b 3%? ‘ ..?L.V2u , u. ‘_ ‘ . . , ‘ , . .V , ‘ ?&%u A .. I. . 5 3m! . A»: .. i... .41. -... 4- .. 2..-. g ..u|.n...uwm..{1vli (raglan. .0. ‘13:“? 1... Wk... flux... H .,‘..h.nua.8rmn¢vh.. , 15:1 Dirty . THESIS ,- Ox 0X10 MICHI Illllullllllllilllllllljwul " 3 1293 01834 LIBRARY Michigan State University This is to certify that the thesis entitled TEACHING MEAP ECOLOGY OBJECTIVES MORE PRODUCTIVELY IN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL CLASSROOM presented by William F. Sammons II has been accepted towards fulfillment of the requirements for M. S . Jegree in Interdepartmental Biology ///4/ (£104 MW / . Major professor Date /§/0‘5éff 0-7639 MS U is an Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Institution PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record. TO AVOID FINE return on or before date due. MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested. DATE DUE DATE DUE DATE DUE 1/93 cleIRC/Dmoupfis—nu TEACHING MEAP ECOLOGY OBJECTIVES MORE PRODUCTIVELY IN THE MIDDLE SCHOOL CLASSROOM By William F. Sammons II A THESIS Submitted to Michigan State University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTERS IN INTERDEPARTMENTAL BIOLOGY Division of Science and Mathematics Education 1999 ABSTRACT By William F. Sammons ll lonia Middle School’s students’ Michigan Educational Assessment Program test scores have been low, compared to the state average, for the last five years. Their lowest section on the MEAP test has been the ecology, which contains more objectives covered on the MEAP test than any other section. The science teachers needed to teach the ecology objectives to the students so that the students would retain the information. Therefore, I developed a series of experiments based on the ecotube that has improved students’ understanding and retention of and retaining the important objectives of ecology. Teaching the ecology objectives using the ecotubes was very efficient because the students could remember more of the objectives than if the objectives were taught the traditional way. The reason for this was that using the ecotube as a tool reinforced the ecology objectives using the three sensory modalities: visual, auditory and kinesthetic. In 1995, the ecology test was given to the students after they were taught using the traditional methods of teaching ecology. In 1996 and 1997, the same ecology test was given to the same age students taught using the ecotube experiments. The results were remarkable. The students who took the ecology final exam in 1996 and 1997 had dramatically increased scores. The students’ MEAP scores were also higher than those of 1995. Not only were the student’s scores higher, they also seemed to enjoy the hands-on style of learning that ecology in a bottle provided. This thesis is dedicated to my wife Diane and my children Carli, and Sierra. Also I would like to thank Jesus. With Him nothing is impossible. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TABLES ........................................................................................................... v LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... vi TEXT Introduction ......................................................................................................... 1 Implementation of Unit ...................................................................................... 10 Evaluation ........................................................................................................... 17 Discussion and Conclusion ............................................................................. 25 REFERENCE MATERIAL Appendices Appendix A - MEAP Ecology Objectives ............................................ 30 Appendix B -Organization of Living Things and Ecosystems ........ 33 Appendix C -Modality Checklist .......................................................... 37 Appendix D -Getting Ecotube set up .................................................. 39 Appendix E -Ecotube check list ........................................................... 44 Appendix F Succession Drawing ...................................................... 49 Appendix G -What is a Living Thing ................................................... 51 Appendix H -Biotic Factors in Soil ...................................................... 55 Appendix I -Population Density Lab ................................................... 58 Appendix J-Saltiness/Brine Shrimp ................................................... 61 Appendix K -Limiting Factors of Grass Germination ....................... 64 Appendix L -Consumer/Producer ....................................................... 68 Appendix M -Competition ..................................................................... 72 Appendix N -Predator/Prey Lab .......................................................... 74 Appendix 0 -Adaptations of Brine Shrimp ........................................ 77 Appendix P -Owl Pellet Lab ................................................................. 80 Appendix Q-Carbon Cycle Lab ........................................................... 84 Appendix R - Ecology Test .................................................................. 87 Appendix S - Ecology Unit Outline ..................................................... 94 Bibliography Bibliography ............................................................................................ 96 LIST OF TABLES Table 1 - Overview of the evaluation of my ecology unit before and after using the ecotube .................................................................... 18 LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1 .................... Overview of My Ecology Unit .................................................. 12 Figure 2 .................... Final Ecology Exam Before and After Ecotube ................... 19 Figure 3 .................... Final Ecology Exam by Year (94-95) .................................... 20 Figure 4 .................... Final Ecology Exam by Year (96-97) .................................... 21 Figure 5 .................... Ecology Final Exams and Level of Students ....................... 