Conveying research development at an undergraduate level (Camilla Blasi Foglietti)
I think it is invaluable to introduce undergraduate students to the world of scientific research. However, it can be extremely challenging to get the balance right without scaring students away and to help them juggle their research hours with all other undergraduate commitments. A recent paper by Emery et al. (2019) highlights some important things to consider, so I thought I’d share a few of them with you. If you are involved in mentoring undergraduate research students, you might find this post useful.
It is important to remember that undergraduate students are very likely to have limited experience in research, so being flexible and patient is essential. Make sure students are guided through essential readings and helped identify sources that might support their understanding of what the current picture in that field is.
Students might feel intimidated by research, so it is important to make sure they gain confidence in their capabilities by encouraging them to share their thoughts and praising good ideas. Meeting students regularly and encouraging them to ask any type of questions about the project, academia and research in general will help them feel more at ease.
Include students in lab life by inviting them to lab meetings and other lab activities so they can observe graduate students and get first-hand experience on what independent research really is.
Be clear on expectations and communicate with them in a friendly and approachable way. Help them to set short-term goals and provide guidance through all stages bu t also encourage them to take rest periods as research can be challenging and draining at times.
Most importantly convey the message that research is very different to the standard lectures they are used to and that looking into a new field often comes with unknown outputs. Reassure students that failure is not necessarily a reflection on their capabilities and that even the research of some of the greatest scientist often does not go as planned.
Reference
Emery, N. et al. (2019) ‘Students as ecologists: Strategies for successful mentorship of undergraduate researchers’, Ecology and Evolution, pp. 4316–4326.
Response:
The majority of undergraduate students have never had to do academic research before, and if they have it has only been for smaller projects where guidance is small, structure is optional and references are not formatted. As you’ve mentioned, these students become intimidated and overwhelmed by the new approach to the work at hand. From my own experience, having a range of involvement from other researchers in varying points of their careers such as early PhDs and junior or senior professors helped me to understand the techniques used and how to be efficient. An important point that students should always be taught, is that it is good to be wrong, research will go against your hypothesis and it will leave you in a state of panic but once they realise that even the most notable scientists have been wrong and laughed at, the new generation of researchers can evolve. (Rhys Miles, Earth Science)
This is an extremely interesting topic, and very important. Undergraduates are often under the impression that scientific research, and any research really, is undertaken by the select few that make it to the stage of getting paid for putting on the white lab coat and goggles. However, researchers undertaking even the highest-level research bringing in all the grant money and publishing revolutionary work all started as an undergraduate. I think it is even harder for experienced academics with long careers to even give the best advice on research to those with no or little experience. It is right to encourage idea development and let first-time researchers know that not everything will go to plan and the results at the end may not be what you expect! I feel like many older researchers are so far removed from the mindset of a scared undergraduate that not enough time is given to development of inexperienced researchers, especially at undergraduate level. In many departments the dissertation supervisors have too many students to be able to properly mentor them in a successful way. By bringing in younger researchers (post-docs and PhD students) who may not be so removed from the student mindset it may help with mentoring undergraduates through the research process. This would address the need to be approachable whilst taking pressure off of senior academics who may see mentoring as burdensome. It would also give early career researchers some great supervision and mentoring experience! (Dave Arnold, Geography)
It is common to see undergraduates struggling with scientific research. I have also found that students take more interest in practice oriented research, like papers or addresses shared at conferences and seminars. This is especially important in management and social sciences where practical lab work is rarity and research is context-oriented. (Sara Bakr, Management)
Yes, I have found that being clear about expectations and communication is key. From the beginning I said to students what I expected from them and kept repeating this all the way through. I saw that a learning culture under those parameters was being built. Also, in relation to communication, after some students didn't come to a seminar, I started emailing them, explaining what we'd cover and why seminars were important. This increased attendance automatically and some students that had never attended a session started coming as well. (Pablo Perez Castello, Politics, International Relations and Philosophy)
Undoubtedly, research is a lengthy process that involves several stages, including literature review, data collection, analysis, interpretation, and discussion. Each stage demands a significant amount of knowledge and skills, making the entire process quite challenging. This can be particularly daunting when introducing undergraduate students to scientific research, as the complexity and scope of the process can be overwhelming. Also, the most significant challenges in introducing students to research is the elusive and ambiguous nature of the research itself. This can make mentoring difficult, even for experienced PhD students who may have limited knowledge of certain aspects of the research. The intricate and multi-faceted nature of research can make it challenging to provide students with the necessary guidance and support. (Cheng-Yu Hsieh, Psychology)
Inquiry based learning in the laboratory (Tamsin Williams)
During laboratory sessions students are often asked to follow a written practical methodology step-by-step in pairs or small groups. However previous research has shown that inquiry based learning where students design their own experiment may increase student learning and enjoyment (Lord and Orkwiszewski, 2006). While this is not possible for every laboratory session, due to practicalities regarding equipment and health and safety practices, it may be possible to increase student’s experimental freedom in practicals. Elements of this method were implemented during a practical sessions (which did not involve any reagents or equipment) where students were not given a rigid step-by-step method to follow and instead generalised instructions and some information on the context. Students (in pairs) then had to organise themselves to obtain data and think for themselves of the best way to efficiently record observations. I found this generated discussion between pairs and they were challenged both scientifically and experimentally to use their knowledge on experimental design to obtain sound scientific data. It also became apparent that it stimulated the students into thinking more about the science as opposed to the technicalities of equipment. The questions students asked me were more about the scientific context and it really seemed to help to get students to think objectively about the task at hand.
