volume xxv, issue 2 summer 2009 $10* the ear t h scien t i · pdf filevolume xxv, issue 2...
TRANSCRIPT
The earTh ScienTiST
Read it online at www.nestanet.org
Volume XXV, Issue 2Summer 2009
$10*
Photo taken just west of Denver on I- 70, at the 259 Exit. The road cut shows a fantastic cross section of the famous Morrison Formation, which contains dinosaur fossils as well as foot prints. (Photo by Tom Ervin)
INSIDE THIS ISSUE
From the President . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
From the Executive Director. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
Editor’s Corner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
TES Index - 2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
NESTA Awards and Recognition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
Advertising in The Earth Scientist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
NESTA 2008 Membership Survey Results, Part 2: NESTA Resources and Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Linking the Geologic with the Biologic: Ecological Stewardship as a Means to Teach Geology Related to Coastal Land Loss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Building a Model in the Classroom to Illustrate Human Interference with Sand Drift . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Misconceptions in Astronomy: Identifying Them in Your Students and a New Teaching Resource to Help Address Them . . . . . . . . . 25
Membership Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Creationism in the New Texas Standards for Earth and Space Science . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
The Earth Scientist (TES) Manuscript Guidelines. . . . . 34
*ISSN 1045-4772
Page 2 The Earth Scientist
From The PreSidenT
neSTa conTacTS
EXECUTIVE BOARD
President
Dr. Michael J. Passow
President-Elect
Ardis Herrold
Past President
Parker Pennington IV
Secretary
Missy Holzer
Treasurer
Bruce Hall
Board Representative
Tom Ervin
Executive Director
Dr. Roberta Johnson
chooSing Your BaTTleSby Michael J. Passow, NESTA President 2008 - 2010
As my first year as your NESTA President draws to a close on 30 April, I’m more aware than ever of the old saying, “Choose your battles wisely.” Teachers, in general, and Earth Science teachers, specifically, find themselves in continuous skirmishes, fights, and battles in the never-ending “war against ignorance.” Some of these are to be expected. We ‘teach’ something in class, but some students don’t ‘learn’ it to our satisfaction. So we have to find some other strategy, or ‘leave them behind.’ This is so common that we often fail even to address the problems. There is a well-known video, “A Private Universe,” which examines student misconceptions. I find it worth viewing every so often to remind me of the necessity of considering the effectiveness of my plans and actions in overcoming pre-conceived ideas or establishing new knowledge. More difficult to confront and overcome are several situations I have encountered in the past year, which affect all of us to some degree, and which is why NESTA can be a leader for K – 12 education. Obviously, we recognize the importance of Earth Science as a “full” partner to biology, chemistry, and physics. But in many states, despite the gains made in the implementation of the “National Science Education Standards,” Earth Science does not receive full recognition as a “lab science.” Reasons for this vary from state to state. What NESTA can do in the coming year and beyond will be to join in efforts to disseminate scientifically-sound, educationally-based resources for teachers and students. This doesn’t necessarily mean NESTA will create such resources unilaterally, but rather that NESTA will seek partnerships with like-minded organizations and individ-uals to develop suitable materials. For example, we’re trying to make stronger bonds with such government agencies as NOAA, NASA, EPA, and the USGS. We’ll also try to work with universities and other professional organizations, and seek the financial resources through the National Science Foundation and other sources. One goal may be to have an exemplar curricular program that any school district would be willing to implement. Already, efforts are underway in states like Texas and New Jersey to create capstone courses. Individual schools have created tailored arrangements with local universities to provide students with college credit through courses that parallel the AP format. In the next year, we hope to explore additional approaches to this fight. Secondly, on-going battles over such contentious issues as evolution of species and “Deep Time” will certainly continue. The recent decision by the Texas State Board of Education about what to include and/or exclude in teaching change over geologic time was only a partial victory for Science Education. The BoE members who consti-tuted the minority opinion have vowed to carry on their efforts to gain access to the classroom. On a more national level, the recent Presidential election has put into key government positions educators who say they will look to the scientific basis in making decisions. But politics often has a way of imposing its own reality. So NESTA will continue to join with fellow organizations to try to “educate” the decision-makers in Congress and the various Departments. Dr. Roberta Johnson, our NESTA Executive Director, already has appointments to meet with many key Washington personnel. Others from the NESTA Executive Board and the general membership may be called on to play roles in these efforts. Finally, another ongoing battle involves, “Just what is the reason for there to be a NESTA?” It’s a question I am often asked, especially by people more familiar with NSTA, NAGT, and state ESTAs. It’s a question that I frequently answer by pointing out our efforts to support K – 12 Earth Science teachers and their students. NESTA
Page 3Volume XXV, Issue 2
strives to provide resources useful for their needs, whether they are in formal or informal settings. But like some of the other battles, this one may continue far into the future, since there are always new people to whom we need to explain our raison d’etre. (My old French teacher would be so proud of me for sticking that idiom in there!) In short, NESTA will do as much as it can to help you and, in turn, we need you to help us. At the simplest level, renew your membership before it expires so that we can continue to show we have large enough numbers to “be a player at the table.” Help recruit new members from your colleagues at school, workshops, and confer-ences. At higher levels: volunteer to present at the NESTA share-a-thons, contribute samples to the NESTA rock raffles, serve on NESTA committees. Or even consider — “BIG GASP”— stepping forward to run for an office. In the next election cycle, we need to choose a new President-Elect, as well as decide on the Treasurer, Secretary, and half of the Regional Director positions. Maybe it’s your turn to join in the bigger battles and help secure NESTA’s victories. Please contact me if you have any questions – [email protected]
From The execuTive direcTor
neSTa evenTS aT The nSTa naTional conFerence in new orleanSBy Roberta Johnson
NESTA hosted a grand total of 14 events, sessions, and meetings during the NSTA National Conference in New Orleans, 18-21 March 2009. This note is to provide high-lights from these events, and point the membership to resources online that were made available as a result of these activities. A major accomplishment unveiled at the meeting was NESTA’s new, redesigned website, available at www.nestanet.org
On Wednesday, March 18, the NESTA Field Trip visited the Lake Pontchartrain Basin Foundation for a presentation provided by the LPBF Education Coordinator, JoAnn Burke. JoAnn provided the group a great overview of the interconnected waterways in the area of New Orleans and their complex interaction. We then continued on with a tour led by Prof. Stephen Nelson (Tulane University) of the levees and areas destroyed as a result of hurricane Katrina and the failure of the levees. Prof. Nelson developed an excellent Field Guide for the trip which is available online through the “Field Trips and Field Conferences” link on the NESTA website (look under “Past Field Trips”). I think I can speak for everyone on the trip in offering our appreciation to Ms. Burke and Prof. Nelson for their excellent presentations – I, for one, feel like I have a much better understanding of what happened during and after the hurricane!
Thursday the 19th was filled with meetings of the NESTA Executive Committee and Board of Directors – not exciting, but necessary! Friday, the 20th, we hosted a break-fast for NESTA VIPs – honoring individuals and organizations that have gone well beyond the call of duty to assist NESTA in its efforts to support Earth and Space Science teachers. We then launched straight into a series of three excellent Share-a-
neSTa conTacTS
REGIONAL DIRECTORSCentral Region - IL, IA, MN, MO, WIYvette [email protected]
East Central Region - IN, KY, MI, OHRon [email protected]
Eastern Region - DE, NJ, PAMichael [email protected]
Far Western and Hawaii Region - CA, GU, HI, NV Wendy Van [email protected]
Mid-Atlantic Region - DC, MD, VA, WVMichelle [email protected]
New England Region - CT, ME, MA, NH, RI, VTLisa Sarah [email protected]
New York Region - NYGilles [email protected]
North Central Region - MT, NE, ND, SD, WY Richard [email protected]
Northwest Region - AK, ID, OR, WA & British ColumbiaJo [email protected]
South Central Region - AR, KS, LA, OK, TXKurtis [email protected]
Southeastern Region - AL, FL, GA, MS, NC, PR, SC, TNBob [email protected]
Southwest Region - AZ, CO, NM, UT Howard [email protected]
Directors-at-LargeSteve [email protected]@charter.net
Page 4 The Earth Scientist
thons on Geology, Oceans and Atmospheres, and Space – all three (as well as the one on Saturday, see below) organized by our extremely capable Share-a-Thon Coordinator, Michelle Harris! Our busy president, Dr. Michael Passow, quickly scur-ried over to the Convention Center to introduce the American Geophysical Union’s speaker, Dr. Sadredin Moosavi (Tulane University), who spoke about the Grand Isle Project: Using Service Learning to Generate Genuine Scientific Experi-ences for Students While Serving Society. Let me take this opportunity to thank the AGU for their generous support for NESTA’s advertisements in NSTA Reports and in the NSTA Conference program!
Friday evening NESTA hosted the Friends of Earth Science Reception, generously sponsored by the Society of Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration and the Mineral Information Institute. SME and MII also provided a suite of educational resources for attendees, which were much appreciated by recipients!
On Saturday the 21st, we launched our Earth and Space Science Resource Day, focused on Natural Hazards and the Environment, with the NESTA Breakfast. The breakfast included a lecture by Dr. Pamela Blanchard (Louisiana State University) on the LSU Coastal Roots Program – an important and successful initiative to engage youth in restoring Louisiana marshes. This was followed up with the NESTA
Natural Hazards and the Environment Share-a-thon.
We then transitioned to a series of fascinating lectures provided by speakers on this theme, including: Hurricane Katrina’s Impact on the Environment of Greater New Orleans: Fears, Concerns, and Prognosis for the Future by Prof. Robert Thomas (Loyola University of New Orleans); Coastal Louisiana in a World of Global Change, by Prof. Torbjörn Törnqvist (Tulane University); and Geologic Processes of Coastal Louisiana and the Impact of Hurricanes: Can New Orleans Survive?, by Prof. Randy McBride (George Mason University). Please visit the NESTA website “Conferences” page, and click on “lectures from scientists” to access more information about these presentations including abstracts, speaker biographies, and the presentations themselves.
After these presentations, we then had a great time at the NESTA Rock and Mineral Raffle. As usual, over 50 wonderful speci-mens were donated from NESTA members and friends of NESTA from across the country and distributed through the raffle to lucky attendees! In addition to providing refreshments for the raffle, Carolina Biolog-ical once again contributed many specimens of petrified wood, as well as a large and mind-blowing set of rocks and minerals that NESTA distributed in part at this event, and will continue distributing through future
Page 5Volume XXV, Issue 2
raffles. Leave Only Bubbles also provided a set of valuable gift certificates that will come in handy for the lucky winners!