22 vi INTRODUCTION When the science teachers at my middle school met in the fall of 1995, we were faced with the unsurprising news that our science MEAP scores were below the state average. The ecology section of the MEAP stood out because the results were extremely poor. Fifty percent of students did not score in the proficient range. These scores coincided with low ecology final exam grades. I also saw that there were thirteen ecological MEAP objectives throughout the MEAP test. With so many objectives and so little time to teach, one can understand why the students might forget some information. We needed to find a way to effectively teach many objectives in a short period of time. The science teachers got together and brain-stormed ways to do this. We knew that our ecology unit had the same objectives as the State of Michigan, because in 1992, we aligned our ecology unit with the state objectives in ecology (See ”MEAP Ecology Objectives", Appendix A). We needed a tool to help the students understand the ecology objectives better. I knew in order for the students to understand the objectives better, they needed to personalize the objectives, have more hands-on activities, and have their individual Ieaming styles addressed. I decided that using the ecotube as a basic tool to teach the ecology objectives would address these issues. The idea of using the ecotube to teach the ecology objectives sprang from a science education conference entitled "Organization of Living Things and Ecosystems." It was a conference that showed how to teach ecology using- two liter plastic pop bottles (See “Organization of Living Things and Ecosystems", Appendix B). The bottles were simply arranged so that the one on top held land organisms. The bottom pop bottle was to be the aquatic ecosystem with fish, snails, Elodea, and algae. The ecosystems once set up 1 were to be almost self-sustaining. The ecotube is really an interactive tool for teaching the ecology objectives, since students keep records and check the conditions of their ecosystem. They also engage in activities with and without the ecotube. The ecotube is the basis for minds-on activities and hands-on labs dealing with ecology which should guide the students to a more personal understanding of ecology. This personal understanding is what teachers want from their students. Randolf Tobias’ research shows that, "Showing relationships between science and the children's everyday lives' is one of the keys to successful and effective instruction (1992)." The ecotube also is a means to teach ecology by addressing the Ieaming styles of individual students. In order to reach every student, the teacher must teach using all three sensory modalities or Ieaming styles: auditory, visual and kinesthetic. If you want to give every student an opportunity to learn, you must teach with their individual Ieaming styles in mind. "A school staff should consider the present level of instruction and investigate methods by which teachers can manipulate the instructional methods so that the teaching strategies and techniques are compatible with the Ieaming styles of the students." (Carroll, 1963) Instruction with the ecotube is one such instructional method used to teach the ecology objectives with all three learning styles in mind. For example, a simple task, such as Ieaming to spell a new word, is approached differently depending on learning styles. One student might be able to Ieam better if he or she sees a word on paper, another might have to say the word and a third might have to do an experiment relating to the word before he or she understands it thoroughly. Teaching to every student's Ieaming style is one of the hardest jobs a teacher has to perform. While it might be one of the most challenging jobs, it is also one of the most important. How long does it take for a person to remember how to spell a word? It may be easier for a person to hear the word in order to remember it. Do you have to say the information aloud in order for you to learn it better? Do you put facts and figures into a song or a rap in order to memorize the information better? If you do these things to remember information, you are probably an auditory learner. Cynthia Tobias (1996), says that an auditory learner Ieams by listening to verbal instructions and remembers information by forming the sounds of words. If you are a strong auditory learner, it does not mean you need to hear someone say something to remember it. It does mean, in most cases, that you need to hear yourself say it in order for you to remember it better. Another person might be able to recall the word better when he or she sees it on paper. Do you use brightly colored folders or notebooks to stay organized? Are you accused of daydreaming or being lost in thought? If so, then you might be a visual learner. Visual learners use strong visual associations when remembering information. They associate pictures with words or concepts (C.Tobias, 1996). Whenever the teacher explains something, these types of students must draw a chart or a picture to help him or herself understand. Students who Ieam this way may need brightly colored flash cards or worksheets. Drawing a quick picture of what is being taught helps some visual learners comprehend the situation. Still another person might be able to remember the word better if he or she uses it in a sentence. Have you ever been told to "sit still", "put your feet on the floor", or that you were “fidgety”? Do you have to have some type of action in order for you to Ieam? If so, you are probably a kinesthetic Ieamer. These Ieamers are very energetic and usually cannot sit still for ten minutes.The “Ieaming” action can be anything from dissection of a cat to just walking around 3 while trying to memorize something. Cynthia Tobias wrote about a girl named Anne. Her mother would tell her to stay in her room or the basement until her homework was completed. This restless and resourceful learner did not like to sit still when she worked, so she devised a way to learn. Anne had steps in her basement and her mother noticed her walking up and down these steps while she was studying. For spelling, each step was a letter or a word. For history, each step was a fact or date. For geography, each step was a location or place. Anne could remember the information better and her grades showed steady