Abstract This action research project investigated the impact ... - iMET

AbstractThis action research project investigated the impact on student learning when twodifferent types of dissection methods were applied. My main inquiry when doing thisresearch was to determine which dissection method, real or virtual, would produce thehighest learning rate for my student population.The study lasted about 5 weeks from start to finish. It involved all my 7 th grade LifeScience students except for 1. Since I had one student protest to doing live dissectionsdue to religious reasons (citing Education Code Section 32255-32255.6), I couldn’t forceher to do the live dissection portion of this unit. Because of her choice to opt out, Icouldn’t count all her data in my overall statistics for this research. Although she stillhad to do the virtual dissection and you will see her data incorporated there, the livedissection data will be a little skewed from her missing scores.I have a total of 137 students, all of varying learning levels, but only 136 of themparticipated in this research (reasoning stated above). I have 51 High Achievement(HA) students, 28 AVID (Advancement Via Individual Determination) students, and 58Traditional/Grade Level students. During the time of my research, I had quite a fewabsences and several students never made up the missing work. Whether it was thereal or virtual dissection they missed, I do have some students missing scores eventhough I gave them 1 week grace period to make up absentee work.The overall result of this study was pretty much what I thought it might be. When I wasgrowing up, I didn’t have the option of “opting out” from doing something that theteacher was doing. I also didn’t have technology being forced upon me in myclassrooms. Because of all these changes, I often wondered what the affect of havingall these options would do to student learning levels. Would having to learn one wayaffect the overall learning outcome of any student? Would my lone student who optedout of doing live labs have a different score from her peers and if so, what would thatresult be? Lastly, which method of learning about animal anatomy is more popular,successful, and welcomed by my students. In the end, will it be live or virtualdissections that comes out as the leader of this research? This is the ultimate questionin this age of pro-technology and pro-choice.IntroductionWhen trying to teach to Standards, it is very difficult to figure out what Standards to staytrue to and which ones to pick and choose from. As much as we don’t want to admit it,teachers are always forced to make the choice of what to teach from these Standardsand what not to. With so many Standards on both the District and State levels, it would

e close to impossible to teach everything in them, regardless of what level they are. Inmaking the decision of which area gets what amount of time, we also have to decidewhich method of teaching would be most beneficial as well as convenient to ourstudents. We can’t possibly rely on one teaching method or way of teaching if it isn’tworking for our students. This is especially true in this age of technology convertedclassrooms. With the hype of going technical, how does one know how helpful thismove will be on the students of today if we don’t do research on it. This is whatprovoked me to conduct my study.Last year, when I first started iMET11, I was a part of the Science Textbook PilotingProgram for San Juan Unified District. During this process of picking an ideal book forour student population in our district’s geographical area, North East Sacramento, wegot first hand insight into the new Science books. It was also during this one yearprocess that I realized the textbooks of today were changing. Since we only go througha book adoption every 7-8 years, it seems inevitable that the content and format of ourtextbooks would change. Although I knew this going into this Science Book PilotingProgram, I was still taken back by the dramatic change. In every Science textbook,there were at least 2-5 computer based dissections incorporated into them. Not onlythis, but every chapter had a minimum of 5 different lessons that were technologybased. It seemed like every other page referenced something that had to do withcomputers. For an individual, such as me, who is known to be computer shy/illiterate,these changes were a bit overwhelming to me.Our administrators are always emphasizing that we teach to the books because of theirthoroughness in covering the State Standards, but how can a non-techie teacher beexpected to do this? And if I personally feel this way, which’s to say some of mystudents wouldn’t either. Will making the world more accepting to technology meansthat everyone who is in the path of this mission will benefit from it? Will teaching withmore technology or even based on technology methods help or hurt my students?What will their feelings/actions show when confronted with learning the old school way(hands-on) vs. the new age way (computer based)? This is what I wanted to know. Inorder to answer my inquiry, I set up a study for all my students. I was going to havethem do a few virtual dissections and then I would compare those results to those of ahands-on live dissection. I would then use different forms of assessments to determinewhich method was more successful.Research QuestionsWhat do you think would be an easier method of learning, hands-on (in class) or virtual(using computers)?

Have any of you had any previous experience with either method in Science?What method do you think you’ll be most successful in? Why?Which do you think would be harder to do/learn from?Do you have a preference on which one you like more?Why do you think your outcome to both these methods is what they are?Are you surprised by the outcome of this study?How do you feel about these learning methods now?SettingThe group members who will be included in the study are my 7 th grade Life Scienceclasses. My school is located in an urban community in Sacramento. The studentscome from a diverse population and about 20% of them are bused in from differentareas. The majority of my students are Caucasian (75%) and their parents are middleupperclass people and mostly educated. The second biggest group of students isHispanics (20%) and they come from parents who fall under the lower class withoutmuch of an education. The next group of student is Asians (10%) and their parents arealso middle-upper class individuals who are mostly educated. The last group ofstudents falls under “other” and make up 5% of the population. The level of educationof these parents is unknown, but I assume is quite low.I have three levels of Science classes and they are: High Achiever (HA), AVID, andTraditional. The HA class is my honors group and are taught with material that is 2grade levels higher than the Traditional group. The AVID students are taught with thesame material as the HA and the Traditional class, but the pacing is slower than HA.The Traditional class is taught at grade level and the pacing is very slow with lots ofmodifications and accommodations made in this class.Description of StudyThis action research was completed during the Animal Kingdom Unitand took up 5 weeks time from this 12 week unit. During the first weekof the study, starting March 9 th , I sent home a survey that informed thestudents and parents that I would be collecting data from the dissectionportion of this unit for research purposes. It took me 3 days to collectall of the surveys and the response of them was: I got every surveyback with 4 students not to have their scores disclosed in anonymously,

