How asset-based assessments can revolutionize math instruction

A student writes in a notebook at a desk with a laptop, as her awesome teacher stands beside her. Both appear engaged in conversation about her academic struggles during ELA class.

Many of today’s math classrooms are facing a perfect storm: declining scores, widening learning gaps, and growing pressure on teachers to deliver solutions. According to the National Assessment of Educational Progress, students are experiencing the steepest drop in math scores since 1990. EdWeek Research Center reports that a persistent gap between educational theory and day-to-day practice is putting added stress on teachers, often leaving them to navigate complex pedagogical demands without adequate support.

So how can we provide both students and teachers with the tools they need to succeed? How can math assessments and math intervention programs provide real help and drive student progress—without piling on more work?

One promising answer lies in rethinking how we assess what students know.

Rethinking the role of math assessments

Traditional assessments tend to focus on correctness alone. Did the student get it right or wrong? How many points did they earn?

But this binary approach misses a lot. A skipped question could mean a tech hiccup or a moment of confusion—not a lack of understanding. A wrong answer might come at the end of otherwise solid problem-solving.

An asset-based assessment approach shifts the focus from mistakes to meaning. It looks beyond outcomes to understanding how students think—their strategies, reasoning, and partial understandings. And when teachers can see that thinking, they gain far more useful data to guide instruction and inform their math intervention program.

This approach doesn’t lower expectations—it raises the quality of insight and gives struggling students (and really all students) a better shot at meeting standards with instruction that’s tailored to their actual needs.

Honoring students’ thinking and teachers’ time

Every student thinks differently. Asset-based assessments help reveal individual thinking, often through short-answer or open-response formats that ask students to explain how they solved a problem.

But this shift isn’t just for students. Teachers can benefit enormously when assessments are designed to surface trends in student thinking. If 30% of a class misinterprets the same concept, that result reveals a teaching opportunity. Rather than reteach an entire unit, teachers can adjust with focused, targeted support. That means less time spent diagnosing, and more time actually helping.

And when technology in the math classroom makes this data easy to collect, analyze, and act on, teachers get a level of consistent insight that is not only helpful, but actionable.

From student performance to student performance + thinking

The ultimate goal of asset-based assessments isn’t to replace performance data—it’s to enhance it. Knowing how a student got to an answer (or why they didn’t) can make all the difference in determining what to do next.

Here’s an example involving a division problem:

A wooden table with four chairs is shown. Text explains each table seats 4, the art class has 33 students, and asks how many tables are needed—an example of using technology in the math classroom to boost student engagement.

When real students were given this problem, they responded with answers like:

  • 33/4 = 8.25, round up to 9 so all kids can sit!
  • 33/4 = 8 with a remainder of 1. She needs 8 tables.
  • 8 x 4 = 32, but 9 x 4 = 36. I don’t know if we can leave one student sitting lonely on the floor, though.

Traditional grading might stop at “correct” or “incorrect” for these responses. But when students are asked to explain their thinking, teachers can uncover a range of reasoning—from successful multiplication strategies to misunderstandings about remainders.

These glimpses into student thinking aren’t just informative—they’re transformative. They can illuminate the performance of students in a deeper, more actionable way. They can help teachers take smarter next steps, and they can help students feel understood, capable, and more like “math people” every day.

More to explore

Welcome!

Amplify Science: California Edition is an immersive and engaging core curriculum authored by UC Berkeley’s Lawrence Hall of Science and built specifically for the NGSS.

K–8 Integrated Course Model

Grades 6–8 Integrated Model

Grades 6–8 Discipline Specific Model

Review the digital curriculum

  1. Click on the orange button below.
  2. Sign in with Google with this username and password:

Username: FLsciencestudent@demo.tryamplify.net
Password: AmplifyNumber1

3. Click on the orange Amplify Curriculum button.

Note: You may be asked by Google to provide your location. If this occurs, please type in: Brooklyn, NY. If Brooklyn, NY does not work, type in: Alpharetta, GA . (This is a Google authentication security measure.)