improvement. Anne found a profession to fit her kinesthetic Ieaming style, that of a physical education teacher. To teach to the kinesthetic learner, the teacher should have demonstrations and labs on the objective being taught. Associating information and facts to a body movement, allowing the student to walk around and do something with the information being taught will also help the kinesthetic student to understand the objectives. Every person Ieams and remembers information differently. If teachers keep the three Ieaming styles in mind, all the students in the classroom will have a better chance of reaching the objectives. Lawrence Lezotte indicated how important it is to use sensory modalities when teaching when he wrote, “The teachers have to carefully plan the lesson and should use sensory modalities to help the students to connect and retain the content being taught" (Lezotte 1992). Since teachers teach from twenty to thirty students in a class, he or she should teach each objective with all three learning styles in mind. "It is essential that teachers be trained to assess individual children's Ieaming styles so they can adequately plan instruction that uses the techniques and strategies to facilitate learning success." (Robinson, 1990). Having the teacher teach with the three sensory modalities in mind is not 4 sufficient to optimally use Ieaming styles as a basis of instruction. The students must know what type of Ieamers they are. Cynthia Tobias (1996) in, The Way They Learn, talks about a class she taught that always did poorly when they took a semester test on eighty-four difficult vocabulary words. She decided to have the students review differently for the test than they had before. The students reluctantly agreed. She explained the three styles of learning to the students and had them fill out a checklist (See Modality Checklist, Appendix C) to see what type of learner they were. For the next three days, the students would devote time to studying the words using their own Ieaming style. Out of twenty-nine “mediocre" students, twenty-six of them did not miss one single item on the test, and no one missed more than five. The most impressive part is that the students remembered the terms for over a year. One student went into the Navy after graduation and returned two years later. He asked the teacher for the same test, and he got eighty-two out of eighty-four correct. This anecdote stresses that the students should know which sensory modality works best for them when learning. Addressing students' Ieaming styles can be readily done in science classes. The ecotube will provide opportunities to tap into each student's Ieaming style. The ecotube is a basis for lectures as one means of auditory Ieaming. There is a problem with using lectures because they can be rather boring. They may not allow active, energetic bodies to relate or personalize any of the objectives. When the ecotube is used as a visual tool during lectures, it is easier for the students to pay attention longer. The teacher can use the ecotube to illustrate information and the students have a visual representation with the auditory feedback to help them personalize the idea. “The most effective training combines lectures, modeling, practice, and coaching“ (Herbert Walberg 5 1990). When the teacher uses the ecotube to teach ecology, this is what he or she is doing. The teacher does not just lecture but also utilizes the ecotube as a model. An example of this occurs when the teacher lectures on food webs and the students are instructed to find a food web in their ecotubes. Use of the ecotube leads to hands-on and minds-on activities which appeal to visual and kinesthetic learners. Minds-on activities range from determining the abiotic factors in their ecotube to predicting what would happen if certain conditions were changed. These activities address visual and kinesthetic Ieaming styles and help to reach as many students as possible. Working with the ecotube every day allows the visual and kinesthetic Ieamers to understand and conceptualize objectives for that day. Using hands- on activities is always a great way to get students to understand the objective. Stephen Foster (1996) wrote, "we Ieam to do by doing, by instruction in or by images of doing and by observing others doing". This is the kinesthetic style of Ieaming, where students learn by doing something physical which deals with each objective. The ecotube is something the student made, so they will immediately personalize it. Doing numerous labs using the ecotube will allow the student to get to know how each organism is connected in the "mini ecology" ecotube. The kinesthetic modality is addressed by checking the ecotube to see what abiotic and biotic factors have changed from day to day. Numerous checks will allow the student to become familiar with their ecotube and how each organism is connected in the ecosystem within the ecotube. They will regularly do activities and checks on their ecotube and explain what is happening. Using hands-on activities in the science classroom is an important key to getting students to be successful in science. Donna Uchida (1996) did some 6 research on what teachers need to do to prepare students for the 21 st Century. She stated, ”Active Ieaming should be increased, with more student involvement with hands-on projects, Socratic questioning, cooperative Ieaming, manipulative, and experiments." Using the ecotube to teach ecology uses all these methods. Incorporating the three learning styles and ecotubes into my ecology unit seemed to be the most effective way to improve our original ecology unit. The original ecology unit was taught using the traditional method of teaching out of the textbook. Teaching using the ecotube is significantly different from the traditional method of teaching. The traditional method can be monotonous and boring. This style of teaching does not appeal to the majority of students. Patricia Phelan discusses this in her research which deals with improving school environments. She states, “Perhaps the most resounding theme in discussions with students about pedagogy is that they want to Ieam from teachers, rather than simply read textbooks...the teachers who depend primarily on the lecture method of instruction