  and  be  successful  in  what  I  do”  to  her  introduction.    She  lives  with  both  her   mother  and  father  and  has  an  older  sister  who  recently  went  off  to  college.         Teacher  participants       The  teachers  in  this  study  are  the  only  science  teachers  in  their  respective   grades  at  Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts.  While  I  had  a  history  with  the   girls,  I  knew  little  about  the  teachers  before  the  study  began.    I  did,  however,  have  a   history  at  the  school  having  brought  GET  City  youth  there  to  present  findings  of   investigations  to  their  peers  as  well  as  completing  classroom  observations  for  a   different  project.    This  experience  allowed  me  to  build  relationships  with  the   principal  and  assistant  principal  at  Bayside,  who  were  very  supportive  of  the  study   and  encouraged  these  science  teachers  to  participate.    Thus,  I  chose  these  three   teachers  due  to  an  existing  relationship  with  the  school  as  well  as  a  desire  to  work   with  middle  school  science  teachers  regarding  classroom  practices.    I  paid  for  half   day  substitute  teachers  during  the  professional  development  meetings  and  gave   each  teacher  $200  upon  completion  of  the  study  to  be  put  toward  classroom  needs.         56   Table  4   Teacher  participants   Name       Grade         Years  of  teaching  experience   Mr.  Greene     Eighth         20   Mr.  Roberts     Seventh       21   Mr.  Jones     Sixth         10       Mr.  Greene.    Mr.  Greene  is  an  African  American  male  who  teaches  eighth   grade  physical  science  and  math  at  Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts.    His   teaching  experience  spans  both  formal  and  informal  spaces.    These  include  work  as   a  community  relations  specialist  for  a  local  university  focused  on  teaching  “cultural   issues  or  cultural  differentiation”,  a  charter  school  in  Great  Lakes  City  that  had  an   African-­‐centered,  integrated  curriculum  and  working  in  both  elementary  and   middle  school  contexts  in  the  Great  Lakes  City  School  District.  He  grew  up  in  Detroit,   a  place  he  explicitly  referenced  several  times  when  talking  through  the  girls  cases.     In  addition  to  his  life  as  a  teacher,  Mr.  Greene  runs  a  non-­‐profit  organization   for  kids  in  Great  Lakes  City  that  includes  a  community  garden  project,  having  local   university  students  tutor  youth  and  providing  opportunities  for  youth  to  give  back   to  others  in  their  community  through  service.    Mr.  Greene  is  an  ex-­‐Marine  who   describes  his  teaching  style  as  being  “tough  on  kids”.    He  believes  his  role  as  a   teacher  is  to  help  the  students  that  enter  his  classroom  be  prepared  for  future   experiences     Mr.  Roberts.    Mr.  Roberts  is  a  Caucasian  male  who  teaches  seventh  grade   life  science  and  math  at  Bayside.    He  has  lived  in  the  Great  Lakes  City  area  his  entire   life.    Mr.  Roberts  is  a  second  career  teacher  who  spent  nearly  a  decade  in  sales     57   before  accepting  his  first  teaching  position,  although  he  had  studied  education   during  his  undergraduate  years.  He  explained  that  he  entered  the  teaching   profession  for  his  family  because  life  as  a  salesmen  caused  him  to  miss  being  there   while  his  daughters  were  growing  up.  He  has  now  been  in  education  for  twenty-­‐one   years,  teaching  in  many  settings  including  alternative,  middle  and  secondary   schools.    He  also  served  as  an  administrator  in  the  district,  but  eventually  moved   back  to  the  classroom  to  “continue  working  with  kids”.       Mr.  Roberts  is  also  a  polio  survivor,  which  has  left  him  with  what  he  referred   to  as  constant  pain.    He  gets  very  tired  by  the  end  of  the  school  day  and  his   movements  get  slower  and  slower.      His  body  is  breaking  down  on  him,  making  it   difficult  to  physically  keep  up  with  the  seventh  graders  who  enter  the  classroom.     Mr.  Roberts  also  described  himself  as  a  tough  teacher  who  feels  responsible  for  his   students’  success,  or  lack  of  success.     Mr.  Jones.  Mr.  Jones  is  a  Caucasian  male  who  teaches  sixth  grade  Earth   science  and  math  at  Bayside.  He  has  been  teaching  for  ten  years,  all  in  the  Great   Lakes  City  district.  He  grew  up  in  a  neighboring  state,  but  described  his  upbringing   in  terms  of  SES  as  similar  to  many  of  his  current  students.    Mr.  Jones  spoke  about   being  raised  in  a  home  where  he  did  not  receive  support  for  his  schoolwork  and   remembered  feeling  labeled  early  on  as  a  struggling  student  by  his  teachers.    He   struggled  to  find  success  in  school  for  most  of  his  K-­‐12  academic  career;  he  felt  he   was  tracked  into  certain  classes  and  viewed  his  grades  as  an  obstacle  to  overcome  in   order  to  stay  eligible  to  play  on  the  basketball  team.    It  wasn’t  until  he  entered   college  and  began  to  study  education  that  Mr.  Jones  “got  interested  in  school”.         58     Mr.  Jones  describes  his  teaching  philosophy  as  centered  on  building   relationships  with  students.    He  approaches  his  work  by  drawing  on  his  past   experiences  as  a  student  and  thinking  about  the  types  of  relationships  he  desired   with  teachers  but  rarely  found.    When  he  talked  about  his  work  with  students,  he   stated,  “I  want  them  to  understand  more  than  anything  else  that  I  care  about  them   and  I  like  them  as  a  person.    I  want  them  to  do  good  and  I  know  they  can.    Wherever   we  go  from  there  is  fine  with  me  as  far  as  achievement  or  whatever.”    This   relationship  building  was  evident  through  observations  of  his  practice.  Each  time  I   would  stop  by  his  classroom  to  see  him  between  classes,  at  lunch  or  during  his   planning  period,  I  found  myself  waiting  behind  a  line  of  students  who  needed  to  talk   to  him.    I  overheard  kids  wondering  if  he  was  coming  to  their  performances,  asking   questions  about  science  grades,  and  inviting  him  to  play  football  with  them  during   lunch.    As  I  became  more  familiar  with  the  school  and  the  students  in  grades  six   through  eight,  I  discovered  that  the  students  waiting  to  talk  to  Mr.  Jones  weren’t   only  sixth  graders  he  had  in  class.  He  had  managed  to  build  relationships  with  youth   who  had  never  been  a  student  in  his  classroom  before.       Teacher,  Researcher  and  Collaborator    As  I  wrote  in  the  introduction,  I  (Danny)  assumed  multiple  roles  in  this   study  as  a  teacher,  researcher  and  collaborator.    I  am  a  white  male  who  is  a  doctoral   student  at  a  university  near  Great  Lakes  City.    Before  entering  graduate  school,  I   taught  eighth  grade  physical  science  and  U.S.  history  at  two  different  schools  in   Colorado.    I  believe  this  prior  teaching  experience  helped  to  legitimize  my   participation  with  the  teachers.    During  graduate  school,  I  worked  as  a  teacher  and  a     59   researcher  on  GET  City  for  two  years  at  the  time  of  this  study,  allowing  me  to  build   strong  relationships  with  the  girls  who  participated.    I  grew  up,  the  youngest  of  four   children,  in  an  upper  middle  class  neighborhood  in  a  suburb  of  Detroit.    My  father  is   a  teacher  and  storyteller  at  heart  and  my  mother  brought  a  social  justice  orientation   to  our  family  through  her  understanding  of  and  desire  to  have  her  children   recognize  the  privileges  we  were  afforded.  I  believe  my  experiences  with  these  two   people  form  the  basis  for  many  of  the  commitments  I  bring  to  my  work  as  an   educator  and  this  dissertation.    For  most  of  the  time  this  study  was  being  carried   out,  my  wife  (Katie)  was  pregnant,  and  we  welcomed  our  first  child  (Sean)  into  the   world  two  weeks  before  the  final  professional  development  meeting.       Data  Sources     I  begin  this  section  with  table  2-­‐5  below,  aimed  at  aligning  each  research   question  with  data  sources  and  fleshing  out  how  my  theoretical  framework   informed  data  analysis.    Next,  I  briefly  describe  the  multiple  data  sources  involved  in   this  study.   Table  5   Connecting  research  question  with  theoretical  framework  and  data  sources     Research  Questions   Theoretical  Framework   1)  What  are  the  stories   these  four  girls  tell  about   what  they  gain  from  their   participation  in  a  year   round  green  energy  club?   Data  Sources   SPC  provides  a  lens  to  look  at   identity  formation  as  well  as   the  types  of  identities   available  in  certain  practices   keeping  in  mind  the   integration  of  the  personal   and  institutional  histories.       • • • •       60   Girls’  Cases   Conversation   Group   One  on  One   conversations   Girls’  artifacts   Table  5  (cont’d)   o How  is  science   learning  and  doing   represented  in  these   stories?   Alongside  SPC,  sense  of  place   will  assist  analysis  of  the   meaning  the  girls  make  and   experiences  leveraged   around  what  counts  as   science,  who  is  capable  of   science  and  the  places   science  occurs.         • • 2)  How  do  teachers  make   sense  of  the  stories  the   girls  tell  about  their   informal  learning   practices  in  support  of   powerful  learning  in   science  classrooms?       SPC  provides  a  lens  for   meaning  making  within   everyday  systems,  identities   that  are  made  available  and   how  activities  organize   participants  in  relation  to   power  (Eisnehart  &  FInkel,   1998)   • o What  do  teachers   notice  in  girls’  stories   and  what  meanings  do   they  make  from  these   observations?   SPC  provides  a  lens  to   investigate  how  teachers   make  meaning  of  stories   related  to  science,  to  what   degree  they  see  these  youth   as  doing  science  and  the   degree  to  which  they   leverage  institutional     • histories  in  this  meaning   making  process.     •   o How  do  teachers   describe  how  they   might  draw  upon   interpretations  of   girls’  stories  for   making  curricular   change  in  their   classroom?       • • • • •   61   Girls’  Cases   Conversation   Group   One  on  One   conversations   Girls’  artifacts   Professional   development   meetings   Individual   interviews   Professional   development   meetings   Individual   interviews   Professional   development   meetings   Individual   interviews   Table  5  (cont’d)   3.      How  do  teachers  draw   upon  interpretations   of  girls’  stories  in  their   classroom  practices?   What  role  does   instructional  context   play  in  implementing   science  learning   experiences?     SPC  and  a  sense  of  place  will   provide  a  lens  to  either   observe  or  interpret  teacher   interview  in  respect  to   curricular  changes  that  allow   youth  to  leverage  a  sense  of   place  or  formulate  a  different   identity  of  what  it  means  to   learn  and  do  science   • • Classroom   observations   Individual   interviews     Youth  Conversation  Groups     As  mentioned  previously,  I  conducted  conversations  with  a  subset  of  GET   City  youth  (4-­‐6)  each  Wednesday  during  the  2009-­‐2010  and  2010-­‐2011  school   years.    The  four  of  the  girls  in  this  study  were  regular  contributors  to  these   discussions.  These  data  provided  information  about  how  science  matters  to  them,   whether  they  see  science  as  part  of  their  place,  what  issues  they  believe  are  facing   their  community  and  what  actions  they  want  to  take  in  response  to  these  issues.   After  each  conversation,  I  wrote  field  notes  regarding  initial  ideas  and  thoughts   inspired  by  our  conversation.    Each  of  these  conversations  was  audio  recorded  and   transcribed  after  the  meeting.       Girls’  Artifacts       In  addition  to  transcripts  from  conversation  groups,  the  girls  created  many   artifacts  through  their  participation  with  GET  City.  Examples  include  public  service   announcement  videos,  informational  videos  about  LEED  for  the  board  of  directors  at   the  Boys  and  Girls  Club,  web  pages  about  themselves  and  their  interest  in  science,   drawings  of  their  high  and  low  points  with  science  and  depictions  of  what  they     62   would  like  to  do  or  be  like  in  the  future.      Additionally,  as  we  co-­‐constructed  these   cases,  the  girls  were  asked  to  write  a  story  of  when  science  mattered  to  them  and   also  were  given  a  video  camera  to  shoot  a  video  diary  or  interview  others  about   science  in  Great  Lakes  City.  These  artifacts  were  central  in  building  well-­‐rounded   cases  of  the  girls’  participation  with  informal  science.       One-­‐On-­‐One  Conversations     As  discussed  previously,  I  conducted  four  one-­‐on-­‐one  conversations  with   each  of  the  girls  as  we  co-­‐constructed  their  cases.    These  conversations  were  not   only  central  to  the  process  of  creating  the  cases,  they  also  provided  data  regarding   the  girls’  beliefs  about  science,  their  desire  to  work  with  teachers  and  their  hope  for   reforming  science  classroom  practices.  The  conversations  were  held  at  the  Boys  and   Girls  Club  and  usually  lasted  between  twenty  and  thirty  minutes.    As  with  other   sources,  after  each  conversation  field  notes  were  written  and  audio  recording  were   transcribed.     Professional  Development  Meetings       As  discussed  previously,  I  conducted  four  professional  development   meetings.    Each  meeting  revolved  around  the  girls’  cases  of  participation,  with  one   case  being  examined  at  each  meeting.    First,  after  viewing  each  message  or  artifact,  I   asked  the  teachers  about  what  they  noticed  (van  Es  &  Sherin,  2002)  or  what  stood   out  to  them.    The  conversations  were  then  directed  by  the  teachers’  noticings  and   often  organically  led  into  further  discussion  points.    One  of  the  roles  I  assumed   throughout  the  process  was  to  direct  the  conversation  back  to  the  girls’  messages  or   artifacts.    This  was  due  to  a  propensity  early  on  in  the  professional  development     63   meetings  for  the  teachers  to  quickly  increase  the  grain  size  of  the  conversation  until   the  girls’  cases  were  no  longer  visible.     After  we  discussed  each  case  in  detail,  each  meeting  then  focused  on  how   these  understandings  might  impact  future  curricular  or  instructional  decisions  in   their  classrooms.    I  asked  questions  such  as:  Has  there  been  a  time  when  you  have   seen  students  take  up  these  issues  or  leverage  different  types  of  expertise  when   investigation  science  in  the  classroom?  What  do  these  messages  mean  for  us  as   science  teachers?  How  might  students  benefit  from  these  implementations?  What   might  constrain  this  process?    How  might  this  constraint  be  overcome?       Individual  Teacher  Interviews    I  conducted  two  separate  one-­‐on-­‐one  interviews  with  each  teacher.    The   purpose  of  the  first  interview  was  to  gain  background  on  each  teacher  and  their   experiences  with  learning  and  teaching  science.  After  professional  development   meetings  were  completed,  I  sat  down  with  the  teachers  to  reflect  upon  what  they   learned  from  girls’  stories  of  participation  with  informal  science  and  the  potential   impacts  for  science  education  in  their  classrooms.    The  interview  also  asked   teachers  to  talk  about  lessons  or  projects  completed  during  classroom  observations.     The  purpose  of  these  questions  was  to  understand  how  each  teacher  saw  the  girls’   cases  influencing  their  current  practices.  Each  interview  lasted  approximately  one   hour  and  as  before,  was  followed  by  field  notes  and  audio  transcriptions.     Classroom  Observations   I  visited  teachers’  classrooms  and  observed  science  lessons  throughout  the   spring  semester  of  2012.    I  focused  the  observations  on  how  ideas  brought  forward     64   during  professional  development  conversations  were  taken  up  in  classroom   discussions,  activities,  and  learning  goals.    I  also  focused  on  the  interactions   between  students  and  teachers  as  well  as  students  and  the  investigation  or  content   introduced.    I  looked  at  the  intended  outcomes  of  the  experiences  and  how  the   teachers  created  space  for  students  to  take  on  various  identities  or  bring  in   strengths  from  cultural  practices  or  informal  science  experiences.  Each  observation   was  accompanied  by  a  written  observation  protocol  completed  during  the   observation  and  field  notes  following  the  observation.     Data  Analysis   My  analysis  was  guided  by  Social  Practice  Theory  and  Sense  of  Place   literature.  Social  Practice  Theory  provided  a  lens  to  look  at  identity  formation  as   well  as  the  types  of  identities  available  in  certain  practices  keeping  in  mind  the   integration  of  the  personal  and  institutional  histories.    Alongside  Social  Practice   Theory,  sense  of  place  assisted  in  the  analysis  of  the  meaning  the  girls  made  and   experiences  leveraged  around  what  counts  as  science  -­‐  who  is  capable  of  science   and  the  places  science  occurs.    Finally,  the  framework  helped  in  thinking  about  what   other  types  of  expertise  and  identities  are  allowed  to  be  brought  to  these   investigations  and  how  this  facilitates  meaningful  learning.     The  first  stage  of  analysis  involved  transcribing  all  conversation  and   interview  data.    As  I  transcribed  data,  I  began  to  notice  initial  themes  and  patterns  in   and  across  participant  talk.    Upon  completion  of  each  transcription,  I  wrote  analytic   memos  regarding  these  themes  and  patterns  as  well  as  questions  that  initial     65   analysis  of  data  brought  up  for  me.    These  analytic  memos  eventually  were  a   starting  point  in  developing  a  coding  scheme  to  guide  work  through  data.     Next,  I  began  to  make  sense  of  the  multiple  data  sources  I  collected.    This   process  was  assisted  by  the  use  of  Dedoose,  a  qualitative  coding  software.  All   transcribed  data  was  imported  into  Dedoose.    In  order  to  investigate  the  stated   research  questions  and  mine  through  the  data  sources,  I  analyzed  data  using   constant  comparative  analysis  (Glaser  &  Strauss,  1967).      I  analyzed  all  data  sources   and  identified  themes  among  and  between  participant  responses.  This  work  was   guided  by  what  Miles  and  Huberman  (1994)  refer  to  as  data  reduction  and  display.     As  data  sources  are  transcribed,  I  worked  to  simplify  and  organize  the  large  amount   of  information  collected  in  order  to  focus  on  stated  research  questions  and   identified  themes.    This  work  resulted  in  the  development  of  a  coding  scheme.    This   scheme  was  informed  by  my  theoretical  framework  and  relevant  literature,  analytic   memos  and  themes  that  emerged  in  participant  responses  during  this  first  pass  of   the  data.    The  coding  schemes  included  the  following  major  themes  (sub  themes  in   parenthesis):  Place  (economic,  physical,  social,  personal,  political),  Institution  (goals   of  school,  administrators,  resources,  role  of  teacher,  deskilling),  Noticings  (sparking   curiosity,  outcomes,  active,  choice,  connect  to  life),  Identity,  Relationships  (deficit,   historical,  positive),  Sources  of  Learning  (informal,  formal)  and  Teaching  Practices   (reform,  daily).       Of  particular  importance  when  working  through  cases  with  teachers  and   analyzing  teacher  data,  was  van  Es  and  Sherin’s  (2002)  Learning  to  Notice   Framework.    Used  by  the  authors  to  analyze  teacher  video  clubs,  this  framework  is     66   characterized  by  an  individual’s  capacity  to  identify  significant  events,  interpret   those  events  and  make  connections  between  “noticings”  and  “broader  principals  of   teaching  and  learning”.    This  framework  assisted  in  analyzing  data  sources  in  terms   of  how  prior  experiences,  beliefs  and  knowledge  impact  what  teachers  see  in   youths’  stories  the  degree  to  which  these  prior  experiences  impact  what  teachers   determine  as  important  and  “what  it  means  to  ascribe  meaning  to  events  teachers   notice”  (van  Es  and  Sherin,  2008,  p.  247).    The  ways  in  which  teachers  identify  and   interpret  important  aspects  of  youths’  stories  directly  impacted  curricular  or   instructional  actions  taken  in  the  classroom.        During  the  next  stage,  I  organized  participant  responses  in  regards  to   themes  across  data  sources  using  a  linkage  charts  and  figures  so  they  could  be   displayed  and  further  analyzed  across  contexts.    As  I  analyzed  this  charts  and   figures,  I  moved  from  themes  to  claims  regarding  the  stories  of  youth  participation   with  informal  science,  teacher  noticings  about  these  stories  and  implementation  in   science  classrooms.    Throughout  this  process,  I  discussed  these  themes  with  critical   friends  (i.e.  co-­‐directors  of  dissertation  and  research  group)  to  receive  feedback   from  various  perspectives.     Finally,  I  moved  into  writing  the  chapters  of  this  dissertation.    I  include  this   as  a  phase  of  analysis  because  I  am  constantly  analyzing  as  I  write.    Putting  ideas  to   paper  led  me  to  continually  go  back  to  data  sources  and  revise.    Once  again,  I  relied   on  critical  friends  to  provide  timely  and  constructive  feedback  throughout  this   process.             67   Limitations     The  major  limitation  of  this  study  is  scale  in  terms  of  number  of  participants   and  locations.    The  study  only  involves  four  youth  and  three  teachers  all  working  in   one  Midwestern  city.  While  I  have  desires  to  expand  the  scale  of  this  study,  I  believe   these  data  collected  allowed  me  to  write  a  compelling  narrative  about  the  potential   impact  of  informal  science  learning  on  youths’  identity  formation,  participation  in   science  and  the  influence  these  ideas  can  have  on  formal  science  learning.    I  aimed   for  what  Clandinin  and  Connelly  (2000)  call  “resonance”  for  the  readers  of  this   study.    It  is  my  hope  that  my  findings  will  “resonate”  with  the  reader  and  open   dialogue  regarding  the  impact  of  informal  learning  in  school  settings.  While  I  do  not   believe  these  findings  will  be  or  should  even  be  considered  generalizable,  I  do   believe  the  findings  of  this  study  have  the  potential  to  push  the  research  community,   teacher  educators  and  classroom  teachers  to  think  in  new  ways  about  science   education.     A  second  limitation  deals  with  the  temporal  aspects  of  the  study.    In  order  to   truly  look  into  the  impact  of  youths’  stories  on  teaching  practice,  further   investigation  in  the  classroom  is  necessary.    Although  I  understand  this  limitation,  I   plan  to  address  it  in  the  following  ways.  One,  I  plan  to  continue  this  work  as  I  move   on  in  my  career  and  have  already  collaborated  with  other  scholars  on  a  grant  to   support  future  work  to  expand  this  study  over  a  longer  period  of  time.    Second,  I   believe  there  are  valuable  findings  in  this  initial  look  at  how  teachers  consider  cases   of  informal  science  learning  the  potential  power  it  holds  for  their  classroom   practices.         68   CHAPTER  THREE   “BUT  THE  SCIENCE  WE  DO  HERE  MATTERS  …”   In  the  odd,  often  upside-­‐down  world  of  schools,  we  typically  start  in  the   wrong  place.    We  start  with  what  the  kids  can’t  do  and  don’t  know.    It’s  as  if   we  brainstormed  a  list  for  each  of  them  …  ,  that  we  figured  out  what  they   don’t  understand  or  value,  what  they  feel  incompetent  or  insecure  about,  and   we  then  developed  a  curriculum  to  remediate  each  deficiency.    The   curriculum  is  built  on  a  deficit  model:  it  is  built  on  repairing  weakness.    And   it  simply  doesn’t  work.    (Ayers,  2010,  p.  44)     When  I  was  hired  for  my  first  teaching  job,  as  is  the  custom  in  most  schools   around  the  United  States,  I  was  assigned  a  mentor.    We  often  spoke  about  our  lives   as  teachers  as  I  cleaned  up  the  mess  my  eighth  graders  left  behind  that  day.  One  of   the  messages  he  used  to  tell  me,  one  that  I  often  drove  home  thinking  about,  was   that  the  greatest  teachers  he  ever  had  were  his  students.    I  later  discovered  this  was   a  common  narrative  of  teachers  that  I  worked  with  and  one  that  I  resonated  with  as   well.    In  fact,  as  I  moved  on  in  my  career  and  began  instructing  teacher  education   courses,  I  positioned  the  idea  of  getting  to  know  and  learning  from  your  students  as   a  key  aspect  of  learning  to  teach.  However,  I  found  myself  asking:  what  is  it  that  we   are  learning?    Are  we  really  listening,  or  hearing,  the  messages  our  students  are   trying  to  tell  us?  What  opportunities  do  we  provide  for  youth  to  teach  us?     As  I  reflect  upon  getting  to  know  my  students,  I  worry  how  the  strategies  I   employed  align  with  passage  that  opens  this  chapter.    I  set  out  to  know  which  of  my   students  didn’t  read  well,  which  had  a  hard  time  making  friends  or  which  had   influences  or  circumstances  at  home  that  prevented  them  from  “learning”  in  my   class.  I  got  to  know  which  of  my  students  played  volleyball  or  were  interested  in   science  fiction  or  played  a  musical  instrument.    All  of  this  “getting  to  know”  them     69   was  really  used  as  leverage  to  help  them  fit  into  what  I  already  envisioned  as  what   learning  looks  like  in  our  classroom.  There  was  little  flexibility  embedded  within   this  vision.  While  there  is  little  doubt  my  former  students  taught  me  lessons  about   humanity,  civility,  passion  and  perseverance,  I  can’t  help  but  wonder  what  I  didn’t   hear  or  didn’t  allow  them  to  say  to  help  me  think  about  designing  learning   experiences  that  aligned  with  their  passions,  wonderings  and  existing  expertise.     This  chapter  sets  out  to  expand  the  notion  of  getting  to  know  our  students   through  sharing  their  stories  of  when  and  how  learning  science  “matters.”    In  other   words,  this  chapter  aims  to  bring  youths’  voices  into  curricular  and  pedagogical   conversations  regarding  the  possibilities  for  science  education  inside  and  outside  of   the  classroom.  The  youth  in  this  case  are  young,  females,  mostly  of  color  from  lower   SES  backgrounds.    They  represent  groups  whose  voice  is  most  often  left  out  of   conversations  regarding  what  it  means  to  do  science  and  who  can  participate  with   science.  The  questions  guiding  this  chapter  are:  What  are  the  stories  these  four  girls   tell  in  their  cases  about  what  they  gain  from  their  participation  in  a  year  round   green  energy  club?    How  is  science  learning  and  doing  represented  in  these  stories?   I  argue,  through  creation  of  these  cases,  the  girls:   1) Share  experiences  that  convey  how,  where  and  why  science  matters;     2) Express  hope  for  future  school  science  experiences  by  offering  visions  of   what  it  looks  like  to  be  scientifically  engaged  in  their  communities  as  well   as  through  offering  critiques  of  current  science  teaching  and  learning   practices;  and     70   3) Challenge  traditional  notions  that  young,  female,  students  of  color  from   lower  SES  backgrounds  are  not  interested  or  capable  of  making   contributions  to  scientific  investigations   In  what  follows,  I  first  provide  a  brief  overview  of  the  case  structure.    Next,  I   look  closer  at  the  messages  and  artifacts  that  were  most  salient  to  each  of  the  girls  in   their  case.    Then,  I  step  back  to  discuss  the  themes  that  run  across  the  four  cases.     These  themes  reveal  the  elements  leading  to  science  learning  that  matters  for  these   girls,  how  and  where  they  push  back  on  their  school  science  experiences  and  details   the  contributions  the  youth  feel  they  can  make  to  science  learning  and  doing.       The  Cases   As  discussed  in  chapter  two,  each  girl  co-­‐created  a  case  that  was  organized  in   three  sections.    The  first  section  was  titled  “Getting  to  know  …”  and  included  a  self-­‐ description  written  by  each  girl,  a  web  site  and  two  self-­‐portraits,  one  addressing   who  she  is  today  and  the  other  sketching  out  who  she  will  be  in  the  future.    The  web   sites  were  created  with  the  following  prompts  in  mind:  1)  introduce  yourself  by   sharing  ideas  about  your  interests,  2)  describe  what  you  like  about  science,  3)   describe  what  you  like  about  GET  City  and  4)  brainstorm  ideas  for  “getting  off  the   grid”,  which  was  the  investigation  GET  City  youth  were  working  on  at  the  time.    The  second  section  of  the  cases  was  titled  “Explicit  messages  to  science   teachers”  and  included  quotes  from  each  girl  regarding  ideas  they  wanted  science   teachers  to  think  about.  The  final  section  was  titled  “Conversations  and  artifacts.”     This  section  included  public  service  videos  the  girls  made,  stories  they  wrote,  video   diaries  they  filmed  and  transcripts  of  conversations  in  which  they  participated.  The     71   artifacts  and  conversations  display  deep  understandings  of  energy  related  science   and  how  this  knowledge  is  leveraged  to  take  action  in  their  community.  This  section   was  designed  to  show  teachers  examples  of  what  each  girl  had  done,  planned  or   created  with  science  in  informal  spaces.   I  describe  each  of  the  four  girls’  cases  by  highlighting  the  messages  and   artifacts  they  chose  to  share  with  teachers.    Unfortunately,  space  does  not  permit  for   me  to  describe  every  aspect  of  each  girl’s  case.    Instead,  I  chose  to  focus  on  the   aspects  the  girls’  prioritized  when  we  created  the  cases  together  as  well  as  the   artifacts  and  messages  that  led  to  the  greatest  amount  of  discussion  from  the   teachers.       Nicole       As  you  may  remember  from  chapter  two,  Nicole  is  an  African  American   female  who  is  a  highly  successful  student  by  traditional  measures  (i.e.  grades,   standardized  test  scores)  and  routinely  finds  herself  on  the  honor  role  at  her  school.   She  was  a  thirteen  year-­‐old  seventh  grader  when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.  She  is  a   bright,  creative  and  talented  young  woman  who  has  shown  through  her   participation  in  GET  City  a  desire  to  seek  out  and  act  upon  opportunities  to  make  a   difference  in  her  community.    Nicole  often  speaks  about  how  important  her  family  is   to  her.    She  has  lived  in  Great  Lakes  City  for  her  entire  life.    She  lives  most  of  the  time   with  her  mother,  but  spends  weekends  with  her  father,  who  also  lives  in  the  Great   Lakes  City  area.    Nicole  represented  her  connection  to  her  family  and  to  her   community  throughout  the  stories,  messages  and  experiences  she  wanted  to  share   with  science  teachers.         72   Getting  to  know  Nicole.    Nicole’s  introduction  highlighted  her  involvement   in  several  informal  learning  groups  such  as  Torch  Club  (leadership-­‐based  club),   karate  and  several  programs  at  her  church.    The  brief  description  of  her  that  opens   the  case  points  to  her  involvement  in  many  of  these  activities  as  well  as  reveals  that   she  has  lived  in  Great  Lakes  City  all  of  her  life  and  dreams  of  being  an  elementary   teacher  some  day.  Nicole  revised  her  personal  description  during  our  last  meeting   to  include  the  statement,  “I  believe  that  I  can  do  anything  if  I  set  my  mind  to  it!    That   is  what  helps  me  in  life!”     Nicole’s  web  site  is  filled  with  pictures  of  her  and  her  friends,  inspirational   sayings  including  “mistakes  are  part  of  being  human”  and  “you  can  do  anything  if   you  set  your  mind  to  it”  (for  which  she  cites  herself),  that  she  dreams  “to  be   successful”  and  that  she  “loves  friends  and  family.”       She  goes  on  to  write,  “I  am  in  GET  City  because  it  is  a  good  way  to  teach  kids   my  age  to  change  the  world.    I  like  that  we  save  money  and  energy.”    Nicole  uses  her   knowledge  of  science  to  impact  local  conditions  by  “sav(ing)  money  and  energy.”   Absent  from  her  web  site  is  any  explicit  commentary  on  what  she  likes  about   science.   Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers.    Nicole  discussed  three  messages   she  wanted  to  convey  to  science  teachers  focused  on  the  ideas  of  collaboration,   community  involvement  and  learning  environmental  science.  The  explicit  messages   were  later  shared  with  teachers  through  Nicole’s  quotes  below.     1) “We  work  in  groups  so  it  works  even  better.    All  of  us  have  different  types   of  knowledge  and  different  levels  of  knowledge,  so  if  someone  doesn’t   know  something  someone  in  your  group  will  help  you.”     73     2) “We  try  to  help  the  community  out.    We  try  to  help  at  the  Boys  and  Girls   Club  first,  then  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  helps  out  other  communities  and   we  help  out  other  communities  too.    It  is  important  because  we  are  a   whole  team  and  no  one  wants  to  die  over  too  much  CO2.    So  we  help  the   community  and  they  need  to  help  us  too.    So  we  are  all  a  team  and  we  are   trying  to  help  the  Earth  be  a  better  place.”     3) “We  learn  different  types  of  science  stuff  and  we  just  did  the  carbon   footprint  and  that  they  should  probably  check  it  out  because  it  told  us   how  many  Earth’s  we  would  need  just  for  us  and  I  felt  bad  because  I  am   using  too  much.”     Nicole  defines  collaboration  as  a  productive  space  where  group  members   bring  their  own  personal  expertise  to  the  process  of  collective  sense  making.  Her   idea  of  collaboration  was  woven  into  and  built  upon  in  her  second  message  for   science  teachers  focused  on  the  idea  of  community  involvement.  Nicole  describes   how  she  and  other  members  of  GET  City  are  trying  to  take  on  leadership  roles  in  the   places  they  know,  care  about  and  feel  they  can  make  an  impact  on  such  as  the  Boys   and  Girls  Club,  their  homes  and  their  schools.     Nicole’s  third  message  points  to  her  participation  with  science  concepts  and   topics  that  fall  outside  the  scope  of  the  intended  curriculum  of  school  science  (at   least  as  she  has  experienced  it  to  this  point).  She  provides  an  example  of  how  one  of   these  investigations  was  personally  meaningful  by  causing  her  to  reconsider  her   own  energy  and  resource  related  behaviors.    Nicole  invites  the  teachers  who  will   later  view  this  case  to  “check  it  out”,  an  invitation  to  participate  with  the  same   activity  and  science  concepts  she  found  personally  meaningful.       Conversations  and  artifacts.    As  we  talked  about  when  and  how  science   matters  both  inside  and  outside  of  school,  Nicole  told  stories  of  bringing  different     74   energy  related  ideas  home  to  her  mother.  She  expressed  concern  for  people  she   knew  in  the  community  who  were  having  trouble  paying  their  energy  bills,  and  we   talked  about  the  people  and  experiences  that  inspired  her  to  get  involved  with   science.    Nicole  decided  these  types  of  stories  were  important  for  teachers  who  were   working  with  kids  who  also  lived  in  Great  Lakes  City.       For  instance,  the  first  two  artifacts  Nicole  included  were  a  description  of  her   community  followed  by  a  video  of  her  talking  about  where  science  mattered  in  Great   Lakes  City.    Her  community  description  highlights  the  physical,  social  and  economic   aspects  of  Great  Lakes  City.    She  ends  by  saying,  “I  already  have  two  friends  that   have  left  Great  Lakes  City  just  because  of  jobs  and  stuff.  And  because  they  don't  like   it  and  don't  have  a  lot  of  activities  or  entertainment  and  I  was  pissed  off  about  that.”   Nicole’s  reveals  a  personal  care  and  connection  with  Great  Lakes  City  through  her   emotional  response  to  losing  friends  due  to  the  loss  of  local  jobs.   Nicole’s  description  of  Great  Lakes  City  leads  into  a  video  of  her  talking  about   where  science  matters  in  Great  Lakes  City.    Instead  of  focusing  on  the  physical   places,  she  speaks  about  how  science  matters  to  her  and  the  people  that  are  closest   to  her.  In  the  video,  she  says:   Some  people  don’t  discover  science,  they  actually  get  into  science  when  they   get  really  older,  but  I  am  glad  I  discovered  it  when  I  got  started  at  a  young   age.    So  it  kind  of  helped  me  become  who  I  am  today  and  if  I  didn’t  know   anything  about  science  I  wouldn’t  be  here  right  now.    I  would  probably  be   getting  C’s,  D’s  and  F’s  right  now  because  science  really  helps  me  a  lot.    I   teach  my  mom  about  it  but  sometimes  she  doesn’t  listen.         Danny:  What  types  of  things  have  you  tried  to  teach  your  mom?     Umm,  recycling,  turning  off  the  lights,  but  that  didn’t  work  out  so  much.     Saving  water,  she  listened  to  me  on  that  one,  because  she  has  a  really  high   bill  and  stuff.    So  she  needed  to  know  a  way  to  bring  her  bill  down  so  now     75   that  we  are  living  in  an  apartment  they  put  energy  efficient  stuff  in  it.    Like   the  showerheads,  it  has  one  of  those  energy  efficient  things  in  it  and  it  is   really  cool  too  because  we  are  saving  water  and  stuff.    And  then,  we  have   these  things  on  our  sinks  too,  and  we  have  energy  efficient  light  bulbs.           Discovering  and  now  doing  science  is  part  of  Nicole’s  identity,  which  she   credits  for  some  of  her  success.  Nicole  is  actively  involved  in  science  and  she   believes  its  influence  can  be  seen  through  of  her  performance  in  school  as  well  as   opening  spaces  to  make  a  difference  at  home.    She  connects  her  deep   understandings  of  science  related  content  to  where  she  lives  and  how  she  lives.    She   did  not  mention  the  local  science  museum  or  classroom  as  places  in  which  science  is   meaningful  in  Great  Lakes  City.    Instead,  through  her  case,  she  is  providing  insight   into  how  her  interests  in  science  connect  with  her  life  at  home  in  ways  that  allow   her  to  impact  both  economic  and  environmental  conditions.     Nicole  was  also  given  a  video  camera  to  record  places  in  her  community   where  science  mattered.    She  came  back  with  a  “MTV  Cribs”  style  tour  of  the   apartment  where  she  lives.    The  video  highlights  “an  energy  efficiency  make  over”   that  had  recently  been  completed  in  her  apartment.   One  example  finds  Nicole  in  the  bathroom  showing  a  water  efficient  faucet   that  was  installed  in  the  bathroom  sink.    The  camera  zooms  in  on  the  faucet  and  you   hear  Nicole  talking  about  the  technology  and  how  it  limits  the  amount  of  water  used.   Next  you  hear  Nicole  say,  “Does  anybody  know  why?  Hmm,  you  don’t  know,  do  you?     Alright,  I  am  going  to  tell  you  why  ….”    Nicole  goes  on  to  talk  about  how  the  faucet   has  a  smaller  opening,  restricting  the  amount  of  water  coming  out  resulting  in  less   water  usage,  while  still  retaining  the  same  amount  of  pressure  as  a  regular  faucet.     Her  explanation  reveals  an  understanding  of  how  this  technology  reduces  the     76   amount  of  water  she  uses  at  home.  Nicole  ends  by  saying,  “That’s  a  good  thing,   because  all  of  us  need  to  save  water,  and  if  you  can,  can  you  please  purchase  all  of   this  water  efficient  stuff.    Please,  please,  please,  help  our  Earth.”    The  video  also   includes  Nicole  showing  off  a  water  efficient  showerhead,  CFL  lights  and  another   energy  efficient  faucet  in  the  kitchen.    Throughout  the  video,  she  explains  how  each   technology  is  more  efficient  and  how  making  a  difference  at  home  can  make  a   difference  for  our  planet.       The  final  piece  of  Nicole’s  case  is  a  video  she  made  with  another  GET  City   youth  (Maya)  about  the  benefits  of  changing  from  incandescent  to  CFL  light  bulbs.     The  video  covered  science  ideas  such  as  electricity  production  in  Great  Lakes  City,   how  we  measure  energy  consumption  and  how  changing  behaviors  at  home  can   impact  local  environmental  quality  as  well  as  the  size  of  energy  bills.       In the video, the girls start by looking at how energy is being wasted by posing the question “Do you turn off the lights when you leave the room? Do you turn off the computer when you are not using it?” The girls take up these questions at a local school, the site where the teachers in this study work, by interviewing teachers about behaviors in their classrooms as well as drawing upon what they learn from an energy audit of the school. The girls offer two solutions to the problem of wasting energy through changing to CFL light bulbs and monitoring personal energy behaviors. Nicole takes the lead during the section regarding changing to CFL light bulbs by contrasting the number of watts a CFL bulb uses compared to an incandescent. To put this idea into context, Nicole shares a story of her grandmother who switched to CFL bulbs upon her urging and was   77   surprised to discover the decrease in the amount of energy used and the cost of her energy bill. Nicole ends by saying, “Now she can use the money for the things she needs.” Nicole constructed her case to exhibit the activities she engages with outside of school that are meaningful to her. Through her case artifacts, Nicole revealed that meaningful learning for her is when she can leverage her deep understandings of energy related science to take action in her community or make sense of something she observes around her. Nicole’s case pushes teachers to think about how their classrooms are part of the community in which they are located and what opportunities are provided for youth to bring what they know and care about from outside of the walls of the classroom into formal learning experiences. Hannah     Hannah  is  a  Caucasian  female  who  was  in  sixth  grade  and  thirteen  years  old   when  we  created  her  case  together.    Hannah  is  not  considered  a  successful  student   by  traditional  measures  such  as  grades  (“mostly  C’s  and  D’s”)  and  test  scores,  and   she  was  held  back  a  grade  earlier  in  her  academic  career.    While  often  not  successful   in  a  school  setting,  Hannah’s  case  is  filled  with  her  experiences  of  finding  success   with  science  outside  of  school.     Getting  to  know  Hannah.  Hannah’s  case  opens  with  a  picture  of  her  handing   out  CFL  light  bulbs  in  front  of  her  school.    The  event  was  part  of  an  energy  efficiency   investigation  GET  City  youth  completed  where  they  examined  relevant  technologies   and  the  impact  of  personal  energy  behaviors.         78     Figure  1:  Hannah  handing  out  CFL’s  (For  interpretation  of  the  references  to  color  in   this  and  all  other  figures,  the  reader  is  referred  to  the  electronic  version  of  this   dissertation)   In  the  picture,  Hannah  is  having  a  community  member  sign  a  pledge   indicating  he  would  change  incandescent  bulbs  in  his  home  to  CFL’s.      The  picture  is   an  example  of  the  types  of  action  Hannah  takes  in  her  community  and  exhibits  her   ability  to  speak  with  adults  about  different  energy  technologies  and  behaviors.   Hannah’s  website  has  three  headshot  pictures  and  two  short  paragraphs   introducing  who  she  is  and  why  she  is  in  GET  City.    Hannah  foregrounded  “learning   about  the  Earth”  as  the  key  component  to  her  enjoyment  of  GET  City  in  her  website.   She  acknowledged  the  idea  that  she  is  learning  new  concepts  through  her   participation  and  gives  an  example  of  how  investigating  water  use  has  impacted  her   own  behaviors.    Hannah  does  not  address  the  prompt  regarding  what  she  likes   about  science  or  offer  ideas  of  how  she  might  get  off  the  grid.       Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers.    Hannah’s  messages  took  a  slightly   different  tone  than  what  Nicole  had  shared.    Instead,  Hannah’s  messages  were   directed  at  her  history  as  a  student  through  both  the  expectations  that  had  been  set     79   upon  her  and  the  lack  of  success  she  had  experienced.  When  I  asked  what  she   wanted  teachers  to  think  about,  she  spoke  about  the  video  she  made  with  Maya  and   Nicole  about  LEED  certification,  which  was  included  as  part  of  Hannah’s  case.    Using   this  video  as  context,  Hannah  discussed  two  messages  she  wanted  science  teachers   to  think  about.       1) “That  I  got  it  done  and  I  worked  hard  on  it  and  the  video  was  good.”   2) “I  am  proud  of  my  video  on  water  efficiency  and  it  is  important  because   people  might  be  wasting  water  which  is  bad  for  the  Earth.”   Hannah  wanted  teachers  to  understand  that  she  was  capable  of  producing   quality  work,  was  willing  to  put  in  the  effort  necessary  to  get  it  done  and  that  she   had  important  environmental  messages  to  share.  She  expressed  pride  in  her  work   and  wanted  science  teachers  to  learn  from  what  she  is  involved  in  outside  of  school.   Hannah  directed  this  learning  toward  having  science  teachers  reflect  upon  what   their  students  are  capable  of  accomplishing.     Conversation  and  artifacts.  A  year  before  making  these  cases,  I  asked  the   youth  in  GET  City  to  draw  their  high  and  low  points  with  science,  an  activity  I  would   later  ask  teachers  to  complete  as  they  examined  Hannah’s  case.  Hannah’s  high  point   was  teaching  a  lesson  about  energy  efficiency  to  younger  students  in  their  school   with  several  other  youth  in  GET  City.    Hannah  worked  in  a  group  of  four  to  plan  and   teach  the  lesson  in  one  fourth  grade  classroom  and  one  first  grade  classroom.  The   lesson  included  asking  students  to  predict  the  most  efficient  types  of  light  bulbs,   asking  students  to  participate  in  an  experiment  investigating  the  efficiency  of  each   bulb  by  measuring  the  heat  given  off  and  then  sharing  findings  and  implications  in  a   PowerPoint  presentation.         80   A  year  later,  as  we  were  co-­‐creating  her  case,  Hannah  brought  this   experience  up  again  and  decided  it  would  be  the  first  artifact  presented  in  her  case.     When  I  asked  her  why  this  experience  was  important,  she  stated  it  was  important,   “because  I  got  to  go  into  other  classes  and  show  people  what  I  know  about  science.”     Figure  2:  Hannah’s  teaching  video   The  teaching  video  included  in  the  case  was  5  minutes  42  seconds  long  and   starts  off  with  Hannah  saying  “Let’s  compare  light  bulbs  to  see  if  CFL  light  bulbs  and   LED  light  bulbs  can  save  energy.    Like,  this  is  the  CFL  and  that  is  the  incandescent.”   Next  another  youth  asks  the  class  to  predict  which  bulb  will  be  the  most  efficient   and  how  many  watts  each  bulb  uses.    Every  student  that  can  be  seen  in  the  video  has   his  or  her  hand  up  to  make  a  prediction.    Hannah  calls  on  students  by  pointing  at   them  and  uses  their  name  when  she  knows  it.    Another  GET  City  youth  makes  note   of  their  predictions  by  repeating  each  students’  guess.    After  many  predictions  are   elicited,  Hannah  poses  the  question,  “How  much  energy  did  each  light  bulb  use?”     Next  she  calls  on  a  student  to  come  to  the  front  of  the  room  and  helps  them  read  the     81   watt  meter,  a  device  measuring  the  output  of  the  CFL  bulb,  which  she  then  repeats   for  the  other  two  bulbs.       After  the  evidence  is  gathered,  the  lesson  moves  on  to  ask  the  class  what,  if   anything,  they  noticed  from  the  data.    This  part  of  the  lesson  was  to  be  completed  by   a  third  GET  City  youth,  but  when  it  came  time  to  share,  she  suffered  from  a  bout  of   stage  fright.    