Fermilab LInC Online

CheSSie

Chesapeake Stream Savers

Scenario

Summary

Student Pages

Index of Projects

 

The middle school students in grade 6 at Blessed Sacrament School in Washington, DC, are studying problem solving strategies. In this process they are using the What killed the stream? at

http://www.mobot.org/MBGnet/fresh/mystery/index.htm

[MBGnet is produced and maintained by The Evergreen Project, Inc. MBGnet@mobot.org. Copyright © 1995-8 The Evergreen Project, Inc. Missouri Botanical Gardens.]

 

In class discussion of this ill-structured problem, students begin to question how accurate the mystery is for water analysis and problem solving strategies. One student inquires if the procedures that are outlined are standard procedures for water quality analysis. Another student reminds the class that some of the class members have performed water analysis in the past....with "What's in our Water?" from Kids Network and through participation in the JASON Project. The teacher confirms this statement with a note that not all students have been a part of these past projects. A comment is made that both of those projects had some similar procedures, but there were also differences. In fact, she continued, there are similarities and differences between the procedures of the two projects and the procedures outlined in the mystery. Perhaps the class should investigate a nearby stream, Beech Street Branch of Rock Creek to determine if the procedures outlined in the Water Mystery can be used to analyze this local stream. The suggestion, in the form of a motion to the class, is made that Beech Street Branch of Rock Creek be tested according to the procedures outlined in the mystery. The students accept this plan through a voice vote.

***

 

Schools in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed have a unit that focuses on the environment and how citizen use and/or abuse impacts the health of the Bay. Since the watershed for the Bay extends into five states and the District of Columbia, some of the most densely populated areas of the United States, it is essential that students understand that actions in one location can have an impact on a distant area. This project offers an involved strategy for students to cover this curriculum in a way that brings home the message of individual responsibility as well as covers the the essential science, geography, mathematics, and communication skills that are a part of the curriculum. This unit lasts approximately eight weeks during the pilot year [phase I]with the class meeting 45 minutes per day on the average of 4-5 days a week. The goal is to determine what is currently known about stream health in the local geographical area, what geographical areas still need to be investigated, and which schools in these areas can be contacted and invited to join in this project. The teachers have planned this project so that their classes will be the major participants during the pilot project or phase one. One class will be totally new to the investigation [Blessed Sacrament]. The second school [Atholton], having participated in a form of stream analysis through other activities, is searching for partners in order to enlarge their view of the Bay.

***

 

Blessed Sacrament students begin to investigate the stream location as part of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed. A comment is made by a student that she wonders how the Beech Street Branch compares to other streams that eventually empty into the Chesapeake Bay. Are most of the streams healthy? Another student makes the suggestion that the class begin to seek partners in other areas of the Chesapeake Bay Watershed to compare results. A few students have questions about the procedures. In order for the comparison to be valid, don't the procedures have to be standardized for all those who are testing the water? After some discussion, the class agrees that standardizing the procedures is essential in order that the results have meaning. One students suggests to the class that they do a trial test with only one other school. This way we can check our procedures and decide if the procedures will answer our question about the health of the stream. If these procedures are then acceptable to both schools, then we can invite other schools to join us. The students put this to a voice vote and it is accepted.

 

The students discuss a variety of ways to contact another school which might be interested in working with us. The teacher offers a suggestion that perhaps schools, located in the Chesapeake Bay Watershed [CBW] and who have participated in the JASON Project, might be interested in joining with us. A student offers that we can locate those schools through the JASON@School server. Students identify Atholton Elementary School as a school in the CBW which participated in the stream analysis through the JASON Project.

 

The class is organized into teams that will be responsible for different aspects of the project. One team is responsible for communications: contact the Maryland National Park and Planning Commission [office for the region referred to as MNPPC] office to secure permission to go on park land and maintain surveillance of stream health for the academic year. Protocols for use of the stream, time, and locations are determined. A second team is responsible for confirming which parameters of stream health are being tested and what materials are needed to obtain this data. The third team establishes contact with Atholton Elementary School [during phase I] which is checking stream health and determines how and where data can be posted. The fourth team searches internet and local environmental groups to obtain historical picture of stream health in close by geographical areas.

