The dropout rate for Hispanics is 3.5 times than for White, non Hispanics (Secada, Chavez-Chavez, García, Muñoz, Oakes, Santiago-Santiago, & Slavin, R., 1998). Hispanics are often held back at least one grade, are mostly in urban school districts, and score significantly below national norms on academic achievement tests (García, 1991).

The inequities in Latino/a representation in science are even greater in some areas. In Texas, Latino/as represent 40% of the population, and this number is higher for the school-age population. On the 1996 National Assessment of Education Progress, 45% of Texas eighth graders were below the basic level in science achievement. Of the Hispanic eighth graders in Texas, 67% were below the basic level in science achievement (O'Sullivan, Reese, & Mazzeo, 1997).

Quality Science

Children, even from infancy, are natural scientists. They want to know more about the world. They explore their world by bringing information into their minds. They gather data through their senses, emotions, trials and errors, and conversations with others. They form concepts about their world, and they want to share that information with the people in their world. They observe with interest and they ask many questions.

When we organize explorations of our world into careful ways of forming questions, gathering information, designing investigations into natural or human made phenomena, and communicating the information publicly, we call it science. It is a process of finding answers and a system for organizing and reporting discoveries. The science education reform movement in the National Science Education Standards (National Research Council, 1996) describes science learning as active learning with many and varied opportunities to do science as scientists do science. They collect, sort and catalogue, observe, take notes, make sketches, interview, measure, and chart. These skills combine with critical thinking to develop understanding. The document stresses the need for a quality science education program for all students, "regardless of age, gender, cultural or ethnic background, disabilities, aspirations, or interest and motivation in science" (p. 2). The reasons for this emphasis are to provide personal fulfillment and to prepare U.S. citizens who are personally fulfilled and able to make wise decisions about our increasingly complex world.

The first of the 10 science content standards listed in the National Science Education Standards is the standard of inquiry. The description of inquiry in the document is more complex and encompassing than the steps to the scientific method. Students should:

Teaching science to children should be enhanced by the use of inquiry and based on their natural tendency to explore their world. As teachers or family members, we guide them into more formal science skills. We help them learn to organize their questions and information gathering so they gain a deeper and more thorough understanding of a concept. For example: condensation on the outside of a cold glass appears to be water leaking out through the glass. More investigations with empty cold glasses, mirrors, and tea kettles provide data that will lead to better explanations. We give them tools such as hand lenses and magnets to gather more information. We help them organize their information into charts, tables, and graphs. As their development levels grow, we begin to lead them to understand how to design and interpret investigations. We help them analyze the information and communicate what they have learned about the exploration.

Inquiry Science as a Language Learning Tool

The U.S. Department of Education and the Evaluation Assistance Center East (George Washington University, 1996) created the "Guiding Principles Promoting Excellence" to ensure academic success for students who are learning English as a second language. These principles clearly define an optimal learning environment for students who are learning English, as well as other disciplines, which is the responsibility of educators, the family, and the community. They stress effective second language acquisition strategies and challenging academic programs built on the cultural and linguistic strengths of the students. According to the principles, these students should: (a) be held to the same high expectations of learning established for all students, (b) develop full proficiency in English, (c) be taught challenging content in all areas, (d) receive instruction that builds on their previous education and cognitive abilities, and that reflects their language proficiency levels, and (e) be evaluated with appropriate and valid assessments.

García's (1991) analysis of recent descriptive research has documented instructional practices that have led to success for students who bring diverse languages and cultures to the classrooms. He consistently found integrated student-centered curriculum where literacy was pervasive in all aspects of the instruction. Teachers organized instruction so that students worked collaboratively, and student-to-student interaction was very common. Teachers in the primary grades used both Spanish and English, moving toward mostly English in the upper grades. However, students were allowed to use either language. García notes that students progressed to conventional writing in English in the upper grades and made the transition from Spanish to English themselves. The teachers did not pressure them to transition.