The  video  shows  her  looking  at  the  PPT  but  not  able  to  speak  the   words.    You  hear  a  few  voices  call  her  name  in  an  attempt  to  indicate  to  her  it  was   time  to  speak.    Still,  she  stood  there  without  saying  a  word.    After  a  few  seconds  of   silence,  Hannah  steps  forward  and  completes  the  part  for  her  friend.    She  does  this   without  even  looking  over  or  urging  her  on  as  the  rest  of  the  group  had  been  doing.     Instead,  Hannah  took  control  of  the  situation  and  kept  the  lesson  moving.    It  was  if   she  invariably  knew  what  her  friend  was  going  through,  and  decided  she  would   simply  handle  it  herself.    The  video  ends  with  a  brief  discussion  of  the  data  and   thoughts  about  which  bulbs  are  used  at  students’  homes  most  often.     Next,  Hannah  chose  to  show  teachers  a  video  she  completed  with  Nicole  and   Maya  during  a  unit  on  LEED  certification.    Their  specific  topic  was  water  efficiency,  a   topic  that  Hannah  worked  hard  to  gain  deep  understandings  of  and  referred  to   several  times  as  holding  important  messages  and  implications  for  her  community.     The  video  begins  with  a  song  the  girls  wrote  mimicking  the  theme  song  from  Bill   Nye  the  Science  guy.    A  choreographed  dance  accompanies  the  playing  of  the  song.   Next,  we  hear  Hannah  and  Nicole’s  voices  explaining  the  concept  of  water  efficiency   before  each  girl  explains  a  specific  technology  that  could  help  others  be  more  water   efficient.    Hannah  discusses  eco-­‐friendly  faucets,  a  technology  she  learned  about     82   during  a  GET  City  field  trip  to  a  local  energy  fair.    Hannah  explains  the  technology   and  points  out  how  it  uses  1.4  gallons  per  minute  compared  to  a  regular  faucet  that   uses  4  or  5  gallons  per  minute.       The  three-­‐minute  video  took  a  great  deal  of  time  and  effort  for  the  girls  to   complete.    They  first  participated  in  learning  about  LEED  certification  through   investigations  with  other  GET  City  youth  in  a  two-­‐week  summer  experience  as  well   as  lessons  during  the  fall.    They  also  came  up  with  a  concept  for  the  video,  decided   on  an  intended  audience,  wrote  scripts,  chose  pictures  and  learned  to  edit  video   using  donated  software.    When  Hannah  talks  about  how  hard  she  worked  on  the   video  in  her  messages  to  science  teachers,  she  is  pointing  to  the  process  of  building   expertise  through  investigation  and  persevering  to  see  the  project  through  which   resulted  in  a  product  she  is  proud  of  and  wants  to  share.       The  third  and  final  video  Hannah  chose  to  include  stems  from  a  conversation   where  many  of  the  GET  City  youth,  despite  being  involved  in  an  afterschool  science   program,  were  having  trouble  coming  up  with  anything  they  liked  about  science.     The  conversation,  which  will  be  expanded  upon  in  Maya’s  case,  led  the  youth  to   create  a  new  word,  fcience  (pronounced  fy-­‐ience),  to  describe  the  type  of  science   they  participate  with  outside  of  school.    Hannah  and  another  GET  City  youth  define   Fcience  in  the  video.                 Female  Youth:  Our  word  of  the  day  is  …   Hannah:  Fcience   Female  Youth:  Fcience  is  what  describes  GET  City,  its  science  that’s  fun   Hannah:  GET  City  knows  how  to  make  science  fun  without  getting  bored   Both:  Instead  of  a  bored  face,  you  will  have  a  happy  face   83   Fcience  is  a  way  for  Hannah  to  describe  her  experiences  with  science  outside   of  school.    It  pushes  back  against  the  barrier  between  fun  and  learning  that  is  so   often  put  up  in  institutions  charged  with  educating  children.    Hannah  makes  space   in  her  case  to  make  sure  the  teachers  see  that  she  believes  the  enjoyment  in  learning   is  missing  from  her  classroom  experiences.  Hannah  also  shares  a  vision  of  fcience   learning  in  her  LEED  certification  video  that  is  both  playful  and  embedded  with  rich   science  content.       Hannah’s  case  reveals  the  experiences  of  a  youth  who  has  traditionally  been   labeled  as  unsuccessful  and  who,  through  her  participation  in  different  types  of   science-­‐related  investigations,  has  found  success.    These  investigations  allow  her  to   be  active,  take  on  the  identity  of  an  expert,  value  different  types  of  outcomes,  use  the   skills  that  are  not  often  valued  in  typical  science  and  connect  the  content  with  her   life  outside  of  traditional  learning  spaces.       Caitlyn     Caitlyn  is  an  African  American  female  that  has  found  success  in  many  areas  of   her  life  including  being  an  honor  roll  student,  winning  first  place  in  a  statewide   competition  for  a  public  service  announcement  she  made  and  finishing  third  in  the   district  essay  contest  for  a  paper  she  wrote  on  Dr.  Martin  Luther  King  Jr.  Caitlyn  was   a  7th  grader  who  has  been  a  regular  contributor  in  GET  City  since  the  5th  grade   when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.    Caitlyn  is  adept  at  gaining  understanding  of  different   audiences  and  using  this  understanding  to  construct  messages.    This  idea  comes  out   in  her  case  both  in  the  way  she  constructs  messages  for  the  teachers  as  well  as  for   community  members  in  her  artifacts.     84   Getting  to  know  Caitlyn.  Caitlyn’s  website  begins  with  the  phrase  “I  dare   you  to  read  all  about  my  amazing  life.”    The  site  is  filled  with  an  eclectic  group  of   pictures  including  ones  of  Spiderman,  Hello  Kitty,  dogs,  a  recycling  logo  and  a  green   light  bulb.  She  includes  a  segment  of  why  she  is  in  GET  City:     i’m  In  get  city  because  it’s  a  fun  place  to  learn  about  “green”  topics  you  want   to  learn  but  are  not  able  to  learn  about  in  school.  I  also  like  being  with  my   friends  and  going  on  field  trips.  We  also  get  to  learn  about  how  we  can   change  to  be  more  “green.”     Much  like  Hannah,  Caitlyn  begins  her  explanation  focused  on  the  intersection   of  fun  and  learning.  Caitlyn  contrasts  her  experience  in  GET  City  with  school  in   terms  of  going  beyond  the  intended  curriculum  to    “green  topics  you  want  to  learn.”     Through  GET  City,  she  is  exposed  to  ideas  and  concepts  on  top  of  what  she  is  getting   to  learn  at  school.  This  allows  her  the  opportunity  to  build  the  knowledge  necessary   in  order  to  change  her  behaviors  or  the  types  of  technologies  she  is  using  with  the   goal  of  being  “more  green.”       Caitlyn  is  one  of  the  few  youth  that  addressed  the  question  regarding  what   she  likes  about  science.    Here,  Caitlyn  writes:   I  like  science  because...   I  love  to  do  experiments  and  love  to  learn  about  the  earth.   I  also  like  to  explore  new  walks  of  nature.     Caitlyn  enjoys  the  hands  on  aspects  of  science,  especially  as  they  pertain  to   being  able  to  discover  new  things  about  the  Earth.    She  also  sees  science  as  a  way  to   explore  and  understand  ideas  or  phenomenon  she  has  not  previously  encountered.     She  mentions  “walks  of  nature”  not  in  terms  of  literally  walking  through  the  woods,   but  in  reference  to  exploring  ideas  and  perspectives  outside  of  what  she  knows,  has   experienced  or  imagined.             85     Figure  3:  Caitlyn’s  drawings  today  (nice,  intelligent,  funny,  kind,  weird,  cheerful)  and   future     Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers.  Caitlyn  formed  her  messages   strategically  by  aligning  them  with  pedagogical  implications  for  student  learning.   Her  advice  speaks  to  both  the  interests  of  her  peers  as  well  as  her  understanding   that  the  teachers  will  want  students  to  learn  something  during  the  investigation.     1) “I  think  they  should  know  about  building  hydrogen  cars.    I  think  a  lot  of   students  would  be  interested  in  it  because  it  was  fun  and  we  actually  got   to  build  something.    It  was  hands-­‐on  but  also  had  to  with  cars  running  on   water  and  other  fuels.”   2) “Sometimes  it  is  easier  for  kids  to  do  something  when  it  is  visual  and  we   don’t  get  a  lot  of  visual  in  school  because  we  are  in  the  building.”   3) “We  learn  about  environmental  science  and  the  idea  that  coal  is  burned  to   make  electricity  leading  to  greenhouse  gases.”         Caitlyn  identifies  a  learning  activity  she  believes  is  appropriate  for  her  peers,   yet  is  being  underused  in  the  classroom  due  to  the  physical  limitations  of  the  place   in  which  learning  occurs.  For  example,  she  refers  to  a  unit  she  competed  on   alternative  fuel  cars  with  a  message  that  provides  advice  for  the  teachers  as  well  as   a  rationale  for  why  this  type  of  activity  is  appropriate.    She  believes  the  active   nature  of  the  investigation  will  be  of  interest  to  students  in  their  classes  and  provide     86   opportunities  for  students  to  explore  and  learn  the  possibilities  for  powering  cars   beyond  fossil  fuels.       Likewise,  her  second  message  referenced  activities  she  has  recently   completed  in  GET  City  regarding  CO2  emissions.    The  group  participated  in  an   experience  where  they  went  outside  to  explore  the  nature  of  the  emissions  that   come  out  of  the  tailpipe  of  one  of  the  GET  City  adult’s  cars  as  it  is  running.    Caitlyn   felt  this  experience  was  impactful  for  her  thinking  about  CO2  and  believed  her  peers   would  be  impacted  as  well.    All  three  of  Caitlyn’s  messages  are  aimed  at  helping   science  teachers  become  aware  of  what  their  students  would  be  interested  in   participating  with  while  still  learning  valuable  science  concepts.     Conversations  and  artifacts.  Caitlyn  wanted  her  case  to  include  examples   of  the  how  she  uses  technology  to  share  findings  with  others.      Her  case  begins  with   a  quote  about  the  difficulty  of  this  work.   Another  challenge  that  we  face  is  deciding  what  the  message  is  going  to  be   because  there  are  a  lot  of  things  we  can  talk  about  green  energy,  but  for   certain  settings  we  have  to  talk  about  certain  things.  Because  other  things   might  not  attract  people  and  attract  other  people  so  we  have  to  figure  out  our   message  for  that  specific  person  or  community.     It  was  important  to  her  that  the  teachers  understood  the  complexity  of   making  videos  for  multiple  audiences  in  and  around  her  community  in  terms  of   connecting  science  to  different  groups.  Forming  these  messages  requires  a  deep   understanding  of  green  energy  concepts  as  well  as  the  interests  of  people  in  her   community.  From  there,  she  wanted  her  case  to  include  examples  of  the  how  she   uses  technology  to  share  her  findings  with  others.       87   The  remainder  of  the  artifact  section  included  three  different  movies  or   public  service  announcements  that  she  created  as  part  of  a  small  group  in  GET  City.     The  movies  she  selected  represent  her  work  over  time,  as  there  is  one  movie  she   created  during  each  of  the  three  years  she  was  involved  in  GET  City.     Her  fifth  grade  video  was  created  to,  “make  people  aware  of  climate  change.   If  people  aren’t  aware  about  climate  change,  the  world  will  never  change.”    The   video  plays  a  climate  change  rap  while  the  screen  shows  images  of  the  Earth  on  fire,   graphs  documenting  increased  global  temperatures  and  messages  like,  “the  Earth  is   in  your  hands.”       The  song  fades  out  as  Caitlyn  and  her  partner’s  voice  come  forward  to  talk   about  the  potential  ramifications  of  climate  change  such  as  global  flooding  and  the   displacement  of  many  species.    The  youth  name  CO2  as  a  cause  of  climate  change  as   the  rap,  queued  up  to  the  section  on  CO2  emissions,  starts  playing  again.    The  video   ends  by  asking  people  “to  take  aim  at  climate  change”  by  getting  involved.    The  girls   ask  people  to  get  involved  by  using  less  energy  at  home  or  joining  GET  City  at  the   Boys  and  Girls  Club.     Caitlyn  made  her  sixth  grade  video  with  two  other  GET  City  female  youth.     The  video  won  a  statewide  green  energy  public  service  announcement  competition   and  was  shown  on  local  television  stations  in  Great  Lakes  City  and  other  areas   around  the  state.    The  video  is  an  energy  audit  of  a  local  school  focused  on  energy   related  technologies  and  behaviors.    The  girls  investigate  which  types  of  light  bulbs   (CFL  or  incandescent)  are  installed  in  various  places  throughout  the  school.       88         Figure  4:  Caitlyn  explaining  how  many  pounds  of  CO2  and  money  could  be  saved  by   changing  technologies  at  the  school     The  youth  embed  their  own  personalities  and  interests  to  make  serious   points  (use  of  Michael  Jackson’s  song  –  what  have  we  done)  as  well  as  bring  humor   and  light  heartedness  (a  warning  sign  with  accompanying  voice  saying  do  not  try   this  at  home)  to  the  video.    The  video  ends  with  discussion  of  the  calculations  the   youth  completed  in  terms  of  how  much  CO2  and  money  could  be  saved  if  the  school   switched  from  incandescent  to  CFL  light  bulbs.     Finally,  Caitlyn’s  seventh  grade  video  is  part  of  GET  City’s  investigation  into   LEED  certification  and  green  building  with  the  hopes  of  building  a  new  teen  center   at  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club.    Caitlyn  and  her  group  members  overview  what  LEED   certification  is,  how  a  building  gains  LEED  credits  and  then  offered   recommendations  for  making  the  new  teen  center  LEED  certified  by  incorporating   their  own  ideas  as  well  as  ideas  from  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club  staff.       Caitlyn  takes  the  lead  on  creating  a  detailed  sketch  of  the  new  teen  center   using  Google  Sketchup,  a  program  allowing  the  youth  to  make  architectural   drawings.    Caitlyn  incorporated  LEED  recommendations  gathered  through  their     89   investigations  in  a  3-­‐D  drawing  of  the  new  teen  center.    The  LEED  video  includes  a   “fly  through”  tour  stopping  at  each  location  where  one  of  the  recommendations  had   been  included.       Although  these  brief  descriptions  of  Caitlyn’s  videos  do  not  do  the  quality  of   the  work  justice,  the  descriptions  do  point  to  several  key  aspects  of  her  experiences   with  science  in  informal  settings.    The  videos  exhibit  her  deep  knowledge  of  energy   related  science,  her  desire  to  share  this  knowledge  with  others,  her  ability  to   structure  messages  that  appeal  to  multiple  audiences,  her  vast  talents  and  areas  of   expertise  to  draw  from  and  the  amount  of  work  she  is  willing  to  put  in  on  these   types  of  projects.    Together,  they  point  to  the  idea  that  she  is  smart,  committed  to   making  a  difference  in  her  community  and  she  has  something  valuable  to  share  with   others.       Maya       Maya  is  a  highly  successful  African  American  female  who  attends  a  local   charter  school  in  Great  Lakes  City.    She  was  in  sixth  grade  and  twelve  years  old   when  we  co-­‐created  her  case.    Although  academically  successful,  at  the  time  of  this   case,  Maya  was  not  enjoying  school  and  often  talked  about  her  plans  (or  hopes)  to   switch  to  a  different  school  the  following  year.    Maya  was  highly  critical  of  her   school  science  experience  through  her  case,  but  she  also  offered  examples  of  how   science  “matters”  to  her.     Getting  to  know  Maya.    Maya’s  website  includes  an  eclectic  group  of   pictures  including  peace  signs,  CFL  light  bulbs  and  pictures  of  herself  in  front  of  the   Eiffel  Tower  (super  imposed  using  a  software  application).    She  includes  a  list  of     90   favorite  things  such  as  her  favorite  book,  My  Life  in  Pink  and  Green  and  her  favorite   quote,  “If  you  want  to  make  your  dreams  come  true,  wake  up!!!”    She  also  includes  a   graph  generated  by  a  carbon  footprint  calculator  that  reveals  how  her  footprint   compares  to  the  rest  of  the  world.   There  is  very  little  commentary  in  connection  to  the  prompts  included  in  the   website.    Maya  does  write,  “Think  if  we  keep  doing  what  we  do  in  GET  City,  1  day  we   can  get  off  the  power  grid  and  save  the  world.”    She  does  not  include  any  details   about  why  she  is  in  GET  City  or  what  she  likes  about  science.       Explicit  messages  to  science  teachers.    Although  the  question  was  framed   as  science  teachers  in  general,  Maya’s  messages  were  directed  at  her  teachers.       1)  “I  would  like  to  tell  my  teachers  that  in  GET  City  we  learn  and  we  learn  a   lot  of  knowledge  but  we  enjoy  it  and  we  do  stuff  that  can  make  a  change  in   our  Earth.  And  do  things  that  really  matters  in  our  Earth.”   2)  “We  work  with  a  group  of  people  who  want  to  be  there  and  want  to   cooperate  together.”   3)  “We  are  interested  in  community  science.    We  actually  enjoy  it  and  it  is   something  that  we  love  to  do.”     Maya’s  messages  mirror  the  messages  revealed  in  the  other  girls’  cases.  Maya   speaks  to  the  connection  between  fun  and  learning  while  contrasting  her   experiences  in  GET  City  with  school  science.    She  wants  her  teachers  to  know  that   she  enjoys  working  with  other  youth  to  take  on  big  problems  facing  our  planet.     Conversations  and  artifacts.    The  vignette  in  the  opening  chapter   described  an  event  in  GET  City  where  youth  struggled  to  come  up  with  things  they   like  about  science,  resulting  in  Maya  contrasting  GET  City  to  school  by  saying,  “the   science  we  do  here  (GET  City)  matters.”  The  next  day  at  our  conversation  group,  I   wanted  to  dig  further  into  what  it  meant  to  say  science  mattered  in  one  space  and     91   not  in  another.    There  were  six  GET  City  youth  and  myself  (Danny)  involved  in  this   conversation,  including  three  youth  in  this  study  –  Maya,  Hannah  and  Caitlyn.  The   conversation  began  with  me  asking  the  youth  to  talk  about  the  statement  that,  “The   science  in  GET  City  matters.”    Maya  chose  to  include  the  following  transcription  in   her  case.   Maya:  I  think  it  matters  because  science  in  school  we  just  sit  there  and  read  a   book  and  that  is  not  doing  anything.    All  we  do  is  sit  there  and  read  a  book   about  doing  something.    And  when  we  do  something,  it  is  like  an  experiment   maybe  that  doesn’t  really  matter.   Male  youth  1:  And  the  teacher  does  it.   Maya:  Yeah,  and  the  teacher  just  shows  you.    (Talks  about  when  her  teacher   showed  a  demonstration  to  them  about  a  drought).    Then  he  said,  “well  you   guys  are  going  to  get  to  do  this,  no  –  never  mind,  I  can  just  show  you.”  So  all   we  did  was  make  water  drip  into  a  bucket  through  a  straw.    When  we  are  in   GET  City  we  actually  do  something.    We  don’t  just  sit  there  and  read  a   textbook  and  watch  our  teacher  drip  water  through  a  straw.       Hannah:  Is  watching  a  straw  and  water  drip  through  it  even  science?  That  is   not  even  science.     This  segment  of  the  conversation  reveals  a  vision  of  science  that  matters  in   terms  of  youth  being  given  opportunities  to  be  active  participants.  The  experience  of   watching  her  teacher  demonstrate  a  phenomenon  left  Maya  frustrated.    She  reveals   a  desire  to  be  a  part  of  investigations  in  terms  of  asking  questions  and  trying  to   figure  out  the  phenomenon  being  examined.       Danny:  Anyone  else  want  to  disagree  or  agree  with  the  statement  that  the   science  in  GET  City  matters?  So  does  it  matter?   Caitlyn:  It  matters  to  the  future.       Male  youth  1:  And  if  you  want  to  do  engineering  like  Brittany  (university   undergraduate  Chemical  Engineering  student  who  worked  with  GET  City).   Danny:  Ok,  so  it  is  important  to  the  future  of  the  Earth  and  your  own  future.     Usually  when  we  say  something  matters  we  say  it  matters  to  someone.    So   who  does  this  science  matter  to?   Caitlyn:  Everyone.   Several  youth:  Me.     92   Maya:  Our  community.    They  don’t  know  it  yet,  but  our  community.  Watch,   when  we  save  the  Earth  from  all  of  the  disastrous  stuff  that  is  going  to   happen  to  us,  they  are  going  to  be  like  …  oh  I  should  have,  yeah.       Danny:  Ok,  so  it  matters  to  the  people  in  GET  City  and  it  matters  to  people  in   the  community.   Maya:  Well,  some  people  don’t  know  it  yet,  but  yeah,  they  will.     Danny:  Anyone  disagree,  and  you  should  feel  free  to  disagree,  that  the   science  in  GET  City  doesn’t  matter?   Maya:  I  think  when  you  have  a  tube  and  make  water  come  out  of  it  (going   back  to  the  story  of  her  teacher)  that  it  doesn’t  matter  much.    It  doesn’t   matter  as  much  as  what  we  are  doing.   Danny:  Why?   Maya:  Because  I  don’t  think  that  is  as  important  as  what  we  are  trying  to  do   in  our  community  and  our  Earth.       Danny:  Why?   Maya:  Because  what  are  you  going  to  do  with  it.    I  think  it  can  help  with   doctor  research  or  something  like  that  or  scientist  research  or  something  like   that,  but  I  think  it  matters  more  than,  I  call  the  zazoom  science,  the  stuff   where  you  mix  the  chemicals  and  all  that  stuff.         The  youth  speak  about  how  energy  related  science  connects  to  their  lives  and   communities.  The  conversation  reveals  how  disconnected  some  of  the  science  they   are  learning  in  school  is  from  the  ways  in  which  they  envision  themselves  doing   science.    Maya  tries  to  connect  what  she  sees  in  school  to  “doctor  research”  or   “scientist  research”,  categories  of  research  that  have  little  connection  to  her  life  or   the  type  of  work  she  sees  herself  doing  with  science  or  in  her  community.    Her   participation  with  “zazoom  science”  has  left  her  questioning  the  relevance  of  these   types  of  experiments.   Danny:  Ok,  then  what  about  school  science  matters?   Caitlyn:  It  matters  for  our  education.   Danny:  What  does  that  mean  Caitlyn?   Caitlyn:  So  we  can  move  on  to  the  next  grade.   Danny:  That  is  really  interesting.    Is  that  what  school  is,  passing  so  you  can   go  onto  the  next  grade?   Several:  Yeah.   Caitlyn:  So  you  can  get  an  education.   Maya:  It  is  learning  to  get  an  education  to  go  to  college  to  get  a  job.    To  get   into  college  to  get  a  job.         93   Danny:  Ok,  so  school  science  only  matters  so  if  you  are  in  7th  grade  you  can   go  onto  8th  grade?     Maya:  It  matters,  just  not  as  much.   Caitlyn:  So  you  can  get  a  job.    And  an  education  so  you  can  have  more   knowledge   Maya:  It  matters,  just  not  as  much.     Learning  or  participating  with  science  is  not  a  central  aspect  to  why  school   science  is  important.    Instead,  these  youth  have  gained  an  understanding  that  in   order  for  them  to  get  into  the  college  or  secure  a  job,  they  must  continue  to  pass   classes  and  check  the  requisite  boxes  that  stand  in  front  of  them.    An  education   signifies  completion  of  a  task  that  allows  them  to  “get  a  job”  for  some  of  these  youth.         The  conversation  continued.   Female  youth  1:  What  matters  more,  science  in  GET  City  or  science  at   school?   Hannah:  GET  City.   Female  youth  1:  What  matters  more  or  which  is  more  fun?  Because  it   matters  in  school,  but  fun  is  here.   Danny:  Ok,  what  is  the  difference  then?  Why  does  it  matter  more  in  school?   Female  student  1:  Because  if  you  don’t  care  you  are  not  going  to  pass  and   then  you  are  going  to  get  held  back  until  you  are  like  34.     Female  student  2:  I  think  it  is  equal  because  GET  City  can  help  you  with   science  and  so  can  school.    So  like  the  more  you  learn  in  GET  City  you  can   pass  it  on  to  school.       Danny:  So  what  do  you  think  Hannah?       Hannah:  I  don’t  know.       Danny:  Just  to  you.  Which  matters  more?   Hannah:  School  matters  more  because  if  you  don’t  get  good  grades  you   might  get  held  back.    And  it  is  fun  because  we  get  to  do  all  kinds  of  stuff  and   go  on  field  trips.   Danny:  At  school  or  here  (Boys  and  Girls  Club)?   Hannah:  Here.   Danny:  So  you  have  more  fun  here,  but  school  is  more  important?   Hannah:  I  think  it  is  kind  of  equal  because  it  is  funner  here.   Maya:  I  think  it  is  funner,  well  funner  is  not  a  word,  but  I  think  it  is  more  fun   here  and  I  think  we  learn  more  here.    In  school  they  don’t  teach  you  to  save   energy  and  stuff  and  I  bet  the  teachers  don’t  even  know  half  of  what  that  is.     And  in  school  you  just  learn  about  -­‐   Hannah:  Soil.     94   Maya:  Yeah,  what  do  you  need  to  learn  about  soil  for?  Why  do  you  need  to   learn  about  dirt?   Danny:  I  don’t  know,  if  you  want  to  start  a  garden  or  something.   Maya:  No  one  wants  to  start  a  garden  Danny  (laughing).   Danny:  I  want  to  start  a  garden.   Maya:  Do  you  want  that  to  be  your  lifelong  career,  starting  a  garden?     Danny:  No,  but  if  you  were  a  farmer  it  would  be  important.   Maya:  Who  is  going  to  be  a  farmer?   Danny:  There  are  a  lot  of  farmers.   Maya:  I  am  not  going  to  be  a  farmer.     Maya  and  Caitlyn,  who  are  both  highly  successful  students,  saw  school   science  as  important  to  gain  admittance  to  college  or  for  gaining  access  to   employment.    Hannah,  who  is  not  a  traditionally  successful  student,  sees  it  as   important  so  that  she  won’t  be  held  back  again.    It  is  the  fear  of  failing  the  grade  and   falling  further  behind  her  classmates  that  makes  science  class  important  to  her.    She   enjoys  participating  with  science  more  outside  of  school,  but  she  also  understands,   through  previous  experience,  not  meeting  the  intended  outcomes  of  school  science   can  have  serious  ramifications.     The  conversation  ends  by  coming  back  to  Maya  who  believes  she  enjoys  and   learns  more  science  outside  of  school.    She  talks  about  how  she  doesn’t  see  herself,   particularly  her  interests,  career  aspirations,  passions  and  prior  experiences,  in  the   school  science  curriculum.    She  is  not  going  to  be  a  farmer  and  thus  had  a  hard  time   finding  relevance  in  the  unit  they  spent  investigating  soil  in  Earth  science.         The  conversation  was  one  where  Maya  expressed  her  displeasure  with   school  science.    She  was  frustrated  with  being  positioned  by  her  teachers  as  passive   and  that  the  science  curriculum  was  disconnected  from  her  experiences  and   interests.    After  reviewing  the  conversation,  Maya  and  I  decided  sharing  examples  of     95   how  science  matters  or  when  it  mattered  would  help  teachers  learn  from  her   experiences.       Maya  chose  a  few  artifacts  to  include  in  order  to  help  teachers  see  the  types   of  things  she  does  with  science  outside  of  school.    The  first  was  an  audio  recording   Maya  made  where  she  discusses  specific  examples  such  as  the  videos  she  has  made   with  others  in  GET  City.    Maya  said  “  When  we  make  our  videos  and  we  make  them   really  interesting  so  people  like  to  watch  them.    Videos  attract  people  so  if  more   people  watch  our  videos,  the  more  people  hear  our  message.”    She  goes  on  to  name   some  of  the  people  she  thinks  about  when  making  videos,  such  as  leaders  at  the   Boys  and  Girls  Club,  community  leaders,  and  teachers,  because,  “people  in  charge  in   our  community  have  a  higher  advantage  to  tell  more  people.”    She  also  targeted,   “people  in  the  community  who  have  high  electricity  bills  and  are  using  incandescent   bulbs.”     One  video  Maya  included  is  an  outtake  her  group  made  when  completing   their  LEED  certification  video.    It  was  filmed  in  the  girl’s  bathroom  at  the  local   school  (after  school  hours).  Maya  is  talking  about  how  her  group  can  gather  data   from  middle  school  kids  about  their  use  of  water  in  the  bathrooms.    This  leads  Maya   to  talk  about  her  commitment  to  saving  water.         I  know  this  is  kind  of  lame,  but  I  went  on  this  web  site  where  you  could   pledge  to  do  stuff  like  keep  the  amount  of  energy  and  water  you  use  low.    It  is   about  green  stuff.    I  pledged  to  do  a  couple  of  things.    Like  turning  the  water   off  while  I  am  brushing  my  teeth  because  that  is  wasting  water  by  the  minute.     And  if  your  water  bill  is  really  high,  if  you  are  using  water  your  bill  is  going  to   be  high,  so  I  pledge  to  do  that  kind  of  stuff.    Like  not  take  20-­‐minute  showers   because  I  used  to  do  that.           96   This  video  reveals  how  Maya  sees  science  as  a  way  to  make  a  difference  in   her  community.    She  sees  how  the  bills  at  home  are  high  and  changes  her  behaviors   based  on  an  understanding  of  water  efficiency  in  order  to  make  an  impact.    She  is   also  thinking  about  how  we  can  gather  data  from  her  peers  in  order  to  share  what   we  have  learned  about  their  behaviors  in  hopes  of  leading  to  change.     The  final  piece  of  Maya’s  case  was  a  story  she  wrote  about  her  high  moment   with  science  outside  of  school  that  was  titled  “Science  from  a  different  point  of   view.”       I  sat  down  in  my  seat  and  looked  at  the  speaker.  His  name  is    and   he  was  talking  about  coal.  I  had  no  idea  what  he  was  talking  about.  “Is  it  good   to  burn  coal”,    said  but  no  one  raised  their  hand.    Then  I  realized  he   was  speaking  to  me.  It  was  my  first  time  in  get  city  so  I  was  nervous.  I   thought  about  it:  burning  coal.  Is  it  good  to  burn  a  house  down  (I  have  a  wild   mind)?  No,  of  course  not.  “No”  I  said  in  a  small  voice  because  if  I  got  it  wrong   I  wouldn’t  want  people  to  laugh.    “Correct”,  he  said,  “Do  you  know  why?”   Then  I  said,  “We  could  use  our  coal  or  use  too  much  of  it.”    THEN  IT   CLICKED!!!  By  clicked  I  mean  that  it  all  came  together,  and  I  realized  that  I   can  make  a  change  if  I  just  apply  myself  and  use  my  brain  and  I  don’t  have  to   worry  about  being  wrong  as  long  as  I  think  my  answers  through  and  have  fun   doing  that  because  all  that  matters  is  that  I  try.     GET  City  isn’t  boring  you  just  have  to  apply  yourself,  give  your  opinion.    No   one  will  laugh  because  you’re  not  going  to  get  every  question  right.    I  started   to  enjoy  GET  City  next  thing  you  know  I’m  making  videos  with  my  friends   and  getting  great  opportunities  to  apply  myself  and  have  fun  doing  it.    Next   thing  you  know  we  are  having  carnivals  and  going  to  MSU.    We  even  made   new  words  (fcience).    We  even  got  a  chance  to  talk  to  Dr.  Maya  Ng  and   children  our  age  in  Hawaii.    GET  City  is  different  from  school  science  because   you  don’t  sit  in  your  seat  and  listen.    You  listen  then  start  letting  your   community  hear  you.    Get  your  point  across  to  the  world.    You  are  saving  the   world  and  its  power.    Think  about  it  -­‐  I  am  a  12-­‐year-­‐old  sixth  grade  girl   saving  the  world  and  its  people.    I  feel  good  to  be  in  GET  City  and  make  a   change  and  that  is  my  best  moment  in  GET  City.           Maya’s  story  describes  science  learning  experiences  where  she  can  take  risks   without  fear  of  it  being  labeled  right  or  wrong.    She  writes  about  spaces  to  apply     97   herself,  to  “use  her  brain”,  and  the  enjoyment  she  finds  through  those  experiences.   She  is  active  as  opposed  to  being  asked  to,  “sit  in  your  seat  and  listen.”  She  mentions   specific  experiences  where  she  had  opportunities  to  share  her  expertise  such  as  at  a   green  carnival  GET  City  youth  put  on  for  the  community  or  in  the  conversation  with   Dr.  Ng  about  being  community  science  experts.    Finally,  she  writes  of  a  feeling  of   empowerment,  despite  her  position  as  being  a  young  African  American  female,  and   how  she  is  taking  action  to  impact  the  “world  and  its  people.”    She  gets  personal   satisfaction  out  of  using  her  emerging  expertise  to  impact  those  around  her.     Maya’s  is  critical  of  her  school  experiences  through  her  case.    Although  highly   successful  and  thus  able  to  take  on  the  identity  of  a  “good  science  student”  in  school   (Carlone  et  al.  2011),  she  is  not  satisfied  by  school  science  and  believes  it  only   matters  as  something  she  must  complete  in  order  to  get  where  she  wants  to  go.    She   contrasts  that  with  her  informal  experience  where  she  is  active  or  able  to  take   action,  she  has  spaces  to  connect  science  to  her  community  and  she  works  to  make   an  impact.     Looking  Across  Cases     Building  the  cases  provided  an  opportunity  for  these  girls  to  share  their   science  learning  experiences  both  inside  and  outside  of  the  classroom.    The  cases   were  constructed  with  the  knowledge  that  science  teachers  would  read  their   messages  and  watch  their  videos.    This  opened  up  space  for  the  girls  to  have  their   voices  considered  in  conversations  regarding  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science.     While  each  case  shared  different  experiences,  much  of  the  power  in  these  cases  was     98   how  the  girls  used  this  space  to  convey  common  messages  about  participating  with   science.    I  argue  these  girls’  used  these  cases  to:     1) Share  experiences  that  convey  how,  where  and  why  science  matters;     2) Challenge  traditional  notions  that  young,  female,  students  of  color  from   lower  SES  backgrounds  are  not  interested  in  or  capable  of  making   contributions  to  scientific  investigations;  and   3) Express  hope  for  future  school  science  experiences  by  offering  visions  of   what  is  looks  like  to  be  scientifically  engaged  in  their  communities  as  well   as  offering  critiques  of  current  science  teaching  and  learning  practices   The  following  section  examines  each  of  these  claims  above  in  greater  detail.       Science  That  Matters       Each  of  the  girls  described  or  shared  specific  examples  of  how,  where  and   why  science  learning  matters  outside  of  school.    While  these  examples  were  often   contrasted  with  school  science,  they  also  provided  science  teachers  with  specific   ideas  to  reference  and  reflect  upon  in  terms  of  alternatives  to  traditional  classroom   learning.    The  girls  and  I  started  with  the  premise  that  if  they  were  asking  teachers   to  reform  classroom  practices,  they  should  provide  insights  into  what  those  reforms   might  look  like.         Four  themes  emerged  in  these  data  regarding  science  that  matters  for  the   girls.    The  themes  are  being  active  participants,  connection  to  place,  having   opportunities  for  expanded  outcomes  in  science  and  leveraging  multiple  areas  of   expertise.    The  themes  together  reveal  a  vision  of  science  that  matters  including     99   where  science  happens,  what  science  is  and  what  it  means  to  do  science  or  to  be   scientific.         First,  the  girls’  cases  reveal  science  that  matters  requires  that  they  are  active   participants  or  given  opportunities  to  take  action.    Maya  and  Nicole  spoke  of  using   science  to  make  a  difference  in  their  community.  Caitlyn  advised  teachers  to  get   their  classes  outside,  building  something,  or  investigating  something  deeply  to   support  their  learning.  Hannah  talked  about  the  hard  work  and  the  pride  that  came   from  making  videos  or  designing  lessons  and  sharing  them  with  others.    Overall,   these  youth  wanted  to  participate  with  science  and  not  be  positioned  as  passive  by   their  teacher  or  anyone  else.  Their  vision  of  what  is  means  to  do  science  stands  in   contrast  to  the  canonical  vision  of  becoming  scientifically  literate  (Roberts,  2007)   where  science  learning  is  based  upon  the  transmission  of  “authoritative  knowledge”   (Bang  &  Medin,  2010).  The  messages  and  artifacts  in  their  cases  reveal  being  an   active  participant  involves  two  different  aspects.    First,  there  is  the  physical  aspect   of  participating  with  hands-­‐on  activities  or  shifting  the  spaces  of  learning  as  Caitlyn   talked  about  in  her  case  with  having  students  build  CO2  vehicles  or  participate  with   science  investigations  beyond  the  classroom  walls.  Second,  and  equally  important,   being  an  active  participant  involves  an  intellectual  aspect.  These  girls  are  interested   working  together  to  come  up  with  questions  or  compose  messages  regarding  their   findings  for  multiple  audiences.    Many  of  the  videos  included  in  the  cases  exhibit  this   idea  as  they  shared  the  findings  of  investigations  (i.e.  Nicole’s  energy  efficiency   video,  Hannah’s  LEED  certification  video)  that  began  with  questions  generated  and     100   vetted  by  these  youth  regarding  how  the  science  they  were  learning  mattered  in   their  community.         However,  the  girls  don’t  just  want  to  be  active,  they  want  that  action  to  be   part  of  investigations  relevant  to  their  place.  These  girls  are  interested  in  “expanded   learning  opportunities”  (HFRP,  2009)  that  go  beyond  the  content,  bringing  in  their   interests,  their  connections  to  their  community  and  the  relationships  built  with   peers  and  adults  through  relevant  science  investigations.    These  girls  are  connected   to  their  place,  both  the  physical  and  social  aspects,  and  want  to  think  about  how  the   content  they  are  learning  is  relevant  to  where  they  live.    Maya  and  Nicole  are  most   explicit  about  the  connection  to  place  and  how  they  see  science  as  a  way  to  make  a   difference  in  their  community  and  how  this  connection  motivates  them  to  take   action.  For  example,  Maya  contrasts  “zazoom”  science  with  the  types  of  science  that   open  up  spaces  for  her  to  make  a  difference  in  her  community.  Maya’s  conception  of   science  that  matters  connects  to  where  science  happens  and  how  science  can  impact   the  people  living  in  that  place.  Both  Hannah  and  Caitlyn  use  knowledge  of  their   place  to  construct  messages  for  videos  or  to  share  findings  with  classmates.    In  our   final  one-­‐on-­‐one  meeting,  Caitlyn  mentioned  that  she  hoped  teachers  would  think   more  about  Great  Lakes  City  because,  “we  talk  about  a  lot  of  different  places,  but  we   never  learn  how  all  of  this  stuff  (science  curriculum)  matters  here.”    It  is  a  powerful   statement  about  these  girls’  desires  to  understand  how  science  is  relevant  to  where   they  live  and  with  whom  they  live  with  as  well  as  how  few  of  these  opportunities   they  find  in  formal  science  education.    Lim  and  Calabrese  Barton  (2006)  argue,   “despite  the  fact  that  there  is  wide  agreement  that  ‘place  matters’  in  science     101   education,  we  have  few  models  for  understanding  how  students  learn  to  bring  a   sense  of  place  to  bear  on  their  science  learning  or  how  they  might  be  best  supported   in  doing  so”  (p.  110).    These  girls’  cases  speak  to  both  of  those  aspects  in  hopes  of   helping  teachers  expand  opportunities  for  youth  to  bridge  science  and  community   in  meaningful  ways.  The  messages  and  stories  embedded  in  the  cases  reveal  how   important  Great  Lakes  City  and  the  people  who  live  there  are  to  these  girls.         Additionally,  the  cases  reveal  the  girls’  desire  to  redefine  the  outcomes  of   science  learning  activities.    The  “expanded  outcomes”  (HFRP,  2010)  of  participating   with  the  energy  related  science  and  completing  movies  or  teaching  classes  were   focused  on  ideas  such  as  making  a  difference  in  their  community,  sharing  what  they   uncovered  with  others  or  working  together  to  make  sense  of  place-­‐based   investigations.    The  expanded  outcomes  allowed  for,  “potentially  powerful   constructions  of  what  it  means  to  learn  science”  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2008,  p.   44)  as  well  as  who  can  participate  with  science  (Carlone  et  al.  2011).    Carlone  et  al.   2011  found  that  outcomes  (normative  or  expanded)  matter  to  the  types  of  identities   youth  take  on  in  respect  to  science.  The  authors  argue  that  expanded  outcomes  led   to  a  greater  number  of  students  identifying  as  “smart  science  students”,  particularly   among  students  of  color  and  females.    In  this  study,  Hannah,  a  student  who  was  not   traditionally  successful  in  school,  shared  stories  of  success  where  she  was  able  to   take  on  the  role  of  an  expert  and  have  that  role  be  recognized  by  others.    This   represented  a  different  identity  for  Hannah,  one  where  she  is  a  smart  and  capable   science  learner  and  doer,  as  she  worked  as  part  of  a  team  to  take  on  complex  issues.     Hannah  often  struggles  with  measures  traditionally  employed  in  school  science,  but     102   here  she  is  showing  when  the  outcomes  were  expanded  she  can  find  pathways  to   success  through  hard  work  and  collaboration.    It  was  important  to  Hannah  that  the   idea  that  she  can  be  successful  when  outcomes  are  expanded  was  shared  with  and   considered  by  teachers.     The  final  aspect  of  science  that  matters  in  the  cases  was  the  space  provided   to  bring  multiple  areas  of  expertise  that  are  not  traditionally  valued  in  science  to   their  investigations.    These  multiple  areas  of  expertise  represent  cultural  practices   (Lemke,  2001)  and  “funds  of  knowledge”  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2009;  Gonzales,   Moll  Andrade  &  Civil,  2001)  that  youth  bring  to  doing,  knowing  and  being  part  of   science.  When  participating  in  these  investigations  and  resulting  artifacts,  science   was  just  one  framework  youth  drew  upon  for  sense  making  (Lee  &  Roth,  2003).    The   girls  brought  knowledge  of  their  place  to  their  investigations  such  as  the  economic   conditions  tied  to  rising  energy  bills  many  of  the  youth  included  in  their  artifacts.     They  also  brought  in  understanding  gained  from  being  part  of  overlapping  social   groups.    For  example,  Caitlyn  talked  about  the  difficulty  of  constructing  energy   related  messages  for  different  audiences.    As  she  considered  how  she  would  present   the  findings  of  her  energy  related  investigations,  she  realized  she  must  consider  the   interests  and  motivations  of  the  various  groups  she  would  eventually  share   messages  with.    The  girls  also  brought  creativity,  humor,  artistic  talents  and  other   skills  to  their  movies,  public  service  announcements  and  presentations.    Once  again,   bringing  in  multiple  areas  of  expertise  opened  up  spaces  of  participation  for  these   youth  and  allowed  them  to  leverage  more  of  what  they  know  and  can  do.    Important   to  note,  it  was  not  just  that  they  brought  these  areas  of  expertise  to  investigations     103   that  mattered,  but  that  these  areas  were  valued  and  recognized  by  others  in  GET   City  and  those  they  shared  their  findings  with.      Challenging  Narratives  of  Who  Can  Do  Science    The  girls  used  their  cases  to  push  back  against  traditional  narratives  that   young  female,  students  of  color  from  lower  SES  backgrounds  are  not  interested  or   capable  of  making  contributions  to  scientific  investigations.  Youth  from  these   contexts  are  often  positioned  as  either  not  interested  in  science  or  unable  to   participate  in  complex  investigations.    Research  reveals  these  traditional  narratives   influence  participation  in  future  science  aspirations.    Although  females  receive  a   majority  of  bachelor  degrees  received  at  colleges  and  universities  in  the  United   States,  women  receive  less  than  30%  of  STEM  related  degrees  (National  Center  for   Educational  Statistics,  2008-­‐2009)  and  only  18%  of  all  engineering  degrees   (Gibbons,  2011).    Similarly,  African  American  and  Hispanic  students  combined  to   receive  just  7%  of  all  Physics  degrees  (AIP  Statistical  Research  Center,  2012).  These   narratives  about  who  can  do  science  and  where  science  is  relevant  are  significant,  as   is  how  the  girls  in  this  study  are  challenging  them.     The  girls  are  challenging  narratives  about  who  can  do  science  that  fall  at  the   “intersection”  of  multiple  categories  due  to  their  multiple  “memberships”  in  the   categories  outlined  above.  It  is  not  just  that  they  are  young,  or  poor,  or  African   American  that  influences  perceptions  of  their  level  of  participation  with  science,  but   instead  that  multiple  narratives  apply  to  and  influence  these  girls.  Martin,  Wassell   and  Scantlebury  (2013)  argue,  “intersectionality  seeks  to  unravel  the  ways  in  which   multiple  marginalization’s  of  race,  class,  gender  or  e|im|migration  at  the  individual     104   and  institutional  levels  create  social  and  political  stratification”  (p.  91).    These  girls   are  challenging  these  multiple  narratives  in  their  cases  that  historically  identified   them  as  outsiders  to  science  by  sharing  powerful  experiences  where  their  deep   understandings  of  science  makes  a  difference  in  their  community.  The  girls  in  this   study  are  working  and  living  in  places  “where  few  people  expect  science  to  be   relevant”  (Feinstein,  2010,  p.  176).  Yet,  through  the  girls’  participation  and  desire  to   use  science  to  address  issues  in  their  community,  they  are  challenging  both  social   and  epistemological  hierarchies  that  historically  position  lower-­‐income   communities  as  passive  in  regards  to  defining  and  responding  to  science-­‐related   community  problems.     For  these  girls,  challenging  narratives  meant  conveying  messages  to  teachers   that  they  had  expertise  to  bring  to  science  investigations;  and  they  were  ready  to   take  on  challenges  and  willing  to  work  hard  for  success.    Both  Maya  and  Nicole   made  last  minute  adjustments  to  their  cases  to  include  statements  speaking  to  their   talents,  abilities  and  work  ethic.    Nicole  revised  her  personal  description  to  include   the  statement,  “I  believe  that  I  can  do  anything  if  I  set  my  mind  to  it!    That  is  what   helps  me  in  life!”  Maya  added  the  statement,  “"I  like  to  put  effort  into  what  I  do  and   am  successful  in  what  I  do."  By  adding  these  statements  to  the  beginning  of  their   respective  cases,  it  was  as  if  these  girls  wanted  to  make  sure  the  teachers   understood  who  they  were,  and  what  they  brought  to  the  process  of  impacting   formal  science  teaching  and  learning.    This  may  have  been  due  to  a  fear  that  they   would  not  be  taken  seriously  as  young  African  American  women  sharing  their  ideas     105   about  reforming  science  practices  with  classroom  teachers  who  belonged  to  a  group   that  had  positioned  the  girls  as  passive  in  prior  experiences.         Pushing  back  also  meant  showing  these  teachers  what  they  could  do  with   science  through  their  artifacts.    Each  of  the  girls  included  videos  they  made  that   were  shown  at  local  schools  and  community  events.    For  example,  Caitlyn  wanted   teachers  to  see  several  of  her  videos  in  order  to  showcase  the  variety  of  things  she   could  do  with  technology,  as  well  as  her  deep  understanding  of  energy  related   science  as  it  pertains  to  the  community.    She  is  proud  of  her  work  and  wanted  to   ensure  these  teachers  saw  what  she  is  capable  of  when  given  the  opportunity.    