Last but not least, NESTA concluded its official activities with our Annual Membership meeting. I’m glad to say that the meeting had larger attendance than usual, perhaps in part building on the excitement growing over NESTA’s recent enhancements in services to the membership and interest in working together with other Earth Science Teacher Associations across the country to build a better integrated (and therefore supported) educator community.
Finally, I would like to reiterate our gratitude to everyone that contributed to the success of our events in New Orleans. To all the organizers, presenters, and contribu-tors – thank you all so much. Without your efforts and contributions, NESTA would not be able to achieve our mission, “to facilitate and advance excellence in Earth and Space Science Education.”
ediTor’S corner With NESTA’s recent work on the Procedures Manual, I found that back in the 2008 Fall/Winter issue of TES, as editor of TES, I was required to submit an index of the articles published in the 4 issues of TES, for that year.
Out of ignorance, I missed that deadline, but I am submitting that index at this time. You will find the TES Index for 2008, elsewhere in this edition of TES.
Regarding this issue, we have a wonderful collection of Earth and Space Science arti-cles for you. The authors were very responsive to any requests I made and that really made producing this issue of TES, a delight.
Tom ErvinEditor, TES
TITLE AUTHoR ISSUE PAgE
Antarctica in High Definition Bindschadler, B., et al
Winter 6 - 9
Polar Exploration in the Classroom Via Windows to the Universe
Gardiner, L., Johnson, R., et al
Winter 10-13
Circumpolar Permafrost Monitoring Program Involving Remote Villages in Permafrost Drilling for Operational and Scientific Applications
Yoshikawa, K. Winter 14-19
The Ship Creek Ice Mystery, An Arctiquest Research Expedition
Shope, R. Winter 20-29
Frozen in Time: Many Choices for How to Teach Climate Change
Cherry, L., et al Winter 30-35
Professional Development at the Center for Microbial Oceanography: Research and Education (C-MORE)
Bruno, B., et al Spring 7-10
Satellites: A Geospatial Technology Program for Teachers and Students
Hedley, M., et al Spring 11-13
TeS index - 2008DISCLAIMER
The information contained herein is provided as a service to our members with the understanding that NESTA (National Earth Science Teachers Association) makes no warranties, either expressed or implied, concerning the accuracy, completeness, reli-ability, or suitability of the information. Nor does NESTA warrant that the use of this information is free of any claims of copy-right infringement. In addition, the views expressed in The Earth Scientist are those of the authors and advertisers and may not reflect NESTA policy.
Page 6 The Earth Scientist
TITLE AUTHoR ISSUE PAgE
The Einstein Fellowship: A Year of Professional Development in Washington D.C.
LaDue, N., et al Spring 14-16
Did It Ever Rain on Mars?A Professional Development Opportunity for Teachers and an Actual NASA Research Opportunity for Middle and High School Students
Kitts, K., et al Spring 17-20
Preparing Teachers to Teach for Deep Understanding: A Curriculum-Based Approach
Pennel, W., et al Spring 21-24
Creating Earth Scientists in Your Classroom Using MY NASA Data
Chambers, L., et al Spring 25-28
University Contributions to Earth Science Teacher Professional Development
Thompson, K., et al Spring 29-32
Opening Doors Celebrating Earth Science Week 2008
Benbow, A., Camphire, G.
Summer 9-10
Crazy Horse: The Memorial and the Geology
Jay, Jennifer, Jay, Jeff
Summer 12-15
Fall Speeds of Precipitation Vavrek, J. Summer 16-19
Science Notebooks Facilitate Weather Literacy
Barrow, L., Wissehr, C.
Summer 20-23
UNAVCO’s Half-Day Educational Workshops on Using High-Precision Global Positioning System Data to Teach about Plate Tectonics
Schiffman, C., Olds, S.
Summer 24-26
Your Planet Earth – An Outreach Initiative
Benton, M. Summer 27-29
Essential Principles and Fundamental Concepts for Atmospheric Science Literacy
Johnson, R., Snow, J.
Summer 30-33
Satellite Observations in Science Education A Free Toolkit for Developing Scientific E-Learning Activities
Jasmin, T. Fall/Winter
8-10
Flying Through Space: Developing Inquiry-Based Astronomy Curriculum Using World Wide Telescope
Dettloff, L. Fall/Winter
11-14
Inspiring Students to Explore Science Careers on Earth and in Space
Manning, M. Fall/Winter
15-19
Stellar Evolution: Cosmic Cycles of formation and Destruction
Young, D. Fall/Winter
20-24
Southwest Astronomy 2008: An Arizona Field Adventure
Herrold, A., et al Fall/Winter
25-29
What Is the Quality of Your Nighttime Sky?
Meymaris, K., et al Fall/Winter
30-35
Google Sky in the Classroom Connolly, A., et al Fall/Winter
36-37
Page 7Volume XXV, Issue 2
neSTa awardS and recogniTionBy Parker O. Pennington, IV
The National Earth Science Teachers Association (NESTA) is an organization run totally through the efforts of its volunteers. We have no headquarters so we really exist wherever our membership lives. We depend upon the efforts of our volunteers, and the support of our sponsors to make possible the services we provide. Each year, at the NSTA National Conference on Science Education, NESTA makes a special effort to recognize those who give of themselves for the betterment of NESTA. This year, In New Orleans, the following people and organizations were so recognized:
Certificates of Appreciation were presented to the following individuals or organizations:
National Center for Atmospheric Research, for financial support of NESTA in 2008
University Corporation for Atmospheric Research, for financial support of NESTA in 2008
American Geological Institute, for providing 2008 Earth Science Week Packets to NESTA members
American Geophysical Union, for sponsoring the NESTA advertisement in NSTA Final Program for New Orleans
Carolina Biological Supply Company for contributions to the 2009 Rock and Mineral Raffles
Marlene DiMarco, for her excellent logistical support of NESTA
Lisa Gardiner, for sharing her graphic talents with NESTA in support of NESTA events and our website
Julia Genyuk, for her effort and commitment working to help NESTA transition to a new website
The Ohio Earth Science Teachers Association, for co-sponsoring the Rock Raffle in Cincinnati
Donna L. Young, for providing the Chandra poster and card inserts for TES
Jean May Brett, for assistance in organizing NESTA events in New Orleans
Michael Corbin, for being the shipping receiver for New Orleans, 2009
Dr. Steven A. Nelson, for conducting the NESTA Field Trip in New Orleans
JoAnn Burke, for her work with the portion of the New Orleans field trip at Lake Pontchartrain
The Mineral Information Institute, for financial and material support of NESTA at the New Orleans NSTA Conference
The Society of Mining, Metallurgy, and Exploration, for financial and material support of NESTA at the New Orleans NSTA Conference
What if? Scientific & Leave Only Bubbles, for model and curriculum contributions to NESTA Rock & Mineral Raffles in 2008/9
Page 8 The Earth Scientist
The Glencoe Company, for being a loyal advertiser in The Earth Scientist
The Michigan Earth Science Teachers Association, for co-sponsoring the 2008 summer field conference “Astronomy in Arizona”
Certificates of Service were presented to the following NESTA members who, during the past year, contributed to the well being of NESTA:
Pamela Weghorst, for being the shipping receiver for Charlotte, 2008
Dr. Scott Burns, for being the shipping receiver for Portland, 2008
Brenda Shafer, for being the shipping receiver for Cincinnati, 2008
Parker Pennington IV, for leadership at Charlotte Area Conference 2008
Tom Ervin, for leadership at Charlotte Area Conference 2008
Steve Carlson, Assistance at Portland Area Conference 2008
Jo Dodds, for leadership at Portland Area Conference 2008
Dr. Michael Passow, for leadership at Portland Area Conference 2008
Ardis Herrold, for leadership at Cincinnati Area Conference 2008
Roberta Johnson, for leadership at Cincinnati Area Conference 2008
David and Marge Mastie, for their generosity and hospitality during the 2009 NESTA Critical Policies Meeting
Mark Francek, for providing “Earth Science Sites of the Week”
Kathryn Barclay, South Central Regional Director. 2007-2009
Colleen Anderson, Central Region Director, 2007-2009
Joe Monaco, Far West and Hawaii Regional Director 2001-2009
Tom Ervin, for service as the Board of Directors Representative on Exec. Comm. 2008-09
Wilene Rigsby, for service as a Director-at-Large on the Board of Directors 2004-2009
Note: The final five awards, above, are coming at the end of their service-and reflect their total service.
Distinguished Service Awards are given to officers and volunteers who provide long term dedicated service to NESTA.
Wilene Rigsby, for her continued long term work on the Executive Committee and the Rock Raffles
Jan & Stoney Award --This Award, named in honor of NESTA’s first President and its first Executive Advisor, is given at the discretion of the NESTA Executive Committee in recognition of an individual or organization’s efforts in promoting Earth Science education in keeping with the goals of NESTA. This award includes a plaque and a lifetime NESTA membership. The Jan Woerner and Harold B. Stonehouse (Stoney) Award is NESTA’s highest form of recognition. In our entire history this award has only been presented to five individuals, and one organization, the Michigan Earth Science Teachers Association.
This year, in New Orleans, the Jan and Stoney Award was presented to Tom Ervin.
Tom has been a NESTA board member continuously since 1992. He has served out two full six-year cycles of Presidency for NESTA. Tom has served on numerous
Page 9Volume XXV, Issue 2
NESTA committees, and special projects. He is currently the Editor of TES, is one of the two At-Large Members on the Board of Directors, and is the Board of Director’s Representative on the Executive Committee. He was previously honored with a NESTA Distinguished Service Award and was made a Fellow of the organization in 1998. Tom has also served as the President of the Iowa Science Teachers Association, as well as the Iowa Earth Science Teachers Association, is a Fellow of the Iowa Academy of Science, and holds the Lifetime Achievement Award from his Alma Mater, the University of Northern Iowa.
Advertising in the NESTA Quarterly Journal, The Earth Scientist
NESTA will accept advertisements that are relevant to Earth and space science education. A limited number of spaces for advertisements are available in each issue.
ArtworkWe accept CD or electronic ad files in the following formats: high-res PDF, TIFF or high-res JPEG. Files must have a minimum resolution of 300 dpi. Ads can be in color.
