-
Title (dcterms:title)
-
Eng
Tribal College Student Perspectives: Sustainability Education Curriculum in STEM
-
Date (dcterms:date)
-
2017
-
Creator (dcterms:creator)
-
Eng
Caughman, Liliana E
-
Subject (dcterms:subject)
-
Eng
Environmental Studies
-
extracted text (extracttext:extracted_text)
-
TRIBAL COLLEGE STUDENT PERSPECTIVES:
SUSTAINABILITY EDUCATION CURRICULUM IN STEM
by
Liliana E. Caughman
A Thesis
Submitted in partial fulfillment
of the requirements for the degree
Master of Environmental Studies
The Evergreen State College
June 2017
©2017 by Liliana Caughman. All rights reserved.
This Thesis for the Master of Environmental Studies Degree
by
Liliana Caughman
has been approved for
The Evergreen State College
by
________________________
Kevin Francis, PhD
Member of the Faculty
________________________
Date
ABSTRACT
Tribal College Student Perspectives:
Sustainability Education Curriculum in STEM
by
Liliana Caughman
Native American students have low participation in Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Math (STEM). Having STEM skills is vital for society, and is especially important
for Native American communities that participate in natural resource management. Thus,
the STEM achievement gap must be closed. This research explores the impacts of
implementing a Sustainability Education (SE) pedagogy in science courses at a tribal
college. Using pre- and post- surveys as well as phenomenographic interviews this work
aims to understand student attitudes towards the combined science and sustainability
curriculum. Results indicate that students are receptive to this class structure and that they
have a positive experience in sustainability focused science courses. Additionally, the SE
science courses positively impacted students’ science identities, which has been shown to
contribute to persistence in science. Tribal colleges and universities can use this work to
better understand what leads to student success in science and update pedagogies to better
meet the needs of tribal college students in STEM.
Contents
List of Figures ................................................................................................................................... v
List of Tables ................................................................................................................................... vi
Acknowledgements........................................................................................................................ vii
Introduction ..................................................................................................................................... 1
Background ...................................................................................................................................... 5
Historical Context: Native American Education ........................................................................... 5
STEM Education ........................................................................................................................... 9
Equity and Inclusion ................................................................................................................... 10
Sustainability Education ............................................................................................................. 13
Literature Review ........................................................................................................................... 15
Introduction ............................................................................................................................... 15
Science Identity .......................................................................................................................... 15
STEM Pedagogies for URM Success ........................................................................................... 18
Native American Teaching and Learning ................................................................................... 25
Conclusions ................................................................................................................................ 29
Methodology.................................................................................................................................. 31
Science and Sustainability Courses ............................................................................................ 31
Student Subjects ........................................................................................................................ 34
Surveys ....................................................................................................................................... 36
Interviews .................................................................................................................................. 37
Results ............................................................................................................................................ 42
Survey Data ................................................................................................................................ 42
Interview Data............................................................................................................................ 44
Science Identity Traits: ........................................................................................................... 44
Interpreting the Science Identities ........................................................................................ 44
Curricular Outcomes and Comments..................................................................................... 62
Discussion ...................................................................................................................................... 70
Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 74
Works Cited.................................................................................................................................... 77
Appendices..................................................................................................................................... 83
Appendix 1 ................................................................................................................................. 83
iv
List of Figures
Figure 1. Breakdown of codes and theme categorization. From a total of 35 major codes two
large groups were formed. Each of those large groups contains major themes that will be further
discussed in results. ....................................................................................................................... 41
Figure 2. This graph shows the Student Identity “Thumbprints” generated from an analysis of
the interview data. Each student has a science identity totaling to 100%, broken down into the
percentage of traits from each science identity category they exhibited. .................................... 45
v
List of Tables
Table 1. This table shows the self-reported demographics of the students who took part in this
study. All students identified as Native American or Indigenous. Most students were early in
their college careers and had taken 2 or less science courses. Student ages varied widely. ........ 35
Table 2. Students used a likert scale from 1 to 5 to self assess their feelings towards each
category. Selecting 4’s and higher indicate stronger science and sustainability literacy. This
shows that students score higher in each category after participation in the course. ..................... 43
vi
Acknowledgements
First and foremost, I would like to thank my students, peers, and coworkers at the Northwest
Indian College Nisqually Campus. They have been extremely welcoming to me and have truly
become my second family throughout my time in MES. Also, I cannot thank them enough for
participating in my study and allowing me to be creative and implement a sustainability focused
curriculum in my science classes. I have unconditional love for every person at NWIC Nisqually.
I would also like to thank the Sustainability in Prisons Project for their flexibility, love, and
support throughout my graduate career. SPP was my lifeline at Evergreen and provided me with
innumerous opportunities for personal and professional growth. Although this thesis is not focus
on my SPP work, the foundation of this thesis came from the great work being done at SPP and
their constant effort to create equitable and just environmental education programs.
Additionally, without the guidance and grace of Jean MacGregor this thesis would have never
been possible. Jean personally helped me define my own understanding of environmental
sustainability pedagogy and provided me with the resources and skills necessary to actually apply
it in the classroom. Jean has been an incredible mentor and I cannot thank her enough.
Finally, I must thank my thesis reader Kevin Francis for his cleverness, wit, and problem solving
skills. He pushed me to improve the professional quality of my writing and research, which I
believe has helped prepare me for PhD work. I also could not have made it through MES without
the one and only Emily Passarelli, my most kind and giving friend, as well as Yonit and Sadie in
my peer review group. Lastly, this list would not be complete without thanking my loving spouse
Megan for being a great listener and my number one fan.
Cheers!
vii
Introduction
Native Americans play an enormous role in natural resource management (Jastad,
McAvoy & McDonald, 1996). In the Pacific Northwest, tribes manage large swaths of
land and work to sustainably maintain everything from salmon populations and old
growth forests to estuaries, prairies, freshwater resources, and more (Charnley, Fischer &
Jones, 2007). Every one of these endeavors requires serious science skills. Additionally,
several tribes are aiming for complete sovereignty and thus need their own people to fill
science-focused positions and pursue related careers within tribal governments (Whyte,
2013). Currently there is a shortage of scientifically trained and educated tribal members
to fill these positions and often tribes must hire outsiders for support. To combat this
trend, many tribes are making higher education a priority (Tinant et al, 2014). They see
the benefit of having a scientifically literate community and believe it can strengthen both
current and future generations, especially in a rapidly changing world.
Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) primarily serve Native American or
Indigenous students and are often located on sovereign tribal land. Unfortunately, these
students exemplify a group that is one of the most underrepresented in the sciences.
Students, especially students who have intersectional characteristics, like those who
identify as a person of color, female, poor, and disabled -- simultaneously, are some of
the most likely to struggle in STEM classes and avoid STEM careers (NSF, 2015).
However, these students have limitless potential and deserve the chance to positively
engage in the sciences and build their confidence. When successful STEM courses are
implemented, more students seek out STEM classes, build their analytical skills, and
open their minds to pursing science related jobs (Maltese and Tai, 2011).
1
Many tribal students enter class with deep admiration for the natural world and
their cultural heritage but fail to see the connection between those values and the material
they learn in science classes (Oatman, 2015). Hence, by implementing an
interdisciplinary sustainability education model that includes these topics within standard
Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM) courses there is an opportunity to
tap into the students’ interests and desires and hopefully allow them to better engage with
science material. Additionally, by allowing students to participate in discourse around
environmental sustainability, the sustainability movement can gain the vital perspectives
of an often-excluded group of people.
To understand if integrating the sustainability education model into STEM
courses does in fact produce these outcomes, we must investigate the following question:
What are tribal college students’ perspectives on learning science through topics in
sustainability? This research aims to decipher this inquiry by exploring the students’
experiences in an integrated science and sustainability course, investigating how they
conceptualize both science and sustainability, and discovering how they see their ability
to participate in both disciplines. This will be achieved by: 1) surveying students on their
attitudes towards science and the environment before and after their participation in an
integrated science and sustainability course, and 2) conducting in-depth interviews with
students at the completion of their course.
If the results of this study are positive and show that the tribal college students are
receptive to this type of hybrid science and sustainability curriculum, then perhaps more
Tribal Colleges and Universities and can adopt this pedagogy. In doing so, there is the
2
opportunity to propel more Native learners to succeed in science and fill vital
environmental science and natural resources positions on their land and beyond.
More broadly, the sustainability curriculum could help reshape STEM in higher
education so that it becomes more relevant for modern times, and potentially evolve to
better meets of needs of other historically underrepresented students. For instance, to
overcome the complex issues of climate change we need a society of competent thinkers
and radically creative problem solvers who can understand complex interdisciplinary
concerns (Gray, 2014). Utilizing a sustainability education curriculum in science requires
teaching interdisciplinary concepts using novel methods like research-based projects,
mentoring, and learning communities, which have been shown to promote deeper
thinking skills (Zoller, 2015). Perhaps this curricular transformation in the college STEM
classroom would help to form scientists who can solve broad problem and collaborate
across disciplines.
Additionally, by making a shift towards a sustainability curriculum in science it
could not only benefit Native American students, but others who have been excluded like
women, people of color, people with disabilities, and those from underrepresented
backgrounds. Many of the pedagogical approaches prescribed by the sustainability
education model have been shown to create an advantageous learning environment for an
extensive spectrum of students. Therefore, if this research shows positive results, the
sustainability education approach should be applied and evaluated in other institutions of
higher learning.
3
The following chapters will explore the complex nature of creating inclusive and
equitable STEM education, the highlights of the sustainability education model, and the
specific needs of Native American learners in science. The background section discusses
the sustainability education model tested in this thesis, as well as the importance of
STEM education, equity, and inclusion. Additionally, it provides a brief historical context
upon which to understand Native American’s relationship with Anglo education. This
will deliver a solid foundation for the literature review and allow the reader to better
interpret the results of this work. The literature review covers the important theoretical
framework for this thesis including the specifics of building science identity and the types
of STEM pedagogies that provide successful learning opportunities for underrepresented
minority students and specifically Native Americans.
Finally, the methodology chapter dives into the specifics of research design and
analysis techniques conducted in this project. In the results chapter, the analysis of
student surveys and interviews are presented. Findings on science identity traits and
student opinions on the sustainability curriculum in STEM classes are thoroughly
reported. These discoveries are summarized, thoroughly evaluated, and connected back to
the literature in the discussion chapter. At the end, the conclusion chapter will look back
upon the entirety of the thesis and look forward to how the results can be applied in the
future.
4
Background
Before commenting further on Native Americans in academia and professing that
a shift towards Sustainability Education should be made to better meet their needs, it is
imperative to understand the context of the current situation. This section provides that
context by briefly exploring the history of Native American’s traumatic experiences in
colonized schools, and the current barriers they face as an underrepresented minority in
both higher education and the sustainability movement. This exploration uncovers a need
for change within STEM education and the importance of equity and inclusion to both
STEM and environmental sustainability. Through the investigation, it becomes even
more clear that a STEM education revolution is required to meet the needs of our country
and that now is the time to make necessary changes. Finally, the Sustainability Education
(SE) model is introduced as a potential avenue for this change. Details about the
proposed curriculum are highlighted and the reader becomes ready for a deeper
consideration of teaching and learning in the Literature Review chapter.
Historical Context: Native American Education
It is no accident that Native Americans, and particularly Native women, are
significantly underrepresented in the sciences. The systematic European colonization,
Christianization, and subjugation of American indigenous people have led to the absence
of Native Americans in science today. By means of attacking cultural identity, and
enforcing a westernized society and educational system, Native Americans were
strategically disempowered and their communities continue to feel the effects of this
trauma (Guerro, 2003; Tsosie 2010). This history must be considered when tackling the
paucity of Native Americans within the scientific community.
5
Indigenous groups have faced brutal treatment through colonization and
implementation of rules that marginalize their culture and force a dominant, usually
Anglo, society upon them. In particular, native science and traditional ways of knowing
have been pushed aside and do not fit into the mainstream views of Western Science
(Smith, 2000). When it comes to increasing participation of Native Americans in science,
this is especially relevant, however, the National Science Foundation tends not to
acknowledge how indigenous people were forced into their current dilemma. Often,
modern problems like poverty or learning differences are used as the basis for
understanding the current dearth of Native Americans in STEM. However, negating
history does not allow the current problems to be fully understood, and therefore solved.
We must acknowledge how detrimental colonization and westernization was to the
Native American population regarding their education.
Euro-Americans began the process of “refining” Native peoples and attempting to
eradicate their “sinful” cultural practices through missionary boarding schools. These
schools were created to immerse young Native Americans in European culture and
religion and to educate them according to the United States Bureau of Indian Affairs
(BIA) standards. This meant dressing in European wear, speaking English, learning
European gender norms, and being stripped away from cultural and traditional values, all
while being indoctrinated into the Christian faith. Typically, children were forcibly
removed from their families and taken to the schools without any choice; many young
students experienced sexual, physical, and/or emotional abuse during their time at
boarding school (Emberly, 2010). The trauma inflicted by the US driven removal of
Indian children caused “dysfunctional family relationships and patterns such as substance
6
abuse, domestic violence, and sexual abuse, which are still present in many Native
families and communities,” (Tsosie, 2010). These painful scholastic experiences continue
to haunt; it is no wonder that a distrust of western education has formed in some
indigenous communities (Smith, 2000).
Beyond personal traumas, there has been ongoing “hostility” towards and often an
outright dismissal of indigenous traditional knowledge in the science classroom (Smith,
2000). This was true in the past at boarding schools, and continues to be true today in
modern K-12 and Higher Education. As Patricia Hilden and Leece Lee (2010) remark in
the book Indigenous Women and Feminism,
“Anyone examining a map of the university’s intellectual world
will see immediately who belongs and who does not… we learn
that only Western-produced knowledge is real, that our stories,
dances, arts, and languages are not real repositories of scholarly
knowledge but rather myths and legends.”
For example, when learning about plate tectonics in an earth science class, a
native student in the Pacific Northwest may bring up the traditional story of the
Thunderbird and the Whale. In this story, the mythical Thunderbird and the whale are in
a constant struggle. When the Thunderbird lifts the whale from the sea the ocean recedes,
when the whale crashes back down it shakes the earth and produces huge waves. This is
not something one would find in a standard science textbook and could easily be
dismissed in the classroom. However, there is real scientific and educational value in this
story. Earthquakes in the region often originate from a major offshore fault line and can
produce large tsunamis and earthquakes. The tectonic plates, just like the whale in the
story, cause movement in the earth and displacement in the water resulting in massive
7
shaking and waves. When a student offers a story like then within the classroom but is
instead shut down it can damage their confidence in the science and cause a divide
between their culture and their learning.
Western Science has no real way to deal with other knowledge systems since it is
highly disciplinary and views itself as an outside observer searching for ultimate truth
(Smith, 2000). It may seem that the Native view of science and the Western view of
science are at odds with one another, however “Native science conforms in many ways to
the definition of Western science” (Cajete, 2000) For instance, both Native and Western
science aim to explain natural phenomena in the world and provide information about
these phenomena in culturally appropriate and understandable ways. The biggest
difference between the two approaches is that in the Native tradition “it is not possible to
separate science from ethics, spirituality, metaphysics, ceremony, and social order”
(Cajete, 2000). While this is usually looked down upon by conventional science
standards, and these topics are rarely included in STEM curricula, I believe this shows
that Native Science is not less than Western Science, but more. By integrating
components of Native Science into the classroom we could not only begin to ease cultural
oppression, but enhance science education by providing enriching learning opportunities
for all students.