Comprehensive Student Investigation Notebooks

Comprehensive Science 1

Comprehensive Science 2

Comprehensive Science 3

Domain Student Investigation Notebooks

Earth and Space Science

Life Science

Physical Science

Inspiring the next generation of Indiana scientists, engineers, and curious citizens

Amplify Science is a proven effective core curriculum designed for three-dimensional, phenomena-based learning that provides an immersive experience for science students. Amplify Science was developed in partnership with the science education experts at UC Berkeley’s Lawrence Hall of Science.

image of Amplify Science and science classroom materials for science teachers

What is Amplify Science?

Amplify Science is a curiosity-driven science curriculum that empowers students to Do, Talk, Read, Write, and Visualize like scientists. Through phenomena-based, literacy-rich, and interactive learning experiences, students develop as critical thinkers who will gain the skills they need to solve real problems in their communities and the world.

Each unit of Amplify Science engages students in a relevant, real-world problem where they investigate scientific phenomena, engage in collaboration and discussion, and develop models or explanations in order to arrive at solutions.

Grounded in research

Developed by the science education experts at UC Berkeley’s Lawrence Hall of Science in partnership with the digital learning team at Amplify, our program features:

  • A phenomena-based approach where students construct a deep understanding of each unit’s anchor phenomenon.
  • A blend of cohesive storylines, hands-on investigations, lively discussions, literacy-rich activities, and digital tools.
  • Carefully crafted units, chapters, lessons, and activities designed to deliver truly authentic three-dimensional learning.
  • An instructional design that supports all learners in accessing all standards.

See more of our research.

Aerial view of the lawrence hall of science at the university of california, berkeley, showcasing the building and surrounding trees with a foggy city backdrop.
Two boys sit at a desk using a laptop in a classroom. Insets show a close-up of sewing, and a child in rain boots splashing in water.

Instructional model

The Amplify Science program is rooted in the research-based proven effective pedagogy of Do, Talk, Read, Write, Visualize.

Here’s how each element works:

Do

Learners engage with scientific phenomena by conducting student-centered investigations.

Talk

Students engage in collaborative and inquisitive discussions and scientific argumentation.

Read

Reading scientific texts is an act of inquiry: Students ask questions, gather evidence, and make connections through literacy.

Write

Students write to share what they have learned and apply new evidence to strengthen written arguments and explanations.

Visualize

Students gather evidence through simulations, physical models, and modeling tools, allowing them to see and investigate complex, microscopic, or otherwise unobservable phenomena.

What’s included

Flexible resources that work seamlessly together

Four children gather around a desk, engaged in a hands-on activity. Two illustrations frame the main image: a storm cloud on the left and a sea turtle on the right.

Grades K–5 materials

A stack of educational science books, ideal for the curious mind of a science student, with titles like "What My Sister Taught Me About Magnets" and "Made of Matter." Perfectly aligned with any science curriculum to inspire young learners in the classroom.

Student Books

Age-appropriate Student Books allow students to:

  • engage with content-rich texts
  • obtain evidence
  • develop research and close-reading skills
  • construct arguments and explanations
Three science notebooks ideal for the science student, titled "Balancing Forces," "History of Earth and Sky," and "Properties of Matter." Each features colorful illustrated covers that enhance three-dimensional learning in the classroom.

Student Investigation Notebooks

Available for every unit, the Student Investigation Notebooks provide space for students to:

  • record data
  • reflect on ideas from texts and investigations
  • construct explanations and arguments
A digital illustration displays a laptop with screens showcasing environmental graphics, including plants and diagrams, perfect for a science student exploring rich science resources.

Simulations and practice tools (grades 2+)

Developed exclusively for the Amplify Science program, these engaging digital tools:

  • serve as venues for exploration
  • enable data collection
  • allow students to explore scientific concepts
  • show what might be impossible to see with the naked eye


A laptop displaying a web page titled "Spinning Earth" sits next to a book on investigation, ideal for the science student delving into valuable science resources.

Teacher’s Guides

Available digitally and in print, the Teacher’s Guides contain all of the information teachers need to facilitate classroom instruction, including:

  • detailed lesson plans
  • unit and chapter overview documentation
  • differentiation strategies
  • standards alignments
  • in-context professional development
A pegboard with pegs, a small solar panel with clips, and three containers with different powdered substances are perfect science resources for enhancing your science curriculum.