risk alienating many students." (Phelen, 1992) Using the ecotube gets away from the tiresome traditional method of teaching by using a variety of Ieaming styles. Phelen also states, "When a variety of teaching methods are used, students report a high level of interest." This interest then will contribute to understanding. This interest also stems from the students working on their ecotubes in groups. Phelen's research indicates that this group work is preferred by both high and low achieving students. Group work not only allows the student to Ieam the material more efficiently but allows the student to enjoy the material. We predicted that using the ecotube would be an outstanding way to teach ecology. It allows the teacher to reach all the students by teaching incorporating all the Ieaming styles. Since it is a long term 7 exercise, the students can learn at their own rate. The teacher can use the hands-on and minds-on activities to illustrate the ecology objectives so the students will enjoy Ieaming. The ecotube also allows the students to personalize the objectives into a real life situation. Teaching using the ecotube can be summed up using Sue Teele's research on redesigning the educational system to enable all students to succeed. Teele stated, “Our educational system should create Ieaming environments that allow students to Ieam basic skills that apply to real-life situations, proceed at a rate that is achievable for them, make no unfair comparisons with the progress of others, ensure positive reinforcement, and provide curriculum, instruction, and assessment procedures that reflect the many different ways students Ieam and process information. ” (Teele, 1996) The students involved in this study were eighth-graders in Life Science classes. There were less than one percent of minority students who were Mexican Americans. In the school year beginning in 1994, I only taught one Life Science class. In 1995 and 1996, I taught two Life Science classes each year. I taught five Life Science classes in 1997. The 1994 and 1995 students (74 total) were taught ecology using the traditional methods of teaching, including lectures, filmstrips and some labs. The 1996 and 1997 students (171 total) were taught using the ecotubes as a basis for instruction in ecology. In the years 1994, 1995 and 1996, there were three Life Science teachers. In 1997, there were only two. The other Life Science teacher also taught using the ecotube in 1996 and 1997, but used a different evaluation tool. All data reported in this document are from my own classroom. Each year, the same final ecology exam was given. It was the primary tool used to evaluate the effectiveness of using the ecotube in an ecology unit. The main difference between the years 1994 and 1997 would be using the ecotube, more labs, and more hands-on activities, that addressed the three 8 sensory modalities. IMPLEMENTATION OF UNIT The students in the study were eighth grade Life Science students. It was a five week ecology unit taught in the first quarter of the school year, which provided some advantages. One advantage was that the students could go outside. This allowed us to do certain activities that could not be done in the confines of the science classroom. Having ecology taught in the first quarter allowed certain terms to be introduced such as organism, symbiotic, ecosystem, adaptations and food chains. This made teaching subsequent units such as the cell, the variety of life, evolution and genetics, easier. The study took place between the years 1994 and 1997, during which the students were taught based on the same ecology objectives (see MEAP Ecology Objectives, Appendix A). In 1994 and 1995, the students were taught using the traditional method of teaching. In 1996 and 1997, the students were taught using the ecotube. There were other teachers who taught Life Science during this period but only my data were used for this research, because the other teachers used a different evaluation tool. I used my ecology final exam as the primary means to measure the effectiveness of using ecotubes as a means to teach ecology in 1996 and 1997. As a basis for instruction, the students in 1996 and 1997 took the Wm; (See Appendix C), so that they would know what kind of learner they were. Before starting the unit, the students were randomly placed into groups of four. The groups obtained three two-liter bottles and constructed the ecotube ( See Organization of Living Things, Appendix B). The students made the land ecosystem first and then the aquatic ecosystem, putting in the required number of organisms (See Setting Up Land and Aquatic Ecosystems, Appendix D). After the ecotubes were constructed, I had half the students put aerators in their ecotubes; the other half put a portion of Elodea in each. Once 10 the ecotubes were ready, the students were showed how to check their ecotube. The students were required to check their ecotubes every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday, making ten terrestrial and ten aquatic checks. Once every student knew how to do all twenty checks, the students delegated assignments as to who should check certain components of the ecotube. Each job must be done by the same student to ensure accuracy in the data collection. Every day a check was made, the students recorded their data on the chart given to them (See Aquatic Ecosystem Chart, Appendix E). Once the students understood how to properly check their ecotubes, only five minutes of class time was required for each check. After the students grasped how to check and document changes the ecotube, they started the "guts" of the ecology unit. Figure 1 is an overview of the five week ecology unit. It lists the topics and shows corresponding activities with the objective being taught. 11 Figure 1 - Overview of the ecology unit Topic Meap Activities Learning Objective Style 1. Modality Test NA. 1 - T_he_T_e_st NA. 2. Succession Vl.A.2.C. 2 * The Drawing K,V 3. Features of Life Vl.A.2.a. 3 * What is a Living Thing K,V Life Vl.A. - Biotic Fectere in the Soil K,V,A 4. Population Vl.A.3.a. 4 * Population Dens_ity K,A 5. Succession Vl.A.2.C. 5 * Water Saltiness end K,V,A Brin hri * Limiting Fectete ef Creee K,V Cermination 6. Organisms are VI.B.1.C. 6 * Consumers and Producers K,V,A Either 7. Feeding Vl.A.l. 7 * Competition Activig K,V Relationships - Predator and Prey K,V,A - Adaptations with Brine K,V,A Shrimp 8. Food Chains VI.B.2. 