Finally, current tribes are part of the modern world and would like to be involved
in science for a variety of practical reasons including resource management and economic
development; however, they need science to be on their own terms (Smith, 2000; Cajete,
2000). Smith says it best, in the book Decolonizing Methodologies (1999):
8
“Although our communities have a critical perspective of
universities and what they represent, at the same time these
same communities want their members to gain Western
educations and high-level qualifications. But they do not want
this to be achieved at the cost of destroying people’s
indigenous identities, their languages, values and practices.”
When this occurs appropriately, Native students are more successful and gain
self-esteem (Kawagley, 1994; Martin, 1995). If these types of changes can be
implemented on a large, structural scale, then it is likely more Native students will persist
in STEM.
STEM Education
In the United States, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Math (STEM)
education has come to the forefront of national education priorities and is ripe for reform.
A large portion of job growth in the 21st century will take place in STEM related fields
and the US aims to have a citizenry that is educated and ready to fill those positions. In
the early 20th century the US was a global leader in STEM, however, recent studies have
shown that the US now lags behind other countries in areas of math and science literacy
(Kuenzi, 2008). According to the Congressional Research Service, “In a recent
international assessment of 15-year-old students, the U.S. ranked 28th in math literacy and
24th in science literacy. Moreover, the U.S. ranks 20th among all nations in the proportion
of 24-year-olds who earn degrees in natural science or engineering,” (Kuenzi, 2008). This
shows just how far the US has fallen behind other modern countries in preparing students
for a scientific future.
Therefore, STEM education and literacy have emerged as significant targets of
the US Department of Education, the National Science Foundation (NSF), the National
9
Institute of Health (NIH), and the Department of Energy (Kuenzi, 2008). In fact, in 2011
the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) created a committee of Science,
Technology, Engineering, and Math Education (CoSTEM), which aims to coordinate
federal programs in support of STEM education (Sargent and Shea, 2012). The US
government believes STEM literacy is essential for American success in the future and it
is funneling resources into higher education to support the cause. This shows that there is
an opportunity to reinvent STEM education and evolve it to better meet the needs of
diverse students in the context of global challenges.
Equity and Inclusion
According to recent Census Bureau projections, minorities will account for 57%
of the U.S. population by 2060 (Hobbs and Stoops, 2002). Since the job market for
STEM fields is growing rapidly and there is a need for a generation of analytical problem
solvers, people from across diverse social and ethnic categories must become involved in
STEM. However, STEM fields in the US are largely homogeneous, dominated by White
and Asian men (NSF, 2015). Generally, “the representation of certain groups of people in
science and engineering (S&E) education and employment differs from their
representation in the U.S. population,” (NSF, 2015). Specifically, three ethnic groups
(Blacks, Hispanics, and American Indians), as well as women, and people with
disabilities are considered to be underrepresented minorities (URMs) in STEM (NSF,
2015). This is a major problem both for educational justice and for the advancement of
human knowledge and technology. Diverse groups contain varying perspectives and
voices to overcome tough issues, homogeneous groups on the other hand do not breed as
10
much “creativity and effectiveness while solving problems” (Oyana, 2015). To have an
effective and equitable STEM workforce the representation gap in STEM must be closed.
There has been a great deal of time and energy dedicated to increasing diversity in
STEM; the issue has risen to become a national priority attached to overall STEM
education and literacy. In fact, there is a biennial report produced, mandated by the
Science and Engineering Equal Opportunities Act (Public Law 96-516), titled Women,
Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering that looks at
participation of various groups in STEM across higher education. The findings of this
report show that while some incremental improvements to diversity in STEM have
occurred over time, large strides in amassed diversity have yet to be observed.
Researchers are investigating the reasons behind this trend and practitioners are
attempting to reverse it. The hope is that by understanding the factors that contribute to
URMs recruitment, retention, and success in STEM fields the climate of STEM can
evolve to better solicit URM participation and achievement.
Concerns about equity in STEM mirror similar discussions within
environmentalism; contributors must be representative of the global community. When
combatting current and future environmental issues, including global climate change and
accompanying social justice issues, it is imperative to include viewpoints from a wide
range of stakeholders. Climate change reflects the collective power of humanity and it
will take a broadminded global society to solve the complex problems we now are facing.
This fact demands that all people have access to education and resources that can allow
them to reach their highest potential, not only for individual fairness, but also for the
greater good of life on our planet.
11
In the past, some of the largest criticisms of environmentalism have focused on
the race and class privilege of many of its proponents and endeavors. Critics have
challenged the values and vision of western environmentalism as catering to a
predominately white and colonial viewpoint (Adam and Mulligan, 2003). Fortunately, the
field of Environmental Justice (EJ) rose in response to environmental racism and the
systemic exclusion of people of color and others from less privileged backgrounds from
standard environmentalism. Through activism, lawsuits, and legislation, EJ has added a
dialogue of anti-oppression and a social justice orientation to the modern definition of
environmentalism. EJ focuses on the “fair treatment and meaningful involvement of all
people regardless of race, color, national origin, or income with respect to the
development, implementation, and enforcement of environmental laws, regulations, and
policies” (EPA, 2016). While EJ has come a long way, there are still many battles ahead,
including most recently a focus on Climate Justice. Taking EJ into consideration shows
how environmental sustainability work is not separate from issues of social justice and
equity, but innately connected to them. Therefore, sustainability and environmentalism
must aim for solutions that are equitable for all people and include all people in the
process.
In both STEM and the environmental sustainability movement, topics of diversity,
inclusion, and generally equal access for all people have become a worthy priority.
However, there is still a great deal of work to be done to make full equity a reality in
either discipline. Again it is clear that now is the time for changes that support and create
this progress.
12
Sustainability Education
Introducing sustainability topics and classes into conventional school settings is
one of the emerging strategies being considered to move status quo educational practices
in a new direction. Since the early 1990s there has been growing interest in developing
sustainability focused pedagogies for use in higher education (Tilbury, 1995). This type
of Sustainability Education (SE) can be applied in a plethora of ways and take many
forms. The model is flexible and adaptable for use in a variety of classes and
circumstances and shifts depending on the goals of the educator using it. This keeps
course topics and practices relevant and malleable, which is one of the strengths of
implementing Sustainability Education (SE) in a modern classroom. This research aims
to evaluate the impacts of employing an SE curriculum in STEM classes at a tribal
college, in hopes it can create a more advantageous learning environment for Native
students.
Since there are so many ways to apply Sustainability Education, it is impossible to
test a version of the curriculum without defining its specific parameters. For the purposes
of this research, Sustainability Education (SE) will be understood as an interdisciplinary
educational model, which appropriately prepares students for an uncertain future in the
context of global climate change. Although there is no official consensus among
sustainability educators, some version of this definition generally appears in nearly every
study of applied Sustainability Education (SE) (O’Byrne, Dripps, & NIholas, 2015;
Wright and Horst, 2013; Wals, 2014).
To create not only a workable definition, but a usable model, the parameters of
curriculum design, content development, classroom application, and assessment of
13
learning outcomes commonly used in SE must be specified1. The version of SE
implemented in this study draws on modern research and includes a shift in educational
pedagogy comprising of: 1) development of Higher Order Cognitive Skills (HOCS) by
means of problem solving and critical thinking as opposed to rote memorization and
algorithms (Zoller, 2015); 2) integrated, interdisciplinary classes combining topics of
science, technology, environment, society, policy, sustainability, etc. as opposed purely
disciplinary subjects i.e. math, physics, geography, political science, etc. (Coops et al,
2015; Ward et al, 2016). 3) experiential and applied learning opportunities including the
use of learning communities, community based research, mentoring, and dissemination as
opposed to purely lecture and examination (McPherson et al, 2016; Wilson and Pretorius,
2017), and 4) a strong interwoven focus on the environment and social justice,
predominantly scientific and social aspects of climate change, and related global and
local environmental issues (Drolet, Taylor, and Dennehy, 2015; Wiek et al, 2014).
Implementing the SE model within STEM classrooms might just be the change
that STEM needs, and this thesis puts it to the test. The SE curriculum may be beneficial
to Native American students as well as other URMs and would introduce topics of
environmental sustainability to a diverse set of people who may in turn become involved
in the environmental sustainability movement themselves. This could have enormous
impacts for Native American learners and their communities, while more broadly
increasing inclusion and diversity in both environmental sustainability and STEM
education across the country.
1
For more details on how aspects of SE have been applied in other contexts see the Literature Review
chapter. For more details on the exact curriculum used for this research see the Methodology section.
14
Literature Review
Introduction
This section synopsizes research explaining why some groups are
underrepresented in the sciences and the pedagogical approaches can be taken to improve
student success. It examines the strategy of using a science identity framework to create
STEM curricula that works for all students. For one to be successful in STEM, the culture
of these disciplines must somehow align with the identity and motivation of the
individual. For many underrepresented minority students (URMs) STEM fields do not
tend to offer this type of personal connection or relevancy. This can be particularly
detrimental for Native American students, for whom connection to place, traditions, and
community are of utmost importance. Despite these difficulties, some URM students
continue in science, and some teachers have found methods that work. Ample research
has gone into identifying the contributing factors. Although there are many overlapping
reasons that cause Native Americans, women, and other URMs to either persist or fail to
persist in STEM, some of the most important are the development of a science identity, a
connection to practical and socially applicable research, and experiential and community
building opportunities like mentoring and research projects. For Native students in
particular this means implementing culturally relevant science content and learning
activities that sustain a deep connection to place.
Science Identity
The development of a science identity, the psychological process of one being
inspired by STEM to the point of personal relevance, ownership, and integration into the
sense of self is one of the leading factors of success in STEM. Growing research since
15
2000 supports the importance of science identity to STEM success. Brickhouse, Lowery,
and Schultz were some of the first to study, as they described it “how students are
engaging in science and how this is related to who they think they are,” rather than
simply what science facts they know (2000). Utilizing four case studies, each focusing on
a middle school aged, black, female student who self-identified as interested in science,
the researchers thoroughly explored and compared the identities of each student. Results
showed that the girl’s identities interacted with school science identities and that this
interaction played a role in their scholastic experience. The conclusion of this paper
called for further research into science identity and how it correlates to academic
achievement in the sciences. Since then, using a science identity based framework to
understand URM persistence in science has proven to be a robust and trusted method
(Hazari et al., 2010).
In 2007, Carlone and Johnson undertook a longitudinal study aimed at
understanding the experiences of successful women of color in STEM fields to gauge
why some women were exiting the science pipeline. This study tracked 15 successful
women of color throughout their undergraduate, graduate, and science-related careers. By
conducting ethnographic interviews, they found that racial, ethnic, and gender identities
fed into academic performance, recognition, and competence to create each individual’s
science identity. This placed the women into three distinct science identity groups: 1)
research scientists who were “passionate about science and recognized themselves and
were recognized by science faculty as science people”, 2) altruistic scientists who
“regarded science as a vehicle for altruism and created innovative meanings of ‘science,’
‘recognition by others,’ and ‘woman of color in science’”, and 3) disrupted scientists who
16
“sought, but did not often receive, recognition by meaningful scientific others,” (Carlone
and Johnson, 2007). Although they were ultimately successful, the trajectories of the
disrupted scientists were “more difficult because, in part, their bids for recognition were
disrupted by the interaction with gendered, ethnic, and racial factors,” (Carlone and
Johnson, 2007). What differentiated the experiences of these women of color was in how
they were or were not recognized as “science people” by others.
It has been shown that when students can see themselves as “science people” they
are more likely to pursue and be successful in the sciences during college and beyond.
One example of this can be seen in a 2013 study which explored science identity and its
connection to intersectional issues of gender, race, and ethnicity (Hazari, Sadler, and
Sonnert). This research sought to understand what it means to be a “science person”. In
the study, survey data from 7,505 college students who participated in the Persistence
Research in Science and Engineering (PRiSE) project were analyzed. In particular, the
researchers were interested in how students responded to the question “Do you see
yourself as a biology/chemistry/physics person?” Their findings indicate that overall
URMs rank themselves lower than their male, white, and Asian counterparts (Hazari et
al, 2013). Additionally, this research shows that those with reduced science identity are
less inclined to pursue majors or careers in the sciences. These results support other
previous research in the arena and indicate that with greater science identity students may
be more likely to continue in science.
Since science identity has come to the forefront of engaging URMs in STEM,
researchers have turned to studying curriculum, pedagogies, and programs that may
positively impact student’s science identity. One such study investigates the effectiveness
17
of “scientist spotlight homework assignments” to enhance student’s science identity in a
science courses at a diverse community college (Schinske et al, 2016). The goal of these
assignments was to broaden the image of a scientist and thus allow the students to
identify with what it means to be a scientist or science person. Each week students read
academic work done by a unique scientist and were exposed to the scientist’s background
story. Using a pre/post method that analyzed essays written by the students at the
beginning and then the conclusion of the course, they found that the scientist spotlight
assignments were successful at broadening the student’s view of scientists and aiding
development of science identity (Schinske et al, 2016). Furthermore, longitudinal data
showed the effects of the assignments were still present six months after the conclusion
of the course and that there is a positive correlation between study participation, interest
in science, and science grades. This research goes to show that even minor changes in
curriculum or creative tweaks to classroom assignments can have large and lasting
positive impacts on students, their science identity, and success in STEM.
STEM Pedagogies for URM Success
A positive science identity can lead URM students to success in STEM, but
sometimes considering an abstract idea like ‘identity’ can be excessively theoretical and
fail to provide practical solutions. Therefore, many studies focus not on building science
identity directly, but on evaluating applied strategies and practices and their ability to
support and retain diverse students. These studies investigate programs, classes, curricula,
and pedagogies, and analyze their ability to positively impact URM students in STEM. It
has been shown that when college level STEM prioritizes pro-social motivation, practical
and socially applicable research, and provides experiential or community-building
18
learning opportunities, URM students are more inclined not only to persist, but to thrive.
This research purports that these pedagogical approaches are successful because of their
ability to engage students and simultaneously cultivate their science identities.
Philanthropic motivation and the building of science identity are interconnected.
Of interest for this analysis is the altruistic scientist identity, or those who decided to be
scientists in order make the world a better place. These women found success by
creatively defining the purpose of science in their own terms and persevered because of
charitable motivations – they felt connected to science because they saw science as a
means of helping others, improving the world, and creating change (Carlone and
Johnson, 2007).
Indeed, this type of pro-social motivating factor has been documented in other
studies as well (Estrada et al, 2016). For example, women recently surpassed men in their
representation in biological fields (psychology, social science, and life science). Some
research has asserted that women can better connect to the positive social outcomes of
biological scientific research, which may be contributing to this phenomenon. For
instance, in a 2012 study on “Gender Segregation in Elite Academic Science” over 2000
scientists from 100 departments at 30 universities were surveyed and 216 were selected
for in-depth interviews where they were asked about their perceptions of the gender gap
in different scientific fields (Ecklund, Lincoln, and Tansey, 2012). Both the survey and
interviews yielded a few common themes, with one of the most often cited reasons being
“natural differences”, both biological and cultural, between men and women (Ecklund et
al, 2012). Women tended to ascribe these differences to “reasons of emotional affinity”
and described biology as more practical and concrete than theoretical fields like physics
19
(Ecklund et al, 2012). One physicist even said that due to the social benefits she would
rather have cancer research funded than her own work in physics (Ecklund et al, 2012).
This shows that the emotional lure of biological sciences is strong, even in some women
who have chosen to work in the physical sciences.