Several other researchers have found that student-centered inquiry classrooms provide excellent language and content learning for students learning English (De Avila & Duncan, 1984; Kessler & Quinn, 1987; Mohan, 1986; Thomas & Collier, 1995; Nieto, 2000). Students are allowed to use their natural curiosity to examine their world. They are actively engaged in the processes of science. They observe, introduce variables, record, measure, predict, infer, inquire, and explore. This allows greater involvement than a vocabulary-driven lecture or text book approach. In the active science classroom, students work in groups to talk out their thinking and planning. The oral language is imbedded in the context. The opportunities for the language learners to develop new language is social and based on commonly understood concepts. The opportunities are also strong for all students to develop new understandings and new vocabulary.

Language Development Programs

Often in the United States, bilingual programs have attempted to eradicate bilingualism as quickly as possible. Linguistic diversity has been viewed as a problem—a barrier to learning. Once the student speaks English, "real" education can take place. As a result of this thinking, some programs have been designed to help the students eliminate their home language. One serious social consequence of this approach is taking from the student and future generations the ability to communicate with their older family members and older members of their society.

The researchers were exploring inquiry science as a tool particularly helpful for teachers across the nation who are teaching children with a home language other than English and who are in the early stages of learning English. Therefore, we chose to implement the program in three schools in El Paso, Texas, where the children are mostly Spanish speaking and who are at various stages in their English language acquisition. In these schools, the teachers are implementing the transitional bilingual model and the maintenance bilingual model, or a blend of the two.

Research Design

[back to top]

The research was designed to determine the value of implementing an inquiry science curriculum in classrooms where elementary children are developing second language skills along with their first language skills. About half of the children were taught in English and about half in Spanish. This was determined by the classroom teachers' perceptions of their students' English- speaking ability. The data were gathered to provide information about the children's concept development and vocabulary development. There was no intention to do a controlled experiment to compare classrooms taught all in English or all in Spanish.

The children in the study are kindergartners through fifth graders in schools within two miles of the Mexican border. Their parents are often recent immigrants living in low-income communities. The majority of the students are Spanish-dominant English language learners. The schools group the children by their English-speaking ability. However, factors such as inadequate assessments, numbers of children per teacher, numbers of new students, etc., prevent these from being homogeneous groupings. Most of the classrooms are providing some or all of the instruction in English. To try to determine an understanding of the teachers' perceptions of their students' language abilities, the teachers in the 13 third-grade classrooms were asked to rate their classes on a scale of 1 (Spanish-speaking only) to 5 (fluent in English and Spanish). One classroom was rated as a 1, three were rated 2, five were rated 3, one was rated 4, and three were rated 5. Therefore, the teachers believe that most of the students are still developing English fluency.

In the bilingual models in these three schools, most of the instruction is provided in Spanish in the primary grades. As they enter the higher grades, more and more of the instruction is provided in English. The goal is for the children to be bilingual after their elementary school experience without sacrificing content learning. However, new students enter the schools with varying levels of English language acquisition. Classes are often created in the higher grades to provide most content instruction in Spanish to children who are new learners.

The science programs at the three schools were weak. A few teachers used science fair as an ongoing science program, but most used it as a short-term project in the spring or did not participate. No regular science curricula was in place in the schools. In one of the schools, a fifth-grade teacher taught science to all the fifth graders each day.

During the research period (spring 2000) over 100 university interns from the University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) Teacher Education program taught from 6 to 12 science lessons in one of the three schools. Sixty-two teachers from the three schools opened their classrooms to our intern teams one afternoon each week. Most of the university interns are bilingual. The university interns provided instruction in the language that the classroom teacher recommended. In about half of the classes the curriculum was delivered mostly in English and about half was delivered mostly in Spanish. In three classes the interns were asked to teach only in Spanish, and in 10 classes they were asked to teach only in English.