While the description above may not be pure inquiry based learning it was moving towards this teaching practice and did stimulate students into raising questions. Inquiry based learning may be an important component of laboratory teaching as it gives students a greater insight into how research works when compared to traditional methods (Adams, 2015). Researchers often face challenges with experimental design concerning both practicalities and efficiency whilst keeping science as robust as possible. Giving students the opportunity to raise questions about the topic being investigated and the methodologies that can be used may further educate them, not only on the topic, but also on how research is carried out.
References:
Adams, D. J. (2009). Current Trends in Laboratory Class Teaching in University Bioscience Programmes. Bioscience Education, 13(1), 1–14.
Lord, T. and Orkwiszewski, T. (2006) Moving from didactic to inquiry-based instruction in a science laboratory. The American Biology Teacher 68, 342–345.
Response:
This is an incredibly interesting concept. Encouraging the students to think about ‘what they want to know’ and then ‘how they are going to find out’ rather than just ‘what does this mean’ opens their minds much more to the scientific rigours behind data collection and its importance in research. It can broaden their understanding of not just the scientific core knowledge, but more so about whole academic principles, for example data integrity, forming hypotheses, or testing our own ideas.
The use of in situ teaching to develop core practical skills (George Skinner)
Over the last few decades, pedagogy in science has moved away from the lecture method of teaching in favour of the inquiry method of learning, and in situ teaching for laboratory sessions. The focus of inquiry learning for the teacher is to support the needs of the student in their pursuit of knowledge, rather than to act as the dispenser of knowledge (Anderson 2002). In doing so, the student transitions from a passive receiver of knowledge, to an active self-directed learner. Undergraduates that are schooled in the inquiry method have been shown to significantly outperform their counterparts that have been taught in the traditional lecture style (Basağa, Geban, and Tekkaya 1994). In laboratory practicals, where the lesson objective is to develop core skills that put into practice key concepts learned in lectures, inquiry learning allows students to develop a deeper understanding of the knowledge they have gained in previous classes.
In situ teaching is utilised in the laboratory environment as a means of facilitating inquiry learning in students, whilst still deriving the benefits of lecture style teaching (Round and Lom 2015). Students are given a short talk at the start of the lab explaining the outline of the experiment, the key concepts that they are expected to take away from the session, and health and safety concerns. Throughout the session students are given the opportunity to discuss as a cohort the progression of the experiment, and what that means in terms of the science that underpins it. This divergence from traditional “cookbook labs” – so called because they resemble following a recipe – gives students the opportunity to troubleshoot problems with their peers and the teacher, in addition to routinely reinforcing the lesson objectives (Round and Lom 2015). Furthermore, in situ teaching has the benefit of providing enough information to carry out the lesson to students who have failed to prepare adequately, thus reducing the time spent on catching these students up individually.
In situ teaching is most effective when teaching practical classes to large groups. It allows you teachers to communicate lesson objectives and information to the cohort, whist also being able to assist on the individual level. For students, it allows pursuit of self-directed learning with support from both peers and instructors, in an environment that encourages students to identify and work through gaps in understanding.
Anderson R. (2002) Reforming Science Teaching: What Research Says About Inquiry, Journal of Science Teacher Education, 13(1), 1-12, DOI: 10.1023/A:1015171124982
Basağa H., Geban Ö., and Tekkaya C. (1994). The Effect of the Inquiry Teaching Method on Biochemistry and Science Process Skill Achievements. Biochemical Education, 22(1), 29-32.
