Science labs are messy

I was reading an article from The Palm Beach Post called "Science teachers at Loxahatchee middle school strike back against hands-on labs, but I could have sworn I was reading America's Finest (and funniest) News Source, The Onion.

Apparently science teacher Greg Loumanis is "insulted" by some of the hands-on learning activities that are suggested to science teachers.

Why is he insulted?

According to Loumanis, he is a "data-driven" teacher who finds hands-on science experiments both inefficient and messy, so his science department at Osceola Middle School in Loxahatchee opted to get rid of hands-on science labs in their classrooms.

What data has convinced these educators to abolish hands-on science labs?

Test scores.

Since Loumanis convinced a couple colleagues to throw lab activities "out the window"in 2008 in favor of watching videos and Powerpoint lectures, they've experienced significant rises in standardized test scores.

Another common problem educators face is that they are inundated with a pre-fabricated, content-bloated, top-down mandated curriculum that is a mile-wide and an inch thick, and encourages teachers to cover  everything at break-neck speeds while uncovering almost nothing. This is precisely what Howard Gardner is referring to when he says:

The greatest enemy of understanding is coverage.

I thought reading about a science teacher who abolished hands-on labs experiments was weird enough, but then I read this quote from a professor of psychology named David Klahr:

There's little evidence to support hands-on learning.

Upon reading this, I was stunned -- I had no idea how anyone with any kind of education, let alone a psychology professor, could make such a claim, but then I realized what Klahr might have meant:

There's little evidence to support hands-on learning as the most efficient way to get through a curriculum while simultaneously raising standardized test scores.

Near the end of the article, it is made clear that there are systemic pressures being placed on teachers from outside the classroom that affect their teaching, including increased emphasis on test-based accountability, pacing guides, and merit pay.

When teachers are under intense pressure to teach specific content in a specific way with their salaries married to student test scores, it should be no surprise that teachers feel like the only tool they have is a hammer and every kid looks like a nail.

While it's true that educators who have come to see hands-on learning as a messy, inefficient inconvenience have lost the plot, it's important to realize that these educators tend to be the product of an education system that has come to see student achievement as nothing more than high scores on bad tests.

In this case, the goal is as misguided as the method, and school becomes a massive exercise in missing the point.

I thought David Wees summarized this entire mess up nicely when he tweeted:

If you measure understanding of science using only tests, you don't need to use labs.

If this is true, is the logical conclusion to challenge the labs or the tests?

What gets you through the day may not get you through the night

"...engagement as a route to mastery is a powerful force in our personal lives. While omplying can be an effective strategy for physical survival, it's a lousy one for personal fulfillment. Living a statisfying life requires more than simply meeting the demands of those in control. Yet in our offices and our classrooms we have way too much compliance and way too little engagement. the former might get you through the day, but only the latter will get you through the night."

Dan Pink wrote these words in his book Dive: The Surprising Truth About What Motivates Us. For me as a classroom teacher, his words carry a mean punch.

I am more than ever committed to creating a learning environment for my students where they can engage in more autonomy in their learning so that they can develop mastery.

This inspired me to clean out my school's science prep room, which had become a dumping ground for storage, and turn it into a science experiment room where students can actively engage in science experiments of the students choice.

The first observation I made was that too often teachers blame students misbehavior on the kid when really we should see the misbehaviour as a message - and the message may be that we are not providng children with an autonomous and engaging curriculum.

Just today, I had a grade 8 boy design and impliment an experiment that he thought of. The ironic part is that when I planned the experiment for him and asked him to do it a week ago he accomplished absolutely nothing and was even less engaged. But when he felt a sense of autonomy, he became rather productive.

Sadly, he is the kind of boy that would typically be given no autonomy because he misbehaves and is difficult to trust. It's a vicious cycle that both the boy and teachers continue to fall into - over and over again.