"EXAMPLE: Action Research
"Let's Talk": Discussions in a Biology Classroom: An
Action Research Project
PENNY JUENEMANN

Introduction
Action research has provided rne with the opportunity to engage in professional developn1ent enabling n1e to reflect upon my teaching and determine
whether I an1 living up to my values. In this action research project I have
been studying how rny teaching has changed in order to facilitate meaningful
discussions in the classroom, and I have been assessing how these changes
impact my students. The motivation for this study carne from my desire to
have students make connections between what they already know and new
knowledge they encounter in biology. By reflecting upon my teaching I dis­
covered that I was doing most of the biology related talking. As an under­
graduate we discussed the importance of a student-centered classroom and
when I graduated I was confident that I would always be a student-centered
teacher. It has been almost ten years since I received my undergraduate
degree and I haven't always lived up to that value. By increasing my ability
to facilitate 1neaningful discussions I hope to swing the pendulum back to
the students. I teach biology to all tenth grade students and believe that it is
important that students are able to make connections between biology content we cover in the classroorn and the world around them. By engaging in
rnore discussions I believe students' learning will become more meaningful.
Context
During the 2003-2004 school year at Two Harbors High School I taught five
sections of 10th grade biology, one section of 12th grade Advance Placement
biology and one section of 11th and 12th grade physics daily. Each class
had approxitnately 22 students except AP biology which had 8 students. My
action research focused on 1ny 10th grade biology students.

(01)

(02)

Research Questions

How will incorporating more meaningful discussions into my biolof!V classroom affect my teaching and the ability of students to learn?

Sub-Questions

(03)

1- How do I need to change my teaching to facilitate more n1eaningful
discussions in n1y biology classrootn?
2. Will having more 1neaningful discussions allow students to learn
content at a higher level?
3. Will having more 1neaningful discussions help students 1nake
connections between biology content and the world around the1n?
4. Will having more meaningful discussions increase students' ability
to make informed decisions regarding socially and/or ecologically
significant issues?

Theoretical Framework
This paper is about my journey as a teacher through action research. Action
research is a process by which teachers atte1npt to study their proble1ns
scientifically in order to guide, correct, and evaluate their decisions and
actions concerning their teaching and learning. Action research requires the
researcher to be reflective of his or her practice. Through action research the
researcher is striving to live his or her values in the classroorn.

Area of focus: The purpose of
this study is to describe the
impact of biology classroom
discussions (as a teaching inter­
vention) on 10th-grade stu­
dents' knowledge of biology.

(04)

463

(05)

(06)

(07)

(08)

(09)

464

I feel it is important for students to make connections between what they
already know and what we learn in class. To acquire a deep understanding
of cornplex ideas (meaningful learning), students need to rnake connections
between what they know and new knowledge that they encounter. Such an
episternology is referred to as constructivisrn. One of the first philosophers
to explain constructivism was Piaget. The idea can be traced back even fur­
ther to Giambattista Vico in 1710 who proclaimed, "To know means to know
how to make." He substantiates this notion by arguing that one knows a
thing only when one can explain it (Yager, 2000, p. 44).
Through better discussions, students can develop a better understanding
of the content being covered in class. Lord (1994) suggests that "By attempt­
ing to explain what one knows about a problem to someone else, explainers
test the fit of their understanding. Sirnilarly, while trying to understand what
a colleague is saying, listeners question and challenge their own understand­
ing and try to fit the material into their already established cognitive founda­
tions" (Lord, 1994, p. 346-347).
Students must talk about what they are doing, relate it to past experience and then apply it to their daily lives. By discussing problerns that are
relevant to students' lives, but also problerns that contain the biological con­
cepts students are required to know, students will construct their knowledge
in a meaningful way. By monitoring these discussions, teachers can obtain
immediate feedback. If one student is incorrectly explaining rnaterial aloud
to another, the teacher can do irnn1ediate re-teaching. More optimistically,
teachers can also give irnmediate praise.
Early on in my project I realized that it would be important to ask good
questions and monitor student responses and cognition. There are three
domains of learning: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. In 1956, Benja­
rnin Bloom defined the cognitive (tl1e rnental process or faculty of knowing)
do1nain for educators (Henson, 1993, p. 124). He developed a taxonorny
for categorizing questions, objectives, or responses. His six categories can
be divided into two groups, low order and high order. The low order cat­
egories are the simplest and the least demanding, whereas high order cat­
egories require greater understanding and are thus rnore demanding. Low
order categories are knowledge and comprehension. High order categories
involve application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Asking higher-order
questions challenges students to think while promoting learning, as higher­
order questions require students to process infonnation in ways associated
with greater comprehension and understanding. In order for n1e to stirnu­
late meaningful discussions, I need to ask questions of a higher order on
Bloom's taxonomy. Simple knowledge-based questions elicit little discussion.
Another important concept regardirlg questioning is wait time. It is recom­
rnended to wait three to five seconds after asking a question, and again after
tl1e response, in order to give students a chance to think and fonnulate a
high-order response. A third important consideration in questioning is the
use of Socratic dialogue. In Socratic dialogue, teachers respond to students'
questions with questions. It is also very important that students ask ques­
tions. "If we want to engage students in thinking through content we must
stimulate their thinking with questions that lead them to further questions"
(Elder, 1998, p. 298).
After monitoring discussions for about a montl1, I discovered that the
make-up of the group conducting the discussion is important as people learn
ir1 different ways. The rnairl learning styles are visual, auditory, and kines­
tl1etic. Visual learners learn best by seeing, auditory learn best by hearing
and talking, and kinesthetic learners learn best by doing. People can possess
any cornbination of these learning styles, but often times one is dominant.
Through discussions with a critical friend, I decided to try grouping students
heterogeneously by tlleir learning styles. Later on, after readirlg more litera­
ture, I discovered tllat rnany teachers have had success grouping their students