The university interns taught the Full Option Science Series (FOSS) curriculum on a weekly basis. FOSS is a hands-on curriculum for science instruction and assessment for students in kindergarten through Grade 6. The inquiry-based collaborative learning program was developed via extensive research and design by the Lawrence Hall of Science, University of California, Berkeley. It aligns with the instructional program described in the National Science Education Standards (NRC, 1996). FOSS is one of several inquiry-based elementary science programs. It was selected because the curriculum materials were provided to the schools in the study by a grant through UTEP Engineering Programs, funded by Agilant Diversity in Education Grants. FOSS has curriculum and student activity sheets available in Spanish.

Data Analysis

[back to top]

Data were gathered from the university interns, the children in the 62 classrooms receiving the new science curricula, and the teachers who participated.

University interns provided data through written responses (from 100 interns) and three focus group sessions (20 interns total). The interns were asked to write an open-ended paper about their experience after implementing two lessons. After four weeks, they were asked to provide written evidence of the elementary students' development of a specific concept, and evidence of students' development of language (English or Spanish). After the sixth week of teaching, 20 of the students participated in one of three focus groups to address the question, "What was the effect of implementing the inquiry curriculum in this school community?"

The qualitative data from the university interns (written comments and focus group comments) were analyzed using the constant comparative method (Lincoln & Guba, 1985; Maykut & Morehouse, 1994) by coding and categorizing the comments and selecting the most common themes and strands. Using more than 300 pages of qualitative information from the university interns, the most typical or relevant comments are reported. Only 12 comments were negative and they dealt with not having enough time to get to know the children by name and problems with the live materials. (The snails were dead when the interns started their lesson, and some of the seeds did not germinate.)

Elementary student data sources were an attitude survey from 80 third graders and a written assessment from 107 fifth graders. The attitude survey results were the total responses for each subject the children selected. The data from the fifth-grade written assessments were analyzed in two categories: "acceptable answer" or "not acceptable answer."

The classroom teachers responded about their perceptions using a Likert scale and through open comments. The totals for the scale responses are reported.

Results

[back to top]

Evidence of Increased Content Knowledge

The inquiry curriculum used in this program was designed to engage students in science thinking processes. The goal of the program is for students to learn important scientific concepts and develop the ability to think well by actively constructing ideas through their own inquiries, investigations, and analyses. Because the future is so dependent on changes brought about by science and technology, it is important for all citizens to be scientifically literate. Project 2061 of the American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990) describes scientific literacy as:

In earlier experiences with inquiry science curricula, the authors had noticed the potential for this program to develop science concepts and critical thinking. However, existing programs were not large scale, not consistent, and were not implemented in these schools where children were learning English as their second language. Because the curricula and support materials were available to all the university interns, and the science teaching experience was the basis of their science methods course, we could assure that the curriculum was taught as it was designed in an inquiry manner. This provided the opportunity to gather relevant data.

The data from this research provide evidence that the elementary children involved in the program did develop concepts and thinking abilities that are components of scientific literacy. The sources of this evidence are (a) university interns via written comments and focus group interviews, (b) in-service teachers in the three schools via a Likert scale and written comments, (c) elementary students (80 third graders) via an attitude survey, and (d) elementary students (107 fifth graders) via written assessment.

Perceptions of the university interns

The university interns gathered specific information that they felt gave evidence that the children were learning science concepts. During the short time, we did not expect the interns to have a thorough understanding of every student's learning record, nor how to adequately assess their learning. However, when we asked them to give specific examples, the following evidences emerged.

Kindergarten children developed observation skills through examining and comparing animals such as worms, snails, and fish:

First-grade children grew plants using four methods of propagation:

Second and third graders explored air and weather:

Fifth-grade students tested foods for fats, acids, and sugars:

The interns provided many examples (from their perceptions) indicating that the children were using their thinking abilities:

In two examples, the students demonstrated the AAAS Project 2061 skill of using scientific knowledge and thinking patterns for personal and social purposes:

Perceptions of the teachers in the three schools

Most of the 62 classroom teachers stayed with the interns to observe the lessons. They were asked to rate their student learning during the science classes on a scale from 1 (no science learning was evident) to 4 (much science learning was evident). Of 43 responses, 33 rated the learning as a 4, and 10 rated their learning as a 3. The chart below presents the numbers of teachers who responded to each of the four levels.