Round J. and Lom B. (2015). In Situ Teaching: Fusing Labs & Lectures in Undergraduate Science Courses to Enhance Immersion in Scientific Research. Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education. 13(3), A206‐A214.
I think this is very important as, firstly, this has greater applicability for students who choose to stay on in science after their degree and the opportunity to gain more transferable skills. Secondly, in situ learning may be particularly beneficial for students who are kinaesthetic learners who may not be getting the most out of lectures. – Stacey Vincent, Biological Sciences.
Response:
I think this is a fascinating topic. Often within laboratory teaching, undergraduate students are guided down a particular path, which does not equip them for the reality of research. Your suggestion of diverging away from “cookbook labs” and promoting students to troubleshoot with their peers or teacher will enable and equip them to have a much easier transition to careers within the sciences where they will need to troubleshoot complex issues on their own. (Joshua Smith Earth sciences)
Demonstrating - how important is interactiveness to student learning?
I often think that the more interactive a session is, the more the student will learn. With regards to UG practical laboratory sessions, students are often split into pairs and given a handbook to read through and follow. The more engaging the demonstrator is with the students, the more engaged they are with the learning process of a practical.
My interpretation of interactiveness in a practical session is a mixture between the levels of effort from both the demonstrator and the student and what is put into a 2-3 person conversation (which is clearly more interactive than communicating with larger audiences). Within this small environment, the student will feel more comfortable communicating with the demonstrator and asking questions. But the way I think most students will become comfortable is by getting them involved in the conversation. You can ask informal questions to get them engaged, I even shared some experiences from my UG practical days to make the student feel more relaxed, and support them that they are doing well in comparison to some not-so-well moments.
Showing the students the correct method/calculation/protocol if they get stuck is important, as some students (myself included) learn best from watching others first in person. Offering to show the student how to do things the first time is important, and recognising when the student is stuck is a key skill demonstrators should have. I spotted one student stuck on calculating dilutions, one of a few they had to do, so I showed them the method of how I would calculate the first dilution, then ask them to attempt the next one in front of me. More often than not, most students struggled with their first attempt despite being shown, and required me to show another example before they fully got the hang of it. This interactiveness and inquiry based practical learning - where students are encouraged to work through real time problems such as dilutions - is a highly effective way of establishing effective understanding. This has been shown through previous studies measuring results on post-scores of practical content comparison of guided inquiry vs. expository labs (Wheeler et al, 2017). But for me, the level of impact is down to the effectiveness of the demonstrator in interacting with the students, making them feel comfortable, encouraging them, effectively divulging information and testing their understanding.
Wheeler, L.B., Maeng, J.L., Chiu, J.L. and Bell, R.L. (2017), Do teaching assistants matter? Investigating relationships between teaching assistants and student outcomes in undergraduate science laboratory classes. J Res Sci Teach, 54: 463-492. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21373
Response:
This is an incredibly important point and something I have routinely come across teaching / demonstrating in Earth Sciences. Students want to be directly engaged and feel like they are having an interactive learning experience whilst also being allowed the time and space to problem solve through trial and error. I find it is also the case on geological fieldtrips outside of the classroom where some students might be happy to get along with the assignment whilst being in the great outdoors, others may not immediately understand why they need to be standing outside in the rain looking at rocks. However, once they are engaged in meaningful discussion about how important fieldwork is for understanding how our planet formed, they often change their opinion and begin to greatly enjoy the experience for what it is. Thanks for sharing this (Max Webb, Department of Earth Science).
An argument for increased seminar-style delivery and discourse in STEM subjects - Stacey Vincent
Lecture-based teaching delivery has long been a cornerstone component of the delivery of undergraduate higher education, enabling the communication of material to innumerable students simultaneously. A study conducted by Freeman et al. (2014) has shown that pedagogical practices in Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (STEM) subjects are heavily lecture-based, with this traditional method of delivery being responsible for more than half of all classroom-based interactions[1]. Yet, a meta-analysis of educational success in STEM[2] has shown that repeatedly this passive method is ineffectual when compared to active learning-based practice. There is an undeniable paradox here – that in subjects that place the utmost importance on evidence-based progress, there is either a lag or unwillingness to employ active learning approaches that demonstrably improve students' performance and which do not give as much space for the diversity of different learnings styles in the target audience.
