Georgia State University
Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vo. 6, No. 4, 1997, 315-321
Students from Lafayette Middle School in north Georgia recentlylearned that one must speak slowly when working with a Russian translator. Progress toward your point also tends to move at a snail's pace, but the resulting smiles and nods of understanding can bring much satisfaction.
These students plus students from four other Georgia schools andfive Russian schools had this opportunity to communicate while participating in the Global Thinking Project's Georgia/Russia Exchange this past October. During the Americans' three week stay they lived with Russian families and attended Russian schools while working on the environmental monitoring and action projects which make up the Global Thinking Project (GTP) curriculum. In March, these students returned their friends' hospitality when the Russian students visited Georgia. The constructivist nature of this project has allowed growth and transformation in the nature of the exchange even during itself as the director, teachers, and researchers involved have continually sought and incorporated student research and ideas. It is strongly felt by all associated with the project that this input has greatly enriched the outcome for all concerned.
The GTP Georgia/Russia exchange, funded by the United States Information Agency, is allowing face-to-face collaboration among students and teachers who have formerly been working on the GTP via the Internet. GTP communities consisting of five to seven schools from around the world, work together to monitor such environmental conditions as ground-level ozone, local stream and river quality and the problems resulting from solid waste disposal. The schools within a community work simultaneously on a particular project, allowing collaboration on data collection, analysis, and discussion of results. These results are not only shared among community members, but also sent to the GTP newsgroup located on Econet, where they can be utilized by other schools within the GTP.
Constructivism in Action
This constructivist ideal, at the heart of the GTP, has shaped theproject since its inception in the early 80's when a team of professors from Georgia State University and teachers from local schools visited Russia with the hope of promoting dialogue about science education. With the advent of Glasnost, telecommunication between U.S. and Russian schools became possible as did collaborative environmental projects such as the GTP. At present, the GTP has grown to include fifty schools in such countries as Russia, Australia, Spain, Singapore, Great Britain, and the Czech Republic.
This year's exchange added yet another dimension to this collaboration as American students had the opportunity to monitor ozone levels in Moscow, test the quality of water flowing in the Oka River near Puschino and discuss ideas for waste disposal and recycling with Russian students and their families in Yaroslavl and St. Petersburg. Russian students had the opportunity to study the quality of the Tennessee River, explore the marches on the coast near Savannah, and study the quality of the air in and around Atlanta. As with all forms of collaboration, the sharing of ideas results in change; in this case, changes in ideas about one another and the environment, changes in the project and changes in the students themselves.
Network Science
In his presentation to the American Educational Research Association in April of 1994, Alan Feldman of TERC which developed ALICE, the computer program which allows students to easily and effectively store, manipulate and send their data, described this kind of student work as "Network Science" (Feldman and Nyland, 1994). Network Science, short for collaborative science inquiry in a networked environment, is the outcome of an understanding that students construct meaning from their experiences and that effective science education should incorporate activities that closely resemble those of real scientists. Characteristics of Network Science, says Feldman, include (Feldman and Nyland, 1994). :
• investigation of real science problems
• collaboration of individuals and groups both within each classroom and among geographically remote classrooms
• shared goals through simultaneous work on a particular problem
• shared data
• shared knowledge building through questioning, data analysis and discussion of results
• technology-enhanced projects going beyond use of the computer for word processing and telecommunications to the use of data tables, graphing, and the display of data on maps through the use of ALICE
Real-World Scientific Problems
Students in the GTP do the work of real scientists, utilizing important data they, themselves have collected and using this information to draw their own conclusions. The environment and its problems are primary concerns for students. During the exchange, GTP activities designed to help students identify their most ardent environmental concerns, Russian and American students were found to be troubled by many of the same environmental problems. See Table 1, below, for a summary of the most serious environmental problems as identified by American and Russian students.