Maya   included  a  story  of  empowerment  as  she  saw  how  sharing  her  videos  could  impact   those  around  her,  which  lead  her  to  write,  “think  about  it,  I  am  an  11  year  old  sixth   grade  girl  saving  the  world  and  its  people."     Maya,  Nicole  and  Caitlyn  are  highly  successful  students  who  still  felt  the  need   to  push  back  against  these  traditional  narratives  of  who  could  do  science.    Hannah   enters  this  conversation  as  someone  who  has  fewer  successful  experiences  in  school   science  classrooms.  Through  her  case,  Hannah  wanted  teachers  to  understand  that   she  is  capable  of  producing  quality  work  and  was  willing  to  put  in  the  effort   necessary  to  get  it  done.    As  a  student  who  has  not  been  successful  in  school,  her   videos  are  evidence  that  she  is  able  to  find  success  when  outcomes  are  expanded   beyond  traditional  measures  and  she  is  able  to  share  what  she  knows  in  non-­‐ traditional  way  that  provide  space  for  her  to  utilize  her  strengths.    Hannah  is   speaking  back  to  the  expectations  placed  upon  her  due  to  her  performance  on  the   types  of  outcomes  that  are  traditionally  valued  in  school.    Although  Hannah  points     106   to  her  own  experiences  in  creating  and  completing  her  video,  her  message   transcends  her  own  history  as  a  learner  and  resonates  with  the  experiences  of  many   students  who  are  labeled  as,  “unable  to  find  success  in  school”.     This  all  matters  because  these  young  women  represent  voices  most  often  left   out  of  conversations  about  who  can  do  science  and  where  science  is  meaningful.     Through  their  participation  in  this  study,  these  girls  reject  the  notion  that  people   who  look  like  them  or  live  in  places  like  Great  Lakes  City  are  not  capable  of  complex   scientific  investigations  or  perhaps  more  importantly,  of  contributing  to   conversations  about  what  those  investigations  should  look  like.    These  girls  did  not   view  what  they  are  able  to  accomplish  with  science  as  isolated  to  themselves  and   the  other  youth  in  GET  City.    Instead,  the  messages  to  science  teachers  were   conveyed  so  that  their  peers  could  have  opportunities  to  participate  with  science  in   ways  that  mattered  to  them.    Pushing  back  meant  pushing  back  for  everyone  in  their   neighborhood.     Expressing  Hope  for  School  Science.     Hopelessness  is  a  form  of  silence,  of  denying  the  world  and  fleeing  from  it.     The  dehumanization  resulting  from  an  unjust  order  is  not  cause  for  despair   but  for  hope,  leading  to  the  incessant  pursuit  of  the  humanity  denied  by   injustice.    Hope,  however,  does  not  consist  of  crossing  one’s  arms  and   waiting.    As  long  as  I  fight,  I  am  moved  by  hope:  and  if  I  fight  with  hope,  then  I   can’t  wait  (Freire,  1970,  p.  72-­‐73).     Through  their  participation  in  this  study  and  desire  to  work  with  science   teachers,  the  girls  expressed  hope  for  what  school  science  could  become.  Despite   their  prior  experiences  in  science  classrooms  through  being  positioned  as  passive   by  their  teachers  or  confronting  narratives  regarding  their  abilities  or  interests  with   science,  these  four  girls  still  hold  hope.  Through  their  cases,  these  girls  exhibit  a     107   realization  that  an  education  is  about  more  than  learning.    It  is  also  the   transformative  power  (Freire,  1970)  of  knowing  and  doing  that  matters.    These   girls’  cases  are  filled  with  stories  of  making  a  difference  in  their  community  with   science.    Their  hope  rests  on  transformation  and  on  the  belief  that  change  is   possible.             The  girls’  hope  manifests  itself  in  the  cases  in  a  few  different  ways.  First,   they  aim  to  present  a  vision  for  what  it  looks  like  to  be  scientifically  engaged  in  their   community  and  the  potential  this  holds  for  classroom  spaces.    Many  of  their   messages  were  strategically  crafted  for  teachers  to  help  them  think  about  what   science  teaching  and  learning  in  connection  to  place  could  look  like.    This  is   evidenced  through  Caitlyn’s  messages  that  are  filled  with  pedagogical  implications   meant  to  help  teachers  see  the  possibilities  for  learning  science  she  believes  holds   the  power  to  engage  her  peers.  She  asks  teachers  to  consider  getting  their  students   active,  extend  science  learning  beyond  the  classroom  and  allow  students  to  show   what  they  know  in  various  ways.  In  her  messages,  she  draws  upon  what  has  worked   for  her  and  theorizes  about  what  might  work  in  their  classrooms.  Her  artifacts,   containing  findings  from  rigorous  science  investigations,  lend  credence  to  her   messages.  She  is  asking  teachers  to  shift  their  practice  toward  their  students.    Her   hope  is  in  her  belief  that  change  can  occur  and  positively  impact  other  students  in   other  science  classrooms.       Caitlyn  is  not  the  only  one  who  shared  these  types  of  messages.  Nicole  and   Maya  talk  about  the  power  of  youth  working  collaboratively  when  taking  on  science   investigations,  pointing  to  specific  pedagogical  moves  to  be  implemented  into  the     108   classroom.    Hannah  includes  demonstrations  of  her  collaborative  efforts  in  her  case.   Additionally,  all  four  girls  discuss  the  different  types  of  science  content  that   interests  them  and  connects  to  their  community.    They  are  explicit  about  the  idea   that  this  science  is  not  being  introduced  in  their  science  classrooms.  These  messages   and  accompanying  artifacts  are  presented  to  offer  a  vision  to  help  science  teachers   bring  science  that  matters  into  their  classrooms.    These  four  girls  worked  tirelessly   to  put  these  cases  together  (in  addition  to  creating  the  artifacts),  and  through  this   work,  expressed  hope  for  change  that  could  impact  both  their  future  participation   with  science  as  well  as  their  peers.      As  Freire  (1970)  notes  above,  “hopelessness  is  a  form  of  silence.”  An  aspect   of  hope  for  these  girls  was  the  insistence  on  being  heard  whether  their  voice  spoke   of  possibilities  for  future  experiences  or  critiqued  what  has  already  been   experienced.    An  expression  of  hope  implies  the  need  to  change  something  as  we   have  come  to  know  it  today.  In  his  writings  on  hope,  Martin  Heidegger  (1927/2006)   states,  “To  say  that  hope  brings  alleviation  from  depressing  misgivings,  means   merely  that  even  hope,  as  a  state  of  mind,  is  still  related  to  our  burdens,  and  related   in  the  mode  of  Being-­‐as-­‐having-­‐been”  (p.  396).    Heidegger  highlights  the  temporal   aspects  of  hope  as  both  related  to  what  is  to  come  as  well  as  a  result  of  what  has   already  been.    Hope  is  a  response  to  an  identified  experience  or  set  of  experiences   that  an  individual  or  group  desires  to  alter  or  change.      Thus,  I  argue  the  fact  that  each  of  these  girls  took  the  opportunity  to  push   back  or  critique  their  school  science  experiences  in  their  cases  is  an  expression  of   hope.    Some  were  more  direct  (Maya)  than  others,  but  all  included  aspects  where     109   school  science  failed  to  live  up  to  what  they  saw  as  science  that  matters  outlined   above.  Failing  to  include  these  critiques  would  be  an  act  of  silence,  or  hopelessness,   and  fail  to  communicate  what  has  been  in  order  to  contextualize  what  could  be.   Examples  of  critiquing  school  experiences  are  evident  across  all  four  cases.   For  instance,  Maya  explicitly  contrasted  formal  and  informal  science  learning   revealing  narratives  of  being  positioned  as  passive  by  teachers  and  seeing  the   purpose  of  school  science  as  something  that  must  be  completed  in  order  to  move  on.     Maya’s  statement  that,  “it  (school  science)  matters,  but  not  as  much”  is  one  that  is   steeped  in  urgency.    Science  that  “matters”  for  Maya  connects  with  the  idea  of   making  an  impact  on  the  planet  and  the  place  in  which  she  lives.    However,  Maya   reveals  that  her  vision  of  school  science  is  one  where  the  learning  experiences   offered  do  not  connect  with  the  world  outside  of  the  classroom  walls.    School   science  is  not  teaching  her  or  providing  opportunities  for  her  to  participate  with   science  that  matters  in  her  current  context  or  her  future.    Eisenhart  (1996)  argues,   “schools  and  teachers  are  to  be  held  accountable  for  knowledge  but  not  for  its   situated  or  future  use”  (p.  268).  Maya  recognizes  and  critiques  the  de-­‐contextualized   nature  of  school  science.  She  knows  that  passing  science  class  matters,  but  beyond   that,  she  sees  little  use  for  it.    This  critique  is  directly  related  to  the  hope  she  has  to   reform  school  science  practices.  Her  hope  is  accompanied  by  a  message  of  urgency   in  her  plea  to  science  teachers  to  reform  practices  or  risk  having  their  students  see   science  class  as  something  to  get  through  too.   The  girls’  critique  of  school  science  also  includes  discussion  of  the  division  of   learning  and  fun.    All  of  the  girls  talk  about  the  idea  of  having  fun  with  science,  but     110   this  idea  might  be  most  salient  in  Hannah’s  case  and  the  creation  of  the  word   fcience.  Fcience  is  a  way  for  Hannah  to  describe  her  experiences  with  science   outside  of  school.    It  pushes  back  against  the  barrier  between  fun  and  learning  that   is  so  often  put  up  in  institutions  charged  with  educating  children.    Throughout  her   case,  Hannah  describes  or  exhibits  experiences  that  are  contrary  to  that  binary,   stories  where  she  participates  in  intellectually  stimulating  and  challenging   investigations  that  led  to  her  establishing  an  identity  as  an  expert  who  is  capable  of   sharing  her  knowledge  with  others.    Hannah  also  tells  about  being  active  and  taking   action  through  these  experiences.  Through  this  hard  work,  she  is  having  fun.     Learning  something  new  and  sharing  it  with  others  is  part  of  the  fun  that  makes  up   the  word  fcience.    Hannah  shares  her  fcience  video  with  the  hope  that  teachers  will   recognize  what  fcience  means  to  her  experiences  outside  of  school  as  well  as   understand  what  is  missing  from  her  formal  science  experiences.       The  hope  these  girls  express  for  school  science  comes  through  in  both  the   possibilities  they  see  for  reform  and  the  critique  of  current  conditions.    These  girls   are  willing  to  participate  and  make  it  known  that  regardless  of  whether  they  are   traditionally  successful  in  school  classrooms  or  not,  all  four  of  them  are  not  satisfied   with  their  school  science  experiences  and  are  willing  to  work  to  improve  conditions   for  themselves  and  their  peers.     Significance     Science  education  reform  documents  (AAAS,  1993;  NGSS,  2013)  as  well  as   work  in  science  literacy  (Anderson,  Holland  &  Palinscar,  1997;  Feinstein  2010;  Lee   &  Roth,  2003;  Lui,  2009)  point  to  the  development  of  citizens  that  have  the  relevant     111   knowledge  and  ability  to  be  civically  engaged  with  science  issues  of  local,  national   and  global  importance.    While  this  is  often  stated  as  a  framing  element  of  science   education  reforms,  we  know  very  little  about  what  this  type  of  education  looks  like   or  how  citizens  can  be  supported  to  build  these  capacities.  Lemke’s  (2001)  question,   “For  all  the  factual  science  curriculum  is  teaching  them,  are  our  students  any  more   knowledgeable  about  the  economic,  sociological,  technical  and  political  role  of   science  in  the  modern  world?”  (p.  300)  speaks  directly  to  what  we  don’t  know  about   how  youth  see  science  as  part  of  their  world.       In  these  cases,  Hannah,  Nicole,  Caitlyn  and  Maya  are  presenting  a  vision  of   what  it  looks  like  to  be  civically  engaged  with  science  in  their  community.    They   define  “science  that  matters”  and  help  educators  think  pedagogically  about   providing  opportunities  for  students  to  engage  in  similar  learning  experiences.    The   girls  draw  upon  rich  understandings  of  energy  related  science  while  challenging  the   boundaries  of  what  it  means  to  do  science  in  and  for  their  community.    Through   messages  of  hope  and  urgency,  the  cases  are  both  an  act  of  and  an  example  of  civic   engagement  with  science.  These  cases  provide  educators  with  concrete  models  to   unpack  what  it  means  for  youth  to  be  civically  engaged  with  science  and  what  can  be   done  to  support  them  in  that  process.     Looking  Ahead     As  we  met  a  final  time  to  complete  the  cases  and  ensure  they  met  our   expectations,  I  asked  the  girls  what  they  hoped  the  teachers  would  do  with  the   messages  embedded  in  their  cases.    The  girls  all  spoke  hopefully  of  change  in   classroom  practices  that  aligned  with  how  they  defined  science  that  matters.    As     112   they  shared  their  hopes,  I  was  filled  with  mixed  emotions.    While  I  saw  the  power  in   their  stories  and  was  inspired  by  their  actions,  I  had  no  way  to  know  what,  if   anything,  the  teachers  would  take  from  these  cases.    Would  they  listen  to  the  girls’   stories?  Would  they  notice  and  make  meaning  around  the  messages  contained   within  the  cases?    Would  I  be  able  to  step  back  from  my  own  understandings  of  the   cases  so  that  teachers  could  come  to  their  own?    Even  if  they  found  power  in  the   cases,  would  they,  or  could  they,  do  anything  with  them  to  reform  what  science   learning  looked  like  in  their  classroom?         While  these  questions  often  kept  me  up  at  night,  I  knew  the  only  answer  was   to  bring  the  cases  to  teachers  to  see  what  they  noticed,  what  they  made  meaning  of   and  whether  or  not  these  cases  inspired  them  to  make  changes  in  their  classrooms.       With  much  uncertainty,  I  set  off  to  share  each  case  with  the  three  middle  school   science  teachers  who  willingly  agreed  to  participate  in  a  professional  development   opportunity  that  foreground  youth  voice.                                 113     CHAPTER  FOUR   “THAT  IS  WHAT  TRUE  EDUCATION  IS  SUPPOSED  TO  LOOK  LIKE  …”   This  chapter  investigates  teachers’  participation  with  and  exploration  of  the   girls’  stories  of  informal  science  learning  experiences.    My  investigation  into  this   phenomenon  was  guided  by  the  following  questions:  How  do  teachers  make  sense   of  the  stories  the  girls  tell  about  their  informal  learning  practices  in  support  of   powerful  learning  in  science  classrooms?  What  do  teachers  notice  in  the  girls’   stories  and  what  meanings  do  they  make  from  these  observations?  How  do  teachers   describe  how  they  might  draw  upon  their  interpretations  of  the  girls’  stories  in   order  to  make  curricular  change  in  their  classrooms?  Throughout  this  chapter,  the   term  “notice”  refers  to  what  the  teachers  see  and  talk  about  with  respect  to  the  girls’   cases.    The  term  making  meaning  (or  making  meaning)  refers  to  how  the  teachers   link  what  they  notice  in  the  girls’  cases  to  science  teaching  and  learning  practices  in   classroom  contexts.   After  the  cases  were  co-­‐constructed,  the  second  phase  of  this  study  was  to   share  these  cases  with  the  three  teachers.  The  profession  development  meetings   were  focused  on  sharing  and  reflecting  upon  the  girls’  informal  science  learning   opportunities  by  asking  teachers  to  explore  the  explicit  messages  and  artifacts   presented  in  each  girls’  case.    The  professional  development  model  was  designed   with  the  following  principles  in  mind.   1) Professional  development  meetings  foregrounded  youth  narratives  of   informal  science  learning  experiences     114   2) Case  exploration  tools  were  developed  to  assist  teachers’  interactions   with  youth  cases   3) Professional  development  meetings  asked  teachers  to  reflect  on  the   power  of  youths’  informal  science  learning  experiences  and  the  possible   implications  for  classroom  practice   We  always  started  by  attending  to  what  Nicole,  Hannah,  Caitlyn  or  Maya   were  trying  to  tell  us  by  foregrounding  the  girls’  stories  embedded  in  their  cases.     These  messages  often  inspired  tangential  conversations  about  other  students  these   teachers  previously  taught  or  were  currently  teaching  as  well  as  the  barriers  they   encountered  when  attempting  to  teach  them  well.    Our  conversations  often   straddled  the  divide  between  hope  and  struggle  as  the  group  tried  to  make  sense  of   the  informal/formal  learning  relationship  as  well  as  the  tensions  between  personal,   institutional  and  societal  narratives  present  in  connecting  the  girls’  messages  to   classroom  practice.    Institutional  narratives  refer  to  historically  and  culturally   constructed  narratives  that  are,  “associated  with  particular  persons  or  groups  of   people  identified  in  social  space  and  historical  time”  (Holland  &  Lave,  2001).    In  this   study,  that  particular  “social  space(s)”  are  schools  and  classrooms  where  narratives   such  as  the  influence  of  a  rigid  curriculum,  standardized  assessments  or  traditional   roles  of  teacher  often  guide  local  practice.    Societal  narratives  refer  to  historically   and  culturally  constructive  narratives  that  influence  identity  formation  and   individual  action  across  contexts.    Examples  include  those  narratives  the  girls   challenged  in  the  previous  chapter  regarding  who  can  do  science  and  where  science   is  relevant.         115   In  this  chapter,  I  argue  that  teachers  noticed  messages  they  found  powerful   in  the  girls’  cases,  which  opened  space  for  them  to  consider  the  possibilities  for   reforming  science  teaching  practices  in  their  classrooms.    This  process  included   collaboratively  reflecting  on  the  cases  leading  teachers  to  consider  different   pathways  to  success  for  students.    However,  making  sense  of  how  to  bridge  the   contextual  divide  between  informal  and  formal  learning  spaces  was  complicated  by   the  tensions  teachers  experienced  between  what  they  found  as  powerful  in  the  girls’   cases  and  the  institutional  narratives  that  often  guide  school  practices  as  well  as   other  societal  narratives  influencing  females’  participation  with  science  and   education  in  general.       In  what  follows,  I  provide  a  brief  biographical  sketch  of  the  teachers,  thus   providing  important  insight  into  their  histories  as  educators  and  their  perspectives   on  Great  Lakes  City.    I  then  describe  the  themes  teachers  noticed  in  the  girls’  cases   and  how  they  made  meaning  of  these  noticings  by  linking  them  to  science  classroom   practices.    I  will  also  discuss  the  tensions  between  what  teachers  found  powerful  in   the  youth  cases  and  the  institutional  narratives  impacting  the  teaching  and  learning   of  science.  These  tensions  are  important  to  the  way  teachers  make  meaning  of  the   girls’  cases  in  terms  of  the  possibilities  for  their  messages  to  be  implemented  into   classroom  practices.    Finally,  I  consider  what  other  educators  can  learn  from  these   teachers’  experiences  investigating  cases  of  informal  science  learning.       Getting  to  Know  the  Teachers   I  begin  this  chapter  by  introducing  the  teachers.    These  introductions  provide   a  view  of  how  they  characterize  their  work  with  youth  in  classrooms,  their     116   relationship  to  place  and  other  personal  histories  they  bring  to  these  conversations.     This  is  important,  because  as  we  came  together  to  discuss  youth  cases,  these   teachers  also  brought  and  shared  powerful  personal  experiences  inside  and  outside   of  schools  that  influenced  what  they  noticed  and  how  they  made  sense  of  the  youths’   messages  and  artifacts.       Table  6   Teacher  participants   Name     Mr.  Greene   Mr.  Roberts   Mr.  Jones             Grade       Eighth     Seventh   Sixth             Years  of  teaching  experience     20     21     10   Mr.  Greene    Mr.  Greene  is  an  African  American  male  who  teaches  eighth  grade  physical   science  and  math  at  Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts.    He  has  been  involved   in  education  for  twenty  years  with  teaching  experiences  in  both  formal  and  informal   spaces.    These  include  work  as  a  community  relations  specialist  for  a  local  university   focused  on  teaching  kids  about  “cultural  issues  or  cultural  differentiation”,  a  charter   school  in  Great  Lakes  City  that  had  an  African  Centered  integrated  curriculum  and   working  in  both  elementary  and  middle  school  contexts  in  the  Great  Lakes  City   School  District.  He  grew  up  in  Detroit,  a  place  he  explicitly  referenced  several  times   when  talking  through  the  girls’  cases.  He  reminisced  about  being  a  student  in  the   first  ever  head  start  classroom  in  the  city,  discussed  the  myriad  of  things  for  youth   to  do  in  Detroit  at  that  time,  and  how  neighborhoods  in  Detroit  were  drawn  along   racial  and  ethnic  lines  instead  of  socio-­‐economic  divisions.    He  believed  these  last     117   two  points,  things  for  youth  to  do  in  the  community  and  the  ways  in  which   neighborhoods  were  organized,  were  distinctly  different  than  Great  Lakes  City.  He   explicitly  talked  about  how  the  cities  were  divided  when  comparing  Nicole’s   description  of  Great  Lakes  City  to  his  own.     This  is  probably  from  being  raised  in  a  very  homogenous  period  and  area  of   Detroit  that  she  makes  no  mention  of  race  at  all.  That  is  something  that   always  threw  me  for  a  loop  when  I  first  arrived  here  (Great  Lakes  City).    I   thought  wow,  because  even  though  I  was  born  after  desegregation,  the   school  I  went  to  was  segregated.    There  was  nothing  but  African  Americans   inside  the  school.    I  never  went  to  school  with  Latinos,  Asians  or  Europeans   until  I  was  in  high  school.    So  it  kind  of  threw  me  for  a  loop  because  there  is  a   big  mixture  here  in  Great  Lakes  City  and  it  is  like,  wow,  that  is  really   interesting  that  people  get  along  fairly  well  inside  this  town  as  opposed  to  a   lot  of  other  towns.  You  don't  really  have  any  ethnic  pockets  inside  this  town.     It  is  more  economic  pockets     Being  part  of  and  giving  back  to  the  community  is  important  to  Mr.  Greene,   and  his  efforts  are  directed  toward  helping  youth  from  the  poorest  “economic   pockets.”    In  addition  to  his  life  as  a  teacher,  Mr.  Greene  runs  a  non-­‐profit   organization  for  youth  in  Great  Lakes  City  that  includes  a  community  garden  project,   having  local  university  students  tutor  youth  and  providing  opportunities  for  youth   to  give  back  to  others  in  their  community  through  service.  His  work  in  service  of  the   community  extends  beyond  the  social  dimensions  to  include  political  and  economic   dimensions  of  his  place  responding  to  what  he  views  as  a  lack  of  opportunities  for   young  people  in  Great  Lakes  City.    For  example,  the  first  time  we  met  to  discuss  this   project,  I  waited  in  his  classroom  as  he  was  on  the  phone  arranging  and  negotiating   a  job  interview  at  a  local  automobile  plant  for  one  of  his  former  students.     Mr.  Greene  is  an  ex-­‐marine  who  describes  his  teaching  style  as  being,  “tough   on  kids.”    He  believes  his  role  as  a  teacher  is  to  help  the  students  that  enter  his     118   classroom  be  prepared  for  future  experiences.    However,  he  feels  conflicted  about   the  lack  of  alignment  of  school  goals  and  opportunities  for  all  youth  to  be  prepared   for  future  success.    He  often  referenced  the  works  of  Paulo  Freire  during   professional  development  meetings  and  in  one-­‐on-­‐one  conversations.    These   references  were  mostly  in  regards  to  a  belief  that  our  educational  system  was   broken  and  set  up  as  a  factory  system.    In  our  PD  conversations,  of  the  three   teachers,  Mr.  Greene  most  often  referenced  institutional  narratives  such  as  being   forced  to  prepare  kids  for  standardized  tests,  being  held  to  a  rigid  curriculum  and   how  the  goals  of  schools  serve  to  separate  kids  and  push  certain  visions  of  success.   Mr.  Roberts    Mr.  Roberts  is  a  Caucasian  male  who  teaches  seventh  grade  life  science  and   math  at  Bayside.    He  has  lived  in  the  Great  Lakes  City  area  his  entire  life.    He  spoke   about  how  people  used  to  envy  those  who  lived  in  Great  Lakes  City,  but  now  holds   the  view  that,  “it  is  a  city  full  of  promise  that  doesn’t  look  like  it  is  ever  going  to  be   able  to  deliver  again.”      Mr.  Roberts  is  a  second  career  teacher  who  spent  nearly  a   decade  in  sales  before  accepting  his  first  teaching  position,  although  he  had  studied   education  during  his  undergraduate  years.  He  told  me  he  entered  the  teaching   profession  for  his  family  because  life  as  a  salesmen  was  causing  him  to  miss  being   there  while  his  daughters  were  growing  up.  He  took  classes  at  night  to  be  recertified   as  a  teacher  and  then  found  a  job  in  the  Great  Lakes  School  District.  He  has  now   been  in  education  for  twenty-­‐one  years,  teaching  in  many  settings  including   alternative,  middle  and  secondary  schools.    He  also  served  as  an  administrator  in  the     119   district,  but  eventually  moved  back  to  the  classroom  to,  “continue  working  with   kids.”       Mr.  Roberts  is  also  a  polio  survivor,  which  has  left  him  with  what  he  referred   to  as  constant  pain.    He  gets  very  tired  by  the  end  of  the  school  day  and  his   movements  get  slower  and  slower.      His  body  is  breaking  down  on  him  making  it   difficult  to  physically  keep  up  with  the  seventh  graders  who  enter  the  classroom.  He   is  also  showing  institutional  wear  from  years  of  being  in  the  education  system.    For   instance,  during  our  time  together,  he  told  many  stories  about  feeling  discouraged   by  a  lack  of  resources,  administrative  support  and  time.    He  feels  these  things   prevent  him  from  providing  many  quality  science  learning  experiences  for  his   students.       Mr.  Roberts  also  described  himself  as  a  tough  teacher  who  feels  responsible   for  his  students’  success  or  lack  of  success.    In  of  our  informal  conversations,  he  told   a  story  of  a  young  man  he  taught  at  an  alternative  high  school  who,  “was  on  his  last   chance.”    Mr.  Roberts  described  pushing  this  student  in  his  classroom  as  well  as   following  him  to  his  other  classes  to  make  sure  he  was  fulfilling  his  obligations.     When  the  school  year  ended,  Mr.  Roberts  was  offered  a  different  job  resulting  in  him   leaving  this  school  and  losing  touch  with  this  young  man.    Years  later,  Mr.  Roberts   was  at  the  checkout  stand  in  a  grocery  store  when  the  young  man  bagging  his   groceries  said  hello.    At  first  Mr.  Roberts  couldn’t  place  the  face,  but  then   remembered  him  as  that  young  man  he  pushed  years  before.    According  to  Mr.   Roberts,  the  young  man  grabbed  the  check-­‐out  stand  microphone  and  said  (so  the   whole  store  could  hear)  “Next  week  I  finish  my  training  to  be  a  certified  EMT.    I     120   would  not  have  done  this  without  this  man  standing  right  here.    I  don’t  know  where   I  would  be,  but  I  owe  him  my  thanks.”    Mr.  Roberts  told  this  story  as  a  success  and  as   a  way  to  show  me  that  he  was  committed  to  and  invested  in  his  students.    He  also   told  the  story  to  show  his  way  of  working  with  students  has  been  successful  in  the   past.  He  ended  the  story  by  saying,  “I  know  I  don’t  reach  them  all,  but  that  one  keeps   me  going.”     Mr.  Jones    Mr.  Jones  is  a  Caucasian  male  who  teaches  sixth  grade  Earth  science  and   math  at  Bayside.  He  has  been  teaching  for  ten  years,  all  in  the  Great  Lakes  City   District.  He  grew  up  in  neighboring  state,  but  described  his  upbringing  in  terms  of   SES  as  similar  to  many  of  his  current  students  in  Great  Lakes  City.    He  views  Great   Lakes  City  as  having  both  “good”  and  “bad”  aspects.    In  particular,  he  mentioned   how  he  has  met  many  wonderful  people  who  were  doing  great  things  in  the  city,  but   also  expressed  worry  that  too  many  people  in  the  community  were  relying  on   others  to  help  them.     Mr.  Jones  spoke  about  being  raised  in  a  home  where  he  did  not  receive   support  for  his  schoolwork  and  remembered  feeling  labeled  early  on  as  a  struggling   student  by  his  teachers.    He  struggled  to  find  success  in  school  for  most  of  his  K-­‐12   academic  career,  felt  he  was  tracked  into  certain  classes  and  viewed  his  grades  as  an   obstacle  to  overcome  in  order  to  stay  eligible  to  play  on  the  basketball  team.  Mr.   Jones  told  several  powerful  stories  about  his  life  as  a  student  during  professional   development  meetings  or  one  on  one  interviews.    Two  stories  in  particular  stood   out  to  me  as  holding  meaning  for  his  interactions  with  the  girls’  cases.    First,  his  high     121   moment  with  science  (case  exploration  tool)  was  when  he  participated  in  a  science   fair  by  creating  a  visual  display  of  the  solar  system  and  was  recognized  for  his   expertise.    He  reflected:   I  was  able  to  stand  up  in  front  of  this  thing  and  explain  it  to  any  adults  that   walked  by  pretty  well.    I  felt  pretty  accomplished,  like  I  had  accomplished   something  good  there.  And  there  were  a  lot  of  times,  like  I  said  I  wasn't  a  kid   who  was  on  the  right  track  very  often  growing  up.    There  were  a  lot  of  times   when  teachers  had  a  lot  of  negative  things  to  say  about  me.  And  that   particular  time  I  did  something  that  a  teacher  could  really  be  proud  of  me  for   so  I  was  really  happy  about  that.     His  second  story  came  in  a  response  to  thinking  about  the  turning  points  for  him  in   education.       My  first  day  of  high  school,  my  first  class  was  General  English.    Our,  um,  high   school  had  a  tracking  system…  where  you  were  basic  track,  general  track  or   advanced.    I  was  in  the  middle:  I  was  in  the  general  track.    The  teacher  gave   us  a  syllabus  and  I  can  still  remember.    It  still  upsets  me  to  the  point  that  I   don’t  really  like  to  talk  about  it  too  much  but  that’s  all  right.    We  sat  in  the   chairs  and  she  handed  out  our  syllabus  and  the  first  line  on  the  syllabus  said   General  English-­‐101,  whatever.    And  it  said…  we  have  to  get  our  goals   straight.    People  who  are  in  General  English  at  this  high  school  aren’t  college-­‐ bound  students.    You  should  set  your  expectations  right  to  make  this  as  easy   as  it  can  be  for  both  of  us.     He  went  on  to  talk  at  first  feeling  he  must  be  in  the  wrong  place,  but  when   efforts  to  shift  to  another  class  were  unsuccessful,  he  spoke  about  shutting  down  in   this  class  and  doing  just  enough  to  pass.    The  story  brought  forward  anger  for  him   when  reminiscing  about  the  expectations  that  were  placed  upon  all  of  the  students   in  that  classroom  by  the  teacher  and  school.       Mr.  Jones  describes  his  teaching  philosophy  as  centered  on  building   relationships  with  students.    He  approaches  his  work  by  drawing  on  his  own  past   experiences  as  a  student  and  thinking  about  the  types  of  relationships  he  desired   with  teachers  but  rarely  found.    When  he  talked  about  his  work  with  students,  he     122   stated,  “I  want  them  to  understand  more  than  anything  else  that  I  care  about  them,   and  I  like  them  as  a  person.    I  want  them  to  do  good  and  I  know  they  can.    Wherever   we  go  from  there  is  fine  with  me  as  far  as  achievement  or  whatever.”    This   relationship  building  was  evident  through  observations  of  his  practice.  Each  time  I   would  stop  by  his  classroom  to  see  him  between  classes,  at  lunch  or  during  his   planning  period,  I  found  myself  waiting  behind  a  line  of  students  who  needed  to  talk   to  him.    I  overheard  kids  wondering  if  he  was  coming  to  their  performances,  asking   questions  about  science  grades,  and  inviting  him  to  play  football  with  them  during   lunch.    As  I  became  more  familiar  with  the  school  and  the  students  in  grades  six   through  eight,  I  discovered  that  the  kids  waiting  to  talk  to  Mr.  Jones  weren’t  only   sixth  graders  he  had  in  class.  He  had  managed  to  build  relationships  with  youth  who   had  never  been  students  in  his  classroom  before.         The  personal  histories  of  these  teachers  and  their  views  of  education  matter   to  the  ways  in  which  they  interacted  with  the  girls’  cases  and  how  they  think  about   making  curricular  change  in  their  classrooms  based  upon  those  interactions.    The   group  consisted  of  three  male  teachers  noticing  and  making  sense  of  the  informal   science  practices  of  four  females.    These  teachers  brought  rich  personal  and   institutional  histories  to  our  professional  development  meetings  that  stemmed  from   very  different  experiences  from  the  youth  participants  along  the  lines  of  gender,  age   and  often  race  and  cultural  practices.    In  order  to  examine  the  complexity  of  these   teachers’  interactions  with  the  girls’  cases  requires  insight  into  the  histories  these   teachers  bring  to  their  work  in  classrooms.       Participating  with  the  Girls’  Stories     123   My  analysis  of  the  professional  development  meetings,  interviews  and   informal  conversations  during  visits  to  the  school  revealed  two  interrelated  findings   regarding  teacher  noticing  and  meaning  making  of  youth  narratives  of  informal   science  learning.  These  findings,  which  are  discussed  in  detail  in  this  chapter,  are:   1.  Teachers  noticed  and  made  meaning  within  and  across  cases  in  terms  of   the  girls  desire  to  be  active  participants  in  investigations,  to  leverage   strengths  when  learning  and  doing  science,  to  connect  science  to  community   and  to  expand  the  outcomes  of  investigations.     2.  Teacher  meaning  making  and  linkages  to  classroom  practices  were   influenced  by  tensions  between  the  themes  teachers  identified  in  girls’  cases   and  the  institutional  narratives  that  often  guide  practice  in  both  school  as   well  as  female  youths’  participation  with  science   Noticings  and  Making  Meaning  of  Girls’  Cases    In  this  section,  I  examine  the  themes  from  teacher  talk  during  professional   development  meetings,  interviews  and  informal  conversations  regarding  what  they   noticed  and  how  they  made  meaning  when  examining  the  girls’  cases.    Mr.  Greene,   Mr.  Roberts  and  Mr.  Jones  noticed  themes  in  and  across  the  girls’  cases  in  terms  of   their  desire  to  be  active  participants  in  science  investigations,  leverage  strengths   when  learning  and  doing  science,  connect  science  to  community  and  expand  the   outcomes  of  investigations.       The  themes  teachers  identified  in  the  girls’  cases  are  interrelated  and  often   overlap.    For  this  reason,  I  begin  by  first  sharing  a  reflection  on  one  case  that   captures  the  interrelatedness  of  the  themes.    Next,  each  of  the  themes  is  examined  in     124   more  detail  to  describe  what  teachers  noticed  as  well  as  to  provide  examples  of   ways  in  which  they  made  meaning  of  these  cases  and  its  potential  influence  on   science  teaching  and  learning.   When  asked  about  science  that  matters  for  Nicole  during  our  first  meeting,   Mr.  Greene  said,       It  was  probably  meaningful  that  she  could  apply  it,  (energy  related  science   knowledge)  and  she  tried  to  apply  it.    It  probably  makes  it  more  meaningful   when  she  tries  to  teach  her  mom,  and  her  mom  accepts  it.  So  all  this  is   meaningful  at  a  certain  level,  but  it  gets  more  profundity  and  more  depth  for   her  if  she  gets  that  positive  benefit  of  saying  I  showed  mama  how  to  do  this   ...Yeah,  and  she  is  not  worried  about  getting  a  grade,  and  she  is  doing   something  she  wants  to  do  out  of  her  enjoyment,  putting  her  own  spin  and   her  own  enjoyment  and  individualizing  this  thing  for  her  own  needs.    That  is   what  true  education  is  supposed  to  look  like.  It  is  not  supposed  to  be  chasing   a  test  score  or  being  focused  on  idio-­‐centric  facts  that  really  don't  concern   you       Mr.  Greene  speaks  to  aspects  of  themes  identified  by  teachers  in  this   statement  about  one  of  Nicole’s  videos.    He  notices  Nicole’s  desire  to  be  active  or   take  action  by  applying  what  she  is  learning  to  the  place  that  matters  to  her.    In  this   case,  Nicole  is  connecting  the  science  she  is  learning  to  her  life  at  home,  resulting  in   helping  her  mother  lower  their  water  and  electric  bills  through  introducing  energy   efficient  technologies  and  discussing  relevant  energy  behaviors.    Mr.  Greene  also   speaks  about  the  benefit  for  Nicole  in  not  only  sharing  what  she  knows  by  bringing   in  her  community  related  knowledge  to  science  investigations,  but  also  having  her   expertise  recognized  and  valued  at  home.    Through  this  process,  Nicole  is  seeing  her   identity  as  someone  who  can  do  science  and  is  smart  in  science  recognized  as   valuable.    Finally,  Mr.  Greene  speaks  about  how  Nicole  has  expanded  the  intended     125   outcomes  of  her  science  investigations  and  directed  her  ability  to  know  and  do   science  toward  making  a  difference  in  her  life  and  community.         Active  participants.  Being  an  active  participant  or  having  space  to  take   action  was  central  to  all  four  cases,  leading  teachers  to  think  about  both  the   messages  embedded  in  the  case  as  well  as  what  doing  science  looks  like  in  their   classrooms.    The  teachers  noticed  that  the  girls’  did  not  define  active  participation   as  simply  situations  where  students  were  allowed  to  get  up  and  move  around  the   room.  Instead,  these  teachers  saw  this  message  in  terms  of  science  investigations   where  students  have  space  to  be  intellectually  active  by  asking  relevant  questions  or   sharing  expertise.    All  three  teachers  talked  about  Hannah’s  ability  to  take  on  a   leadership  role  and  her  increases  motivation  to  learn  when  working  in  a  group,   Caitlyn’s  desire  and  ability  to  share  messages  and  findings  of  science  investigations   with  multiple  audiences  in  Great  Lakes  City  and  Maya’s  desire  to  pursue   environmental  questions  that  impact  those  closest  to  her.    For  example,  Mr.  Jones   reflecting  on  Nicole’s  case  and  what  makes  her  informal  science  learning  experience   matter  to  her.     If  she  can  find  a  way  in  her  mind  to  see  an  experiment  other  than  the   fireworks  of  science,  there’re  fireworks  all  over  in  science  but  just  the   learning  science  and  experimenting  with  science.    I  think  it  is  first  of  all  that   she  has  to—not  knowing  her  other  than  this—she’s  got  to  have  some  kind  of   questioning  kind  of  mind,  an  exploring  type  of  mind,  an  inquiry  type  of  mind.     She  wants  to  answer  some  questions  and  I  think  getting  those  answers  is   really  important  to  her.     Mr.  Jones  highlights  the  idea  that  the  girls  were  not  simply  asking  to  do   experiments  or  work  with  their  friends.    Instead,  they  wanted  to  be  part  of  the   investigations  from  the  initial  forming  of  the  questions  to  the  sharing  of  the  results.       126   They  brought  questions  and  interests  to  their  informal  science  practices  that   mattered  to  them  and  expressed  a  desire  to  actively  participate  in  science   investigations  in  a  classroom  space.   The  stories  the  girls  told  in  their  cases  led  teachers  to  make  meaning  by   linking  the  girls’  experiences  to  classroom  practices.  For  instance,  after  thinking   about  Maya’s  case  where  she  talked  about  watching  her  teacher  perform  a   demonstration  in  her  science  class,  Mr.  Jones  remarked:       It  was  just  how  it  was  such  an  indictment  on  how  we  teach  with   demonstrations  and  them  sitting  in  their  chairs  and  watching  science  go  by   instead  of  being  a  participant  in  science.    That  just  sucks  to  me.  I  just…  that’s   not  the  way  I’d  ever  want  to  be  in  a  classroom  if  I  was  twelve.    And  I  certainly   don’t  want  to  teach  a  classroom  that  way.     Maya’s  story  caused  Mr.  Jones  to  reflect  upon  the  ways  in  which  teachers   often  positioned  students  as  passive  in  the  classroom.  Maya’s  story  about  her   teacher  led  him  to  think  about  his  own  experiences  as  a  student  and  eventually   reconsider  his  practices  as  a  science  teacher.  The  girls’  stories  of  active  participation   through  their  informal  science  experiences  as  well  as  their  pushing  back  against   being  passive  in  school,  led  teachers  to  think  about  the  ways  in  which  they  most   often  positioned  students.         The  teachers  made  sense  of  their  role  in  getting  students  to  be  active   participants  by  taking  the  responsibility  for  sparking  curiosity,  helping  them   understand  the  relevant  science  information  and  then  allowing  them  to  investigate   science  concepts.  These  ideas  were  captured  in  a  conversation  reflecting  upon   Caitlyn’s  public  service  announcement  and  connecting  back  to  classroom  practices.   All  the  facts  and  information  they  (Caitlyn’s  group)  need  would  probably  fit   in  an  8  1/2  by  11  sheet  tri-­‐fold.    You  know,  all  the  information  they  would     127     need  to  be  excited  about  this  idea  could  come  from  that  little  slip  of   information.    From  that  comes  the  question,  what  happens  if  we  change  from   regular  bulbs  to  CFL  bulbs?  Discuss  it  saves  energy,  it  doesn't  get  so  warm,   there  is  less  CO2  in  the  air,  and  if  the  kids  are  curious,  it  is  enough  to  keep   them  going  through  the  whole  thing.    It  doesn't  take  a  dissertation  to  get  that   point  across.    So  as  far  as  source  of  information,  it  wouldn't  have  to  be  much.     I  mean  it  would  be  nice  if  it  was  well  produced  and  tapered  to  match  the   reading  level  of  a  5th  or  a  6th  grade  kid,  but  it  wouldn't  have  to  be  volumes.     Most  kids  do  really  well  with  big  ideas  that  can  be  simply  explained.     Something  that  simple  they  can  get  their  head  around.       Mr.  Roberts,  who  later  mentioned  that  sparking  curiosity  is,  “something  he   wishes  he  was  better  at”,  believes  that  in  order  to  be  active,  students  must  be   motivated  and  interested  to  learn  about  the  topic.    He  sees  this  motivation  coming   from  the  science  related  information.    His  approach  is  to  take  responsibility  for   providing  the  information  or  designing  the  lessons  to  spark  that  curiosity  and  then   trying  to  provide  space  for  students  to  ask  questions  and  learn  more.       Mr.  Jones  spoke  about  allowing  his  students  to  become  active  participants   by  providing  students  the  freedom  to  choose  their  own  pathways  in  a  science   project  once  they  had  been  introduced  to  the  necessary  science  content.    He  saw  his   role  as  helping  them  understand  that  content,  so  that  they  could  actively  participate   in  their  project.   Projects.    Like  the  project  I  am  trying  to  do  in  my  science  class  right  now.    I   think  that  gets  people  active  because  it  is  on  them.    At  this  point,  I  am  just   presenting  the  information  because  that  is  what  they  need  to  know  to  be  able   to  complete  whatever  their  project  is  going  to  be.    But  I  don't  think  that,  well,   it  is  kind  of  boring  for  them.    It  is  kind  of  boring  to  learn  about  the  facts,  but  I   also  think  they  also  understand  that  it  is  a  grind  they  have  to  go  through  to   be  able  to  do  what  they  need  to  do,  because  I  don't  think  any  of  them  want  to   do  it  on  their  own.       Mr.  Jones  also  sees  presenting  science  content  as  part  of  his  role  in  getting  his   students  active.    However,  slightly  different  than  Mr.  Roberts,  Mr.  Jones  sees  the     128   content  as  what  they  need  to  produce  quality  projects  from  the  types  of  questions   they  ask.  Student  motivation  comes  from  choice  and  ownership  over  what  they  do   with  the  information.    Ownership  allows  students  to  be  intellectually  active  with  the   science  content  presented.     During  our  conversations,  Mr.  Greene,  Mr.  Roberts  and  Mr.  Jones  noticed  the   girls’  desire  to  be  active  participants  in  science  investigations  by  intellectually   engaging  in  science  investigations  as  well  as  having  a  desire  to  take  action  in  the   community.    These  teachers  also  made  meaning  of  what  they  noticed  by  reflecting   on  their  roles  in  providing  opportunities  for  their  students  to  take  on  the  identity  of   an  active  participant.  They  saw  their  role  as  teachers  to  bring  these  topics  to  their   students  and  try  (or  hope)  to  get  them  excited  about  it.       Table  7   Active  participants   Noticed   Active  participants  in   science  investigations   (intellectual,  physical,   taking  action)       • • • Made  Meaning   Take  responsibility  for  sparking   curiosity     Help  them  understand  relevant   science  understandings   Choice/freedom   Leveraging  strengths  when  learning  and  doing  science.  The  teachers   noticed  the  artifacts  these  girls  presented  in  their  cases  often  brought  in  skills  and   knowledge  that  are  not  traditionally  valued  in  science  classrooms.  The  girls’   presented  movies  they  made  and  talked  about  events  they  put  on  and  shared  how   they  believed  science  mattered  in  their  community.    The  girls  often  drew  upon  what   they  knew  about  their  community  -­‐  in  particular  the  economic  messages  embedded     129   in  ongoing  energy  related  conversations,  when  constructing  messages  in  their   videos.    Their  artifacts  were  also  often  playful,  artistic  and  creative.    While  still   showing  a  deep  understanding  of  the  energy  related  science,  the  ways  in  which   science  was  represented  in  these  artifacts  stands  in  contrast  to  views  of  science   being  carried  out  in  controlled  laboratories  by  “scientists”  or  even  the  type  of   science  that  is  traditionally  carried  out  in  science  classrooms.     I  use  the  term  “strengths”  in  this  section  because  that  is  how  the  teachers   named  this  noticing.    Strengths  refer  to  various  abilities,  multiple  ways  of  knowing   and  doing  science  as  well  as  the  funds  of  knowledge  (Gonzales,  Moll,  Andrade  &   Civil,  2001)  the  girls  bring  to  their  messages  and  artifacts.    These  strengths  are   different  for  each  students  yet  when  leveraged  allows  that  student  to  be  successful.   Mr.  Greene  pointed  out  the  idea  of  bringing  in  multiple  ways  of  knowing  and   doing  science  when  discussing  a  video  presented  in  Hannah’s  case  where  she,  Maya   and  Nicole  investigated  technologies  and  behaviors  connected  to  the  concept  of   water  efficiency.  Mr.  Greene  said:   I  think  that  might  be  part  of  the  problem  with  our  traditional  educational   expectations,  that  we  fall  into  the  traditional  didactic.    I  am  going  to  spit  some   information  out,  and  if  you  don't  spit  it  back  to  me  the  way  I  want  it  then  you   fail.  