heterogeneously by ability. I then tried arranging my students heterogeneously
by learning style and ability in an atte1npt to improve discussions.
Another path my action research has taken me on is cooperative learning.
Cooperative learning models also recommended that groups be arranged
heterogeneously. In a study conducted on cooperative learning at the college level the researcher said, "We experienced first hand that homogenous
teams are a prescription for disaster in a cooperative learning driven course
... It is important for students from different backgrounds to work together
and learn from each other's perspectives and strengths" (Trempy, 2002,
p. 32). To facilitate meaningful discussions, students need to work together
cooperatively. This practice was reinforced by the results of a questionnaire
I gave my students in which they stated that participation was important
for quality discussions to take place. To address this concern, I began using
some cooperative learning techniques. Cooperative learning is an approach
that encourages students to collaborate with each other to achieve co1nn1on learning goals. According to Johnson and Johnson (1985) one of the
main ele1nents of cooperative learning is "individual accountability," where
every student is responsible for contributing to the group. This can be done
by assigning and checking individual contributions to the group, assigning
roles or jobs to every 1nember, randomly quizzing every n1e1nber over the
material, and/or giving individual tests. Another essential element is "positive interdependence" when students feel they need each other in order
to complete the task successfully. According to Holubec (1992), cooperative learning is also a style that leads toward higher-level thinking. When
students are working together and discussing the material, they will work
beyond the lower-order questions. Within discussion groups, students need
to accept and learn fro1n each other's opinions, strengths, and contributions.
In Lotan's research she found that students can be empowered by this type
of group work, "Group-worthy tasks require students to share their experiences and justify their beliefs and opinions. By assigning such tasks, teachers delegate intellectual authority to their students and make their students'
life experiences, opinions and points of view legitimate components of the
content to be learned" (Lotan, 2003, p.72).
The affective domain, which addresses students' attitudes and values,
is also important in the classroom. Part of my research examined socially
and/or ecologically significant issues, with the hope of encouraging 1noral
growth in my students, helping the1n become more aware of their values and
to allow the111 to make connections between biology and the world around
them (between new and preexisting knowledge). In addition to making necessary connections, hopefully students will improve their critical thinking
skills. Woodn1ff explains how discussing these issues can increase students'
critical thinking skills, "Ethical thinking is neither a n1atter of pure intellect
nor of gut feelings and prejudices. What is ilnportant here is one's reasoning and critical thinking skills. Thus, by strengthening and expanding these
skills, the student will be able to view our ever-changing biological world
from a new perspective, and not be limited by the past or previous belief­
systems" (Woodruff, 1992, p. 2).
In summary, through my action research and 1ny desire to be 1nore of a
constructivist teacher, I have found it necessary to research good questioning skills, higher-order learning, learning styles, and cooperative learning.

