Patricia Goodnight, a biology teacher in Washington, D.C., describes her experiences with INTEC⁵, a yearlong netcourse for math and science secondary teachers, developed by The Concord Consortium and funded by the National Science Foundation (NSF⁶). INTEC engaged over 800 participants across the country and around the globe. Participants learned new tools and technologies as they developed their skills at using inquiry as an instructional approach in their own classrooms. For many participants, the netcourse itself was inquiry in action.

INTEC, the International Netcourse Teacher Enhancement Coalition, is now compiling the stories of participants, including Goodnight's, in a book on inquiry, to be published in spring 2000.

hen I read the overview of the INTEC netcourse as well as instructions for accessing the web site, I promptly wondered aloud why I had ever signed up for the INTEC course. I felt as if I were beginning a long journey through a very dark tunnel. Even after reading the introductory information, I had no idea what to expect: this was my first online course.

I proceeded on my virtual journey while sitting in my basement with a computer. At least there was no dress code and it didn't matter what time of day or night I did my work. The course schedule and assignments were explicit; there was a timeline - with some built-in flexibility - and, of course, deadlines. But, if I needed help understanding the instructions or an assignment, a quick email to the project coordinator or the academic director would bring a response overnight.

The course began with an eye-opener: the first assignment was designed to make INTEC participants - teachers from across the country and in Canada, Russia, and Ireland - aware of the importance of teaching for conceptual understanding and how implementing the inquiry approach facilitates this level of understanding. I asked some of my students, each of whom was assigned a password, to respond online to several conceptual probes (questions) designed to get students to elaborate as much as possible on their answers, thereby enabling the teacher to determine the extent of the students' conceptual knowledge.

For example, students were asked to respond to the following: A container of bleach and ammonia is set up in two rooms with a lab assistant in each room. Which vapor would be detected first, and why?

Invariably, the students indicated that the ammonia would be detected first because it is "stronger."

This was their "private universe": the definitions and explanations by which they make sense of their world. This was an epiphany for me: the first glimmer of light on the far side of the INTEC tunnel.

As I thought about my students' responses, I learned a lot about my style of teaching and how I needed to make some changes in the way I designed my lessons. I would have to restructure them in order to get students to a point where they could demonstrate conceptual knowledge.

For instance, I realized biology can't be taught as a separate entity anymore. A way and time must be found to incorporate chemistry and mathematics. More work for me!

With the gentle prodding from a mathematics colleague, I selected the Calculator Based Laboratory (CBL⁷) module to use for the second half of the course. My colleague was familiar with CBL and thought that if we chose the same practicum, we would have an opportunity to work together as a team. Since I teach biology, it would have been logical for me to select another program, such as BioQUEST⁸ or GenScope⁹ or even Algebra. Any one of the three seemed doable. But my colleague assured me that she would assist me whenever the need arose. I acquiesced - with much trepidation.

When the equipment arrived, I looked at it and wondered, once again, what I had gotten myself into. The light that had briefly shone when doing the conceptual probes had dimmed significantly.

It comes as no surprise that teachers are always busy. Thus began my frustration. I was getting behind with INTEC coursework. While other INTECers were posting their successes - and, admittedly, their own problems - I still had no idea what to even do with the equipment.

Finally, I learned how to set up and use the CBL¹⁰. Some time later, I felt confident about involving my students in an activity.

I planned and implemented the "Use of Sonic Ranger and CBL to Test Hypotheses" activity from the "New Standards High School Science Portfolio: Scientific Tools, Techniques, and Communication Exhibit." With this introductory exercise, I wanted to demonstrate that the CBL provides a link between science and mathematics. Pairs of students learn how to set up the equipment to test their hypotheses regarding the motion required to produce a specific line on the calculator.

The motion detector is a sonar device that emits pulses which are reflected back to it when they reverberate from an object at a distance. The procedure called for the students to draw a line and then write a description of how one has to walk in front of the motion detector to produce this line. Prior to testing the hypothesis, each pair of students had to reach consensus on the hypothesis regarding the type of line that would be produced based on the movement in front of the motion detector. The students had to assemble the equipment, access the correct program which was in the calculator, and include the values for y-minimum and y-maximum. Once they accomplished this, students tested their hypotheses by walking in a prescribed manner. They then determined whether the actual motion in front of the detector produced the same line that was drawn originally.

This inquiry-oriented activity allowed for creativity and discovery. The CBL permits more time to analyze data as opposed to plotting it. Actual distance-time data are generated. The interesting question then becomes "What does this mean?" I observed students thinking logically and asking a lot of "What if" statements. They were developing an understanding about negative and positive slope.

I enlisted the help of other mathematics teachers in my attempt to learn this technology. Thanks to the patience of several mathematics teachers and especially the math department chair, I succeeded. CBL became a sort of buzzword at our school.

At times, we practiced our CBL activities in the hall. The curiosity of other colleagues was aroused as they walked by. As a matter of fact, during a PTA meeting when there was a lull, we seized the moment by setting up the experiment which required temperature probes. We wanted to investigate Newton's Law of Cooling. We assembled our materials and proceeded to collect data. It was refreshing to be part of a group of mathematics and science teachers working together for the common interest of students.

The INTEC⁵ experience was a departure from the mundane "sit and git" type of course that's filled with theoretical jargon about education that is frequently completely devoid of practical application. From the beginning, I involved my students. I felt as if I had a learning laboratory - an inquiry lab, one might say.

The students were learning a technology that was new to them. And I went from knowing nothing about CBL to being a quasi-expert on the technology. I'm now a convert to how valuable this technology is for our students. I saw firsthand how the CBL allows for the integration of the inquiry approach - guided or open-ended - and how students ask more questions, form and test explanations, and use critical thinking skills.

As I reflect on my INTEC experience, I can say that it included an epiphany or two and, of course, the trials and tribulations one expects, though doesn't necessarily prepare for, in life.

Patricia Goodnight teaches biology at Bell Multicultural High School¹² in Washington, D.C.

Copyright © 2000 The Concord Consortium, All rights reserved. Last updated: 1-Feb-00
Questions and comments regarding this site can be sent to webmaster@concord.org¹⁶