Table 1. Most Serious Environmental Problems Identified by American and Russian Students
|
|
|
|
|
Through their GTP work, these students were able to collect actual, meaningful data on a number of these problems. Choice of students' environmental projects were made by the students themselves through collaboration among Russians and Americans and based on environmental problems indigenous to the students' city or town. Table 2, below, gives a summary of the students environmental projects conducted in Russia.
Table 2. Summary of the Research Projects Completed in Russia by American and Russian Student Teams, October - November, 1995
|
School Pair |
Research Problem |
Methods |
Data |
Results |
|
Bartlett - St. Petersburg 157 |
How does the quality of the water compare at different sites? |
Tested water at different sites |
Values for salinity, pH, dissolved oxygen |
County water sites were cleaner than sites in city. |
|
Dunwoody - Moscow 710 |
What is the quality of the air in Moscow? |
Monitored air daily at different sites in Moscow |
Values for temperature, particulates, ozone, wind speed & direction |
Community needs to work together to make the air cleaner. |
|
Lafayette - Pushchino 2 |
What is the quality of the air in Pushchino? |
Monitored the air at different times daily for a week. |
Values for temperature, particulates, ozone, wind speed & direction |
Air in Pushchino was very clean. |
|
Ridgeland - Moscow 91 |
What is the quality of the air in Moscow? |
Monitored the air at different times daily for a week. |
Values for temperature, particulates, ozone, wind speed & direction |
Not enough data to make conclusion. |
|
Salem - Yaroslavl 22 |
How does the quality of the air in Yaroslavl compare with the air quality in St. Petersburg? |
Monitored the air in both cities at the same time, twice a day. |
Values for temperature, particulates, ozone, wind speed & direction |
Ozone levels were higher in Yaroslavl than in St. Petersburg. |
Collaboration with Others: Shared Goals and Data
The GTP is designed to allow students in different countries to work simultaneously on environmental research projects. Working together in this way enables the students to discuss strategies, compare data and discuss results. Use of the ALICE network software allows students to accomplish this communication with ease. ALICE, is an integrated computer application designed to improve the use of telecommunications for collaborative investigations. This software incorporates word processing, data analysis and graphing, mapping, and telecommunications tools.
During the GTP Georgia/Russia exchange, students communicated with one another in a number of ways. Besides the sharing of ideas occurring within the classrooms and in the homes of Russian and American families, students collaborated with one another across Russia and with other GTP students around the world. One project designed by the students compared water quality data between the Neva River in St. Petersburg and the Moskva River in Moscow. At the end of their Russian stay, American students are also using their Russian data to compare to similar data collected in the U.S. Students at School 91, Moscow and Ridgeland High School in north Georgia, compared water quality in Moskva River in October, and the Tennessee River in March. Data collected, discussions, and research reports created by the Russian and American students were posted electronically on the GTP conference to allow students from around the world to make use of this information. In addition, student discussion and research has been disseminated via GTP's newsletter, The Global Journal. Through this type of work, students have come to discover that environmental problems are not just found in their locality, but are global problems as well.
Sharing of Ideas Helps Plan for Future Work
The culmination of the exchange to Russia was an Environmental Summit held in Moscow in early November, 1995 and attended by all 100 Russian and American students and their teachers. During the Moscow Summit, students shared the results of their environmental work, reflected on their experiences during the exchange and made plans for further work. Russian/American groups from the various Russian schools prepared poster presentations which illustrated the environmental work they had done during the exchange. The students were given the opportunity to discuss the results of their work with the other student groups, with 20 Russian environmental educators who attended the summit plus the principals of the various schools and the Director of the Russian Academy of Education. These young scientists learned the importance of clarity in scientific reporting of results, for it is one thing to claim understanding of your own work, but quite another to make it clear to someone from another culture who does not speak your language.