Why, then, is seminar-style delivery not more widely employed across STEM subjects? It is one of the more widely utilised methods of the delivery of higher education that involves active student participation; and confers specific benefits and transferability to STEM students – particularly those who choose to continue in research or science communication. Matriculating postgraduates in STEM subjects will find themselves thrust into a world of laboratory meetings that are highly discourse-orientated – mirroring the purpose and goals of seminars that are so widely used in humanities subjects. Arguably, a heavy reliance on lectures ill-prepares students for this.
References
1. M. Stains, J. Harshman, M. K. Barker, S. V. Chasteen, R. Cole, S. E. DeChenne-Peters, M. K. Eagan, J. M. Esson, J. K. Knight, F. A. Laski, M. Levis-Fitzgerald, C. J. Lee, S. M. Lo, L. M. McDonnell, T. A. McKay, N. Michelotti, A. Musgrove, M. S. Palmer, K. M. Plank, T. M. Rodela, E. R. Sanders, N. G. Schimpf, P. M. Schulte, M. K. Smith, M. Stetzer, B. Van Valkenburgh, E. Vinson, L. K. Weir, P. J. Wendel, L. B. Wheeler, A. M. Young. "Anatomy of STEM teaching in North American universities." Science, 2018; 359(6383): 1468
2. Freeman, S., S. L. Eddy, M. McDonough, M. K. Smith, N. Okoroafor, H. Jordt, and M. P. Wenderoth (2014). "Active Learning Increases Student Performance in Science, Engineering, and Mathematics." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA, 2014; 111(23): 8410-15.
I truly believe that increased seminar-style delivery of lectures should be considered as a very useful tool of lecturers and teachers, as these would give students the opportunity to comprehend the aims and objectives of the sessions that are being taught, to gain new and transferable skills, as well as to stay on in a science-based field even after the completion of their studies. (Panagiota Sarri Biological Sciences)
This is such an important argument that is not often discussed, and I think you make very valid arguments in favour of seminar-style teaching in STEM subjects. It is true that, particularly for STEM students, their career prospects will likely involve more seminar-style than lecture-style conversations and meetings. Yet, I know from personal experience that my confidence in this style of discourse was lacking due to very little prior experience. I do wonder if the obstacles in the way of this style of teaching might be more practical in nature than pure unwillingness. For example, seminar teaching typically requires much more teacher planning and also more teachers in itself. However, I agree that we should seriously start to consider how we could better introduce seminar teaching into STEM subjects. (Rebecca Crowley, Department of Psychology)
Response:
I also agree that seminar-style teaching should be adopted. In particular, I think this mode of education will help students to engage in more critical thinking practices, which is often lacking in my experience in STEM subjects, where literature and 'established knowledge' is too often taken as unchallengeable 'truth'. Seminars will engage undergraduates in valuable critical discussions, helping them to understand and appreciate their subject in greater depth, as well as more effectively prepare them for postgraduate study, if they choose to continue in that regard.
(Joseph Da Silva, Information Security Group)
Laboratory work: Forming groups to enhance understanding of the lab sessions (Panagiota Sarri)
It is well-known that a team is a small number of people with complementary skills who are committed to a common purpose, performance goals, and an approach for which they hold themselves mutually accountable (Katzenback and Smith, 1993). Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the formation of a group in the lab session has a lot of advantages for the students to develop their team spirit and to make research collaborations and networking, which are all very important in the science community.
As part of my teaching this year I participated as a demonstrator in the “Synaptosomes” laboratory classes of the “Neuronal and Cellular Signalling” course. During the first weeks, I noticed that most students were not really aware what the purpose of certain laboratory steps actually were and what the outcomes of this lab should be. Another problem that I came upon with, was how to engage first-year undergraduate students in the laboratory, as they were often not confident in the individual steps due to a lack of previous knowledge and purpose of the procedures.
For all those reasons and most importantly, in order to familiarise the students with the lab, the lecturer and I decided to form groups of two up to three different students, so we could observe if they would be more interested in the experiments and if they would comprehend further the aims and purposes of the sessions. Since the allocation of the groups was random, students with different cultures and skills were involved to conduct the experiments. Because of the above, we were able to encourage and support the students to develop the team spirit in them. Furthermore, we assessed the different teams by monitoring their responsibilities to achieve the common goal of getting an outcome of the experiments expected along with the development of the subject knowledge. I truly believe that during the sessions, the groups were challenged both scientifically and experimentally and they were stimulated into thinking more objectively about the tasks at hand.