Hands-on materials kits

Hands-on learning is at the heart of Amplify Science. Each unit kit contains:

  • consumable and non-consumable hands-on materials
  • print classroom display materials
  • premium print materials for student use (sorting cards, maps, etc.)

Grades 6–8 materials

A laptop displays a diagram about jellyfish population explosion; next to it is a magazine page featuring a scientist who preserves artwork.

Science articles

The middle school science articles serve as sources for evidence collection and were authored by science and literacy experts at the Lawrence Hall of Science.

Four Amplify Science investigation notebooks are displayed, perfectly enhancing any science classroom with their covers showcasing diverse scientific topics.

Student Investigation Notebooks

Available for every unit, the Student Investigation Notebooks provide space for students to:

  • record data
  • reflect on ideas from texts and investigations
  • construct explanations and arguments
  • Available with full-color article compilations for middle school units
Images of data visualization tools displayed on a laptop, showcasing graphs, maps, and analytical data—essential resources for any science student looking to enhance their understanding through interactive learning.

Digital student experience

Students access the digital simulations and modeling tools, as well as lesson activities and assessments, through the digital student experience. Students can interact with the digital student experience as they:

  • conduct hands-on investigations
  • engage in active reading and writing activities
  • participate in discussions
  • record observations
  • craft end-of-unit scientific arguments


A laptop displaying the Geology on Mars webpage sits beside a book titled "Geology on Mars," both featuring the same cover image of Mars and a spacecraft, perfect for enhancing three-dimensional learning in any science classroom.

Teacher’s Guides

Available digitally and in print, the Teacher’s Guides contain all of the information teachers need to facilitate classroom instruction, including:

  • detailed lesson plans
  • unit and chapter overview documentation
  • differentiation strategies
  • standards alignments
  • in-context professional development
A pegboard with pegs, a small solar panel with clips, and three containers with different powdered substances are perfect science resources for enhancing your science curriculum.

Hands-on materials kits

Hands-on learning is at the heart of Amplify Science. Each unit kit contains:

  • consumable and non-consumable hands-on materials
  • print classroom display materials
  • premium print materials for student use (sorting cards, maps, etc.)
Collage of four images: a hairdryer testing a paper structure in a science classroom, a cartoon monkey on a vine, two kids interacting with a wall activity emblematic of three-dimensional learning, and a hand displaying dinosaur-topped pencils with math cards.

Unit Sequence

Our lessons follow a structure that is grounded in regular routines while still being flexible enough to allow for a variety of learning experiences.

In fact, our multimodal instruction offers more opportunities for students to construct meaning—and practice and apply concepts—than any other program. What’s more, our modular design means our units can be flexibly arranged to support your instructional goals.

A chart lists science topics by grade, from Kindergarten to Grade 5, covering subjects like plants, animals, forces, materials, weather, and Earth systems.
A list of science curriculum topics for Grades 6, 7, and 8, organized under each grade with bullet points for subjects like microbiome, geology, energy, and natural selection.

Contact us

Support is always available. Our team is committed to helping you every step of the way. Contact your dedicated Indiana representative here for program access, samples, and additional information.

A woman with long brown hair and a white top smiles at the camera in front of an orange background, showcasing her passion for the Science of Reading and dedication to Indiana middle school education.

Elizabeth Sillies Callahan

Southern IN
(513) 407-5801

A woman with long brown hair and blue eyes smiles gently at the camera. The background is a light purple circle, reflecting her passion for the Science of Reading and dedication to Indiana middle school education.

Jody Kammer

Central IN
(310) 402-7837

Woman with long brown hair, large black glasses, and a nose ring, wearing a striped shirt and dark blazer, posing in front of a neutral background—professional style suited for the Indiana Department of Education.

Amanda Knipper

Northern IN
(260) 894-5123

A woman with wavy red hair and blue eyes, dressed in a purple turtleneck, smiles at the camera against a dark background—reflecting the approachable spirit of Indiana middle school teachers.

Paige Lawrence

District enrollment below 1200
(980) 421-2608

Welcome, Idaho science reviewers!