Advertising RatesFull-page (9 5/8 X 7 3/8 inches) $500Half-page (4 13/16 X 3 11/16) $250Quarter-page (2 7/16 X 1 13/16) $125Eighth-page (1 3/16 inches x 7/8 inches) $75
Submission Deadlines for AdvertisementsSubmission dates given below are the latest possible dates by which ads can be accepted for a given issue. Advertisers are advised to submit their ads well in advance of these dates, to ensure any problems with the ads can be addressed prior to issue preparation. The TES Editor is responsible for decisions regarding the appropriateness of advertisements in TES.
Issue Submission Deadline Mailing Date
Spring January 15 March 1Summer April 15 June 1Fall July 15 September 1Winter October 31 January 1
For further information contactBruce Hall, Treasurer, [email protected]
Page 10 The Earth Scientist
neSTa 2008 memBerShiP SurveY reSulTS, ParT 2: neSTa reSourceS and ProgramSBy Roberta Johnson
inTroducTionNESTA periodically surveys its membership to better understand our demographics as well as the needs and concerns of our members. On 29 August 2008, we started such a survey, which remained open until 30 September 2008. The survey was composed of a total of 50 questions: 11 demographic questions; 16 questions about member needs and concerns, national and local trends, technology use, curriculum resources and collaborative connections; and 23 on NESTA resources and programs and how they can be improved. The survey received 271 responses (~30% of the membership), 210 of which were complete (answering each question of the survey). Because all respondents did not answer each question of the survey, the number of responses varies for each question. As a consequence, the results we report here are relative to the number of respondents for each question.
The previous issue of The Earth Scientist included an article summarizing the results of the demographic portion of the survey, and the reader may be interested in refreshing their mind about NESTA demographics through that article. The purpose of this article is to share with the NESTA membership the results of the survey regarding NESTA resources and programs. The next issue of The Earth Scientist will include the results of the final section of the survey, which addressed the needs and concerns of Earth and Space science teachers across the country.
neSTa reSourceS and ProgramSSurvey respondents indicated that the most valuable resources offered by NESTA for its membership are the quarterly journal, The Earth Scientist, our e-mail newsletter (NESTA E-News), periodic emails to members, our Share-a-Thons, and our Field Trips. Not surprisingly, respondents indicated that their least valuable resource or program is the opportunity to volunteer (which was only slightly less popular than our legally-required, constitutionally mandated Annual Membership Meeting)!
NESTA Program Rankings
1
2
3
4
5
TES
E-New
s
Perio
dic em
ails
Web
site
Share-a
-Thon
s
(Nation
al)
Share-a
-Thon
s
(Area)
Field
Trips
ESSR
D
Even
ts at
stat
e co
nfer
ence
s
Rock
Raffle
Rece
ption
Mem
bership
Mee
ting
Volun
teer
Opp
s
Ran
kin
g
Figure 1 – Rankings of NESTA Resources and Programs for members on a scale of 1 to 5, with 1 not valuable and 5 extremely valuable.
Page 11Volume XXV, Issue 2
PuBlicaTionS
The Earth ScientistRegarding our journal, The Earth Scientist, respondents indicated a preference for a quarterly publication (59.5%), rather than monthly (34%) or every six months (6.5%). Respondents indicated a preference for including more classroom activities relevant to specific topics in geoscience in TES (32.6%), although 19% of respondents felt the current mix in the journal is “just fine”, 14.7% indicated that they would like to see more background scientific information on topics in geoscience, and 13.9% indicated that they would like to see more information about pedagogical approaches for effectively teaching geoscience. Respondents did not indicate a preference for topical issues, focused on one subject, or for general issues, which include resources on numerous topics. Receiving a copy of TES by mail, as hard copy, is still the preferred way of receiving TES, at 73.6% of respondents, compared to 26.4% that indicated they preferred to receive TES through the website. (Note that current and past issues of TES are available for all members online, at the NESTA website, under “Publications”). Some respondents provided some interesting additional comments,
including:
• “Moreclassroomideasformiddleschoolareneeded.”
• “Morearticleswrittenbyhighschoolteachers.”
• “Ineedpackagedlabsorlessonplansforlabs.”
• “IfindmostofthearticlesinTESaimedathighschoolorcollegelevelandnoteasytolowertoyoungeragegroups.”
• “CitemoreInternetsiteswithresourcesconnectedtothearticlessoteachersandstudentscanlearnmore.”
• Useoftechnologyinclass.Newtechnology.”
• “Greateremphasisonteachinggeoscienceconceptsattheelementarylevelas well as articles to help preservice elementary teachers with geoscience concepts.”
NESTA E-NewsThe survey asked members to comment on how NESTA E-News can be improved. 52% of respondents indicated that they are pleased with the newsletter as it is now. Although there was a range of responses to this open-ended question, several indi-viduals indicated that they felt we should include more information on classroom activities, perhaps as a “Activities in Geoscience” section. Other ideas that several individuals suggested include links to great websites, more notices about profes-sional development opportunities and other events, and trying to keep the newsletter items succinct.
Special AlertsNESTA periodically emails the membership about opportunities for professional devel-opment, employment opportunities, and new resources for geoscience education. The survey asked how frequently members would like to receive these emails. Respon-dents indicated that they prefer receiving these email special alerts as information or opportunities arise (58.5%). 30% indicated they would like to receive these notices on a monthly basis only, while only 1% indicated they never wished to receive these emails.
Website92.2% of survey respondents indicated that they have visited the NESTA website at www.nestanet.org. Respondents indicated a strong interest in having: classroom
Page 12 The Earth Scientist
activities, profes-sional development opportunities, NESTA products and resources, and a calendar of events available through the website (see Figure 2). Respondents had the opportunity to make other sugges-tions, which were naturally wide-ranging. However, a number of respondents asked that NESTA continue to work to keep the web site up to date, and to provide networking information for other relevant societies and organizations, such as state geological surveys.
neSTa evenTS
Share-a-ThonsThe survey included four questions on our Share-a-Thons, which NESTA offers at all NSTA National and Area Conferences. A significant majority of respondents (61.7%) indicated that they have participated in Share-a-Thons as an attendee, while only 29.9% have participated as a presenter. Respondents had the opportunity to provide suggestions on how our Share-a-Thons can be improved in an open-ended format. 58.3% of respondents indicated that they are very happy with the current NESTA Share-a-Thon format, and find them valuable and effective. There were many other individual responses to this open-ended question, without a lot of duplica-tion. However, several respondents suggested trying to organize the presenters by grade level, made suggestions of how the layout of the Share-a-Thon room might be improved to avoid crowding, and making the resources from Share-a-Thons available online or on CD. On the question of whether NESTA Share-a-Thons should be focused on specific themes (such as individual Share-a-Thons for geology, space, etc), be general for all topics in Earth and Space Science, or a mix of both, responses were roughly equal, without consensus. 30.6% of respondents requested only themed Share-a-Thons, 31.8% requested only general Share-a-Thons, and 37.6% preferred a mix of some themed and some general Share-a-Thons.
Rock and Mineral RafflesThree questions on the survey addressed NESTA’s Rock and Mineral Raffles, held at each NSTA Area and National Conference. The majority of respondents (56.4%) indicated that they have not participated in a raffle. Of those that have participated, the survey asked how the raffles can be improved, and what the best and worst aspects of the raffle are. 56.8% of these respondents indicated that they are very happy with the raffles as they are currently run. Some interesting suggestions were provided, including requests for more specimens, encouraging networking among participants, providing classroom sets, maintaining high quality of specimens, and an improved specimen label form. The consistent favorite aspect of the raffle is no surprise – WINNING – but other comments included the pleasure of seeing all the cool specimens, seeing old friends and making new ones, and the fun atmosphere of the event. Likewise, the least favorite aspect of the raffle is (drum-roll) – LOSING! Several respondents indicated the importance of give-aways, so no one leaves empty handed.
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
Classroomactivities
PD opportunities Links to NESTAproducts and
resources
Calendar of events Mentoringopportunities
Online Rock Raffle
Website Resources
Ran
king
Employmentopportunities
Figure 2 – Resources desired to be provided through the NESTA website selected from a list of options by survey respondents, who could select as many items as they wanted in response to this question. Ranking is provided in % of respondents.
Page 13Volume XXV, Issue 2
Annual Membership MeetingThe large majority of survey respondents (69.9%) have not attended NESTA’s Annual Membership Meeting (a meeting that is required by law for a non-profit organization), held regularly after the Rock and Mineral Raffle at the NSTA National Conference. Those that have attended these meetings stressed the importance of keeping the meeting moving along, with limits on speaking time. Several respondents indicated that the timeframe of the meeting is inconvenient, in the evening of the last full day of the conference (let me assure the reader that NESTA leadership agrees with this comment). Unfortunately, the NESTA schedule at the NSTA National Conference is so full that there are no other slots available during the conference for this meeting.
NESTA Field TripsOnly 31.3% of respondents indicated that they had participated in a NESTA Field Trip, which is usually offered immediately before the NSTA National Conference. Of those that have participated, comments indicated nearly unanimous enthusiasm for NESTA Field Trips – their quality, their structure, and the supporting field guide. Indeed, many comments asked for more field trips, either at the NSTA National, associated with NSTA Area conferences or other conferences, or stand alone summer field confer-ences. Some interesting comments include:
•“Ithinktheyaregreat!Ilikethelow-keytrips,wheretherearelearningguides.But we are also left to explore what we are interested in on our own. Too structuredisnotgood.”
•“Makethepriceaslowaspossibletojustcovercost”
•“Inquiryfieldtripsareaturn-off;Icometohearexpertstellmesomethingorthere’snoneedtocome.”
•“Ireallyenjoythefieldtrips...I’vebeenon8orsoandtheyarealwayswelldoneandinformative.”
E-Commerce and MerchandiseA whopping 72.6% of respondents indicated that they prefer to renew their member-ship online. However, an important minority (27.4%) still prefers to renew via the mail, so NESTA will be sure to retain this capability. The survey also requested feedback on the type of merchandise that would be interesting to members on the website. Respondents could indicate as many of the items listed as they were interested in. In order of ranking, respondents showed interest in sets of classroom activities (26.3%), T-shirts and Polo-shirts (24.3%), bumper stickers (18%), sweatshirts (14.7%), and NESTA membership pins (12.9%). Other suggestions from respondents included mugs, CDs, posters, classroom activity kits (including materials), hats, and pens.
concluSionSResults from our survey of member satisfaction with NESTA resources and programs show that many are quite popular with our members. In most of our activities, there is room for improvement, and many useful suggestions have been provided through the survey. Interestingly, the effort to develop a new NESTA website has already addressed a number of the suggestions made in the survey, such as providing links to educational resources, a calendar of events, and professional development opportunities. Unfortunately, our inability to conjure time, limits the opportunity to solve some problems, such as the timing of the Annual Membership Meeting. NESTA leadership appreciates the time taken by our busy members in completing this survey, and will continue our efforts to improve our resources and programs based on the guidance provided through your responses.