and 1 student that opted out of doing any animal dissections at all.Since my students have every right to protest certain teaching methodsif it goes against their core beliefs, I had no choice but to let here optout of doing live dissections. Since she cited Education Code Section32255-32255.6, which states an individual can’t not be forced intolearning activities that go against their religious/traditional beliefs, myhands were tied only in making her do the live labs. She was not ableto opt out of the virtual dissections though and this would give me greatinsight into how well she would do when missing the hands-on labexperience.During the 5 weeks of the study I had my students do a hands-on labdissection on a worm. I conducted the lab as I normally would, byteaching them all about the anatomy of the worm first. Then I had themwork on drawing the worm, with its parts labeled and colored. After theintroduction portion of this sub-unit and before the actual dissection, Igave my students a pre-dissection survey. After all this, they had todissect the worm using all these resources. From the point ofintroduction of the Worm sub-unit, it took me 7 days to get completelythrough the live dissections, survey them post dissection, and givethem an assessment on the Worm Lab.I then signed up for some computer lab time for all my classes. Thiswas the most time consuming part of this study. Since we have ashared computer lab, there were days when I could get the lab for 3classes and not 2 that same day. Then I would get 4 periods in the laband not 1 class. Another frustration with using a communal computerroom, was when I got there, some students were already using them. Ittook me a good 2 weeks to get enough time for my students to do 2different virtual dissections. After this process, I gave all my studentspre-virtual dissections survey questions. I then took them into thecomputer lab on the days I was able to sign up for it. We went throughthe two virtual dissections, took the post dissections survey, and took aquiz on it. During these 5 weeks of studying the impact of dissectionson students, I was also keeping a day-by-day journal of what washappening as it did.Limitations of the StudyAs with all studies/experiments, there are always constants that will be beyond theexperimenters/researchers control. Since the in-class dissection labs are already builtinto my curriculum, I didn’t have many problems in this area except for studentabsences. The main area I felt might give me problems was the online dissections.Since I don’t normally use virtual labs in my curriculum and I don’t have full access to a

computer lab anytime I need it, there were many factors I had to overcome even beforethe study began. Another limitation was that my students didn’t have the same level ofexposure to computers use. I know this because some of my students informed me atthe beginning of the year that they didn’t have any email addresses due to lack ofhaving a computer at home. These are some of the areas of limitation for my study.TimelineWeek 1 – March 9 th to 13 th 2009I distributed the dissection study informative handout to student/parent and collectedthem from all my 139 students. I had 138 opt in and 1 opt out of the live animaldissections. I had 4 individuals request for their data not to be disclosed. I also handedout the pre-dissection survey questions for the animal dissections and collected themthis first week. The last 2 days of this week, I handed out the introduction worksheetsfor the Worm Unit. This gave the students the weekend to get familiar with the anatomyof our first dissection animal.Week 2 – March 16 th to 20 th 2009We spent this week learning about the anatomy of worms. We spent time onsegmented worms, round worms, and flat worms. We ended the week concentrating onthe segmented worm.Week 3 – March 23 rd to 27 th 2009I had the students work on the Worm Dissection this week. The week ended with aWorm review (Thursday) and a quiz on Friday. I also spent time signing up forcomputer lab time this week. I was able to get time to work in the lab on Monday, partof Tuesday, and 1 period on Wednesday.Week 4 – March 30 to April 3 rd 2009I gave the pre-dissection survey for the virtual labs on Monday. We then headed overto the computer lab, but discovered that another class signed up for the lab AFTER I didfor 6 th period. Since it was the Computer Exploration class that conflicted with my signup time, I had to give up the lab time slot I signed up for. This was frustrating. Weended up spending periods 1-5 in lab on Monday, 1-6 in lab on Tuesday, and period 6on Wednesday.Links to virtual dissections:

Virtual Frog Dissection:http://mariemarie0000.free.fr/fichiers/images/frog.swfVirtual Eye Dissection:http://www.eschoolonline.com/company/examples/eye/eyedissect.htmlWeek 5 – April 6 th to April 10 th 2009I handed out the post dissection virtual lab surveys on Monday and scheduled a quiz forThursday on the virtual labs. We spent part of Wednesday studying the material. Thisweek also gave me time to get all my surveys in as well as giving time to my absenteestudents to make up missing in class and virtual lab work.Presentation of DataResults from: Letter Informing Students/Parents of Intent toCollect and Share DataTraditional/Grade Level ClassesStudent population 58Student that approve 58Students that disapprove 0Student’s non-approval for data sharing 2