To view this protected page, enter the password below:



S4 – 03: LIVE from NCTM with Bethany and Dan

Hosts Bethany and Dan, both smiling, in a promotional image for the "Math Teacher Lounge" podcast, Season 4 Episode 3, titled "Live from NCTM!" with an

In this episode, co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer are LIVE with more than one hundred Math Teacher Lounge listeners at the recent National Council of Teachers of Mathematics conference. Listen in as they answer the pressing question: Who is the best teacher in film or television?

Explore more from Math Teacher Lounge by visiting our main page

Download Transcript

Presenter (00:00):
Ladies and gentlemen, from Math Teacher Lounge, we have Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer! <cheering>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:08):
Doesn’t go well that the door was locked. Like, I could not get in! <Laugh>

Dan Meyer (00:12):
Yeah. Gotcha. All right. We’re gonna sit a little bit. Let’s see how that works—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:16):
Hi!

Dan Meyer (00:16):
Yeah. I think we’ll stand up? Or whaddaya think, sit…?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:19):
Should we stand? Hi.

Dan Meyer (00:22):
Hello. Great to see you folks. Yeah, I can hear you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:25):
Can you hear me? That’s—I know YOU can me. Can you hear me OK? OK! We’re here. Hello. Thank you for like, lining up and coming out and being here. Thank you!

Dan Meyer (00:35):
Means so much to me that you could be here for me, on my show, with Bethany Lockhart Johnson, my co-host. <Audience laughs>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:40):
The hour has just started.

Dan Meyer (00:42):
We’re just getting going. Yeah. If you folks have heard the podcast, you don’t know how much gets cut out. And it’s like, mostly me just having, you know, anxious nerves and saying something silly and then we cut it out and we can’t do that here today. So it should be real fun for all of us, I think. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:55):
It’s not true. It’s mostly dancing. “Bethany, can you stop talking? Bethany?” Cause it’s mostly—

Dan Meyer (00:59):
“It’s my turn. It’s my turn! Bethany <laugh>! I haven’t been heard for a while.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:02):
Dan. We’re at an in-person conference.

Dan Meyer (01:05):
In-person BIG conference, I would say. I’d say a big conference. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:08):
And have you been to the Amplify booth?

Dan Meyer (01:11):
I have! Have these people? There’s a claw machine with free socks.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:16):
Yeah. You’re saving me socks, right? That’s what you’re saying. <Laugh> I mean, it’s exciting. How has your conference been so far?

Dan Meyer (01:21):
So far it’s been a blast. I feel fed. I feel like the community’s been awesome. How are you feeling about it?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:29):
OK. Let’s talk about me for just a second.

Dan Meyer (01:31):
Yeah. Talk about you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:31):
Last night, Dan, was the very first night that I was away from my toddler. <Audience: Aw!>

Dan Meyer (01:38):
Big commitment being here. Thank you.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:40):
I got super-emotional walking back to the hotel after dinner, and then I got in my room, <laugh> I put on pajamas, and I turned on music. I slept so good!

Dan Meyer (01:50):
Yeah. <Audience laughs> Give it up for no kids! <Audience laughs> Hey!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:55):
I love him so much. But I slept all the way through the night. Oh, by the way, I ordered room service in the morning.

Dan Meyer (02:01):
On Amplify.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:01):
That bill’s coming. But it’s been a great conference and I’m so delighted to be here in person and to get to share energy…and hopefully that’s all we’re sharing today. Y’all got your tests, right? Yep. Sharing energy and community today. Because we know it’s been hard. Hardness. Hard.

Dan Meyer (02:25):
Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (02:26):
Years. Hard. And to be in person, I know conferences reinvigorate me and I go back into my educational spaces feeling revitalized with new connections and new ideas to try. So yeah, I’ve been excited to be here. And thank you all for being here.