Page 14 The Earth Scientist
linking The geologic wiTh The Biologic:
ecological STewardShiP aS a meanS To Teach geologY relaTed To coaSTal land loSS
aBSTracTA common misconception among the public with respect to coastal land loss in Louisiana is that many think that Louisiana’s coast is retreating and that this retreat is responsible for the land loss reported by the media in recent years. In reality, Louisiana’s land loss is related not to the retreat of coastal beaches, but to the change of interior marshes to open water. This inte-rior land loss is related directly to the natural subsidence of former deltaic lobes of the Mississippi River and has been exacerbated by the leveeing of the Mississippi River, upriver damming of both the main river and its tribu-taries, closure of distributaries, and tropical storm events. In order to assist teachers in teaching about the geologic processes involved in Louisiana’s coastal land loss and the restoration efforts underway to save Louisiana’s coastal habitats, the LSU Coastal Roots Program was begun in 2000 as a means to introduce students to these critical issues facing Louisiana’s citi-zenry. Currently, students in grades 2-12 in 36 public and private schools across south Louisiana raise native seedlings and grasses in school-based plant nurseries. Once a year, on a field trip to a partner restoration site located in Louisiana’s coastal zone, students transplant their crop of restora-tion seedlings. This vegetative planting trip enables students to see a site impacted by habitat loss and provides them an active learning situation in which they can make a positive impact in the larger community.
inTroducTionLouisiana’s coast faces a perilous future. The first levee on the Mississippi River was constructed in New Orleans shortly after its founding in the late 1700’s. Since that time, human mediated processes, such as alterations to the natural hydrology, closure of distributaries, oil and gas exploration, extraction and related canal dredging, and the harvesting of wetland forests have interfered with sediment delivery to the current delta. Levees and the closure of distributaries have significantly sepa-rated the river from its surrounding delta and have resulted in high rates of land loss across Louisiana’s coastal zone (Committee on the Restoration and Protection of Coastal Louisiana, 2006; Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, 2003). Louisiana has lost 1,900 square miles of land since the 1930’s (Barras et al., 2003; Dunbar et al., 1992). Future land loss (2000-2050), with consid-eration for existing restoration projects and diversions, is projected to be 513 square
By Pamela B. Blanchard, Louisiana State UniversityDepartment of Educational Theory, Policy and Practice
Page 15Volume XXV, Issue 2
miles (1329 square kilometers), with an annual loss rate of 10.26 square miles (26.6 square kilometers) per year (Barras et al., 2003). Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005 resulted in an estimated land loss of 217 square miles (526 square kilometers) (Barras, 2006). These two storm events alone represent nearly half of the projected net land loss for 2000-2050.
The land loss experienced in Louisiana is not due to the retreat of Louisiana’s coastal beaches. Instead the loss of land is in the interior marshes. This marsh land loss is due in part to subsidence-driven relative sea level rise. Simply put, the marshes are sinking. Prior to levee building and distributary closures, sediments delivered to the marshes kept pace with the rate of subsidence. With sediment deprivation, as the marsh sinks, the marsh plants become stressed and die, and in other places, the marsh is undercut by wave action (erosion) at the marsh-water interface (Nyman et al., 2006). The result is interior marsh land loss and the conversion of these areas into open water.
The land loss in Louisiana has serious state and national economic ramifications. Louisiana is the largest producer of shrimp, oysters and blue crab, with a fisheries industry valued at over $2.85 billion (Bourque, 2007). Many of these fisheries rely on intact estuaries and adjacent marshes for a portion of the life cycle of the organisms. For instance, shrimp release their eggs in the Gulf of Mexico. As the larva mature, they migrate into the estuarine waters of the marsh, where they feed and shelter until they migrate back to the sea as subadults (Louisiana Sea Grant College Program, n.d.). With the breakup of the marsh, the productivity of these fisheries is expected to decline. Other industries, such as tourism, oil and gas, agriculture and commercial shipping will be impacted as the marshes deteriorate. Despite the obvious value of the commodities produced by these industries to the nation, convincing the nation to invest in saving these fragile coastal lands has been a long and arduous process. The Coast 2050 Executive Summary gives a clear call to action, “Stewardship requires us to care for and nurture what we have and what we are given” (Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force, 1998, p. 11).
overview and STrucTure oF The lSu coaSTal rooTS ProgramThe LSU Coastal Roots Program was initiated in 2000 to provide a sustained hands-on school-based stewardship activity that offers students an opportunity learn about coastal issues and have a hand in taking positive actions to preserve and rebuild our coast. In this program students grow native plants in school-based plant nurseries. Each participating school is partnered with a long-term restoration site and grows the plants needed specifically by the site. The project provides a means for students in grades 2 through 12 to give back to their larger community by becoming active stewards of their natural resources. The program currently has 36 active schools participating in 16 parishes (counties) across south Louisiana.
The LSU Coastal Roots Program involves three components: nursery production, a habitat restoration trip, and supporting learning communities. The cost to join the program is $1200, which covers the costs involved in establishing their school-based nursery (e.g., an automatic irrigation system, plant cells, trays, ground cloth, and fencing). Yearly expenses, which include bus transportation and substitute teacher pay, are about $300 and are covered by the school. Funds obtained by Coastal Roots staff through grants and contracts cover staff salary and travel, seeds and soil, and professional development expenses for participating teachers (stipends and materials).
nurSerY ProducTionWhen schools enter the program, students help to install their school-based plant nursery (Blanchard, 2007; Coleman & Bush, 2002). Students dig the irrigation
Page 16 The Earth Scientist
trenches, cut and glue the PVC pipe together for the irriga-tion system, lay the gravel and ground cloth, and build the dog kennel that is used to enclose their 10’x10’ nursery produc-tion area. This initial activity takes about three hours to complete.
A long-term restoration partner is identified for the school. This partner site is selected based on how far the students can travel from their school on their restoration trip and the type of
plants (trees or grasses) that the teacher would prefer to grow. The manager of the site is asked for the names of restoration plants needed at the site. Coastal Roots staff either purchase tree seeds from a local seed vendor or make arrangements with the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Golden Meadow Plant Materials Center in Golden Meadow, Louisiana, to obtain starter grass plugs. Schools growing tree seed-lings are asked to grow two different species. This ensures that should one tree crop fail, the school will still have the second species to plant on their restoration trip. Schools growing trees can potentially grow 980 seedlings. Schools growing grasses can potentially grow 768 grass plugs. Currently, tree species being planted by schools in the program include southern baldcypress, live oak, water oak, nuttall oak, longleaf pine, tupelo gum, swamp red maple, and black cherry. Grass species include smooth cordgrass, bitter panicum, and seashore paspalum.
In early spring students plant the seeds or grass plugs in their plant nursery. Over the spring and summer students and teachers manage the irrigation system, fertilize the plants, and keep the perimeters and plant cells weeded to ensure that their plants are as robust as possible. A preliminary plant count is submitted to Coastal Roots office along with possible planting dates for their resto-ration planting trip.
reSToraTion TriPSchools plant their nine-month old tree seedlings from late October through the end of January. The seed-lings are dormant during this period and transplanting them at this time will allow them to begin to establish their root systems before they start putting on new leaves in the spring. This is also the best time to avoid field trip nuisances like reptiles, mosquitoes, ticks, and biting gnats. Once at the site, schools plant as many of their seedlings as possible during the time they have available. This is generally around 400-600 seedlings. Plantings take place on a school day and are completed in about two to three hours. Coastal
Figure 1A typical LSU Coastal Roots nursery. Photo by Ann Blanchard.
Figure 2Students planting their loblolly pine seedlings on a restoration planting trip to Fontainebleau State Park. Photo by Pam Blanchard.
Page 17Volume XXV, Issue 2
Roots staff facilitate the planting event and provide dibbles (a tree planting tool), seedling sacks, and containers of time-released fertilizer. Staff demonstrate how to properly plant the seedlings and enlist the chaperones and teachers to help ensure that the seedlings are properly planted. After the field trip, the empty reusable plant cells are taken back to school and are cleaned by the students and are stored for use the following spring. The restoration cycle begins again the next spring.
SuPPorTing learning communiTieS
Twice a year, at the Winter Workshop and at the Summer Institute, teachers come together to learn from experts about coastal issues, as well as each other. In the Winter Workshop, the focus is on best practices in seed germination, grass propaga-tion, and nursery production. Teachers take home their seeds and soil at the end
of this meeting. At the Summer Workshop, guest speakers, field trips, and specific activities are presented and related coastal resources are shared. The location of this meeting moves each summer with the inten-tion of giving teachers a different coastal location to learn from and experience.
The LSU Coastal Roots Program operates in grades 2-12, thus, there is no written curriculum. Instead, teachers determine how the program will be integrated at their school. Teachers make use of published lessons and other coastal resources identi-fied by Coastal Roots staff (see Resources). In May 2009, American Wetlands Month was celebrated with the inauguration of the Loui-siana Wetland Ambassador Day. Each of the Coastal Roots schools, as well as schools participating in Bayouside Classroom, a water quality monitoring program supported by staff at the Louisiana Universities Marine Consortium (LUMCON) in Cocodrie, Louisiana, selected two students to accom-
pany their teacher for a special six hour learning experience at LUMCON. Highlights included sessions on water quality testing, net and bucket fishing, plankton, plant and bird identification, marsh coring, and a voyage on the R/V Acadiana. This Wetland Ambassador Day program was proposed by participating teachers during the 2007 Summer Institute. They wanted to be able to bring students out to the coast to learn first-hand about some of the coastal issues facing Louisiana. These students will take what they’ve learned at the Wetland Ambassador Day and bring it back to share with their classmates.
reSourceS To aSSiST learningTeachers participating in the LSU Coastal Roots Program have a number of resources available to them through the program website (coastalroots.lsu.edu/). Resources include program information, nursery instructions (information on seed preparation and plant nursery production, specific information about restoration plants that are grown in the program, and information about managing the container yard and auto-matic irrigation system), and specific information for teachers participating in the program (e.g., professional development workshops, process and cost to enter the program, potential sources of grant money).
A number of Louisiana-based agencies have invested in K-12 resources that focus on coastal issues facing south Louisiana (see Resource List for URLs). An example of an
Figure 3A teacher pulling in a plankton trawl on a field trip during the 2008 Coastal Roots Summer Institute.Photo by Pam Blanchard.