But  this  right  here  proves  that  when  she  (Hannah)  is  allowed  to  use   alternative  means  or  alternative  intelligences  to  share  what  she  does  know   or  what  she  feels  comfortable  knowing.     Mr.  Greene  recognized  the  valuable  contributions  Hannah  can  make  to   science  investigations  when  those  investigations  allow  space  for  her  to  draw  upon   multiple  sources  of  knowing  and  communicate  her  findings  through,  “alternative   means  or  alternative  intelligences.”  Hannah  is  not  a  successful  student  in  terms  of   academic  measures  especially  when  teaching  follows  a  “traditional  didactic.”     130   However,  Mr.  Greene  sees  that  she  has  strengths  to  bring  to  investigations  when   spaces  are  created  for  her  to  leverage  “alternative  intelligence”,  and  what  she  does   know  and  is  able  to  do  is  valued  within  the  group  she  is  working  with.    Mr.  Greene   reflects  on  both  Hannah’s  abilities  as  well  as  what  restricts  her  from  finding  success   in  classroom  spaces.   Talking  through  Hannah’s  case  led  Mr.  Roberts  and  Mr.  Jones  to  make   meaning  of  their  own  work  with  students  and  the  difficulty  of  recognizing  the   strengths  students  bring  to  the  classroom.    As  you  may  remember  from  chapter  two,   Hannah  was  a  student  in  Mr.  Jones’  classroom  at  the  time  of  this  study.   Roberts:  Do  you  find  that,  no  that  is  not  fair,  one  of  the  things  I  find  really,   really  difficult  to  do,  and  I  have  been  doing  this  for  a  long  time,  is  to  pick  out   the  strengths  in  the  students  that,  when  they  first  show  up  at  the  table  don't   appear  to  have  a  lot  of  strengths.         Jones:  Yeah,  yeah     Roberts:  And  your  first  interaction  with  Hannah  probably  wasn't  amazing     Jones:  Right,  umm  hmm     Roberts:  The  trick  is,  and  I  think  sometimes  you  keep  slogging  along  until   you  finally  figure  them  out  but  you  wish,  at  least  I  wish,  that  I  had  the  ability   to  look  at  these  kids  and  not  only  assume  but  assess  what  their  strengths  are   so  I  can  get  them  to  play  to  those.    Because  a  lot  of  times,  I  have  a  couple  of   kids,  and  I  have  been  working  with  them  since  October,  and  I  haven't  found   their  strength's  yet.    Now,  I  am  running  out  of  days  and  I  am  not  going  to  find   them,  I'm  afraid.      And  to  me,  that  is  my  failing,  but  you  want  to  find  the   places  where  the  Hannah's  fit.    Where  Hannah  can  do  the  most  good  and  by   doing  the  most  good  she  gets  a  whole  bigger  sense  of  accomplishment  for   herself.       Jones:  Absolutely.    And  you  want  to  be  able  to  do  that  for  Hannah.    You  want   to  bring  that  out  in  her.       Roberts:  You  want  her  to  feel  good  or  feel  right  about  themselves  that  I  am   contributing.    And  although  I  am  not  a  straight  A  student,  I  can  understand   this  stuff  and  I  can  help  other  kids  get  it.         131   There  are  two  noticings  here  regarding  student  strengths.    First,  that  all   students  have  strengths  that  can  be  brought  into  a  science  classroom,  and  it  is  the   role  of  the  teacher  to  open  spaces  for  these  strengths  to  be  leveraged.    Mr.  Jones  and   Mr.  Roberts  are  implicating  their  own  practice  and  the  difficulty  they  find  in   recognizing  and  giving  space  for  students  to  use  their  strengths  after  seeing  that   Hannah  is  capable  of  successfully  participating  with  science  when  given  the   opportunity.    Mr.  Roberts’  worries  that  he  hasn’t  found  their  strengths  yet,  but   indicated  a  belief  that  they  are  present  and  could  help  the  student  participate  with   science  if  recognized.   Second,  these  teachers  believe  allowing  students  to  leverage  their  strengths   in  science  class  improves  their  self-­‐concept  as  a  science  learner  as  well  as  their   understanding  of  science  content.    They  both  talk  about,    “bringing  that  out  in  her”   and  “…  want(ing)  her  to  feel  good  …  (she)can  understand  this  stuff  and  help  other   kids  get  it.”    This  is  important  in  light  of  scholars  (e.g.  Bang  &  Medin,  2010;  ;   Calabrese  Barton  &  Yang,  2000;  Carlone  et  al.  2011)  work  regarding  identity  in   science  classrooms,  especially  among  females  and  underprivileged  students  whose   cultural  practices  are  often  not  recognized  as  resulting  in  a  feeling  that  their  ways  of   knowing  and  being  are  valued.    Instead,  these  teachers  believe  all  students  have   strengths  that  can  be  leveraged  in  a  science  classroom  when  given  space.   The  girls’  cases  opened  up  spaces  for  the  teachers  to  think  about  who  is   getting  left  behind  in  their  classes,  and  who  isn’t  getting  the  opportunity  to  share   what  they  know.    This  is  one  example  of  where  collaboratively  making  meaning   about  the  girls’  cases  provided  opportunities  for  teachers  to  consider  different     132   pathways  for  students  to  be  successful.    This  was  evident  in  the  way  Mr.  Jones  spoke   about  what  he  learned  from  being  part  of  the  group  when  discussing  Hannah’s  case,   who  was  a  student  in  his  class  at  the  time.       Hearing  them  talk  about  her  (informal  science  practices)  as  not  knowing  her   and  seeing  strengths  in  her  that  I  didn’t  see  as  her  classroom  teacher.    It   really  helped  me  work  with  Hannah,  which  I  thought  was  really  cool.  It   helped  me  understand  that  she’s  the  team  player,  the  glue-­‐player  on  the   team.    That’s  kinda  what  I  equated  her  to  after  that  and  she  did  a  lot  better   (in  class)  after  that.     Mr.  Jones  saw  power  in  discussing  Hannah’s  case  with  other  teachers.    Mr.   Greene  and  Mr.  Roberts  helped  his  see  the  strengths  Hannah  can  bring  to  science   investigations  and  what  elements  help  her  find  success.      Mr.  Jones  implicated  his   prior  practice  with  Hannah  by  revealing  that  he  had  not  been  able  to  see  these   strengths  in  her  before.    His  understanding  of  Hannah’s  abilities  led  him  to  design   lessons  where  Hannah,  and  students  like  her,  could  be  successful.    He  noted   observing  her  taking  a  leadership  role  in  a  project  where  she  worked  in  a  group  to   design  a  PowerPoint  to  share  with  the  class  stood  in  contrast  to  the  types  of   classroom  actions  (or  lack  of  actions)  he  had  observed  with  Hannah  in  the  past.       Mr.  Jones  wasn’t  the  only  teacher  to  think  about  pathways  to  success  for   students  in  their  own  classrooms.    Mr.  Roberts  also  talked  about  this  idea  in  our   final  interview  when  discussing  what  he  is  taking  away  from  this  experience.    The   idea  of  working  collaboratively  on  investigations  had  been  brought  by  several  of  the   girls  in  their  messages  and  artifacts.    He  wrestled  with  that  idea  and  what  it  meant   to  the  classroom  environment  and  the  idea  that  he  was  responsible  to  hold   individual  students  accountable  for  their  science  learning.         133     Well,  I  think  most  teachers  don’t  like  teaching  collaboratively  (group  work)   because  it  is  really  pandemonium  a  lot  of  times  and  it’s  hard  to  maintain  the   control  of  the  class  that  you  want  to  maintain.    But  I  think  you  have  to  keep   going  back  to  it  and  giving  different  kids  a  chance  to,  uh,  to  take  a  shot.    And  I   think  you  have  to  try  grouping  the  kids  yourself.    You  also  have  to  try  letting   the  kids  group  themselves  and  see  which  one  works  the  best  because   sometimes  the  teacher  does  know  best  but  not  always.       During  the  first  professional  development  group  Mr.  Roberts  expressed   hesitation  and  worry  when  reading  Nicole’s  message  of  working  collaboratively  to   solve  problems.    However,  after  reflecting  with  his  colleagues  and  seeing  the  girls’   find  success  and  space  to  bring  in  strengths  when  working  collaboratively,  he  is   rethinking  what  it  means  to  work  collaboratively  in  a  classroom  space.    The  group’s   conversations  left  Mr.  Roberts  weighing  the  benefits  to  his  students  and  the   outcomes  of  their  investigations  with  his  concerns  for  holding  each  student   individually  accountable.         These  teachers  equated  multiple  ways  of  knowing  and  doing  science  to   seeing  students’  strengths  when  making  meaning  of  the  girls’  cases.    They  spoke   about  allowing  students  to  use  “alternative  means”  in  science  investigations  and  a   desire  to  understand  students’  strengths  in  order  to  understand  each  students’   pathways  to  success  in  science  class.     Table  8   Leveraging  Strengths   Noticed   Leveraged  strengths   when  learning  and  doing   science       Made  Meaning   • All  students  have  strengths  to   leverage   • Improves  self-­‐concept  as  science   learner   • Multiple  pathways  to  success     134     Community.  The  teachers  noticed  doing  science  in  and  for  Great  Lakes  City   was  central  to  the  girls’  cases.    Whether  it  was  Nicole  being  inspired  by  her  mother   to  take  action  that  made  a  difference  at  home;  Caitlyn  explicitly  stating  she  wished   she  learned  things  connected  to  Great  Lakes  City  in  school,  or  Maya  talking  about   science  that  matters  in  terms  of  making  a  difference  in  her  community  and  Earth,   place  was  a  central  aspect  to  the  ways  in  which  these  girls  constructed  messages  to   science  teachers.    When  talking  about  what  Caitlyn  drew  upon  to  make  her  school   audit  video,  Mr.  Jones  remarked:     Sure,  their  personal  experience.  If  you  go  into  your  bathroom,  well  they  see   that  at  school,  but  I  bet  every  one  of  them  went  home  and  looked  at  how   many  incandescent  light  bulbs  they  had  in  their  house.    And  were  probably   ragging  their  parents  on  switching  it  out  and  told  them  how  much  change   that  would  make.    Probably  for  a  week,  everywhere  they  went,  they  noticed   incandescent  light  bulbs.    I  think  that  is  the  impact  here,  not  so  much  the   video  that  they  made  but  how  they  started  to  look  at  their  entire  world   differently  and  where  they  went  differently  and  then  they  started  to  think   that  if  my  school  had  30  or  40  incandescent  light  bulbs  and  that  stopped  and   if  we  just  changed  those  that  would  stop,  what,  31,000  pounds  of  CO2?    Well   what  about  my  house  where  I  have  25  alone  in  my  house?    And  my  next-­‐door   neighbor  probably  has  some.    I  think  that  starts  to  get  kids  to  think  of  things   on  a  larger  scale.    So  that  is  what  I  think  the  benefit  is  of  the  whole  thing  from   what  they  learned  from  not  only  what  they  did  but  also  how  it  affected  the   rest  of  their  world  so  to  speak.       Mr.  Jones  notices  the  importance  place  holds  for  Caitlyn  and  her  group   members.    The  influence  of  this  video  extends  beyond  their  school  to  other  spaces  in   their  communities  with  potential  to  inspire  these  youth  to  take  action  to  influence   the  behaviors  of  those  that  live  in  that  community.    He  believes  that  the  “impact”  of   making  the  video  lies  in  a  transformation  of  how  these  girls  see,  “their  entire  world   differently.”    The  emerging  vision  of  the  world  plays  out  in  their  schools  and   neighborhoods  with  teachers  and  other  community  members.    Science  is  part  of  this     135   vision  and  is  used  to  try  to  make  a  difference  in  their  community  with  the  people   they  care  about.       The  message  of  place  stuck  with  Mr.  Jones.  When  asked  about  messages  he   was  taking  away  from  this  professional  development  experience,  Mr.  Jones  said:   To  make  things  as  meaningful  to  the  students  as  you  possibly  can.    To   connect  it  to  their  life,  anyway  that  you  possibly  can.    Just  like  we  talked   about  at  the  beginning…  if  we  can  find  a  way  to  connect  it  up  with  their  life,   then  they’re  discovering  science  as  you’re  teaching  rather  than  just  doing   science  for  that  hour  of  the  day.       Mr.  Jones  articulates  the  message  he  received  that  meaningful  learning  for   these  youth  often  occurs  when  science  is  part  of  the  place  in  which  they  live  and/or   matters  to  the  people  in  which  they  care  about.    Connecting  science  to  the  lives  and   interests  of  students  is  also  part  of  current  science  reform  movements  (NGSS,  2013).     The  girls’  provide  a  clear  vision  of  what  science  in  and  for  their  community  looks   like  in  informal  learning  spaces.     The  idea  of  bridging  science  with  place,  although  clear  in  the  messages  of  the   youth,  was  difficult  for  the  teachers  to  make  sense  of  when  trying  to  connect  it  back   to  classroom  practices.    The  difficulty  speaks  to  the  disconnect  between  school   experiences  and  the  types  of  science  knowing  and  doing  represented  in  the  girls   artifacts  and  explicit  messages.    This  disconnect  was  evident  during  one  of  the  case   exploration  tools  where  the  three  teachers  were  asked  where  is  science  meaningful   in  Great  Lakes  City?    None  of  the  responses  were  connected  to  their  classroom  or   the  school  in  which  they  worked.    During  our  third  meeting,  as  we  discussed   Caitlyn’s  case,  the  idea  of  place  came  up  once  again.    As  we  were  trying  to  think   about  what  it  means  to  connect  science  with  Great  Lakes  City,  Mr.  Roberts  came  to     136   the  conclusion  that  his  school  was  “an  island”  in  the  community.    It  was  something   that  was  physically  placed  there,  but  did  not  connect  with  the  social,  economic  and   political  dimensions  of  place  in  any  meaningful  way.       Each  of  the  teachers  made  meaning  of  the  question  of  how  to  connect  science   learning  to  place  in  a  slightly  different  way.  However,  the  common  theme  that  ran   across  their  responses  was  building  this  connection  to  prepare  students  for  future   endeavors.  Mr.  Greene  thought  the  answer  was  through  an  overhaul  of  the   educational  system.       I  would  say  let’s  get  rid  of  the  classroom  and  lets  hold  class  down  at  the   courtroom  this  week  and  next  week,  they  will  loan  us  a  class  for  a  week  or   two,  then  do  a  class  at  the  library  all  week  long  for  Language  Arts.    Then   science  and  math  at  the  hospital  or  MSU  or  where  ever  resources  are.     For  Mr.  Greene,  a  connection  to  place  is  achieved  by  moving  school  into  the   community.    He  spoke  at  length  about  providing  experiences  for  youth  to  see  what  a   doctor  or  a  lawyer  does  in  order  for  his  students  to  both  get  a  sense  for  what  the   profession  takes  as  well  as  provide  his  students  with  a  view  of  what  is  possible.    Mr.   Greene  worried  that  the  kids  who  were  in  his  class  didn’t  dream  to  be  doctors,   because  they  didn’t  know  anyone  who  had  ever  become  a  doctor.  Through  this,  he  is   responding  to  what  he  believes  kids  need  by  drawing  on  his  experiences  both  in  his   classroom  and  working  in  his  non-­‐profit  organization.  His  understanding  of  Great   Lakes  City  reveals  opportunities  his  students  aren’t  getting  at  home  or  within  the   walls  of  the  school  that  limit  their  vision  of  what  they  can  become.         Mr.  Roberts  agreed  with  Mr.  Greene  and  told  a  story  about  the  amount  of   work  it  took  to  get  funding  to  bring  students  to  a  local  planetarium.    He  expressed   desires  to  take  students  to  other  science  related  spaces  in  the  community,  but  he     137   hadn’t  figured  out  a  way  to  make  it  happen  yet.      Mr.  Roberts  also  held  a  belief  that   he  could  bring  the  community  into  his  classroom  to  open  access  for  his  students.    He   expressed  interest  in  having  guest  speakers  come  once  a  week  to  speak  to  his   students  about  their  careers  and  what  they  did  to  get  there.    While  believing  this   would  be  beneficial  to  his  students,  he  expressed  little  hope  for  ever  being  able  to   pull  it  off.       The  problem  is  it  becomes  a  body  of  work  to  put  it  together.    I  would  take  a   year  of  my  career  to  put  together  that  type  of  curriculum  with  that  type  of   community  connections.    But  I  would  have  to  take  a  year  of  my  career:  I   wouldn't  have  time  to  do  it  in  my  everyday  workload.      So  yeah,  it  can  be   done,  it  should  be  done,  but  it  is  not  as  simple  to  be  done.    It's  something,  you   want  to  take  the  community  and  tie  them  into  science;  you  can  do  it.  You  are   going  to  spend  an  awful  lot  of  time  putting  together  the  network  and  then   coordinating  the  network  once  it  is  put  together  before  you  get  results.         Mr.  Roberts’s  words  express  frustration  and  professional  exhaustion.    He   believes  this  would  be  good  for  students,  but  does  not  believe  it  is  attainable  in  his   present  situation.    However,  as  he  talks  about  the  effort  necessary  to  design  this   type  of  curriculum,  he  is  also  implicitly  arguing  that  place  and  science  are  not  part  of   the  school  curriculum  at  Bayside  School  by  describing  the  extreme  efforts  it  would   take  in  order  to  make  this  happen.           Mr.  Jones  didn’t  speak  about  the  need  to  get  his  students  out  into  the   community  in  order  for  them  to  connect  it  with  science.    Instead,  he  spoke  of   designing  projects  in  which  his  students  could  investigate  an  issue  by  taking  on  the   role  of  a  scientist.     I  think  that  as  far  as  careers  and  community,  it  is  kind  of  easier  for  the   curriculum  that  I  teach  in  6th  grade  because  we  did  a  lot  of  -­‐  you  know,  you   start  with  the  soil,  and  then  you  go  under  the  soil  to  the  layers  of  the  Earth   and  plate  tectonics  so  there  are  a  lot  of  careers  you  can  get  into  when  you   talk  about  plate  tectonics  and  soil.    And  within  the  soil,  later  on  you  get  into     138   ecology  and  where  to  build  and  erosion  so  we  did  a  whole  big  thing  where   we  were  all  ecologists  and  we  wrote  ecology  reports  to  the  mayor,  talking   about  where  we  were  building  for  this  fictitious  city.    And  how  it  would  effect   the  environment  -­‐  would  it  be  a  successful  place  to  build?  What  would  be  the   pros  and  cons  of  it?  We  tied  that  back  into  what  would  happen  when  there  is   a  choice  to  build  somewhere  in  a  city.  Some  kids  really  got  into  that  a  lot.         Mr.  Jones  wanted  to  bring  in  speakers  to  talk  to  students  during  this  project   and  hoping  next  year  that  it  would  be  able  to  happen.    Unlike  the  previous  two,  Mr.   Jones  sees  ways  in  which  his  current  curriculum  can  be  connected  to  things  that   happen  in  communities.    However,  his  project  is  not  situated  in  Great  Lakes  City.   The  investigations  are  not  of  areas  these  kids  walk  by  on  their  way  to  school  or   something  they  were  interested  in  investigating,  but  instead  are  situated  in  a   fictitious  place.      The  connection  for  students  here  is  once  again  on  future  careers   and  making  them  aware  of  how  science  may  be  a  part  of  what  they  end  up  doing.         These  teachers  noticed  place  as  a  central  theme  in  the  girls’  cases.    They   made  meaning  of  this  message  by  thinking  about  ways  to  connect  community  and   science  to  prepare  students  for  future  careers  or  life.     Table  9     Community     Noticing   Find   relevance  to   place   • • •   • Meaning  Making   Greene  –  Redefine  classroom  by  putting  it  in  the  community   Roberts  –  Bring  community  to  the  classroom  (Time  and   resources  restrict)   Jones  –  Simulate  conditions  in  the  classroom,  also  recognize   the  importance  of  personal  experiences   All  –  prepare  for  future  careers       139   While  these  teachers  struggled  in  earnest  to  think  about  the  girls’  messages   regarding  science  and  place,  none  of  the  teachers  explicitly  talked  about  how  the   students  that  were  in  their  classes  brought  knowledge  of  Great  Lakes  City  to  that   space.    The  responses  were  to  bring  others  into  the  classroom,  or  get  the  students   out  of  the  school  to  learn  from  experts.    While  these  experiences  could  be  impactful   for  students,  these  students  also  bring  a  wealth  of  experiences  in  Great  Lakes  City  to   school  everyday.  Although  the  teachers’  spoke  about  student  strengths  as  described   in  the  previous  theme,  their  sense  of  place  was  not  explicitly  referenced  as  one  of   these  strengths.    I  could  imagine  Mr.  Jones  ecological  project  taking  on  a  different   meaning  if  they  had  explored  different  dimensions  of  their  community  and  how  the   land  there  was  or  was  not  fit  for  certain  uses.         Expanded  outcomes.  The  final  theme  in  teacher  noticing  and  meaning   making  regarded  the  expanded  outcomes  (Carlone,  et  al.,  2011)  of  investigations.     The  teachers  noticed  that  the  videos  and  other  artifacts  the  girls  shared  in  the  cases   were  focused  on  making  a  difference  in  their  community  or  for  their  Earth.    The   purpose  of  the  investigations  was  different  than  the  outcomes  of  school  science.   There  were  no  grades  being  assigned  to  work  or  individual  evaluations  being  levied   on  group  members  as  Mr.  Greene  pointed  out  at  the  beginning  of  this  chapter.  Often   these  expanded  outcomes  came  from  the  girls’  having  space  to  bring  in  ways  of   knowing  and  doing  that  are  not  traditionally  valued  in  a  science  class  as  with   Hannah’s  participation  in  the  videos  in  her  case  and  the,  “alternative  means  and   alternative  intelligences.”    When  Mr.  Greene  referenced  Hannah’s  ability  to  bring     140   these  strengths  in,  he  also  recognized  that  the  outcomes  of  the  investigations   provided  space  for  Hannah’s  expertise  and  skills  to  be  valued.       The  expanded  outcomes  of  their  investigations  opened  spaces  for  these  girls   to  assume  different  identities  with  science.    These  girls  took  on  the  identity  of   community  science  experts  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2010)  by  leveraging   knowledge  of  energy  related  science  to  make  a  difference  in  their  communities.   There  was  something  about  how  and  why  these  investigations  mattered  to  Nicole,   Caitlyn,  Hannah  and  Maya  that  tied  to  what  they  got  out  them  and  the  types  of   identities  they  took  on.    Mr.  Jones  commented  during  Nicole’s  case:   I  mean  how  many  twelve  or  thirteen-­‐year-­‐olds  have  a  life  mission.    She   basically  has  a  life  mission  of  helping  other  people  through  energy  efficiency   at  eleven  years  old.    That’s  really  cool.    I  would  say  that  is  uncommon.    I   wouldn’t  say  that  kids  being  interested  in  science  and  wanting  to  help  others   are  uncommon  but  that  particular…  that  particular,  um,  kind  of  pro-­‐ activeness  about  it  is  uncommon.    Her  pro-­‐activeness  about  her  mission  is   very  uncommon,  I  think.     Mr.  Jones  speaks  about  her  desire  to  learn  about  energy  efficiency  to  fulfill  a   “life  mission”  of  helping  others.    The  outcomes  of  these  learning  experiences  are   centered  on  taking  action  in  her  community.    Although  Nicole  is  a  high  achieving   science  student  in  school,  who  she  is  and  what  she  does  with  science  outside  of   school  results  in  a  life  mission  of  “helping  other  people.”    Mr.  Jones  notices  that  the   outcomes  Nicole’s  experiences  speak  to  are  much  different  than  how  the  girls  speak   about  their  school  experiences.     Expanded  outcomes  were  part  of  how  these  teachers  made  sense  of  the  girls’   messages  of  active  participation,  leveraging  strengths  and  connecting  science  to   community.    For  example,  Mr.  Jones  responds  to  the  girls’  desire  to  be  active     141   participants  by  shifting  to  more  projects  in  his  classroom.    As  will  be  discussed  in   great  detail  in  the  next  chapter,  the  project  was  also  designed  to  expand  the   outcomes  of  investigations  beyond  facts  to  developing  science  practices  (NGSS,   2013)  and  collaboratively  communicating  results.    Additionally,  all  three  teachers   reflected  upon  opportunities  for  students  to  leverage  their  strengths  in  the   classroom  and  whose  strengths  are  being  recognized  and  valued.    This  led  to   meaning  making  around  the  types  of  classroom  activities  that  foster  greater   opportunities  for  youth  to  leverage  cultural  practices  (Bang  &  Medin,  2010).    Finally,   these  teachers  thought  about  community  and  science.    This  lead  to  meaning  making   where  the  outcomes  were  helping  their  students  become  aware  and  familiar  with   the  possibilities  for  future  participation  with  science  through  careers  and  other   community  opportunities.     Table  10     Expanded  Outcomes   Noticing   Expand  outcomes   of  investigations   Making  a   difference  in   community       Meaning  making   • • • Choice     Foster  opportunities  to  leverage  cultural  practices   Taking  on/redefining  identity  of  “smart  science   student”     The  Consistency  of  the  Messages    As  we  progressed  through  the  professional  development  meetings,  the   teachers  began  to  notice  these  themes  in  the  cases  during  our  conversations.    They   noticed  that  across  the  cases  there  were  consistent  messages  about  how  and  why   science  mattered,  as  well  as  where  school  science  was  failing  to  meet  those     142   expectations.    There  was  power  for  the  teachers  in  the  collective  voice  of  the  cases   despite  many  differences  in  the  individuals  who  constructed  them.    In  fact,  during   our  final  PD  meeting,  Mr.  Jones  remarked,     To  hear  it  from  a  kid’s  mouth,  not  only  one,  but  to  hear  the  same  message   from  all  the  kids;  we  don’t  like  what  our  teachers  are  doing  and  we  want  to   do  more  of  this  and  not  only  from  the  Hannah’s,  the  struggling  students,  but   also  from  the  achieving  students.     I  think  it  is  important  to  note  that  Mr.  Jones  found  the  consistency  of   messages  was  not  bound  by  how  youth  were  positioned  as  either  achieving  or  non-­‐ achieving  learners  by  teachers,  schools  or  researchers  such  as  myself.    These  four   girls  had  clear  messages  to  share  with  teachers  and  regardless  of  whether  they  were   getting  straight  A’s  or  struggling,  they  knew  what  they  wanted  out  of  science   experiences,  what  they  could  bring  to  investigations  and  how  school  was  failing  to   deliver.  The  teachers  found  that  none  of  these  girls  were  satisfied  with  their  science   experiences  regardless  whether  they  were  able  to  assume  the  identity  of  the  “good   science  student”  in  their  classroom.      This  is  important  because  it  reveals  the  power   of  these  messages  across  different  types  of  learners.    The  teachers  noticed  despite   three  out  of  four  of  these  girls  being  labeled  as  successful,  they  were  still  dissatisfied   with  their  formal  science  experiences   The  Tensions  of  the  Informal/Formal  Relationship     In  the  section  above,  I  outlined  what  the  teachers  noticed  and  examined  the   meaning  they  made  by  linking  the  girls’  cases  to  classroom  practices.  While  this  was   important  to  this  study  and  how  the  teachers  thought  about  their  classroom   practice,  meaning  making  was  not  as  simple  as  thinking  about  the  girls’  cases.   Instead,  meaning  making  was  a  messy  process  influenced  by  how  messages  from  the     143   girls  were  situated  in  broader  institutional  and  societal  narratives  (Holland  &  Lave,   2001).      As  these  teachers  made  meaning  of  the  girls  cases  in  connection  with  their   classrooms,  their  conversations  revealed  tensions  between  the  themes  they  noticed   and  the  institutional  narratives  that  often  guide  the  practice  of  working  in  schools,   the  societal  narratives  regarding  the  intersectionality  (Martin,  Wassell  and   Scantlebury,  2013)  of  “multiple  marginalization’s  …  that  create  social  and  political   stratification”  (p.  91)  and  the  personal  narratives  the  girls’  stories  brought  up  for   each  teacher.       Figure  5:  Sources  of  tension           The  teachers  spoke  about  several  institutional  narratives  that  guided  what   science  learning  looked  like  in  their  classrooms.    These  included  deskilling   narratives  such  as  a  rigid  curriculum,  standardized  testing  and  how  administrators   and  district  officials  communicated  the  intended  goals  of  school  to  teachers.    Other   institutional  narratives  included  the  lack  of  resources,  which  included  materials,   time,  money  and  physical  spaces.    Finally,  the  teachers  spoke  about  the  traditional   roles  of  the  teacher  in  a  classroom  such  as  managing  the  classroom,  providing   knowledge,  sparking  interest,  assessing  individual  students  and  determining     144   outcomes.    I  refer  to  all  of  these  as  institutional  narratives  due  to  their  connection   with  the  teaching  profession  across  contexts  over  time  (Holland  &  Lave,  2001).     The  institutional  narratives  present  in  our  conversations  were  not  only  those   that  influenced  how  these  teachers  made  meaning  of  the  potential  impact  of  the   girls’  cases  on  classroom  practice.  Teacher  meaning  making  was  also  tied  to  societal   narratives  linked  to  science  learning  and  participation  based  on  the  intersectionality   of  race,  gender  and  social  class.    The  teachers  spoke  often  about  success  and  how  the   future  for  Nicole,  Caitlyn,  Hannah  and  Maya  was  difficult  to  predict.    Holland  and   Lave  (2001)  argue  it  is,  “useful  to  consider  day-­‐to-­‐day  struggles  over  community   identities  as  in  part  staking  claims  into  the  future.    If  people  fight  with  and  over   versions  of  history,  they  are  fighting  for  particular  versions  of  the  future”  (p.  27).     These  teachers  all  shared  experiences  with  students  and  held  certain  hopes  for   them,  that  is  in  some  ways  was  tied  to  their  own  success  as  an  educator.  While  these   girls  experienced  success  today,  the  teachers  wondered  would  these  experiences   with  informal  science  learning  lead  them  to  continue  this  work  after  they  had  left   GET  City  or  when  their  social  environment  changed?       Finally,  the  girls’  cases  also  brought  up  personal  narratives  for  these  teachers   that  influenced  meaning  making.    Holland  and  Lave  (2001)  argue,  “just  as  we  author   ourselves  by  repeating  the  words  of  others,  we  are  frequently  in  the  process  of   enacting  ourselves  through  enacting  the  culturally  identified  activities  of  others”  (p.   15).  At  times,  the  teachers  saw  themselves  in  the  girls’  cases  leading  to  stories  of   their  own  schooling,  experiences  with  science,  where  they  grew  up  or  what  their   upbringing  was  like.  These  personal  narratives  linked  the  teachers  and  the  girls     145   either  in  similarities  or  difference  of  experience.  The  personal  narratives  often   overlapped  with  societal  narratives  and  thus  are  brought  together  in  the  analysis  in   this  section.     All  of  these  narratives  caused  tensions  for  the  teachers  as  they  thought  about   linking  the  girls’  informal  science  practices  with  their  science  classrooms.    In  this   section,  I  explore  the  sources  of  tensions,  institutional,  societal,  personal  and   noticings  (see  figure  4-­‐1),  teachers  revealed  during  conversations,  and  how  those   tensions  influenced  sense  making  of  youth  cases.    I  argue  each  of  the  teachers  found   different  aspects  of  these  narratives  most  salient  and  thus  experienced  different   tensions  through  the  meaning  making  process.    I  further  argue  that  each  of  these   teachers  eventually  implicate  their  own  practices,  in  different  ways,  through  the   process  of  making  sense  of  the  link  between  the  girls’  cases  and  teaching  and   learning  science  in  their  classroom.   Mr.  Greene     Figure  6:  Mr.  Greene’s  tensions   Institutional.  In  this  section  I  examine  the  institutional  narratives  most   salient  to  Mr.  Greene.    These  institutional  narratives  centered  on  administrative     146   pressures  placed  upon  him  in  his  classroom  such  as  adherence  to  a  rigid  curriculum   or  the  need  to  prepare  students  for  success  on  standardized  assessments.     As  mentioned  in  his  introduction,  Mr.  Greene  often  spoke  of  institutional   narratives  when  discussing  the  girls’  cases.    In  fact,  when  asked  what  he  noticed   about  a  specific  artifact,  Mr.  Greene’s  response  could  very  quickly  escalate  grain   sizes  from  talk  about  one  of  the  girls’  artifacts,  to  his  classroom,  to  his  school,  to  his   district  and  then  to  the  educational  system  as  a  whole.    He  would  often  skip  many  of   those  steps  and  move  straight  to  a  critique  of  the  educational  system.    Mr.  Greene   saw  the  tensions  between  the  messages  embedded  in  the  cases  and  his  life  in   schools  as  dichotomous.    He  defined  this  dichotomy  as  one  between  his  life  as  a   community  member  and  his  life  as  a  teacher.   The  nature  of  our  job  is  to  do  individual,  we  are  being  pushed  toward  that.  I   know  conscientiously  that  is  not  appropriate.    I  know  standardization  is  not   the  right  thing.    I  know  children  learn  in  a  variety  of  different  ways.    I  also   know  that  our  focus  on  curriculum  doesn't  take  into  account  things  like  art,   creativity  or  community  involvement  like  she  (Nicole)  is  talking  about.    There   is  no  mention  of  that.  We  are  living  in  a  post-­‐industrialized  capitalist   paradigm  where  everybody  wants  to  shoot  to  be  the  number  one  A  star  and   to  be  the  best  individually,  and  we  are  still  trying  to  break  down  that   paradigm  and  what  it  means  in  our  new  post-­‐industrial  world.    So  there  are   some  conflicting  aspects  just  as  a  teacher,  as  a  community  member,  that  I  see   with  what  my  job  tells  me  to  do  and  what  I  am  supposed  to  do  as  a  good   community  member.  There  is  an  inner  conflict  and  sometimes  it  gets  passed   along  the  wrong  way  to  the  kids.     Mr.  Greene’s  “inner  conflict”  leaves  him  dealing  with  the  tension  of  what  it   means  to  be  a  teacher,  and  how  he  sees  the  world  as  a  community  member.    Nicole   and  the  other  girls’  messages  bring  this  tension  to  the  forefront  as  he  recognizes  the   power  in  their  informal  science  experiences,  but  also  believes  there  are  certain   expectations  he  must  adhere  to,  as  a  classroom  teacher,  that  prevent     147   implementation  in  his  science  classroom.    One  example  is  how  he  responded  to  the   idea  several  of  these  girls  put  forward  about  working  collaboratively  to  solve   problems  in  their  community.     I  hear  what  she  (Nicole)  is  saying  and  when  I  work  at  the  center  and  there   are  no  grades  involved,  kids  collaborate  on  their  art  projects  or  whatever.     They  help  each  other  with  tutoring  or  planting  plants  and  when  we  discuss  it,   it  works  out  a  lot  better.    But  as  a  school  teacher  who  has  to  test  them  and  to   know  they  are  held  to  a  standard  that  they  are  going  to  have  to  take  MEAP   and  this,  that  and  the  other  thing,  the  collaboration  aspect  kind  of  falls  apart.     Because  you  have  some  students  that  abuse  it  number  one,  and  some   teachers  don't  manage  it  as  well  as  they  could.         Mr.  Greene  feels  his  role  as  a  teacher  is  to  assess  individuals  understanding   of  science  concepts  due  to  a  need  to  prepare  students  to  take  state  standardized   tests.    He  admits,  when  he  works  at  his  non-­‐profit  center,  that  collaboration  is  a  big   part  of  the  process.    However,  he  does  not  feel  like  collaboration  is  something   supported  in  school  due  to  its  difficulty  to  hold  each  individual  student  accountable   and  the  potential  impact  on  classroom  environment.    He  draws  a  clear  divide   between  what  learning  looks  like  inside  and  outside  of  the  classroom.    He  was   impressed  with  the  girls’  cases  and  what  they  were  able  to  do  with  science,  but  was   also  initially  skeptical  that  most  of  what  they  were  saying  and  doing  would  not   translate  to  a  classroom  context.       Mr.  Greene  believes  his  role  as  a  teacher  (as  compared  to  community   member)  is  dictated  by  administrative  pressures  that  define  the  goals  of  school  such   as  covering  the  curriculum  or  holding  individual  students  accountable  for  learning.     In  our  second  professional  development  meeting,  he  stated:   We  have  administrators  that  don't  act  like  sergeants  or  don't  act  like  leaders.     They  are  fingers  on  higher  administration  just  saying  follow  that  order,  push   that  AYP,  push  that  curriculum,  and  there  is  no  concern  about  the     148   individualization  and  the  needs  of  these  kids.    These  kids  are  just  numbers.     Hannah  isn't  Hannah,  Hannah  is  a  MEAP  score.    Nicole  is  a  MEAP  score.         Mr.  Greene  is  frustrated  by  his  administrators  in  terms  of  how  they  view   students  and  the  goals  of  school.    He  is  conflicted  by  the  messages  he  receives  from   administrators  informing  him  of  what  he  needs  to  do  as  a  teacher,  yet  he  also   recognizes  the  power  these  messages  hold  over  his  classroom  practice.    These   institutional  narratives  were  a  central  aspect  of  Mr.  Greene’s  process  of  making   sense  of  the  girls’  cases.   Societal/personal.  Additionally,  Mr.  Greene  drew  upon  societal  narratives   about  these  girls  future  that  worked  at  the  intersection  of  their  race,  gender  and   class.    He  drew  upon  histories  as  a  teacher,  a  community  member  and  a  minority   growing  up  in  a  similar  urban  area.    For  example,  Mr.  Greene  entered  our  second   professional  development  meeting  thinking  about  what  makes  a  student  successful   and  expressing  great  worry  for  Nicole  as  she  grows  older.       She  (Nicole)  is  an  inner  city  African  American  child  and  if  her  company  is  not,   if  she  does  not  maintain  that  self  esteem,  her  self  esteem  becomes  a  collective   item  for  trade  that  she’ll  sell  this  piece  of  her  self  esteem  to  hang  out  with   these  girls  or  I  want  to  be  cool  like  them  so  I  am  going  to  start  wearing  this   type  of  hairdo  or  this  type  of  clothing.    And  the  boys,  the  cute  boys,  don't  like   girls  that  are  smarter  than  them  so  I  am  going  to  start  acting  a  little  dumber   and  goofier.  That  is  honest  and  it  is  scary  in  this  day  and  age  that  women  still   deal  with  that,  but  young  girls  still  deal  with  that.     Mr.  Greene  is  drawing  upon  his  prior  experiences  with  students,  like  Nicole,   who  he  saw  as  bound  for  success,  but  according  to  him  ended  up  with  a  different   outcome  or  at  least  not  the  future  he  wished  for  them.    While  his  comment  is  in   regards  to  success  for  Nicole  is  in  terms  successfully  navigating  the  system,  he   brings  up  several  societal  narratives  that  connect  with  the  participation  of  African     149   American  females  in  science  or  school  in  general.    He  is  speaking  to  societal   narratives  of  girls  dropping  out  of  science  due  to  social  pressures  that  indicate  the   identities  that  females  “should”  take  on.    In  other  words,  being  smart  in  science  is   not  a  pathway  to  popularity  and  he  feels  it  takes  strong  character  in  order  resist   these  social  pressures.    He  worries  whether  these  girls  have  what  it  takes  to  resist   social  pressure  and  is  perplexed  that  he  is  unable  to  figure  out  and  communicate  the   elements  that  allow  some  females  to  navigate  these  pressures.  As  Nicole  and  the   other  girls  in  this  study  challenged  traditional  notions  of  who  could  do  science  and   where  science  was  meaningful,  Mr.  Greene  worried  that  they  would  fall  into  traps  he   had  seen  other  “inner  city  African  American”  children  fall  into  and  no  longer  be   interested  in  challenging  these  narratives  once  their  social  environment  changes   and  their  expertise  is  no  longer  valued  in  the  same  way.         It  wasn’t  just  what  these  girls  would  be  exposed  to  that  worried  him,  but   also  what  experiences  with  science  they  were  missing.  His  worries  connect  back  to   issues  of  access  he  spoke  about  previously  in  this  chapter  regarding  models  of   science  doers  in  the  community.    Mr.  Greene  worries  that  the  lack  of  role  models,   particularly  women  in  science  related  fields,  present  in  Great  Lakes  City  influences   the  possibilities  these  girls  see  for  future  success.    Thus,  it  was  both  what  they  did   see  and  what  was  invisible  to  them  that  worried  Mr.  Greene.         Salient  noticings.  Despite  these  worries,  he  found  several  ideas  in  the  girls’   cases  salient  and  was  vocal  in  the  professional  development  meetings  he  was  able  to   attend.    He  was  inspired  by  the  girls’  desire  to  be  active  participants  as  he  viewed   their  cases  and  saw  what  they  were  doing  with  science  in  their  community.    He  was     150   also  taken  by  how  these  girls’  expanded  notions  of  what  science  is  in  ways  he   doesn’t  see  many  of  his  students  understanding.    He  remarked,  many  students   believe  it,  “is  not  science  unless  the  science  book  is  open  and  it  is  2nd  hour,  and  this   is  science  because  we  are  doing  it  in  science  class.”    He  saw  that  Nicole,  Hannah,   Caitlyn  and  Maya  extended  their  notions  of  what  science  is  and  where  it  happens  to   their  homes,  schools  and  other  spaces  in  the  community.  Although  these  were  not   the  only  things  he  noticed,  these  noticings  were  salient  for  him  as  he  talked  about   what  this  might  all  mean  in  his  science  classroom  as  well  as  what  was  eventually   implemented  (see  chapter  5).         All  of  these  narratives  caused  tension  for  Mr.  Greene  as  he  thought  about  his   students,  his  profession  and  the  community  in  which  this  all  takes  places.    This   tension  caused  him  to  look  at  his  own  practice  to  make  sense  of  the  influences  over   his  decisions.       We  have  the  easiest  job  in  the  world;  we  just  have  to  throw  stuff  out  there  for   them  to  discover  and  find  and  explore  and  do  what  they  want  to  do.    It's  like   children  naturally  learn;  they  naturally  learn,  and  we  hit  ourselves  in  the   head  when  we  try  to  find  out  better  ways  to  teach  them  when  maybe  we   need  to  listen  to  what  they  want  to  learn.  They're  redefining  of  science  and   putting  it  in  their  own  terms  might  be  a  call  towards  that.  Maybe  we  need  to   make  it  more  hands-­‐on,  it  shouldn't  just  be  about  this  textbook,  maybe  it   should  be  about  the  paper  airplane  or  an  egg  drop  or  an  experiment  of  some   sort  where  they  get  to  make  a  mess  and  see  things  in  action.    I  don't  know,  we   take  the  soul  out  of  learning;  we  take  the  soul  out  of  learning.         Mr.  Greene  struggled  with  the  tension  that  the  girls’  cases  brought  up  for   him.    The  girls’  messages  and  artifacts  made  him  aware  of  what/who  was   influencing  his  practice  leading  him  to  reconsider  whose  voices  should  be  part  of  the   decision  making  process.    His  eventual  classroom  implementation  (described  in   chapter  five)  was  influenced  by  the  tensions  he  found  most  salient,  how  he  made     151   sense  of  these  tensions  and  what  implicating  his  practice  meant  for  his  current   students.       Mr.  Roberts       Figure  7:  Mr.  Roberts’  tensions   Institutional.  Mr.  Roberts  most  often  spoke  of  institutional  narratives  in   terms  of  lack  of  resources.      These  resources  usually  pertained  to  materials  needed   for  science  labs,  physical  spaces  to  set  up  science  labs  and  the  time  needed  to  reform   his  curriculum.    During  one  professional  development  meeting,  he  expressed  his   frustration  regarding  setting  up  science  experiences  for  his  students.   But  the  fact  of  the  matter  is  we  don’t  have  the  resources  to  do  that.    But   anytime  you  can  get  that  stuff  in  your  kids’  hands  it’s  a  big  deal.    My  kids  are   bubbling  with  excitement  right  now,  literally.    You  know  the  kites  and  this   stuff…  you  know  it’s  out  of  my  pocket.    I  can  afford  to  do  it  right  now,  so  I’m   doing  it.    But  it’s  not,  uh,  you  know  that  ain’t  no  way  to  run  the  show,  man.    A   teacher  should  be  able  to  look  at  the  principal  and  say  do  you  have  an  extra   hundred  bucks  so  I  can  do  this  with  these  kids…  and  here’s  why  I  want  to  do   it  for  them.  I  need  a  thousand  dollars  to  buy  supplies  so  my  kids  can   experience  this…  or  I  can  take  them  on  a  field  trip.    They  started  the  school   year  by  announcing  there  was  no  money  for  buses  for  any  field  trips.    That   pretty  much  quashes  your  opportunity  for  field  trips.    You  can’t  ask  kids   where  seventy-­‐five  percent  of  them  are  on  free  lunch  and  just,  bring  in   money  to  pay  for  a  bus  ride.    It’s  not  right.           152   Mr.  Roberts  resorted,  as  many  teachers  do,  to  buying  materials  himself  in   order  to  complete  activities  such  as  building  kites  during  the  flight  unit  he   referenced  above.    He  spoke  often  about  not  having  materials  to  complete  labs  with   his  students  and  having  to  piecemeal  science  investigations  together  with  his  own   money  and  imagination.       When  I  first  started  interacting  with  Mr.  Roberts,  I  worried  that  his   propensity  to  cite  a  lack  of  resources  was  a  way  for  him  to  avoid  conversations   about  the  girls’  cases.    While  I  understood  that  a  lack  of  resources  was  a  real  issue   for  him,  I  was  initially  concerned  that  citing  resources  allowed  him  to  succinctly  end   all  conversations  regarding  the  possibilities  of  the  girls’  messages  for  his  science   classroom.    However,  I  later  realized  this  was  not  the  case.    His  focus  on  the  lack  of   resources  was  his  way  of  voicing  his  frustration  and  implicating  what  was   happening  in  his  science  classroom.    The  cases  the  girls  shared  with  him  and  what   he  found  powerful  in  those  cases  made  him  reflect  upon  what  was  missing  for  his   students  in  science  class  and  why  it  was  missing.  For  instance,  when  I  asked  him   during  our  third  professional  development  meeting  about  what  he  was  taking  away   from  Caitlyn’s  case,  he  remarked,  “It  really  makes  me  angry  that  I  don’t  have  the   resources  to  do  labs  the  way  I  should  do  them  …  I  think  that  that’s  where  my  kids   are  really  getting  screwed.”   Mr.  Roberts  saw  Caitlyn,  Hannah,  Maya  and  Nicole  using  technology  in  many   of  their  artifacts  to  share  rich  and  deep  understandings  of  science  and  how  it   connects  to  Great  Lakes  City.  By  talking  about  resources,  he  was  really  pointing  to  a   desire  to  see  his  students  engage  in  the  same  types  of  experiences.    The  institutional     153   narrative  of  resources  was  one  he  was  trying  to  see  ways  around  including  using  his   own  money  in  order  to  buy  supplies  and  calling  in  favors  from  people  in  the   community  so  his  students  could  experience  a  trip  to  the  planetarium.    However,  his   efforts  to  deal  with  the  lack  of  resources  also  left  him  frustrated  that  he  was  not  able   to  provide  rich  and  varied  science  experiences  for  his  students.   Societal/personal.    In  addition  to  institutional  narratives  around  resources,   Mr.  Roberts  also  worried  about  the  futures  of  Nicole,  Hannah,  Caitlyn  and  Maya.   Specifically,  he  worried  about  what  happens  when  the  conditions  that  allowed  for   their  success  are  no  longer  in  place.    In  our  final  meeting,  I  asked  the  teachers  if   there  was  anything  missing  from  the  cases  and  Mr.  