(10)

(11)

(12)

Changes in My Teaching Practices
The main focus of my research is on small group discussions, as that is
where more students can participate in a more comfortable environment.
Though I didn't have a defined method of research as I began, I collected
and analyzed data and 1nade what I thought were appropriate changes in my
teaching as I progressed through my action research. The following is a list
of changes that I made.

(13)

Teaching Intervention, based
on promising practices from
a review of related literature,
included the use of question­
ing skills, higher-order learning
(according to Bloom's tax­
onomy), learning styles, and
cooperative learning.

465

1. I increased the number of discussion opportunities in my classrootn.
2. I adtninistered a learning style inventory then arranged students
into groups heterogeneously based on their learning style and
later on arranged students heterogeneously by learning style and
ability.
3. I increased the nu1nber of high-order questions. Throughout 1ny
research I tried to ask higher-order questions according to Bloom's
taxono1ny in hopes that students would increase their higher-order
responses. When preparing discussion questions I referred to Bloo1n's
taxonomy. Also, I tried to keep 1nyself frotn directly answering a
student's question but to guide thetn to their own understanding
through an increase in Socratic dialogue.
4. I used 1nore cooperative learning techniques. Frotn the first
questionnaire that I gave students I discovered that students wanted
everyone to participate more, including the1nselves. I used roles or
jobs within a group, the numbered heads together technique, the
round robin technique, and the jigsaw technique. In the numbered
heads technique, the students were nu1nbered off witlun a group
and told tl1at I would rando1nly pick a person frotn their table to
answer a question. They 1nust work together to make sure everyone
understands the problem. The round robin technique is when each
group has one paper and it is passed around the table for everyone
to contribute to. I used this technique to review the plant kingdo1n.
Students were instructed to make a dichotomous key as a group going
around t11e table until the key was finished. The jigsaw method uses
two groups, a 'ho1ne' group (their original group) and the 'jigsaw'
group. First students start in t11eir home group to discuss the issue,
then t11ey break into their jigsaw group (students are numbered
within their ho1ne group-then all like nu1nbers get together to make
the jigsaw group). Last, students return to their ho1ne group to share
information they collected. While using cooperative learning groups
I had a student mention that discussions should be "worth more"
(referring to points) and it was suggested by a colleague to have
students evaluate each other on their participation. In response to
this I developed a rubric for students to evaluate each other on their
participation.
S. As a way to involve students in discussions, I designed and facilitated
discussions on socially and ecologically significant issues. Ten of the
twenty discussions focused on socially and/or ecologically significant
issues. Some discussions involved scientific articles. First, students
read the articles and answered questions independently. Then they
discussed their answers to the articles using a cooperative learning
technique. Another type of activity I used was dilemma cards, for
example, 'Deer Dilem1na' 1nodified from an activity in Project Wild
where students had to respond to the ecological impacts that the
growing deer population has in our environ1nent and design a solution
as a group. I used the jigsaw method for this activity.
6. Another way to involve students in discussions was by having them
design and carryout Jabs as a group. I provided them with the question
and with some guidelines; guided inquiry. Four of the twenty planned
discussions were designing labs.
Data collection strategies
included questionnaires, inter­
views, journal, audio recordings
of group discussions, and test
scores.

466

Data Collection and Analysis
(14)

Data collection for this study came frotn several sources. To analyze this data
I read through my journal on a regular basis, analyzed student question­
naires, discussed results with my validation team while searching for themes
within the data.

Chart 1

Triangulation ofData
Data Collection Techniques
Research Questions

l

2

3

4
Lesson
Plan
Book

How do I need to change my
teaching to facilitate more
meaningful discussions in my
biology classroom?

Teacher Journal

Student
Questionnaire

Student Interviews

Will having more meaningful
discussions allow students to
learn content at a higher level?

Audiotape of
Discussions

Student
Questionnaire

Unit Tests

Will having more meaningful
discussions help students make
connections between biology
content and the world around
them?

Audiotape of
Discussions

Student
Questionnaire

Student Interviews

Will having more meaningful
discussions increase students'
ability to n1ake informed
decisions regarding socially
and/or ecologically significant
issues?

