BERGMAN, D. J. (2021). Spoiler Alert! Avoiding Hazards to Science Inquiry and Classroom Creativity. Science Scope, 45(1), 10–15. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27135437

The article focuses on what to avoid when teaching science to students. It lists 5 things to avoid doing in the classroom to prevent “spoiling” experiments for students and is meant to help teachers foster a learning environment in their classrooms. It is a journal article meant to act as a guide for teachers. It was published in Science Scope, which is targeted toward 6-8 grade teachers looking to prepare themselves. The actual article was found on JSTOR (a library-provided database). The edition was published in September-October of 2021, which means that it features post-COVID research. The information is incredibly helpful and made me understand why I preferred bio with Mr. Comfort over my previous classes. One of the things he really excelled at was making sure to leave room for students to be curious. The years before that, the teachers usually gave the answers and minimized time for the students to draw their conclusions, which made learning boring. It including post-COVID research is really helpful as that has been the main issue I am seeing with sources. They are outdated/don’t include the research from after a major event.

Bolger, D., & Ecklund, E. H. (2018). Whose Authority? Perceptions of Science Education in Black and Latino Churches. Review of Religious Research, 60(1), 49–70. http://www.jstor.org/stable/26652738

The article focuses on religious Black and Latino communities and their perception of science. The main point is that Black and Latino people are more skeptical of science authority figures rather than actual scientific concepts. It is a journal article on religious research. Although it is from 2018, the data seems relatively accurate and they name how they conducted their research and what sources of error there could have been. It is also found on a library provided website (JSTOR). The information mentioned is interesting to consider. This is not the first time I’ve wondered why certain groups were more religious than others and although the article doesn’t answer that, it did make me curious enough to click on it. Once I began reading, the main thing that caught my attention was how underrepresented the groups were in STEM jobs. It made me realize that focusing on STEM education would probably be the path my project went down as it combines a personal interest (STEM) with a topic I’m passionate about (completing high school).

Halpern, R. (1999). After-School Programs for Low-Income Children: Promise and Challenges. The Future of Children, 9(2), 81–95. https://doi.org/10.2307/1602708

The article focuses on the problems that come with afterschool programs and specifically the problems faced in lower income areas. It then explains issues that would likely become a problem in the future. The source was provided on JSTOR, a library-provided website. The article itself was published in 1999, which likely makes some of the information outdated. However, I believe that the information is still valuable as the issues that the article discusses are problems that I have seen in my own research. There is a list of sources at the end of the article. The information was interesting, although a lot of it was about the MOST program in Boston, Chicago, and Seattle but I don’t intend on copying their program. Again, many of the issues the article pointed out were things I have been considering. It wasn’t quite as useful as the other sources I’ve looked at but it does provide a place to start for tracking funds, which I have been struggling with.

Irgens, G. A., Adisa, I., Bailey, C., & Quesada, H. V. (2022). Designing with and for Youth: A Participatory Design Research Approach for Critical Machine Learning Education. Educational Technology & Society, 25(4), 126–141. https://www.jstor.org/stable/48695986

The article focuses on how children can participate in making and teaching AI. It argues that children and adults can work together to create a more effective machine learning system. Again, the source was provided on a library-trusted website (JSTOR). The article was published in October of 2022, making it a decently new source. The article includes credentials and methodology, which makes it feel more trustworthy as it is very open about how it got its information. The part that originally enticed me was the title. Critical machine learning registered as something based on human education and I hadn’t realized that it meant AI. Although it is interesting to consider the effects of child and adult cooperation, my primary focus is on school retention and education, not collaborative work. This wasn’t quite as useful as the last one.