Science Comprehension Retention Among Youth Agriscience Students Instructed in Weather and Climate

Authors

  • Thomas J. Dormody Department of Agricultural and Extension Education, New Mexico State University
  • Peter Skelton Youth Agricultural Science Center, 4-H and Youth Development, New Mexico State University
  • Gabrielle Rodriguez Rural Agricultural Improvement and Public Affairs Project, New Mexico State University
  • David W. Dubois Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, New Mexico State University
  • Dawn VanLeeuwen Department of Economics, Applied Statistics and International Business, New Mexico State University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5195/jyd.2020.902

Keywords:

experiential education, inquiry-based learning, NMSU Extension and Research Youth Agricultural Science Center, youth science comprehension retention, weather and climate curriculum

Abstract

The purpose of this article is to examine the science comprehension retention of 8th-grade science students taught a new weather and climate curriculum. The students’ middle school is part of an innovative Extension youth agricultural science center that has a mission to develop and test new teaching and learning models and curricula in agriculture and natural resources. Our curriculum was developed following a science comprehension model we created and have been testing at the center. It contained lessons on the water cycle, the greenhouse effect, measuring and analyzing precipitation and temperature data, and mitigating and adapting to weather and climate extremes in agriculture and natural resources. For each lesson, students viewed introductory PowerPoint slides, participated in an activating strategy, set up an experiment or analyzed local precipitation or temperature data, formulated hypotheses, participated in a summary activity, and completed a worksheet. We pretested 81 students, taught the curriculum over a 6-day period, and gave the posttest. We returned 2 months later to administer a follow-up to check for science comprehension retention. The students’ overall science comprehension and science knowledge, science skills, and reasoning abilities subcomponent follow-up scores were lower than their post-program test scores. Both boys and girls declined in their overall post-program test gains over the 2 months. Students also declined in their preference for learning-by-doing from post-test to follow-up. Based on these results, we made changes to the curriculum consistent with the literature on learning retention before publishing it online for youth educators.

Author Biographies

Thomas J. Dormody, Department of Agricultural and Extension Education, New Mexico State University

Dr. Dormody is a Regents Professor in the Department of Agrcultural and Extension Education at New Mexico State University.

Peter Skelton, Youth Agricultural Science Center, 4-H and Youth Development, New Mexico State University

Dr. Skelton is a Professor and Director of the NMSU Extension and Research Youth Agricultural Science Center in the Department of 4-H and Youth Development at New Mexico State University.

Gabrielle Rodriguez, Rural Agricultural Improvement and Public Affairs Project, New Mexico State University

Ms. Rodriguez is a Graduate Research Assistant in the Department of Agricultural and Extension Education at New Mexico State University.

David W. Dubois, Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences, New Mexico State University

Dr. Dubois is a College Associate Professor and the New Mexico Climatologist in the Department of Plant and Environmental Sciences at New Mexico State University.

Dawn VanLeeuwen, Department of Economics, Applied Statistics and International Business, New Mexico State University

Dr. VanLeeuwen is a Professor in the Department of Economics, Applied Statistics and International Business at New Mexico State University.

References

Bourdeau, V. D. (2004). 4-H experiential education: A model for 4-H science as inquiry. Journal of Extension, 42(5). Article 5TOT3. http://www.joe.org/joe/2004october/tt3.php

Britner, S. L. (2008). Motivation in high school science students: A comparison of gender differences in life, physical, and earth science classes. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 45(8), 955-970. https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.20249

Campbell, D. T., & Stanley, J. C. (1963). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for research. Houghton Mifflin Company.

Castillo, S. (2003). Agriculture, food, and natural resources content standards and benchmarks for New Mexico. http://www.nmffa.org/uploads/4/1/0/7/41075673/standard_benchmarks.pdf

Cervetti, G. N., Pearson, P. D., Bravo, M. A., & Barber, J. (2006). Reading and writing in the service of inquiry-based science. In R. Douglas, M. P. Klentschy, K. Worth, & W. Binder (Eds.), Linking Science and Literacy in the K-8 Classroom (pp. 221-244). National Science Teachers Association Press.

Cheng, S., She, H., & Huang, L. (2018). The impacts of problem-solving instruction on middle school students’ physical science learning: Interplays of knowledge, reasoning, and problem solving. EURASIA Journal of Mathematics, Science, and Technology Education. https://doi.org/10.12973/ejmste/80902

Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Desy, E. A., Peterson, S. A., & Brockman, V. (2011). Gender differences in science-related attitudes and interests among middle school and high school students. Science Educator, 20(2), 23-30.