Page 18 The Earth Scientist
activity that helps students recognize the consequences of coastal land loss is one entitled, “Wetlands Loss = Fisheries Loss” (Activity 2-6) from the Educators Guide to the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary (Blanchard, 2006). In this activity, students simulate the break-up of a healthy marsh and record the area and perimeter of the remaining marsh pieces in a data table, which they analyze. In this activity, students can draw conclusions based on their data about how the area and available perimeter of the marsh is connected with fisheries populations. They find that as the marsh breaks up, there is initially an increase in the marsh perimeter (i.e., available fishery nursery area) even though the total area of the marsh is declining. Eventually, a tipping point is reached where both the area and perimeter are both declining rapidly. When students graph their results, this relationship becomes apparent. Scientists think that our Louisiana coast is somewhere near the top of the curve and that while our fisheries are not yet in decline, they will be soon.
concluSionSince its inception in 2000, the LSU Coastal Roots Program has facilitated 3,454 students in grades 2-12 in planting nearly 29,000 student-grown seedlings and grass plugs on 88 restoration trips to partner restoration sites. The program offers a means to help make students aware of coastal issues, builds scientific knowledge about some of the ways these issues are understood and addressed, and provides a meaningful way for students to take responsible action based on that awareness and knowledge.
reFerenceSBarras, J. (2006). Land area change in coastal Louisiana after the 2005 hurricanes - a series of three maps (U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 06-1274). Retrieved June 1, 2007, from pubs.usgs.gov/of/2006/1274/
Barras, J.A., Beville, S., Britsch, D., Hartley, S., Hawes, S., Johnston, J., Kemp, P., Kinler, Q., Martucci, A., Porthouse, J., Reed, D., Roy, K., Sapkota, S., & Suhayda, J. (2003). Historical and projected coastal Louisiana land changes: 1978-2050 (USGS Open File Report 03-334).
Blanchard, P.B. (Ed.). (2006). Educator’s Guide to the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary. Retrieved April 13, 2009, from educators.btnep.org/default.asp?id=64
Blanchard, P.B. (2007).
Bourque, H. (Ed.). (2007, April). Coastal industries rely on wetlands bounty [Electronic version]. WaterMarks, 37: 3-7. Retrieved June 15, 2007, from www.lacoast.gov/news-letter.htm
Coleman, E., & Bush, E. (2002). Putting Down Roots: Starting a Seedling Nursery for Wetland Replanting. Louisiana Sea Grant College Program, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge. Retrieved May 25, 2007, from nsgl.gso.uri.edu/lsu/lsuh02002.pdf
Committee on the Restoration and Protection of Coastal Louisiana, National Research Council. (2006). Drawing Louisiana’s New Map: Addressing Land Loss in Coastal Louisiana. National Academies Press.
Dunbar, J.B., Britsch, L., & Kemp, E. (1992). Land loss rates: Louisiana Coastal Plain. Technical Report GL-92-3, U.S. Army Engineer Waterways Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MS.
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force. (2003). Why is the land in South Louisiana disappearing? Retrieved June 15, 2007, from www.lacoast.gov/news/press/2003-09-11b.htm
Louisiana Coastal Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Task Force and the Wetlands Conservation and Restoration Authority. (1998). Coast 2050: Toward a Sustainable Coastal Louisiana, an Executive Summary. Louisiana Department of
Page 19Volume XXV, Issue 2
Natural Resources, Baton Rouge, LA. Retrieved June 1, 2007, from www.earthscape.org/r1/usg05/usg05b.html
Louisiana Sea Grant College Program. (n.d.). The Life Cycle of a Shrimp. Retrieved April 13, 2009, from www.seagrantfish.lsu.edu/pdfs/shrimpcycle_info.pdf
Nyman, J. A., Carloss, M., Delaune, R. D., & Patrick, Jr., W.H. (2006). Erosion rather than plant dieback as the mechanism of marsh loss in an estuarine marsh, Earth Surface Processes and Landforms, 19(1): 69-84.
reSourceSBarataria-Terrebonne National Estuary Program Website for Educatorseducators.btnep.org/
Main website for educators (All products are FREE to the public). It has a host of comprehensive source of information and activities for formal and nonformal educators. The activities are created specifically for students K through 12th grade. Videos, DVDs, Field Trip guide, Workbooks, Educational Resource Guides, Maps, Workshops, etc. To obtain materials, call 800-259-0869.
Educator’s guide to the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuaryeducators.btnep.org/default.asp?id=64
The BTNEP Educator’s Guide to the Barataria-Terrebonne National Estuary is a comprehensive source of information and activities for formal and nonformal educators. The activities are created specifically for students K through 12th grade.
LaCoAST.gov www.lacoast.gov/
This website contains multiple resources: educational information, maps of coastal Louisiana (including restoration projects, pre and post hurricane, land loss, aerial photographs and teaching aids), multimedia resources, and reports.
Lake Pontchartrain Basin’s Lessons on the Lakewww3.selu.edu/turtlecove/lessonsonthelake
A free interactive tool to learn more about water-sheds, in particular the Lake Pontchartrain Basin. The Lake Pontchartrain Basin, in Loui-siana, is part of the much larger Mississippi River water-shed which covers more than half of the United States.
Louisiana Sea grant College Program, Louisiana Marine Education Resources websitelamer.lsu.edu/
A website containing educa-tional information and activities focused on Louisiana’s coast and the Gulf of Mexico, including the Dead Zone, Ocean Commotion, Native Fish in the Classroom and EstuaryLive Louisiana activities.
aBouT The auThorDr. Pamela B. Blanchard, Louisiana State University, Department of Educational Theory, Policy, and Practice, 223-E Peabody Hall, Baton Rouge, LA 70803Hm phone: 337/ 332-6689 Wk phone: 225/ 578-2297 Email: [email protected]
Your one-stop shop for marinescience curriculum supplies .
www.LeaveOnlyBubbles.com 715-659-5427
Leave Only Bubbles is a subsidiary of “What If…?” Scientific, a teacher-owned and operated earth science supply company founded in 1997.
Page 20 The Earth Scientist
Wetlands Loss = Fisheries Loss
Before levees and other human activities, Louisiana’s coastal marshes stretched out along the coast in a more or less continuous band with only occasional marsh ponds and tidal inlets cutting through them. As the rate of subsidence increased to a level that exceeded the rate of marsh sedimentation, the once continuous marsh began to break up into smaller and smaller segments. The health of the marsh affects the productivity of our estuaries and bays, which are nursery grounds for many species of animals, including commercial fish.
This exercise looks at what happens to the fisheries productivity as the marsh breaks up.
1. Think of the area below as a map of a 7 km by 10 km piece of the marsh. Each square is 1 km on its sides. The fringes of this marsh area are especially important nursery areas for juvenile species of commercial fish, crabs and shrimp. At this stage, what is the perimeter of this piece of marsh? Record this perimeter in your data table. What is the area of the marsh? Record this area in your data table. (Division 1)
3. Human activities have resulted the breakup of your marsh, therefore, divide your marsh in half by shading in one vertical column. Now your once continuous marsh is broken into two pieces. What is the total perimeter of your two pieces of marsh now? Record this total perimeter in your data table. What is the area of the two pieces of marsh? Record this area in your data table. (Division 2)
4. Nutrias invade this marsh area. Divide your two pieces of marsh in half again by shading in a horizontal row through both of your pieces. Record the resulting perimeter and marsh area in the data table.
5. Continue subdividing your marsh pieces, removing alternating horizontal rows and vertical columns, until you have no marsh remaining. At each division, record the resulting perimeter and area in your data table.
Graph your data on the next page.
Division Perimeter (km) Area
(km2)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
Page 21Volume XXV, Issue 2
What does your data (both perimeter and area) tell you about the breakup of the marsh?
If 1,000 juvenile fish, crabs and shrimp thrive on 1 km of marsh perimeter, what happens to their populations as the marsh breaks up?
How will this affect Louisiana’s commercial fisheries?
Area o
f Marsh
Rem
ainin
g (km
2)
Key
= Perimeter
= Area
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15
Division #
Per
imet
er o
f M
arsh
Rem
ain
ing
(km
)
Total Marsh Perimeter and Area During a Simulated Breakup of the Marsh
Page 22 The Earth Scientist
aBSTracTThis article present a project developed by Portuguese high school students. They have manufactured an analogical model that demonstrates how sedi-ment is transported alongshore. The model also illustrates the anthropogenic interference with the sand drift as a result of the implementation of coastal engineering structures like groins (a hard, man-made stabilization built perpendicular to the beach intended to prevent the migration of sand during alongshore drift). From the results, students have concluded that the groins are not the solution to the problems of coastal erosion; on the contrary, they enhance and transfer it to the adjacent areas.
inTroducTionAlong most of the world’s coastal areas one can observe the increase of erosion and shoreline retreat. In Portugal, as in many other countries, this situation has been recognized as an important problem.
The main factors contributing to this growing problem are: (a) sea level rise, (b) decrease in the amount of sediment that reaches the coastal areas, (c) the human occupation and deterioration of natural landforms and (d) the deployment of coastal engineering structures. The recent evolution of the coastal stretch along Vilamoura and Quarteira towns (Algarve, Southern Portugal) (Fig.1) is a paradigmatic example of this problem.
The most significant human engineered structures in this area are the Vilamoura Marina jetties (600 and 500 m long); the Quarteira fishing boat harbour and the groins (140 m long) built to protect the oceanfront of Quarteira. These structures interrupted the flow of sand along-
Building a model in The claSSroom To illuSTraTe
human inTerFerence wiTh Sand driFT
Figure 1 - Location of the study area near the coastal towns of Vilamoura and Quarteira (Algarve, Southern Portugal)
By Hélder PereiraGrupo de Biologia e Geologia, Escola Secundária de Loulé, Loulé, Portugal
Page 23Volume XXV, Issue 2
shore, causing the increase of the erosion rates of the cliffs located eastwards. This situation led to the construction of more groins, which require regular maintenance and enhancement, without solving the problem.
After a fieldtrip to the study area three students, from our school’s Earth and Space Sciences Club, developed this project with the main purpose to demonstrate the flow of sand along a beach, and the interference of human engineered structures in the alongshore sand drift.
maTerial and meThodSThe first step of the model manufacture was making an aquarium from acrylic glass plates; silicone was used to join glass plates. Then polyurethane foam and sand were used to make the beach profile; gravel allowed making a groin like structure perpen-dicular to the shore. A wave generator mechanism was developed using an electric motor attached to an acrylic glass plate (Fig. 2 and 3).
reSulTSThe model built in this project illustrates the movement of sediment parallel to shore when waves strike the shore-line at an angle. After turning on the wave generator, one can see waves hitting the shoreline and changing direc-tion, becoming nearly parallel to the shoreline (wave refrac-tion). Refracted waves hit the coastline at a small angle, pushing water and sand parallel to the coastline in the form of an alongshore current. Consequently, sand has a net movement down current. This net movement of the sand is known as alongshore sand drift.
