CE  Vol.4 No.4 , April 2013
Relevance, Rigor, and Relationships: Student Perceptions Following Participation in an Integrated Experiential Zoo-Based Academic High School Science Program
ABSTRACT

The purpose of this survey study was to compare students’ measured Likert scale perceptions of posttest school climate survey, relevance, rigor, and relationships domain scores following 11th- and 12th-grade participation in either an integrated experiential zoo-based academic high school science program (n = 18) or a same school district integrated experiential school-based academic high school science program (n = 18). Science coursework delivery site served as the study’s independent variable. ACT composite scores and science grade point average scores were equivalent for students participating in both science programs. Students participating in the zoo-based experiential academic high school science program completed real world, hands-on projects on-site at a nationally recognized zoo while same school district control group students participating in the integrated experiential school-based academic high school science program completed matched curriculum, real world, simulated projects in their classrooms. Students who completed the integrated experiential zoo-based academic high school science program compared to control group students had statistically greater posttest Likert scale perceptions of program relevance where independent t(34) = 4.13, p = .0002 (two-tailed), ES = 1.410; program rigor t(34) = 3.66, p = .0008 (two-tailed), ES = 1.237; and program relationships t(34) = 4.98, p < .0001 (two-tailed), ES = 1.690. The importance of these powerfully held beliefs for students’ successful participation in their future science studies is discussed.


Cite this paper
Mulkerrin, E. & Hill, J. (2013). Relevance, Rigor, and Relationships: Student Perceptions Following Participation in an Integrated Experiential Zoo-Based Academic High School Science Program. Creative Education, 4, 287-297. doi: 10.4236/ce.2013.44043.
References
[1]   Achieve, Inc. (2005). Rising to the challenge: Are high school graduates prepared for college and work? Washington DC: Peter D. Hart Research Associates.

[2]   Achieve, Inc. (2009). Taking root: Lesson learned for sustaining the college and career ready agenda. Washington DC: America Diploma Project Network.

[3]   Adelman, H., & Taylor, L. (2009). Learning supports and small schools. Los Angeles, CA: School Mental Health Project, Department of Psychology, UCLA.

[4]   Bernhardt, V. (2004). Continuous improvement: It takes more than test scores. Leadership, 34, 16-19.

[5]   Breunlin, D. C., Mann, B. J., Kelly, D., Cimmarusti, R. A., Dunne, L., & Lieber, C. (2005). Personalizing a large comprehensive high school. NASSP Bulletin, 89, 24-42. doi:10.1177/019263650508964503

[6]   Bybee, R. W. (2010). The teaching of science: 21st century perspectives. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.

[7]   Cesswell, R. A., & Rasmussen, P. (1996). Developing a structure for personalization in the high school. NASSP Bulletin, 80, 27-30. doi:10.1177/019263659608058406

[8]   Cleary, M., & English, G. (2005). The small schools movement: Implications for health education. Journal of School Health, 75, 243.

[9]   Conley, D. T. (2001). Rethinking the senior year. NASSP Bulletin, 85, 26-41. doi:10.1177/019263650108562504

[10]   Daggett, W. R. (2005). Achieving academic excellence through rigor and relevance. Rexford, NY: International Center for Leadership in Education.

[11]   Deutsch, F. M. (2003). How small classes benefit high school students. NASSP Bulletin, 87, 35-44. doi:10.1177/019263650308763504

[12]   Downing, K., Kwong, T., Chan, S.-W., Lam, T.-F., & Downing, W.-K. (2009). Problem-based learning and the development of metacognition. Higher Education, 57, 609-621. doi:10.1007/s10734-008-9165-x

[13]   Dryer, T. J. (1996). Personalization: If schools don’t implement this one, there will be no reform. NASSP Bulletin, 80, 1-8. doi:10.1177/019263659608058402

[14]   Easton, L. (2008). Mix it up. Journal of Staff Development, 29, 21-24.

[15]   Elliott, M. N., Hanser, L. M., & Gilroy, C. L. (2002). Career academies: Additional evidence of positive student outcomes. Journal of Education for Students Placed at Risk (JESPAR), 7, 71-90. doi:10.1207/S15327671ESPR0701_5

[16]   Fullan, M. (2006). Change theory: A force for school improvement. Center for Strategic Education, 157, 3-14.

[17]   Gonzales, P., Williams, T., Jocelyn, L., Roey, S., Kastberg, D., & Brenwald, S. (2008). Highlights from TIMSS 2007: Mathematics and science achievement of US fourth and eighth-grade students in an international context. URL (last checked 9 December 2008). http//:www.nces.ed.gov

[18]   Graves, L. N. (1992). Cooperative learning communities: Context for a new vision of education and society. Journal of Education, 2, 57-79.

[19]   Grigg, W., Lauko, M. A., & Brockway, D. M. (2006). Nation’s report card: science 2005. Washington DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

[20]   Hawkins, J. D., Oesterle, S., & Hill, K. G. (2004). Successful young adult development. Seattle, WA: The Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, Social Development Research Group, University of Washington.

[21]   Hirsch Jr., E. D. (2001). Seeking breadth and depth in the curriculum. Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 59, 22-25.