Dormody, T. J., & Skelton, P. (2019). Let’s learn about weather and climate science. https://aces.nmsu.edu/weatherclimate

Dormody, T., Skelton, P., Parker, H., Lee, T., Jaquez, C., Dooley, D., & Church, S. (2016). Using a university class to develop and test an 8th grade climate science curriculum [Abstract]. NACTA Journal, 60(Supplement 1), 15.

Dormody, T. J., Skelton, P., Rodriguez, G., Dubois, D. W., & VanLeeuwen, D. (2020a). Lesson worksheets: A tool for developing youth weather and climate science comprehension. Journal of Extension, 58(2), Article v58-2rb7.

Dormody, T. J., Skelton, P., Rodriguez, G., Dubois, D. W., & VanLeeuwen, D. (2020b). Developing and Assessing the Impact of a Weather and Climate Curriculum on Youth Science Comprehension. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Else-Quest, N. M., Mineo, C. C., & Higgins, A. (2013). Math and science attitudes and achievement at the intersection of gender and ethnicity. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 37(3) 293-309.

Gonzalez, J. (2018, November 4). To learn, students need to do something. Cult of Pedagogy. https://www.cultofpedagogy.com/do-something/

Hyde, J. S., & Linn, M. C. (2006). Gender similarities in mathematics and science. Science, 314, 599-600.

Johnson, C. C., Zhang, D., & Kahle, J. B. (2012). Effective science instruction: Impact on high-stakes assessment performance. Research in Middle Level Education, 35(9), 1-14.

Johnson, G. (2019, Summer). AG 101: The + & – of climate change. New Horizons, 67(4), 8-9.

Kolb, D. A. (1984). Experiential learning: Experience as the source of learning and development. Prentice-Hall.

Lee, V. E., & Burkam, D. T. (1996, November). Gender differences in middle grade science achievement: Subject domain, ability level, and course emphasis. Science Education, 80(6), 613-650. https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1098-237X(199611)80:6<613::AID-SCE1>3.0.CO;2-M

Lengnick, L. (2018, March). Cultivating climate resilience on farms and ranches. (Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education, U.S. Department of Agriculture Publication No. 2014-38640-22173).

Lin, E. (2006, June 2). Cooperative learning in the science classroom. NSTA WebNews Digest. https://www.nsta.org/publications/news/story.aspx?id=52116

McDaniel, M. A., Agarwal, P. K., Huelser, B. J., McDermott, K. B., & Roediger H. L. III. (2011). Test-enhanced learning in a middle school science classroom: The effects of quiz frequency and placement. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(2), 399-414. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0021782

McLeod, S. (2017). Kolb's learning styles and experiential learning cycle. SimplyPsychology, 1-5. https://www.simplypsychology.org/learning-kolb.html

Morpus, N. (2017, November 30). Experiential learning lessons to incorporate into youth K-12 curriculum. Capterra. https://blog.capterra.com/experiential-learning-lessons-to-incorporate-into-your-k-12-curriculum/

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Regional Climate Centers. (n.d.). SC ACIS. http://scacis.rcc-acis.org/

National Research Council. (2000). Inquiry and the national science education standards; A guide for teaching and learning. National Academy Press.

Nazier, G., Hawthorne, M. J., & Henley, T. B. (2014, October-December). Narrowing the gender gap: Enduring changes in middle school students’ attitude toward math, science and technology. Journal of Stem Education, 15(3) 29-34.

New Mexico State University. (n.d.). The NMSU Extension and Research Youth Agricultural Science Center (YASC). https://yasc.nmsu.edu/

Next Generation Science Standards. (n.d.). Middle school standards. https://www.nextgenscience.org/search-standards?keys=&tid%5B%5D=106

Pedaste, M., Mäeots, M., Siiman, L. A., de Jong, T, Van Riesen, S. A., Kamp, E. T., & Manoli, C. C. (2015). Phases of inquiry-based learning: definitions and the inquiry cycle. Educational Research Review, 14, 47-61. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.edurev.2015.02.003

Quinn, D. M., & Cooc, N. (2015). Science achievement gaps by gender and race/ethnicity in elementary and middle school: Trends and predictors. Educational Researcher, 44(6), 336-346. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X155988539

Skelton, P., Blackburn, J. J., Stair, K. S., Levy, N., & Dormody, T. J. (2018). Agriscience education through inquiry-based learning: Investigating factors that influence the science competence of middle school students. Journal of Agricultural Education, 59(1), 223-237. https://doi.org/10.5032/jae.2018.01223

Skelton, P., & Dormody, T. (2009). Adding context to content: The Memorial Middle School Agricultural Science Center model. The Agricultural Education Magazine, 81(5), 26-28.