The model also demonstrates the interference of human engineered structures in the alongshore sand drift. Groins
interrupt sand flow along the coast and one can see that the beach up current widens due to sand accumulation, but as sand continues to move the beach down current erodes severely (Fig. 4).
Figure 2 – general view of the model manufactured by the students.
Figure 3 - Students making final adjustments in the wave generating mechanism of the model.
Figure 4 – Aspect of the model after the generated waves hit the shoreline: deposition up current (left) and erosion down current (right).
Page 24 The Earth Scientist
diScuSSion and concluSionS
With this project an analogical model was built, that demonstrates the alongshore sand drift. The model also illustrates the effect of human interference with the sand drift, as a result of the construction of coastal engineering structures like groins.
From the results obtained, the students have concluded that shorelines are very dynamic and that the groins do not minimize, nor are they the solution to the prob-lems of coastal erosion; on the contrary they enhance and transfer it to the adjacent areas.
During the fieldtrip to the study area, students realized that the other approach of coastal management – beach nourishment – has contributed to the decrease of the erosion of the coastal cliffs located east of Quarteira, induced by the groins interfer-ence with the sand drift.
acknowledgemenTS The author would like to thank the enthusiasm and commitment of the 3 students – that developed the described model and Óscar Ferreira for his suggestions on how to build and improve it. The author would like to thank the editor, Tom Ervin, who provided his very useful comments for this article.
BiBliograPhY Bettencourt, P. (1985) Géomorphologie et Processus d’Évolution Récente de la Côte Sotavento (Algarve, Sud Portugal). Ph.D Thesis, Univ. de Bordeaux I: 92p. (Unpublished)
Correia, F., Dias, J.M.A. and Boski, T. (1994) The retreat of eastern Quarteira cliffed coast (Portugal) and its possible causes. In: Jones, P.S.; Healy, M.G. and Williams, A.T. (Eds.) Studies in European Coastal Management: pp.129-139.
Dias, J.M.A. (1988) Aspectos Geológicos do Litoral Algarvio. GEONOVAS, 10: pp.113-128.
Dias, J.A. (1990) A Evolução Actual do Litoral Português. GEONOVAS, 11: pp.15-28.
Dias, J. A. and Neal, W.J. (1992) Sea cliff retreat in Southern Portugal: profiles, processes, and problems. Journal of Coastal Research, 7 (3), pp. 839-852.
Dias, J.A. and Taborda, R.P.M. (1988) Evolução Recente do Nível Médio do Mar em Portugal. Anais do Instituto Hidrográfico, 9: pp. 83-97.
Gomes, F.V. and Pinto, F.T. (2004) Vale do Lobo (Portugal). EUROSION, Case Study. http://copranet.projects.eucc-d.de/files/000149_EUROSION_Vale_do_Lobo.pdf (last time accessed, 15 Jan 2009).
Kraus, N.C. and Galgano, F.A. (2001) Beach erosional hot spots: types, causes and solutions. Coastal and Hydraulics Engineering Technical Note CHETN II-44, U.S.Army Engineer Research and Development Center, Vicksburg, M.S.: 17p.
Oliveira, S. Cruz de; Catalão, J.; Ferreira, Ó. and Dias, J.M.A. (2008) Evaluation of cliff retreat and beach nourishment in southern Portugal using photogrammetric techniques. Journal of Coastal Research, 24(4c): pp. 184-193.
Pereira, H.; Guerreiro, V.; Dias, J.M.A. and Ferreira, Ó. (1998) Short term cliff retreat at Quarteira-Vale do Lobo (Algarve - Southern Portugal). Proceedings of Littoral’98 -Fourth International Conference: pp. 397-403.
Pilkey, O.H. and Wright III, H.L. (1988) Seawalls versus beaches. Journal of Coastal Research, SI (4), pp. 41-64.
aBouT The auThorHélder Pereira (1) Grupo de Biologia e Geologia, Escola Secundária de Loulé, Av. Laginha Serafim, 8100-740 Loulé, Portugal ([email protected])
Page 25Volume XXV, Issue 2
AbstrActWhat exactly are misconceptions? Why do they persist, and what can we do to overcome them? The results from a review of literature show that miscon-ceptions occur for many reasons, from misunderstanding of vocabulary to combining several ideas into one. The best way to counteract misconceptions is to challenge students to think objectively. One good way of challenging the students is through guided inquiry investigations where the students discover the correct ideas for themselves. If teachers were able to do more than just get through the prescribed material, but could also eradicate incor-rect information through inquiry, students would leave school better equipped with the tools needed for life, such as self-initiative and critical thinking. The Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics has developed a new resource for middle school and high school science teachers to help students think critically using inquiry investigations and studying the latest research in astronomy.
liTeraTure reviewWhat exactly are misconceptions? They are also known as: preconceived notions, nonscientific beliefs, naive theories, mixed conceptions, alternative frameworks or conceptual misunderstandings. Misconceptions are defined as something a person knows and believes but does not match what is known to be scientifically correct (Misconceptions in Science, n.d.). There are five major classifications defined by how they occur: preconceived notions, nonscientific beliefs, conceptual misunderstand-ings, vernacular misconceptions, and factual misconceptions. They can also occur from not knowing where or how to look to find the correct answer. From the literature research, it appears that misconceptions are much more complex and prevalent than simple misunderstandings or the receiving of incomplete information. There are multiple methods for arriving at misconceptions. They can occur as a result of a misunderstood vocabulary or they can occur as a result of combining several ideas into one. Some are caused by deeply held beliefs, while others are caused because the recipient was overwhelmed with information causing a shutdown of all processing. Misconceptions can also occur from not knowing where or how to look to find the correct answer. The next thing needing investigation is how teachers can help students to confront and overcome their misconceptions (Riche, R.D., 2000).
miSconcePTionS in aSTronomY: idenTiFYing Them in Your
STudenTS and a new Teaching reSource To helP addreSS Them
By James T. McDonaldAssociate Professor of Science Education, Department of Teacher Education and
Professional Development, Central Michigan University
Page 26 The Earth Scientist
Preconceived notions are ideas formed from what we see everyday. For example, young children think the Earth is the center of the galaxy or universe because people describe the sun as setting and rising. Nonscientific beliefs are views learned from sources other than scientific education, such as religious or mythical teachings that do not have supporting scientific evidence. Conceptual misunderstandings can occur when scientific information is presented in a way that does not challenge their preconceived notions, and as a result, conflicting information results. Vernacular misconceptions, or vocabulary problems, occur when a scientific term means one thing in science, and something else in everyday life. The best example of this is “work”. In science the word “work” means exerting a force over a distance, while in everyday terms this word means getting up early and going to a job. This double meaning often confuses students. Factual misconceptions are false information usually learned early in life that goes unchallenged (Simanek, n.d.). An example is the belief that there are no earthquakes in Texas. Though they do not occur as often as in California, they do get small ones occasionally.
Most of the methods countering misconceptions are aimed at junior-high to high school aged students. University level students tend to have fewer misconceptions overall, probably because by this age they have been exposed to science for quite some time. The most likely age group to hold misconceptions tends to be elementary students, because they have the least experience (Trumper, 2001).
There are numerous ways that misconceptions can occur. Scientific data is constantly changing. No one person can stay current on all of the new research findings. As teachers, we are supposed to be teaching the newest and best of scientific informa-tion, but by the time textbooks are written and published, some of the information is old. This inability to stay on top of constant change causes misinformation. We also deal with conflicting information because of opposing viewpoints. This conflict of infor-mation causes much confusion, and can lead a learner to combine information into a completely new concept (adapted from Misconceptions in Science, n.d.). Parents and teachers relay their misconceptions to the children they teach with little to no challenge of the ideas. Often, adults have no idea that what they “know” is actually a misconception (Greenhouse Effect Misconceptions, n.d.).
Another way misconceptions occur is by oversimplification of scientific information, either by the media, who may not be trained in science (Public Misconceptions in Science, n.d.), or by teachers and parents. In trying to make scientific material under-standable, many times the information is overly simplified, causing an inaccurate view. The media also tend to have an agenda that slants scientific information to their point of view. One of the worst causes of misconceptions is cognitive overload. This occurs when too much information is presented at one time causing people to shut down all processing because they are overwhelmed with information (University of Massachusetts, 2000). This is detrimental because it can cause children to lose interest in science as a result of the “fear of failure” or “fear of peer ridicule”. The loss of interest in science can also eliminate the possibility of pursuing a science related career if not taught properly (McComas, 1996).
The persistence of misconceptions gives us clues to counter them. Teachers and parents often are not aware of children’s incorrect scientific ideas. As a result, adults are unable to challenge students’ thinking. Misconceptions also persist in children because too often they are not taught critical thinking skills in school. Instead, chil-dren are taught to memorize facts and to take multiple-choice tests. As a result, when presented with incomplete or new information, many students do not ask questions or otherwise challenge the new information, causing misconceptions to take root and flourish.
So what can we do to prevent misconceptions and challenge misconceptions held by our students? The first step is to attempt to discover what misconceptions the students already have. To do this we need to ask open-ended questions and truly
Page 27Volume XXV, Issue 2
LISTEN to the students’ ideas (Misconceptions in Science, n.d.). This can be done in small groups, as a class, or in a journal. The students should commit to an outcome before an activity begins. Their ideas should be written on the board or on an over-head for later comparison (Podolner, 2000).
Once we know where the students stand, student thinking can be challenged by structuring experiences and the learning environment so that there are opportunities for students to “test out” their ideas and prove the correct concepts to themselves (Simanek, n.d.). While students are testing their ideas, they also need to resolve any conflicts between their preconceived ideas and observations that may arise within their team during the testing (Podolner, 2000). When finished with the activity, the teacher must debrief the class, checking for student questions and for understanding of the new concepts learned (Podolner, 2000).
Another good method to counter misconceptions is to use concept mapping during the lessons. With concept mapping, students learn to visualize a group of concepts and their interrelationships (Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, 1997). A good way to utilize concept mapping is to do a “before lesson concept map” and an “after lesson” map, so that the learners can see what they have accomplished.