Furthermore, several studies have shown that not only many women highly value
the social impacts of their scientific work, but so too do many underrepresented minority
(URM) students (Hurtado et al, 2010). Research that surveyed over 26,000 college
students from 160 universities, compiled by the UCLA Higher Education Research Unit,
found that “URM students often leave the sciences due to the perceived lack of social
value or relevance to improving conditions for their communities,” (Hurtado et al, 2010).
While perceived lack of social value causes students to leave the scientific pipeline,
connecting class lessons directly to the values of the students has been shown to have
positive impacts on academic success and persistence in the sciences (Harackiewicz et
al., 2013). Socio-emotional value in scientific research and education is vital for the
participation of URMs in STEM. Perhaps, since it is important for the students’
“scientific labor to have a practical application that benefits society,” scientific
disciplines should take note and markedly introduce the potential social benefits of their
research to young students as they enter the field (Ecklund et al, 2012). This can be
achieved by something as simple as having students do writing activities that connect
STEM topics to their own lives (Hulleman et al., 2010). Therefore, taking measures to
highlight the social importance of STEM could aid the recruitment and retention of
women and URMs in science.
20
Besides STEM content being practical and socially applicable, it is beneficial for
women and URMs if the academic environment provides experiential learning activities
that aid community building. A few examples include mentoring, learning communities,
and research experiences.
Mentoring, by more advanced scientific peers, upperclassmen, graduate students,
postdocs, professors, or professionals has proven to be one of the biggest indicators of
success for women and URMs in STEM (Carlone and Johnson, 2007; Cole, 2008;
Ecklund, 2012; Herrman et al, 2016; Hurtado et al, 2010). One reason for the importance
of mentoring, as documented by Hurtado et al (2010), is that having guidance and
feedback from faculty members and peers aids the development of a science identity.
Students can receive feedback and praise from trusted authorities, which can lead them
on their own path towards success.
In addition, mentors act as role models, which can be especially effective if the
role model is the same gender or ethnicity as the student (Ecklund, 2012). It has been
shown that when students simply receive even small amounts of outreach from a mentor,
in the form of a letter or email, where the role model “normalizes concerns about
belonging and emphasizes the value of a college degree” it can greatly impact student
grades and motivation to stay in STEM (Herrman et al, 2016). Students with mentors can
actively engage with these role models and picture themselves as successful scientists in
their discipline who are part of the scientific community (Ecklund, 2012). Furthermore,
in a study on factors that contribute to persistence and success of Latino students in
STEM fields, it was found that there is a strong positive correlation between “faculty
support and encouragement” and the strength of a student’s GPA (Cole, 2008).
21
Additionally, if students do not have mentors, or have a negative experience with a
mentor, their science identity can be negatively impacted and their chances of success
hindered (Carlone and Johnson, 2007). Therefore, the role of positive mentoring is of
upmost importance for women and URMs in STEM fields.
Mentors offer support and encouragement to URM students in the sciences, but
that needed support can also come from other sources like peer groups and learning
communities. Learning communities, or spaces where groups of people can collaborate
on classwork and work towards shared academic goals, have also proven to be an integral
instrument for supporting URMs and women in STEM (Dagley et al, 2015; Dennis et al,
2005; Hurtado, 2010). For example, students increased their chances of persisting in
STEM by more than 150% if they joined a pre-professional or departmental club in their
first year of college (Hurtado, 2010). It is thought that such learning communities aid
student success by developing their science identity and allowing students to form bonds
with a peer group that shares academic and career goals, motivating students to work
together to succeed (Hurtado, 2010). Additionally, this peer network can work to provide
support for academic achievement including formation of study groups, sharing
knowledge and experience, and advising about which classes to take or research to pursue
(Dennis et al, 2005). A prime example of a successful learning community can be seen in
the University of Central Florida’s STEM EXCEL program. Each year 200 first year
STEM majors join the learning community that has both social and scholastic
components (Dagley et al, 2015). Students involved in EXCEL have a 43% higher
retention rate, and URM students have much higher graduation rates compared to similar
students not involve in the learning community (Dagley et al, 2015). When students bond
22
together, they feel a sense of community, they can see themselves in the struggles and
successes of their peers, and they can cultivate their science identity.
While substantial research shows the positive impacts of such learning
communities, it is important to note that Cole (2008) found a negative correlation
between involvement in co-curricular activities/group studying and GPA of Latino STEM
students. This does not mean that these activities necessarily cause a lower GPA, but
could indicate less time spent “on-task” and deeply focusing on schoolwork (Cole, 2008).
From this it follows that the type and quality of the learning community must be
appropriate and resonate with the desired college learning outcomes to be effective.
However, if properly crafted, like the EXCEL learning community in Florida, learning
communities can act to bring students together and build strong academic bonds, further
connecting women and URMs to science.
Undergraduate research opportunities (UROs) often offer students a combination
of learning communities, mentorship, and hands-on research. UROs have proven to be
essential for the success of all students in STEM, but are particularly important for
women and URMs since they build science identity and increase motivation (Ghee et al,
2016; Hurtado, 2008; Russel et al, 2007). Hurtado (2008) found that for minority students
“participating in undergraduate science research opportunities through structured
programs appears to contribute to persistence and the development of an identity as a
scientific researcher.” Additionally, in their study of successful women of color in
STEM, Carlone and Johnson found that almost every woman they interviewed had
participated in undergraduate research (2007). On the one hand, the women who
developed the most rigorous research scientist identity had partaken in the most positive
23
research experiences where they were included as authors on publications and presented
their work at conferences (Carlone and Johnson, 2007). On the other hand, some of those
with the disrupted science identity had negative research experiences, plagued with
gender discrimination or lack of recognition (Carlone and Johnson, 2007). For better or
worse, this shows just how vital such research opportunities can be in developing science
identities and motivation to continue into a research-oriented career in academia.
Participation in a successful URO strongly impacts student’s interest in pursuing
STEM related careers and graduate studies (Russel et al, 2007). This data, from a survey
of 4500 undergraduates and 3600 faculty, graduate students, and postdoc mentors who
participated in NSF sponsored UROs also found that “among racial/ethnic groups, effects
of UROs tended to be strongest among Hispanics/Latinos and weakest among nonHispanic whites,” (Russel et al, 2007). Research experiences give STEM students the
best look into their future as academics and can be the turning point in many young
scientists’ careers.
There are many ways to broaden participation in undergraduate research and the
impacts can last well into a student’s career. For example, by simply adding research
components to introductory level science courses, institutions can potentially impact a
wide variety of URM students and influence their choices to remain in science. For
instance, Harvey Mudd College in Claremont, California recently updated the curriculum
for their introductory level computer science courses, adding a research and professional
development component. They saw the number of women in their computer science
program grow from 10 to 40% in only five years’ time (Corbett and Hill, 2015).
Additionally, it has been shown that research experiences work to illuminate possible
24
careers within STEM fields and simultaneously motivate students to pursue those
endeavors (Ghee, 2016; Lopatto, 2007). Ghee et al. (2016) surveyed students before and
after the completion of a summer research program for undergraduates. They found that
before the program 60-70% of students reported understanding the graduate school
application process, graduate school life, and careers available in their scientific
discipline; by the end of the summer that number jumped to 90% (Ghee et al, 2016).
Clearly, if more students can have the opportunity to become involved in undergraduate
research then there is a high likelihood of increasing their scientific identity, graduation
rates, and ultimately retention in STEM careers.
Overall, a combination of socially motivated work, hands-on experiential learning
opportunities, and connection to community may work in tandem to increase URM
students’ science identities and propel them to success in STEM.
Native American Teaching and Learning
While there is a plethora of studies that focus on Underrepresented Minority
students (URMs) in the sciences, fewer focus specifically on the needs of Native
American students. Often, studies will group Native learners into the demographic
category of “other” which fails to highlight their unique experiences as science students.
However, many of the strategies that were emphasized in the previous section are also
applicable for Native American students. For instance, Maughan, Bounds, Morales, and
Villegas (2001) highlighted the importance of mentors for Native American learners and
Oatman (2015) showed the significant role identity plays within the science classroom. In
addition, research indicates that interdisciplinary coursework and inquiry-based
approaches to learning facilitate Native student success in the sciences (Roehrig et al,
25
2012). While each of these components contributes to a positive learning experience for
Native students, two of the most important aspects necessary for student success are
place-based learning and culturally sustaining pedagogy (Kowalczak, 2013; McCart et al,
2014; Oatman, 2015; Riggs 2005; Roehrig et al, 2012; Semken, 2005: Sleeter 2012).
Best practices in science education for Native American students includes the
need for place-based curricula. Science classes should offer material that is experiential,
connects students to their homeland, and gets students outside studying familiar
environments from a scientific lens (Riggs, 2005). Riggs (2005) calls for the “explicit
inclusion” of culturally relevant material within science courses, including but not limited
to traditional indigenous knowledge and the involvement of tribal community members
and elders. This pedagogical approach seems to align with the importance of experiential
learning opportunities, socially relevant material, and community focused practices,
which were shown to be pertinent for the success of all URM groups within the sciences.
The biggest difference between what other URMs require and the specific needs for
Native American learners, is the extent to which these practices are important.
Connection to place and community runs deep particularly on traditional lands which
tribes have lived on for hundreds, if not thousands of years.
In an analysis of Native American students that participated in an outdoor STEM
camp, in-depth interviews explored student experiences learning environmental science
in a hands-on and culturally significant way (Kowalcak, 2013). The students described
how the camp provided culturally related material, which made them feel more deeply
connected to their tribe during the scientific learning process (Kowlacaks, 2013).
Additionally, students described the hands-on lessons and place-based scientific research
26
opportunities provided to them at the camp as enjoyable, even though most of them had
referred to themselves as bad at math or disliking science (Kowlacks, 2013). Results
showed the STEM camp influenced the participants’ attitudes about themselves in
relation to science, and that a place-based and culturally connected curriculum can have a
positive influence on students’ science identity. As mentioned in previous sections, the
growth of a positive science identity is crucial for one’s desire and motivation to continue
within in the sciences.
Using a place-based and culturally competent curriculum to teach science to
Native learners is not only good for their psychology, but works to teach complex science
topics. A 2004 study describes the ways in which a science program in the Navajo Nation
used the local environment and traditions to teach geoscience content (Semken). The
course used the local Plateau to introduce topics of geology, which then evolved into
lessons on both climate and environmental quality (Semken, 2004). This allowed for the
students to be introduced to fundamental science subjects including plate tectonics,
mountain building, magnetism, landscapes, fossils, fossil fuels, volcanism, and
groundwater basins in ways associated with their personal lives and the areas in which
they live (Semken, 2004). Each of these topics were also connected to the ancestral
stories of how each of the geological features came to be, which allowed students to hold
both traditional and modern science viewpoints simultaneously. This permits the
dissolution of cultural discontinuity between western science and indigenous life,
empowering students to engage in science in meaningful ways.
Indeed, when a culturally sustaining pedagogy (CSP) is properly implemented in
the classroom it can motivate students by valuing both their identity and cultural
27
expression (Oatman, 2015). Tribal sovereignty, or the recognition that tribes have the
right to full self-governance, should be at the core of CSP teachings (McCarty et al, 2014;
Oatman, 2015). Material taught in class should be cognizant of colonizing influences and
should also make space for the reclamation of Indigenous language and culture (McCarty
et al, 2014). Often this means that the course curriculum should engage in communitybased research and educational activities, while also offering students the opportunity to
critique social issues and institutions surrounding race and inequity (McCarty et al, 2014;
Oatman, 2015). In her 2015 dissertation “Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy in a Science
Classroom: The Phenomenology of the Pit House” Oatman examined students’
experiences in the CSP focused course. Her analysis showed that identity politics and
self-efficacy in science were key themes that emerged from the students’ involvement
(Oatman, 2015). Self-efficacy relates to one’s sense of self and the belief that one can
succeed in a given task, which is intimately connected to identity. Therefore, by virtue of
CSP in the science curriculum, science identity is indeed being impacted.
Despite the best intentions of educators, CSP can be challenging to include in the
classroom, and it has generated some criticism when improperly applied (Nykiel-Herbert,
2010; Sleeter, 2012). Research by Sleeter (2012) points to three main condemnations that
feature an incorrect interpretation and application of CSP: simplification, trivialization,
and substitution of cultural relevancy. For example, to simplify could mean to merely
“celebrate” culture in the classroom, which does not fully constitute culturally relevancy
and therefore does not foster student success (Nykiel-Herbert, 2010; Sleeter, 2012).
Trivilization could indicate an occasional culturally related activity but no further
integration, and substitution avoids discussing issues surround racism and oppression in
28
hopes that talking about tolerance is enough (Sleeter, 2012). Instead, cultural relevancy
must be fully engrained into the curriculum, it should be utilized as a means for learning,
and it must enable students to use their own lives to deepen their scholarship (NykielHerbert, 2010; Sleeter, 2012). In general, it is important for educators not to diminish the
culturally focused parts of the curriculum; they must unequivocally and confidently
incorporate interdisciplinary topics regarding tradition, community, and the history of
colonialism in their courses so that their Native students can triumph.
Conclusions
There must be a paradigm shift within science education to better make space for
women and URM learners, and specifically Native Americans. Dull, theoretical,
individualistic and sterile STEM courses alienate a diverse set of students and appeal
primarily to the status quo scientists: white and Asian men. In order to become more
inclusive, science curricula must make a transition towards place-based activities,
experiential learning opportunities, culturally sustaining pedagogies, community oriented
practices, and generally more socially relevant material.
Thinking back to the description of Sustainability Education (SE), as outlined in
the background section of this thesis, it appears that there is overlap between what the
sustainability education model prescribes for science curriculum and what Native and
other URM students require in order to succeed in STEM. In particular, implementing
Sustainability Education in STEM would be a paradigm shift in higher education; it
would redefine what it means to study science. This offers a chance to redefine the traits
of scientists and could give students new opportunities to imagine themselves as
scientists, thus supporting the development of their science identity.
29
Further, the Sustainability Education in STEM model puts experiential and
community-based learning at its core. There is a strong focus on local research
experiences for students and learning community activities are made a priority in the
classroom. This directly connects to research that has shown how important community
involvement and hands-on learning opportunities are to retain Native Americans and
other URMs in STEM. It has been well documented that URM students respond better to
STEM fields in which the effects of their research can benefit society. Additionally, it has
been shown how crucial it is for Native American students to have culturally sustaining
classroom material that connects to both tradition and institutional inequities. Yet again,
the Sustainability Education (SE) model calls for these interdisciplinary issues to be
included within standard science curriculum. Specifically, the model prepares students to
face the interdisciplinary issues of the Anthropocene and urges them to find creative
solutions to problems like global climate change and local environmental injustice. This
focus on a big, interconnected picture could very well inspire students by allowing them
to emotionally connect with their work and connect it with their lives.
The connections between the SE model and the needs of Native Americans and
other URMs in STEM cannot be overlooked; there is strong potential here to move
science into a new direction that is more appropriately structured for a diverse set of
students to thrive. Currently, there is no research exploring the potential of the
Sustainability Education (SE) pedagogy to engage URMs or Native American students in
science. This research aims to uncover if indeed this SE model creates an advantageous
learning environment for Native Americans within STEM by means of implementing the
pedagogy and interviewing the student participants regarding their experience.
30
Methodology
The goal of this thesis is to understand if implementing the sustainability model
within STEM classes is advantageous for Tribal College students. In order to explore this
phenomenon, it is useful to ask: What are Tribal College students’ perspectives on
learning science through topics in sustainability? Therefore, for this study a purposive
selection of Tribal College students were surveyed and interviewed regarding their
experience participating in a science class that incorporated the sustainability curriculum.