Roberts  responded:         I  think  part,  and  it  is  not  what  is  missing,  I  think  part  of  what  underlies  all   that  you  are  doing  is  what  about  the  future  for  these  kids.    What  happens  to   the  little  girl  who  functions  well  in  a  group  but  as  an  individual  can  barely   look  you  straight  in  the  eye?  Or  what  happens  to  the  girl  who  gets  straight   A's,  but  she  doesn't  give  a  damn  about  what  she  is  studying?    What  happens   to  those  kids?  And  that  is  the  open-­‐ended  question  that  there  is  no  quick   answer  to.    Five  years  from  now  you  will  know,  but  five  years  from  now  you   will  probably  be  in  Las  Vegas  or  Seattle  or  Golden  Colorado  drinking  beer,   hell  I  don't  know.  That  is  one  of  the  problems  with  the  work  that  we  do;  we   don't  know  what  the  results  are  until  we  walk  into  the  grocery  store  and   some  kid  you  haven't  seen  in  years  grabs  you  by  the  shoulder.     Like  Mr.  Greene,  Mr.  Roberts  is  concerned  for  these  young  women  as  they   move  into  different  environments.    However,  his  concern  isn’t  that  they  will  lose   their  convictions  for  community  related  science  or  no  longer  want  to  leverage  their   strengths  to  collaboratively  take  on  environmental  issues  due  to  social  pressures.     Instead,  Mr.  Roberts  worries  how  these  new  scholarly  environments  they  find   themselves  in  will  respond  to  them  and  the  ways  of  knowing  and  doing  science  they   bring  with  them.  Science  is  a  male  dominated  field  that  often  aligns  with  normative     154   ways  of  knowing  and  doing  science.  In  a  sense,  he  is  asking  whether  bringing  their   informal  science  practices  into  his  classroom  will  set  these  young  women  up  for   failure  down  the  line.    This  isn’t  a  question  that  he  has  an  answer  for,  but  the   uncertainty  has  him  wondering  what  any  of  this  will  lead  to  when  we  see  these  girls   and  others  like  them  years  from  now.    He  implicates  both  of  us  in  this  question  as  he   acknowledges  that  I  most  likely  will  not  be  around  to  follow  these  girls  through  this   process,  just  as  he  is  not  able  to  follow  all  of  his  students  through  their  education.     His  worries  represent  his  personal  history  as  a  teacher  and  connect  back  to   the  success  stories  he  told  about  students  during  our  time  together.    He  mentioned,   ““I  know  I  don’t  reach  them  all,  but  that  one  keeps  me  going”  in  connection  with  the   student  he  saw  in  the  grocery  store  who  was  on  his  way  to  being  an  EMT.    While  he   told  that  story  as  a  success,  there  was  also  an  acknowledgement  that  he  didn’t  have   that  impact  on  many  others.  There  were  many  he  saw  at  the  grocery  store  that  he   didn’t  tell  me  about.    He  worries  what  the  stories  of  these  four  girls  as  well  as  all  the   students  that  enter  his  science  classroom,  will  end  up  being  five  years  in  the  future.     Salient  noticings.  Like  Mr.  Greene,  there  were  elements  of  the  girls’  cases   that  were  most  salient  to  Mr.  Roberts  in  the  sense  making  process.    He  spoke  of  the   girls’  ability  and  confidence  to  teach  others  about  the  science  they  were  learning.    He   also  spoke  often  of  strengths,  reflecting  upon  how  Hannah,  Caitlyn,  Maya  and  Nicole   leveraged  their  strengths  in  artifacts.    This  led  Mr.  Roberts  to  reflect  on  his  own   classroom  and  implicate  his  practice.  He  wondered  which  of  his  students  were   having  opportunities  to  use  their  skills  in  his  science  classroom.    As  you  may  recall,   he  mentioned,  “I  am  running  out  of  days”  in  connection  with  thinking  about  finding     155   the  strengths  in  kids  that  he  has  yet  to  uncover  throughout  the  year.  The   intersection  of  these  narratives  with  what  he  found  most  salient  influenced  how  he   made  meaning  of  potential  linkages  to  science  teaching  and  learning.     Mr.  Jones     Figure  8:  Mr.  Jones’  tensions   Institutional.  Mr.  Jones  was  generally  quiet  during  conversations  where  Mr.   Greene  and  Mr.  Roberts  were  talking  about  institutional  narratives  that  guide   practice.    He  did  talk  a  few  times  about  wishing  he  had  more  resources,  but  for  the   most  part  said  he  needed  time  to  build  understandings  of  the  curriculum.    It  wasn’t   that  he  didn’t  know  the  science,  it  was  the  transitional  nature  of  his  teaching   assignment  and  the  fact  that  he  did  not  begin  his  teaching  assignment  until  several   weeks  of  the  school  year  had  elapsed  that  made  him  hesitant.  This  was  evident   when  I  asked  what  constrained  him  from  implementing  lessons  where  students  get   to  experience  and  discover  science  in  the  way  Nicole  had  talked  about  in  her  case.   Mr.  Jones  responded:   That’s  a  good  question.    I  would  say  time.    Um,  a  lot  of  times,  um,  maybe   knowledge  of  the  curriculum  whether  it  be  new  curriculum  or  you  just  don’t   know  the  curriculum  all  that  well…  experience  with  the  curriculum.    I  think     156   another  thing  is  [pause]  I  don’t  want  to  use  class  size  as  a  crutch  but  it   definitely  does  play  into.    I  would  say  a  relationship  with  your  students.     More  towards  the  end  of…  the  middle…  maybe  the  second,  third  and  fourth   marking  period,  you  can  do  that  better.    It’s  hard  to  do  with  an  unknown   group  of  kids  at  the  very  beginning  of  the  school  year.    But  I  think  there’re   common  themes  with  kids.    It’s  not  like  our  kids  are  coming  from  hugely,   diverse  backgrounds.    They’re  coming  from  a  diverse  background  but  they’re   all  similar  socio-­‐economic  level.      They’re  all  the  same  age.    They  all  have   pretty  much  the  same  interests.    So  I  think  [pause)  I  think  the  biggest  thing   for  myself,  personally,  would  be  experience  with  the  curriculum  and  time  to   sit  down  and  really  figure  out  a  way  to  write  it  at  the  beginning.         Mr.  Jones  found  himself  teaching  sixth  grade  science  for  the  first  time  and   believes  that  has  been  his  biggest  hurdle  in  designing  science  experiences.    He  didn’t   have  time  to  become  completely  familiar  with  his  curriculum  and  the  materials  he   has  to  set  up  experiments  in  his  classroom.    He  offers  several  other  possible  reasons   but  then  seems  to  back  off  them  one  by  one  and  put  the  onus  on  himself.    He   mentions  class  size  and  a  diverse  population,  but  then  worries  if  he  is  using  these   ideas  as  a  crutch  or  if  they  are  even  accurate  interpretations  of  classroom  dynamics.     He  referenced  institutional  narratives  less  often  than  Mr.  Greene  and  Mr.  Roberts   during  professional  development  meetings  and  wondered  about  the  validity  of  the   power  these  narratives  hold  to  influence  practice.       The  first  time  we  met  together  over  there  at  the  Boys  and  Girls  Club,  I  kinda   got  the  feeling  it  was  like  [pause]  like  they  were,  um,  those  guys  were  kind  of   finding  a  lot  of  excuses  why  science  doesn’t  work  in  the  schools…  curriculum,   administration  and  things  like  that.    I  remember  at  one  point  saying…  I   haven’t  had  an  administrator  step  in  my  science  class  once  this  year     While  he  wondered  about  the  validity  of  these  statements  and  was  quiet   during  much  of  the  talk  focused  on  administration,  rigid  curriculum  and  the  role  of   assessment,  he  spoke  about  being  interested  in  their  perspectives  because,  “they   were  at  different  points  in  their  careers.”    Despite  not  seeing  the  same  institutional     157   narratives  in  his  classroom,  he  respected  Mr.  Greene  and  Mr.  Roberts  in  terms  of   their  experiences  in  the  classroom.    This  was  evident  when  he  talked  about  how   they  helped  him  see  the  strengths  in  Hannah  he  had  not  seen  himself.   Societal/personal.  However,  Mr.  Jones  had  a  different  reaction  when  talk   focused  on  different  societal  narratives  about  the  futures  of  these  girls.  When  asked   about  what  factors  influence  students  in  Great  Lakes  City,  he  began  talking  about   SES  before  shifting  gears  and  challenging  the  societal  narratives  he  believed  Mr.   Greene  placed  upon  these  girls  during  our  second  professional  development   meeting.     I  think  that  would  be  the  most  interesting  way  to  look  at  the  whole  situation   from  the  socio-­‐economic  standpoint  or  perspective.    Because  a  lot  of  times…   and  [sighs]  I’ve  heard  it.    I  think  we  talked  about  it.    I—I  can’t  remember  who   in  our  group  said  it  but  someone  said,  “There  needs  to  be  someone  to  dig  a   ditch.”    That  just  makes  me  cringe.    Do  you  remember  hearing  that?    Was  that   in  our  group?     Danny:    Yeah.     I  was  thinking  that’s  just…  to  have  that  kind  of  expectation  for  anybody  is   horrible.    Now,  I  mean  if  that  ends  up  happening…  whatever.    You  can  look  at   choices  that  led  to  that  kind  of  a  situation.    But  I  think  that  those  kinds  of  jobs   are  [pause]  not  what  I  see  in  the  future  of  any  of  my  students.    And  to  say   that…  for  me  to  hear  somebody  else  say  that…  a  colleague  of  mine…  it  really   makes  me  cringe  and  think.    Then  you  have  to  think  who  are  we  pointing  out   for  these  jobs?    And  most  of  the  time  that’s  the  lower  socioeconomic  kids  that   we’re  looking  at,  saying  that,  and  I  don’t  think  that’s  at  all  the  case.    I  think   that  any  of  these  students…  I  mean  I  can’t  imagine  Nicole  as  a  ditch  digger.     You  know.      Not  that…  I’m  not  saying  that  there’s  any  kind  of  [pause],  you   know  that’s  a  respectable  way  to  make  a  living,  but  I  just  can’t  see  her  doing   that.    She’s  got  so  much  more  to  offer  and  Maya  and  Hannah  are  the  same   way.  They  have  so  many  more  skills  that  would  lend  to  something  different.     So  to  limit  people  like  that…  I  think  that’s…  where  that  comment  came  from…   I  think  it  came  from  a  money  standpoint.    I  don’t  like  that.    So  I  think  that   that’s  more  than  the  gender  and  the  race.    It  might  have  been  the  only  thing   that  bugged  me  about  our  whole  thing  (PD  experience)  because…  I  can’t   remember.    I  don’t  think  it  was  (Mr.  Roberts)  that  said  it.    I  think  it  was  (Mr.   Greene)  and  he  said  it  three  or  four  times.    I  don’t  know.    I  think  that  day  I  got     158   real  quiet.    You  came  up  to  me  and  said,  “Are  you  more  comfortable  one-­‐on-­‐ one  or  in  a  group?”    I  just…  I  didn’t  know  how  to  respond  to  that.    It  made  me   feel  uneasy.  I  didn’t  appreciate  that  comment,  and  it  made  me  feel   uncomfortable  that  we’re  just  kind  of  sitting  there  talking  about  it.    And  he   would  just  be  able  to  throw  something  out  there  like  that.    I  don’t  know.    I   don’t  know  where  it  came  from,  but  it  was  obviously  a  socio-­‐economic  thing     Mr.  Jones  speaks  to  expectations  for  these  girls’  futures  based  on  them  being   from  lower  SES  backgrounds  and  where  they  live.  He  felt  that  being  poor  in  this  case   was  foregrounded  over  race  or  gender  in  terms  of  the  expectations  placed  upon   these  girls.  He  was  offended  by  Mr.  Greene’s  comments  about  the  social  efficiency   aspects  of  schooling  in  connection  to  kids  from  poor  backgrounds.    The  experience   brought  up  personal  memories  for  Mr.  Jones  of  being  tracked  in  high  school,  the   feeling  of  having  low  expectations  placed  upon  him  and  being  from  a  low  SES   background.  He  saw  himself  in  the  case,  but  it  became  clearer  for  him  when  he   perceived  Mr.  Greene  to  set  expectations  for  them  as  others  had  done  to  him.  It   made  him  uncomfortable  to  speak  about  these  girls,  who  we  saw  so  much  promise   for,  in  ways  that  marginalized  their  trajectories  due  to  being  poor.    The  conversation   reveals  how  his  own  experiences  as  a  student  and  a  person  growing  up  in  spaces   where  little  was  expected  of  him  matters  to  his  practice  with  kids  in  Great  Lakes   City.     Salient  noticings.  Although  Mr.  Jones  found  a  lot  of  powerful  messages  in   the  girls’  cases,  perhaps  most  salient  for  him  was  the  idea  that  they  were  using   science  to  make  a  difference  in  their  community.    He  spoke  about  taking  away   messages  from  these  girls  of,  “just  making  it  connect  to  their  (students)  lives  or  the   world  they  live  in.”    He  was  inspired  by  the  way  Nicole  “discovered”  science  and   then  used  her  knowledge  and  practices  to  impact  those  closest  to  her.  This  led  Mr.     159   Jones  to  think  about  the  ways  in  which  his  students  took  up  science  in  the   classroom.    He  worried  about  his  propensity  to  control  the  outcomes  of   investigations  in  his  classrooms  limited  the  types  of  connections  his  students  could   make  to  their  community,  or  which  cultural  practices  could  be  leveraged  in   classroom  spaces.    The  ways  in  which  Mr.  Jones  felt  and  made  sense  of  the  tensions   directly  influenced  his  eventual  attempts  at  reforming  his  classroom  practices.     The  Influences  on  Teacher  Learning     A  framing  aspect  of  this  study  centers  on  the  idea  of  flipping  the  direction  of   the  informal/formal  question  to  think  about  what  educators  working  in  schools   could  learn  from  an  individual’s  informal  science  experiences.    Framing  the  study   this  way  places  much  of  the  focus  on  teacher  learning.    In  particular,  in  this  study  the   focus  is  on  teachers  learning  from  youth  voice  and  experience.    So  what  have  we   learned  so  far?     The  HFRP  (Harvard  Family  Research  Project,  2009)  argues  informal  science   learning  provides,  “expanded  learning  opportunities”  that  go  beyond  the  content,   bringing  in  the  learners’  interests  and  relationships  built  with  peers  and  adults  as   they  investigate  science  related  ideas.    Similarly,  CAISE  (Center  for  the  Advancement   of  Informal  Science,  2010)  argues  these  types  of  opportunities,  “have  been  shown  to   spark  curiosity,  generate  questions,  and  lead  to  a  depth  of  understanding  and   commitment  in  ways  that  are  often  less  possible  when  the  same  material  is   encountered  in  books  or  on  screens”  (p.  11).    The  teachers  in  this  study  noticed   these  ideas  within  and  across  the  girls’  cases.    It  came  out  in  the  themes  they   identified  and  the  conversations  they  had  about  the  cases  and  the  different  ways     160   these  girls  participated  with  science.  Perhaps  more  importantly,  these  noticings  led   teachers  to  reflect  upon  the  types  of  experiences  their  students  where  having  with   science.  The  girls’  cases  provided  a  bridge  between  the  informal  and  formal  world   by  sharing  a  vision  of  what  science  that  matters  looks  like  as  well  as  communicating   hope  that  the  science  in  classrooms  could  emulate  these  experiences.  This  was   important  because  shifting  the  direction  of  the  question  required  shifting  the  power   dynamic  traditionally  found  in  schools.    Even  the  HFRP  (2009)  argues  the  most   powerful  informal  opportunities  are,  “continuous,  comprehensive  and   complimentary”  (p.  1)  with  school  science  experiences  leading  to  academic   achievement  and  preparation  for  future  citizenship.  Yet,  in  this  study,  the  teachers   were  asked  to  learn  from  the  girls  and  responded  by  actively  engaging  with  each   case  as  well  as  making  attempts  to  link  their  messages  to  classroom  practices.     I  believe  there  is  power  and  potential  in  the  ways  in  which  these  teachers   saw  the  girls’  cases  as  sources  of  teacher  learning.    However,  the  teachers’  also   revealed  that  teacher  learning  is  messy  and  influenced  by  many  factors.    Lortie   (1975)  argued  there  is  an  “apprenticeship  of  observation”  in  education  where   learning  is  influenced  by  the  prior  experiences  an  individual  has  in  schools.    While   the  teachers  in  this  study  reveal  that  there  are  narratives  connected  to  being  and   working  in  schools  at  play  here,  the  influences  over  their  meaning  making  is  more   holistic  than  simply  originating  from  participation  in  a  school.    Instead,  tensions  in   local  practice  (classrooms)  are  also  influenced  by  historically  and  culturally   constructed  personal  and  societal  narratives  (Holland  and  Lave,  2001).    These   competing  narratives  come  together  to  cause  tensions,  or  struggle,  for  these     161   teachers.  Lemke  (2001)  argues,  “our  individual  ways  of  living  and  making  meaning   are  different  according  not  only  to  which  communities  we  have  lived  in,  but  also  the   roles  we  chose  or  were  assigned  by  other  –  how  we  presented  ourselves  and  how   we  were  seen  and  treated  by  others”  (p.  297).  Each  of  these  teachers  brought,   shared  and  drew  upon  different  experiences  during  the  professional  development   meetings  that  influenced  what  they  noticed  as  well  as  the  ways  in  which  they  made   sense  of  the  girls’  cases.    These  teachers  reveal  the  complexity  of  teacher  learning  as   well  as  the  power  youth  voice  holds  to  help  teachers  reflect  upon  the  competing   narratives  that  guide  their  practice.     Next  Step     Although  there  was  no  expectation  placed  upon  these  teachers  for  taking   this  learning  to  their  classroom,  I  hoped  that  their  stories  would  end  in  that  space   where  a  teacher’s  work  with  and  for  his  or  her  students  takes  place.  Thus,  while  this   chapter  focused  on  teachers’  talk  about  the  link  between  the  girls’  cases  and   classroom  practice,  the  next  chapter  follows  teachers  into  the  classroom  to  examine   their  actions.                                   162   CHAPTER  FIVE   “LOOKING  THROUGH  THE  KIDS  PERSPECTIVES  MADE  ME  CHANGE.”   The  final  phase  of  this  study  investigated  whether  the  three  participating   teachers  drew  upon  interpretations  of  the  girls’  cases  in  their  classroom  practices.     It  should  be  noted,  reforming  their  science  teaching  practices  was  not  an   expectation  linked  to  participation  in  this  study.    When  designing  the  professional   development  program,  I  resisted  asking  teachers  to  implement  lessons  or  activities   due  to  a  belief  this  request  would  not  reveal  whether  they  were  actually  linking   what  they  found  powerful  in  the  girls’  cases  with  their  classroom  practice  or  simply   fulfilling  another  requirement  bestowed  upon  them.  However,  as  we  came  together   to  talk  about  the  girls’  cases  of  informal  science  learning,  I  wondered  what  this   meant  for  their  practice  as  science  teachers.    Would  these  teachers  do  anything  with   what  they  noticed  and  made  meaning  of  in  the  girls’  messages  and  artifacts?    Or  was   this  just  talk  about  other  kids,  other  teachers  and  other  schools?     This  chapter  examines  the  science  learning  experiences  these  three  teachers   designed  and  carried  out  in  their  classrooms  during  and  after  the  professional   development  meetings.  The  chapter  is  guided  by  the  questions:  How  do  teachers   draw  upon  interpretations  of  the  girls’  stories  in  their  classroom  practices?  What   role  does  instructional  context  play  in  implementing  science  learning  experiences?   In  this  chapter,  I  argue:   1) All  three  teachers  took  different  pathways  when  implementing  science   learning  experiences  based  upon  the  meaning  they  made  of  the  girls’     163   informal  science  learning  cases  and  its  link  to  classroom  practices   resulting  in  varied  learning  experiences  for  their  students.       2) The  pathways  to  implementation  were  influenced  by  how  each  teacher   made  sense  of  the  tensions  between  the  institutional  narratives  and   meaning  making  from  the  girls’  cases  each  found  most  salient.   3) Student  and  teacher  experiences  during  implementation  were  linked  to   how  the  tensions  were  encountered  and  resolved  in  each  classroom.       I  use  the  term  “pathways”  in  respect  to  teacher  actions  to  focus  attention  on   the  process  of  making  meaning  of  the  tensions  that  emerge  through  examination  of   the  girls’  cases,  its  link  to  their  science  teaching  practices  and  eventual   implementation  in  their  science  classrooms.    Each  teacher  found  different  aspects  of   the  narratives  most  salient  and  they  made  different  meanings,  thus  took  different   pathways  to  implementation.       In  what  follows,  I  describe  the  classroom  implementations  for  each  of  these   three  teachers.    Following  each  description,  I  build  upon  findings  from  the  previous   chapter  by  linking  classroom  implementations  back  to  noticings  and  tensions  that   emerged  during  the  meaning  making  process.    Finally,  I  reflect  upon  teacher   learning,  aspects  of  teacher  learning  evident  through  implementation  of  lessons  as   well  as  reflection  on  participating  in  this  professional  development  experience.       Mr.  Greene:  Interest  Activities   This  section  investigates  the  actions  taken  by  Mr.  Greene  and  his  students  in   his  eighth  grade  science  classroom  during  the  spring  of  2012.    I  argue  that  Mr.   Greene  drew  upon  what  he  found  powerful  in  the  girls’  cases  and  implemented     164   these  ideas  in  his  classroom  practices  by  adding  interest  activities  to  break  up  the   expected  routine  of  science  learning  in  the  classroom.    However,  this   implementation  was  influenced  by  the  institutional  and  historical  narratives  he   brought  to  making  sense  of  how  the  girl’s  cases  mattered  to  his  classroom  context.       In  particular,  this  section  examines  how  Mr.  Greene  drew  upon  the  meaning   he  made  of  the  girls  cases  when  designing  an  inventions  project  for  his  classroom.     He  noticed  the  girls  were  active  participants  with  science  through  their  cases.     Active  participation  included  the  ability  to  apply  science  to  their  lives,  leverage   multiple  areas  of  expertise  in  science  investigations  and  be  motivated  to  make  a   difference  in  their  community.    However,  as  discussed  in  the  previous  chapter,   classroom  implementation  was  influenced  for  Mr.  Greene  by  perceived   administrative  pressures  regarding  curriculum  coverage  and  student  assessment  as   well  as  his  belief  in  preparing  students  for  future  learning  experiences.   The  Inventions  Project    Shortly  after  our  first  professional  development  meeting,  Mr.  Greene   approached  me  about  implementing  a  science  fair  project  in  his  classroom.    He   explained  that  he  was  concerned  students  at  Bayside  School  for  the  Performing  Arts   did  not  have  the  opportunity  to  participate  in  science  fair  activities  that  would  allow   them  to  share  what  they  know  and  were  curious  about.    After  speaking  with  him   about  the  idea  several  times,  I  came  to  understand  that  science  fair  for  Mr.  Greene   meant  that  he  wanted  his  students  to  engage  in  the  science  and  engineering   practices  (NGSS,  2013)  by  carrying  out  investigations  centered  on  the  creation  of   new  knowledge  and  then  sharing  the  findings  with  a  critical  audience.      However,     165   this  was  not  something  he  had  planned  and  implemented  before  and  asked  if  I  was   willing  to  help.     Mr.  Greene  and  I  met  several  times  to  brainstorm  ideas  for  the  project.    We   wanted  to  avoid  a  scattered  collection  of  “traditional  science  fair  projects”  and   decided  a  theme  or  overarching  idea  might  help  his  students  avoid  making  a  baking   soda  volcano  or  tornado  in  a  bottle.    This  was  important  because  Mr.  Greene   expressed  that  he  wanted  his  students  to  see  that  science  extended  beyond  the  walls   of  the  classroom.    Thus,  he  and  I  felt  contextualizing  these  projects  or  situating  them   in  Great  Lakes  City  or  the  lives  of  his  students  would  help  to  avoid  this  becoming   another  project  for  these  students  to  complete.    Mr.  Greene  also  expressed  that  he   wanted  the  projects  to  be  the  result  of  scientifically  rigorous  investigations.    He   believed  this  could  be  accomplished  through  asking  students  be  transparent  about   their  procedures  as  well  as  guiding  them  through  the  process  of  designing  and   implementing  their  study.    He  built  into  the  project  a  proposal  stage  where  students   presented  initial  ideas,  questions  or  findings  to  the  class  for  peer  review.    This   opened  space  for  a  greater  number  of  voices  to  provide  feedback  on  each  project   before  final  presentation.      After  meeting  and  discussing  various  ideas,  Mr.  Greene  decided  to   implement  an  inventions  project  that  asked  his  students  to  come  up  with  an  idea   that  addressed  a  question,  issue  or  need  they  felt  was  important  to  them  and/or   others  in  or  around  their  community.    The  class  was  not  necessarily  studying   inventors  or  inventions  at  the  time,  but  Mr.  Greene  believed  the  project  would  help   develop  scientific  practices,  increase  his  students’  interest  in  science  through     166   engagement  with  authentic  investigations  and  help  them  see  that  science  extended   beyond  the  walls  of  the  classroom  by  asking  them  to  extend  an  aspect  of  science  into   the  community.  Although  not  necessarily  on  the  his  radar  at  the  time,  his  goals   aligned  with  STEM  related  goals  laid  out  in  the  Next  Generation  Science  Standards   (2013)  in  terms  of  having  students  participate  with  engineering  practices  through   designing  and  later  building  prototypes  of  their  inventions.       Mr.  Greene’s  goals  also  spoke  to  opening  space  for  students  to  bring  different   cultural  practices  to  science  investigations.  As  you  might  remember  from  the   previous  chapter,  Mr.  Greene  worried  about  taking  the  “soul  out  of  learning”   through  normative  measures  and  authoritarian  teaching  practices.    He  also  spoke   about  Hannah  finding  success  when  leveraging  her  strengths  through  being,   “allowed  to  use  alternative  means  or  alternative  intelligences  to  share  what  she   does  know.”    These  alternative  means,  intelligences  and  strengths  are  the  valued   cultural  practices  the  girls  bring  to  science  informed  by  their  sense  of  place  and   experience  with  informal  science  learning.  Each  of  the  girls  brought  with  them   cultural  practices  through  their  engagement  of  science  in  and  with  the  community.     Mr.  Greene  believed  the  girls’  cultural  practices  enriched  their  investigations  by   broadening  the  scope  through  which  they  conceptualized  and  evaluated  the  world   in  ways  that  focused  on  rigorous  meaning  making  of  local  phenomenon.      He  hoped   his  students  would  also  be  able  to  draw  upon  their  cultural  practices  through   rigorous  investigation  of  how  science  related  to  an  issue  or  topic  connected  to  their   lives  or  the  lives  of  those  around  them.       167   Mr.  Greene  asked  that  I  be  involved  through  introducing  the  project  and   framing  it  as  a  partnership  between  Bayside  School  and  the  local  university.    My   involvement  was  another  signal  that  this  project  reached  beyond  the  classroom  by   providing  students  with  an  additional  audience  to  share  ideas  as  well  as  a  “model”  of   someone  who  was  participating  with  science  in  their  community.    I  presented  the   parameters  of  the  project  to  both  of  his  science  classes  in  the  early  spring  of  2012.     The  students  were  asked  to  address  a  question  or  issue  they  are  responding  to,   design  an  investigation  to  gather  multiple  sources  of  data  or  evidence  and   communicate  findings  to  an  audience  in  ways  that  help  them  understand  why  the   invention  is  important.  Mr.  Greene  added  that  students  would  be  expected  to  turn  in   a  poster  board  outlining  the  key  features  of  the  invention,  a  three-­‐dimensional   mockup  of  the  invention  and  a  written  report  addressing  the  ideas  I  had  gone  over   with  them.       A  few  days  after  the  project  was  introduced,  I  returned  to  Mr.  Greene’s   classroom  to  hear  his  students’  proposals  for  their  inventions  project.    As  I  entered,  I   noticed  the  school  principal  sitting  in  one  of  the  corners  of  the  room  writing   something  on  a  yellow  pad  of  paper.    One  by  one,  Mr.  Greene  asked  his  students  to   come  to  the  center  of  the  room  to  share  their  invention  proposal  with  the  class  and   get  feedback  on  their  ideas.    The  students  talked  about  their  inventions  idea,  what   types  of  data  they  would  gather  and  why  this  idea  was  important  for  people  to   consider.    After  each  presentation,  Mr.  Greene  asked  questions  about  connections  to   relevant  science  concepts  or  practices,  gave  students  suggestions  of  science  ideas   they  might  want  to  consider  and  reminded  students  what  they  needed  to  complete     168   before  the  due  date.    Next,  Mr.  Greene  provided  an  opportunity  for  me  to  ask   questions  by  verbally  recognizing  or  calling  on  me.  Finally,  Mr.  Green  opened  space   for  students  in  the  classroom  to  ask  questions  or  make  comments.  After  a  few   presentations,  the  school  principal  took  the  chance  to  enter  the  conversation  and   ask  questions  or  make  comments  as  well.   For  example,  the  first  presenter  discussed  an  idea  for  a  backpack  that  glows   in  the  dark  for  safe  passage  home.    The  young  woman  explained  that  she  wanted  to   make  kids  safe,  so  they  wouldn’t  get  hit  by  cars  that  couldn’t  see  them  when  they   were  walking  home  after  dark.    When  she  had  completed  the  presentation,  Mr.   Greene  talked  about  what  he  believed  the  merits  of  the  idea  were  and  told  a  story   about  a  child  he  knew  who  was  injured  in  the  same  way  the  girl  had  described  in  her   presentation.  Next  he  asked  about  the  materials  needed  to  build  the  prototype,  the   inventions  connection  to  areas  of  chemistry  and  sources  of  data  such  as  how  often   kids  were  walking  home  in  the  dark.    I  asked  her  if  a  car  would  be  the  only  danger   from  which  she  wanted  to  protect  people.  She  mentioned  providing  protection  for   someone  under  attack  by  installing  an  alarm  sound  that  would  go  off  if  someone   were  coming  after  you.  This  led  to  discussion  from  peers  about  who  they  might  need   protection  from  revealing  insight  into  how  they  navigate  Great  Lakes  City.    Finally,   peers  took  the  opportunity  to  ask  additional  questions  such  as  what  colors  the   backpack  would  come  in  and  how  much  it  would  cost.     Other  students  followed  by  sharing  proposals  for  inventions  such  as  an   elevator  system  that  uses  ballast  tank  technology  for  power,  a  power  plant  that  used   metal  roots  to  extract  nutrients  from  the  soil  as  an  energy  source,  a  car  that  ran  on     169   magnets  instead  of  gasoline,  a  machine  that  could  change  your  eye  color,  robotic   human  organs,  a  phone  that  could  project  3-­‐D  images  and  a  windmill  that  could   generate  wind,  solar  and  hydro  power.    The  students  showed  enthusiasm  and   creativity  when  presenting  their  proposals.    Some  students  were  marketing  a   product  for  people  to  buy  because  they  thought  it  responded  to  a  need.  Other   students  were  responding  to  social  or  environmental  needs  such  as  the  students   who  had  a  car  on  magnets  or  the  power  plant  with  metal  roots  who  both  explained   their  idea  as  one  that  would  improve  environmental  conditions  locally  as  well  as   around  the  world.         The  following  week  I  returned  to  class  to  see  the  final  presentations  and   found  the  school  principal  had  also  returned.    However,  only  six  of  the  twenty-­‐four   students  presented  their  final  project  that  day.    Mr.  Greene  explained  that  he  was   not  allowing  students  to  present  if  all  three  aspects  (poster,  3D  representation,  and   written  report)  were  not  completed  and  turned  in.    Although  most  of  the  students   had  completed  the  poster  and  were  ready  to  talk  about  the  three-­‐dimensional   mockup  of  the  invention,  most  had  not  completed  the  written  report  aspect  of  the   assignment.    While  it  is  significant  that  only  six  of  the  twenty-­‐four  presented  that   day,  the  other  students’  projects  did  not  go  without  recognition.    Mr.  Greene   displayed  their  posters  on  the  walls  and  left  their  three-­‐dimensional  mockups  on   tables  in  a  corner  of  the  room  for  all  to  see.    Their  efforts  were  recognized  through   this  display  of  their  work,  and  as  the  class  moved  onto  their  next  task  that  day,   students  were  still  talking  to  each  other  about  the  different  inventions  and  how  they   might  be  improved  or  built  upon.         170   At  the  end  of  the  class  that  day,  Mr.  Greene  announced  to  the  class  that  they   would  be  doing  a  science  project  each  week  and  revealed  upcoming  plans  for  a   paper  airplane  contest  and  an  egg  drop.  As  a  physical  science  class,  the  students   would  be  studying  concepts  connected  to  motion  through  these  and  other  science   projects.    The  introduction  of  the  paper  airplane  was  accompanied  by  a  brief   overview  of  concepts  students  would  be  exposed  to  such  as  force,  acceleration,   pressure  and  drag.    This  brief  introduction  was  followed  by  a  class  discussion  that   evolved  into  a  debate  about  the  materials  the  students  would  be  allowed  to  use  for   the  paper  airplane.    The  students  had  begun  thinking  about  ways  to  influence  the   flight  of  their  planes  such  as  adding  weight  with  paper  clips  and  using  different   types  of  paper.  Mr.  Greene  began  the  process  of  connected  their  airplane  design   plans  with  the  science  concepts  previously  introduced.    The  students  were  filled   with  excitement  once  again  -­‐  the  type  of  excitement  I  had  observed  during  the   presentations  of  invention  proposals.  Mr.  Greene  ended  this  discussion  by  telling  the   class  they  would  need  to  complete  a  three-­‐paragraph  write-­‐up  about  their  airplane   design  before  they  built  them  and  competed  with  another  classroom.    The  students   let  out  a  collective  groan.       Linking  Back  to  Noticing/Meaning  Making    Mr.  Greene  noticed  the  girls’  ability  to  apply  science  to  their  lives,  leverage   strengths  and  expertise  in  science  investigations  and  be  motivated  to  make  a   difference  in  their  community  when  viewing  their  cases.    When  asked  about  what   resonated  with  him  about  the  girls’  cases  in  an  interview  held  after  the  professional   development  meetings,  he  said:       171   I  think  something  that  stuck  with  me  is  the  need  for  project  based  creations   and  project  based  things  where  its  just  not  a  written  assignment  or  its  not   just  reading  text  and  moving  on  to  the  standardized  test.    When  the  kids  did   their  inventions,  I  thought  some  of  them  became  very  creative  and  there   were  some  very  good  ideas  that  some  of  the  kids  threw  out.    It  inspires  kids.     The  inventions  project  was  designed  with  the  goals  to  offer  students  space  to   use  their  creativity,  leverage  their  expertise  and  connect  science  with  their  lives  or   perceived  needs  of  the  community.   Mr.  Greene  expressed  a  desire  to  increase  his  students’  interest  and   participation  in  science  while  helping  them  develop  scientific  ways  of  thinking  and   investigating  phenomena.  Once  again,  he  worried  how  power  dynamics  in   classrooms  with  the  teacher  being  the  authority  in  terms  of  knowledge  took  the   “soul  out  of  learning.”    While  he  made  this  statement  in  terms  of  all  teachers,  the   reflection  led  him  to  implicate  his  own  practice  and  notice  his  own  students’   participation  with  science.  He  also  wanted  to  help  them  see  that  science  was  all   around  them.    He  worried  that  his  students  thought  science  was  only  connected  to   experiences  they  were  having  in  a  science  classroom,  or  that  science  in  a  classroom   had  to  be  carried  out  a  certain  way.  He  spoke  about  his  concern  for  the  views  youth   hold  of  where  and  how  science  is  relevant  while  discussing  Nicole’s  case.  “Science   has  to  be  an  experiment  or  has  to  be  something  we  do  in  science  class  and  that  is  the   only  time  kids  understand  science.  They  don't  realize  that  science  is  the  snow  that   they  are  sliding  on.    They  learn  it  in  the  traditional  way.    Science  is  only  when  the   science  teacher  breaks  out  the  book.”  He  hoped  that  including  interest  activities   would  increase  his  students’  participation  with  science  and  expand  his  students’   notions  of  where  science  is  carried  out  by  asking  them  to  connect  it  to  the  world     172   around  them  as  he  saw  with  Nicole  and  how,  “she  is  making  an  application,  she  is   learning  and  she  is  trying  to  help  mom.”   In  many  ways,  Mr.  Greene  achieved  his  goals  through  implementation  of  the   inventions  project.    The  day  I  spent  in  his  classroom  as  students  were  presenting   their  proposals  was  one  in  which  students  were  enthusiastic  about  participating   with  science.    Question  and  answer  sessions  after  each  presentation  often  had  to  be   cut  short  so  that  every  student  would  have  a  chance  to  present.    As  students  left  the   class,  I  wrote  in  my  field  notes  that  they  were  still  talking  about  each  other’s   inventions  and  how  they  could  be  built  upon.    That  day,  the  project  expanded   outcomes  beyond  traditional  school  measures  and  allowed  space  for  students  to   bring  in  their  own  cultural  practices,  expertise,  and  perceptions  of  issues  or   understandings  about  how  their  inventions  might  impact  those  around  them.    For   example,  the  young  woman  who  presented  about  a  glow  in  the  dark  backpack  with   an  alarm  feature  system  for  safety  was  connecting  her  invention  with  an  issue  she   saw  in  her  community.  The  project  allowed  her  space  to  ask  a  question  she  saw  as   relevant  to  the  safety  of  those  around  her  and  use  creativity  and  science  to  address   it.       The  excitement  of  the  proposal  presentation  was  not  lost  on  Mr.  Greene.     After  class  he  expressed  how  well  he  thought  it  went  and  how  impressed  he  was   with  the  level  of  creativity  from  students  and  their  ability  to  connect  science  with   perceived  needs  of  the  community.    He  recognized  a  difference  in  the  level  of   participation  on  the  part  of  his  students  both  with  science  ideas  and  providing   critical  feedback  to  each  other.         173   Despite  some  of  the  difficulties  involved  in  students  completing  the   inventions  project,  Mr.  Greene  believed  these  types  of  projects  or  opportunities   were  important  for  his  students.    Returning  to  a  portion  of  his  quote  about  what   stuck  with  him  from  the  girls’  cases  allows  insight  into  this  belief:     I  think  something  that  stuck  with  me  is  the  need  for  project  based  creations   and  project  based  things  where  it  is  just  not  a  written  assignment  or  it  is  not   just  reading  text  and  moving  on  to  the  standardized  test.    When  the  kids  did   their  inventions,  I  thought  some  of  them  became  very  creative  and  there   were  some  very  good  ideas  that  some  of  the  kids  threw  out.    It  inspires  kids.     It  is  more  about  that  inspiration.  I  think  it  would  be  a  good  idea  to  create  a   glow  in  the  dark  backpack.       Mr.  Greene  saw  the  project  as  a  way  for  his  students  to  use  their  creativity   and  have  space  to  bring  in  what  they  were  interested  in  or  concerned  about.  The   project  asked  students  to  engage  in  the  type  of  engineering  and  science  practices   laid  out  in  the  NGSS  (2013).    Their  involvement  in  these  practices,  as  young,  mostly   minority  students  from  lower  SES  backgrounds,  is  significant  in  the  light  of  research   regarding  the  lack  of  participation  from  individuals  who  align  with  one  or  several  of   the  categorizations  (AIP  Statistical  Research  Center,  2012;  Gibbon,  2011;  National   Center  for  Educational  Statistics,  2008-­‐2009).    The  importance  of  these  types  of   activities  is  tied  to  how  students  participate  or  are  inspired  to  participate  with   science  for  Mr.  Greene.  He  believes  his  students  are  inspired  by  the  opportunity  to   connect  science  with  where  they  live,  and  he  refers  to  the  young  woman  with  the   backpack  invention  as  a  powerful  example  of  how  this  project  was  meaningful  to   many  of  his  students.    Having  his  students  complete  the  project  reminded  Mr.   Greene  that  he  believes,  “it  is  more  about  the  inspiration”  for  his  students  than  “a   written  assignment”  or  “standardized  test.”       174   The  inspiration  is  not  only  tied  to  participation  for  his  students,  but  also  with   the  idea  of  being  able  to  shape  the  outcomes  of  the  investigations.    The  inventions   project  allowed  space  for  science  to  be  relevant  in  Great  Lakes  City  and  for  students’   ideas  to  be  valued  by  their  peers,  teacher,  principal  and  someone  from  the   university  in  ways  that  standardized  tests  and  the  established  routine  of  his  science   class  does  not.    Mr.  Greene  realizes  that  the  invention  project  was  meaningful  for  his   students  due  to  the  spaces  it  created  for  them  to  leverage  their  strengths  or  what   they  know  to  be  creative  in  order  to  address  something  they  see  facing  their  local   community  or  communities  around  the  country.  Although  he  had  specific  outcomes   in  mind  (poster,  three-­‐dimensional  representation  and  a  paper),  his  students  also   constructed  their  own  outcomes  through  participation  in  this  project  such  as   bringing  their  cultural  practices  to  bear  on  scientific  investigations.    Their  peers  and   Mr.  Greene  recognized  these  outcomes  by  participating  in  the  presentations  of  their   proposals  as  well  as  displaying  and  examining  their  posters  and  three-­‐dimensional   artifacts  around  the  classroom  for  weeks  after  the  project  was  completed.    Mr.   Greene’s  reflections  reveal  how  expanding  outcomes  leads  to  meaningful  learning   for  his  students  because  they  have  a  voice  in  shaping  the  outcomes.     Examining  the  Tensions    Mr.  Greene  encountered  tensions  from  institutional,  societal  and  personal   narratives  when  implementing  interest  activities  into  his  classroom.    First,   administrative  pressures  influenced  his  beliefs  about  the  need  to  cover  his   curriculum  and  hold  individual  students  accountable.    Second,  Mr.  Greene  drew   upon  institutional,  societal  and  personal  narratives  regarding  his  perceived  role  in     175   the  classroom  to  teach  responsibility  and  provide  access  to  science  models  in  order   to  prepare  students  for  future  success.         Administrative  pressures.  Mr.  Greene  worried  about  the  institutional   narrative  connected  to  the  lack  of  administrative  support  for  changes  in  classroom   practices,  especially  when  those  changes  deviated  from  the  intended  curriculum  or   individualized  assessment  of  students.    He  often  mentioned  feeling  constrained  by   the  ways  in  which  his  administrative  team  and  other  administrators  working  in   Great  Lakes  School  District  interpreted  the  goals  of  the  science  curriculum  and  how   they  saw  kids  “as  MEAP  scores.”  For  Mr.  Greene,  the  administrative  institutional   narrative  resulted  in  two  related  pressures,  covering  the  curriculum  and  assessing   students  on  completion  and  individual  competencies.     In  terms  of  the  curriculum,  Mr.  Greene  argued,  “we  have  a  curriculum  that  is   set  and  fixed  and  it  is  that  brick  in  the  wall  and  it  is  part  of  that  structure.”    Mr.   Greene’s  belief  in  the  rigidness  of  the  curriculum  resulted  in  the  inventions  project   being  mostly  an  additive  element  to  science  class  rather  than  an  activity  integrated   into  the  daily  activities  of  teaching  and  learning  of  science.    Students  were  expected   to  complete  the  project  largely  outside  of  school  as  most  class  periods  were  still  run   in  a  similar  fashion  to  the  ways  in  which  it  was  before  interest  activities  were   introduced.  Although,  Mr.  Greene  did  create  space  for  presentations  of  both   proposals  and  final  projects  to  receive  peer  and  teacher  feedback,  he  did  not  feel  he   could  carve  out  more  time  for  students  to  work  on  their  projects  in  class  due  to   perceived  obligations  to  get  through  the  intended  curriculum.         176     While  the  rigid  curriculum  narrative  was  very  real  for  Mr.  Greene,  he   essentially  challenged  that  narrative  through  inserting  the  project  into  his   classroom.    The  inventions  project  was  something  he  felt  students  needed,  and   possibly  more  importantly,  wanted.    While  he  didn’t  feel  he  could  give  a  great  deal  of   class  time  to  the  project,  the  time  he  did  give  allowed  for  his  students’  ideas  to  be   shared,  valued  and  peer  reviewed.    In  these  moments,  the  routine  of  his  classroom   and  of  the  curriculum  was  disrupted  through  the  implementation  of  this  project.       In  addition  to  the  curriculum,  Mr.  Greene  believed  holding  individual   students  accountable  was  part  of  his  job  as  a  teacher  and  was  expected  of  him  by   school  administrators.    His  students  were  assessed  on  the  basis  of  completing  three   tasks  that  could  be  physically  turned  in,  examined  and  assigned  a  grade.  In  some   ways,  this  was  Mr.  Greene’s  way  of  applying  rigor  to  a  project  that  was  based  around   creativity  and  wonder.    Coming  up  with  the  idea  and  presenting  inventions  to  their   peers  created  interest,  but  understanding  was  to  be  measured  through  more   traditional  measures  that  align  with  the  ways  in  which  he  interprets  administrators’   understandings  of  the  goals  of  school.         The  role  of  the  teacher.  In  connection  to  a  belief  in  assessing  students   individually,  Mr.  Greene  exhibited  a  belief  that  his  role  as  the  teacher  was  to  ensure   students  were  learning  responsibility  in  order  to  be  prepared  for  future   experiences.  Students  who  had  not  completed  all  three  components  of  the  project   were  not  allowed  to  present  the  final  version  of  their  inventions.  The  first  line  of   assessment  was  completion.  Many  of  them  had  one  or  more  components  completed   and  expressed  the  desire  to  present  what  they  had  finished.  In  his  view,  if  his     177   students  were  not  responsible  enough  to  get  it  done  on  time  they  were  not  going  to   be  rewarded  by  being  able  to  share  what  they  completed  with  the  rest  of  the  class.     While  he  did  value  their  work  by  displaying  it,  he  did  not  budge  on  letting  students   present  final  presentations  unless  all  three  aspects  were  completed.   Through  this,  he  was  speaking  to  societal  and  personal  narratives  about   preparing  his  students  for  future  success  as  discussed  in  the  previous  chapter.     Being  responsible  for  completing  what  was  assigned  was  something  that  Mr.  Greene   believes  will  be  expected  of  them  next  year  and  beyond.  It  is  part  of  being  a  good   student.  It  is  part  of  being  a  community  member.  He  worried  about  youth  from   Great  Lakes  City  that  are  black  or  poor  or  fit  into  other  marginalized  categories  not   being  exposed  to  lessons  on  what  it  means  to  be  responsible.    Thus,  it  was  part  of   Mr.  