There are several things to keep in mind as we work to correct misconceptions. One method is to remind students that experiments are a means of testing ideas, not just arriving at an expected result. In other words, remind them that just because an activity doesn’t turn out the way they expect, it does not mean that the experiment failed (Committee on Undergraduate Science Education, 1997). Students must also be encouraged to think more like problem-solvers and to practice critical thinking skills (Beaty, W. J., 2000).
Through reviewing the literature, it is apparent that there are several fairly common astronomy- specific misconceptions. The most common concerns the cause of the seasons (Trumper, 2001; Henriques, 2000). Others include the formation of clouds, rain, thunder and lightning (Henriques, 2000), the nature of a vacuum (Henriques, 2000; Oberg, J., 1993), lunar phases, revolution and rotation of the moon, and the size of the universe and the distance between the planets (Trumper, 2001).
a new reSource To helP TeacherS addreSS miSconcePTionSDo you teach students and/or adults about stars, galaxies and other astronomical topics? Want to gain access to a set of unique field-tested resources designed to build understanding about our vast, dynamic universe?
Many new astronomy learners, students and adults alike, are unfamiliar with the universe beyond the solar system. The Beyond the Solar System Professional Devel-opment Project offers opportunities for deepening content knowledge and exploring strategies for teaching and learning about current scientific models and evidence for the origin and evolution of our universe of galaxies. The project is an initiative of the NASA Universe Education Forum at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics, as part of its mandate to foster public understanding of NASA’s exciting astronomy and space science research. In 2006, a training event was held for professional developers to share this resource with preservice and inservice teachers.
You can register on the website to become part of a nationwide network of profes-sional development providers and astronomy educators, sharing resources and insights on student learning ‘beyond the solar system.’ The website to register to receive the DVD is: www.cfa.harvard.edu/seuforum/btss/RegistrationForm.html
In collaboration with the video producers of A Private Universe and Minds of Our Own a new teaching tool was created. Beyond the Solar System: Expanding the Universe in the Classroom is a multimedia DVD that contains a rich set of science content and
Page 28 The Earth Scientist
teaching and learning resources for teacher professional development. The modular resources on the DVD include:
• videodescriptionsofkeyconceptsandevidenceneededtounderstandtheorigin and evolution of the universe
• sciencevisualizationstohelpbuildaccuratementalmodelsoftheuniverse
• interviewswithscientistsresearchingcurrentfrontiersinastrophysics
• studentinterviewshighlightingcommonconceptualbarrierstodeeperunder-standing of space science concepts
• documentaryfootageofrealstudentsandteachersusingfield-testedBeyond the Solar System classroom activities and assessments
• extensiveprintmaterials,teacherandstudentlessonguidesincludingonlinetelescope investigations, and assessments
Beyond the Solar System: Expanding the Universe in the Classroom DVD has two strands of resources for teachers. 1) Science Content: key concepts (short video clips), evidence (illustrates practical and conceptual tools used by astronomers), and researchers (interviews with scientists). 2)Teaching and Learning: student ideas (interviews illustrate common student ideas and mental models), Classrooms (videos of classrooms using these instructional materials/lessons), Resources (print and web resources, plus video science visualizations).
Classroom lessons include: 1. Modeling the Universe - building models of the Universe 2. Exploring with Telescopes - Students use the MicroObservatory to make on-line images, and then interpret the information contained in images, including shape and structure, size and scale, light and brightness. 3. Measuring with Tele-scopes - Using images of galaxies from the MicroObservatory, students interpret evidence bearing on the question, “How big and how old is the Universe?” 4. Cosmic Timeline - This assessment activity launches the students on discussions about the relative ages of objects in the universe, and about how those ages can be deter-mined. By physically manipulating objects and images of items new and old, students develop their own mental models of change through time.
reFerenceSBeaty, W. J. (2000). Recurring science misconceptions in K-6 textbooks. www.eskimo.com/~billb/miscon/miscon4.html
Committee on Undergraduate Science Education (1997). Misconceptions as barriers to understanding science. Washington D. C.: National Academy Press.
Gay, L. R. and Airasian, P. (2003). Educational research: Competencies for analysis and applications. Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall
Greenhouse effect misconceptions. www.personal.psu.edu/users/j/n/jnw108/misconceptions.htm
Henriques, L. (2000). Children’s misconceptions about weather: A review of the litera-ture. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Association of Research in Science Teaching, New Orleans, LA, April 29, 2000. www.csulb.edu/~lhenriqu/NARST2000.htm
Misconceptions in science. mentor.ucs.indiana.edu/~w505a007/
Oberg, J. (1993). Space Myths and Misconceptions. Omni Magazine, 15(7), 38-43.
Podolner, A. S. (2000). Eradicating physics misconceptions using the conceptual change method. www.kzoo.edu/educ/PodolnerSIP.pdf
Page 29Volume XXV, Issue 2
Public misconceptions of science. www.stormwind.com/common/responsibility.html
Riche, R. D. (2000). Misconceptions in high school physics: Strategies for assisting students overcome their misconceptions in high school physics. www.bishops.ntc.nf.ca/rriche/ed6390/strategy.html
Simanek, D. E. Didaktikogenic physics misconceptions: Student misconceptions induced by teachers and textbooks. www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/scenario/miscon.htm
McComas, W. F. (1996). Ten myths of science: Reexamining what we think we know. School Science & Mathematics, 96(1) 10-17.
Trumper, R. (2001). A cross-college age study of science and nonscience student’s conceptions of basic astronomy concepts in preservice training for high-school teachers. Journal of Science Education and Technology, 10(2), 189- 195.
University of Massachusetts Physics Education Research Group. (2000). Research results relevant to education in physics. umperg.physics.umass.edu/perspective/researchfindings
aBouT The auThorJames T. McDonald Associate Professor of Science Educa-tion, Department of Teacher Education and Professional Development, Central Michigan University, Mt. Pleasant, MI 48859, Work: 989-774-1723, Home: 989-779-7410, [email protected]
memBerShiP inFormaTionby Bruce Hall, Membership Coordinator
RENEW oR UPDATE YoUR MEMBERSHIP PRoFILE oNLINEOn your address label of this Earth Scientist you will find your membership expiration date. Here is how to renew your membership or edit or your member’s profile: 1. Go to www.nestanet.org 2. Click on LOG IN 3. Welcome to NESTA Member Menu
Edit your profile - please use this to update your information. It is very important that this information be current.
Renew your membership - use this to renew using a credit card and the secure PayPal account site. If you do not have a PayPal account and wish to use your credit card, click Continue
4. If you do not wish to use a credit card you can renew by check or money order. Click on Download Renew Membership application Mail the completed form to the address indicated.
ADDRESS oR EMAIL HAVE CHANgESIt is very important that we have your current address and email. To update your membership information 1. Go to www.nestanet.org 2. Click on LOG IN 3. Welcome to NESTA Member Menu
Edit your profile - please use this to update your information. It is very important that this information be current.
MEMBERSHIP EXPIRATIoNYou will be notified via email regarding your membership renewal.
If you wish further information regarding membership please contact, Bruce Hall, at [email protected]
Page 30 The Earth Scientist
aBSTracTThe State of Texas is one of the nation’s largest buyers of K-12 textbooks. Because of Texas’ purchasing power, the standards Texas uses to select textbooks have a major influence on national textbook content. The Texas State Board of Education finalized its new science standards during a meeting in late March 2009. Although the new Earth and Space Science standards crafted by an expert writing team mandated robust earth science instruction in Texas high schools, a series of amendments weakened these standards and opened the door for creationist teachers to bring non-scientific ideas into the science classroom.
The original STandardSThe Earth and Space Science (ESS) standards were crafted by a 10-member writing team over the course of a year,1 and form the structure for a new high school capstone course.
The ESS standards envision a strong earth science program that, like all new Texas science subjects, is split between 60% classroom time and 40% laboratory and field studies. This large amount of field and laboratory time will be of great pedagogical benefit, allowing the practical hands-on experiences that are so essential in stimu-lating student interest in the sciences.
ESS students will learn about fundamental, unifying concepts such as plate tectonics and geologic time, as well as the specific tools of modern earth sciences, such as GIS, GPS, radiometric dating, and ice cores. ESS students will be prepared for a scientific career by learning a strong definition of science drawn from the National Academy of Sciences, the use of SI units, an introduction to peer-reviewed journals, and the communication of their data through presentations and posters.
Far from being a dull course, the topics outlined in the ESS standards include some of the most exciting and current areas of earth science research. ESS students will examine the mass extinctions at the Cretaceous-Tertiary and Permian-Triassic bound-aries, the evidence for how the early Earth acquired its water from a combination of volcanic outgassing and comets, the formation of the Moon, and the ideas about how life originated abiotically. Climate change, with discussions of anthropogenic CO2 and El Niño Southern Oscillation events, will be part of the course. Students finishing this ESS course will be able to talk about extra-solar planets, hydrothermal vents, Pangaea, and the Coriolis effect. As the standards were originally written by the
creaTioniSm in The new TexaS STandardS For earTh and SPace Scienceby Steven NewtonPublic Information Project Director, National Center for Science Education
1 available at http://www.texscience.org/pdf/Earth_and_Space_Science_Proposed_TEKS_2009Jan5.pdf
Page 31Volume XXV, Issue 2
science teams, students would also use radiometric dating to calculate the age of the Earth and the universe.
The amendmenTSUnfortunately, ESS students will not learn the age of the universe. After agreeing in principle to the ESS standards, the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) then voted to insert a number of amendments into the standards that criticize well-established scientific ideas, cast doubt upon evolution and radiometric dating, and to open the door for creationist teachers to introduce concepts such as “intelligent design.”
The age of the universe standard was amended from:
(4)(A) evaluate the evidence concerning the Big Bang model, such as red shift and cosmic microwave background radiation, and the concept of an expanding universe that originated about 14 billion years ago.
to:
(4)(A) evaluate the evidence concerning the Big Bang model, such as red shift and cosmic microwave background radiation, and the concept of an expanding universe that originated 14 billion years ago, current theories of the evolution of the universe including estimates for the age of the universe.
Why would the Texas SBOE omit the specific age of the universe? The basis of this removal is not scientific uncertainty; the widely-accepted number of 13.7 billion years is well-established by numerous separate lines of evidence. The phrase “14 billion years” was removed in order to satisfy creationist board members who believe the universe, and the Earth, to be less than 10,000 years old.