The survey results were analyzed quantitatively to describe students’ attitudes towards
science and sustainability immediately before and after participation in the course, as
well as to describe the demographics of the study group. The interviews were transcribed
and then coded using a phenomenographic qualitative analysis technique, rooted in the
theory of science identity.
Science and Sustainability Courses
The students who participated in this study took either an “Introduction to
Biology” or “Introduction to Geology” science course that incorporated the sustainability
curriculum model. These quarter-long courses are at the freshman undergraduate level
and aimed at students enrolled in Associate Degree programs. Class sizes at this college
are small, there were 6 students enrolled in Biology and 8 enrolled in Geology. Both
courses are described below:
Introduction to Biology: This class utilized inquiry, problem-based learning,
and case study methodology to allow students to directly experience the
scientific method, understand the nature of biological systems, and discover
how matter and energy work in living systems. It also covered the importance
of environmental sustainability in the context of climate change and its
impacts on biological systems.
This class was aimed at providing students with hands-on opportunities to
learn the scientific method and explore real-world concepts and issues.
31
Students gained experience in how scientists explore questions through
inquiry, problem-solving, and critical thinking. Learning themes included:
regulation, structure and function, evolution, community ecology, biological
sustainability, and local biological impacts of climate change.
Essential questions covered in the course include: How do scientists use
the scientific method to solve problems? How do invasive species affect
aquatic systems in the Pacific Northwest? What are keystone and indicator
species, and how can they be identified? How does population adaptation and
natural selection lead to the evolution? How do climate and environmental
factors influence biologic processes? How do we use a decision-making
model to make decisions about biological systems?
Introduction to Geology: This class was designed for students to learn,
through hands-on inquiry, the nature of earth systems and how matter and
energy work in the interior and exterior of the earth. Students worked to
develop a positive attitude towards science while understanding what it means
to learn scientific concepts. They also became more familiar with the geologic
processes associated with climate change and its effects on interconnected
earth systems.
Learning themes included explaining and interpreting geologic processes,
characterizing and explaining the nature of geologic events that could affect
their lives in the Pacific Northwest, interpreting the geologic and
environmental processes involved in forming and changing local and global
landscapes, and understanding the importance of scientific research and
communication, particularly as it relates to environmental issues and
sustainability.
Essential questions covered in the course include: How do scientists use
the scientific method to solve problems? How do geologic processes
contribute to natural disasters in the Pacific Northwest? What is our local
geology and how can it be studied? How do river systems connect to the rock
cycle, sediment transport, and the health of ecosystems? What are fossil fuels
and how are they connected to climate? How do we use a decision-making
model to make decisions about geologic systems?
For both courses, each standard life or earth science module was accompanied
with a topic and activity that highlighted a connected environmental, social, cultural, or
economic sustainability issue. The goal of this was to give meaning to the material in
order to draw students in to the courses in a tangible way, while also increasing their
sustainability literacy. Some sustainability topics that were paired with biological
32
concepts included: climate change and local affects, benefits and costs of genetically
modified organisms, ocean acidification and local shellfish, natural resources and salmon,
tribal fishing rights and protections, symbiotic relationships between native plants and
native bees, and the microbiology of soil and composting. Some sustainability topics that
were paired with geological topics included: No Dakota Access Pipeline/Standing Rock
protests and fossil fuels, natural disasters and traditional stories, climate change and tribal
investments in renewable energy, local mountain glaciology and global warming, river
geomorphology and dam removal, rocks and minerals and global technology economies.
An example of one activity that went particularly well was the water filtration lab.
This lab occurred within the “Sustaining Natural Resources” module of the biology
course when the class was focused on ecosystems, ecosystem services and
bioremediation. The goal was for each student to design and build a water filter using
only a cup and a variety of natural materials. This served a dual purpose of showing how
naturally occurring biological and physical systems provide us with services, like
cleaning our water, while also thinking about sustainable architecture and green building.
After the students built their filters we had a class competition to see whose filter worked
the best. A disgusting mixture of water, oil, dirt, cigarette butts and ash was poured into
each filter and we judged them as a group on drain time and water cleanliness. Then, we
analyzed the results as a class and thought critically about what made some filters work
better than others. This demonstrates a successful science and sustainability education
activity: it offered a remarkable opportunity for hands-on interdisciplinary learning.
When describing these courses it is also important to note that the classes were
designed, implemented, and taught by the author of this study, which presents both pros
33
and cons to the study design. While there is the potential that this introduced bias into the
students’ responses, it is not uncommon for educational research to be undertaken by the
educators themselves (Demircioglu, 2008; Oatman, 2015). In fact, especially in close knit
communities like this Tribal College campus on a reservation, having the interviews
conducted by a well known and trusted educator can illicit more open responses
(Roehrig, Campbell, Dalbotten, Varma, 2012). Details describing how potential bias was
mitigated will be further discussed in the survey and interview portions of the
methodology section.
Student Subjects
Each student enrolled in Biology and Geology was invited to participate in this
study, but it was not a required part of the course. In the end, 9 students participated in
both the pre and post surveys (5 from biology and 4 from geology) and 10 students
participated in interviews (6 from biology and 4 from geology). The following table
describes the demographics of the students:
34
Demographics of Student Participants
Characteristic
Category
Number of Participants
(n)
Percent (%)
Under 18
0
0%
18-24
2
22%
25-34
3
33%
35-50
3
33%
Over 50
1
11%
Native American
or Indigenous
9
100%
Caucasian (mixed)
2
22%
1 (freshman)
5
56%
2 (sophomore)
3
33%
3 (junior)
1
11%
0
4
44%
1 or 2
4
44%
3+
1
11%
Age
Race/Ethnicity
Year in College
Number of previous
college science classes
Table 1. This table shows the self-reported demographics of the students who took part in this study. All students
identified as Native American or Indigenous. Most students were early in their college careers and had taken 2 or
fewer science courses. Student ages varied widely.
35
Surveys
The students who were involved in this study were surveyed immediately before
and after participation in their science course. The 9 students who chose to participate in
this portion of the study took the pre-class survey on the first day of class before
instruction began. They then took the post-class survey on the last day of class, directly
after instruction concluded. Students were surveyed in this way to best gauge the direct
impact of the course on their scientific and environmental interests and engagement.
Additionally, the pre-class surveys were useful to get a picture of the viewpoints of the
students before the course, since in-depth interviews were only conducted after the
course.
The survey instrument consists of 34 questions that were taken from scales
developed and verified by the Cornell Citizen Science group at the Center for
Ornithology. These tools have been validated and are used by numerous organizations to
evaluate scientific and environmental literacy.
Survey data was analyzed using a pre-post method of comparison. This allowed
for changes in student attitudes before versus after the course to be described, explored,
and quantified. Four areas of the survey were analyzed 1) self-efficacy for learning and
doing science, 2) self-efficacy for environmental action, 3) nature relatedness, and 4)
interest in science. These sections were chosen from the Cornell Citizen Science guide of
evaluation instruments used to measure environmental and scientific literacy. Taken
together, the results from these surveys provide a representation of the students’ baseline
feelings towards science and the environment from both a personal and academic stance.
The data were analyzed and interpreted using the methods as outlined on the survey tool
36
scoring instruction guidelines (see Appendix 1). This data can be subject to statistical
analysis, but is primarily used descriptively as the sample size for this study is quite
small.
There is a potential for bias in this methodology specifically because the
researcher is also the classroom instructor and is a part of the close-knit college
community. Therefore, some students had a close relationship with the researcher, which
may have influenced their responses on the surveys. However, potential bias was
mitigated in two main ways: 1) by assuring students that their grades in the course would
not be impacted by the results of their survey and 2) by informing them that honest
answers would be used to help improve future science courses. Additionally, despite the
possible bias, the benefits of having a community member conduct the research far
outweigh the costs. Without having a relationship with the school and the students this
research would likely have never been approved.
Interviews
Students who were involved in the study were interviewed regarding their
experience in the science course within 1 week of completing the class. There were 10
students interviewed overall and each interview session lasted approximately 30 minutes.
The interviews were audio recorded and then each recording was manually transcribed.
The goals of the interviews were to: 1) explore students’ prior and current
perceptions of science and sustainability, 2) explore students’ views toward the science
lessons contextualized in issues of sustainability, 3) describe the students’ views of
experiential learning as it relates to the scientific lessons, and 4) describe students’
perceptions of their ability to take part in scientific and/or sustainable actions. In general,
37
the aim was to understand at a deep level the individual learning experiences of
individual students.
As mentioned above, due to the close relationship between the researcher and the
students who participated in the study, there is a slight concern for possible bias. In order
to minimize this concern, potential bias was mitigated in a few main ways: 1) students
were given a separate time and space to express grievances and/or admiration for the
course as well as to provide feedback on the quality of the teaching, 2) students were told
they were not being tested, there are no right or wrong answers, and responses would not
impact their grades, and 3) students were informed that honest answers would be more
useful in understanding the impacts of the pedagogy and how it should be implemented in
other classes in the future. Again, the benefits of this methodology outweigh the costs of
possible bias since without the close relationship it is unlikely that this research would be
taking place.
The interview prompts were created based on the style of questions typically used
in other studies that are attempting to understand student perceptions (Bradford, 2016;
Diehm and Lupton, 2012). The following prompts were used in the interviews:
•
Describe your experience learning science through the lens of
sustainability.
•
Finish this sentence for me. Sustainability is…
•
Do you see a relationship between science and sustainability? Why or why
not?
•
How do you see your current ability to participate in science?
38
•
How do you see your current ability to contribute to a sustainable world?
Follow up questions included (but were not limited to):
•
What makes you say that?
•
Can you define that term?
•
What do you mean by that?
•
How did you decide that?
•
Did you enjoy that?
•
Can you describe that to me in more detail?
•
How do you know?
•
Has your view on this changed over time?
The qualitative data obtained via the in-depth interviews were analyzed following
the well-established method of phenomenography, combined with the theoretical basis of
science identity. The sample size of 10 participants meets the requirements for qualitative
phenomenology research, which suggests a sample size of 5-25 participants (Cresswell,
1998). When conducting phenomenographic educational research, the aim is to explain
variation in student learning experiences (Waters, 2016). Therefore, the interviews were
as non-directive as possible and the students could take the conversation in whichever
way worked best for them and their communication style.
In analyzing the data, the focus was on a deep understanding of the meaning
behind the descriptions given by the students. To get at the essential meaning of the
experience, a common approach is to abstract out the themes and assign codes to each
one. In phenomenographic research such as this, themes are essential aspects "without
39
which the experience would not have been the same" (Waters, 2016). The themes were
discovered through a thoughtful engagement with the student interviews and multiple,
careful readings of the student responses.
Through this process 35 codes were created that captured the essence of the
students’ experiences and perceptions of learning science through the context of the
sustainability curriculum. The coding process focused on understanding the student’s
words in the context of their life experience, classroom experience, and overarching
science identity. From the original 35 codes, similar codes were grouped together. Two
major grouping were formed: 1) Science Identity Traits and 2) Curricular Comments and
Outcomes. There were 14 codes that fell into the Science Identity Traits group, 13 codes
that fell into the Curricular Comments and Outcomes group, and 8 codes that did not fit
into any predominant thematic category. After the codes were placed into the main two
groups, subgroups were formed by again placing similar codes together. This process
revealed 5 major Science Identity Trait group themes and 4 major Curricular Comments
and Outcomes group themes (figure 1).
40
Figure 1. Breakdown of codes and theme categorization. From a total of 35 major codes two large groups were
formed. Each of those large groups contains major themes that will be further discussed in results.
The overall groupings and subthemes were then analyzed in the context of
previous research in the fields of science identity and sustainability pedagogy in order to
reveal how student identities overlap and interact with the science and sustainability
curriculum. Additionally, the codes were analyzed quantitatively. Co-occurrence tables
were utilized to investigate unique and informative overlaps between codes that
demonstrate students’ learning experiences and highlight their science identities. Finally,
a science identity “thumbprint” was developed for each student to visually and
quantitatively express the differences and similarities in science identity and how that
connects to STEM and sustainability learning. The results from this analysis will be
described in detail in the following section.
41
Results
Two large motifs arose upon analyzing the interview data: 1) each student
exhibited a unique combination of overlapping science identity traits and 2) students
expressed shared attitudes and feelings towards the science and sustainability curriculum.
Survey data supports the findings from the interviews and shows that students
experienced attitudinal changes over the extent of their participation in the science and
sustainability courses.
Survey Data
While there is not a large enough sample size to run statistical analysis on the
survey data, it is possible to look for trends. There were 9 students surveyed immediately
before and after participation in the science course. The surveys aimed to measure
science and sustainability literacy by means of examining interest in science, nature
relatedness, self-efficacy for the environment, and self-efficacy for science. Looking at
the students as a whole, they experienced a positive shift in all 4 categories of the survey
after participation in the course. Overall, the students experienced a 14% increase in
science and sustainability literacy (table 2).
42
Survey Results
Interest in
Science
Nature
Relatedness
Self-efficacy
for
Environment
Selfefficacy for
Science
Overall
Pre-survey
score
3.18
3.80
3.54
2.86
3.30
Post-survey
score
3.65
4.20
4.07
3.42
3.79
Change
0.47
0.41
0.53
0.56
0.49
(% Increase)
(15%)
(11%)
(15%)
(19%)
(15%)
Table 2. Students used a Likert scale from 1 to 5 to self-assess their feelings towards each category (Appendix 1).
Selecting 4’s and higher indicate stronger science and sustainability literacy. This summary table shows that students
score higher in each category after participation in the course.
The surveys also showed that students who started with the lowest scores in each
category were the students who showed the most growth by the completion of the course.
For example, 4 out of 9 students scored low on “self-efficacy for science” at the
beginning of the course with an average score of only 1.8 on the scale. By the end, those
same students scored an average of 3.9 in that category, a 68% increase. Students who
scored higher at the beginning of the class showed little to no change. This can still be
considered as a positive outcome since the students began with strong science and
sustainability literacy and maintained this level throughout the course. Although, it may
also indicate that this curriculum is a more powerful educational tool for beginning
students, early in their science and sustainability careers.
43
Interview Data
The interview data was analyzed under two large overarching categories, which
materialized during the coding process. The first category is “science identity” or how the
students integrated the class material into their personal lives and sense of self. The
second category is “curricular comments and outcomes” wherein students describe their
classroom experience and discuss their attitudes and skills regarding science and
sustainability. The findings from this analysis illustrate how the Sustainability Education
(SE) curriculum impacts individual students on a deeply personal level (science identity)
as well as on a tangible level (curriculum comments and outcomes). Based on the results
of this study, it seems that SE curriculum was beneficial for these Tribal College
students.
Science Identity Traits:
Under the category of science identity five major themes arose, each one correlating to a
style of science identity. These themes can be used to describe the type of scientist with
whom each individual identifies (either fully or partially). I have called the five groups:
1) The Personal Scientist, 2) The Career Scientist, 3) The Family Scientist, 4) The Active
Scientist, and 5) The Cultural Scientist. Each science identity group is described and
analyzed in depth below.
Interpreting the Science Identities
Each student is unique and demonstrated an individual mix of science identity
traits. To highlight these differences, the graph below shows a Science Identity
“Thumbprint” for each student. To create the thumbprint the total number of identity
traits demonstrated by each student was counted. Then, the number of identity traits in
each category was counted so that a percentage corresponding to each identity group
44
could be developed. Every student has a science identity totaling 100%, which is divided
up among one or more of the science identity categories.