8 * Cwl Pellet K,V 9. Cycles of Nature VI.B.2.a.b.c. 9 - Demonstrating the Carbon K,V,A Dioxide le Key: * = Ecotube activity - = Non Ecotube activity K = Kinesthetic V = Visual A = Auditory 12 The students drew a picture of their ecotubes the day after they constructed them (See Activity 1, Appendix F). They also drew their ecotube again after three weeks and also at the end of the unit. The students, using the drawings, stated what changed in their ecotubes. The students should have noticed a change in the land and aquatic ecosystems. The students then went back to their records and determined what caused certain things to die or survive. The students then discussed as a group what their ecotubes would look like in another three weeks. This showed the students what succession is, at least on a small scale. The students then did an activity, called what is a living thing, and deciphered the abiotic and biotic factors in their ecotubes ( See Activity 1, What is a Living Thing, Appendix G). Before doing this lab, the students heard a lecture on the features of living things. After discussing the features of life, the students did a lab activity, not directly associated with the ecotube, to determine me pietie factore in the spil ( See Biotic Factors in the Soil, Appendix H). This helped the students to understand that biotic factors do not have to be “big" or on a macro level. The class then studied population density by viewing a ”Bill Nye the Science Guy" video on this topic. We related these principles to their ecotubes. We found the population density of the room, and the students found the population density of their ecotube. We discussed how scientists determine the population of a species followed by an activity on Population deneity ( See Activity 3, Appendix I). After reading an article on population density, its effects on competition, colonization and extinction, the students did an entertaining lab in which they studied water saltiness, brine shrimp and limiting factore. (See Activity 4, Appendix J). Students needed to understand that “organisms" 13 include plants so we then did a lab that dealt with limiting factors of grass germination. (See Activity 5, Appendix K). We then discussed limiting factors in their ecotubes. Once the students understood what populations and limiting factors were, we discussed communities and ecosystems, in conjunction with their ecotubes. This was followed by a filmstrip and a "Bill Nye the Science Guy" video on communities. Next, students learned about producers and consumers. After the students had a good grasp of what these terms meant, they engaged in an activity related to ceneumers and producers ( See Activity 6, Appendix L). This was followed by the competition activity, which was based on varying amounts of grass growing in two separate containers (See Activity 7, Appendix M). Students then read an article on competition, which described the overlapping ranges of game animals and livestock and how they competed for food. At the midpoint of our unit, we looked at changes in the ecotubes and related this to the student’s readings. We discussed certain stresses the organisms were subjected to. Studying their written records, they should have seen a pattern that allowed them to make predictions of what their observations would be in three weeks. By this time, some of the fish in the ecotubes had had babies (from two to five). The students then observed what a lack of space would do to even the parents, which would eat their offspring if there is not enough space. The students got to see the cruelty of nature, first hand. Feeding relationships was our next topic, including competition. Lecturing on competition with the ecotube in front of the students and relating the topic to it was a powerful means of learning for the students. The students 14 could personalize and observe this competition in the form of food webs, food chains, competition and adaptations. We used the laser disk "Windows on Science“ (1994) to show competition between different and similar species, such as a predator and prey relationship between a rabbit and a hawk. We discussed the adaptations of the rabbit and hawk. The students saw what was happening as the disk was playing, while being lectured on the information. We then went outside and played a game on competition called fledetppepd EM ( See Predator and Prey, Appendix N). The students also had their ecotubes in front of them as we discussed certain feeding relationships in their ecotubes. This was reinforced by the students viewing a Trials of Life video, Hunting and Escaping. This was a graphic and vivid depiction of nature and the adaptations that predators and prey have. Students then studied the edeptations pf brine ehriptp ( See Activity 9, Appendix 0), listing behavioral and structural adaptations. Using another Trials of Life episode, called Living Together, the students viewed different symbiotic relationships. With each of these films and filmstrips, the students completed worksheets that I developed to evaluate their understanding of the terms. We next discussed food chains, food webs and energy pyramids in nature and in their ecotubes. They dissected owl pellets ( See Activity 10, Appendix P), putting the bones they found into groups (rodent, shrew, mole and other) to find out what the owl ate. By answering a series of questions, the students learned which animals influenced the owl population the most. The last topic in the ecology unit was cycles of matter. The three main cycles discussed were water, carbon dioxide and nitrogen. The students were lectured on these cycles and then each group was assigned to draw all three 15 cycles on poster board. After the drawing was completed, the students did an activity that demonstrated the carbon dioxide cycle in a sealed environment (See Activity 11, Appendix O). Most of the material (labs, activities, etc.) in this ecology unit were not original, although I did adapt several lab activities. I developed/adapted these activities while doing my summer research at Michigan State University in 1996. Keeping in