Student
Questionnaire

Mock situations
where students
use their biology
knowledge and
skills to address a
social or ecological
problem

Student Interviews

Chart 2

Analysis of Biology Tests

Date

Test name

Point total for
higher-order
question/total
point

from higherorder
questions

Number of
tests analyzed

Students'
average
score on
higher-order
questions

% of points

% of points

earned for
higher-order
questions

9/12/03

Microscope and
Scientific Method

10/47

21%

111

6.7

67%

10/10/03

Eukarya Test

13/60

22%

95

8.1

62%

10/29/03

Animal Kingdom

7/22

32%

107

5.4

78%

11/11/03

Bacteria and Viruses

4/22

18%

99

2.6

65%

Teacher Journal

While reflecting on my journal entries I was able to verify the need for this

action research project. In an early entry I was concerned about 'down time,'

(15)

students not engaged and a couple months later was very excited about ini-

tiating a good discussion. Reading journal entries helped guide my teaching.

Student Questionnaires

Students responded to two questionnaires. The greatest benefit frorn the first

questionnaire was that students let 1ne know that participation was critical

(16)

for group work success. One open-ended question on the questionnaire was:
What can I (the teacher) do to inlprove discussions in the classroorn? 8% of

the students responded that I should rnake sure everyone participated. In the

second open-ended question: What can you (the student) do to improve dis­

cussions in the classroorn? 46% of the students responded that they should

participate more. Also, from this first questionnaire, I noticed that students

467

(17)

(18)

(19)

(20)

(21)

(22)

(23)
(24)
(25)

(26)
(27)
468

want to 1nake connections between what we are doing in biology and the
world around them. Two students made this comment, "Have things we may
run into later in life." One student seemed to be aware of the benefit of dis­
cussions to constructivism, "Have a weekly class discussion that involves not
only what we learned but what we know."
In the second questionnaire I noticed that students were still concerned
about participation but they noted several instances when discussions were
better because everyone participated. For example, with the round robin
virus articles a student said, "Everyone participated because they had differ­
ent infonnation." And with the deer dilemma so1ne student co1n1nents were:
"It got everyone involved and participating." "We had to decide so1nething as
a group." "We had good conversations." From the second questionnaire l also
noticed that students enjoyed discussing socially and ecologically significant
articles. A student said, "We shared our point of views and opinions on the
article. So I learned others' thoughts on the article."
In sum1nary, the questionnaires helped guide me in my research by showing how important it was to the students that everyone participates. l also
discovered that students feel it is necessary to make connections between
the biology content and the world around them and that they felt that by
engaging in these discussions helped them to do that.

Unit Tests

When analyzing my tests I used Bloo1n's taxono1ny to detennine if questions
were low or high order questions. Then I studied the students' responses to
determine the percent of points earned on the higher order questions. The
purpose was to see if increases in discussions would lead to more points
earned on higher order questions throughout 1ny research.
From this data I can conclude that I still need to work on writing higherorder questions. I believe the content type influences the amount and type
of questions that are asked.

Audiotapes of Discussions

On seven different occasions I audiotaped discussions. Using Bloom's taxon­
omy I categorized the discussion questions that I designed prior to the discus­
sions and questions that developed during the discussion. When I audiotaped
more than one group I averaged the number of high- or low-order questions.
From this graph I can see that I have increased the number questions that I
am asking and I have increased the amount of high-order questions that I am
asking. However, because this graph con1bines different types of activities, I
graphed the difference between high-order and low-order questions in graph 2.
As indicated by this graph I a1n making progress toward asking more
high order questions compared to low order questions over time.
Student responses fro1n the audiotapes were also categorized using
Bloom's taxonomy.
Again it is important to note that the six discussions in these graphs are
from different types of activities. 9/3 and 11/4 are when students designed
and conducted their own labs within their discussion group. On 9/3 students
had chosen their discussion groups and on 11/4 they were arranged hetero­
geneously by ability and learning style. 9/23 and 11/3 students read articles
and answered questions independently and then discussed tl1eir answers.
On 11/3 they answered their questions using the numbered together coop­
erative learning technique. On 10/2 students were analyzing data from a
lichen field study. On 10/23 students solved the deer dile1nma. On 1/7 stu­
dents responded to an ethical dilemma based on articles they read about
stem cell research.
I graphed the difference between high-order and low-order questions
from 3 in graph 4.
I was excited when I unexpectedly noticed that students had more highorder responses to low-order responses when they were involved in student-

Applying Bloom's Taxonomy

8.

 

7.
Vl

0
Vl
Q)

6.

.c:::::.

5.

.....0 4 .

.::::::::::::;

,c::;;

,c::;;

Q)

3.
.::::::::::::;

2.
1.

0

,c::;;

,J 9/3Iab

9/23article

-'

.c:::::.