To sum up, this model of practice in the laboratory is an important component of laboratory teaching as it gives students a greater insight into how research works and trains students to develop their team spirit while learning a subject (Adams, 2015). Giving students the opportunity to work in small groups, to raise questions about the methodologies being used gives them the opportunity to understand in depth how research is carried out.
References:
1. Katzenback and Smith (1993), The Wisdom of Teams.
2. Adams (2009), Current Trends in Laboratory Class Teaching in University Bioscience Programmes.
Response:
I think this is a great idea. I can reflect on this from sessions as a Geography student where, especially at masters level, the skills of fellow peers do vary depending on previous course experiences. Being able to support each other and share the task at hand leads to a more immersive experience rather than simply following a guide from the lecturer. In addition, fieldwork in Geography often involves teamwork, so bringing in this idea to other aspects of the project such as laboratory work is a great idea. Thanks for sharing. (Daniel Gallagher, Department of Geography).
Teams are a very important element to making 1+1=3, getting the best from everybody as well as encouraging all to take part and learning more. The complimentary skills element is crucial. I remember my first days in a Biochemistry lab as an undergrad not really knowing what I was doing. Pairing up and then working in bigger project teams helped me gain confidence as well as encouraging me to be a better team-player - a lesson in life. One thing from my experiences to be conscious of is to ensure that all contribute positively, sometimes a team approach may allow some not to do their fair share. (Vinod Kaushal, School of Management)
Adapting in-person practical labs with real biological samples to the online teaching environment in response to Covid-19 (Emily Leggatt)
The microteach was a virtual session due to Covid restrictions. I had chosen to teach and adapt a practical laboratory I learnt as a student. I chose the taxonomic classification of trees; the practical element was being able to recognise and classify tree leaves based on their shape. When I did this practical myself as a student, it was with actual leaves and we were able to get up close with the specimens and observe the finer details. The adaptation to an online teaching session was focused on being able to run that practical element smoothly as it greatly solidifies student learning on tree taxonomy. Through the online activity the students were able to classify the leaves into several categories, using a taxonomic key with descriptors on leaf shape and appearance. I used Jamboard which was well received by the students and the microteach assessor, who found the activity very interactive with the feature of being able to drag and drop images of the leaves, add text anywhere to the slide and having individual slides per student so each had their own separate activity sheet. The used of online tools, such as Jamboard, worked very well to adapt a once in person practical with actual leaf specimens to an interactive and critical thinking activity. after the activity, I prepared the presentation to have some actual journal publications to look at for tree taxonomy. The students were then able to compare the activity to the research paper which proved useful in two ways: they saw and therefore explain the similarities in how they designed their own taxonomic trees compared to how a scientific publication would design a taxonomic tree and, secondly, they were able to critically evaluate their own work in comparison to a scientific paper – a critical role in becoming a life scientist. I designed this part of the lecture incorporating the Blooming Biology Tool [Crowe et al., 2008] based of Bloom’s taxonomy and adapted to life sciences. Being able to use the online environment in an interactive way is in my opinion key to delivering practical session and ensuring students will apply their knowledge and practical skills.
Reference
Crowe, A., C. Dirks, and M. P. Wenderoth (2008), Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology, CBE life sciences education, 7(4), 368-381, doi: 10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024. Crowe, A., C. Dirks, and M. P. Wenderoth (2008), Biology in Bloom: Implementing Bloom's Taxonomy to Enhance Student Learning in Biology, CBE life sciences education, 7(4), 368-381, doi: 10.1187/cbe.08-05-0024.
Response:
This is a really good example of transfering in person practicals to an online teaching environment in response to COVID-19. There are certainly some really useful pieces of of software that can be applied in an online learning environment for UG students, but the concern is how well these compare to in person practicals for student learning. Students using Jamboard to interact with certain features such as adding text to the slides, dragging and dropping images of the leaves and completing an activity sheet, all which can be seen by the assessor and feedback can be provided in real time, provides a similar interactive environment and is able to provide students with that personalised touch, allowing them to make effective learning progress.
Flipping the classroom – learning by teaching
I Effective teaching isn’t just about depth of knowledge, it is also about an ability to deliver learning in an understandable and digestible manner. Einstein famously said, “If you can't explain it to a 6-year-old, you don't understand it yourself.” The practice of teaching is therefore the practice of learning. This is not a new concept, it is known as ‘learning by teaching’. The idea was first formalised by Jean-Pol Martin and emerged from foreign language studies, whereby modelling is a key part of teaching and learning (Martin, 1985).