mind the three learning styles, I also developed the structure of the ecology unit. Each of the thirteen ecology objectives was aligned with the 1998 MEAP ecology objectives. This unit was developed through researching activities and teaching strategies which addressed the three sensory modalities. Since every objective was taught using all three sensory modalities, every student had a chance to Ieam through their preferred Ieaming style. The skeleton of this unit was taken from a conference on teaching ecology using two liter bottles. The “guts" of the unit - activities, lectures, videos, and labs - were taken and developed from a variety of sources. The primary evaluation tool was the ecology final exam. Because this exam ( See Ecology Final Exam, Appendix R) did not change from the years 1994 to 1997 and was based on the same objectives and materials, I could make valid comparisons between students taught with and without the ecotube. The test had questions ranging from multiple choice, true and false, essay, and matching. 16 EVALUATION As stated previously, the same final exam was given to the eighth grade Life Science students from the fall of 1994 through the fall of 1997. In 1994 and 1995, the students were taught using the traditional method of teaching ecology, using filmstrips, videos, lectures and a few labs. In 1996 and 1997, the students were taught based on the ecotube with appropriate support activities. This was a new form of teaching for me that allowed the objectives to be taught using the three sensory modalities. Table 1 is an overview of the evaluation of my ecology unit. It shows the year the unit was taught, before and after the ecotube. It includes the ecology final test average per class, the average quarter (term) grade, and the period of the day the class was taught. 17 Table 1 - Overview of the evaluation of my ecology unit before and after using the ecotube Before the Ecotube Year Ecology Test Avg. Term Period 1994 79% 85% 6th 1995 84% 87% 5th 1995 75% 81 % 6th TOTALS 79% 84% 3 PERIODS After the Ecotube Year EcologyTest Avg. Term Period 1996 90% 86% 5th 1996 88% 77% 6th 1997 93% 94% ISI 1997 89% 89% 3rd 1997 95% 94% 4th 1997 82% 78% 5th 1997 83% 79% 6th TOTALS 89% 85% 'l PERIODS 18 To determine whether the new unit helped to improve student performance, I had to know the basic skill level of each group of students. The students who were taught using the traditional method (n=84) in 1994 and 1995, had an average quarter grade of 84%. The students who were taught using the ecotube in 1996 and 1997 (n=117), had an average quarter grade of 85%. This establishes that these two groups of students were essentially of the same skill level. The results of the ecology final exam for both groups of students are shown in Figure 2. The exam covered all thirteen objectives with several questions on each objective. Figure 2 - Results of final exam before and after using the ecotube —m:-11 75 *' 7O ' ' ‘ZIT|§IJITICD momma) UITTITICD QZ_4>Zm§IDITTG) SEED IN COLD (BAR GRAPH) AAA—LA—A—L—L—L—tm o-smooammNoocoo ANw-bU'IODVCDCO DAYS SEEDS IN WARM (BAR GRAPH) Add—L—l—L—ld—Ldm O-th-AUIOJNCDCOO dNOO-hU'IODVmCD 66 20 SEEDS IN HOT (BARGFIAPH) mOmmm 02-4}Zmzwmm 5 amm-hmmwooco 1 2 3 4 DAYS QUESTIONS: 1. Which grass looked healthier? How did it look healthier, and why was it healthier? 2. What does this experiment have to do with competition? 3. How would this experiment help you plant grass better? 4. What would happen to any organism if overcrowding occurs? 67 APPENDIX L 68 APPENDIX L Activity 7 Consumer and Producer 1. What is a producer? 2. What is a consumer? 3. How do producers get their energy? 4. How do consumers get their energy? 5. Knowing how they get their energy from where does the producer and consumer ultimently get their energy from? 6. Name two consumers in your ecotube? 7. Name 3 consumers in your ecology in a bottle? 8. How can you tell if it is a producer or a consumer? 9. What would happen if we took all the producers out of the bottle? 10. What would happen if we took all the consumers out of the bottle? 69 11. Graph out the population of corn with the population of deer: POPULATION OF RABBITS WEEK 1 80 WEEK 2 60 WEEK 3 57 WEEK 4 52 WEEK 5 50 WEEK 6 41 WEEK 7 18 WEEK 8 22 WEEK 9 27 WEEK 10 37 DEER POPULATION IN A 10 WEEK PERIOD RABBITS 80 7O 6O 50 4O 30 2O 1O WEEKS 70 POPULATION OF CORN WEEK 1 6 WEEK 2 WEEK 3 WEEK 4 WEEK 5 WEEK 6 WEEK 7 WEEK 8 WEEK 9 WEEK 10 @QVV-bww-bh 0101 O (DITIJJO> .h C) 2300 N 71 APPENDIX M 72 APPENDIX M Competition Background: When there is competition, the environment is affected. The niche, habitat, growth, or even reproduction is affected. We will see if the growth of grass seeds is affected by overcrowding. Observe: Observing two lawns. One yard, the grass is growing great. In the other yard is not growing great. Question: I wonder if planting too much seed can effect the growth of the Hypothesis: I_f_ I plant a lot of grass in one area then it will be (larger/ shorter) and (thicker / thinner) Experiment: 1. Put two cups of soil in a glass. 2. Label the cups A and B. * In cup A put a hand full of grass seeds and cover them with dirt. * In cup B spread out 35 seeds and cover them with dirt. 3. Wait 5 days and record in the chart below, then graph the results on the last page. * Make a table using the data from your grass. 4. When you take the 30 blades of grass, it is easier to take scissors and snip a bunch of grass from the dirt and count out 30. Do not pull the grass out by hand, just use the stalk of the grass. 73 APPENDIX N 74 APPENDIX N Predetor Prey Experiment Background: In nature an animal is either a predator or a prey. A predator is an animal which hunts down another animal and a prey is what is being hunted. An example is a lion is a predator and its prey would be a deer. Now an animal can be a predator and a prey. Like a lion can also be a prey, when humans are the predator. First Experiment: 1. With 25 students use 25 peanuts and: * Distinguish 2 of the students as being OWLS. Use a sign paper or something. * Distinguish 5 of the students as being BIRDS. * Distinguish 13 of the students as being grasshoppers. 