Greene’s  role  to  help  his  students  understand  the  expectations  that  would  be   placed  upon  them  as  they  continued  through  their  educations  and  lives.     Finally,  Mr.  Greene  took  the  opportunity  to  speak  back  to  societal  narratives   about  students  from  lower  SES  backgrounds  having  access  to  professionals  by   asking  me  to  not  only  be  part  of  the  planning  process,  but  also  the  implementation   of  project.    Although  my  personal  experiences  and  background  are  very  different   from  the  students  in  his  classroom,  he  positioned  me  as  someone  “important”  from   a  large  nearby  university  who  was  interested  in  their  work.    In  fact,  the  hand  out   given  to  students  to  introduce  the  project  stated  that  the  university  and  school,   “have  come  together  to  showcase  your  ideas,  talents  and  ability  to  connect  science   with  your  life  outside  of  school”.    Implicitly,  my  role  was  to  show  these  students  that     178   others  were  interested  in  what  they  had  to  offer  and  help  them  see  that  science  in   Great  Lakes  City  mattered  outside  of  the  classroom  walls.         Teacher  learning.  Through  implementation  of  interest  activities  and   participation  in  professional  development  meetings,  Mr.  Greene  points  to  areas  of   teacher  learning  resulting  from  this  experience.  First,  the  experience  led  Mr.  Greene   to  think  about  the  focus  of  his  science  classroom  practices.    I  return  to  a  transcript   from  our  second  conversation,  after  the  invention  projects  had  been  presented,  the   professional  development  group  was  discussing  opportunities  for  Hannah  to  be   successful  inside  a  traditional  classroom:       I  think  that  is  one  of  the  sins  we  suffer  as  teachers  is  that  we  allow  the  system   to  continue  to  go  down  the  railroad  tracks  knowing  that  is  only  going  to  help   x  percentage  on  that  bell  curve  and  it  is  definitely  going  to  hurt  more  kids  on   the  opposite  end  …  It’s  like,  children  naturally  learn,  maybe  we  need  to  listen   to  what  they  want  to  learn.    Their  (case  girls)  redefining  science  and  putting   it  in  their  own  terms  might  be  a  call  towards  that.    It  shouldn’t  just  be  about   the  textbook.    Maybe  it  should  be  about  the  paper  airplane  or  an  egg  drop  or   an  experiment  where  they  get  to  make  a  mess  and  see  things  in  action.    I   don’t  know.  We  take  the  soul  out  of  learning.    We  take  the  soul  out  of   learning.    It  should  be  the  easiest  thing  to  teach  a  child.     Mr.  Greene  implicates  himself  as  well  as  many  others  in  the  profession.  He  points  to   his  role  in  taking  the  fun,  the  inspiration  and  the  “soul”  out  of  learning.    The  girls’   cases,  as  well  as  his  own  students,  have  led  him  to  reflect  on  what  is  important  in  the   classroom  and  whose  voice  should  matter.    The  statement  starts  with  an   acknowledgement  that  the  system  drives  what  happens  in  classrooms  and  who  is   and  is  not  successful.    However,  he  is  conflicted  about  the  influences  on  his   classroom  practices  and  where  his  students’  voices  fall  into  that  equation.    He  is  still   dealing  with  the  tension  between  the  institutional  narratives  that  influence  his   practice  and  the  personal  narratives  he  now  brings  of  student  participation  (or  lack     179   of  participation)  with  school  science.    However,  he  is  now  reconsidering  what   matters  or  more  importantly,  who  matters  to  his  decisions  around  science  teaching   and  learning.   He  responds  to  this  tension  by  making  space  in  his  classroom  for  students  to   leverage  their  cultural  practices  through  involvement  of  community  related  science.     He  connects  his  actions  in  designing  learning  experiences  with  the  ways  in  which   youth  participate  with  science  through  the  inventions  project.    When  reflecting  on   what  he  took  from  this  experience  in  our  final  interview,  he  noted,  “you  need  to   teach  people  from  where  they  are  not  just  put  an  artificial  curriculum  on  them.”    Mr.   Greene  is  beginning  to  see  the  power  of  opening  spaces  for  youth  to  bring  cultural   practices  to  bear  on  science  investigations  instead  of  asking  them  to  “conform  to   authoritative  knowledge  and  scientific  discourse  that  are  relevant  to  research   scientists”  (Lee  &  Roth,  2003,  p.  404).     Additionally,  in  our  final  interview,  he  revealed  a  shift  in  the  way  he  thought   about  his  students’  perceptions  of  the  boundaries  of  science.    As  you  may  remember,   during  professional  development  meetings  he  spoke  about  the  narrow  conceptions   students  had  of  science.    During  our  final  interview,  he  stated:   Kids  are  always  doing  science  and  experimenting,  but  sometimes  they  don’t   have  the  terminology  for  it.    I  think  it  is  more  important  that  the  process  goes   on  than  we  have  a  product  where  the  kid  knows  the  vocabulary.    Vocabulary   is  good  to  know,  especially  when  the  kid  wants  to  articulate  themselves,  but   the  kid  has  to  understand  the  concept  first     His  shift  is  in  the  way  he  conceptualizes  students  understanding  and   participation  with  science.    He  reveals  a  belief  that  “kids  are  always  doing  science”   even  if  they  name  it  something  else  than  what  is  listed  in  the  back  of  a  science  book.       180   This  is  a  contrast  to  the  idea  that  students  don’t  realize  science  is  a  part  of  lives   outside  of  schools.    Here  the  implication  is  on  schools,  instead  of  just  the  students.     He  responds  by  beginning  to  share  authority  and  opening  spaces  for  youth  to   participate  with  and  gain  valuable  science  and  engineering  practices.    Although   teaching  his  student  to  be  responsible  adults  is  still  a  vital  aspect  of  his  practice,  he   is  beginning  to  understand  that  participating  with  science  is  also  a  vital  aspect  of   their  futures.       Second,  challenging  narratives  about  the  rigid  curriculum  with  his  principal   in  the  room  led  Mr.  Greene  to  reflect  upon  the  influence  of  this  institutional   narrative  over  his  classroom  practice.    During  the  second  professional  development   meeting,  when  talking  about  the  freedom  they  feel  as  teachers  to  shape  curriculum,   Mr.  Greene  said,  “You  know  what,  we  are  throwing  airplanes  and  doing  a  science   project  and  next  week  I  am  talking  about  doing  an  egg  drop.  And  they   (administration)  are  in  my  classroom  watching  me  do  this  because  of  other  issues   and  no  one  said  anything.”    The  experience  of  having  administration  in  his   classroom  led  him  to  reflect  on  his  interpretation  of  their  view  of  the  intended   curriculum  and  whether  his  classroom  practices  were  as  limited  as  he  feared.  He   referred  to  it  as  the  “myth  of  accountability”.    At  least  in  this  case  with  this  principal,   the  intended  goals  of  science  learning  in  classroom  spaces  is  not  simply  to  see   students  as  test  scores,  but  to  also  see  students  participate  with  science  knowledge   and  practices.   Mr.  Roberts:  Space  to  Leverage  Student  Strengths?     181     This  section  examines  the  actions  taken  by  Mr.  Roberts  and  his  students  in   their  7th  grade  science  classroom  during  the  spring  of  2012.    I  argue  Mr.  Roberts   made  efforts  to  shift  classroom  practices  to  include  more  student  voice  and  allow   students  to  leverage  their  strengths/expertise  based  upon  the  meaning  he  made   during  professional  development  meetings.    However,  the  classroom   implementation  was  influenced  by  institutional  narratives  regarding  Mr.  Roberts’   beliefs  about  the  lack  of  needed  resources  on  learning  experiences  as  well  as  how  he   saw  his  role  as  the  teacher  in  the  classroom  to  support  students  through  leveraging   their  strengths.    The  way  in  which  he  made  sense  of  the  tensions  and  his   understandings  of  implementing  youth  voice  into  the  classroom  led  to  a  lack  of   support  for  students,  resulting  in  youth  being  unsure  of  what  choices  they  had  when   completing  the  project  and  which  of  their  strengths  might  be  valued.  In  this  section,   I  describe  how  Mr.  Roberts  tried  to  bring  youth  voice  into  his  classroom  through   implementing  a  choice  project.       Choice  Project   As  you  may  remember  from  the  previous  chapter,  Mr.  Roberts  worried   about  his  abilities  to  discover  the  strengths  in  his  students  and  what  it  meant  when   student  capabilities  went  unnoticed.    This  noticing  was  most  salient  for  Mr.  Roberts   from  the  girls’  cases  and  opened  up  the  idea  the  girls  had  knowledge  and  skills  they   brought  to  science  investigations  that  served  to  shape  and  strengthen  the  messages   they  shared.    He  also  noticed  the  girls  were  committed  to  teaching  others  about   what  they  were  discovering.  These  noticings  led  Mr.  Roberts  to  reflect  during  our   professional  development  meetings  on  his  students  and  the  various  pathways  that     182   allow  them  to  showcase  what  they  can  bring  to  knowing  and  doing  science.    He   realized  his  classroom  was  a  space  where  some  students  had  room  to  leverage  their   strengths  and  others  had  a  more  difficult  time,  leaving  him  worrying  “I  am  running   out  of  days.    And  I  am  not  going  to  find  them  (students’  strengths),  I'm  afraid.      And   to  me,  that  is  my  failing.”    This  statement  speaks  both  to  the  importance  Mr.  Roberts   sees  in  opening  these  spaces  for  students  as  well  as  the  responsibility  he  places   upon  himself  for  making  it  happen.     I  begin  the  description  of  the  choice  project  implemented  in  Mr.  Roberts’   classroom  in  this  way  because  it  provides  insight  into  what  inspired  him  to  bring   youth  voice  into  his  classroom  teaching  practices.  The  changes  occurred   incrementally  as  he  opened  up  classroom  conversations  to  become  aware  of   students’  interests.    For  example,  he  inserted  more  lessons  on  recycling  and   renewable  resources  into  a  unit  on  natural  resources  based  on  his  students   expressing  a  desire  to  know  more  about  the  topic.    He  told  me  he  did  not  have  the   recycling,  reusing  and  reducing  aspect  as  prominent  in  the  unit  until  his  students   expressed  great  interest  through  both  words  and  actions.    They  brought  a  recycling   bin  into  the  classroom  and  encouraged  each  other  to  put  it  to  good  use.    They  spent   time  on  the  school  grounds  cleaning  up  what  had  left  behind,  which  led  them  to  put   posters  up  in  the  school  about  behaviors.  This  example  reveals  how  Mr.  Roberts   took  student  voice  into  consideration  during  this  unit.    The  interest  was  not  simply   to  go  outside  but  was  focused  on  taking  action  in  and  around  the  school.    This  is   evidenced  by  the  number  of  students  who  choose  recycling  as  their  topic  for  their   choice  project  described  below.     183     In  addition  to  shifting  focus  to  reflect  student  interests  during  lessons,  Mr.   Roberts  also  planned  a  student  project  as  the  culminating  assignment  for  the  year.       The  project  asked  students  to  choose  a  topic  they  had  studied  in  science  throughout   the  year  and  investigate  it  in  greater  depth  than  time  had  allowed  as  a  whole  class.     They  would  also  have  the  choice  to  present  these  findings  in  a  variety  of  ways  that   fit  into  three  categories:  video,  oral  presentation  or  written  paper.    Mr.  Roberts   offered  suggestions  such  as  a  movie,  PowerPoint,  poster,  speech  or  essay.    Mr.   Roberts  also  explained  this  was  an  individual  project  that  was  to  be  completed   outside  of  class.         A  week  before  the  end  of  the  school  year,  I  returned  to  Mr.  Roberts’   classroom  for  the  choice  project  presentations  in  both  of  his  science  classes.  Mr.   Roberts  stood  in  the  front  of  the  room  and  announced  that  it  was  the  day  to  present   choice  projects.    He  quickly  reminded  the  students  to  be  respectful  of  one  another  as   they  presented  and  then  asked  for  any  volunteers.    In  the  first  class,  one  by  one,   students  came  to  the  front  of  the  room  and  presented  their  projects.    The  first   presentation  was  on  recycling  where  a  young  woman  showed  a  poster  with  facts   about  recycling  and  the  amount  of  money  that  could  be  saved  in  homes  if  behaviors   were  changed.    When  she  was  done,  Mr.  Roberts  asked  her  if  there  was  anything  she   wanted  us  to  know  and  she  said,  “  I  worked  really  hard  on  it  and  put  a  lot  of   information  on  it.”    She  looked  around  to  see  if  there  were  any  other  questions  and   remained  there  for  what  seemed  like  a  long  time.    It  was  as  if  she  anticipated  more   questions  about  her  topic.    When  she  realized  the  students  in  the  class  did  not  have   questions  for  her,  she  sat  down.         184   After  that,  the  project  presentation  fell  into  a  pattern.    All  but  three  of  the   twenty  students  in  the  first  class  who  completed  the  project  did  a  poster   presentation.    Two  others  did  an  oral  presentation  without  a  visual  representation   and  one  student  completed  a  PowerPoint  presentation.  All  but  two  of  the   presentations  were  about  either  recycling  or  an  aspect  of  solar  system  with  the   remaining  two  focused  on  explaining  a  mentos/soda  reaction  lab  they  completed  a   few  weeks  earlier.    Some  of  the  presentations  would  be  followed  with  questions   from  Mr.  Roberts  and/or  students,  while  others  did  not  result  in  any  questioning.   Mr.  Roberts’  questions  almost  always  focused  on  giving  students  the  opportunity  to   share  more  or  to  elaborate  on  a  specific  aspect  of  a  project.      For  instance,  after  one   young  woman’s  presentation  on  recycling  he  asked,  “How  much  energy  is  saved  by   recycling  a  bottle  rather  than  making  a  new  one?”    When  the  student  stated  that  she   didn’t  know,  Mr.  Roberts  responded,  “Ok,  it  is  ok  to  say  you  don’t  know.”  The  class   then  moves  on  to  talk  about  why  you  do  not  get  a  deposit  back  for  water  bottles.     One  student  completed  a  PowerPoint  presentation  about  the  solar  system.    I   overheard  her  say  to  Mr.  Roberts,  “I  am  the  only  one  to  do  a  slide  show.”     Unfortunately  the  cord  for  the  projector  was  missing  so  she  presented  her  slides  to   Mr.  Roberts  at  his  desk  as  the  other  students  received  a  break.    After  sharing  it  with   Mr.  Roberts,  she  brought  it  to  the  desk  where  I  was  sitting  and  shared  it  with  me.   Each  slide  had  the  name  of  a  planet  and  several  facts  about  the  planet  including   Greek  god  origin  of  the  name.  There  were  eleven  slides,  one  for  each  planet   (including  Pluto)  and  introduction  and  a  conclusion.  I  asked  her  how  she  thought   she  did  on  this  and  she  responded,  “Good,  Mr.  Roberts  said  it  was  good.”    I  asked     185   what  she  had  learned  and  she  said,  “all  about  our  solar  system  and  the  planets  in  it.     I  was  the  only  one  to  do  a  slide  show  too.”    That  seemed  to  be  something  she  was   proud  of  and  wanted  to  share  with  me.  Next,  I  asked  if  she  was  disappointed  that   she  was  not  able  to  show  it  to  the  whole  class  and  she  said,  “yeah,  but  I  got  to  show   it  to  Mr.  Roberts  and  you.    He  didn’t  have  the  cords  to  let  me  show  it  to  the  rest  the   class.”        The  second  class  had  a  very  similar  pattern  with  one  student  making  a   movie  but  the  majority  completing  a  poster  and  presenting  it  to  the  class.      The   majority  of  students  in  the  second  class  also  choose  recycling  or  the  solar  system,   but  a  few  also  completed  projects  on  a  flight  unit  that  had  been  completed  in  March.   Over  both  classes,  there  was  very  little  participation  from  peers  in  terms  of   questions  or  feedback.   Linking  Back  to  Noticing/Meaning  Making       One  of  Mr.  Roberts'  goals  in  implementing  this  project  was  to  allow  students   to  use  their  strengths  to  show  what  they  know  and  can  do  with  science.    This  was   meant  to  open  spaces  for  all  or  most  students  to  feel  successful.  This  was  a  salient   message  for  Mr.  Roberts  as  he  talked  about  it  several  times  throughout  the   professional  development  meetings  in  connection  to  Hannah  and  Nicole’s  cases,  as   well  as  mentioning  it  an  important  take  away  message  of  the  professional   development  program.    In  speaking  about  allowing  students  to  leverage  their   strengths  while  reflecting  on  Hannah’s  case  and  her  ability  to  find  success  when   working  as  part  of  a  team,  Mr.  Roberts  mentioned:   Well,  I  think  most  teachers  [pause]  don’t  like  teaching  collaboratively  (group   work)  because  it  is  really  pandemonium  a  lot  of  times,  and  it’s  hard  to     186   maintain  the  control  of  the  class  that  you  want  to  maintain.    But  I  think  you   have  to  keep  going  back  to  it  and  giving  different  kids  a  chance  to,  uh,  to  take   a  shot.       Mr.  Roberts  speaks  to  the  power  of  alternating  teaching  practices  to  allow   space  for  students  to  be  successful.    By  success,  they  are  able  to  show  what  they   know  and  are  able  to  do  with  science.  According  to  him,  this  should  be  attempted   despite  the  discomfort  teachers  feel  over  sharing  control  of  their  classroom  spaces   with  students.       However,  many  of  his  students  produced  very  similar  looking  school  projects   despite  having  choice  to  show  what  they  know  in  a  variety  of  ways.    When  I  asked   him  during  our  final  interview  to  show  me  examples  of  students  who  were   successful  in  this  project,  he  mentioned  a  student  that  went  beyond  the  poster   presentation  of  facts  to  make  a  movie  and  the  student  who  made  a  bird  feeder  out  of   reused  materials  to  go  along  with  her  reduce,  reuse,  recycle  presentation.  When   asked  how  these  students  typically  do  in  his  classroom,  he  mentioned,  “They  are   both  A  students.”  He  went  on  to  tell  me  that  these  students  were  high  achievers  in   his  class  and  had  out  of  school  supports  that  allowed  for  this  type  of  project.     I  argue  the  outline  of  this  project  and  supports  in  place  for  students   eventually  restricted  students  like  Hannah  or  students  who  do  not  have  out  of   school  support  from  being  successful  or  seeing  how  their  strengths  might  be   recognized  and  valued  in  the  classroom.    In  the  end,  for  many  of  his  students,  the   choice  project  had  little  choice  and  became  another  school  project  with  predictable   outcomes  that  hinged  on  the  number  of  points  that  were  received.   Examining  the  Tensions     187    As  with  the  other  teachers,  Mr.  Roberts  faced  tensions  when  attempting  to   bring  youths’  interests  into  his  classroom  practices.    The  narrative  around  the   availability  of  resources  was  something  he  brought  up  often  during  professional   development  meetings  and  influenced  how  he  made  sense  of  both  what  the  girls   were  able  to  do  as  well  as  what  his  students  were  unable  to  do.    Additionally,  he  saw   the  role  of  the  teacher  as  the  one  responsible  for  ensuring  individual  students  were   learning  by  providing  knowledge,  sparking  their  interest  and  assessing  individual   effort.  These  two  narratives,  resources  and  the  role  of  the  teacher,  influenced  how   his  students  participated  with  the  choice  project  and  why  the  project  presentations   eventually  resembled  typical  school  projects.   After  viewing  the  presentations,  the  choice  project  brought  up  the  question   for  me,  why  would  the  majority  of  these  students  choose  the  same  format  and  the   same  two  topics?    I  initially  wondered  if  those  topics  were  fresh  in  their  minds,  but   that  did  not  turn  out  to  be  the  case.    Although  the  mentos  experiment  had  just  been   completed,  the  solar  system  was  a  unit  studied  in  February  and  recycling  was  an   aspect  of  a  unit  examined  in  January.    Further  insight  regarding  why  these  projects   may  have  been  similar  to  each  other  was  gained  when  Mr.  Roberts  talked  about  the   framing  of  the  project  to  students:   I  told  them,  first  of  all  I  am  not  going  to  supply  you  the  technology  if  this  is   something  you  choose  to  do.    You  have  to  find  a  source  for  your  technology.     If  you  are  typing  this  paper,  you  have  to  find  a  source  and  learn  how  to  word   process  it  yourself;  I  am  not  going  to  take  class  time  to  do  it.    And  if  you  are   prepping  for  an  oral  presentation  to  the  class,  then  you  are  going  to  prep   outside  of  class.    So  whatever  you  do,  it  is  on  your  own  …  one  kid  said  I  don't   have  a  camera,  and  I  said  well  you  won't  be  doing  a  video,  will  you?    Now  you   have  two  choices  (from  oral,  video  or  written)       188     Mr.  Roberts’  positioned  the  project  as  something  that  happens  outside  of   class  and  placed  the  onus  on  the  students  for  planning  their  project  and  finding  the   resources  to  facilitate  that  plan.    The  project  was  to  be  completed  “on  your  own”,   thus  removing  himself  and  the  classroom  space  as  potential  resources.    Students   had  choice,  but  these  choices  were  limited  by  what  they  could  imagine  in  the  context   of  a  school  project  and  what  resources  they  had  access  to.      Being  a  school  with  a   majority  of  students  coming  from  high  poverty  backgrounds,  some  of  the  choices   such  as  making  a  movie  or  making  a  PowerPoint  presentation  were  not  realistic  for   many  without  support  at  school.    Mr.  Roberts  presented  these  as  possibilities,  but   also  knew  that  many  of  his  students  would  not  have  the  resources  to  take  that   option.    He  also  believed  their  school  could  not  provide  these  resources  as  well:     We  have  a  computer  lab  that  was  accessible  to  the  classroom  but  only   fourteen  computers  worked.    So  I’m  going  to  take  twenty-­‐four  kids  to  the   computer  lab  and  tell  ten  of  them  to  stand  over  somebody’s  shoulder?  I  won’t   do  that.    And  um,  so  I  couldn’t  show  them  any  techniques  on  the  computer  as   far  as  Excel  or  any  type  of…  even  Microsoft  Word  stuff.    I’ve  taught  that   before,  I  could  have  helped  them  with  it  -­‐  Power  Point  or  any  of  those  things.     The  lack  of  resources  not  only  limited  what  his  students  could  do  with  their   projects,  but  also  limited  the  possibilities  that  Mr.  Roberts  could  envision  to  help  his   students  complete  these  projects.    The  quote  above  expresses  Mr.  Roberts’   frustrations  and  feeling  that  his  hands  are  tied  due  to  not  having  access  to  what  his   students  need  to  be  successful.    This  project  design  incorporated  space  for  student   strengths,  but  the  lack  of  support  resulted  in  his  students  being  unsure  of  what  to  do   with  this  space.    In  the  end,  the  students  chose  a  format  (posters)  that  they  were   familiar  with  having  completed  those  several  times  throughout  the  year  in  Mr.   Roberts’  classroom.     189   In  addition  to  resources,  how  Mr.  Roberts  envisioned  his  role  for  the  project   influenced  how  his  students  perceived  and  participated  with  the  project.    First,  as   noted  above,  he  stepped  back  from  the  project  and  did  not  offer  himself  or  class   time  as  a  resource  for  students.    This  was  interesting  because  Mr.  Roberts’  described   himself  as  a,  “little  of  a  control  freak”  in  terms  of  setting  goals  in  the  classroom  and   ensuring  his  students  met  those  goals.    In  this  case,  he  removed  himself  largely  from   the  project  asking  his  students  to  complete  the  project  outside  of  class.    Through   this,  he  positioned  the  project  as  something  extra  that  was  not  going  to  take  class   time  away  from  the  other  things  that  needed  to  get  done.    Thus,  while  Mr.  Roberts   may  have  given  up  control  of  the  projects’  outcomes,  students’  participation  in  the   project  did  not  alter  how  science  was  carried  out  in  his  classroom  or  the  role  he  took   on  as  their  teacher.     Mr.  Roberts  also  saw  his  role  as  the  teacher  in  this  project  to  hold  individual   students  accountable  for  effort  and  completion.    This  influenced  the  way  the  project   was  introduced  to  students  as  well  as  the  way  they  participated  with  it.  The  fact  that   the  students’  projects  looked  similar  to  products  they  completed  throughout  the   year  in  his  class  was  not  lost  on  Mr.  Roberts.    In  an  interview  completed  after  the   presentations,  he  revealed  disappointment  with  the  diversity  of  projects  (both   topics  and  format)  and  that  his  students  stuck  to  what  they  knew  and  had  the   resources  to  accomplish:     Roberts:  I  was  disappointed  more  of  the  kids  didn’t  want  to  take  risks.     Danny:    How  do  we  get  our  kids  to  take  a  risk?       190   Roberts:    Well,  I  think,  part  of  it  is  in  my  situation,  if  the  kids  put  any  effort   into  their,  um,  poster  or  their  presentation…  they  got  between  thirty-­‐five  out   of  forty  points.    I  wasn’t  looking  for  ways  to  de-­‐grade  what  they  did.     Danny:    Right.     Roberts:    You  know  if  I  got  a  partial  poster  that  wasn’t…  you  know  the  effort   wasn’t  there.    But  if  I  saw  effort  at  all  I  gave  them  as  much  credit  as  I  possibly   could  for  it.    I  think  you  have  to  do  that.    You  have  to  give  them  credit  for   trying  hard.   For  Mr.  Roberts,  risk  was  associated  with  the  ways  in  which  the  project  was   assessed  and  implies  the  path  to  having  more  students  take  risks  lies  with  the   criteria  for  success  he  established  and  not  with  the  types  of  investigations  students   chose  to  complete.    In  this  case,  he  chose  to  evaluate  the  effort  students  put  into  the   project  including  the  level  of  detail,  being  prepared  and  completion.    Mr.  Roberts   believes  having  this  as  the  criteria  for  success  limits  the  amount  of  risk  taking   students  engage  with  due  to  setting  the  bar  low  for  expectations.   The  influence  of  holding  students  individually  accountable  also  came  through   as  Mr.  Roberts  reflected  on  the  presentations:     The  one  thing  I  should  have  done  that  I  didn't  do  out  of  that,  I  should  have   sent  a  letter  home  to  their  parents  explaining  that  your  child  has  three   options  and  here  is  what  they  are  and  here  is  what  they  can  do  in  each  of   those  and  here  is  how  they  are  going  to  be  evaluated  in  each  of  those.    I  didn't   do  that,  and  I  put  it  all  on  the  kids  and  maybe  that  is  a  lot  to  put  on  an  11   year-­‐old  kid.    To  let  them  choose  and  to  ask  their  parents  to  be  involved   probably  would  have  been  a  good  thing.  But  I  didn't  want  the  parents   shooting  the  videos.     The  project  was  assigned  as  something  students  were  to  complete  on  their   own.  Something  they  were  responsible  to  design  and  create.  Mr.  Roberts  reflects   that  the  project  design  may  have  been  too  much  for  his  students  to  handle  and  thus   influenced  the  types  of  projects  that  were  eventually  completed.    He  also  reveals   feelings  that  including  the  students’  families  would  have  resulted  in  projects  that     191   were  not  completed  entirely  by  the  student  himself  or  herself.    While  he  realizes  the   students  may  have  needed  assistance,  he  also  worries  how  that  assistance  would   have  influenced  the  ways  in  which  he  would  be  able  to  hold  students  accountable.   His  role  is  to  assess  what  individual  students  know  and  are  able  to  do  and  thus  his   assignments  are  designed  in  ways  to  ensure  it  is  a  particular  student’s  effort  that  he   is  assessing.    While  the  students  had  choice,  the  outcomes  of  these  projects  aligned   with  traditional  school  outcomes.       Teacher  learning.    I  argue  Mr.  Roberts  made  an  important  shift  in  his   classroom  practices  through  the  consideration  of  youth  voices  regarding  their   interests  in  science.    Student  voices  led  him  to  alter  unit  plans  in  order  to  engage   student  interests  as  well  as  design  a  final  project  intended  to  allow  each  student’s   strengths  to  be  brought  into  an  investigation  of  a  science  concept.    It  should  be   noted  one  of  these  shifts,  lessons  on  studying  recycling,  sparked  enough  interests   that  a  majority  of  his  students  choose  to  do  more  with  it  during  their  choice  project.   He  spoke  about  the  idea  of  discovering  and  brings  in  youths’  strengths  during  our   last  meeting  together  when  reflecting  on  what  this  experience  helped  him  think   about:    You  have  already  been  to  college.    You  already  have  the  content  matter  and   you  already  have  all  the  competency  based  techniques  that  any  teacher   would  need.  What  you  don't  have  is  the  hands-­‐on  practical  experience  of   reading  these  kids,  and  there  is  only  one  way  to  get  it.    So  you  can  have   people  coach  you  on  that,  but  that  is  not  what  they  coach  you  on  …  It  is   important.       He  leaves  this  experience  still  thinking  about  what  kids  can  bring  to  science   investigations  and  how  teachers  can  values  their  strengths.  While  the  choice  project   may  not  have  turned  out  how  either  of  us  had  envisioned  it,  understanding  his     192   students  bring  ideas  and  skills  to  science  investigations  is  an  “important”  idea  that   came  out  or  participating  with  the  girls’  cases  for  Mr.  Roberts.     However,  what  might  be  most  salient  for  us  as  educators  in  Mr.  Roberts’   experience  is  what  didn’t  happen.    Mr.  Roberts  was  unsure  of  how  to  support  his   students  through  the  choice  project  in  terms  of  providing  them  with  resources  he   believed  they  needed  to  be  successful.    His  beliefs  about  his  role  as  the  teacher   positioned  the  project  as  individual  expressions  of  what  they  know  and  can  do  with   science.    The  lack  of  support  students  had  through  this  process  in  terms  of  guidance   or  class  time  influenced  what  they  saw  as  possible  or  even  worth  doing.    The  project   was  another  assignment  to  be  completed  before  the  end  of  the  year  was  over.    The   experience  shows  how  students  still  need  support,  despite  the  types  of  choices  they   are  allowed  to  make  about  topics  or  how  they  will  share  their  learning.    The   experience  also  reveals  that  the  types  of  supports  teachers  need  to  implement   changes  based  on  informal  science  practices.         Mr.  Jones:  Transforming  Practice   In  this  section,  I  examine  the  actions  taken  by  Mr.  Jones  and  his  students   during  the  spring  of  2012.    I  argue  Mr.  Jones  shifted  his  beliefs  about  the  role  of  the   teacher  in  the  classroom  leading  him  to  design  a  project  aimed  at  providing   meaningful  learning  experiences  through  sharing  authority,  valuing  student   expertise  and  opening  up  forms  of  participation   This  project  provided  opportunities  for  youth  to  be  successful  in  ways  that   fall  outside  of  traditional  school  outcomes.    This  shift,  for  Mr.  Jones,  was  not  without   tension  as  he  confronted  the  discomfort  of  sharing  power  with  students  and  well  as     193   the  uncertainty  of  not  knowing  what  will  come  next.    Viewing  and  discussing  the   girls’  cases  led  Mr.  Jones  to  reflect  upon  these  tensions  and  the  possibilities  to   reform  classroom  practices  within  this  struggle.    His  desire  to  act  in  his  classroom   came  both  through  reflecting  upon  the  youth  cases  discussed  at  professional   development  meetings  as  well  as  in  sorting  through  his  personal  stories  of  being  a   student  that  were  brought  back  to  the  surface  when  examining  the  girls’  cases.       Solar  System  Project      During  our  professional  development  meetings,  Mr.  Jones  noticed  several   things  within  and  across  the  girls’  cases.    Most  salient  to  the  final  project  he   designed  was  1)  the  girls’  desire  to  be  active  participants  in  their  learning  and  how   they  shared  their  learning,  2)  they  were  not  satisfied  with  school  science  and  3)  they   brought  knowledge  and  abilities  to  science  investigations.    This  included  a  deep   knowledge  of  energy  related  science,  knowledge  of  Great  Lakes  City  and  the  ability   to  teach  others  about  energy  related  science.  Mr.  Jones  made  sense  of  these   noticings  and  connected  them  to  his  classroom  through  the  design  of  a  project  that   allowed  student  choice  over  what  they  investigated  and  how  they  presented  their   findings  to  the  class.    He  hoped  this  would  spark  interest  within  his  students  in   science  class,  provide  space  for  them  to  use  the  multiple  skills  they  brought  to  the   classroom  and  share  authority  in  determining  the  outcomes  of  these  investigations.     He  described  introducing  the  project  to  his  students  this  way:   I  told  them  about  going  to  their  performances  throughout  the  year.    And  you   know  every  school  isn’t  like  ours  with  the  dance  and  the  drama  and  the   musical  aspects  and  how  into  that  these  kids  are.    I  told  them  I  see  these   amazing  things  you  guys  do.    Every  time  I  went  to  one  of  their  performances  I   came  away  absolutely  floored.    So  I  said  to  them  we’re  going  to…  our  final   project  for  this  solar  system  unit…  this  little  mini  solar  system  we’re  going  to     194   do  is…  for  them  to  present  that  in  any  way  they  want  to  whether  it’s  a  rap,  a   song,  a  poem,  um,  acting  it  out,  a  public  service  announcement  like  you  guys   did  with  your  kids.       Mr.  Jones  first  mentioned  the  amazing  abilities  his  students  exhibited  during   school  concerts,  plays  and  other  activities.    He  was  “floored”  and  “amazed”  both  at   what  his  students  were  able  to  do  and  that  he  was  unaware  of  these  abilities  despite   spending  several  hours  a  day  with  these  students.    These  strengths  were  not   apparent  in  his  classroom  revealing  for  him  the  idea  that  spaces  were  not  provided   for  these  strengths  to  be  leveraged  and  valued.  In  the  girls’  cases,  he  saw  how  these   strengths  could  be  leveraged  to  make  energy  related  science  investigations  engaging   to  multiple  audiences.     The  solar  system  project  was  introduced  in  mid-­‐May  with  the  idea  that  the   students  would  share  authority  with  Mr.  Jones  regarding  what  science  learning  and   doing  would  look  like  in  the  classroom.  The  final  project  asked  students  to  come  up   with  a  question  they  were  interested  in  that  pertained  to  the  solar  system,   investigate  the  question  and  then  design  a  presentation  that  showcased  both  their   findings  and  their  skills.  There  were  times  when  classroom  instruction  looked  very   traditional  in  terms  of  Mr.  Jones  providing  knowledge  and  steering  the  conversation   toward  concepts  he  deemed  important  for  all  groups.    He  mentioned  this  was  done   to  ensure  the  students  received  the  relevant  background  knowledge  they  needed   about  the  solar  system.  At  other  times,  students  used  the  computer  lab  to  complete   research  or  met  as  groups  to  plan  their  final  presentations.    The  work  was   completed  mostly  in  class,  and  students  could  choose  to  work  in  groups  or   individually.       195   As  the  project  progressed,  Mr.  Jones  began  to  see  his  role  in  the  classroom   change.    When  talking  about  how  he  thought  the  project  was  going  a  week  into  it,  he   mentioned,  “so  I  think  they  (students)  see  me  more  as  a  researcher  for  their  team   rather  than  a  teacher  who  is  telling  them  these  are  the  facts  that  you  need  to  know   for  the  test.”    This  comment  speaks  to  a  shift  in  classroom  practices  in  two  different   ways.    First,  according  to  Mr.  Jones,  his  students  are  seeing  him  as  a  partner  or  a   teammate  rather  than  a  teacher  who  holds  all  of  the  knowledge  and  distributes  it  to   his  students.  This  shift  speaks  to  a  perceived  share  of  power  and  authority  between   teacher  and  students.  The  expertise  of  his  students,  and  the  cultural  practices  they   bring  from  experiences  outside  of  the  classroom,  were  valued  and  encouraged  in   this  investigation.  Second,  Mr.  Jones  comments  reveal  a  shift  in  the  way  he  believes   his  students  see  the  outcomes  of  this  project.    The  knowledge  is  not  being  gained  for   a  test,  but  instead  the  students  are  gaining  understandings  to  be  incorporated  into   the  findings  of  their  groups’  investigations.    The  students  are  gaining  experiences   with  science  practices  (NGSS,  2013)  as  they  work  together  to  investigate  their   question  of  interest.  Mr.  Jones  helped  each  group  think  about  the  types  of   information  they  may  need  but  does  not  limit  it  to  what  will  be  asked  of  them  in  a   traditional  school  measure.     Mr.  Jones  also  believed  the  project  motivated  his  students  to  learn  more  and   get  excited  about  participating  with  science.    This  motivation  and  excitement  was   not  limited  to  those  students  in  his  class  who  were  traditionally  successful  in  school.     As  you  may  recall,  Hannah  was  one  of  Mr.  Jones  students  during  this  school  year  and     196   thus  participated  in  the  project.    He  reflected  during  our  last  professional   development  meeting:     Even  the  kids  like  Hannah  are  really  looking  forward  to  doing  it  too  and   that’s  cool.    It  makes  you  feel  a  little  better  as  a  science  teacher,  you  know   what  I  mean?  I  am  really  getting  to  these  kids  right  now,  but,  now,  what  do  I   do  with  it?       Mr.  Jones  started  to  see  how  opening  different  spaces  for  participation   through  this  project  allowed  students  who  struggle  with  traditional  structures  of   school  to  be  excited  about  learning  and  participating  with  science.    This  matters  as   we  see  so  many  students  turned  away  from  science  due  to  not  feeling  successful   based  on  traditional  outcomes  (Carlone  et  al.,  2011).  It  made  Mr.  Jones  feel  good   that  he  reached  these  students  in  ways  he  hadn’t  observed  previously  throughout   the  year.    At  this  point,  Mr.  Jones  is  also  expressing  feelings  of  uneasiness  as  he  is   unsure  of  where  the  project  will  take  the  class  and  how  he  can  help  each  group  get   there.    This  uneasiness  is  due  to  transforming  classroom  practices  that  extend   outside  of  his  comfort  zone  and  what  he  knows  about  the  teaching  and  learning  of   science.         This  was  the  first  time  Mr.  Jones  had  ever  tried  a  project  like  this  in  his   classroom,  and  he  believed  most  of  his  students  had  little  experience  with  it  as  well.     Sharing  authority  with  students  and  having  many  investigations  going  on  at  once   takes  time.    Unfortunately,  time  was  not  what  Mr.  Jones  had  as  the  school  year  at   Bayside  ends  in  early  June.    Mr.  Jones  and  his  students  began  to  suspect  that  they   would  not  have  time  to  complete  their  projects  leading  to  reactions  Mr.  Jones  had   not  anticipated:     197   I  had  a  kid  crying  today  when  they  asked  me  (about  the  project)  and  I   stretched  myself  pretty  thin.    I  wanted  to  present  all  the  information  to  them   and  get  them  into  the  lab  and  have  them  create  an  informational  PowerPoint   and  then  let  them  take  that  and  go  with  it  wherever  they  wanted  to.    Well,  we   just  finished  our  PowerPoint’s  today  and  the  girl  asked  me,  what  are  we   doing  about  the  end  of  the  year  performance  thing.  I  said  we  are  going  to  get   to  it  Thursday,  and  I  crossed  my  fingers  and  she  started  crying.    I  was  like,   gosh,  dang.    So  I  brought  her  out  in  the  hallway  and  I  said  [student  name],   (it’s)  the  only  thing  in  my  plan  book  for  science  next  week.  So  you  are  going   to  have  time  to  work  on  it,  you  are  going  to  have  time  outside  of  school  to   work  on  it,  so  we  are  going  to  get  there.  And  she  said  I  hope  so  Mr.  Jones,  I   want  to  do  it  so  bad.  I  was  like  dang.       Danny:  That  is  so  interesting  that  she  wants  to  do  it  so  bad     Yeah,  it  is  not  that  she  is  nervous  about  doing  it:  it  is  that  she  wants  to  get  it   done  and  present  something  to  the  class.    It  broke  my  heart  because  man  we   are  really  going  to  have  to  push  it  to  get  those  things  in  and  it  is  going  to  be   hard.    It  did  what  I  wanted  it  to  do,  it  created  a  lot  of  interest  and  people   wanted  to  do  it.    That  is  the  positive  and  negative  thing  that  I  had  no  idea  the   amount  of  time  it  would  take.     This  student,  who  Mr.  Jones  revealed  was  not  one  who  acted  emotionally   about  assignments  before,  was  brought  to  tears  when  confronted  with  the  idea  that   completion  of  this  science  project  may  not  be  a  reality.    Her  response  indicates  an   intense  desire  to  be  involved  in  this  project  and  have  the  opportunity  to  show  the   class  what  she  knows  and  what  she  can  do.    The  quote  also  reveals  Mr.  Jones   inability  to  predict  how  much  time  the  project  would  take.    In  the  end,  despite  both   Mr.  Jones  and  the  students’  desire  to  complete  the  project,  they  ran  out  of  time  and   the  presentations  were  never  made.     Linking  Back  to  Noticings/Meaning  Making   Mr.  Jones  linked  noticings  and  meaning  making  from  the  girls’  cases  to   meaningful  science  learning  experiences  for  his  students.    He  designed  the  project  to   allow  choice,  spark  interest  and  provide  space  for  his  students  to  leverage  their     198   strengths  in  science  investigations.  Through  doing  this,  he  provided  expanded   learning  opportunities  leading  to  expanded  learning  outcomes.    Allowing  space  for   students  to  bring  in  strengths  allowed  outcomes  that  extended  beyond  traditional   school  measures  and    for  students  to  take  on  identities  they  had  not  before  in  his   science  classroom.    As  an  example,  I  turn  to  our  last  interview  together  where  he   talks  about  the  crying  student  and  how  she  eventually  took  the  news  that  the  project   would  not  be  completed:     She  said,  “I  just  wanted  you  to  see  how  well  I  was  able  to  act  this  out.”    I  was   like…  dang.    She  said,  “I  have  another  DVD  of  me  acting  that  I  wanted  you  to   see.”    I  said  bring  it  in,  and  I’ll  watch  it  tomorrow  when  I’m  on  my  break  and   it’s  sitting  on  my  desk.    She  really  wanted  to  perform,  and  she’s  not  a  kid  who   I  would  think…  she’s  really  shy.      So  that’s  kind  of  her  way  of  being…  you   know.    What  did  we  call  it  over  there  on  our  little  chart?    The  non-­‐traditional   way  that  she  normally  is  in  school…     Danny:  Yeah,  her  different  identities.     Acting  is  a  totally  different  identity  for  her.    And  evidently,  she  can—she  can   put  herself  in  that  role  and  not  be  the  quiet,  shy  [student  name]  everyone   knows.    Which  is…  it  still  stinks  that  I  can’t  get  her  to  get  the  science  thing   down  but  I’ll  get  to  see  this  one  and  talk  to  her  about  it  and  learn  from  it  for   next  year.     Through  this  experience,  Mr.  Jones  understood  how  meaningful  this   experience  was  for  this  student.    The  outcomes  of  the  investigation  connected  with   her  identity  as  a  performer  as  opposed  to  the  type  of  identity  she  normally  takes  on   in  a  science  classroom.    This  project  presented  an  opportunity  to  showcase  a  side  of   her  that  is  not  shy  or  quiet  when  communicating  what  she  and  her  group  had   learned  through  their  science  investigations.    It  meant  enough  to  her  she  was  crying   that  the  class  was  not  going  to  have  time  to  finish  a  project  …  at  the  end  of  the  school   year.         199   She  was  not  the  only  student  who  Mr.  Jones  believed  experienced  a   meaningful  learning  experience  due  to  expanded  outcomes.    He  spoke  of  an  increase   in  participation  by  most  students,  including  Hannah  who  is  also  shifting  the  identity   she  is  usually  assumes  in  a  science  class.    The  project,  although  not  completed,   allowed  Mr.  Gates  insight  into  how  much  it  means  to  his  students  to  be  active   participants  in  science  investigations  as  well  as  what  it  means  to  bring  in  their   strengths  and  have  them  recognized  as  expertise  in  the  context  of  science.       Examining  the  Tensions       As  the  project  went  on,  Mr.  Jones  felt  tensions  around  two  different   narratives.    The  first  was  time.    This  was  a  very  real  tension  as  the  end  of  the  school   year  was  not  willing  to  compromise  with  what  still  needed  to  be  accomplished.    Mr.   Jones’  lack  of  experience  with  this  type  of  project  influenced  his  ability  to  predict   how  long  each  aspect  would  take  to  complete.    He  could  have  made  the  decision  to   speed  things  up,  skip  aspects  or  take  back  some  of  the  control,  but  a  major  change   would  have  shifted  the  original  intent  of  the  project  away  from  sharing  authority   with  students  and  allowing  them  to  bring  strengths  that  are  not  traditionally   recognized  in  science  classrooms.    Instead,  he  and  his  students  tried  to  outrun  time   and  were  not  able  to  accomplish  that.    He  reflected,  “next  year,  the  fifth  graders  will   really  get  a  shot  at  this.”    This  quote  recognizes  his  learning  about  the  amount  of   time  these  projects  take  as  well  as  the  importance  he  places  on  these  experiences  as   he  plans  to  continue  in  the  future  despite  how  the  first  attempt  ended.       The  second  tension  is  connected  to  how  he  dealt  with  his  shifting  role  as  the   teacher  through  the  process  of  implementing  this  project.    Despite  ten  years  of     200   teaching  experience,  this  shift  caused  uncertainty  about  what  was  to  come  next  in   the  project  and  what  he  was  supposed  to  do  to  help  his  students.    In  a  statement   above,  Mr.  Jones  mentioned,  “I  am  really  getting  to  these  kids  right  now,  but,  now   what  do  I  do  with  it?”    The  statement  reveals  the  tensions  he  feels  as  he  gives  up   some  of  the  control  over  what  knowing  and  doing  science  looks  like  in  his   classroom.    He  spoke  about  being  uncomfortable  giving  up  control  during  our  third   professional  development  meeting:     I  get  a  little  bit  nervous  giving  up  that  much  control.  We  all  have  the   technology,  and  I  think  sometimes  I  come  up  with  the  excuse  that,  I  don’t   know,  letting  go  of  that  control  for  some  reason  is,  I  don't  know  I  have  a   problem  about  that  sometimes  and  I  hate  that  about  my  teaching.    Because  I   would  love  to  say  that,  here  are  the  guidelines  and  here  is  what  I  need,  and  I   am  learning  slowly.   He  made  this  statement  as  he  was  introducing  the  solar  system  project  to  his   students.    He  had  made  the  decision  to  attempt  this,  but  was  also  wrestling  with   what  this  meant  for  him  as  a  science  teacher  to  give  up  that  type  of  control.    His   propensity  to  control  what  happens  in  the  classroom  is  something  he’s  not  proud  of   as  a  teacher.    Later,  as  the  project  was  under  way,  he  joked  to  the  professional   development  group,  “Whoa,  let’s  get  back  to  the  test.    Here’s  the  book,  let’s  do  this.     Yeah,  that  is  exactly  how  I  feel.    Uh  oh,  now  what?  We’ll  see  what  happens.”    