-

10/2data

.c::::;;
'

,;:::=.

-'

'

10/23deer 11/3article

11/4Iab

-'

'

1/7dilemma

O Low Order O High Order

GRAPH 1 An evaluation of teacher questions
3

High Order minus Low Order Questions

--

2 - 

(I)
0

1

...
.

0 0

-1

'

.

''

'

'

''

'

'

'

...

-2 - 

9/3 lab

9/23 article

10/2data

10/23deer 11/3article

11/4 lab

1/7dilemma

GRAPH 2 Change in higher order questions
centered activities. The three positive bars are from designing their own
experiments and from the deer dilemma. Even though I increased the num­
ber of higher-order questions with the antibiotic article on 11/3/03, students
responded with a higher number of low-order statements. However, I can
also see that as discussions have increased, there is more being said during
the discussions.
Student Interviews

Fro1n the student interviews, I found that students believe and appreciate
that I am trying to get everyone involved but two of the four were still con­
cerned that everyone doesn't always participate. In response to the question
"What do you like about my teaching?" one student seemed to recognize

(28)

469

Applying Bloom's Taxonomy

12 -

.c:::;

10 gi
8Cl)
.:::::=::;

0
Cl)

0

6.c:::::;

4-

.c:::::;

..c::::

,,c::::.

3-

-

 

20

..::=.

.

9/3 lab

'

'

4Lt= -

9/23 article 10/2 data

'

 

'

10/23 deer 11/3 article

'

11/4 lab

-'

 

1/7 dilemma

□ Low Order □ High Order
GRAPH 3 An evaluation of student responses

8

High Order minus Low Order Responses

- 

-4 -2 -6

(I)

(I)

0

I .

'

.

''

''

'

.

''

'

''

-2 ->-4 ->-

-6 ->-8 _,_

--12 --

-10

9/3 lab

9/23 article

10/2 data

10/23 deer

11 /3 article

11/41ab

1/7 dilemma

GRAPH 4 Change in higher order responses

that discussions help her make connections, "You teach from the book but
then we do other things and we discuss the1n. It sticks really well. When I
first read the chapter I think I'm never going to re1nember but after while it
all clicks together and by the end it's stuck in my brain." Three of the four
students felt that having roles during discussions helped improve the par­
ticipation, and one felt that it worked really well in the deer dile1nma. All
four students felt that grading students on their participation would ilnprove
discussions. Three of the four students felt that discussing socially or envi­
ronmentally significant issues was 1neaningful to them. I asked the following
question: We discussed a couple of socially or environmentally contro­
versial issues-the deer population and the antibiotics-how do you feel
about discussing these types of issues-is it 1neaningful to you? One student
470

responded, "I like to discuss them because it gives you more understanding
of the world around you. 'Cause like I never knew there were so many anti­
biotic resistant bacteria. I learned a lot from that. And then with the deer it
gave me different perspectives because I'1n not the deer hunting type so it
gave 1ne a different perspective of where people are con1ing from. And it is
something you could relate to in your life." A second student responded, "Oh
yeah I take what I think of it and then with the deer you gave us the things
that we had to be, the thing that you gave me was not what I was originally
thinking so it made me think in their point of view which was a lot better
than just staying focused on n1y point of view."
Results

A.s a result of this study many the1nes emerged. In the following cl1art I will
triangulate the the1nes that emerged with the data that was collected.
How Do I Need to Change My Teaching to Facilitate More
Meaningful Discussions in My Biology Classroom?
With the goal of facilitating meaningful discussions in 1ny classroom I have
been 1nore systematic when designing discussion groups and using more
cooperative learning techniques. I have been more thoughtful when designing questions and have required students to be more responsible for their
role within their discussion group. I have been focusing more on problems
of concern to our society. The numbers of discussions that students par­
ticipated in are greater this year than in the past. Students are doing more
guided inquiry activities than in the past. With the greatest challenge, I have
increased the number of higher order questions that I ask.
Will Having More Meaningful Discussions Allow Students to Learn
Content at a Higher Level?
Fro1n analyzing the audiotape transcriptions the length of student discussions
has increased over time; however, this could be due to the type of discussion.
Depending on the type of activity, students increased the number of higherorder responses made during discussions. Student-centered or student-directed
activities see1ned to elicit higher-order responses. Fro1n student responses to a
questionnaire 77% of my students believe discussions help them learn biology
content. I was unable to see any changes in my students' test scores by analyzing points they earned on higher-order questions. Throughout the course
of this project lower-ability students have increased their participation. This
could be the result of a variety of factors such as the heterogeneous grouping,
1naturity, the increase in discussions, and/or other factors.
Will Having More Meaningful Discussions Help Students Make
Connections between Biology Content and the World Around T hem?
Yes. Having meaningful discussions does help students make connections
between biology content and the world around the1n. One piece of data
to support this result is fro111 an audiotape transcription of a discussion on
an article about using hydrogen produced from algae as a fuel source. The
question was: Why would you want to fuel your car with pond scun1? One
student responded, "So we reduce carbon dioxide." Another student in the
san1e group responded, "And we don't need to borrow it (oil) from foreign
countries." The article does not discuss nor had we discussed in class where
our fuel supply currently co1nes from. The deer dilem1na clearly helped stt1dents connect biology to tl1e world around them because many of my students hunt and there were a lot of varying strong opinions. But as students
said on the questionnaires and in interviews, they found it valuable to roleplay a perspective other than their own. It was rewarding to learn fro1n parents that students were discussing these issues at home.