2. Give each student a peanut. ( On 7 of the grasshopper peanuts put a small blue dot, this shows that there is poison in those grasshoppers) 3. Find an area about 100 ft. by 100 ft. and spread the students out then say, “ Go”. The birds should try to catch the grasshoppers and if they do catch the grasshoppers the grasshopper sits down and give that peanut to the bird. The owls have to try to catch the birds and if they do the birds give their peanut to the owls. After 15 seconds say, “Stop”. Then the students should fill out the attached sheet. 4. If the birds do not capture at least 2 grasshoppers they die and are out of the game. If the owl does not capture at least one bird they are out of the game. 5. You can also use the blue dot as pollution and see where all the pollution gathers in a food chain. Second experiment: 1. Divide the students the way you did in the 1st step of the first experiment. 2. Don’t give any students peanuts. 3. Find an area about 100 ft. by 100 ft. and spread the students out and say, “Go”. The same rules apply in experiment one but when the bird catches the grasshopper the grasshopper becomes a bird, this is because they live longer and reproduce. Same applies to the owl, but they need to capture the birds. What happens to the population of Birds, Grasshoppers, and owls? 75 Type of Animal Rounds # Captured Blue dot 76 APPENDIX 0 77 APPENDIX 0 Adaptations Background: Every organism has adaptations. An adaptation is a trait that helps an organism survive. Cheetahs have speed, turtles have shells, and bears have strength. Brine shrimp also have adaptations that helps them to survive. There are two types of adaptations that enable the success of an organism, structural and behavioral adaptations. You will find the structural and behavioral adaptations of brine shrimp. More Background: Brine shrimp are crustaceans. They like to live in a weak salt solution. They feed off the algae on the top of the water. -__B_ehavLoral Adaptations Procedure: 1. Get a solution of brine shrimp and put it in the petri plate. 2. Put a paper towel over half the petri plate and watch where the brine shrimp go. 3. Wait for one minute and take the towel off the plate. Below draw where the brine shrimp were located when you took the towel off. Covered Side Adapted from Merrill Biology, Biolab Worksheets, Copyright 1991 78 Questions: 1. Where were most of your brine shrimp located, in the light or dark? 2. What is a behavioral adaptation? 3. Why would it be better for the brine shrimp to be located in the light? 4. Is this a structural or a behavioral adaptation? Why? Structural Adaptation Procedure: 1. Take one brine shrimp and put it on a microscope slide. 2. Look at it under low power and draw it below. 3. What is the definition of a structural adaptation? 4. Below list three structural adaptations and tell how they help the brine shrimp survive. Structural adaptations How they help brine shrimp survive 79 APPENDIX P 80 APPENDIX P Activity 10 Owl Pellet Background: An owl is a carnivore so it eats meat. You can determine the prey of an owl by looking at its pellets. An owl pellet is the substance an owl does not digest. The owl regurgitates the substances that it can not digest in a little ball called a pellet. You are going to look at a pellet and find what animals the owl depends on for survival. Experiment: *Put safety goggles on. 1. Take an owl pellet and with your instruments carefully dissect it. 2. Divide the types of skeletons in piles. 3. By using the pictures on the back page decide if the animal the owl ate was a rodent, shrew, mole or another animal. 4. Below put the number of animals found in the chart below. Individuals Results # of animals Animal found Rodent Shrew lvlole Other Total It idapted from Scott, Foresman, Biology Laboratory Manual, Copyright 1995. 81 5. Get a total of animals found in your class and find a percent of them by dividing each animal by the total number of animals found, do this below. Class Results Animal Number of animals Percent of Found Animals Rodent Shrew Mole Other Total Number 6. Which organism would effect the owls health the most if the grass was sprayed with a carcinogen or DDT. 7. Assume that owl that produced your owl pellet produces one pellet every day. Estimate the owl’s annual consumption of each animal: TIMES EACH ANIMAL BY 365. RODENT = SHREW MOLE = OTHER = 8. Which animal would effect the owl the most if it had a decline in number or went extinct 82 9. Assume a mole weighs 110 grams, rodent 25 grams, and a shrew 3 grams. Compute the average weight in grams of each of the owls prey in an annual diet. Rank each animal from importance in the owl’s diet. Use your individual data. Rank Grams Rodent: Shrew = Mole = 10. From what you know about an owls diet you should be able to draw a food web starting with the sun and ending with the owl. Remember a food web is overlapping food chains. 11. Why do animals at the top of the food web considered the most threatened organism in a community that is exposed to such poisons. Are we at the top of the food web? 12. Draw three food chains to make a food web of your ecology in a bottle below. 83 APPENDIX Q 84 Appendix Q Demonstrating the Carbon Cycle in 3 Sealed , Environment Background: Elements are cycled through the environment. These cycles include the nitrogen cycle, water cycle and the carbon cycle. Carbon is found in all living things and needs to be cycled or else living things will die. One way this happens is when animals give off carbon dioxide during respiration and plants take this carbon dioxide in during photosynthesis. We will be observing this cycle in a sealed environment. Procedure: 1. Pour 150 ml of aquarium water into a beaker and add one to two ml of bromothymol blue. 2. Put four test tubes on a test tube rack. Label the test tubes A, B, C, and D. 3. Pour 4/5 of aquarium water in each test tube. 4. Test tube A = Don’t put anything in it. Test tube B = Put 2 snails Test tube C = Put Elodea Test tube D = Put Elodea and snails. 5. Record under day one in your data table. Observations should include color of water (Blue, Light blue, Green, Yellow or clear). Test tube ----> A B C D Day Aquarium Water Snails Elodea Elodea/Snails 1 2 3 Adapted from Scott, Foresman, Biology, Copyright 1991 85 Questions: 1. Which test tube is your control. (A,B,C or D)? 