Dan Meyer (02:40):
Yep. I don’t care if I get six different strains of Covid here. I’m just thrilled to be here. <Audience laughs> I don’t know if you’ve had the same feeling, though, Bethany, you folks…I’m a little bit confused to some degree about what we’re doing. I just wanna be really transparent. This is my sarcastic voice but I’m being sincere here. It kind of feels like we’re in a little bit of a time capsule. Like we all got in a time capsule in 2019 and, you know, you open it back up and it’s like, OK, so we’re still, you know, talking about X, Y, or Z protocol for establishing classroom routines or whatever. And I’m like, OK! Like, I loved that in 2019! But I do admit, I’m still trying to figure out a little bit like, what are we doing now? What’s our relationship to the world out there? Things are very different. I have had some great sessions that I’ve enjoyed. I’m also like, still waiting for a session to draw a little blood. Do you know what I mean? Like there’s been sessions…no? OK. You’ve been in these sessions where it’s like, “Oh, ow.” Like, and you look down and there’s and there’s blood there. It’s like, I thought I knew what we were up to. Like, I thought I knew what teaching was and how we relate to the world. I dunno, like in any Danny Martin session in 2019, “Take a Knee” was one, where I was like, “Oh, OK. Like, I’m not as hot as I think I am here. Like, I’m part of a system.” That kind of thing for me draws blood. And I haven’t been in one of those yet. Been some great sessions. I’m a little hopeful that today we draw a little blood and think about what we’re doing here, is my hope here, if that’s OK. So Bethany’s gonna moderate that impulse and she’ll be the fun one and I’ll be the blood-drawing one.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:05):
No, I don’t…that metaphor doesn’t speak to me personally. But what I will say is, I get what you’re saying about really wanting to be in that room where there’s like this synergy happening. No promises about that today other than—

Dan Meyer (04:18):
I promise. <Audience laughs> Go on.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:20):
Other than I get what you’re saying. I’ll find my own metaphor that does not involve bloodshed, but.

Dan Meyer (04:25):
Sure. There’s a lot of ways we we could go about this today. And the one that I’m excited about is, you know, we could like, you know, analyze some results from students, and talk about what went into that. Look at classroom video. Lots of possibilities. But here’s what we’re up to today. Hope you’re into it. Which is, we are here in the heart of the entertainment industry. You know, Tinseltown! Um, the Big Apple! Uh…

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:47):
No!

Dan Meyer (04:47):
Come on. What do you got here? Um…

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:51):
It was daytime at night. Like the lights were so bright.

Dan Meyer (04:54):
The City of Lights.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:55):
There was a movie premiere outside my hotel room, which I was not invited to, unfortunately. But so what are we doing today?

Dan Meyer (05:01):
So here’s what we’re doing. We are gonna settle, once and for all, a question you have not asked yourself yet, perhaps, but will want to know the answer to in a moment. Which is: Who is the best teacher in all of film or television? OK? We’re gonna do that. It’ll be fun. But I hope that in debating this a little bit with a special guest we’ll bring up in a moment, that we will start to uncover some truths about what makes good teaching. How that’s different from teaching as we see it in movies and tv. Why middle-class America wants teachers to look a certain way in movies and tv. What all that means. And it’ll be awesome. I think. I’m hopeful it’ll be awesome. So what we did here is we’ve invited eight people. Eight folks you people may have known. You’ve been in their sessions today, in this conference, perhaps. And asked them: Who’s your fave? Like, we might have our favorites, but we wanted to democratize it a bit. So asked some cool people who you folks like, who are very smart and thoughtful about teaching: Who’s your favorite teacher?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:58):
A few of whom are in this room. Thank you for your submission.

Dan Meyer (06:00):
Thank so much. Yeah. We’ll see what happens here. <laugh>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:03):
As they shrink down.

Dan Meyer (06:03):
Yeah. Might draw some blood that I don’t mean to right now. We’ll see. OK.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:06):
That metaphor, what IS that??

Dan Meyer (06:07):
Yeah. Yeah. I love it. I’m still going with it. <laugh> And you folks will be a huge part of this. THE part of this, really. So what will happen is I’ll share with you our first nominees. A few of us will make a case for our favorites, or least favorites, as the case may be sometimes. And then by applause, by acclamation, you folks will decide who wins and advances to the next round. Start with eight, move to four. You folks know math.You know where this goes. OK.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:34):
No, keep going. Keep going.

Dan Meyer (06:36):
Two, then one.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:36):
Yeah. Got it.

Dan Meyer (06:37):
Then a half of it. No?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:38):
He had to school me on the making of brackets. But we got it. Yeah.

Dan Meyer (06:41):
How brackets work.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:41):
But we got it. March Madness, what?