(29)

(30)

(31)

(32)

471

Theme

Data source

Data source

Data source

Increase in discussion opportunities

Lesson plans

Teacher journal

Student questionnaire

Increase in cooperative learning techniques

Lesson plans

Teacher journal

Student interviews

Increase in higher-order questions being
asked of students

Audiotapes of discussions

Unit tests

Teacher journal

Increase in authentic learning through
discussions of socially and ecologically
significant issues

Lesson plans

Audiotapes of
discussions

Teacher journal

A more student-centered classroom

Audiotapes of discussions

Student interviews

Teacher journal

Data analysis and interpretation
resulted in the identification of
the following themes: increas,.
ing the number of higher-order
questions in group discussions
increases student learning;
improved in-class discussion
results in improved student
transfer and application of
knowledge to the world around
them, including the ability to
make better informed decisions
regarding socially and ecologically significant issues.

(33)

(34)

(35)

(36)

(37)

(38)

(39)

(40)
472

Will Having More Meaningful Discussions Increase Students'
Ability to Make Informed Decisions Regarding Socially and/or
Ecologically Significant Issues?
Frorn the second questionnaire 74% of ,ny students felt that discussing
socially and ecologically significant issues will help thern make informed
decisions._From the interviews I discovered that it is through these types of
issues that students are really able to make the connections between biology
and their life. These issues provide the hook that gets students interested in
the problem of study. Frorn interviews students agreed that it is a good idea
to discuss these issues and they are glad that they are informed.
Conclusions
To achieve meaningful learning, I have also considered the four common­
places: teacher, learner, curriculum, and governance.
Teacher
Through action research I have beco,ne a ,nore reflective teacher. I have
studied my teaching and used the data I collected to guide 1ny actions while
continuing to collect data for self-evaluation. Throughout my pilot study con­
ducted last year, and my current project, action research has connected me
to my students. It is their feedback combined with my journal that I have
used to make changes in how I teach!
Because of this project I am living closer to my values. One of the main
motivations for this study was to help students make connections. I have
gained a lot of satisfaction hearing students say that discussions have helped
then1 connect biology to their world.
My classroon1 is a rnore student-centered environment; I am more
learner-sensitive and constructivism is taking place as I am facilitating more
,neaningful discussions. By monitoring students' discussions, I listen ,nore,
detecting misconceptions and giving students inunediate feedback. I learn
fro,n ,ny students.
Action research has given rne a systematic way to make changes in my
classroorn and detennine if those changes are worthwhile. I will continue to
facilitate meaningful discussions and use action research as a tool to evalu­
ate the impact these discussions are having on my students and myself.
Learner
Students are talking about science more in the biology classroom! These dis­
cussions give students the opportunity to share their knowledge and beliefs,
which deepens their understanding through actively discussing and listen­
ing. In the course of these discussions students have acquired meaningful
learning. Through cooperative learning techniques, students began helping
each other in a productive way. Students can learn ,nore in a group than
individually. We are ,nore together than alone.
Curriculum
This project has not required much change in the biology curriculum.
We studied the same problems while I used articles and/or activities to

compliment [sic] these problems. Any extra ti1ne these discussions take is
worth it, because when students can discuss what they know it reinforces
their learning and makes them active learners.
Governance
Currently, the state of Minnesota is in the process of developing a new set of
standards, which at this time looks like biology will have to cover an even
broader range of problems. As teachers are asked to cover more ,naterial in
the same amount of time, it becomes ,nore difficult to set up a learning envi­
ronment that is conducive to meaningful learning. I am confident that student
discussions will be integral to the meaningful learning of these new standards.