2. Increase amounts of carbon dioxide will change the color of the water to 3. Which test tube will turn clear? Why? 4. Which test tube(s) will not change? Why? 5. Which test tube did the organisms remain alive? Why? 6. Where did the snail in the fourth tube obtain its oxygen for respiration? 86 APPENDIX R 87 APPENDIX R Ecology Test l. Matching: Match the letter with the correct statement below'. A. Biology D. Microbiologist B. Zoologist E. Ecologist C. Botanist F Anatomy 1 . A person studying pollution, or the environment. 2. A person who studies animals. 3. A person who studies structures. 4. A person who studies small living things. 5. A person who studies living things. 6. A person who studies plants. ll. Short Answer: 79 There are a frog and a rock lying next to each other on a table. What are some features of the frog that make it alive: 7. 8. 9. 10-11. What are two needs that frog has to have in order for it to be considered alive 10. 11. 12. 88 III. Matching: A. Abiotic B. Biotic C. Niche D. Habitat E. Predator F. Prey 12 A squirrel eats nuts and gathers leaves. 13. An animal that gets eaten. Like that rabbit and the hawk, the rabbit is this. 14. Water or carbon dioxide is this, a nonliving thing. 15. A tree or an animal is this, a living thing. 16. The animal that eats things, like the hawk and the rabbit, the hawk is this. 17. The squirrel lives in the tree, the tree is this. lV. Short Answer 18. Define an ADAPTATION - 19. Name a structural adaptation: 20. Name a behavioral adaptation 21. When a deer used camouflage to hide in the dark brown weeds during hunting seasons, is the brown coat on the deer a structural or behavioral adaptation? 22. When a walking stick used mimicry to hide from the predators, the parts on the walking stick's body a structural or behavioral adaptation? 89 Vll. Put in the circle below where POPULATION, COMMUNITY, INDIVIDUAL, AND ECOSYSTEM belong in the center of the circle is greater in number and the farther you go outside the more abundant the organisms. 23 4'24 l / / 27. How are strength and health effected by overpopulation? VII. Matching A. Limiting Factor B. Primary Succession C. Secondary Succession 28. When a volcano forms and a new land area is created in the ocean. 29. When a forest fire burns down the woods of previously existing land area. 30. What an organism needs to survive. 90 V. Multiple choice 31. An organism that makes its own food. a. Producer b. Consumer c. Decomposer 32. An organism that gets its own food. a. Producer b. Consumer c. Decomposer 33. A consumer that eats only vegetables. a. Omnivore b. Carnivore c. Herbivore 34. A consumer that eats only meat. a. Omnivore b. Carnivore c. Herbivore 35. A consumer tat eats both meat and vegetables. a- Omnivore b. Carnivore c. Herbivore 36. What part of the food chain turns dead material into a usable form of energy. a. Scavenger b. Producer c. Consumer cl. Decomposer Vl. Label what type of symbiotic relationship it is, Mutualism Parasitism Commenselism 37. Where both organisms benefit. 38. Where one benefits and the other is harmed. 39. Where one benefits and the other is neither harmed nor benefits. 91 VII. Multiple Choice 40. When the crab puts anemones on its back and both organism are helped a. Parasitism b. Commenselism c. Mutualism d. None of the above 41. When a leach sticks to your skin to suck your blood a. Parasitism b. Commenselism c. Mutualism d. None of the above 42. A mouse eats some grain containing a kind of bacteria. That bacteria begin to live in the mice' intestines and cause the mouse to become sick. That bacteria are most likely a. Predators b. Scavengers c. Carnivores d. Parasites VIII. Fill in- Use the words below to answer questions 43-46. Energy pyramid Carnivore Food chain Decomposers 43. Shows the loss of energy in a food chain. 44. A lion is a because it eats only meat. 45. A breaks down food into a usable form of energy. 46. A shows the flow of energy from organism to organism. 92 Vllll. Label the pyramid below. C: Carnivore P: Producer H=Herbivore +4? \ >48 \ .4. \ 50. Can we use nitrogen can be fixed onto another element. 52. Name one way nitrogen is used in an organism. 53. Name one thing you learned from your ecotubes. 54. Name the three steps in the water cycle in order. 93 APPENDIX 8 94 APPENDIX 8 Ecology Unit Outline 1. Ecology A. Features of Life 1. Biosphere 2. Biotic 3. Abiotic B. Population 1. Population Density C. Community D. Ecosystem E. Succession 1. Primary succession 2. Secondary succession 3. Climax community 4. Limiting factors F. Organisms are either 1. Producers 2. Consumers G. Feeding relationships 1. Competition a. Niche b. Predator, prey 2. Adaptations a. Behavioral adaptations b. Structural adaptations 1b. Camouflage 2b. Mimicry 3. Symbiotic relationships a. Mutualism b. Parasitism c. Commencelism H. Food chain 1. Food web I. Energy pyramid J. Cycles of matter 1. Water cycle 2. Carbon dioxide cycle 3. Nitrogen cycle 95 BIBLIOGRAPHY 96 Bibliography Carroll, John B. “A Model for Student Learning.” Teacher’s College Record Vol. 64, No. 8, pp. 723-733. May, 1963. Foster, Stephen F. “Ten Principals of Learning Revised in Accordance with Cognitive Psychology: With Implications for Teaching,” Educational Psychologists, Vol. 21, No. 3, Summer 1986. pp. 235-243 Lezotte, Lawrence W. Effective Schools Abstract. Vol. 6 No. 2, 1992. pp.105- 112. Phelan, Patricia. Ann Locke Davidson, and Hahn Thanh Cao. “Speaking Up: Students’ Perspectives on School.” Phi Delta Kappan. Vol. 73, No. 9, May 1992, pp. 695-704. Robinson, Glen E. “Synthesis of Research on the Effects of Class Size.” Educational Leadership. Vol 47, No. 7, April 1990, pp. 80-90. Teele, Sue. “Redesigning the Educational System To Enable All Students To Succeed. “ NASSP Bulletin, November 1996, pp. 65-75. Tobias, Cynthia Ulrich. “The Way They Learn.” Focus on the Family. Colorado Spnngs,1994. Tobias, Randolf. Nurturing at Risk in Math and Science: Curriculum and Teaching Considerations. National Educational Service, Bloomington, Indiana, 1992. Uchida, Donna with Marvin Cetron and Floretta McKenzie, Preparing Students for the 21st Century, American Association of School Administrators, Arlington, VA, 1996. Walberg, Herbert J. “Productive Teaching and Instruction.” Phi Delta Kappan. Vol. 71, No. 6, Feb. 1990, pp. 470-478. 97 "Illllllllllllllllllllllllllllf