Restructuring High School Science Curriculum: A Program Evaluation PDF
Preview Restructuring High School Science Curriculum: A Program Evaluation
Walden University ScholarWorks Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection 2015 Restructuring High School Science Curriculum: A Program Evaluation Cathy Robertson Walden University Follow this and additional works at:https://scholarworks.waldenu.edu/dissertations Part of theEducational Assessment, Evaluation, and Research Commons,Elementary and Middle and Secondary Education Administration Commons,Science and Mathematics Education Commons, and theSecondary Education and Teaching Commons This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies Collection at ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Walden Dissertations and Doctoral Studies by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks. For more information, please [email protected]. Walden University COLLEGE OF EDUCATION This is to certify that the doctoral study by Cathy Robertson has been found to be complete and satisfactory in all respects, and that any and all revisions required by the review committee have been made. Review Committee Dr. Rachel Pienta, Committee Chairperson, Education Faculty Dr. Kimberley Alkins, Committee Member, Education Faculty Dr. Miranda Jennings, University Reviewer, Education Faculty Chief Academic Officer Eric Riedel, Ph.D. Walden University 2015 Abstract Restructuring High School Science Curriculum: A Program Evaluation by Cathy Jean Robertson EdS, Walden University, 2011 MS, Southeast Missouri State University, 2006 BS, Southeast Missouri State University, 1999 Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Walden University February 2015 Abstract One rural Midwestern high school discovered a discrepancy among school, state, and national science skill attainment, verified by ACT scores. If students do not acquire vital science skills, they may not perform proficiently on science tests, thus impacting future college options. Inquiry based instruction and constructivism provided the basis for the theoretical framework. This study questioned associations between ACT scores, inquiry science technique usage, and ACT standard usage (Phase 1), and teachers’ views on science instruction (Phase 2). This sequential explanatory mixed methods program evaluation included 469 ACT scores, surveys sent to 9 science teachers, and 8 interviews. Phase 1 used the inquiry science implementation scale survey and an ACT college readiness standards workbook to determine proportional associations between datasets. Descriptive statistics, one-sample t tests, and binomial tests were used to analyze Phase 1 data. Phase 2 interviews augmented Phase 1 data and were disassembled, reassembled, and interpreted for parallel viewpoints. Phase 1 data indicated that teachers use a slightly above average amount of inquiry and science ACT standards in the classroom; however, most science students did not test above the curriculum and there were inconsistencies in standards covered. Phase 2 data revealed teachers need time to collaborate and become skilled in inquiry methods to rectify the inconsistencies. The project was an evaluation report. This study will foster positive social change by giving the district a plan: adapt the science curriculum by integrating more ACT and inquiry standards and participate in more professional development that applies inquiry as a tool to increase science skill proficiency, thus generating locally competitive students for college and the workforce. Restructuring High School Science Curriculum: A Program Evaluation by Cathy Jean Robertson EdS, Walden University, 2011 MS, Southeast Missouri State University, 2006 BS, Southeast Missouri State University, 1999 Doctoral Study Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Education Walden University February 2015 Dedication I would like to dedicate this paper to my family and friends. To my husband Tommy, over the years, you have watched me fall and each time you have been there to help me get back up. To my son Aidan, God brought you into my life at the perfect time, and through you I have learned the purest forms of love and happiness. To my parents, you have shown me that hard work is all in a day’s work. To my siblings, you have taught me that there is always a little bit more fight left in me. For the rest of my family and friends, each one of you has been there to listen to the cries of protest and the subsequent elevated eagerness to complete this paper. To conclude, I must dedicate this paper to God. You have carried me through the darkest moments of my life, and because of you I now have the strength to walk. Acknowledgments I would like to recognize my committee chair, Dr. Rachel Pienta, for teaching me that all of the corrections really were for a reason. I have to express a special thank you to my second chair, Dr. Kimberley Alkins, for stepping in to help me finish this journey. I would also like to acknowledge my all of my past teachers from Walden University for helping me determine my focus. Last but not least, I must say thank you to my Yoda of English, Alicia. Without your help, I never would have made it through the semicolon era. Table of Contents List of Tables ..................................................................................................................... vi List of Figures ................................................................................................................... vii Section 1: The Problem ........................................................................................................1 Introduction ....................................................................................................................1 Definition of the Problem ..............................................................................................4 Rationale ........................................................................................................................6 Evidence of the Problem at the Local Level ........................................................... 6 STEM Careers ......................................................................................................... 7 Evidence of the Problem from the Professional Literature ................................... 10 National NAEP Versus the International PISA .................................................... 11 Definitions....................................................................................................................12 Significance..................................................................................................................14 Research Questions ......................................................................................................15 Phase 1: Quantitative Questions ........................................................................... 15 Phase 2: Qualitative Question ............................................................................... 16 Review of the Literature ..............................................................................................16 Theoretical Framework ......................................................................................... 17 Implications..................................................................................................................36 Summary ......................................................................................................................37 Section 2: The Methodology ..............................................................................................39 Introduction ..................................................................................................................39 i Mixed Methods Justification................................................................................. 40 Program Evaluation .............................................................................................. 42 Setting and Sample/Participants ..................................................................................48 ACT Data .............................................................................................................. 48 Teacher Data ......................................................................................................... 49 Instrumentation and Materials .....................................................................................50 Data Collection ..................................................................................................... 50 Phase 1: Quantitative Instruments ........................................................................ 51 Phase 2: Qualitative Sequence .............................................................................. 55 Data Analysis ...............................................................................................................55 Phase 1: Quantitative Analysis ............................................................................. 55 Phase 2: Qualitative Analysis ............................................................................... 61 Assumptions .......................................................................................................... 65 Limitations ............................................................................................................ 66 Scope and Delimitations ....................................................................................... 67 Limitations of the Evaluation................................................................................ 67 Participants’ Rights ............................................................................................... 68 Role of the Researcher .......................................................................................... 69 Findings........................................................................................................................70 Phase 1: Quantitative Findings: Comparison between Data Sets ......................... 70 Phase 2: Interpretation of Qualitative Findings .................................................... 75 Summary of Findings ............................................................................................ 78 ii Conclusion ...................................................................................................................80 Section 3: The Project ........................................................................................................82 Introduction ..................................................................................................................82 Description and Goals ..................................................................................................82 Rationale ......................................................................................................................84 Review of the Literature ..............................................................................................85 Types of Program Evaluation ............................................................................... 86 Research-Based Recommendations for Program Evaluators ............................... 87 Using the Results of Program Evaluation ............................................................. 89 Analysis of Theory and Research ......................................................................... 90 Implementation ............................................................................................................96 Potential Resources and Existing Supports........................................................... 96 Potential Barriers .................................................................................................. 97 Proposal for Implementation and Timetable......................................................... 98 Roles and Responsibilities of Those involved ...................................................... 99 Project Evaluation ......................................................................................................100 Implications Including Social Change .......................................................................100 Local Community ............................................................................................... 100 Far-Reaching ....................................................................................................... 101 Conclusion .................................................................................................................103 Section 4: Reflections and Conclusions ...........................................................................104 Introduction ................................................................................................................104 iii
Description:The list of books you might like