Figure 2. This graph shows the Student Identity “Thumbprints” generated from an analysis of the interview data. Each
student has a science identity totaling to 100%, broken down into the percentage of traits from each science identity
category they exhibited.
1) The Personal Scientist
The Personal Scientist Identity belongs to those who are interested in benefiting
their own personal life through science and sustainability. Examples include gardening,
making healthy choices, becoming self-sufficient, personally surviving climate change,
and generally bettering themselves and their local environment.
45
The Personal Scientist identity was the most popular of all identities within the
group of participants. Every participant demonstrated at least some Personal Scientist
identity traits. Personal Scientist traits were mentioned 79 times among the 10
participants. For 7 participants this was the strongest aspect of their identity. For 2
students it was mid-range and for one it was low. One student demonstrated only
Personal Scientist traits. Others showed a very high number of these traits as compared to
the other areas of their science identity.
The most common sub-themes for those expressing Personal Scientist traits
include growing food (mentioned 22 times), being self-sufficient (mentioned 14 times),
making personal lifestyle changes (mentioned 19 times), and caring for health (mentioned
9 times).
There is a lot of overlap between the aforementioned sub-themes within each quote. For
example, many people combined talking about food and health:
“We can do so much stuff from food. Food was one, that's a big thing, especially
in native country where diabetes is a high killer, high cholesterol, high sugars, all that
stuff. Like I said the one [science thing] I'd want to get into is the gardening and stuff.
Would that be a science? I try to stick to everything natural, foods and all that.”
“Yeah, and how to save the storm water, and how to plant stuff that doesn't use
the fertilizer, the round up, or the chemical stuff. You just do it organically… [It’s
science] because you learn like, you don't need chemicals to make your food grow. And
the chemicals affect you, like they affect people thinking of something with their babies or
diseases and stuff.”
46
“And then yeah, you talk about food. We make plenty of food, we have plenty of
food, but protein is expensive. It's difficult to raise, it's... you have to pen it, you have to
feed it, there's a lot of negative to it. But um, if you just harvested fish, you don't have to
feed them. They show up, you're good to go.”
“Because I used to work on a farm and after the first year of working there when
we presented the farm on the first year we went into sustainability where we were using
the seeds of our own crop to spring forth the new crop for the following seasons. And our
focus was to keep the cost minimal at the farm, minimum down, because everything was
going out for free to the tribe, so we did what we can do to sustain the farm, at the
minimum cost for the tribe.”
“Science is in sustainability. I see it because you know, like I said the soil, and
you showed a video about soil and farming. So the soil and the different soils around the
whole world and how certain soils are good for farming. How that the food that comes
from the farming areas get on to our table. You know, how they have to practice the
fertilization and the different, what chemicals are bad, and what they don't want in their
food or want in their plants. How that all affects us.”
“People are like "I have to take omega-3 or omega 6" well you could take this
[Natural and indigenous alternative], it's like 60% of your daily nutrition values and like,
there's food right there. That's a big thing in America, not only just Native country.
America everywhere, starvation, people can't afford even a WalMart stuff.”
47
Many respondents also mentioned that learning about science and sustainability
could help them personally survive and thrive. They stated that by understanding these
topics and living by them they could become more self-reliant:
“[Science and sustainability] are important to survive. Learning to survive every
situation I guess you can say.”
“Because science has to do with living. I mean, what happens if we don't have the
Internet or we don't have no more oil, what if everything just shuts down? You know and
it's good to know about your environment and how to make things work or adapt.”
“Once you start growing your own stuff it's better than going to the super market
and picking up food, groceries that's been there for a couple days and once you figure
out that it's actually really easy to do, to grow your own food and it tastes a lot better and
you know where the actual food is coming out”
“Well, I always say if I ever got my own house I'd like to have solar panels on
there. Not pay an electric bill.”
Additionally, many of the students with the Personal Science Identity felt that
they best way they could contribute to both science and sustainability was by changing
their lifestyles:
“Oh yeah, the more I get more knowledgeable about science and our
environment, the more I make different changes. Don't idle my car, you know, just little
things, there's some things like I have bad habits. Like I use a lot of plastic grocery bags.
I don't bring them back! And I get so mad at myself!”
48
“Recycle more and compost (we learned about that). Compost and try to take
care of the environment better.”
“Yeah, making people aware. Making personal strides myself, it's a little difficult
to do that because you know, then you start thinking well what is the impact of one
person going to do? But then of course that becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy if you can't
chance yourself how can you expect to change other people. So it does start with you,
ultimately.”
“Recycle or reuse, or cut down on less paper products. "Go green". Green like...
we were at [a water park] and everybody had to buy their drinks and I go ‘they should
have those water coolers where they fill up the bottles!’ ”
“Currently, what I can do to contribute to a sustainable world is to ensure that
I'm not using products that are not sustainable. So if I go into a restaurant and they're
using styrofoam, still, which a lot of restaurants still do. You can educate them, you can
let them know, like "Hey, did you realize that styrofoam isn't biodegradable and that it's
going to sit in the landfill forever? You know, there are other products that you can use
and they're actually to the point now where they're not that much more expensive" Like
little things like that.”
“Consume less stuff. Or not consume less, buying less horrible things.”
“I know, my niece, she's trying to ask me "can we do some science"? Cause I
don't know, she's always trying to, and I was like "yeah, we'll do something" and then I
was like, I was telling her "hey if you're going to be a scientist you can't be buying just
49
horrible stuff". She's like "can we buy a science kit?" I was like, "this is just a lot of
plastic and not very biodegradable".
2) The Career Scientist
The career scientist identity belongs to students who are either pursuing a science
degree or career, or who want to utilize science within their career. Examples include
farming, working for their tribe in resource management, or starting a business that
utilizes modern science and technology.
There were 4 participants who demonstrated the traits of a Career Scientist
identity. The theme of careers arose 14 times among these 4 participants. For 2
participants Career Scientist was the strongest part of their identity and for the other two
it represented a moderate portion of their identity. One participant is pursing a science
major and plans to be the head of Fish and Wildlife at their tribe in the future. One
participant is a science entrepreneur who is interested in incorporating science,
sustainability, and engineering into a start-up company. One participant has worked on a
farm that practices sustainable agriculture and might want to pursue this again in the
future. This participant also has a strong personal interest in physical sciences and could
potentially follow that to a career. The final participant is highly interested in a science
career in fisheries biology connected to their tribe and has also thought about teaching
science.
Two Career scientists stated that they already felt confident in their science skills
before taking the course. These students felt the curriculum used was highly beneficial to
their peers who might just be experiencing college level science for the first time:
50
“I really think this is like a recommended class for beginning students. Especially
just to get them, like I said, a little wet into the science field and maybe it might plant
some thoughts into people. I mean; I would probably have been in my degree a lot sooner
if maybe I had taken your class. Because you don't know what's out there in the science
fields, it's so open and confusing almost. And I think this kind of helped.”
“The exposure to science through a sustainable lens can actually create scientists
because there are a lot of people that don't really understand maybe what scientists do so
they take a class that's required of them, they don't really have a major yet and they find
out that they absolutely love science and they love, love the sustainability aspect of it and
then three years later they’re sustainable scientists!”
This sentiment seems to be validated by the aforementioned survey results in
which students who scored lower on self-efficacy for science showed the most
improvement by the end of the course.
One Career Scientist student gained a noticeably stronger interest in pursuing
science from taking the course. The student mentioned using the class as a way to gauge
if a science career really was in their future, and found that many topics in the class
stimulated their interests and motivation:
“I'm kind of hoping like with these two classes, it would, I'd get more of a solid
answer, a solid yes or no, like is [science] something that I could do? Is this something, I
mean, I know I'd like to do it but it's like, can I really do it?”
51
The student went on to describe how classroom activities connected to their
personal interests in rivers, flooding, dams, and fish and how this made them more
interested in pursing a science career:
“I would like to help with the maintaining the fish population… I like to be
outside, figuring things out. I grew up on the rivers so the river has been close to me, has
always interested me because there's so much to it. Especially when you live by a river
that floods... To understand how it works and to maybe prevent future home losses or
property losses or cattle losses also… that would be interesting. The video we watched
about the Elwha River dam, how they were studying the fish in there? That was pretty
neat to me… it was pretty interesting. I was like "oh wow that looks like a lot of fun" You
go out there and you shock the fish and you study them, interesting. Hopefully, if I was to
work with the tribe, which is kind of where I'm going, I would like to do something to
help, help preserve our reservation. Mainly our rivers. I find the river very important.
Given the body is made up mostly of water as well as the earth, so I find water, the rivers,
the ocean, very important.”
All of the Career Scientists were fairly confident in their ability to participate in
science by the end of the course.
3) The Family Scientist
The Family Scientist identity belongs to students who care about science and
sustainability for their family’s sake or for the sake of future generations. Examples
include doing experiments at home with family or children, wanting to have scientific
experiences with family members, and passing on science and sustainability interest and
skills to the next generation.
52
There were 6 participants who showed traits of the Family Scientist identity. The
theme of engaging in science with family arose 19 times among these 6 participants. For
one participant the Family Scientist was their strongest identity. For two participants it
was a moderate portion of their identity and for 3 it was a small part of their identity.
One spoke about gardening, fishing, and hunting with uncles and grandparents as
a child. This student enjoyed learning topics that connected to their upbringing and
family history:
“I think I've always been more of an outdoor person, I remember my uncle on my
mom's side he had a whole garden, big outdoor garden, and a greenhouse and when we'd
go visit him, you know, he'd say, you guys better go out there and get your veggies and…
I was looking at my mom she was looking, it was always cool to go get your own food…
out in the garden and pick it and clean it. So that's always kind of been there and plus
fishing, hunting, just always learned that you take care of [the environment].”
One spoke about completing science activities with their sister and niece on a
regular basis and enjoyed doing experiments in class that could also be completed at
home. When discussing why they enjoyed the water filter project so much they said:
“… It's just good to know. Well, cause I'm hoping, because my sister got stuff to
grow. I'm thinking we're going to do that. Try to start planting our own stuff. But the
filter project it was just fun. It was just fun doing the data. I just liked that one. Just the
mixing everything. It just felt like something me and my niece would do.”
Two spoke about teaching their children how to live more sustainably, by means
of understanding the science-based consequences.
53
“Yeah, I think I can learn more. I have children, you know? Because they, you
know, either they're probably going to have to put me in the ground so I want them to be
able to survive. I want them to be able to take care of themselves. Teach my kids how to
ride horses! Keep taking them to canoe journey. Learn about, you know, how things
grow, it's good to know how to put in a garden, it's good to know about climate change,
and to recycle, to what else, I don't know!”
“Another, well what I was talking about was the compost. You know, learning if
there was a compost site near me. Teaching my son how to recycle. We're actually going
through that phase right now, where he's going through the house and if there's
cardboard or papers that need to be recycled, I send him to the recycling bin almost
every other day.”
Two spoke about sustainability as connected to “7 generations” specifically
focusing on children.
“Plus I feel like if we can remember that it all comes back to us that can provide
the motivation as to why we need to support the other aspects of things. If we remember
that, you know, 7 steps down the line or 7 generations down the line, that could affect
something regarding us or our children, which you could say are us as well, then you're
more motivated to try and keep that process of a circle going but in a positive way, not in
a negative way.”
Two were interested in understanding science and sustainability topics to better
care for the health and well being of their children, either in general, or in the wake of
environmental dangers and climate change.
54
“You know, for my son that has asthma. Or you know learning what fresh air is.
Learning what clear water means. Learning the different things in a river. Like you know,
the fungi, or what do you call those? The moss and how they develop and we know
they're not bad for us, but they are contributing to our air. I guess because if you do have
a kid who does have asthma, or eczema or allergies, those all tie in to one, so you know
just learning what's good for him and what's not.”
Two specifically spoke about children in their lives who are interested in science,
and whom the participants hoped to intellectually stimulate and educate.
“[My son] loves clams. You know learning how to, the sea life, his uncles dive so
he gets to hear that my brothers and them actually want to sit down and talk. They talk
about that stuff and to him that's science. The whole [starfish dissection lab] was science
to him. You know, he wanted to learn more, why was it, why are they like this, why are
they like that? Why did your teacher say this? So it was learning about that, you know,
out of our way, outside of class”
4) The Active Scientist
The Active Scientist identity belongs to students who want to use science
to better understand social and environmental injustices and who care about activism and
societal change. Examples include researching and being involved in the Standing Rock
protests, exploring environmental injustices, and using science to find solutions and gain
understanding of politics.
There were 7 participants who expressed Active Scientist traits. Among these
participants Active Scientist themes were mentioned 14 times. Only one participant had
55
the Active Scientist as (tied) for their strongest identity group. The other 6 participants
experienced a low, but not negligible, level of Active Scientist traits.
Political activism including protesting and forms of direct action were mentioned
4 times by 3 participants. Of these participants 2 focused on the recent Standing Rock and
No Dakota Access Pipeline (No DAPL) protests and one focused on potential future
threats that they would likely fight against. The students seemed to connect these topics
directly to the need for science and research:
“Well the issue with oil, you know, people when they say, we were in Standing
Rock, we were talking about, because they were trying to build a pipeline... and the
reason why there's such a high demand for oil is because of our cars! We all drive cars.
And there's got to be another way of doing this without having to use oil. And that's my
big old, that's my thoughts "well if we don't have oil then what else?" How are we going
to get places? How are we going to get places without oil? And that’s what I want to find
out, I want to research. I want to learn more.”
The students seemed to be inspired to learn more science to better understand
these issues, find alternatives, and fight for their rights.
Three participants in this group lamented the “American way of life” and
understood their gains in science and sustainability as acts of resistance against these
norms.
“Oh yeah, with like the fish hatcheries and they got to study the rivers, study the
water, the fish, the plants around it, the animals, which is, up here they're close to the
army base which is a little more interesting because I don't know, I don't work with the
56
tribe on this but I always would wonder if the army base pollutes our river. I would like
to study it. The thing though would be like if they were dumping in our river and we
didn't know about it, it would be quite the fight to get them to stop because it's the
government against our little tribe, so... It would be, I'd probably get pretty fired up
about it.”
Additionally, anti-capitalist sentiments were expressed 6 times by 4 participants;
again the fight for both science and sustainability resonated with their motivation against
pure profit.
“Well I mean ultimately, cause there's other things that I want to change, but it
comes into the same context, its like well you're not going to change the big people unless
you can change the small people because the big people are the ones doing the most of it.
But just like people say, the real way to defeat big corporations is with your dollar: don't
go to them. And it's the same thing with sustainability. If you want to help the
environment, well then stop doing things that hurt the environment. So it's the same thing,
it all starts small.”
“Well, so I think something maybe individuals should start doing, is they should
start figuring out how to be what they call off grid. But it's like, how can you survive
without taking from these corporations? So something I've always wanted to do, I've
always wanted to create my own [sustainable business]. So, I mean eventually, I'm going
to have to, I'll have to use science if I want to create that.”
“Because if there is sustainable energy then who can make money off of it? Sure
you can get money off of selling the patent but then who would use it? "Oh no we have
57
like 500,000 people and we have this renewable energy source and energy could be free"
Look at Nicola Tesla! Like his way of distributing energy though out New York was
actually very safe and free, but there is no way to control who gets it and how to pay for
it … But since the power company couldn't control who gets power because if someone
doesn't pay the bill you can't just shut of that carrier wave, because if you shut off that
one carrier wave it shuts off the entire neighborhood and city so sustainable energy won't
come around until we get rid of currency.”