Skelton, P., & Dormody, T. (2018). Preparing a university agriscience teaching methods class to design, deliver, and assess a preservice climate science teaching activity [Abstract]. NACTA Journal Abstracts, 62 (Supplement 1), 5.

Skelton, P., Dormody, T., & Dappen, P. (2016). The learning tornado: An agriscience comprehension model [Abstract]. NACTA Journal, 60(Supplement 1), 85.

Skelton, P., Dormody, T., Haggard, M., Johnson, E., Monita, A., Pinnell, M., Runyan, T., Stuart, S., & Lewis, M. (2017). Using a university agriscience teaching methods class to test a science comprehension model [Abstract]. NACTA Journal Abstracts, 61(Supplement 1), 17.

Skelton, P. Dormody, T., & Lewis, M. (2016). Examining the effects of an Extension youth science center on middle school science comprehension. Journal of Extension, 54(6), Article 6RIB6.

Skelton, P., Seevers, B., Dormody, T., & Hodnett, F. (2012). A conceptual process model for improving youth science comprehension. Journal of Extension, 50(3). Article 3IAW1. https://joe.org/joe/2012june/iw1.php

Swinehart, B. (1992). Youth involvement: Developing leaders and strengthening communities. Partners for Youth Leadership.

Terada, Y. (2017, September 20). Why students forget—and what you can do about it. George Lucas Educational Foundation, Edutopia. https://www.edutopia.org/article/why-students-forget-and-what-you-can-do-about-it

U.S. Department of Agriculture. (2014, February 5). Secretary Vilsack announces regional climate hubs to help agriculture, forestry mitigate the impacts of climate change (USDA Release No. 0016.14).

U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Science, technology, engineering, and math, including computer science. https://www.ed.gov/stem

U.S. Global Change Research Program (2018). Fourth National Climate Assessment. https://nca2018.globalchange.gov/

Wilhelm, P., & Beishuizen, J. (2003). Content effects in self-directed inductive learning. Learning and Instruction, 13(4), 381-402. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0959-4752(02)00013-0

Willingham, D. (2015, August 12). When knowledge is unforgettable. The Atlantic Education. https://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2015/08/the-power-of-curriculum/400976/

Downloads

Published

2020-12-15

Issue

Vol. 15 No. 6 (2020)

Section

Feature Articles

License

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. The Author retains copyright in the Work, where the term “Work” shall include all digital objects that may result in subsequent electronic publication or distribution.
  2. Upon acceptance of the Work, the author shall grant to the Publisher the right of first publication of the Work.
  3. The Author shall grant to the Publisher and its agents the nonexclusive perpetual right and license to publish, archive, and make accessible the Work in whole or in part in all forms of media now or hereafter known under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License or its equivalent, which, for the avoidance of doubt, allows others to copy, distribute, and transmit the Work under the following conditions:
    1. Attribution—other users must attribute the Work in the manner specified by the author as indicated on the journal Web site;
    with the understanding that the above condition can be waived with permission from the Author and that where the Work or any of its elements is in the public domain under applicable law, that status is in no way affected by the license.
  4. The Author is able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the nonexclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the Work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), as long as there is provided in the document an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  5. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post online a prepublication manuscript (but not the Publisher’s final formatted PDF version of the Work) in institutional repositories or on their Websites prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work. Any such posting made before acceptance and publication of the Work shall be updated upon publication to include a reference to the Publisher-assigned DOI (Digital Object Identifier) and a link to the online abstract for the final published Work in the Journal.
  6. Upon Publisher’s request, the Author agrees to furnish promptly to Publisher, at the Author’s own expense, written evidence of the permissions, licenses, and consents for use of third-party material included within the Work, except as determined by Publisher to be covered by the principles of Fair Use.
  7. The Author represents and warrants that:
    1. the Work is the Author’s original work;
    2. the Author has not transferred, and will not transfer, exclusive rights in the Work to any third party;
    3. the Work is not pending review or under consideration by another publisher;
    4. the Work has not previously been published;
    5. the Work contains no misrepresentation or infringement of the Work or property of other authors or third parties; and
    6. the Work contains no libel, invasion of privacy, or other unlawful matter.
  8. The Author agrees to indemnify and hold Publisher harmless from Author’s breach of the representations and warranties contained in Paragraph 6 above, as well as any claim or proceeding relating to Publisher’s use and publication of any content contained in the Work, including third-party content.

Revised 7/16/2018. Revision Description: Removed outdated link.