Figure 1. Teachers perceptions about their students' science learning

In addition to the data (above) about their students' learning, 35 of the 43 teachers volunteered comments and all were positive. Typical responses included:

Elementary students' attitudes about science

The third graders in the program were asked to circle their two favorite courses from the list provided below (Figure 2). Science clearly is one of their favorites. Science had not been taught in the third-grade classrooms during the school year prior to our program.

Figure 2. Students' favorite subjects

Written assessments from the elementary children

There was little hope to find evidence of students' increased content knowledge after six one-hour lessons spread over six weeks taught by interns; but we made a focused effort to gather authentic data. Gathering evidence from students under these conditions is difficult; however, with the assessments embedded in the curriculum, we were able to administer one written assessment to 107 fifth graders in the three schools. All had participated in parts of the Foods and Nutrition Unit. This four-page written assessment was available to the students in Spanish or English and they could respond in the language of their choice. Fifty-five percent of the children chose to respond in Spanish, and 45% responded in English.

The first item asked that the student read a drawing of the results of a fat test and place the foods in order from most to least fat. They were to observe the ring of oil that formed around the food. All students had participated in this activity for testing fats. Most students (54% Spanish and 46% English) were able to respond correctly.

In the acid test question, the students had to identify which food contained the most acid by the amount of carbon dioxide that formed when baking soda was added to the food. The gas was measured in a syringe placed in the bag containing fruit juice and carbon dioxide. Only two classes (both English speaking) performed this lesson during the six weeks. Of the 48 students who responded to this, 71% were able to correctly list the juices from most acid to least.

All of the classes had done the sugar testing activity, but the question to determine their ability to do a sugar test required that the students describe the correct procedure, a rather complex series of steps involving crushing equal quantities of different cereals into baggies, adding a quantity of dry yeast and warm water, placing them in a water bath, and, after a certain time, measuring the gas that is formed. Only 38% of the 84 children who responded to this question were able to identify some aspect of this test (14 Spanish and 18 English). Only two children (English) wrote all the steps to the procedure. Others responded to this question ("Tell what you would do if you wanted to find out if a contained sugar") by writing that they could read the label on the package (8 Spanish and 7 English). Reading package labels was a part of the lessons, and this is a technically correct answer, so these are included in the correct response column. Reasons for these less than satisfactory results may be the short time for taking the test, the complexity of the response, or students' lack of knowledge about the test.

The responses to three open-ended questions were analyzed. The first was to list foods that were high in fat and ones that were low in fat. Most students were able to do this correctly. The second was to tell why parents want their children to eat their vegetables. Almost everyone who responded was able to identify that vegetables are healthy or they will not make you fat. The third question analyzed was to define a fat. In this question, also, the children responded satisfactorily that fat is a nutrient or food high in oils.

Time to administer this assessment was cut short in most classes because of external programs. Some students did not respond to every question. Not enough information is available to tell if it was because of a time factor, because they did not cover this concept in the lessons, or because they did not understand the question or answer. Students were able to read and answer the assessment in either Spanish or English. Figure 3 (below) summarizes the results of the assessment. The first bar shows the number of correct responses, the second the number of incorrect responses, and the third the number who did not respond. Of particular interest is the similarity of results from Spanish responses and English responses.