Lastly, one student within the Active Science identity group focused on the
societal nature of environmental problems and scientific progress. This student is the
likely social scientist of the group, based on expressed interest.
“Well, each of those aspects are equally important if you're going to consider a
giant social aspect of groups, grouping of people... but personally I think the most
important would be the environmental sustainability because everything else pretty much
depends on the environment working. If you don't have an environment your social
structure collapse. Your social structures develop within an environment. We all come
into the environment, the environment is here before us. In all honesty economics are the
motivation for that sustainability, that's how I see it. So I view the environmental part
being very important and the other two supplemental more or less but in the wider range
of sustainability they all have an equal importance because a lot of people are motivated
by the money in it, or being able, and not necessarily in a greedy sense but being able to
make a living which is important in our day because that how the world works now. So
it's important to sustain the economic aspect just as much as it is the environmental
aspect and they're all interrelated really.”
58
5) The Cultural Scientist
The Cultural Scientist identity belongs to those who understand the importance of
science and sustainability in terms of tribal sovereignty and cultural sustainability.
Examples include connecting science and environmental sustainability to cultural
sustainability, finding science important for traditional reasons, wanting to conserve
indigenous culture, land, and animals, and wanting to use science and sustainability to
benefit tribes.
There were 8 participants who exhibited the traits of Cultural Scientists. This
identity was (tied) for the strongest identity in one individual, was relatively strong for 3
individuals, and was low for 4 individuals. Among the 8 participants in this group,
Cultural Scientist themes arose 25 times.
The idea of sustaining indigenous culture was mentioned 3 times by 2
participants. These students specifically noticed the connection between learning the
necessary science, sustaining the environment, and keeping their culture alive.
“But they started doing the Canoe Journey in Indian Country on the side of the
mountains of all these coastal tribes and it started up in Canada, people from Alaska,
they were all bringing their canoes out on the ocean, in the ocean waters, paddling like
the used to. And even the Indians over on the Eastern side of Washington, from Canada
and all the way down the Columbia river, we used Canoes and we used horses to get
where we needed to go. And we used our canoes and we would meet up and go to
different certain areas like Kettle Falls and we would do our trading, and we would play
our bone games, and do trading… but they brought the canoe journey back in 2005 and
we're showing our people that we can still do this. That the ancestors are not the only
59
ones that are strong, that we can do this too. So I think that if we had to reverse [our
modern lifestyles] in order to save our world then that's something we have to look into.”
All 8 of the students who showed Cultural Scientist identity traits connected their
thoughts to their Indigenous heritage, tribal community, or philosophy. In fact, this was
done 22 times.
“Maybe going together with cultural ways I understand [science] more ‘cause an
example is food sovereignty and biodiversity I would have never thought those two were
the same. I was like, well, that's pretty cool.”
“It seems like more of the non-tribal don't understand what I'm saying when I say
I want to learn everything holistically, because I need to. As a tribal member I have to go
back into my community and know everything.”
“If we're going to talk about food diversity including plants and animals, we can
no longer have that discussion without native diversity. Because they all go together. And
that's true because Native way, we take care of the land a lot. And we know how to make
sure it comes back, we have our feast. Say huckleberry season is right now. You go pick
huckleberries, you’re going to have a big feast at the longhouse and part of it is helping
returning every year. And it's true, you can't just talk like, "we could just replace it, we
could" – No! You got to have indigenous… we have to have indigenous minds as
leadership in there because you can't talk about plant diversity, animal diversity, without
having indigenous diversity because we have more connection with it here than say a
scientist or someone that read about it. We know a lot more, like people from this area
know more about this land than someone who went to school for it.”
60
In general, this group tied culture to their experiences in science and sustainability
and saw science and sustainability as innately connected to who they are as Native
people. Major themes included thinking of sustainability in the “7 generations” context
and maintaining salmon populations. However, there were a wide variety of cultural
connections brought forward by the participants that are best displayed as quotes to
highlight their uniqueness:
“Well in native traditions that's kind of just how it goes you look at everything
and everything should or at least originally recycled into one another whether that was
the food process, whether that was the social aspect weather that was looking at natural
processes in the environment. The circle is considered sacred but ultimately you start to
see in a practical sense how your actions affect the next thing that affect the next thing
that ultimately come back to you anyways so no matter how you structure it if it comes
back to you, to me that makes sense that it operates as a circle even if the circle might go
in 7 different directions. That's how it makes sense to me at least.”
“Yeah, to, to us [the plants are sacred]. From our family back home. So, just
respecting plants and animals. You know, there's always a story and [my son] loves
hearing stories. So just understanding how, how big animals play a role in our tradition,
our every, almost everyday life.”
“Sustainability is thinking 7 generations ahead and understanding that everything
you do, everything we do as a human race is going to impact the people who come after
us. So... Thinking 7 gen. I think when you can start to think 7 gen, you can really push it
out. Push out that timeline and realize that people they’re like "oh an oil spill it's not a
61
big deal, it's not going to do much" but then when you look at oh, that beach can't be
used for so many years now. And you look at dams... they're like ‘oh we'll dam it, what's
the worst that can happen, we'll have plenty of power,’ then 74 years later we're looking
at a significant decline in food for the world. When you think about the Colombia River
being the number one salmon producing river in the lower 48, and now there's no salmon
that pass the Colombia, or pass the Coulee Dam. That was not thinking 7 gen! That was
thinking immediately. It's like when you start thinking delayed gratification you're going
to form a better, better community, as a world community. It's going to be better for
everyone. But when you're that sort sighted you cause devastating impacts to the world!”
“The video it showed the tribe, the Elwha tribe there and how they suffered, with
the loss of their fish which was their source of food and money. It kind of, it hit close to
home because you know, a lot of Natives around here, a lot of tribes they do fish and
bring money in from it and stuff so it was kind of like "oh wow" it kind of, tugged at you a
little bit. And there's a talk about, where I live of them wanting to put a dam on the
River.”
Curricular Outcomes and Comments
Under the second major category “Curricular Outcomes and Comments” 4 major
themes arose: 1) STEM Trauma & Recovery, 2) Science & Sustainability Connection, 3)
Science Skills, and 4) Pedagogy Positives. Each of these themes emerged as students
reflected on their experience in the course, and their thoughts, attitudes, and feelings
towards science and sustainability, as well as the curriculum. Each of the themes is
described in more details below:
62
1) STEM Trauma & Recovery
All ten interviewees mentioned either STEM Trauma or Recovery at least once
during their interview. There were 17 incidences of past STEM trauma that were
discussed. However, increased interest in science and sustainability was mentioned 18
times and a gain in confidence was noted 23 times.
Students often discussed being weak in science and mentioned feeling inadequate
for a variety of topics:
“I mean like a lot of science, biology, you know, but that area is my weakest
subject”
“I think there's different areas of science, isn't there? I could probably get a
different area it's just the molecules and atoms and electrons and all that, that's just
going over my head.”
“On the first day of this class I was like ‘I don't know anything about science,
what am I taking a science class for?’ "
“Yeah, I'm not a really big science person so, when it comes to science I kind of
grit my teeth because I don't like it... I can get excited about it, but then I realize what I
am excited about is something I don't understand.”
Others discussed how they had previously been told they were not good enough
or smart enough to participate in math and science:
“Well, it was in high school many many moons ago. We had to write about
careers, pick three of them. First career was, you know, black jack dealer. The second
63
career was a bartender, and I, you know, I'm kind of searching... I just kind of put fish
hatchery as one of my careers. And I kind of remember my teacher being like "yeah right,
you're not going to go that far", that kind of attitude. And I didn't blame her because I
was a high school drop out, you know I wasn't very studious at that time.”
“When I was a little kid, I've told you, my teacher told us ‘boys are better at math
and science’. Which was cool because I got good at the reading thing and I was like "yes
I don't have to do my math and that's it". Well, I kind of believed it. But as I got older, I
was like ‘no, you're crazy’.”
Fortunately it seems that this class has a positive impact on the students and their
confidence in their science abilities:
“Because for your classes, you just like you jam-packed it with knowledge. It was
just crazy. No! I mean just stuff I never even thought of. It was just, it was awesome.”
“It was kind of like a good beginners course for students just getting in to college.
I think it kind of maybe lightens up, brightens up a light bulb in their head like ‘oh wow,
you know science is kind of more interesting than I thought! It's not about just rocks and
this and that...’ So I think this is a really good subject, especially for beginning students
and that might steer future students into getting into the environmental degree. I actually
do feel like this is something that would be like ‘oh wow I actually like environmental
science, it's not so scary.’ Cause when you think of the environmental science, any kind of
science, you know, it just like ‘I don't think I can.’ “
“I feel like I personally was a lot more involved in it wasn't just a straight lecture,
do this test do this experiment then get out. I feel like everything that was presented to us
64
involved us in some way shape or form it regarded our opinions and validated them. So
in comparison to other science classes I've taken it changed my opinion for the better
regarding science and I would do it again actually.”
“I feel like after this class [my ability to participate in science] increased because
again like I was saying, you have to be aware of things in order to get involved in them.
So I feel like now that I am aware of more things, I could get involved and I could... I
know ways of finding out how to get involved in terms of scientific efforts.”
2) Science & Sustainability
All students interviewed expressed that they understood there to be a connection
between science and sustainability. They mentioned the interdisciplinary aspects 19 times
and generally explained how they saw science and sustainability as connected 23 times.
Some noted how without scientific understand and evidence we would not be able
to tackle environmental sustainability issues:
“[Science and sustainability are] almost one and the same. I mean you need your
science to understand what you're doing. You know, we're a people that need numbers
and substance and tangible information to understand. We can’t just, you know like "oh if
you cut the water off we'll go save the planet!" Where's the proof? So you need that
backup, especially today, we need proof.”
Some describe how working with the tribe requires their knowledge to bridge
science and sustainability in order to solve problems and get work done:
“Well, I have to know from the Salmon restoration, salmon hatchery, near shore,
offshore, I have to know about our climate, I have to know about our timber, our land,
65
our wetlands, our... I need to know how everything works. I have to build relationships
with all these people. All these different entities -- state, federal, and tribal.”
Others had a hard time even parsing science and sustainability apart from one
another:
“I don't think there's a science that doesn't, I guess correlate, with sustainability.
I think anything you, I was trying to think of the sciences but it's like, I think that anything
you talk about in science can relate to sustainability. I think it would be very difficult for
you to come up with one that didn't. I mean, some people, they think geologists don't deal
with that, but we learned that they do.”
3) Science Skills
All of the interviewees mentioned at least one topic related to understanding
science and growing their science skills. There were 23 examples of explicit content
knowledge being shared and 9 time that science skills were mentioned. Science was
defined 10 times and sustainability was defined 28 times. There were 31 instances of how
students thought they could participate in science and 26 instances of how to participate
in sustainability.
Science skills that were stated included experimenting, testing, observing the
natural environment, seeking science information from valid sources, identifying facts,
critical thinking, and asking questions.
A large number of content knowledge facts were also recording during the
interviews. Topics that were cited include correct information about: global warming,
climate change, environmental sustainability, weather patterns, biological impacts,
66
colonization, native plants and animals, fossil fuels, hydrologic fracturing, composting,
soil, sustainable agriculture, photosynthesis, oxygen, biodegradability, wetlands,
economic and social connections, human impact on the environment, earthquakes,
drilling, glaciers, renewable energy, dams and dam removal, river geomorphology,
sediments, tsunamis, genetic modification, bioremediation, ocean acidification and more.
Additionally students were asked to define both science and sustainability. The
answers range greatly, but showed that students had internalized their ideas about both
subjects.
One student defined science as follows:
“Science has to do with like the world, the world around us, and the climate, the
education of science, or biology. Like we learned about soil and how we need it and I just
learned a lot from this class and it's only been like a few weeks.”
One student defined sustainability as follows:
“I think sustainability really is about living on this planet with all of, with
everyone and these creatures in the best way possible and I think that's probably, I mean
it's a very new thought to western culture, whereas, indigenous people, they've been
doing this for, since time immemorial. They've been living sustainable.”
Many saw science and sustainability as generally sharing a definition (as
mentioned in the previous section):
“When it comes to science and how we look at things and how we look at things
and how we observe things, whether that be in a different field of science, biology, or
67
geology, or whatever, it call comes back to being able to sustain it because that's how we
make those observations. We observe that if we don't sustain it, animals for example go
extinct. They weren't sustained and then we are able to observe the negative impacts that
has on the environment. But at the same time because we've let that animal go extinct we
can't observe that now, the scientific process for that has ended. So in order to not only
maintain our scientific observations but increase them, that depends on sustaining what
we have. And increasing what we have.”
These gains in science skills, content knowledge, and the ability to broadly
explain science and sustainability indicate that learning did in fact take place throughout
the course.
4) Pedagogy Positives
There were 8 out of 10 students who mentioned curricular or pedagogical
components of the class and why they like them. These general pedagogical positives
were mentioned 18 times. In particular, “hands-on” labs and classroom activities were
mentioned 16 times. Students were adamant that the amount of hands-on activities made
a large impact for them and that this should be included more heavily in all science
classes:
“Because it seems like you learn more. Seems like, maybe just watching the video
it's telling you but then, hands-on it's like you're actually doing it.”
“I mean it was simple because you know you had us do the little experiment with
how much the water goes through and you know we had to figure out for ourselves how
68
science interacted with just simple things. I mean, simple things that people would think
just plants and soil and just learning how to utilize what we have around us.”
“When you do a lab and you can see all of this sediment that comes out of a free
flowing water and then you see what happens to it when it's dammed, I think it definitely
hits home. And then you realize "oh wow, these things are holding in a lot of sediment"
and then if you've learned about what sediment does for the environment... you're kind of
like ‘oh shoot! That's not good!’ So I think that lab definitely helps.”
The other curricular components that people seemed to like the most include:
interdisciplinary topics, connecting science and sustainability to their lives, practical
applications, covering topics that actually interest them (i.e. sustainability of hemp
production), connection to culture, dissection, experiments, activities that they could do
at home with their families, material that was at a true introductory level, many different
subjects covered in one class, and connecting to local environmental and social issues.
“I thought it was I thought it went over well. I enjoyed the class very much and I
feel that everything that we went over is readily applicable to things that I can do in my
life and things that you can make sustainable or that relate to sustainability more than I
would have initially thought. So in terms of how the class was presented through that lens
of sustainability I thought it was enjoyable and I thought it was very beneficial for my
personal knowledge and actions that I can improve upon.”
“My experience learning science through the lens of sustainability... It was a
good experience. I appreciate that science is being taught through that lens because it's
important that individuals who are going to be going out in the world with their degrees,
69
taking on the world, understand that when they get in to whatever job they may end up in,
that they understand that there are a lot of different things that impact our planet
negatively and they can be the change in their company or their corporation or if they're
scientists themselves they, you know, get that base understanding.”
Overall, all interviewed students had a positive experience in their science course
and saw value in the combined science and sustainability curriculum.
Discussion
In this preliminary examination, the impact of implementing the Sustainability
Education (SE) model in science courses at a Tribal College has shown to be positive.
Students were very receptive to the combined science and sustainability content and
interviews suggest the students see the two disciplines as one interdependent topic. The
results of the surveys indicate that students obtained increases in science and
sustainability literacy at the completion of the course. Interviews revealed that students’
own unique science identities connected to and were supported by the SE curriculum and
students saw increases in their science confidence and skills. Overall, the students
generally enjoyed their experience in the course and saw a pronounced difference
between the class and previous negative and traumatic STEM experiences.