During the Moscow Summit, American students and their Russian counterparts created charters to guide their work in the interim between the two phases of the exchange when they would be separated. Much work had been accomplished by the students during their Russian stay and they wanted to assure that nothing would be lost during their separation. The charter activity allowed all students to have input into the following problems:
1. What are some ideas for continuing the environmental work we've done here?
2. What can we learn from this phase of the exchange that we can use in the next phase?
3. How and how often should we communicate between October and March (the date of the Russian's visit to America?)
4. How can we overcome some of the telecommunications problems we've had in the past?
5. What are some ideas for helping American families prepare for their Russian visitors?
Each Russian/American school group answered one question and presented its results to the rest of the group. Student groups came up with such ideas as plans to increase computer literacy among group members and schedules to ensure communication during the period between October and March when the groups would be separated. Students were also concerned about the need to continue their environmental research and prepared blueprints for continued monitoring of environmental conditions and sharing of data. Observation of the similarities in environmental data between Russia and America made the students more aware of the global nature of problems and of the necessity for global action. A number of comments were made concerning the need for research into other areas of environmental degradation and a commitment to take action locally and globally by sharing this information with others. Sharing their ideas about these problems helped the student groups come up with ideas to create charters especially suited to their own particular situations. An example of a charter is given in Table 3, below.
Table 3. A Charter Written at the Global Summit in Moscow.
Ridgeland High School and School 91, Moscow
GTP--Georgia/Russia Exchange
Coming Together a Second Time
The charters provided a link between the student researchers during the interim between exchange visits. In March, the Russian delegation arrived in Atlanta for three weeks of environmental investigations, cultural activities and school acitivites. This period provided a second experience of cross-cultural collaboration among the same 100 students. Students were able to plan new investigations and carryout monitoring projects they had talked about in Moscow. At Salem High School, located in a small town east of Atlanta, the 20 American and Russian students organized four research teams comprised of Americans and Russians to investigate air, water and soil quality in the local community. In the small town of Lafayette, Georgia, located about 100 miles northwest of Atlanta in the folded Appalachian Mountains, student collaborators completed the second half of their research, and that was to monitor the Tennessee River and compare this data with the data they collected on the Moskva River in October.
The Citizen Scientist
In a recent study focuing on technology and the future of education, Stephen Kerr suggested four foci based on human values and concerns as characteristics of the use of technology in our schools (Kerr, 1996). We might think of these foci as characteristics leading to toward the development of active citizens in a democratic society. Foci that Kerr identified include (Kerr, 1996):
• A focus on the acquisition of knowledge as a tool for self-discovery and liberation;
• A focus on self-esteem and a feeling of self-worth;
• Respect for others with differing values and characteristics;
• The development of a democratic world view, a willingness to participate in the affairs of a democratic society.
Integrating the ideas of network science by Feldman with the notions proposed by Kerr leads to a concept we call the citizen scientist. Citizen scientists are global thinkers taking action on issues, and problems at the local level, to seek connections at the global level. This type of thinking and action-taking characterizes the "citizen scientist." We see the citizen scientist as a scholar and an activist. As a scholar, the student uses science as a vehicle to inquire into the nature of the environment. As a "scientist" students learn to monitor the environment, search for, observe and collect data and information, as well as analyze, and draw conclusions. As a "citizen," students become activists, and as such learn self-responsibility, and the value of democratic action-taking.
When the Russian students and teachers arrived in Atlanta for their experience in Georgia, we discussed with them and their American cohorts, the concept of a citizen scientist. During this portion of the exchange, the focus was not only on their environmental inquiries, but also on public policy issues that would concern citizen scientists.
Resolving a Public Policy Issue
Students in the GTP exchange were presented with a real-world problem in which they had to make use of scientific information, as well as suggesting decisions that were based on human concerns and values. To focus on collaboration, we provided minimal information on this problem: The State of South Carolina claims that Georgia is using too much water from the Florida aquifer and is threatening legal action. They were given a few newspaper articles that discussed the issue, and were presented with the challenge to develop a solution to the dilemma and be prepared to present it at a real-time teleconference using the GSAMS technology (Georgia Statewide Academic and Medical System). Students were brought together at three remote sites (Atlanta, Northwest Georgia and Savannah) for a two-hour teleconference. Each American and Russian team presented their solutions, and then heard comments from professor Robert Almeder, a specialist in public policy issues.