Figure 3. Fifth-graders responses to nutrition content questions

(C-Correct response, I-Incorrect response, N-No response)

Elementary students' language development

There are several reasons why inquiry science is especially well-suited for students learning a second language. First, the activities are hands-on and interactive, and the concepts are built through manipulating the materials, prior knowledge, and verbal interaction with peers. Second, the foundation for many science terms is Latin, and its vocabulary is often similar to Spanish. Third, the inquiry approach is inclusive rather than exclusive. We observed, for example, a classroom where the students were speaking about the science lesson to each other mostly in Spanish as the university interns conducted the class in English. This bilingual phenomenon occurred throughout the lesson, enabling every child to be fully involved. In this activity, the children were given a large syringe and a plastic tube and told to use these tools to explore air. Each child attached the tube to the syringe and began pushing and pulling air through the tube. Soon, each child found a partner and asked if they could use the friend's syringe to attach to the open end of the tube. Then they both began pushing the syringes. They could force the air into the tube, but when one student released her or his pressure on the plunger, the air pressure forced the plunger backward. The syringes were marked so the children began to measure the amount of the pressure. Soon one of the children addressed the intern in English: "Look, Miss. You can feel the air push." She asked the children if they knew the science word for "air push." When no one responded, she said the word was "compression" in English and compresión in Spanish.

The interns' comments support the value of using science to build concepts in classrooms where children are learning English.

Thomas and Collier (1995) found that classes that are highly interactive provide the kind of social setting for natural language acquisition to take place simultaneously with academic and cognitive development. This was evident as the children were trying the target language and building new vocabulary.

One intern team had a bilingual intern and a monolingual English intern. Their interaction showed respect for the children, for each other, and for both languages.

In the monolingual Spanish classrooms, Spanish speakers were developing concepts and vocabulary in their native language. First language development can be accomplished through a language maintenance program similar to that provided at these schools or through two-way dual language programs. Many studies cite the value that cognitive and academic development in the first language has on the development of the second language (Thomas & Collier, 1995; García, 1994; Cummins, 1979).

Limits to full inquiry learning when science is delivered solely in the second language

Although the children were fully engaged and learning, there is evidence that a lack of English skills is a barrier to the full inquiry experience when it is solely delivered in English. At the end of the interactive activity, the university interns held group discussions with the children. During this time, the children were encouraged to share what they had discovered in their explorations. This is a very language-rich experience as children are using new concepts and new vocabulary and publicly presenting their thinking to the class. On several occasions, the students demonstrated inquiry thinking by asking what would happen if they modified the materials or the procedure. The inquiry teacher used this as a starting point to lead children to designing scientific investigations.

In a setting where the teacher does not know the home language of the student, this group dialogue may be difficult for the student with very little English skills. With an inquiry curriculum, however, the teacher knows that the child was included and was participating in the majority of the lesson. The child was fully engaged in the science processes up until the point when the large group began to dialogue about their new experiences. This dialogue is a valuable point for the teachers to assess the students' understanding and thinking. When the teacher does not know the home language of a student in the early stages of learning English, this student will be at a disadvantage during the large group dialogue, and the teacher will not be able to assess the student as well as English speaking students. Further investigations into teaching English-language learners may reveal options to increase the student's involvement in the group dialogues and the teacher's ability to assess the student.

Summary and Recommendations

[back to top]

This investigation was designed to improve understandings about the value of teaching inquiry science in elementary schools where the children's home language is one other than English. We had the unique opportunity to observe closely the interactions between teachers, university interns, and elementary students in 62 classrooms, where almost all the children are learning English as a second language and science through an inquiry approach. We also had the unique opportunity to team with university interns who are bilingual and have a personal understanding of the benefits and detriments of various bilingual programs.