During the interviews, students spoke about the connection between science and
sustainability. All of the students understood the topics to be innately connected and saw
value in learning about both topics simultaneously. In fact, it seems that teaching this way
might actually be specifically useful for tribal work where solving interdisciplinary
problems that connect science, the environment, and the local economy are especially
important. This means that it is useful to implement the Sustainability Education (SE)
70
model in science courses for practical reasons beyond learning basic science skills.
Additionally, students may have been able to easily see science and sustainability as
connected topics because of its similarity to Native Science, wherein science issues and
“ways of knowing” are inherently interdisciplinary and multifaceted. Therefore, the
integrated science and sustainability classroom may be successfully supporting traditional
thought processes and cultural sovereignty.
This curriculum was successful because of its ability to connect with the unique
science identity traits of each student. Additionally, now that five major science identity
groups have been identified, there is a distinguishable path for growth of the SE model
for Tribal College students. The identity categories of The Career Scientist, The Family
Scientist, The Active Scientist, The Cultural Scientist, and The Personal Scientist each
nicely connect with the prescriptions of the applied Sustainability Education (SE)
pedagogy. Therefore, it seems that the SE model does have the ability to positively
impact the science identity of each student, which studies show can lead to long term
academic impacts (Carlone and Johnson, 2008).
In particular, Career Scientists and Personal Scientists need science course
materials to be practical, readily applicable, and connected to real world problems they
may face one day either at work or at home. Meanwhile, the Family Scientists, Cultural
Scientists, and Active Scientists need the course materials to be relevant to lives of those
they love and the needs of their communities. Since most students have a mix of science
identity traits, the science classroom must have a mix of curricular methods. This can be
achieved through many of the recommended pedagogical approaches of SE model
71
including community-based research, mentoring, experiential and applied learning
opportunities, and learning communities.
Beyond connecting course material to personal traits and interests, it is also vital
to consider the past negative and traumatic STEM occurrences many students have
experienced and how the SE model curriculum can be used for mitigation. By resonating
with the students’ personal science identity the SE curriculum can work to further
develop and deepen their sense of science identity. This has been shown to further
improve science confidence and propel students to continue in the sciences (Carlone &
Johnson, 2008). The SE curriculum gives the students the ability to have positive
experiences in the science classroom, which may help to overpower negative experiences
they have had in the past. Due to the redefined nature of the SE curriculum, it seems that
students have an opportunity for validation as budding scientists and they have the
chance to overcome the trauma of not fitting into the ordinary science mold.
Finally, there were specific pieces of the SE pedagogy that stood out to the
students as being particularly useful and rewarding. Students felt very strongly about the
hands-on aspect of the course and echoed again and again the importance of learning
through doing. They enjoyed the experiential opportunities the course provided and cited
them as being the most crucial to their learning and general interest in science. In
implementing this curriculum providing such experiential learning opportunities should
be vital. This might be the most important aspect of the 4 core components of the
curriculum, or at least it was the most tangible part that students actually recognized.
Either way, it is clear from this research that students are very responsive to the
experiential learning aspect of the SE curriculum.
72
Overall, the results of this study support previous research that shows how
important science identity, personal connection, and general relevancy of material are to
Native students as well as others who are typically underrepresented in the sciences.
Based on this research, it seems that implementing the Sustainability Education
curriculum might be one method of progressing science curriculum to better meet the
needs of all students. It would be ideal if a larger scale study could be commissioned to
see if these results hold true at other Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) or with
other groups of marginalized students. Also, it would be useful to tweak the curriculum to
find out which of the core components are truly the most valuable to the students. With
this additional work to corroborate the findings of this study it could be possible to
confidently proclaim that this curriculum is both viable and necessary for creating a more
inclusive and successful science classroom.
73
Conclusion
As a global community we are currently living in tumultuous times. We must deal
with interdisciplinary problems of environmental, social, political, and economic unrest.
One of the largest and most defining issues of this Anthropocene epoch is the everpresent and wicked problem of climate change. In order to overcome climate change, we
must work together to create brilliant and resilient solutions and this cannot occur without
a generation well educated problem solvers and creative thinkers. It is time for academia
to recognize its importance in solving these problems and producing a diverse group
people who are ready for the challenge. In particular, Science, Technology, Engineering,
and Math (STEM) education needs to undergo a paradigm shift towards a more social
and transdisciplinary model of sustainability education for the changing world (Gilbert,
2014). This will help to produce scientists who can not only calculate, but also can think
more holistically and deeply, and apply their complex thinking skills to multifaceted
global problems.
There are many changes that must occur within STEM, especially in higher
education, in order to make the discipline more relevant, useful, and equitable for the
current era. One way that STEM education can evolve is by implementing the
Sustainability Education (SE) model. This means incorporating interdisciplinary topics
into science courses by means of research-based projects, learning communities,
experiential learning, and interconnected issues of local and global sustainability, with
the goal of developing higher order cognitive skills. This could create students better
prepared to analytically tackle modern problems. Additionally, STEM must evolve by
creating a more inclusive environment for people of color, women, Native Americans,
74
and other groups who have been traditionally excluded from science. This needs to
happen not only for general social justice and educational equity, but because we need all
people and all unique points of view in order to combat the combined scientific and
societal challenges we are facing.
This researched aimed to discover if both goals could be met simultaneously. It
looked into the relationship between implementing the SE curriculum in tribal college
science classes and impacts on the students’ science identity and learning outcomes. In
particular, this research asked: What are tribal college students’ perspectives on learning
science through topics in sustainability?
By means of interviews and surveys, students’ experiences in integrated science
and sustainability courses were explored. The findings indicate that indeed science and
sustainability curriculum can be successfully combined and have positive impacts on
students who have been historically underrepresented in the sciences. For instance, the
interdisciplinary aspect of the curriculum proved particularly useful for local tribal work
and community concerns on the reservation. Additionally, the hands-on and experiential
learning approach was especially engaging to the students and worked to increase their
interest in science and science skills. Most importantly, the SE curriculum naturally
found ways of connecting with the student’s personal science identities, which has shown
to be a key component in developing future scientists (Carlone and Johnson, 2008).
These results are from a small, preliminary study, but are positive and useful
nonetheless. There surely need to be more work done to further understand how this type
of curriculum impacts students over time, how it effects other groups of students, and
75
which aspects of the curriculum are more vital to reaching both science and equity goals.
However, these positive results can have immediate use. There was nothing in the
findings of this research that indicate any negative impacts, and overall students were
more thoroughly enjoying their science experience and combatting previous STEM
traumas. Therefore, at minimum the institution where this study took place can continue
to implement these types of STEM courses and hopefully continue to monitor their
impacts on the students.
It appears that by combining science courses with the Sustainability Education
(SE) curriculum an advantageous learning environment was created for the tribal college
students in this study. Research shows that similar pedagogical techniques also tend to be
valuable for other underrepresented groups including women, people with disabilities,
Hispanic/Latino, and black students. Therefore it is possible that by implementing the
Sustainability Education curriculum STEM can evolve to meet the needs of a diverse set
of students while also better preparing all students to solve the complex interdisciplinary
problems that are threatening our global community.
76
Works Cited
Adams, W. M., & Mulligan, M. (2003). Decolonizing nature: strategies for conservation
in a post-colonial era. Earthscan.
Brickhouse, N. W., Lowery, P., & Schultz, K. (2000). What kind of a girl does science?
The construction of school science identities. Journal of research in science
teaching, 37(5), 441-458.
Cajete, G. (2000). Native science: Natural laws of interdependence. Clear Light Pub.
Carlone, H. B., & Johnson, A. (2007). Understanding the science experiences of
successful women of color: Science identity as an analytic lens. Journal of research
in science teaching, 44(8), 1187-1218.
Charnley, S., Fischer, A. P., & Jones, E. T. (2007). Integrating traditional and local
ecological knowledge into forest biodiversity conservation in the Pacific Northwest.
Forest Ecology and Management, 246(1), 14-28.
Cole, D., & Espinoza, A. (2008). Examining the academic success of Latino students in
science technology engineering and mathematics (STEM) majors. Journal of
College Student Development, 49(4), 285-300.
Coops, N. C., Marcus, J., Construt, I., Frank, E., Kellett, R., Mazzi, E., ... & Schultz, A.
(2015). How an entry-level, interdisciplinary sustainability course revealed the
benefits and challenges of a university-wide initiative for sustainability education.
International Journal of Sustainability in Higher Education, 16(5), 729-747.
Corbett, C., & Hill, C. (2015). Solving the equation: the variables for women’s success in
engineering and computing. DC: AAUW.
Dagley, M., Georgiopoulos, M., Reece, A., & Young, C. (2015). Increasing retention and
graduation rates through a STEM learning community. Journal of College Student
Retention: Research, Theory & Practice, 1521025115584746.
Dennis, J. M., Phinney, J. S., & Chuateco, L. I. (2005). The role of motivation, parental
support, and peer support in the academic success of ethnic minority first-generation
college students. Journal of College Student Development, 46(3), 223-236.
Drolet, J., Wu, H., Taylor, M., & Dennehy, A. (2015). Social Work and Sustainable
Social Development: Teaching and Learning Strategies for ‘Green Social
Work’Curriculum. Social Work Education, 34(5), 528-543.
77
Ecklund, E. H., Lincoln, A. E., & Tansey, C. (2012). Gender segregation in elite
academic science. Gender & Society, 26(5), 693-717.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Environmental Justice (2016, February 2).
Retrieved March 06, 2016, from https://www3.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/
Estrada, M., Burnett, M., Campbell, A. G., Campbell, P. B., Denetclaw, W. F., Gutiérrez,
C. G., ... & Okpodu, C. M. (2016). Improving Underrepresented Minority Student
Persistence in STEM. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15(3), es5.
Ghee, M., Keels, M., Collins, D., Neal-Spence, C., & Baker, E. (2016). Fine-Tuning
Summer Research Programs to Promote Underrepresented Students’ Persistence in
the STEM Pathway. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 15(3), ar28.
Gray, D., & Colucci-Gray, L. (2014). Globalisation and the Anthropocene: The
reconfiguration of science education for a sustainable future. Sisyphus Journal of
Education, 2(3), 14-31.
Guerrero, M. J. (2003). “Patriarchal colonialism” and indigenism: Implications for Native
Feminist spirituality and Native womanism. Hypatia, 18(2), 58-69.
Hazari, Z., Sonnert, G., Sadler, P. M., & Shanahan, M. C. (2010). Connecting high school
physics experiences, outcome expectations, physics identity, and physics career
choice: A gender study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 978-1003.
Harackiewicz, J. M., Canning, E. A., Tibbetts, Y., Giffen, C. J., Blair, S. S., Rouse, D. I.,
& Hyde, J. S. (2014). Closing the social class achievement gap for first-generation
students in undergraduate biology. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(2), 375.
Hazari, Z., Sadler, P. M., & Sonnert, G. (2013). The science identity of college students:
exploring the intersection of gender, race, and ethnicity. Journal of College Science
Teaching, 42(5), 82-91.
Herrmann, S. D., Adelman, R. M., Bodford, J. E., Graudejus, O., Okun, M. A., & Kwan,
V. S. (2016). The Effects of a Female Role Model on Academic Performance and
Persistence of Women in STEM Courses. Basic and Applied Social Psychology,
38(5), 258-268.
Hilden, Lee, Suzack, C., Huhndorf, S. M., Perreault, J., & Barman, J. (Eds.). (2011).
Indigenous women and feminism: Politics, activism, culture. UBC Press.
Hulleman, C. S., Godes, O., Hendricks, B. L., & Harackiewicz, J. M. (2010). Enhancing
interest and performance with a utility value intervention. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 102(4), 880.
78
Hobbs, F., & Stoops, N. (2002). Demographic Trends in the Twentieth Century. Census
2000 Special Reports.
Hurtado, S., Newman, C. B., Tran, M. C., & Chang, M. J. (2010). Improving the rate of
success for underrepresented racial minorities in STEM fields: Insights from a
national project. New Directions for Institutional Research, 2010(148), 5-15.
Jostad, P. M., McAvoy, L. H., & McDonald, D. (1996). Native American land ethics:
Implications for natural resource management. Society & Natural Resources, 9(6),
565-581.
Kowalczak, C. C. (2013). Native American Students’ Perceptions of the Manoomin
STEM Camp (Doctoral dissertation, University of Minnesota Duluth).
Kuenzi, J. J. (2008). Science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM)
education: Background, federal policy, and legislative action.
Lopatto, D. (2007). Undergraduate research experiences support science career decisions
and active learning. CBE-Life Sciences Education, 6(4), 297-306.
Maltese, A. V., & Tai, R. H. (2011). Pipeline persistence: Examining the association of
educational experiences with earned degrees in STEM among US students. Science
Education, 95(5), 877-907.
Maughan, O. E., Bounds, D. L., Morales, S. M., & Villegas, S. V. (2001). A successful
educational program for minority students in natural resources. Wildlife Society
Bulletin, 917-928.
McCarty, T., & Lee, T. (2014). Critical culturally sustaining/revitalizing pedagogy and
Indigenous education sovereignty. Harvard Educational Review, 84(1), 101-124.
McPherson, S., Anid, N. M., Ashton, W. S., Hurtado-Martín, M., Khalili, N., & Panero,
M. (2016). Pathways to Cleaner Production in the Americas II: Application of a
competency model to experiential learning for sustainability education. Journal of
Cleaner Production, 135, 907-918.
National Science Foundation, National Center for Science and Engineering Statistics.
2015. Women, Minorities, and Persons with Disabilities in Science and Engineering:
2015. Special Report NSF 15 311. Arlington, VA. Available at
http://www.nsf.gov/statistics/wmpd/
Nykiel-Herbert, B. (2010). Iraqi refugee students: From a collection of aliens to a
community of learners. Multicultural Education, 17(3), 2.
79
O’Byrne, D., Dripps, W., & Nicholas, K. A. (2015). Teaching and learning sustainability:
An assessment of the curriculum content and structure of sustainability degree
programs in higher education. Sustainability Science, 10(1), 43-59.
Oatman, B. J. (2015). Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy in a Science Classroom: The
Phenomenology of the Pit House (Doctoral dissertation, UNIVERSITY OF
IDAHO).
Oyana, T. J., Garcia, S. J., Haegele, J. A., Hawthorne, T. L., Morgan, J., & Young, N. J.
(2015). Nurturing Diversity in STEM Fields through Geography: the Past, the
Present, and the Future. Journal of STEM Education: Innovations and Research,
16(2), 20.
Riggs, E. M. (2005). Field‐based education and indigenous knowledge: Essential
components of geoscience education for Native American communities. Science
Education, 89(2), 296-313.
Roehrig, G., Campbell, K., Dalbotten, D., & Varma, K. (2012). CYCLES: A culturallyrelevant approach to climate change education in native communities. Journal of
Curriculum and Instruction, 6(1), 73-89.
Russell, S. H., Hancock, M. P., & McCullough, J. (2007). Benefits of undergraduate
research experiences. Science(Washington), 316(5824), 548-549.
Sargent Jr, J. F., & Shea, D. A. (2012). The President’s Office of Science and
Technology Policy (OSTP): Issues for Congress. Congressional Research Service.
Schinske, J. N., Perkins, H., Snyder, A., & Wyer, M. (2016). Scientist Spotlight
Homework Assignments Shift Students’ Stereotypes of Scientists and Enhance
Science Identity in a Diverse Introductory Science Class. CBE-Life Sciences
Education, 15(3), ar47.