Other amendments sought to cast doubt upon well-established earth science ideas. The language changes are subtle but significant, hinting to students that scientists do not really know as much as they claim to understand. One amendment altered:
(c)(6)(A) analyze the changes in Earth’s atmosphere through time…
to:
(c)(6)(A) analyze the changes in Earth’s atmosphere that could have occurred through time…
Clearly, the atmosphere has changed over time. Earth scientists know about stroma-tolites, banded iron formations, the oxygen tipping point about 1.8 billion years ago, and the current changes in CO2 and other anthropogenic gases. These phenomena are well-documented and can be described with more confidence than they “could have occurred.” Therefore, when the ESS standards cast doubt upon these subjects, they not only disparage earth sciences, but the validity of science itself.
Another amendment changed the standard:
(c)(5)(B) investigate sources of heat, including kinetic heat of impact accretion, gravitational compression, and radioactive decay, which allow protoplanet differ-entiation into layers.
to say:
(c)(5)(B) investigate sources of heat, including kinetic heat of impact accretion, gravitational compression, and radioactive decay, which are thought to allow protoplanet differentiation into layers.
Is there really any scientist who doubts that radioactive decay releases heat? Is there any seismologist who does not think that the Earth’s interior is differentiated into layers with unique properties? Is there any scientist who does not believe in gravity?
Page 32 The Earth Scientist
Not only is there is no scientific reason to cast doubt upon these topics, there is no logical reason to suspect them—unless one believes in an extremist and creationist view of the Earth, as do many members of the Texas SBOE.
Another ESS standard was changed from:
(c)(13)(F) discuss scientific hypotheses for the origin of life by abiotic chemical processes in an aqueous environment through complex geochemical cycles.
to:
(c)(13)(F) discuss scientific hypotheses for the origin of life by abiotic chemical processes in an aqueous environment through complex geochemical cycles given the complexity of living systems.
New language was also added to the Biology standards that read:
(c)(7)(G) analyze and evaluate the sufficiency or insufficiency of natural selection to explain the complexity of the cell.
This modification will allow teachers to bring intelligent design creationism (IDC) into the classroom. This language is a code for the creationist concept of “irreducible complexity.” One of the proponents of IDC, Michael Behe, author of Darwin’s Black Box, asserts that some biological systems are so complicated that evolution could not have produced them. Behe terms such systems “irreducibly complex,” and claims they must have been designed by a supernatural intelligence.
These amended standards will affect Texas ESS textbooks that include material on the chemical origins of life. If a textbook refers to Stanley Miller’s famous experiment, for example, the book could now be required to also discuss irreducible complexity as a problem for the origin of life. There is the danger that in order to comply with these new standards, textbook publishers will simply omit sections on Stanley Miller’s experiment and the abiogenic origin of life in order to avoid this issue entirely.
The ESS standards include material on the fossil record, and this was a predictable target for creationist board members. A standard in the original ESS read:
(c)(8)(A) evaluate a variety of fossil types, transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits with regard to their appearance, completeness, and rate of diversity of evolution.
This was amended to:
(c)(8)(A) evaluate a variety of fossil types, proposed transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits with regard to their appearance, completeness, and rate of diversity of evolution and assess the arguments for and against universal common descent in light of this fossil evidence.
One pro-science board member attempted to return (c)(8)(A) to its original language, but was voted down; as bad as most of these amendments were, things would have been worse had it not been for the efforts of pro-science board members.
The final language adopted by the board removed references to common descent and evolution:
(c)(8)(A) analyze and evaluate a variety of fossil types, transitional fossils, proposed transitional fossils, fossil lineages, and significant fossil deposits with regard to their appearance, completeness, and alignment with scientific explana-tions in light of this fossil data.
The phrase “proposed transitional fossils” implies a doubt that is not shared by scien-tists; the peer-reviewed literature contains numerous examples of clear, undisputed
Page 33Volume XXV, Issue 2
transitional fossils, including a recently discovered transitional bat (Onychonycteris finneyi) and a transitional turtle (Chinlechelys tenertesta).
The adopted amendment omitted the word evolution in conjunction with fossils. This reflects the young-earth creationist view that fossils are unchanging relics of animals that died during the Noachian flood. In reality, the fossil record is one of the best places to observe evolution in action.
oTher ProBlemaTic amendmenTS The Texas SBOE also adopted anti-science amendments to other discipline standards, including Biology and Environmental Systems.
In Biology, evolution was a major target of the creationist amendments. The board passed this amendment to the Biology standards:
(7)(B) analyze and evaluate scientific explanations concerning any data of sudden appearance, stasis and the sequential nature of groups in the fossil record.
“Sudden appearance” and “stasis” are creationist code-words referring to the alleged problem for evolution of explaining the Cambrian explosion and the fact that some species exhibit little change over time. Scientists, of course, do not refer to the Cambrian explosion as something that disproves evolution, but this is a standard creationist claim. Now this claim is enshrined in Texas Biology standards.
In Environmental Systems, Texas students are now required to, “Analyze and evaluate different views on the existence of global warming.”
This is the language of global warming denialists, not of the scientific community. In Naomi Oreskes’ famous 2004 examination of 928 peer-reviewed scientific papers on climate change, she determined that 0.0% rejected the existence of global warming.2 This conclusion agrees with the IPCC’s 2007 report, for which they jointly won the Nobel Prize. Thus it is hard to fathom how high school students, just learning the subject for the first time, can be expected to analyze and evaluate alleged evidence disproving global warming that expert scientists, Nobel-prize winners and all, have so far been unable to find.
SummarYAlthough the original ESS standards were based on strong science and outlined an excellent course in earth sciences, a number of creationist and anti-science amend-ments have weakened the ESS standards and disrespected the hard work and expertise of the writing team.
The standards are finalized and in place, bad amendments and all. The struggle for science education in Texas now shifts to the adoption of textbooks in 2011, when these deeply-flawed amendments may be used to force a creationist agenda into Texas science classrooms.
reFerenceS Texas Citizens for Science: http://www.texscience.org/
Texas Freedom Network: http://tfnblog.wordpress.com/
Audio of Texas SBOE meetings at Tony Whitson’s Curricublog: http://curricublog.word-press.com/
2Oreskes,N.(2004).“TheScientificConsensusonClimateChange.”Science,3December2004: Vol. 306. no. 5702, p. 1686, DOI: 10.1126/science.1103618
aBouT The auThorby Steven Newton, Public Information Project Director, National Center for Science Education, 420 40th Street, Suite 2, Oakland, CA 94609-2509, (510) 601-7203, [email protected]
Page 34 The Earth Scientist
The Earth Scientist (TES) Manuscript GuidelinesNESTA encourages articles that provide exemplary state-of-the-art tested classroom activities and background science content relevant to K-12 classroom Earth and Space Science teachers.
• Originalmaterialonly;referencesmustbeproperlycitedaccordingtoAPAstylemanual
• Cleanandconcisewritingstyle,spellandgrammarchecked
• Demonstratesclearclassroomrelevance
Format Specifications• Manuscripts should be submitted electronically – Microsoft Word (PC or Mac),
Appleworks, size 10 point, single-spaced
• Length of manuscript should not exceed 2000 words.
• All submissions must include a summary/abstract.
• Photos and graphs: should be submitted as separate files, of excellent quality and in PDF, EPS, TIFF or JPEG format. 300 dpi minimum resolution. Color or black and white are both accepted.
– Photos/charts should not be embedded in the Word file. References to photo/chart placement may be made in the body of the article identified with some marker: <Figure 1 here> or [Figure 1 in this area].
• Figures should be numbered and include captions (Figure 1. XYZ.).
– Captions may be included with photo/chart reference or at the end of the article.
• If using pictures of students, a signed model release will be required of EACH student pictured.
• Each article must include: author names, school/organizations, mailing address, home and work phone numbers, and e-mail addresses.
ReviewManuscripts are reviewed by the Editor for content and language. The Editor is responsible for final decisions on the publication of each manuscript. Manuscripts may be accepted as is, returned for minor or major revisions, or declined, based on the deci-sion of the Editor. The editor reserves the right to edit the manuscript for typographical or language usage errors.
Page ChargesA fee of $100 per page is charged to authors who have institutional, industrial, or grant funds available to pay publication costs. Authors without access to such funds are strongly urged to assist in defraying costs of publication to the extent their resources permit, but payment of page charges is not required from such authors. Payment of page charges has no bearing on the decision to accept or reject a manu-script.
Submission Deadlines Issue Submission Mailing Deadline Date
Spring January 15 March 1Summer April 15 June 1Fall July 15 September 1Winter October 31 January 1
For further information contact:
Tom Ervin, [email protected]
Roberta M. Johnson, Executive [email protected]
Page 35Volume XXV, Issue 2
Date _______________________________
Name __________________________________________________________
Address 1 _______________________________________________________
Address 2 _______________________________________________________
City ________________________________State ________ Zip ___________
Home # (________) _________________________________
Work # (________) _________________________________
Email ___________________________________________________________(required; home email preferred)
Please be aware that NESTA does not distribute your email address to any outside agency.
Position _________________________________________________________
Grade level(s) ___________________________________________________
Subject area(s) __________________________________________________
Academic major __________________________________________________
NESTA Dues Structure and Benefits
Check or money order only please
Domestic Full Membership – includes printed and online versions of The Earth Scientist, E-News, special e-mailings, access to member-only sections of the website, and full voting privileges
•Oneyear-$20 •Twoyears-$38 •Threeyears-$55
E-Membership – includes all of the above except the printed version of The Earth Scientist.
AVAILABLE ONLY THROUGH OUR WEB SITE WWW.NESTANET.ORG
•Oneyear-$10
International Full Membership (available for Mexico and Canada only) – same benefits as Full Domestic Individual Membership
•Oneyear-$30 •Twoyears-$48 •Threeyears-$65
Individuals from countries other than Mexico and Canada may join as E-Members only
Domestic Library Rate – includes print copies of The Earth Scientist, only, and does not include NESTA membership
•Oneyear-$40
Mail to:
NESTA MEMBERSHIPPO BOX 2194
LIVERPOOL NY 13089-2194
NESTA also offers online membership at www.nestanet.org/php/signup.php
Join NESTA Today!www.nestanet.org
Membership is for one, two, or three years. An expiration date will appear on your mailing label affixed to any NESTA mailings.
NESTA Membership
PO Box 2194
Liverpool NY 13089-2194
non profit org.u.s. postage
paidpermit #718syracuse ny
please inform us if you are moving.
cHange service reQuested.
www.nestanet.org
This photo was taken at Yellowstone National Park. The photographer says it was a fairly warm winter day with an air temperature of about 15°F, with sun and only a little wind. “It would have been pretty comfortable for a Bear.” (Photo by Rich Jones)