[22]   Hmelo-Silver, C. (2004). Problem-based learning: What and how do students learn? Educational Psychology Review, 16, 235-266. doi:10.1023/B:EDPR.0000034022.16470.f3

[23]   Hoachlander, G. (2008). Bringing industry to the classroom. Educational Leadership, 65, 22-27.

[24]   Hugh, M., Taylor, J., Chin, P., Hutchinson, N. L. (2006). Co-op students’ access to shared knowledge in science-rich workplaces. Science Education, 91, 115-132.

[25]   Johnson, B., & McElroy, T. M. (2010). The changing role of the teacher in the 21st century. Teachers.net Gazette, 7. http://www.teachers.net/gazette

[26]   Johnson, L. F., Smith, R. S., Smythe, J. T., & Varon, R. K. (2009). Challenge-based learning: An approach for our time. Austin, TX: The New Media Consortium.

[27]   Jones, M., Yonezawa, S., Ballesteros, E., & Mehan, H. (2002). Shaping pathways to higher education. Educational Researcher, 31, 3-11. doi:10.3102/0013189X031002003A

[28]   Keefe, J. W., Kelly, E. A., & Miller, S. K. (1985). School climate: Clear definitions and a model for a larger setting. NASSP Bulletin, 69, 70-77. doi:10.1177/019263658506948416

[29]   Kemple, J. J. (2004). Career academies: Impacts on labor market outcomes and educational attainment. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

[30]   Kemple, J. J., & Willner, C. J. (2008). Career academies: Long-term impacts on labor market outcomes and educational attainment, and transitions to adulthood. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

[31]   Mackin, R. A. (1996). Hey, Dr. Bob, can we talk? Toward the creation of a personalized high school. NASSP Bulletin, 80, 9-16. doi:10.1177/019263659608058403

[32]   Manning, M. L., & Saddlemire, R. (1996). Developing a sense of community in secondary schools. NASSP Bulletin, 80, 41-48. doi:10.1177/019263659608058409

[33]   McLeod, J., & Kilpatrick, K. (2001). Exploring science at the museum. Educational Leadership, 58, 59-63.

[34]   Mehan, H. (2006). Restructuring and reculturing schools to provide students with multiple pathways to college and career. San Diego, CA: University of California.

[35]   Mourshed, M., Chijioke, C., & Barber, M. (2010). How the world’s most improved school systems keep getting better. London: McKinsey & Company.

[36]   National Academies (2007). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future. http://www.nap.edu/catalog/11463.html

[37]   National Center for Education Statistics (2011a). Comparing TIMSS with NAEP and PISA in mathematics and science. Washington DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

[38]   National Center for Education Statistics (2011b). The nation’s report card: Mathematics 2009. (NCES 2010-451). Washington DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

[39]   National Center for Education Statistics (2011c). The nation’s report card: Science 2009. (NCES 2011-451). Washington DC: US Department of Education, Institute of Education Sciences.

[40]   National Research Council (NRC) (1996). National science education standards. Washington DC: National Academies Press.

[41]   National Association of Secondary School Principals (2005). Breaking ranks II: An executive summary. http://www.nwrel.org/scpd/sslc/institutes_2005/documents/Ollarvia_executive-summary.pdf

[42]   Peterson, P.E. (2010). US students advancing in math trails most industrialized nations. http://www.physorg.com

[43]   Pittman, K. (2005). Blurring the lines for learning: Youth and community centered responses to the challenges of high school reform. Louisville, KY: CCSSO Summer Institute.

[44]   Quint, J. (2006). Meeting five critical challenges of high school reform. New York: Manpower Demonstration Research Corporation.

[45]   Quint, J. (2008). Implementation study of smaller learning communities: Final report. US Department of Education. http://www.edpubs.org

[46]   Quint, J. (2008). Lessons from leading models. Educational Leadership, 65, 64-68.

[47]   Sawchuk, S. (2010). Global study tracks common paths to improving schooling. Education Week, 30, 10.

[48]   Senge, P., Cambron-McCabe, N., Lucas, T., Smith, B., Dutton, J., & Kleiner, A. (2000). Schools that learn. New York: Doubleday Dell Publishing Group, Inc.

[49]   Sergiovanni, T. J. (1994). Organizations or communities? Changing the metaphor changes the theory. Educational Administration Quarterly, 30, 214-226. doi:10.1177/0013161X94030002007

[50]   Silverstein, S. S., Dubner, J., Miller, J., Glied, S., & Loike, J. D. (2009). Teachers’ participation in research programs improves their students’ achievement in science. Science, 326, 440-442. doi:10.1126/science.1177344

[51]   Smith, T. J. (2008). Striking the balance: Career academies combine academic rigor and workplace relevance. National High School Center, Washington DC: American Institutes for Research. http://www.betterhighschools.org

[52]   Toch, T., Jerald, C. D., & Dillon, E. (2007). Surprise: High school reform is working. Phi Delta Kappan, 88, 433-437.

[53]   Visconti, C. F. (2010). Problem-based learning: Teaching skills for evidence-based practice. Perspectives on Issues in Higher Education, 13, 27-31. doi:10.1044/ihe13.1.27

[54]   Wagner, T. (2010). The global achievement gap: Why even our best schools don’t teach the new survival skills our children need and what we can do about it. New York: Perseus Books Group.

 
 
Top