Simpsonwood Declarations
Citizen scientists were in action at the Simpsonwood Conference Center in Atlanta in March, 1996. Five teams of students representing five American and five Russian secondary schools came together for the GTP---Georgia/Russia Exchange Project Global Environmental Summit. Through their research projects, they learned to be "scientists." At Simpsonwood, they learned to be "active citizens".
At the Summit, the same student teams that worked together in Russia built displays of and reported on their social and scientific work. However, to help the students realize the vision of a "citizen" in the context of global thinking, we organized an activity in which the five joint American and Russian teams wrote the "Simpsonwood Declarations." We explained that the Simpsonwood Declarations were statements of their beliefs about the state of the environment and principles for future action. Students worked for an hour or so, and then presented their "Declarations" at a press conference. For example, the Simpsonwood Declaration written by students from Puschino Experimental School 2 and LaFayette High School stated in part, read as follows:
"We believe that nature is very fragile system---a chain that consists of many items (if you destroy one item, the chain would be broken). Most environmental problems stem from overpopulation. We believe that education (knowledge and awareness), participating (recycle, conserve, and organize), responsible attitude (every individual does their part) are needed."
Table 4 shows the points of the Simpsonwood Declaration written by students from Moscow Experimental School 710 and Dunwoody High School.
Table 4. Simpsonwood Declarations Written by Students From Moscow Experimental School 710 and Dunwoody High School, Georgia.
The declarations, although written at Simpsonwood, represented concluding statements of environmental principles that students had constructed through their work over the year. In developing these ideas students discussed the scientific principles related to their beliefs about the environment, as well as the social implications of these ideas on people and communities. Adult analogs of the Simpsonwood Declarations include the Tbilisi Document (Federal Interagency Committe on Education, 1978), and the Montreal Protocals. The later sent forth the characteristics and requisite education for environmentally literate persons, and the former outlined the principles to reduce the depletion of ozone in stratosphere. The student declarations, which were sent electronically to the GTP newsgroup outline their principles of environmental education based on their shared experiences as cross-cultural partners.
Concluding Ideas about Global Collaboration
The GTP Georgia/Russia exchange was designed to promote understanding of the environment and of a different culture. Collaboration and its resultant learning occurred not only among students in the exchange, but also between American and Russian teachers, and designers and researchers of the project. In the constructivist classroom, teachers and students strive to be open to one another's ideas and to opportunities to perceive learning moments. During this exchange, such learning moments abounded and understanding occurred well beyond the anticipation of any of the participants involved: understanding of the environment, of a culture different from our own, certainly, but also a greater understanding of ourselves.
In any such project, prearranged plans become influenced by the people involved and the events which occur. By being open to student ideas, the constructivist teacher can more easily create the kind of learning environment most conducive to student understanding. During the whole of the exchange, students, teachers and developers of the project were open to one another's ideas and allowed these ideas to shape the work done by all. The result of this communication of ideas was growth of the work of the exchange, of the Global Thinking Project, and of all persons involved.
References
Feldman, A. H. and Nyland, H. (1994), Collaborative inquiry in networked communities: lessons from the Alice Testbed. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA. April 4-8.
Federal Interagency Committee on Education subcommittee on Environmental Education. (1978) Toward an action plan: A report on the Tbilisi conference on education. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. Ed 155 063
Hassard, J. (1996), The Georgia/Russia Exchange Project Interim Report, Washington, D.C. United States Information Agency, February.
Kerr, S. T. (1996). Technology and the Future of Schooling. Chicago, IL: National Society for the Study of Education.