Semken, S. (2005). Sense of place and place-based introductory geoscience teaching for
American Indian and Alaska Native undergraduates. Journal of Geoscience
Education, 53(2), 149-157.
Sleeter, C. E. (2012). Confronting the marginalization of culturally responsive pedagogy.
Urban Education, 47(3), 562-584.
Smith, L. T. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. Zed
books.
80
Tilbury, D. (1995). Environmental education for sustainability: Defining the new focus of
environmental education in the 1990s. Environmental education research, 1(2), 195212.
Tinant, C. J., Kant, J. M., LaGarry, H. E., Sanovia, J. J., & Burckhard, S. R. (2014).
Building Trust, Experiential Learning, and the Importance of Sovereignty: Capacity
Building in Pre-Engineering Education-a Tribal College Perspective.
Tsosie, R. (2010). Indigenous peoples and global climate change: intercultural models of
climate equity. J. Envtl. L. & Litig., 25, 7.
Ward, M., Bowen, B., Burian, S., Cachelin, A., & McCool, D. (2016). Institutionalizing
interdisciplinary sustainability curriculum at a large, research-intensive university:
challenges and opportunities. Journal of Environmental Studies and Sciences, 6(2),
425-431.
Wals, A. E. (2014). Sustainability in higher education in the context of the UN DESD: a
review of learning and institutionalization processes. Journal of Cleaner Production,
62, 8-15.
Wiek, A., Xiong, A., Brundiers, K., & van der Leeuw, S. (2014). Integrating problem-and
project-based learning into sustainability programs: A case study on the School of
Sustainability at Arizona State University. International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education, 15(4), 431-449.
Whyte, K. P. (2013). Justice forward: Tribes, climate adaptation and responsibility.
Climatic Change, 120(3), 517-530.
Wilson, G., & Pretorius, R. W. (2017). Utilising Work-Integrated Learning to Enhance
Student Participation and Engagement in Sustainability Issues in Open and Distance
Learning. In Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in
Higher Education (pp. 245-257). Springer International Publishing.
Wright, T., & Horst, N. (2013). Exploring the ambiguity: what faculty leaders really
think of sustainability in higher education. International Journal of Sustainability in
higher education, 14(2), 209-227.
Zoller, U. (2015). Research-Based Transformative Science/STEM/STES/STESEP
Education for “Sustainability Thinking”: From Teaching to “Know” to Learning to
“Think”. Sustainability, 7(4), 4474-4491.
81
82
Appendices
Appendix 1
INTEREST IN SCIENCE (Adult version)
The Interest in Science questionnaire on page 3 measures general interest in learning science
topics and engaging in scientific activities among adults. Interest in science is considered a key
driver to pursuing science careers in youth (Tai, et al. 2006, Maltese and Tai 2010) and sustained
lifelong learning and engagement in adults (Dabney et al. 2011, Falk, et al. 2007). We define
interest as it relates to science and the environment as “the degree to which an individual
assigns personal relevance to a science topic, activity, environmental issue, or the scientific
endeavor.” Over time, this type of interest can lead to sustained engagement, motivation, and
can support identity development as a science learner (National Research Council 2009).
About the Questionnaire
The questionnaire contains 12 items total, and can be administered either online, by telephone,
or via paper. It should take about 10 minutes to administer. This version of the questionnaire
can be administered as a pretest and/or posttest. Please contact us if you would like to
administer a retrospective pre-post version of this scale.
This questionnaire was developed and tested in the context of a variety of informal science
learning settings (primarily with participants of Citizen Science projects). Because Citizen Science
participants are typically involved in learning and doing science, we recommend implementing
the full questionnaire.
Cleaning your data
Some project participants will not respond as carefully as you might hope. It is important to
clean your data to account for this. Once you have entered the data into a spreadsheet such as
Microsoft Excel, keep the original as a master, and make a copy from which to work from. Do
the following simple checks:
1.) Go down each row (i.e., individual participant) and look across the set of responses for that
participant – if two or more responses are missing, exclude that row from your analysis.
2.) Once again, go down each row (participant) and look across the set of responses. Then scroll
through the rows looking for sets where all of the responses are the same.
3.)
In general, seeing the same response across all of the items is an indication that the
respondent was not reading the items carefully. We recommend excluding sets where all
answers are the same from your analysis unless the answers are all 3s, as many respondents
do legitimately use midpoint responses to all questions.
83
Scoring instructions
These instructions pertain to the full 16-item questionnaire: Interest in Science (Adult version).
Once you have implemented the questionnaire on page 3 and have your data in a spreadsheet,
calculate a score for interest in science:
1.) Average together the scores for all of the items for each participant (score should be
between 1-5).
2.) You can also average together the overall scores from all of your participants for an overall
group score (score should be between 1-5).
Average scores below 3 indicate low levels of interest in learning or doing science activities.
Note: if you are administering the questionnaire before and after program participation and
comparing the two sets of scores as part of a pre-post evaluation, you might want to consider
first grouping your participants into those who started out relatively low in interest and those
who started out relatively high in interest. While it is reasonable to expect an increase among
participants who started out relatively low, you should not expect to see much, if any, increase
in those who started out already quite high in their interest. You should consider merely
maintaining that high level as a positive outcome.
INTEREST IN SCIENCE (ADULT VERSION) (remove title before administering)
Please indicate how much you DISAGREE or AGREE with each of the following statements by
placing an X in the appropriate column. Please respond as you really feel, rather than how you
think “most people” feel.
Choose one answer in each row.
1. I want to learn more about the
biological sciences (e.g. ecology,
zoology, evolutionary biology).
2. I like to engage in science-related
hobbies in my free time.
3. I want to understand how processes in
nature work (e.g. how birds migrate,
why leaves change color, how bees
make honey, etc.)
4. I often visit science-related web sites.
5. I enjoy learning about new scientific
discoveries or inventions.
Strongly
Strongly
Disagree Neutral Agree
Disagree
Agree
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
84
6. Other people would describe me as a
“science person.”
7. I am very interested in the natural
sciences.
8. I enjoy reading about science-related
topics.
9. I like to observe birds, butterflies,
bugs, or other things in nature.
10. I enjoy talking about science topics
with others.
11. I am interested in learning more about
the physical sciences (chemistry,
physics, astronomy, and geology).
12. I enjoy looking at information
presented in scientific tables and
graphs.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
* This scale is still in development and subject to possible changes as testing continues
NATURE RELATEDNESS (Short Form)
The Nature Relatedness Short Form questionnaire (see page 2) is adapted from the original
Nature Relatedness Scale (Nisbet et al. 2009) and the shortened version (Nisbet et al. 2013). This
scale is intended to measures one’s interest in the natural world. We define interest here as a
tendency to direct one’s attention toward, be aware of, and attribute importance to the natural
world. Interest in the natural world is associated with persistence in the pursuit of positive
environmental activities. This questionnaire was developed and tested in the context of informal
science learning environments (primarily with participants of Citizen Science projects).
Cleaning your data
Some project participants will not respond as carefully as you might hope. It is important to
clean your data to account for this. Once you have entered the data into a spreadsheet such as
Microsoft Excel, keep the original as a master, and make a copy from which to work from. Do
the following simple checks:
1.) Go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that observer – if two
or more responses are missing, exclude that row from your analysis.
2.) Once again, go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that
observer. Then scroll through the rows looking for sets where all of the responses are the
same.
Scoring instructions
Once you have implemented the Nature Relatedness (Short Form) questionnaire and have
85
cleaned your data, calculate the overall scores for individual participants and for the group of
participants as a whole as follows:
1.) Average together the scores for all of the items for each participant.
2.) You can then average together the overall scores from all of your participants for an
overall all group score.
*Note. If you are administering the questionnaire before and after program
participation and comparing the two sets of scores as part of an evaluation of your
program, you might want to consider first grouping your participants into those who
started out relatively low in interest and those who started out relatively high in
interest. While it is reasonable to expect an increase among participants who started
out relatively low in interest, you should not expect to see much, if any, increase in
those who started out already quite interested in the natural world. You should consider
merely maintaining that high level as a positive outcome.
3.) Scores below 3 indicate low levels of interest in the natural world.
NATURE RELATEDNESS (Short Form- adapted) (remove title before administering)
Please indicate how much you DISAGREE or AGREE with each of the following statements by
placing an X in the appropriate column. Please respond as you really feel, rather than how you
think “most people” feel.
Strongly
Disagree
Disagree
1. My relationship to nature is an important part of
who I am.*
2. I feel very connected to all living things and the
earth.*
3. I am not separate from nature, but a part of
nature.
4. I always think about how my actions affect the
environment.*
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
5. I am very aware of environmental issues.
1
2
3
4
5
6. Even in the middle of the city, I notice nature
around me.
1
2
3
4
5
•
•
•
Neutral Agree
Agree
Strongly
This scale is still in development and subject to possible changes as testing continues
* One of the six items included in the Short Version of the scale: Nisbet EK, Zelenski JM.
2013. The NR-6: a new brief measure of nature relatedness. Front Psychol. (4):813.
Nisbet E. K. L., Zelenski J. M., Murphy S. A. (2009). The nature relatedness scale: linking
individuals' connection with nature to environmental concern and behavior. Environ.
Behav. 41, 715–740 10.1177/0013916508318748
86
SELF-EFFICACY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
The Self-Efficacy for Environmental Action questionnaire (see page 2) measures one’s
confidence in their ability to effectively address environmental concerns. Self-efficacy for
environmental action is associated with persistence in the pursuit of positive environmental
activities. This questionnaire was developed and tested in the context of informal science
learning environments (primarily with participants of Citizen Science projects).
Cleaning your data
Some project participants will not respond as carefully as you might hope. It is important to
clean your data to account for this. Once you have entered the data into a spreadsheet such as
Microsoft Excel, keep the original as a master, and make a copy from which to work. Do the
following simple checks:
3.) Go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that observer – if two
or more responses are missing, exclude that row from your analysis.
4.) Once again, go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that
observer. Then scroll through the rows looking for sets where all of the responses are the
same.
In general, seeing the same response across all of the items is an indication that the
respondent was not reading the items carefully. In particular, items 6 and 8 are “reverse
coded,” which means they are worded in such a way that they should receive opposite
answers from other questions if respondents are answering all questions in a consistent
manner. We recommend excluding sets where all answers are the same from your analysis
unless the answers are all 3s, as many respondents do legitimately use midpoint responses
to all questions.
Scoring instructions
Once you have implemented the Self-Efficacy for Environmental Action questionnaire and have
cleaned your data, calculate the self-efficacy score as follows:
4.) Reverse the responses to questions 6 and 8 such that 1s become 5s, 2s become 4s, 3s stay
3s, 4s become 2s, and 5s become 1s.
5.) Average together the scores for all of the items for each participant.
6.) You can then average together the overall scores from all of your participants for an overall
all group score.
87
*Note. If you are administering the questionnaire before and after program participation
and comparing the two sets of scores as part of an evaluation of your program, you might
want to consider first grouping your participants into those who started out relatively low in
self-efficacy and those who started out relatively high in self-efficacy. While it is reasonable
to expect an increase among participants who started out relatively low in self-efficacy, you
should not expect to see much, if any, increase in those who started out already quite
confident in their abilities. You should consider merely maintaining that high level as a
positive outcome.
7.) Scores below 3 indicate low levels of confidence in one’s ability to effectively address
environmental concerns.
SELF-EFFICACY FOR ENVIRONMENTAL ACTION
Please indicate how much you DISAGREE or AGREE with each of the following statements about
your influence on the environment by placing an X in the appropriate column. Please respond as
you really feel, rather than how you think “most people” feel.
Strongly
Disagree Neutral
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
1. I feel confident in my ability to help
protect the planet.
2. I am capable of making a positive
impact on the environment.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
3. I am able to help take care of nature.
1
2
3
4
5
4. I believe I can contribute to solutions to
environmental problems by my actions.
1
2
3
4
5
5. Compared to other people, I think I can
make a positive impact on the
environment.
6.
I don’t think I can make any difference
in solving environmental problems.
7. I believe that I personally, working with
others, can help solve environmental
issues.
8.
It's hard for me to imagine myself
helping to protect the planet.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
* This scale is still in development and subject to possible changes as testing continues
88
SELF-EFFICACY FOR LEARNING AND DOING SCIENCE
The Self-Efficacy for Learning and Doing Science questionnaire (see page 2) measures one’s
confidence in learning science topics, engaging in scientific activities, and more generally in
being a scientist. Self-efficacy for science is associated with persistence in the pursuit of scienceoriented activities. This questionnaire was developed and tested in the context of informal
science learning environments (primarily with participants of Citizen Science projects).
Cleaning your data
Some project participants will not respond as carefully as you might hope. It is important to
clean your data to account for this. Once you have entered the data into a spreadsheet such as
Microsoft Excel, keep the original as a master, and make a copy from which to work. Do the
following simple checks:
5.) Go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that observer – if two
or more responses are missing, exclude that row from your analysis.
6.) Once again, go down each row (observer) and look across the set of responses for that
observer. Then scroll through the rows looking for sets where all of the responses are the
same.
In general, seeing the same response across all of the items is an indication that the
respondent was not reading the items carefully. In particular, items 3 and 7 are “reverse
coded,” which means they are worded in such a way that they should receive opposite
answers from other questions if respondents are answering all questions in a consistent
manner. We recommend excluding sets where all answers are the same from your analysis
unless the answers are all 3s, as many respondents do legitimately use midpoint responses
to all questions.
Scoring instructions
Once you have implemented the Self-Efficacy for Learning and Doing Science questionnaire and
have cleaned your data, calculate the self-efficacy score as follows:
89
8.) Reverse the responses to questions 3 and 7 such that 1s become 5s, 2s become 4s, 3s stay
3s, 4s become 2s, and 5s become 1s.
9.) Average together the scores for all of the items for each participant.
10.) You can also average together the overall scores from all of your participants for an overall
group score.
4.) Scores below 3 indicate low levels of confidence in learning project-related information
and/or participating in project activities. Given that the questionnaire includes separate sets of
items for learning (items 1-4) and doing (items 5-8), you might want to average those sets of
responses (either for individual or group) separately to investigate whether participants are
more or less confident with one or the other concept.
Note that if you are administering the questionnaire before and after program participation
and comparing the two sets of scores as part of a pre-post evaluation, you might want to
consider first grouping your participants into those who started out relatively low in selfefficacy and those who started out relatively high in self-efficacy. While it is reasonable to
expect an increase among participants who started out relatively low in self-efficacy, you
should not expect to see much, if any, increase in those who started out already quite
confident in their abilities. You should consider merely maintaining that high level as a
positive outcome.
SELF-EFFICACY FOR LEARNING AND DOING SCIENCE
Please indicate how much you DISAGREE or AGREE with each of the following statements about
science by placing an X in the appropriate column. Please respond as you really feel, rather than
how you think “most people” feel.
Strongly
Disagree Neutral
Disagree
Agree
Strongly
Agree
These statements are about how you feel about learning and understanding science
topics.
1. I think I'm pretty good at
understanding science topics.
2. Compared to other people my age, I
think I can quickly understand new
science
topics.
3.
It takes
me a long time to understand
new science topics.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
90
4. I feel confident in my ability to explain
science topics to others.
1
2
3
4
5
These statements are about how you feel about doing scientific activities.
5. I think I'm pretty good at following
instructions for scientific activities.
6. Compared to other people my age, I
think I can do scientific activities
7. It takes me a long time to understand
pretty well.
how to do scientific activities.
8. I feel confident about my ability to
explain how to do scientific activities to
others.
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
1
2
3
4
5
91