6050403020100TraditionalLevelStudentsApproveDisapproveNo Disclosure ofdataHigh Achievement (HA) Level ClassesStudent population 51Student that approve 50Students that disapprove 1Student’s non-approval for data sharing 2

50454035302520151050HA LevelStudentsApproveDisapproveNo Disclosure ofDataAVID Level ClassesStudent population 28Student that approve 28Students that disapprove 0Student’s non-approval for data sharing 0

302520151050AVIDLevelStudentsApproveDisapproveNo Disclosure ofDataPre-Dissection Survey ResultsReal DissectionsPeriods 1-6 (No data provided for 3rd period=prep)1. Do you have previous dissection experience? Yes2. Do you have previous dissection experience? No3. You are comfortable with dissections? Yes4. You are comfortable with dissections? NoPeriod-1 Period-2 Period-4 Period-5 Period-6Prev Dissection Ex 6 5 4 13 23No Prior Experience 27 26 17 14 2High Comfort w/ Di 10 11 8 14 6Low Comfort w/ Di 23 20 13 13 19

Period-1Period-2Period-4Period-5Period-6Post-Dissection Survey ResultsReal DissectionsPeriods 1-6 (No data provided for 3rd period=prep)1. How do you feel about dissections now? Good2. How do you feel about dissections now? Bad3. Was this dissection easy? Yes4. Was this dissection easy? NoPeriod-1 Period-2 Period-4 Period-5 Period-6Feelings-Good 6 4 11 15 5Feelings-Bad 27 26 10 8 20Dissections Easy 18 6 17 5 6Dissections Hard 15 24 4 18 19

Period-1Period-2Period-4Period-5Period-6Animal Dissection (Hands-On) AssessmentQuiz on Worm Anatomy(No 3 rd period data due to prep)Period-1 Period-2 Period-4 Period-5 Period-680% or higher (A or B) 23 24 17 18 1065% to 79% ( C ) 7 4 2 6 4Below 64% (Not passing) 3 2 2 4 11

3025201510580% or higher(Aor B)65% to 79% ( C )Below 64% (Notpassing)0Per-1 Peri-2 Per-4 Per-5 Per-6Pre-Dissection Survey ResultsVirtual DissectionsPeriods 1-6 (No data provided for 3rd period=prep)1. Do you have previous virtual dissection experience? Yes2. Do you have previous virtual dissection experience? No3. You are comfortable with virtual dissections? Yes4. You are comfortable with virtual dissections? No

Period-1 Period-2 Period-4 Period-5 Period-6Feelings-Good 25 19 16 13 18Feelings-Bad 8 11 5 15 17Dissections Easy 26 25 17 18 20Dissections Hard 7 5 4 10 5Problems-Yes 30 5 19 20 23Problems-No 3 25 2 8 2Period-1Period-2Period-4Period-5Period-6Animal Dissection (Virtual) AssessmentQuiz on Virtual Frog and Eye(No 3 rd period data due to prep)

Period-1 Period-2 Period-4 Period-5 Period-680% or higher(A or B) 10 16 10 8 565% to 79% ( C ) 12 13 8 10 5Below 64% (Not passing) 11 11 3 10 15181614121086420Per-1 Per-2 Per-4 Per-5 Per-680% or higher(A or B)65% to 79% ( C )Below 64% (Not passing)ConclusionIn this action research, I sought to discover the impact of different forms of dissectionson my student’s overall assessment scores. Prior to the study, my hypothesis was thatmost students wouldn’t do as well on virtual dissections as they would in realdissections. I believe the hands-on version of learning about animal anatomy helpscontribute to the overall learning experience you would get from doing anylab/experiment. Having the luxury of feeling, smelling, seeing, and sometimes tastingthe lab supplies helps to engrain the experience inside your brain. This is what I thinkmost students gravitate towards.

If you take a look at the graph of the pre-dissection survey for both methods ofdissections, you will notice that the students seemed to struggle more on the real labs incomparison to the virtual ones. Unfortunately, there wasn’t a correlation to assessmentscores and ease of use for the two methods. The assessment data chart and graphshow that the scores are lower on the virtual labs even though the students preferred touse this method and liked it a lot more. I thought this survey question of which methodwas preferred and easier was quite interesting because the students said the computerone was. At the same time, those who were absent and making up this assignmentthought this was the most difficult method of doing dissections. Also, this was themethod that caused problems for the majority of the students. They said the computerkept skipping to different pages right in the middle of the virtual dissection.It’s quite interesting that the students didn’t prefer the one method that they seemed tolearn more from. According to the quiz scores, the live labs had higher assessmentresults and lasting impressions. Every day the students came into the in classdissection labs and complained about the tediousness and smell of the lab. But whenthey were tested on the anatomy of the animals, the one they enjoyed the least, left thestrongest impression in their brains. The study’s data shows that real dissections helpstudents to retain the knowledge/information they learned at a higher rate than thevirtual one.