These   statements  reveal  his  struggles  with  sharing  authority  and  power  with  his  students   and  allowing  them  to  determine  the  outcomes  of  these  investigations.    These  actions   stand  in  contrast  to  the  way  he  has  taught  before  and  leaves  him  feeling  as  a  novice   in  his  classroom  once  again.    It  makes  me  wonder,  if  this  shift  made  him  so   uncomfortable,  why  did  he  continue  to  do  it?       201   As  discussed  in  the  previous  chapter,  he  felt  personally  implicated  by  both   what  the  girls  were  able  to  do  through  their  informal  science  experiences  as  well  as   the  ways  in  which  they  experienced  school  science.    He  remarked,  “that’s  not  the   way  I’d  ever  want  to  be  in  a  classroom  if  I  was  twelve,  and  I  certainly  don’t  want  to   teach  a  classroom  that  way.”    The  girls’  cases  and  the  personal  narratives  they   brought  up  for  him  led  him  to  reflect  on  what  was  really  happening  in  his  classroom   and  how  his  students  were  experiencing  science.    The  personal  narratives  included   reflections  on  his  own  experiences  as  a  student,  telling  stories  mostly  of  feeling   tracked  or  given  up  on  by  his  teachers.    His  science  experiences  were  spent  largely   in  the  hall.    However,  the  positive  experience  that  stayed  with  him  was  when  he  was   recognized  for  his  expertise,  hard  work  and  creativity  during  a  science  fair.    All  of   this  meant  something  to  the  way  he  made  sense  of  the  tensions.    In  the  end,  he   decided  to  transform  his  classroom  practices  around  what  he  noticed  and  made   meaning  of  through  the  girls’  cases  despite  the  discomfort  this  caused  for  him  in   encountering  what  he  had  come  to  know  about  teaching  and  learning  science.   Teacher  learning.    I  argue  Mr.  Jones’  story  and  implementation  of  the  solar   system  project  constitutes  teacher  learning  for  Mr.  Jones.    Through  this  solar  system   project,  he  saw  heightened  student  participation  with  science  investigations  when   the  authority  for  what  they  learned  and  how  they  revealed  their  findings  was  shared   between  teacher  and  student.    This  learning  was  uncomfortable  for  Mr.  Jones  and   did  not  result  in  the  completion  of  the  project,  but  resulted  in  a  desire  to  continue  to   plan  activities  and  projects  based  upon  this  experience  with  students  next  year  and   beyond.     202   While  this  is  significant,  if  we  step  back  from  the  solar  system  project  and   look  at  Mr.  Jones’  participation  in  the  professional  development,  an  additional  claim   can  be  made  regarding  his  learning.    I  argue  that  Mr.  Jones  experiences  show  the   power  youth  narratives  of  informal  science  learning  hold  for  reforming  classroom   teaching  practices.    During  our  last  interview,  he  spoke  about  what  we  had   experienced  in  the  professional  development  meetings  with  Mr.  Roberts,  Mr.  Greene   and  myself  as  transformative  to  his  practice:         Looking  through  the  kids’  perspectives  made  me  change.  I  have  been  to   millions  of  PD’s  and  haven't  left  many  of  them  thinking,  ‘Wow,  that  was   pretty  good.’  I  can't  ever  remember  instituting  a  strategy  that  I  have  learned   at  a  PD!  I  did  [this  time]  just  to  see  what  would  happen.  Now  I  have  kids  in   my  class  crying  because  they  might  not  have  the  time  to  finish  their  projects.   It  is  really  interesting:  it  is  something  that  should  be  looked  at.     The  transformation  started  with  the  girls’  stories  of  participation  with   science  both  inside  and  outside  of  school.    Their  stories  inspired  him  and  led  him  to   implicate  his  own  science  teaching  practices.    The  girls’  cases  also  caused  Mr.  Jones   to  reflect  on  what  he  had  been  doing  and  take  risks  in  order  to  attempt  to  improve   science  knowing  and  doing  in  his  classroom.    While  uncomfortable,  the  changes   shifted  the  way  science  learning  was  carried  out  in  his  classroom  in  terms  of  who   could  do  science  and  what  experience  and  expertise  was  valued  in  that  space.       Looking  Across  Teacher  Pathways     What  do  these  three  teachers  and  their  pathways  to  implementation  help  us   think  about  in  terms  of  linking  informal  science  learning  to  classroom  practices?  The   pathways  each  of  these  teachers  took  was  different,  due  to  what  they  noticed  and   made  meaning  of  during  professional  development  as  well  as  how  these  tensions   manifested  during  classroom  implementations.    I  have  spent  the  past  two  chapters     203   detailing  how  these  tensions  matter  for  these  teachers  both  with  the  girls’  cases  as   well  as  science  teaching  and  learning  in  their  classrooms.    More  specifically,  I   described  which  institutional,  societal  and  personal  narratives  sat  juxtaposed  with   what  they  found  powerful  in  the  girls’  cases  leading  to  tensions  for  each  teacher.     While  I  have  presented  the  teachers  dealing  with  tensions  individually,  stepping   back  allows  a  clearer  picture  about  what  is  common  across  these  pathways  in  terms   of  teacher  learning.  These  aspects  of  teacher  learning  include  creating  space  for   students  to  leverage  strengths,  sharing  authority  with  students  in  the  classroom  and   student  voice  leading  to  teachers  responding  to  a  sense  of  urgency.         First,  all  of  the  teachers  noticed  that  the  girls’  leveraged  strengths  in  their   cases  and  expressed  desires  for  their  students  in  their  classrooms  to  do  the  same.     These  strengths  connect  back  to  the  cultural  practices  of  doing  science  (Bang  &   Medin,  2010)  and  the  funds  of  knowledge  students  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2009;   Gonzales,  Moll,  Andrade  &  Civil,  2001)  leverage  when  encountering  a  question,  issue   or  new  situation.    All  three  teachers  found  aspects  of  this  message  powerful  and   attempted  to  incorporate  it  into  science  classroom  implementations.    While  each  of   these  teachers  took  up  this  idea  slightly  differently,  allowing  space  for  student   strengths  helped  teachers  develop  insights  into  how  youth  learn  and  engage  with   science  as  well  as  how  the  design  of  learning  activities  supports  this  type  of   engagement.    For  instance,  Mr.  Greene  shifted  his  idea  of  how  his  students  viewed   science  from  narrow  to  broader  upon  reflecting  on  the  types  of  science  practices   students  brought  to  the  inventions  project.    Similarly,  Mr.  Jones  learned  how     204   opening  up  spaces  for  students  strengths  led  to  motivation  among  a  wide  array  of   students  who  are  not  traditionally  successful  in  school.     Second,  and  connected  to  students’  strengths,  is  the  idea  of  how  sharing   authority  in  the  classroom  matters.    I  argue  that  two  of  the  three  teachers  shifted   their  teaching  practices  to  share  authority  with  students.    Mr.  Jones  opened  spaces   for  students  to  expand  the  outcomes  of  learning  and  take  on  identities  not   traditionally  valued  in  science  classrooms  while  still  engaging  in  scientifically   rigorous  investigations.  It  also  led  to  Mr.  Jones  confronting  his  issues  of  control  in   the  classroom  and  dealing  with  the  discomfort  that  goes  along  with  sharing   authority.    Mr.  Greene  made  space  for  students  to  author  their  own  inventions  by   responding  to  something  they  saw  an  issue  in  their  community.    This  led  to  students   expressing  expanded  notions  of  what  science  is  as  well  as  them  assuming  active   participants  roles  in  science.    It  also  led  to  Mr.  Greene  implicating  his  own  practice   by  thinking  about  whose  voice  matters  when  making  curricular  and  instructional   decisions.     Mr.  Roberts  does  not  share  authority  with  students  in  the  ways  that  led  to   learning  or  implicating  his  practice.    He  did  express  the  desire  to  bring  in  youth   voices  and  did  this  on  a  few  occasions  (i.e.  recycling  section  of  the  natural  resources   unit)  during  our  time  together.    However,  the  consideration  of  youth  voices   provided  ideas  for  how  he  would  expand  the  content  or  the  unit  of  investigation.     While  the  students’  voice  was  heard,  Mr.  Roberts  still  held  the  authority  over  how   and  whether  it  was  taken  up.    In  the  choice  project,  Mr.  Roberts  does  not  share   authority  with  students.    Instead,  he  sets  them  off  on  their  own  and  then  assesses     205   the  work  they  have  done  through  his  rubric  of  success.    This  resulted  in  choice   projects  that  appeared  like  many  others  his  students  had  completed  throughout  the   year.       Mr.  Roberts’  experience  has  implications  for  this  professional  development   model.    His  story  reveals  that  teachers  need  guidance  and  support  when  planning   and  implementing  these  types  of  learning  experiences.    That  guidance  includes   collegial  conversations  regarding  the  narratives  that  restrict  as  well  as  stories  of   hope  that  implementation  can  lead  to  meaningful  learning  experiences  for  their   students.    It  also  includes  conversations  about  how  others  have  been  successful  in   sharing  authority  and  bringing  youth  voice  into  science  classroom  practices.     Finally,  the  teachers  experiences  show  how  foregrounding  student  voice  led   to  teachers  responding  to  a  sense  of  urgency  embedded  on  their  cases.  These   experiences  reveal  the  potential  impact  youth  narratives  of  informal  science   learning  can  have  on  how  students  participate  with  science  in  school  contexts.    None   of  these  teachers  were  asked  to  implement  lessons  or  activities,  yet  all  three  were   inspired  to  do  so  based  on  what  they  found  as  powerful  in  the  girls’  messages  and   what  those  messages  might  mean  for  their  own  students.    While  the  divide  between   informal  and  formal  learning  contexts  was  apparent  for  all  three  teachers,  each   worked  to  make  sense  of  those  tensions  to  bring  more  meaningful  science  learning   experiences  to  their  students.    Each  teacher  was  willing  to  take  varying  levels  of   risks  in  an  attempt  reform  their  science  teaching  practices.    These  teachers’  stories   reveal  that  the  divide  between  informal  and  formal  learning  is  not  too  wide  to  be     206   examined  and  that  what  is  powerful  about  informal  science  learning  experiences   doesn’t  always  have  to  be  compromised  when  implemented  in  school  settings.       Implications  for  Professional  Development     The  ways  in  which  these  teachers  participated  with  the  girls’  cases  led  to   changes  in  their  classrooms.    I  have  spent  the  past  two  chapters  outlining  how  these   changes  came  about  and  how  they  were  implemented  differently  for  each  teacher   participant.    However,  the  questions  still  remain:  What  was  it  about  the  girls’  cases   and  the  design  of  this  professional  development  that  facilitated  these  changes?  What   was  it  about  Mr.  Roberts’  situation  that  led  to  fewer  changes?  And,  what  can  we   learn  from  these  differences?         I  believe  the  inclusion  of  youth  voice/stories  into  professional  development   experiences  has  major  implications  for  the  ways  in  which  teachers  learn  by  shifting   what  and  how  they  learn.    I  will  expand  in  this  idea  in  the  final  chapter  but  I  wanted   to  spend  time  here  thinking  about  how  this  shift  influenced  the  changes  observed  in   the  talk  and  practice  of  these  science  teachers  and  what  this  means  for  what  and   how  teachers  learn.       By  foregrounding  the  girls’  stories  and  experiences  with  science  throughout   this  professional  development,  it  forced  teachers  to  shift  (or  at  least  share)  their   focus  from  delivering  their  science  curriculum  or  adhering  to  institutional  pressures   to  how  students  experience  science  in  different  contexts.    Our  professional   development  conversations  focused  on  what  types  of  science  related  questions  and   investigations  the  girls  were  interested  in,  what  roles  they  hoped  to  assume  in  these   investigations  and  how  they  saw  science  as  dynamic  and  connected  to  their     207   community.    Shifting  the  focus  to  the  girls’  voices  led  teachers  to  interrogate  their   own  practices.    Specifically,  it  led  teachers  to  reflect  upon  how  their  students  were   currently  experiencing  science  in  their  classrooms  juxtaposed  with  how  they  hoped   or  wanted  students  to  interact  with  and  experience  science  based  upon  the  salient   messages  they  took  from  the  professional  development  meetings.  Thus,  the   professional  development  model  started  with  the  student’s  interests  and   connections  to  the  discipline  and  worked  out  from  there.    Starting  with  who  they   were  teaching  led  to  these  teachers  to  enact  change.   For  these  teachers,  this  shift  in  focus  and  eventually  change  was  facilitated   through  the  collaborative  conversations  on  youth  experience  during  professional   development  meetings  as  well  as  through  interaction  with  case  exploration  tools.     The  use  of  case  exploration  tools  asked  teachers  to  search  their  own  experiences   and  often  led  to  awareness  and  interrogation  of  the  institutional  narratives  that   often  guide  practice  in  schools  and  take  teachers’  focus  away  from  how  students   interact  with  the  discipline.    For  Mr.  Jones,  the  case  exploration  tools  brought  up   memories  of  his  own  experiences  as  a  science  student  in  terms  of  when  and  how  he   found  success  as  well  as  how  feeling  tracked  or  being  unable  to  conform  with   traditional  notions  of  how  science  is  learned  negatively  impacted  his  academic   participation.    For  Mr.  Greene,  the  PD  conversations  and  case  explorations  tools  led   him  to  reflect  upon  the  types  of  experiences  the  youth  he  worked  with  outside  of   school  had  with  science  as  well  as  a  concern  that  his  Bayside  students  held  a  very   narrow  conception  of  the  discipline  based  upon  typical  classroom  activities.    This   left  him  wondering  how  he  could  bring  more  creativity  and  spaces  for  investigation     208   into  his  eighth  grade  classroom.    These  reflections  led  him  to  ask  for  my  help  in   developing  a  project  where  his  students  were  given  these  types  of  opportunities.     For  both  Mr.  Jones  and  Mr.  Greene,  placing  youth  voice  at  the  center  of  the   professional  development  and  investigating  experience  through  case  exploration   tools  led  to  reflection  regarding  how  students  currently  learn  science  in  their   classrooms  and  what  is  missing  for  their  students  in  those  experiences.     Instructional  change  was  based  off  this  reflection.   However,  while  Mr.  Roberts  participated  in  the  same  professional   development  experiences,  the  change  implemented  in  his  classroom  was  quite   different  from  the  other  two  teachers.  Specifically,  he  largely  removed  himself  from   the  final  project  leaving  students  unsure  of  what  was  possible  and  what  types  of   choices  were  available.    Thus,  Mr.  Roberts  did  not  implicate  his  own  practice  in  the   ways  the  other  two  teachers  did.    He  believed  what  was  missing  from  his  students   science  experiences  were  materials  needed  that  would  enable  them  to  participate  in   ways  that  were  currently  not  possible.    This  belief  influenced  what  he  saw  as   possible  for  his  students  in  his  science  classroom  as  well  as  the  roles  he  imagined   for  himself  as  a  science  teacher.     The  difference  for  Mr.  Roberts,  as  opposed  to  the  other  two  teachers,  was   that  he  did  not  interrogate  his  own  role  in  creating  opportunities  for  students  or   providing  guidance  for  his  students  to  choose  different  pathways  in  science   investigations.  His  story  reveals  that  teachers  need  guidance  and  support  when   planning  and  implementing  these  types  of  learning  experiences.    For  Mr.  Roberts,   support  was  needed  in  thinking  about  the  roles  he  could  play  in  helping  his  students     209   ask  questions,  design  investigations  and/or  creatively  share  what  they  had  found.     Mr.  Roberts  needed  support  that  started  with  the  idea  that  there  are  roles  for  him   assume,  the  roles  he  takes  on  to  support  students  are  vital  and  there  are   opportunities  to  alter  his  students’  science  experiences  despite  the  lack  of  materials.   In  order  for  this  support  to  help  Mr.  Roberts  interrogate  his  science  teaching   practices,  I  also  needed  to  include  deeper  conversations  about  how  his  students   were  currently  experiencing  science  in  his  classroom.    After  reflecting  upon  this  idea   and  knowing  how  important  his  students  are  to  him,  I  believe  including  the  voice  of   his  students  would  have  had  a  greater  impact  on  his  desire  to  examine  what  was   happening  and  what  was  possible.  This  support  was  missing  in  this  professional   development  experience  and  influenced  how  Mr.  Roberts  responded  to  the  girls’   messages  and  designed  experiences  for  his  students,  limiting  the  possibilities  he   envisioned  in  implementing  lessons  from  the  girls’  cases  into  his  classroom.       Throughout  the  past  two  chapters,  I  argued  that  there  is  power  in   foregrounding  youth  voice  in  professional  development  by  sharing  how  it  impacted   three  science  teachers  in  Great  Lakes  City,  MI.  These  teachers  shifted  science   teaching  practices  based  on  seeing  to  what  youth  are  capable  of  and  interested  in   when  participating  with  science.  In  the  next  chapter,  I  expand  on  the  implications  of   this  professional  development  model  for  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in   school  contexts.    I  delve  deeper  into  what  it  means  for  science  teachers  to   foreground  youth  voice  in  professional  development  experiences.             210   CHAPTER  SIX     WHAT  DOES  IT  ALL  MEAN?    REFLECTING  ON  THE  PROCESS,  THE  OUTCOMES   AND  WHERE  WE  GO  FROM  HERE       In  the  spring  of  2013,  I  attended  my  last  GET  City  event  as  a   teacher/researcher  in  the  program.    The  completion  of  this  dissertation  sends  me   off  to  a  new  place  to  build  relationships  with  more  youth  and  work  with  more   teachers.    However,  at  this  event,  the  GET  City  youth  once  again  reminded  me  of  the   importance  of  this  work.    GET  City  youth  assembled  a  group  of  science  educators,   college  students  and  community  members  at  a  local  university  to  share  their   findings  of  a  healthy  food  investigation  they  participated  with  this  year.    I  was  once   again  amazed  to  watch  the  youth  interact  with  these  visitors  and  observe  the   confidence  with  which  they  shared  their  expertise  with  others.    My  amazement   wasn’t  in  the  sense  of  surprise  for  what  they  could  do  because  I  have  seen  this  group   do  these  types  of  things  before.    Instead,  my  amazement  was  about  what  was   happening  in  this  room.    A  group  of  people  from  different  backgrounds,  different   experience  levels  and  varied  interests  all  come  together  to  deliberate  upon  access  to   healthy  food  options  in  Great  Lakes  City.    The  room  wasn’t  divided  into  people  who   held  the  knowledge  and  those  who  didn’t.    Instead,  these  youth  created  a  space  for   people  to  come  together  to  learn  and  participate  in  discussions  about  the  connection   between  science  and  community.         On  my  drive  home,  I  couldn’t  help  but  reflect  on  what  these  youth  have   taught  and  shared  with  me.    As  I  was  working  to  help  them  learn  the  science   concepts  and  practices  connected  to  our  investigations,  they  were  working  to  help   me  think  about  why  and  how  this  matters  to  people  and  places  outside  of  science     211   classrooms.    Now  it  seems  simple  to  me  to  think  about  the  power  of  youth  voice  for   teacher  learning,  but  I  know  that  wasn’t  always  the  case.    They  inspired  this  study   and  will  continue  to  inspire  my  future  work.   It  feels  strange  to  write  a  conclusion  to  this  study  because  in  many  ways,  I   think  the  work  is  just  beginning.    There  are  more  questions  to  ask,  more  people  to   talk  to  and  more  stories  to  be  revealed.    Yet,  in  order  to  understand  the  next  steps,  it   is  always  helpful  to  reflect  upon  what  was  done  and  what  was  learned.       This  chapter  is  divided  into  three  sections.    First,  I  look  back  at  what  was   learned  through  this  study  by  summarizing  my  findings  with  respect  to  my  research   questions.    Next,  I  use  those  findings  to  demonstrate  how  my  research  contributes   to  the  literature  on  science  teacher  learning  as  well  as  the  ways  in  which  youth   challenge  narratives  that  define  who  is  capable  of  doing  science  and  where  science   is  meaningful.    This  section  continues  with  a  discussion  of  limitations  of  this  study   and  next  steps  for  this  line  of  research.    Finally,  I  conclude  this  dissertation  with  a   discussion  of  implications  of  this  work.    More  specifically,  I  argue  for  the  inclusion  of   youth  voice  in  current  reform  movements  as  well  as  what  this  work  means  for   teacher  educators.       Reflecting  on  the  Phases  of  This  Investigation   This  study  aimed  at  bringing  youth  narratives  of  informal  science  learning  to   teachers  in  order  to  investigate  what  they  noticed  and  how  they  made  meaning  in   connection  to  classroom  practices.    Through  this,  I  aimed  at  flipping  the   formal/informal  question  by  positioning  these  girls’  informal  science  experiences  as     212   sources  for  teacher  learning  designed  to  open  possibilities  to  alter  school  science   practices.     I  began  by  introducing  the  girls  and  looking  closely  at  their  cases  of  informal   learning.  I  asked:  What  are  the  stories  these  four  girls  tell  in  their  cases  about  what   they  gain  from  their  participation  in  a  year  round  green  energy  club?  How  is  science   learning  and  doing  represented  in  these  stories?  The  girls’  cases  show  that  through   their  participation  in  a  year  round  green  energy  club  they  gain  understandings  of   relevant  energy  related  science  and  experience  creating  hybrid  spaces  merging  this   science  with  their  everyday  lives.  The  girls  exhibit  how  important  the  opportunities   to  engage  in  this  merging  process  are  to  how  they  interact  with  science  and  their   desire  to  know  more.  These  opportunities  to  create  hybrid  spaces,  merging  science   and  place,  stand  in  contrast  to  experiences  they  have  in  formal  education  by  shifting   outcomes  of  investigations  from  traditional  school  measures  to  making  a  difference   in  their  community.   Thus,  science  knowing  and  doing  is  represented  as  relevant  to  the   communities  in  which  they  live  and  shares  authority  with  other  ways  of  knowing   and  doing.  The  girls  show  how  science  is  one  of  several  frameworks  they  drawn   upon  for  making  sense  of  local  phenomenon.    Through  telling  stories  of  when,  how   and  why  science  matters  with  teachers,  the  girls  show  how  they  draw  upon  valued   cultural  practices  (Bang  &  Medin,  2010;  Holland  &  Lave,  2001;  Lemke,  2001)  as  well   as  science  understandings  when  conducting  energy  related  investigations  in  and  for   their  community.         213   Perhaps  more  importantly,  through  their  cases,  the  girls  represent  expanded   visions  of  what  knowing  and  doing  science  looks  like  and  who  is  capable  of  this   work.    Knowing  and  doing  science  is  not  reserved  for  those  working  in  laboratories   or  who  have  earned  advanced  degrees  in  the  discipline.    Additionally,  knowing   science  does  not  have  to  take  place  seated  in  rows  in  their  classrooms  or  having   information  transmitted  at  them.  Taking  action  with  science,  or  being  a  scientifically   literate  citizen,  is  not  reserved  for  adults  who  have  been  exposed  to  the  requisite   amount  of  formal  science  education.    Instead,  these  girls  show  that  categories  such   as  age,  race,  gender  or  SES  shouldn’t  exclude  them,  or  anyone,  from  participating   with  science  in  meaningful  and  rigorous  ways.    These  girls  challenge  traditional   notions  of  who  can  do  science  and  where  science  is  relevant  by  positioning   themselves  as  experts  and  sharing  experiences  where  that  expertise  was   recognized,  valued  and  directed  toward  making  a  difference  in  their  community   (Calabrese  Barton  &  Yang,  2000;  Carlone  et  al.,  2011;  Martin,  Wassell  and   Scantlebury,  2013).    The  importance  of  this  expanded  vision  is  that  it  holds   possibilities  for  teachers  as  well  as  their  peers  to  consider  what  it  means  to  be   scientific  and  participate  with  science.       The  next  phase  of  this  study  focused  on  bringing  these  cases  to  science   teachers.  It  was  in  the  sharing  of  these  cases  with  three  male  science  teachers  where   I  was  able  to  examine  the  relationship,  or  potential  relationship,  between  informal   and  formal  science  learning  experiences.  I  described  teacher  interactions  with  the   cases  through  examining  what  they  noticed  and  made  meaning  of  in  regards  to  the   girls’  messages  and  artifacts.    The  central  question  in  the  chapter  was:  How  do     214   teachers  make  sense  of  the  stories  the  girls  tell  about  their  informal  learning   practices  in  support  of  powerful  learning  in  science  classrooms?       I  argued  through  chapters  four  and  five  that  these  teachers  noticed  powerful   messages  within  and  across  the  girls’  cases  in  terms  of  the  girls  desire  to  be  active   participants  with  science  (Falk  &  Dierking,  2002),  leverage  strengths  to  enhance   science  investigations  (Bang  &  Medin,  2010;  Carlone  et.  al.  2011),  connect  science   and  community  (Lim  &  Calabrese  Barton,  2009)  and  expand  outcomes  of   investigations  (Carlone  et  al.,  2011;  HFRP,  2009).      Noticing  the  power  in  the  girls’   informal  science  practices  led  teachers  to  implicate  the  science  teaching  and   learning  practices  in  their  classrooms.      However,  making  meaning  of  the  cases  was   a  messy  process.  Individual  meaning  making  was  influenced  by  the  tensions   between  what  teachers  found  as  powerful  in  the  girls  cases,  the  institutional   narratives  that  often  guide  practice  in  schools  and  the  societal  and  personal   narratives  around  girls  from  non-­‐dominant  communities  participation  with  science   (Holland  and  Lave,  2001;  Martin,  Wassell  and  Scantlebury,  2013).    Each  teacher   drew  upon  different  narratives  influencing  the  meaning  they  made  in  connection  to   the  teaching  and  learning  of  science.  Thus,  how  they  made  sense  of  the  girls’  stories   was  dependent  on  overlapping  and  competing  narratives  they  found  most  salient  in   the  girls’  cases  and  in  their  work  as  teachers.     Finally,  I  followed  the  teachers  into  their  science  classrooms  during  and  after   the  professional  development  meetings  to  examine  the  following  questions:  How  do   teachers  draw  upon  interpretations  of  the  girls’  stories  in  their  classroom  practices?   What  role  does  instructional  context  play  in  implementing  science  learning     215   experiences?  This  aspect  of  the  study  was  not  intended  to  diminish  the  importance   of  teacher  talk  about  the  girls’  cases,  but  instead  to  further  understand  individual   meaning  making  and  provide  insight  into  what  messages  were  most  salient  in   connection  to  classroom  practice.   The  first  question  guiding  this  chapter  looked  at  how  teachers  drew  upon  the   girls’  stories  in  their  science  classrooms.  As  you  may  remember,  implementing   lessons  based  upon  professional  development  meetings  was  not  asked  of  these   teachers  as  part  of  their  participation.  In  the  end,  each  of  these  teachers  made   efforts  to  implement  learning  experiences  based  upon  what  they  found  powerful  in   the  girls’  cases.    However,  all  three  of  these  teachers  took  different  pathways  when   implementing  science  learning  experiences  based  upon  the  meaning  they  made  of   the  girls’  informal  science  learning  cases  and  its  link  to  classroom  practices,   resulting  in  varied  learning  experiences  for  their  students.    These  pathways  to   implementation  were  influenced  by  how  each  teacher  made  sense  of  the  tensions   between  the  institutional  narratives  and  meaning  making  from  the  girls’  cases  each   found  most  salient.       Thus,  instructional  context,  or  the  ways  in  which  these  teachers  envisioned   their  instructional  context,  assumed  a  major  role  in  how  each  teacher  made  sense  of   the  girls’  cases,  and  the  potential  the  cases  held  for  altering  classroom  instruction.     How  each  envisioned  such  elements  as  their  role  as  teachers,  their  freedom  to   implement  reform  and  the  capabilities/desires  of  their  students  influenced  the   types  of  instructional  risk  they  took  (or  didn’t  take),  the  purposes  for  implementing   change  and  the  degree  to  which  those  implementations  altered  traditional  norms  of     216   knowing  and  doing  science  established  in  formal  settings.  As  with  the  youth  and   how  knowledge  of  place  mattered  to  the  ways  in  which  they  participated  with   science,  these  teachers’  insider  knowledge  of  their  instructional  context  was  vital  to   how  they  made  sense  of  the  girls’  stories  and  planned  reform  based  upon   understanding  of  those  stories.   I  believe  the  findings  of  this  study,  both  in  terms  of  the  girls’  stories  and  the   teachers  meaning  making,  hold  important  insights  that  extend  to  other  contexts,   teachers  and  youth.    In  the  next  section,  I  argue  how  this  study  contributes  to   current  science  education  literature  before  turning  to  the  implications  this  study   holds  for  science  teachers,  teacher  educators  and  authors  of  reform  documents.     Contributions  to  the  Literature   This  section  examines  how  this  study  contributes  to  the  literature  on  science   teaching  as  well  as  challenging  narratives  of  who  can  do  science  and  where  science   is  relevant.    I  discuss  three  major  areas  in  which  I  believe  this  study  contributes  to   existing  literature.    First,  I  discuss  how  this  professional  development  model  shifts   what  and  how  science  teachers  learn.    Next,  I  examine  the  ways  in  which  this  study   shares  challenges  to  traditional  notions  of  who  can  do  science  and  where  science  is   relevant  authored  by  youth.  Finally,  I  discuss  the  urgency  of  the  girls’  messages  -­‐   how  maintaining  the  status  quo  in  science  classrooms  may  influence  their  continued   participation  with  science.    I  end  this  section  by  looking  at  the  limitations  of  the   study  and  how  the  next  steps  address  those  limitations.               217   Shifting  What  Science  Teachers  Learn     A  major  contribution  of  this  study  centers  on  a  shift  in  what  teachers  learned,   resulting  a  changing  vision  of  what  teaching  and  learning  science  can  look  like  in   school  classrooms.  I  began  the  study  by  arguing  that  greater  recognition  has  been   given  to  informal  science  learning  opportunities  and  the  possibilities  it  holds  to   develop  science  practices  and  interest  in  science  related  topics  (Falk  &  Dierking,   2002).  For  instance,  the  HFRP  (2009)  argues  informal  science  experiences  provide,   “expanded  learning  opportunities”  that  go  beyond  the  content,  bringing  in  the   learners’  interests  and  relationships  built  with  peers  and  adults  as  they  investigate   science  related  ideas.      CAISE  (2010)  argues  these  types  of  opportunities,  “have  been   shown  to  spark  curiosity,  generate  questions,  and  lead  to  a  depth  of  understanding   and  commitment  in  ways  that  are  often  less  possible  when  the  same  material  is   encountered  in  books  or  on  screens”  (p.11).       Despite  the  positive  influence  of  informal  science  learning  experiences,   including  learning  opportunities  that  “transcend  school  science”  (NRC,  2007),  there   are  very  few  studies  that  address  a  connection  between  informal  and  school-­‐based   learning  opportunities  with  science  or  build  on  how  findings  from  one  venue  impact   the  other.  (Dierking,  Falk,  Feher  &  Rennie,  2003;  NRC,  2009).    A  major  goal  of  this   study  was  to  begin  to  bridge  the  divide  between  informal  and  formal  science   learning  by  opening  a  dialog  among  individuals  who  invest  their  time  and  energy  in   learning,  teaching  and  using  science  to  make  a  difference.    Through  my  work  with   GET  City  youth,  I  saw  how  their  science  learning  impacted  individuals  involved  and   their  community  and  themselves  in  powerful  ways.    As  a  former  science  teacher,  I     218   also  saw  powerful  implications  for  reforming  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in   classroom  settings.      Their  stories  inspired  me  to  think  about  what  they  were  able  to   do  and  what  was  missing  for  them  in  their  school  experiences.    It  was  in  their  stories   recounting  experiences  of  engaging  with  science  in  their  community  that  I  felt  held   real  potential  for  impacting  science  teachers’  conceptions  of  classroom  practices.       Upon  reflecting  on  this  study,  I  believe  the  dialog  between  teachers  and   youth  offers  important  contributions  to  our  knowledge  of  and  ability  to  bridge  the   gap  between  informal  and  formal  science  learning.    Specifically,  the  dialog  and   actions  of  teachers  shows  how  examining  and  participating  with  youths’  informal   science  learning  experiences  can  shift  what  teachers  learn.    “What”  refers  to  the   changing  content  of  teaching  learning,  and  how  the  youth  stories  shifted  the  focus   away  from  traditional  notions  of  what  it  means  to  learn  and  do  science  in  classroom   spaces  to  how  children  experience  science  in  various  contexts.    Specifically,  “what”   includes:  1)  students’  desire  to  be  active  participants  in  science  investigations,  2)   the  need  to  provide  spaces  for  students  to  leverage  their   strengths/experiences/funds  of  knowledge  when  learning  and  doing  science,  3)  the   importance  of  building  connections  between  science  and  community,  and  4)   expanding  the  outcomes  of  scientific  investigations  beyond  traditional  school   measures.  This  shift  opened  ideas  for  teachers  that  perhaps  weren’t  necessarily  new   to  their  experiences  with  science,  but  were  new  to  how  they  thought  about  the   teaching  and  learning  of  science  in  their  classrooms.       For  example,  foregrounding  youth  narratives  during  professional   development  meetings  resulted  in  foregrounding  students’  cultural  practices  and     219   funds  of  knowledge  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2009;  Carlone  et  al.,  2011;  Holland   and  Lave,  2001)  that  professional  development  programs  rarely  address  (Banks  et   al.,  2005).    The  girls’  cases  revealed  valuable  resources  to  be  considered  when   planning  learning  experiences  or  considering  how  students  experienced  science  in   their  classrooms.  This  was  evident  in  Mr.  Jones’  classroom  as  he  implemented   change  intended  to  value  what  students  brought  to  his  classroom.    He  saw  his   students  respond  to  how  he  legitimized  the  funds  of  knowledge  they  leveraged  to   make  sense  of  science  or  help  others  understand  how  they  make  sense  of  science.     This  was  a  powerful  experience  for  Mr.  Jones,  one  that  caused  him  both  discomfort   and  exhilaration,  as  he  relinquished  power  in  order  to  better  serve  his  students.     The  girls’  cases,  as  well  as  teacher  talk  of  the  girls’  cases,  resulted  in  Mr.  Jones   expanding  his  notions  of  what  science  teaching  and  learning  can  look  like  in  a   classroom  space.     Teacher  learning  also  included  what  expanded  outcomes  mean  to  their   students  in  terms  of  the  types  of  identities  they  take  on  through  science   investigations.  This  is  evident  in  Hannah’s  case  as  she  finds  success  working   collaboratively  to  take  on  science  investigations  in  and  for  her  community.    In  her   case,  we  see  a  student  who  has  not  traditionally  been  successful  in  school  take  on   the  identity  of  a  “smart  science  person”  (Carlone,  et  al.,  2011).    All  three  teachers   spoke  about  and  aimed  at  addressing  this  idea  through  their  classroom   implementations.    For  instance,  Mr.  Roberts  spoke  of  finding  students’  strengths  and   designing  experiences  where  all  students  can  leverage  their  individual  strengths  in   order  to  be  successful.    Teachers  learned  about  the  strengths  their  students  can     220   leverage  to  bolster  science  investigations,  and  what  it  means  for  students  to  have   these  strengths  recognized  in  science  classrooms  (Calabrese  Barton  &  Tan,  2009).     This  is  also  evident  in  Mr.  Jones’  story  regarding  one  student’s  devastation  upon   hearing  she  would  not  be  able  to  share  the  findings  of  her  investigation  with  the  rest   of  the  class.    These  types  of  teacher  learning  opportunities  shift  the  focus  of   classroom  instruction  back  to  the  students  and  their  interactions  with  science.    It   redefines  the  idea  of  getting  to  know  our  students  by  shifting  the  focus  to  what  these   students  can  tell  educators  about  teaching  and  learning  science.     Shifting  what  teachers  learn  is  vital  as  we  consider  the  ways  in  which  school   science  continues  to  fail  to  engage  youth  from  non-­‐dominant  communities  (Carlone   et  al.,  2011).  Women  and  minorities  continue  to  receive  a  fraction  of  STEM  related   degrees  (AIP  Statistical  Research  Center,  2012;  National  Center  for  Educational   Statistics  2008-­‐2009).    Opportunities  for  teachers  to  engage  with  how  students   experience  science  inside  and  outside  of  formal  educational  institutions  opens   possibilities  for  what  can  be  considered  when  planning  learning  experiences.  These   possibilities  extend  beyond  the  content  to  how  their  students  see  science  as  relevant   in  their  lives,  or  the  ways  in  which  traditional  approaches  to  science  teaching  might   isolate  many  students  from  the  science  community.    Thus,  this  professional   development  asked  teachers  to  engage  with  youths’  stories  and  gain  better   understandings  of  how  the  youths  experience  school  science,  ways  in  which  science   matters  to  them  and  the  hope  they  hold  for  school  science.             221   Shifting  How  Science  Teachers  Learn    This  study  also  shows  that  the  context  and  process  of  learning  are  explicitly   tied  together.    Opening  up  a  new  dialog  with  these  teachers  regarding  the  teaching   and  learning  of  science  in  their  classrooms  required  altering  the  ways  in  which   teachers  learn  and  grow.    Thus,  a  second  contribution  of  this  study  focuses  on  the   role  of  the  professional  development  model  in  shifting  how  science  teachers  learn.     Specifically,  foregrounding  the  girls’  narratives  over  curricular  or  instructional   interventions  shifted  the  focus  of  this  teacher  learning  experience  away  from  the   ways  in  which  teachers  typically  receive  professional  development.  It  reframed  how   teacher  learning  occurred  by  starting  with  the  girls’  experiences.  In  “My  Pedagogical   Creed,”  John  Dewey  (1897)  wrote:   Education,  therefore,  must  begin  with  a  psychological  insight  into  the  child's   capacities,  interests,  and  habits.  It  must  be  controlled  at  every  point  by   reference  to  these  same  considerations.  These  powers,  interests,  and  habits   must  be  continually  interpreted  -­‐  we  must  know  what  they  mean.  They  must   be  translated  into  terms  of  their  social  equivalents  -­‐  into  terms  of  what  they   are  capable  of  in  the  way  of  social  service  (p.  i).       Dewey  argued  educational  pursuits  should  begin  with  the  child’s  experience   in  order  to  gain  insight  into  appropriate  modes  of  instruction  or  topics  of  study.    I   designed  this  professional  development  model  with  this  idea  in  mind  based  on  the   powerful  stories  these  girls  told  about  when  science  mattered  to  them  and  how  I  felt   these  stories  could  impact  teacher  learning.    I  felt  the  girls’  stories  contextualized   science  learning  and  opened  spaces  for  teachers  to  talk  about  teaching  and  learning   of  science  in  their  classrooms  in  ways  that  mattered  to  their  students.       Altering  what  was  foregrounded  during  this  professional  development   resulted  in  learning  experience  vastly  different  than  what  teachers  typically     222   experience  in  professional  development  sessions.    Traditionally,  professional   development  relies  on  the  transmission  of  knowledge  from  an  expert  to  a  group  of   teachers  in  the  form  of  seminar  presentations  with  little  follow  up  on  a  program’s   impact  or  transference  to  classroom  practices  (Huberman,  1995).    Teachers  are   introduced  to  a  strategy  that  “works,”  provided  with  examples,  and  left  on  their  own   to  implement  change  in  the  classroom.    Districts  often  adopt  professional   development  that  is  under-­‐researched  and  aligns  with  the  latest  fad  in  the   educational  community,  only  to  have  it  replaced  as  a  new  approach  surfaces   (Guskey,  2000).    These  factors  lead  many  teachers  to  view  professional   development  in  a  negative  light  with  little  connection  to  their  classroom  (Cochran-­‐ Smith  &  Lyttle,  1992;  Little,  2001).    In  fact,  Hill  (2009)  found  that  while  almost  all   teachers  engaged  in  some  form  of  professional  development,  most  participated  in,   “the  minimum  professional  learning  required  by  their  state  or  district  each  year”  (p.   471).     In  contrast  to  the  ways  in  which  professional  development  is  traditionally   carried  out,  this  study  contributes  a  model  for  teacher  learning  focused  on  the   inclusion  of  youth  voice  in  the  teaching  and  learning  of  science.    The  model  is   focused  on  foregrounding  youth  voice,  providing  teachers  with  “case  exploration   tools”  in  order  to  assist  in  linking  science  learning  contexts  (case  and  classroom)   and  time  to  collectively  reflect  upon  implications  for  classroom  practices.    The   meetings  and  conversations  placed  the  girls’  experiences  at  the  center  (Dewey,   1903)  of  the  learning  process.         223   Additionally,  shifting  how  teachers  learned  not  only  resulted  in  altering  what   they  learned,  but  also  how  they  interacted  with  the  core  ideas  embedded  in  girls’   cases.  The  messages  embedded  throughout  the  cases  were  more  accessible  to   teachers  because  it  came  from  students  in  their  community  who  could  be  sitting  in   their  classrooms.    The  accessibility  of  the  cases  opened  up  safe  spaces  where   teachers  could  interrogate  their  own  practice  in  ways  I  had  not  imagined.     Foregrounding  youth  voices  alleviated  a  common  power  dynamic  and  contextual   divide  that  is  often  found  in  professional  development  experiences  (Huberman,   1995).    More  specifically,  the  science  learning  messages  were  not  coming  from  an   authoritative  voice  from  the  university,  administration  or  another  outside  source   that  could  be  morphed  into  another  institutional  narrative  pressed  down  upon   teachers.  Instead,  the  messages  came  from  voices  of  youth  who  are  currently  in   science  classrooms  every  day.    Because  they  were  part  of  the  learning  process  in   science  classrooms,  the  messages  could  not  be  disregarded  because  the  messengers   didn’t  understand  the  context  in  which  these  teachers  were  working  as  often   happens  when  professional  development  rests  on  the  expertise  of  those  from  the   outside.  The  voices  represented  the  students  who,  these  teachers  all  professed,  were   the  reason  they  were  in  the  classroom  in  the  first  place.     The  power  of  how  teachers  interacted  with  the  girls’  messages  in  this  study  is   evidenced  in  Mr.  Jones’  reflection:   Looking  through  the  kids’  perspectives  made  me  change.  I  have  been  to   millions  of  PD’s  and  haven't  left  many  of  them  thinking  ‘Wow,  that  was  pretty   good.’  I  can't  ever  remember  instituting  a  strategy  that  I  have  learned  at  a  PD!   I  did  [this  time]  just  to  see  what  would  happen.  Now  I  have  kids  in  my  class   crying  because  they  might  not  have  the  time  to  finish  their  projects.  It  is   really  interesting;  it  is  something  that  should  be  looked  at.     224     The  accessibility  of  the  girls’  messages,  as  well  as  the  content,  changed  how   Mr.  Jones  interacted  with  ideas  in  this  professional  development  model.    Their   “perspectives”  caused  him  to  reflect  on  his  actions  as  a  science  teacher  in  ways  other   professional  development  approaches  had  not.  He  changed  classroom  practices   based  the  on  “powers,  interests  and  habits”  of  students  that  Dewey  argues  must  be   central  to  educational  experiences.         Shifting  how  and  what  teachers  learn  are  major  contributions  of  this  study   that  will  be  expanded  on  in  the  implications  section.    This  professional  development   model  holds  promise  for  teachers  to  authentically  participate  with  how  youth   experience  science  in  different  contexts.    This  participation  opens  space  for   conversations  that  can  go  beyond  traditional  science  teaching  and  learning  to  focus   on  who  that  teaching  and  learning  are  designed  to  impact.       Girls  Authoring  Their  Own  Challenges.       While  I  believe  findings  regarding  altering  how  and  what  teachers  learn  are   significant,  the  contributions  of  this  study  extend  beyond  teacher  learning.  A  central   aspect  of  this  study  aimed  at  opening  spaces  for  these  girls  to  share  their   experiences  of  when,  how  and  why  science  mattered.    The  substance  of  these   experiences,  where  the  girls  challenged  traditional  narratives  about  who  can  do   science  and  where  science  is  meaningful,  make  an  important  contribution  to  the   field  by  sharing  messages  authored  by  youth.  The  girls  shared  stories  of  the  rich   science  investigations  they  carried  out  in  and  with  their  community.  The   experiences  included  performing  energy  audits  of  local  schools,  bringing  their   findings  and  expertise  to  younger  students  and  taking  teachers  on  tours  of  their     225   homes  by  highlighting  energy  efficient  technology.    They  also  shared  messages,   filled  with  pedagogical  implications,  about  how  their  participation  in  informal   science  contexts  helped  them  build  deep  scientific  understandings,  gain  experience   with  science  practices  and  leverage  their  sense  of  place  to  enrich  energy  related   investigations.    These  girls  shared  their  messages  and  artifacts  hoping  that  teachers   would  think  about  the  possibilities  each  case  held  for  science  teaching  and  learning   in  their  own  classroom.  Through  sharing  these  experiences,  the  girls  authored  their   own  narratives  about  the  ways  in  which  girls  from  low  income  areas  can  make   engage  in  rigorous  scientific  investigations  without  neglecting  their  own  cultural   practices  or  the  perceived  needs  of  their  community.   There  is  a  great  deal  of  research  on  how  youth  from  non-­‐dominate   communities  challenge  traditional  narratives  regarding  participation  with  science   through  their  actions  (Bang  &  Medin,  2010;  Calabrese  Barton  &  Yang,  2000;   Eisenhart,  1996;  Tan  &  Calabrese  Barton  2008).    