This is also explored as part of ‘flipping the classroom’. This model changes traditional lecture-style delivery to create more collaborative learning environments. In flipped scenarios, the low levels of cognitive work (knowledge building) are scheduled prior to the class (through pre-recorded lectures, reading, videos etc.). The classroom then becomes a space for the higher levels of cognitive work (evaluation, application etc.) (Brame, 2013). Examples of this type of space include group work, discussions, or even asking the students to teach each other. This latter concept has been shown to enhance science teaching in children and could also be suited to adults who appear to respond positively to being given the opportunity to display well-earned skills (Murphy et al., 2004).
As an example, within my course, students are expected to know 10 botanical families. These are revised through reading materials and videos over a period of a year. At the end of the year, the class is split into 10 groups and assigned one family to research and teach. Critically, the students become teachers for one summer’s day in an outdoor classroom.
Each group delivers their lesson through an informal 10-minute presentation (using an A-board and colourful pens) and passes round ‘live’ examples. I am on hand to guide corrections in a gentle manner (usually rarely required) and answer more complicated questions/points during the discussion. After all lectures are over, a few hours are spent with students finding their own 10 examples to discuss these with each group of ‘experts’.
The session is fun for both teacher and students. It is hands-on, practical and students have fed back that they enjoy the more collaborative approach over formal lecturing. ‘Flipping’ students to become teachers helps embody their understanding in an empowered way.
References
Brame, C. (2013). Flipping the classroom. Vanderbilt University Center for Teaching. Retrieved [15/03/23] from http://cft.vanderbilt.edu/guides-sub-pages/flipping-the-classroom/.
Martin, J.-P. (1985). Zum Aufbau didaktischer Teilkompetenzen beim Schüler. Fremdsprachenunterricht auf der lerntheoretischen Basis des Informationsverarbeitungsansatzes. Narr Verlag.
Murphy, C., Beggs, J., Carlisle, K., & Greenwood, J. (2004). Students as ‘catalysts’ in the classroom: the impact of co‐teaching between science student teachers and primary classroom teachers on children's enjoyment and learning of science. International Journal of Science Education, 26(8), 1023-1035.
Responses:
I think you draw on a great skill that must be incorporated in all teaching (where possible). Often in academia, it is easy to simply just follow the steps/processes without really understanding why you are doing so. In that case, you have not engaged in learning but only made use of your procedural memory. This is an issue as future more developed skills become harder to learn as the basic conceptual understanding is not there. It is important to reverse that role and make sure that the student can explain concepts. Importantly, these explanations can then be delivered by a fellow student to all other students. They would make use of language that the whole cohort is likely to understand, which is not always the case when senior academics convey the material. The idea incorporated in your department is great, and I hope to incorporate something similar in the workshops that I demonstrate (Anonymous, Department of Psychology).
Children and science, Hands-on! Make it fun! (Marta Pérez)
I am very passionate for sciences, but based on my experience, science is generally seen as a very hard, boring, and difficult subject during school. One of the main challenges of teaching sciences is to inspire students to develop a passion for science and scientific inquiry and importantly, to maintain it. The science curriculum in schools is mainly focused on facts and concepts; however, teaching sciences to children can be a very fun and rewarding activity. It also helps them develop a better understanding of the world around them. Hands-on learning or “learning by doing” is very important for children. Embodied cognition is a part of psychological research that explains how our understanding is influenced by physical experiences (Kontra et al. 2015). In sciences, seeing how things happen (e.g. moving the gears by themselves in a graphic computer simulator) it has shown that enhances the student´s learning (Black et al. 2012). Outreach activities like Open Science Days, Science Festivals or talks at schools can engage children from an early age.
During the past years, I have been involved in the Science Festival at RHUL by showing children (ages 0-18) seed biology concepts. Using fun activities like growing “cress heads”, quizzes or even looking in the microscope different types of seeds, children (and their families) can get an idea of why things are happening, how a seed grows and why it is so important. This type of activity will also develop their curiosity and critical thinking skills and (hopefully) make them future scientist.
“The child gives us a beautiful lesson – that in order to form and maintain our intelligence, we must use our hands” – Maria Montessori
References
Black J., Segal A., Vitale J., Fadjo C. (2012) Embodied cognition and learning environmental design. In D. Jonassen and S. Lamb (Eds.) Theoretical foundations of student-centered learning environments. New York: Routledge.
Kontra C., Lyons D., Fischer S., Beilock S. (2015) Physical experience enhances science learning. Psychological Science. 26(6) 737-749. DOI: 10.1177/0956797615569355