***

 

The teams meet in the classroom and discuss the results of their investigations. Each team, an expert in their assignment, reports to the group and determine further plans and tasks. The teacher monitors progress through daily questioning. Teams keep written reports in online dialogue journals; the teacher responds in a continuing dialogue to each student. These journals are available for review and reference; they are used for continual record keeping and assessment by students and teacher. The internet is used for continued research and communication with Atholton students. Students arrive at the decision that in order to have data that is meaningful, both classes must be following the same protocol. The decision is made by the class that they must communicate with Atholton online and debate to establish the protocol that each class will use in the process of gathering data. [Student use of the JASON@School server for online journals, etc., has been approved by the webmaster.]

 

Dates, times, and procedure for debate are posted online and agreed to by both classes. The teacher monitors classroom activities through daily: 1. group questioning [orally]; 2. online journal writing [in the form of a learning log] in which student and teacher dialogue in written format; and 3. monitoring of online debate where the teacher takes the role of moderator, but does not participate in the decision-making process [debate may not be daily, but rather as needed when communicating with partner classrooms]

 

Students will use a variety of technologies and skills in the pursuit of their team roles. These include more traditional forms such as telephones, library searches, map reading, and a variety of research skills that will be required as students obtain information about their site and plan for the investigation. Students are responsible for producing and consuming knowledge as they work. A focus on good communication skills is essential to the student in communicating what they have learned, what they need to learn, and how they intend to go about it. Although the initial phase appears to be a simulation, the intent by both classroom teachers is that this evolves into an authentic project in which student generated data is made available to environmental agencies; this continued monitoring of areas in the watershed will replace the monitoring that can no longer be done by governmental agencies due to budget restrictions.

***

 

At the end of eight weeks, students from both classrooms will meet online, via global chat or CUSeeMe videoconferencing, to discuss the data collected. Through a variety of prepared visuals [either online web pages or submitted drawings, maps, graphs and charts], students determine what areas of the watershed are currently monitored. Through strategic questioning students are led to a decision that more areas of the watershed need consistent monitoring in order to understand the current state of the CBW. With this student decision, phase I is completed and students begin to debate how best to contact other schools in the CBW and invite them to join in the project. Students list the groups they have partnered with during phase I; they include the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the Audubon Naturalists of the Mid-Atlantic, and the Isaac Walton League "Save our Streams" staff. Students determine that CBF has the largest geographical area coverage and students will work with them to identify other possible schools to participate. The invitation to join the investigation signifies the beginning of phase II.

 

As students prepare for phase II, a subset begins to address the findings of phase I. Working with Atholton students, students design an action plan that will be based on the outcomes of data analysis; that is, the action plan has as its goal to maintain the stream's health if all parameters indicate good health, or to improve the stream's health if there are parameters indicating a need to change current conditions. These action plans must be based upon the results of the investigations.

***

 

Students will share the results of their investigations with the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, the MNPPC, Audubon Naturalists, and Isaac Walton League. These organizations maintain monitoring records in a variety of locations, including online.



 

Created for the Fermilab LInC program sponsored by Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory Education Office, Friends of Fermilab, United States Department of Energy, Illinois State Board of Education, and North Central Regional Technology in Education Consortium (NCRTEC) which is operated by North Central Regional Educational Laboratory (NCREL).

 

Author(s): Susan Hurstcalderone (calderone@sysnet.net)
School: Blessed Sacrament School, Washington, DC
Mellie Lewis (mlewis@umd5.umd.edu)
School: Atholton Elementary, Columbia, Md.
Created: April 23, 1998- Updated: May 3, 1998
URL: /lincon/w98/projects/chesapeake/scenario_blsac.html