These  studies  speak  to  the   boundaries  around  science  that  influence  youths’  participation  and  identity   formation  as  well  as  the  ways  in  which  these  boundaries  are  challenged.    I  argue  this   study  contributes  to  this  literature  by  sharing  challenges  to  these  traditional   narratives  authored  by  youth.    Instead  of  scholars  identifying  what  restricts  youth   participation  in  or  with  science,  this  study  shares  authentic  voices  of  young  women   who  recognize  how  they  are  traditionally  positioned  outside  the  scientific   community,  and  how  their  experiences  in  formal  science  learning  contexts  serve  to   further  isolate  science  from  their  community.    However,  their  challenges  are  filled   with  hope  as  they  share  a  vision  of  what  it  looks  like  to  be  civically  engaged  with     226   science,  and  provide  expertise  regarding  how  formal  science  learning  holds   potential  to  offer  opportunities  for  their  peers  to  do  the  same.    Through  inclusion  of   stories,  artifacts  and  messages  in  their  cases,  the  girls  indicate  an  awareness  of  the   types  of,  “multiple  marginalizations”  (Martin,  Wassell  &  Scantlebury,  2013)  that   were  imposed  upon  them  and  a  desire  to  challenge  these  marginalizations.    Their   actions  with  science  outside  of  school  as  well  as  their  participation  in  this  study,   challenged  narratives  about  how  young  girls,  mostly  of  color  from  economically   disadvantaged  backgrounds,  can  participate  in  rigorous  scientific  investigations  as   well  as  make  meaningful  contributions  to  conversations  about  what  formal  science   education  can  be.       Specifically,  the  girls  challenge  notions  about  who  can  do  science  and  where   science  is  relevant  in  several  ways  through  their  cases.    First,  the  girls  position   themselves  as  experts  (Tan  &  Calabrese  Barton,  2008)  who  have  valuable   knowledge  and  experiences  to  share  with  teachers  both  about  doing  science  as  well   teaching  and  learning  science.    When  authoring  their  messages  for  teachers,  they  are   challenging  traditional  power  dynamics  between  students  and  teachers  by  speaking   back  to  the  notion  of  who  holds  authoritative  knowledge  and  expanding  upon  the   sources  of  this  knowledge.    Calabrese  Barton  and  Yang  (2000)  argue  that  asking   students  to  assimilate  to  rigid  definitions  of  legitimate  scientific  knowledge  and   practices  can  lead  to,  “[s]tudents  learn(ing)  that  boundaries  exist  which  separate   who  is  and  who  is  not  capable  of  science”  (p.  876).    In  this  study,  these  girls  are   reorganizing  these  boundaries  not  only  for  themselves,  but  for  their  peers  as  well.     Despite  traditionally  being  positioned  as  outsiders  to  science  due  to  the     227   intersectionality  of  their  race,  gender,  SES  and  age  (Martin,  Wassell  &  Scantlebury,   2013),  they  challenge  that  positioning  by  exerting  themselves  among  those  who  can   do  science  through  sharing  their  expertise  and  experiences.  They  reorganize  the   boundaries  by  challenging  traditional  images  of  what  it  looks  like  to  be  “smart”  in   science  and  what  it  means  to  be  an  expert  with  science.    They  do  not  present   themselves  as  special  cases  that  exceed  expectations  and  barriers  to  be  successful   with  science.    Instead,  their  messages  are  intended  for  teachers  to  think  about  how   their  peers  are  interested  in  and  capable  of  this  type  of  work  with  science  given  the   opportunity.  They  do  all  of  this  by  authoring  a  vision  of  what  it  looks  like  to  civically   engaged  with  science  in  and  with  their  community.       Second,  through  their  cases,  the  girls  push  on  the  idea  of  what  learning  from   rigorous  scientific  investigations  can  look  like  in  a  formal  setting.    The  girls  share   artifacts  with  teachers  that  are  a  result  of  science  investigations  where  they   developed  deep  understandings  of  the  concepts,  ideas  and  burning  questions   related  to  the  energy  investigations  in  which  they  participated.  They  identified   issues,  asked  questions,  gathered  multiple  sources  of  data  and  engaged  in  discussion   and  debate  over  what  it  all  means.    In  other  words,  these  artifacts  are  a  result  of   building  scientific  knowledge  and  practices  as  we  traditionally  think  about  it  playing   out.  However,  these  girls  also  expand  the  idea  of  what  learning  from  rigorous   science  investigations  can  look  like  -­‐  at  least  in  connection  with  how  they  are  carried   out  in  formal  educational  contexts.    They  demonstrate  how  aspects  of  this  work  is   fun,  collaborative  and  draws  from  multiple  frameworks  of  knowing,  ideas  in  formal   science  education  that  often  signal  that  real  learning  is  absent.    Instead,  these  girls     228   show  teachers  how  working  collaboratively  helped  them  more  deeply  investigate   the  science  concepts  as  each  member  of  the  group  brought  understandings  and   questions  to  the  table.       However,  the  girls  also  show  that  engaging  in  scientifically  rigorous   investigations  does  not  have  to  occur  at  the  expense  of  enjoying  the  process  of   learning  and  being  passionate  about  making  a  difference  with  science.    They  argue   that  enjoying  what  you  are  doing  doesn’t  have  to  be  the  antithesis  of  learning  or  a   signal  that  students  are  not  seriously  participating  with  science.    For  instance,  they   (and  others  in  GET  City)  created  a  new  word  (fcience)  to  signify  the  existence  of   science  that  was  fun.  The  fact  that  they  felt  a  need  to  create  this  term  showed  how   these  youth  conceptualized  and  experienced  school  science.    Fcience  represents   science  in  which  they  are  active  participants  instead  of  passive  receivers  of   decontextualized  scientific  knowledge.    Their  argument  isn’t  that  they  want  to   simply  socialize  with  their  friends.    Instead,  they  are  asking  to  be  more  involved,   have  more  ownership  and  have  opportunities  to  leverage  what  they  know  and  can   do  when  participating  in  scientific  investigations.  It  was  an  important  message  for   teachers  connected  to  narratives  of  classroom  control  or  silence  as  the  pathway  to   learning  as  well  as  to  interrogate  what  science  learning  looks  like  in  their   classrooms.     Additionally,  the  girls  exhibited  that  the  environmental  issues  they  are   interested  in  deal  with  questions  that  require  the  ability  to  situate  science   knowledge  among  other  societal  concerns.    The  girls  brought  in  understandings  of   economic,  political  and  social  aspects  to  their  investigations  to  be  considered     229   alongside  the  energy  related  science  concepts.    Science  shared  authority  with  other   ways  of  knowing  as  they  took  action  in  and  for  their  community.  Being  civically   engaged  with  science  meant  that  these  girls  had  the  capacity  to  consider  several   complex,  and  often  competing  narratives,  when  making  decisions  as  citizens.    The   inclusion  of  scientific  understandings  and  practices  in  the  decision  making  process   stands  in  contrast  to  research  suggesting  that  scientific  understanding  bears  little   impact  on  the  decisions  people  make  on  civic  engagement  (Allum,  Sturgis,  Tabourazi   &  Brunton-­‐Smith,  2008;  Sadler,  2004).   Their  ability  and  desire  to  take  multiple  areas  of  knowing  into  consideration   is  important  for  educators  to  consider  when  designing  learning  experiences  if  the   goal  of  science  education  is  to  develop  individuals  who  are  civically  engaged  with   science.    Lemke  (2001)  asked,  “For  all  the  factual  science  curriculum  is  teaching   them,  are  our  students  any  more  knowledgeable  about  the  economic,  sociological,   technical  and  political  role  of  science  in  the  modern  world?”  (p.  300).  The  girls,   although  unaware  that  this  question  has  been  posed,  respond  to  it  through  the   artifacts  that  are  included  in  their  cases  in  which  they  draw  upon  multiple  ways  of   knowing  when  investigating  environmental  issues  in  their  place.    They  did  this,   worked  collaboratively,  broke  down  the  binary  between  fun  and  learning,  and  drew   upon  multiple  ways  of  knowing,  all  while  presenting  high  quality  work.    These  girls   weren’t  simply  reciting  facts;  they  were  participating  in  investigations  where  new   knowledge  was  being  created  and  shared  with  members  of  their  community.       Finally,  the  girls  in  this  study  challenge  traditional  notions  by  connecting  the   science  to  the  community  and  thus  pushing  on  the  idea  of  where  science  is  relevant.       230   Great  Lakes  City  is  a  high  poverty  area  with  a  high  minority  population  where   science  is  often  out  of  reach  or  disconnected  from  the  everyday  lives  of  citizens.     However,  many  of  the  girls  artifacts  centered  on  the  overlap  of  science  and  place  in   framing  what  matters.    The  videos  they  showed  took  place  in  their  schools,  homes   and  community  centers.  These  weren’t  simply  the  sites  of  their  investigations,  they   also  held  many  of  the  reasons  why  these  investigations  mattered  in  ways  that  school   science  did  not.  In  that  way,  they  challenged  the  notion  of  where  science  is   meaningful  by  expanding  the  outcomes  of  the  investigations  through  which  they   participated  to  the  people  and  places  of  Great  Lakes  City.    Instead  of  science  leading   to,  “acquiring  a  sufficient  number  of  facts  and  understandings  to  ensure  adequate   performance  on  exams”  (Sadler,  2009,  p.  7),  these  girls  looked  to  use  science  to   make  a  difference  in  their  community.    Science  mattered  when  it  could  be   contextualized  and  leveraged  for  taking  action  or  gaining  a  deeper  understanding  of   that  context.    In  turn,  they  found,  and  showed,  that  science  does  matter  in  Great   Lakes  City  as  much  as  it  does  in  other  places,  and  their  peers  and  other  community   members  are  interested  in  being  a  part  of  conversations  about  energy  related   science  technologies  and  behaviors.   The  Urgency  of  Their  Messages     As  I  thought  more  about  the  girls’  cases,  I  felt  there  was  still  something  I  was   missing  in  the  ways  these  girls  authored  their  cases.  In  addition  to  being  hopeful  and   authoring  challenges,  they  stressed  to  teachers  that  something  needs  to  change  in   science  classrooms,  and  it  needs  to  change  now.  Embedded  throughout  their  cases,   both  in  their  talk  and  video  of  their  actions,  was  a  sense  of  urgency  for  reforming     231   formal  science  learning.  I  felt  part  of  this  urgency  connected  to  the  girls’   understanding  of  the  gravity  of  the  environmental  concerns  they  cared  about  and   the  need  for  action  now.    However,  the  urgency  went  beyond  concern  for  the   environment,  to  their  own  futures  as  science  learners  and  potential  aspirations  as   science  professionals.    Although  I  sensed  this  urgency  in  their  messages,  I  had  yet  to   make  sense  of  it.      It  wasn’t  until  I  attended  a  keynote  presentation  given  by  Dr.  William  Tate  5   that  this  idea  came  more  into  focus.    That  day,  Dr.  Tate  spoke  to  a  large  group  of   science  educators  regarding  the  state  of  public  education  and  the  place  of  science  in   what  he  saw  as  the  major  educational  issues.    One  of  the  several  ideas  Dr.  Tate  spoke   about  was  an  “empty  seat”  phenomenon  occurring  in  many  urban  schools,  referring   to  the  increasingly  high  drop-­‐out  rate  in  these  contexts.    One  of  his  messages  to  the   audience,  and  I  am  paraphrasing,  was,  “it  doesn’t  matter  how  great  the  curriculum   you  are  designing  is  or  the  instructional  strategies  you  are  writing  about  are,  if  the   kids  aren’t  there,  it  doesn’t  mean  a  thing.”    I  found  this  message  powerful  and   wondered  what  it  meant  to  these  girls  and  the  urgency  of  the  messages  they  were   telling  science  teachers.  I  left  thinking  there  was  something  I  was  missing  in  this   story.    The  power  of  the  message  is  strengthened  by  research  regarding  young,   minority,  female,  poor  students’  participation  with  science.    Although  females  earn  a   majority  of  bachelor  degrees  at  colleges  and  universities  in  the  United  States,   women  receive  less  than  30%  of  STEM  related  degrees  (National  Center  for                                                                                                                   5  Keynote  presentation  given  at  the  2013  Annual  Conference  for  the  National   Association  for  Research  in  Science  Teaching     232   Educational  Statistics  2008-­‐2009)  and  only  18%  of  all  engineering  degrees   (Gibbons,  2011).    Similarly,  African  American  and  Hispanic  students  combined  to   receive  just  7%  of  all  Physics  degrees  (AIP  Statistical  Research  Center,  2012).     The  reflection  on  Dr.  Tate’s  talk  juxtaposed  with  what  I  had  felt  about  the   girls’  cases,  left  me  thinking  about  their  message  of  urgency  the  girls  authored  in   their  cases.  How  these  girls  compare  their  informal  experiences  to  formal  school   experiences  led  me  to  reflect  about  “empty  seats”  and  the  urgency  of  their  messages   in  a  different  way.    Through  laying  out  how  school  matters  in  terms  of  needing  to   pass  to  move  on  to  the  next  experience,  these  girls  are  creating  a  metaphorical   category  of  empty  seats.    They  are  physically  present  in  their  science  classrooms,   but  not  participating  with  science  in  ways  that  matter  beyond  completion  of  a   course.    For  the  most  part  they  are  “achieving”  in  terms  of  grades  and  test  scores,   but  are  seeing  little  value  in  what  they  are  doing.    In  a  sense,  part  of  the  urgency  of   the  message  is  that  they  know  there  are  more  empty  seats  than  we  can  count.  They   will  pass  and  move  on,  but  what  will  they  take  with  them?      Their  sense  of  urgency  is  a  warning  to  educators  that  the  hope  these  girls   have  for  school  science  is  not  infinite.  It  is  a  message  better  authored  by  youth  than   researchers.  They  want  teachers  to  know  that  current  conditions  warrant  change,   and  they  believe  they  have  ideas  that  will  help  their  peers  participate  with  science  in   ways  that  matters  to  them.  Otherwise,  science  classrooms  will  continue  to  be  filled   with  “empty  seats”  regardless  if  the  students  are  there  for  count  day  or  not.     I  believe  this  is  a  powerful  message  for  science  educators.  These  are  students   who  for  the  most  part  are  achieving  at  high  levels,  yet  are  not  satisfied  with  their     233   school  science  experiences  in  terms  of  the  interactions  with  science  knowledge  and   practices  gained.    They  are  all  students  who  are  participating  with  science  outside  of   school  where  they  are  findings  success,  enjoyment  and  space  to  take  action  in  and   for  their  community.    They  all  have  something  to  say  about  learning  and  doing   science  based  on  expertise  gained  through  participation  with  science  outside  of  the   classroom.       Limitations  and  Next  Steps   While  I  believe  this  study  makes  important  contributions  to  science   education,  there  are  also  questions  that  emerge  from  this  study  that  I  am  unable  to   answer  but  feel  are  important  to  address  as  this  work  moves  forward.    These   questions  stem  from  the  major  limitation  of  this  study  –  scale.    I  carried  out  this   study  with  only  four  female  youth  and  three  male  teachers  who  all  lived  in  the  same   city.  Additionally,  the  phase  of  the  study  with  teachers  was  conducted  during  only   one  semester  of  a  school  year.    This  relatively  short  amount  of  time  limited  the  type   of  work  that  could  be  done  with  teachers  in  their  classrooms.    I  firmly  believe  this   work,  where  reforming  classroom  practices  based  on  foregrounding  youth   narratives,  needs  to  be  ongoing  and  provide  support  to  teachers  throughout  the   process.    I  also  believe  the  phenomenon  of  investigation  needs  to  be  examined  in   additional  contexts  where  youth  leverage  their  own  cultural  practices  when   participating  with  science.  Thus,  the  limitations  of  this  study  lead  me  to  two  main   areas  of  questions  and  next  steps  for  this  line  of  research.   First:  What  would  other  teachers,  other  youth,  in  other  places  tell  us  about   bridging  the  informal/formal  divide?  How  would  other  youth  author  their  cases  for     234   teachers?  I  am  interested  in  investigating  similarities  and  differences  among   participants,  who  live  in  different  places,  have  different  life  experiences,  draw  up   different  cultural  practices  and  identify  in  different  categories  (i.e.  gender,  race).   This  would  add  depth  to  the  findings  of  this  study  and  more  importantly  expand  our   knowledge  of  how  other  youth  experience  science  in  various  contexts  as  well  as  the   possibilities  these  experiences  hold  for  teacher  learning.  While  this  study  was  small   in  scale,  I  do  believe  it  provides  and  exciting  jumping  off  point  to  continue  to   investigate  what  youth  are  doing  with  science  outside  of  school  and  how  that  might   impact  formal  science  education.       Second:  What  supports  do  teachers  need  to  implement  or  reform  science   teaching  practices  based  on  youth  voice?  Each  of  these  teachers  drew  upon  different   narratives,  different  histories  and  found  different  aspects  of  the  girls  cases  salient.     The  meaning  making  process  was  often  messy  leaving  teachers  wondering  about   the  best  ways  in  which  to  implement  what  they  find  powerful  into  their  classroom   spaces.    Since  I  wanted  to  see  if  these  teachers  would  draw  upon  the  girls  narratives   in  their  classrooms,  I  did  not  provide  support  unless  specifically  asked  for  it.     However,  as  this  type  of  work  moves  forward,  it  is  vital  to  investigate  the  types  of   support  teachers  need  as  they  implement  projects  into  their  classrooms  and  make   sense  of  the  competing  narratives  in  local  practice.    It  is  not  enough  to  simply  share   stories  with  teachers.    Instead,  science  educators  must  engage  in  ongoing  work  in   classrooms  and  other  spaces  of  learning  in  order  to  support  teacher  learning  from   youth  voice.       235   I  believe  this  work  is  important  to  both  youth  and  teachers,  and  I  am   committed  to  pursuing  these  questions  as  well  as  others  that  emerge  along  the  way.     I  hope  this  work  inspires  others  to  pursue  questions  regarding  how  youth   experience  science  in  different  contexts  and  what  we  as  science  educators  can  learn   from  their  stories.         Implications   I  end  this  dissertation  thinking  about  the  implications  for  authors  of  reform   movements,  science  teacher  educators  and  practicing  science  teachers  as  we  work   to  provide  meaningful  science  experiences  for  the  youth  in  our  classrooms.    These   implications  speak  to  the  need  to  include  youth  voice  in  larger  reform  conversations   as  well  as  in  teacher  learning  experiences  at  the  classroom  level.     Spaces  for  Youth  Voice  in  Current  Reform  Movements?     Recently,  the  next  wave  of  k-­‐12  science  standards  were  developed  and   dispersed  to  schools  and  science  teachers  with  a  focus  on  science  content  as  well  as   science  and  engineering  practices.    In  addition  to  the  organizing  features,  science   practices,  cross  cutting  concepts  and  core  disciplinary  content,  the  authors  of  the   Next  Generation  Science  Standards  (2013)  argue  that  investigations,  “relate  to  the   interest  and  life  experiences  of  students  or  to  be  connected  to  societal  or  personal   concerns  that  require  scientific  or  technical  knowledge.”    While  the  authors  of  the   NGSS  give  a  nod  to  making  science  relevant  to  the  learners  through  potential   connections  to  issues  they  care  about  or  experiences  they  are  interested  in,  it   remains  to  be  seen  how  science  teachers  will  take  up  this  idea  in  science  classrooms   since  other  aspects  of  the  new  standards  documents  are  foregrounded.    While  it  is     236   encouraging  that  the  new  standards  speak  to  a  relationship  between  science   content/skills  and  the  learners’  lived  experiences,  the  question  I  can’t  help  but  ask   is:  how  will  we  know  which  investigations,  “relate  to  the  interest  and  life   experiences”  or  what  types  of  experiences  with  help  students  envision,  “societal  or   personal  concerns  that  require  scientific  or  technical  knowledge”?  It  is  only  through   inclusion  of  youth  voices  in  these  curricular  conversations  that  this  aspect  of  the   standards  document  can  be  taken  up  in  schools.    Otherwise,  implementation  of  this   idea  results  in  students  being  asked  to  assimilate  to  authoritative  knowledge  that   serves  to  isolate  certain  cultural  practices  (Bang  &  Medin,  2010)  by  being  told  how   science  connects  to  their  lives  as  I  described  from  my  own  practice  in  the  opening   chapter  of  this  dissertation.     Instead,  the  youth  in  this  study  exhibit  the  desire  to  be  part  of  these   conversations  as  well  as  the  desire  to  participate  with  the  types  of  science   experiences  that,  “relate  to  the  interest  and  life  experiences  of  students  or  to  be   connected  to  societal  or  personal  concerns  that  require  scientific  or  technical   knowledge.”  Their  participation  in  these  conversations  and  experiences  is  the  only   way  to  ensure  that  connections  between  science  and  their  lives  are  authentic.     Leaving  out  their  voices  and  foregrounding  science  content  and  practices  in  ways   that  cast  a  shadow  on  connections  to  everyday  life,  result  in  further  isolating  youth   from  science  as  well  as  implicitly  communicating  messages  to  science  teachers   about  the  secondary  importance  of  connections  to  community  and  lives.               237   Shifting  Professional  Development    This  study  also  holds  several  implications  for  work  with  practicing  science  teachers.   Specifically,  I  believe  this  study  reveals  powerful  science  teacher  learning   implications  when  practicing  teachers  participate  in  professional  development   opportunities  foregrounding  youth  experience.    For  these  teachers,  the  professional   development  experience  led  to  change  in  their  classrooms  focused  on  increasing   student  participation  with  science.    I  outline  two  implications  of  shifting  what  and   how  teachers  learn  based  upon  the  findings  of  this  study  below.   First,  the  study  reveals  a  disconnect  between  the  girls’  experiences  with   science  in  formal  and  informal  settings.  By  examining  this  disconnect,  the  teachers   in  this  study  were  forced  to  implicate  their  science  teaching  practices.  Specifically,   the  teachers  identified  ideas  and  experiences  in  the  girls’  cases  that  were  missing   from  the  ways  in  which  their  students  experienced  science  in  their  classroom.    This   self-­‐examination  resulted  in  powerful  learning  for  teachers  as  illustrated  through   their  discussions  and  classroom  actions  connected  to  challenging  institutional   narratives  that  influenced  their  practice.    The  influence  of  these  institutional   narratives  has  become  automated  for  these  teachers  in  terms  of  the  ways  in  which   they  thought  science  teaching  and  learning  in  schools  had  to  be.    The  process  of  this   professional  development  caused  them  to  rethink  who  or  what  should  be   considered  when  planning  learning  experiences  in  their  classrooms  as  well  as   caused  them  to  reflect  on  narratives  that  automatically  assumed  a  role  in  that   process.       238   The  pressure  to  meet  certain  standards  and  achievement  scores  can  result  in   teachers  making  decisions  Mr.  Greene  states,  “aren’t  what  is  best  for  the  kids.”    This   study  contains  lessons  for  science  teachers  about  the  importance  of  continually   reflecting  upon  the  influences  over  classroom  practices  and  how  those  influences   impact  student  experience.  This  type  of  reflection  and  awareness  of  who  and  what  is   considered  when  planning  classroom  experiences  is  vital  for  educators  as  they   continue  to  carry  out  work  in  an  era  of  high  stakes  testing  and  standardization  of   learning  outcomes.  This  study  introduces  and  outlines  a  viable  and  practical   professional  development  model  that  opens  space  for  student-­‐centered  reflections.     The  model  requires  very  few  resources  beyond  time  for  teachers  to  come  together   and  make  meaning  of  youth  experiences  and  voices  about  meaningful  science.    The   model  allows  teachers  working  in  different  science  disciplines,  different  grade  levels   and  different  contexts  to  come  together  to  collaboratively  make  meaning  about   youth  science  experiences  and  their  potential  impact  on  science  learning  in   classrooms.   Second,  this  study  further  shows  science  teachers  the  wide  array  of  skills,   abilities  and  knowledge  their  students  bring  with  them  to  the  classroom,  and  how   these  capabilities  and  cultural  practices  can  positively  impact  participation  with   science.    It  lends  further  evidence  to  the  notion  that  their  students  are  not  devoid  of   experience  with  science  regardless  of  where  they  live,  what  they  look  like  or   previous  performance  in  science  classrooms.  Providing  opportunities  that  allow   youth  to  leverage  these  skills,  abilities  and  sources  of  knowledge  can  have  positive   impacts  on  their  motivation  to  learn  more  and  take  civic  action,  as  well  as  whether     239   they  see  themselves  as  “scientific”  or  not.    Thus,  the  important  work  of  getting  to   know  students  as  individuals  is  expanded  here  to  include  how  what  teachers  learn   about  their  students  can  impact  practices  and  activities  in  their  classrooms.       Youth  Voice  in  Teacher  Education    Finally,  this  study  leads  me  to  implicate  my  own  practice  as  a  teacher   educator  working  with  both  pre-­‐service  and  in-­‐service  science  teachers.  In  some   ways,  this  study  has  come  full  circle  as  the  girls  stories  initially  led  me  to  reflect   upon  my  practice  as  a  former  eighth-­‐grade  teacher  in  the  vignettes  that  open  this   dissertation.    Now  I  wonder,  how  can  I  continue  to  help  others  think  about  the   knowledge  and  practices  their  students  bring  to  classroom  spaces  that  can  enhance   the  teaching  and  learning  of  science  in  the  classroom?    Additionally,  how  do  I  help   teachers  think  about  opening  spaces  for  students  to  leverage  this  knowledge  or   these  practices  they  bring  with  them  while  gaining  a  deep  understanding  of  science   concepts?  As  I  mentioned  at  the  beginning  of  this  dissertation,  I  continue  to   foreground,  “getting  to  know  your  students”  in  my  practice  as  a  teacher  educator.     This  study  has  caused  me  to  continually  reflect  upon  what  I  am  really  asking   teachers  to  consider,  what  challenges  I  face  in  this  work  and  how  I  live  these   commitments  in  my  own  classroom.    Three  ideas  that  stem  from  these  reflections   and  have  implications  for  others  working  with  preservice  teachers  are  outlined   below.       First,  I  believe  this  study  holds  power  for  teacher  educators  to  think  about   what  it  means  when  we  tell  our  pre-­‐service  teachers  about  the  importance  of  getting   to  know  your  students.    Instead  of  positioning  this  knowledge  as  leverage  that     240   allows  teachers  to  better  help  students  assimilate  to  certain  ideas  of  what  learning   and  doing  science  looks  like,  I  hope  to  share  lessons  with  preservice  teachers  that   youth  have  experiences  and  voices  regarding  what  is  important  to  teaching  and   learning  science.    These  lessons  include  how  science  matters  to  their  community  as   well  as  their  future  lives  and  careers.    Thus,  getting  to  know  our  students  is  also   about  being  able  to  value  the  cultural  practices  they  bring  with  them  and  open   spaces  for  their  prior  experience  and  expertise  to  be  leveraged  when  learning  and   doing  science.  I  understand  there  are  challenges  embedded  in  this  work  as   experience  with  youth  can  be  viewed  as  a  precursor  to  valuing  the  experience  they   bring  them.    However,  this  study  helps  me  think  about  how  foregrounding  youth   voice  can  facilitate  teacher  learning.    I  plan  to  help  preservice  teachers  understand   the  valuable  resources  youth  bring  by  sharing  the  voices  of  youth  and  providing  safe   spaces  for  preservice  teachers  to  collaboratively  make  sense  of  the  messages   embedded  in  youth  narratives.     Second,  the  work  of  the  girls  and  teachers  in  this  study  has  implications  for   teacher  educators  in  terms  of  helping  our  students  unpack  the  institutional   narratives  present  in  schools  that  guide  practice  and  continually  reflect  on  who  and   what  is  considered  when  planning  learning  experiences.    This  is  challenging  due  to   the  experiences  preservice  teachers  bring  with  them  as  students  themselves  as  well   as  how  each  envisions  the  role(s)  of  a  teachers.    These  experiences  and  expectations   of  the  profession  impact  the  type  of  teaching  and  learning  they  see  as  possible  in   science  classrooms.  Once  again,  I  see  foregrounding  youth  narratives  as  a  pathway   to  identifying,  critiquing  and  challenging  the  institutional  narratives  that  often  guide     241   practice  in  science  classrooms  as  was  the  case  for  the  teachers  involved  in  this   study.  While  potentially  uncomfortable,  I  believe  preservice  teachers  need  ongoing   opportunities  to  be  critical  of  school  practices  and  their  role  in  designing  learning   experiences  students  may  find  less  than  meaningful  to  their  communities  or  loves  as   citizens.    I  believe  this  study,  and  the  voices  of  youth,  provide  avenues  to  open  these   opportunities  for  teachers.       Finally,  this  study  has  lessons  for  teacher  educators  in  terms  of  helping  our   students  and  future  teachers  think  about  the  places  in  which  doing  science  takes   place  for  youth,  and  how  these  experiences  can  impact  what  school  science  can  look   like.    The  girls  in  this  study  are  findings  meaningful  science  learning  experiences   outside  of  school.    Often,  they  see  these  experiences  as  directly  opposed  to  what   science  looks  and  feels  like  in  a  classroom.    Their  voices  point  to  a  divide  that  might   prevent  students  from  connecting  school  science  concepts  to  their  lives  as  citizens   and  by  which  teachers  may  not  see  how  their  students’  lives  outside  of  school   impact  their  interactions  with  science  in  their  classrooms.  Understanding  this  divide   is  vital  if  we  hope  that  students  will  leave  schools  ready  to  consider  and  draw  upon   scientific  understandings  when  making  decisions  on  local,  national  or  global  issues.   Helping  presevice  teachers  understand  the  potential  impact  of  this  divide  might   mean  altering  how  and  where  teacher  education  occurs  by  taking  our  classes  out  of   universities  into  various  places  where  youth  are  engaged  in  learning  and  using   science  to  make  a  difference  in  their  community  and  lives.    In  other  words,  it  might   require  teacher  educators  to  reflect  upon  their  practice,  the  institutional  narratives     242   that  guide  it  and  how  decisions  made  in  teacher  education  classes  impact  what  and   how  preservice  teachers  learn.       I  am  deeply  committed  to  this  work  and  plan  to  continue  to  make  youth  voice   a  central  aspect  to  the  science  preparation  courses  and  professional  development   sessions  I  am  a  part  of  in  the  future.     Conclusion   It  turns  out  that  ideas  are  not  luxuries  gained  at  the  expense  of  the  3  R’s,  but  instead   enhance  them.    And  it  turns  out  that  public  schools,  in  new  and  different  forms,  are   the  best  vehicle  for  nourishing  the  extraordinary  untapped  capacities  of  all  our   children.    The  question  is  not,  Is  it  possible  to  educate  all  children  well?  But  rather,   Do  we  want  to  do  it  badly  enough?   Deborah  Meier,  1995,  p.  4     I  find  the  quote  above  a  fitting  ending  to  this  study.    The  participants,  both   teachers  and  youth,  exhibited  a  desire  to  reform  science  classroom  practices.      They   have  shown  that  there  is  space  for  new  and  different  ideas  in  science  education   despite  many  institutional  narratives  that  speak  to  the  contrary.    They  also   demonstrate  that  the  space  for  these  ideas  is  productive  by  allowing  youth  to  be   active  participants,  expand  outcomes  of  investigations  and  make  meaningful   connections  between  science  and  place.    These  ideas  allow  for  youth  to  position   themselves  as  experts  who  have  something  to  say  about  the  teaching  and  learning  of   science  in  classroom  spaces  as  well  as  what  knowing  and  doing  science  can  mean  for   their  community.       This  study  has  been  an  immense  learning  experience  for  me  that  will   continue  to  shape  and  reshape  the  next  steps  in  my  academic  career.  As  I  reflect   back  on  the  process  and  the  impact  it  has  had  on  me  as  a  teacher  and  a  learner,  I   keep  coming  back  to  Maya’s  story  included  in  her  case  where  she  wrote,  “think     243   about  it,  I  am  an  eleven  year  old  girl  who  is  saving  the  world  and  its  people.”  I  can’t   help  but  think  that  experiences  like  this,  where  a  young  women  feels  empowered  by   her  ability  to  use  science  in  her  community,  need  to  be  explicitly  foregrounded  as   the  goal  of  science  education.  I  further  believe  fostering  these  types  of  experiences   for  youth  as  the  goal  of  science  education  is  necessary  if  we  hope  to  have  a  future   generation  that  considers  science  when  civically  engaged  in  local,  national  or  global   debates.  The  power  of  her  story  drives  me  to  think  about  the  opportunities  other   youth  need  in  order  to  feel  that  empowerment  and  that  drive  to  use  science  to  make   a  difference  in  the  lives  of  those  around  them  as  well  as  what  support  science   teachers  need  to  open  these  types  of  spaces  for  their  students.       I  end  this  dissertation  with  even  more  energy  and  a  greater  commitment  to   the  inclusion  of  youth  voice  in  curricular  conversations  and  reforming  formal   science  through  examining  informal  learning  experiences  than  when  it  began.    I  am   excited  for  what  comes  next  in  pursuing  these  passions  and  continuing  to  grow  as   an  educator  and  a  researcher.    I  feel  like  the  work  is  just  beginning.                   244                   REFERENCES                               245   REFERENCES       Achieve  Inc.  (2013).  Next  generation  science  standards.  Washington,  DC:  Authors.       Allum,  N.,  Sturgis,  P.,  Tabourazi,  D.,  and  Brunton-­‐Smith,  I.  (2008)  ‘Science  Knowledge   and  Attitudes  across  Cultures:  A  Meta-­‐analysis’.  Public  Understanding  of   Science,  17(1):  35-­‐54.  -­‐  See  more  at:   http://www.surrey.ac.uk/sociology/people/ian_bruntonsmith/#sthash.ZCZ vV0hL.dpuf     American  Association  for  the  Advancement  of  Science  (AAAS).  (1993).  Benchmarks   for  science  literacy.  New  York:  Oxford  University  Press.     Anderson,  C.  W.  (2007).    Perspectives  on  science  learning.  In  S.  K.  Abell  &  N.  G.   Lederman  (Eds.),  Handbook  of  research  in  science  education  (pp.  3  –  30).   Mahwah,  NJ:  Erlbaum     Anderson,  C.W.,  Holland,  J.D.  &  Palincsar,  A.S.  (1997).  The  story  of  Juan  and  his   group.  The  Elementary  School  Journal,  97(4)  359-­‐383.     Anderson,  G.  (1989).  Critical  ethnography  in  education:  Origins,  current  status  and   new  directions.  Review  of  Educational  Research,  59(3),  249-­‐270.     Ardoin,  N.  M.  (2006).  Towards  and  Interdisciplinary  understanding  of  place:   Lessons  for  environmental  education.  Canadian  Journal  of  Environmental   Education,  11,  112-­‐126.     Ayers,  B.  (2010).  To  Teach:  The  Journey  of  a  Teacher,  3rd  Edition.    New  York:   Teachers  College  Press.         Bang,  M.  &  Medin,  D.  (2010).  Cultural  processes  in  science  education:  Supporting  the   navigation  of  multiple  epistemologies.  Science  Learning  in  Everyday  Life,  1-­‐ 19.         246   Banks,  J.  A.,  Banks,  C.  A.  M.,  Cortés,  C.  E.,  Hahn,  C.  L.,  Merryfield,  M.  M.,  Moodley,  K.   A.,  et  al.  (2005).    Democracy  and  diversity:  Principles  and  concepts  for   educating  citizens  in  a  global  age.  Seattle:  Center  for  Multicultural   Education,  University  of  Washington.     Barton,  A.  C.,  &  Yang,  K.  (2000).    The  culture  of  power  and  science  education:   Learning  from  Miguel.    Journal  of  Research  in  Science  Teaching,  37(8),  871-­‐ 889.     Barton,  A.  C.  (2001).  Science  education  in  urban  settings:  Seeking  new  ways  of   praxis  through  critical  ethnography.  Journal  of  Research  in  Science  Teaching,   38(8),  899-­‐917.     Barton,  A.  C.,  &  Tan,  E.  (2008).  Creating  hybrid  spaces  for  engaging  school  science   among  urban  middle  schoolgirls.  American  Educational  Research  Journal,   45(1),  68  –  103.     Bevan,  B.  with  Dillon,  J.,  Hein,  G.E.,  Macdonald,  M.,  Michalchik,  V.,  Miller,  D.,  Root,  D.,   Rudder,  L.,  Xanthoudaki,  M.,  &  Yoon,  S.  (2010).  Making  Science  Matter:   Collaborations  Between  Informal  Science  Education  Organizations  and  Schools.   A  CAISE  Inquiry  Group  Report.  Washington,  D.C.:  Center  for  Advancement  of   Informal  Science  Education  (CAISE).     Carlone,  H.,  Huan-­‐Frank,  J.  &  Webb,  A.  (2011).  Assessing  equity  beyond  knowledge   and  skils  based  outcomes:  A  comparative  ethnography  of  two  fouth-­‐grade   reform-­‐based  science  classrooms.  Journal  of  Research  in  Sience  Teaching,   48(5),  459-­‐485.       Clandinin,  D.  J.,  &  Connelly,  F.  M.  (2000).  Narrative  inquiry.  San  Francisco:  Jossey-­‐ Bass.       Cochran-­‐Smith,  M.,  &  Lytle,  S.  L.  (1992,  April).  Interrogating  cultural  diversity:   Inquiry  and  action.  Paper  presented  at  the  Annual  Meeting  of  the  American   Educational  Research  Association,  San  Francisco.  Education  3,  303-­‐320.       Cogan,  J.,  Grossman,  D.,  &  Liu,  M.-­‐H.  (2000).  Citizenship:  The  democratic  imagination   in  a  global/local  context.  Social  Education,  64(1),  48-­‐52.     247     Dierking.  L.D.  (2007).  Evidence  &  categories  of  informal  science  education  impacts.   (Ed.)  A.  Friedman.  A  Framework  for  Evaluating  Impacts  of  Informal  Science   Education  Projects.  Washington,  DC:  National  Science  Foundation.     Dierking,  L.D.,  Falk,  J.H.,  Rennie,  L.,  Anderson,  D.,  &  Ellenbogen,  K.  (2003).  Policy   statement  of  the  informal  science  education  ad  hoc  committee.  Journal  of   Research  in  Science  Teaching,  40,  108–111.     Deschenes,  S.  &  Malone,  H.  J.  (2010).  Year-­‐round  learning:  Linking  school,  afterschool   and  summer  learning  to  support  student  success.    Retrived  from  Harvard   University,  Harvard  Family  Research  Project:  www.hfrp.org.       Dewey,  J.  (1897).    My  Pedagogic  Creed.    New  York:  E.L.    Kellogg  &  Company.       Dewey,  J.  (1938).  Experience  and  education.  New  York:  Kappa  Delta  Pi.     Duschl,  R.  A.,  Schweingruber,  H.  A.,  &  Shouse,  A.  W.  (Eds.).  (2007).  Taking  science  to   school:  Learning  and  teaching  science  in  grades  K-­‐8.  Washington,  DC:  National   Academies  Press.     Eisenhart,  M.,  &  Finkel,  E.  (1998).  Women’s  science:  Learning  and  succeeding  from  the   margins.  Chicago,  IL:  University  of  Chicago  Press.     Eisenhart,  M.,  Finkel,  E.,  Marion  S.  (1996).    Creating  the  conditions  for  scientific   literacy:  A  re-­‐examination.  American  Educational  Research  Journal,  33(2),   261-­‐295.     Falk,  J.H.  and  Dierking,  L.D.  (2002)  Lessons  without  limit:  How  free-­‐choice  learning  is   transforming  Eeducation.  Walnut  Creek,  CA:  AltaMira  Press.     Falk,  J.H.,  Storksdieck,  M.,  &  Dierking,  L.D.  (2007).    Investigation  public  science   interest  and  understanding:  Evidence  for  the  importance  of  free-­‐choice   learning.  Public  Understanding  of  Science,  16,  455-­‐469.       248     Feinstein,  N.  (2010).  Salvaging  science  literacy.  Science  Education,  168-­‐185.     Fenichel,  M.  and  H.  A.  Schweingruber.  2010.  Surrounded  by  science:  Learning  science   in  informal  environments.  Board  on  Science  Education.  Center  for  Education.   Division  of  Behavioral  and  Social  Sciences  and  Education.  Washington,  DC:   The  National  Academies  Press.       Freire,  Paulo.  Pedagogy  of  the  oppressed.  [New  York]:  Herder  and  Herder,  1970.     Gibbons,  M.  T.  (2011).    Engineering  by  the  Numbers.  American  Society  for   Engineering  Education.    Washington,  D.C.       Glaser,  B.  G.,  &  Strauss,  A.  L.  (1967).  The  discovery  of  grounded  theory.  Chicago:   Aldine  Publishing  Company.     González,  N.,  Andrade,  R.,  Civil,  M.,  &  Moll,  L.  (2001).  Bridging  funds  of  distributed    knowledge:  Creating  zones  of  practices  in  mathematics.  Journal  of  Education   for  Students  Placed  at  Risk,  6(1),  115-­‐132.     Granger,  R.  T.,  &  William  T.  Grant  Foundation.  (2008).  After-­‐school  programs  and   academics:  Implications  for  policy,  practice,  and  research.  Social  Policy   Report,  XXII(2).     Gruenewald,  D.  A.,  &  Smith,  G.  A.  (Eds.).  (2008).  Place-­‐based  education  in  the  global   age.  New  York:  Taylor  &  Francis.     Guskey,  T.  R.  (2000).  Evaluating  professional  development.  Thousand  Oaks,  CA:   Corwin  Press.     Heidegger,  M.  (2006).  Being  and  time  (J.  Macquarrie  &  E.  Robinson,  Trans.).  Malden,   MA:  Blackwell  Publishing.  (Original  work  published  1927)       249   Hill,  H.  (2009).  Fixing  teacher  professional  development.  Phi  Delta  Kappan,  90(7),   470-­‐476.   Holland,  D.  &  Lave,  J.  (2009).    Social  practice  theory  and  the  historical  production  of   persons.    Action:  An  International  Journal  of  Human  Activity  Theory,  2,  1-­‐15.     Holland,  D.  &  Lave,  J.  (eds).  (2001).  History  in  Person,  Santa  Fe:  School  of  American   Research  Press.       Huberman,  M.  (1995).  Networks  that  alter  teaching:  Conceptualizations,  exchanges   and  experiments,  1(2),  193-­‐211.     Jackson,  P.  (1968).  Life  in  Classrooms.  New  York:  Teachers  College  Press.     Lee,  S.,  &  Roth,  W.-­‐M.  (2003).  Science  and  the  "good  citizen":  Community-­‐based   scientific  literacy.  Science,  Technology  &  Human  Values,  28(3),  403-­‐424.     Lave,  J.  (2011).  Apprenticeship  in  Critical  Ethnographic  Practice.  Chicago:  The   University  of  Chicago  Press.     Lemke,  J.L.  (2001).  Articulating  communities:  Sociocultural  perspectives  on  science   education.  Journal  of  Research  in  Science  Teaching,  38(3),  296-­‐316.     Lemke,  J.  L.  (1992).  Intertextuality  and  educational  research.    Linguistics  and   Education,  4,  257-­‐267.     Lim,  M.,  &  Barton,  A.  C.  (2010).  Exploring  Insideness  in  Urban  Children's  Sense  of   Place.  Journal  of  Environmental  Psychology,  30,  328-­‐337.     Little,  J.  W.  (2001).  Professional  development  in  pursuit  of  school  reform.  In  A.   Lieberman  &  L.  Miller  (Eds.),  Teachers  caught  in  the  action:  Professional   development  that  matters  (pp.  28-­‐44).  New  York:  Teachers  College  Press.     Liu,  X.  (2009).  Beyond  science  literacy:  Science  and  the  public.  International  Journal   of  Environmental  and  Science  Education,  4(3),  301-­‐311.         250   Lortie,  D.  (1975).  Schoolteacher:  A  Sociological  Study.    Chicago:  University  of  Chicago   Press     Luke,  A.,  Green,  J.,&  Kelly,  G.J.  (2010).  What  counts  as  evidence  and  equity?  Review  of   Research  in  Education,  34,vii–xvi.     Martin,  S.N.,  Wassell,  B.  &  Scantlebury,  K.  (2013).    Examining  the  intersections  of   race,  ethnicity,  class  and  gender:  An  analysis  of  research  on  English  language   learners  in  K-­‐12  science  education.    In  J.  A.Bianchini,  V.  A.Akerson,   A.Calabrese  Barton,  O.Lee,  &  A.  J.Rodriguez  (Eds.),  Moving  the  equity  agenda   forward:  Equity  research,  practice,  and  policy  in  science  education.  The   Netherlands:  Springer.     Meier,  D.  (1995).  The  power  of  their  ideas:  Lessons  for  America  from  a  small  school  in   Harlem.  Boston:  Beacon  Press.         Miles,  M.  &  Huberman,  M.  (1994).  An  expanded  sourcebook;  Qualitative  data  analysis.   Thousand  Oaks,  CA,  Sage  Publications.     Murillo,  E.  (1999).  Mojado  crossings  along  neoliberal  borderlands.  Educational   Foundations,  13(1).       The  National  Academies:  Board  on  Science  Education,  (2011).    Conceptual   framework  for  new  science  education.  Washington  DC:  U.S.  Retrieved  from   http://www7.nationalacademies.org/bose/Standards_Framework_Homepage .html     NRC  (National  Research  Council).  (2009).  Learning  science  in  informal  environments:   people,  places,  and  pursuits.  Washington,  DC:  The  National  Academies.     National  Center  for  Education  Statistics.  (2011).  The  nation’s  report  card.   Washington,  DC:  Author.     Newton,  P,  Driver,  R.  &  Osborne,  J.  (1999).  The  place  of  argumentation  in  the   pedagogy  of  school  science.  International  Journal  of  Science  Education,  21(5):   553–576.       251   Roberts,  D.  A.  (2007).  Scientific  literacy/science  literacy.  In  S.  K.  Abell  &  N.  G.   Lederman  (Eds.),  Handbook  of  research  in  science  education  (pp.  729  –  779).   Mahwah,  NJ:  Erlbaum.     Roth,  W.-­‐M.  (2003).  Scientific  literacy  as  an  emergent  feature  of  human  practice.   Journal  of  Curriculum  Studies  35,  9-­‐24.     Roth,  W.-­‐M.  (2006).  Activity  theory.  In  N.  J.  Salkind  (Ed.),  Encyclopedia  of  human   development  (Vol.  1,  pp.  16–23).  Thousand  Oaks,  CA:  Sage.     Rudolph,  J.  L.  (2002).  Scientists  in  the  classroom:  The  cold  war  reconstructing  of   American  science  education.  New  York:  Pelgrave.     Sadler,    T.D.  (2004).  Informal  reasoning  regarding  socioscientific  issues:  A  critical   review  of  research.    Journal  of  Research  in  Science  Teaching,  41,  513-­‐536.     Sadler,  T.  D.,  &  Zeidler,  D.L.  (2009).    Scientific  literacy,  PISA,  and  socioscietific   discourse:  Assessment  for  progressive  aims  of  science  education.  Journal  of   Research  in  Science  Teaching,  46(8),  909-­‐921.       Sosniack,  L.  (2001).    The  9%  challenge:  Education  in  school  and  society.  Teachers   College  Record,  103.     Tesfaye,  C.L.,  Mulvey.P.  (2012).  Physics  Bachelor’s  Initial  Employment.  American   Institute  of  Physics,  College  Park,  MD.       Thomas,  J.  (1993).  Doing  critical  ethnography  (Vol.  26).  Newbury  Park,  CA:  SAGE   Publications.     U.S.  Census  Bureau,  (2010).  State  and  county  quick  facts.  Retrieved  from   http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/26000.html.     U.S.  Department  of  Labor,  Bureau  of  Labor  Statistics,  (2011).    Economy  at  a  glance.   Retrieved  from  http://www.bls.gov/eag/eag.mi_lansing_msa.htm.         252   Weiss,  H.,  Little,  P.,  Bouffard,  S.  Dechenes,  S.  &  Malone  H.  J.  (2009).  The  Federal  role   of  out  of  school  learning.    Retrieved  from  Harvard  University,  Harvard  Family   Research  Project:  www.hfrp.org.     van  Es,  E.  A.,  &  Sherin,  M.  G.  (2008).  Mathematics  teachers  "learning  to  notice"  in  the   context  of  a  video  club.  Teaching  and  Teacher  Education,  24,  244-­‐276.     van  Es,  E.  A.,  &  Sherin,  M.  G.  (2002).  Learning  to  notice:  Scaffolding  new  teachers’   interpretations  of  classroom  interactions.  Journal  of  Technology  and  Teacher   Education,  10(4),  571–596.     Van  Manen,  M.  (1990).  Researching  lived  experience.  New  York:  State  University  of   New  York  Press.     Yin,  R.  (1994).  Discovering  the  future  of  the  case  study  method  in  evaluation   research.  Evaluation  Practice,  15(3),  283-­‐290.                           253