(41)

Discussion

Action research has given me the opportunity to study ,ny profession in
a syste,natic way. The part of action research that has always been most
appealing to me is the opportunity to live closer to my professional values.
McNiff says, "Another difference of action research is that it has an explicit
value basis. Your intention as an action researcher would be to bring about a
situation that was congruent with your value position." I have long believed
tl1at students need to visualize that what they are studying fits into tl1e
broader sche,ne of life. Through constructivist methodologies students can
connect what they know and what they have experienced to new pieces of
information. Through this action research project I have been able to live
closer to ,ny values as I facilitated discussions and that helped students make
tl1e biology knowledge fit their prior experiences. Through these discussions
students are able to learn content at a higher level because they are discussing the issues, formulating the infonnation into their own words. I believe
students need to think critically about the world around thetn, by studying
and discussing social and ecological issues students are better able to relate
tl1ese itnportant issues to the biology content they are being exposed to.
The journey we make is not alone-the teacher and the student must
both be active participants. Through this project I have learned a lot from
,ny students and myself. This has been the most itnportant lesson of action
research; that I can effectively make changes in my teaching profession if I
reflect on my own thoughts and the thoughts of my students.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Council for Environmental Education. (2000). Project
Wild K12 Curriculum & Activity Guide.
Elder, L., & R. Paul. (1998). The Role of Socratic Ques­
tioning in Thinking, Teaching, and Learning. Clear­
ing House, 71(5), 297-301.
Henson, Kenneth, T. (1993). Methods and Strategies

for Teaching in Secondary and Middle Schools

(2nd ed.). New York, Longman.
Holubec, E. J. (1992). How Do You Get There From
Here? Getting Started with Cooperative Learning.
Contemporary Education, 63(3), 181-184.
Johnson, D. W., R. T. Johnson, E. J. Holubec, & Roy,
P. (1985). Circles of Learning: Cooperation in the
Classroom. Association for Supervision and Cur­

riculum Development.

Lord, Thomas, R. (1994). Using Constructivism to
Enhance Student Learning in College Biology. Jour­
nal of College Science Teaching, 23(6), 346-348.
Lotan, Rachel, A. (2003). Group Worthy Tasks. Educa­
tional Leadership. March. 72-75.
McNiff, Jean., P. Lomax, & W hitehead, J. 1996. You
and Your Action Research Project. London, Rout­
ledgeFalmer.

(42)

Action plan for future teach­
ing, specifically addressing
the adoption of new state
standards for biology, requires
the implementation of the
teaching strategies identified as being effective for
improved student learning in
this teacher's 10th-grade biol­
ogy classroom.

(43)

Novak, J. D., & Gowin, D. B. (1984). Learning How
to Learn. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.
SchoolNet Grass Roots Program. (2003). GrassRoots
Taxonomy of Thinking Skills. Retrieved from
schoolnet.ca/grassroots/e/project.centre/shared/
Taxonomvy.asp
St. Edward's University Center for Teaching Excel­
lence. (2001). Bloom's Wheel. Retrieved from
easykayaker.com/school/reading/bloon1.html
Trempy, J. E., Siebold, W. A., & Skinner, M. M. (2002).
Learning Microbiology Through Cooperation:
Designing Cooperative Learning Activities that Pro­
mote Interdependence, Interaction, and Account­
ability. Microbiology Education, 3(1), 26-36.
Woodruff, Brian. (1992). Woodrow Wilson Biology
Institute.
Yager, Robert E. (2000). The Constructivist Learning
Model. The Science Teacher, 67(1), 44-45.
Source: From "'Let's Talk': Discussion in a Biology Classroom:
An Action Research Project" by P. Juenemann, 2004, AR Expedi­
tions, arexpeditions.montana.edu. Reprinted with permission.

473

"  what issues did the teacher-researche focus on?, what was the intent of the teacher-researcher?, What is the role of the theoritical franworkj described in the article?, How did the teacher-researcher colelct adn analyze data?, How are the results presented, are they action oriented, how?, Did the action research change the situation presented in the the research ğroblem?