The consistency of the data gathered indicates that there was a strong positive feeling about the value of this inquiry approach for increasing the children's language skills in both languages and that their science content and skills increased. The student assessments show that new science concepts were understood, and there was very little difference between children who chose Spanish or those who chose English to respond. The children rated science as a favorite subject. The classroom teachers were strong in their assertions that these few weeks of inquiry instruction were effective in increasing their children's science content. The university interns were able to provide many specific examples of students' content and vocabulary development. The results of this research illustrate the value of a science program in a bilingual community that is aligned with the high standards for quality as described in the National Science Education Standards and the Guiding Principles Promoting Excellence to ensure academic success for students who are learning English as a second language. Even with limited time to observe the curriculum implementation, the variety of sources of information and the consistently positive data indicate that this was a valuable method to achieve these standards in many models of bilingual education. The research was implemented to explore the value of an inquiry science tool for teachers who do not speak the home language of their children who are learning English. However, the data indicate that this type of science learning may be valuable in any bilingual setting.

Traditional programs in bilingual communities often eliminate science in order to focus on more rigid vocabulary development or implement a text book approach where the children are exposed to words but denied the opportunity to interact with materials from which to build related concepts. The standards for excellence in science education and in bilingual education are consistent in recommending rich content, high standards, interactive learning, and many opportunities for hands-on, minds-on explorations into real world phenomena. This can be achieved through a language-sensitive inquiry science curriculum.

References

[back to top]

American Association for the Advancement of Science (1990). Science for all americans project 2061. New York: Oxford University Press.

Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language proficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age question and other matters. Working Papers on Bilingualism,19, 197-205.

De Avila, E., & Duncan, S. (1984). Finding out and descubrimiento: Teacher's guide. San Rafael, CA: Linguametrics Group.

García, E. (1991). Education of linguistically and culturally diverse students: Effective instructional practices. Educational Practice Report #1. Santa Cruz, CA: University of California, National Center for Research on Cultural Diversity and Second Language Learning.

García, E. (1994). Understanding and meeting the challenge of student cultural diversity. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

George Washington University Center for Equity and Excellence in Education (1996). Promoting excellence: Ensuring academic success for limited English proficient students. Arlington, VA: George Washington University. Kessler, C., & Quinn, M. E. (1987). ESL and science learning. In J. Crandall (Ed.), ESL through content-area instruction: Mathematics, science, social studies (pp. 55-88). Englewood Cliffs, NM: Prentice Hall.

Lincoln, Y. S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.

Mason, C., & Barba, R. (1992). National Science Teachers Association. Equal opportunity science. In Science for all cultures. Arlington, VA: NAST. (Original work published in The Science Teacher, May 1992)

Maykut, P., & Morehouse, R. (1994). Beginning qualitative research: A philosophic and practical guide. Briston, PA: Falmer Press.

Mohan, B. (1986). Language and content. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.

National Research Council (1996). National science education standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Nieto, S. (2000). Affirming diversity: The sociopolitical context of multicultural education. New York: Addison Wesley Longman, Inc.

Oakes, J., Ormseth, T., Bell, R., & Camp, P. (1990). Multiplying inequalities: The effects of race, social class, and tracking on opportunities to learn mathematics and science. [A report to the RAND Corporation.] Santa Monica, CA: RAND.

O'Sullivan, C. Y., Reese, C. M., & Mazzeo, J. (1997). NAAEP 1996 science report card for the nation and the states, Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.

Riley, R. W. (1999). Excelencia para todos. Address by U.S. Secretary of Education on the progress of education for Hispanic Americans and the challenges of a new century. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Education.

Samway, K. D., & McKeon, D. (1999). Myths and realities : Best practices for language minority students. Portsmouth, NH : Heinemann.

Secada, W. G., Chavez-Chavez, R., García , E., Muñoz, C., Oakes, J., Santiago-Santiago, I., & Slavin, R. (1988). No more excuses: The final report of the Hispanic Dropout Project. Available: http://www.senate.gov/~bingaman/bingaman/hispanic_dropout_prevention.html.

Thomas, W., & Collier, V. (1995). Language minority student achievement and program effectiveness. California Association for Bilingual Education Newsletter, 17 (5), 19-24.

Vetter, B. M. (1995). Status of Hispanics in science and engineering in the United States. Washington, DC: American Association for the Advancement of Science.