Dan Meyer (06:44):
Yeah, in order to do this right, we had to bring up—all the folks that you’ll see are also former Math Teacher Lounge guests, or like, just fan favorites. And we’re also bringing up a former Math Teacher Lounge guest to help us decide this and debate this in a respectful manner.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:59):
New dad.

Dan Meyer (07:00):
New dad.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:01):
You see where my brain’s still at? I miss him. <Laughs>

Dan Meyer (07:03):
Friend from San Diego. Really cool teacher.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:06):
Incredible teacher.

Dan Meyer (07:06):
Works at Desmos and Amplify. And I just want you to welcome up your friend and mine. Chris Nho!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:11):
Chris Nho!

Dan Meyer (07:13):
Come up, Chris. Let’s go, buddy. We didn’t talk about it, but did you want to do the cornball stuff too?

Chris Nho (07:22):
Wow. Would I love to do—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:23):
And then the door could be locked! And then you have to wait and like, just—

Chris Nho (07:27):
Yeah, I’ll skip that part.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:28):
Hi. Welcome. You’re here. We’re here in person.

Chris Nho (07:30):
Very glad to be here. Thank you all for having me.

Dan Meyer (07:33):
Tell me who you are.

Chris Nho (07:34):
My name is Chris Nho. I live in San Diego. I’m a new dad. A three month old, just had. Yeah, she’s actually here at the conference with us in the hotel room. And I promise you she is not by herself. She is with…come on. I was like, “Hey, just gimme one hour. I’ll be right back. I have to do very important work.” But yeah, I think I got invited here because I have opinions and I’m willing to draw…some…blood.

Dan Meyer (08:02):
There we go! Two outta three! We’re good on the metaphor now.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:06):
We’re so glad you’re here. If you haven’t listened to the episode where Chris and Molly and some other public math folks share their ideas and ideas of how to take math out into the world, please listen, because we had a blast.

Dan Meyer (08:19):
Inspiring work. Really inspiring work. Very cool. Cool. OK. Right on. OK.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:23):
Let’s do this!

Dan Meyer (08:24):
Let’s get started here. Yeah! <Audience cheers> Yeah. And we might ask you who your favorite teacher is, who’s missing from our list of eight? We might have forgotten some people. Anyway. All right. So here’s our first two. Our first two are nominated by way of, let’s see, um, Mandy Jansen is a professor at the University of Delaware. Got some awesome talks here this week, a Shadow Con talk last night. She’ll be nominating one. And also, um, Lani Horn is a professor at Vanderbilt, also extremely cool, prolific author and speaker, just all-around great human and friend of teachers everywhere. And she’ll nominate another in this bracket, which is the Northeastern Comedy bracket, Northeastern comedy bracket.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (09:06):
It just worked out that way.

Dan Meyer (09:07):
Yeah. Here it is. Here is Tina Fey in Mean Girls.

Tina Fey in Mean Girls (09:12):
“OK. Everybody close your eyes. All right. I want you to raise your hand if you have ever had a girl say something bad about you behind your back. Open your eyes. Now close your eyes again. And this time I want you to raise your hand if you have ever said anything about a friend behind her back. Open up. It’s been some girl-on-girl crime here.”

Lani Horn (09:52):
I am nominating Sharon Norbury from Mean Girls as the best movie math teacher. She is an awesome teacher who is always there for her kids. She always sees the best in them. She shows that she can forgive even some pretty bad behavior, if she sees that kids are trying. She’s a strong feminist who makes sure that smart girls don’t dumb themselves down just to impress boys.

Tina Fey in Mean Girls (10:22):
“Katie, I know that having a boyfriend may seem like the most important thing in the world right now, but you don’t have to dumb yourself down to get guys to like you.”

Lani Horn (10:30):
She’s also super hard-working. She works three jobs. She’s always there for the kids. She plays piano in the talent show and takes them to Mathlete competitions. And she’s also socially aware. And when things go really badly among the girls, she does some pretty creative things to try to get them to be kinder to each other.

Dan Meyer (10:54):
OK. That’s one.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:55):
Helen Case.

Dan Meyer (10:57):
All right. Settle down. Settle down. Settle down. All right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:59):
Piano too!

Dan Meyer (11:00):
Bethany’s already trying to bias people here. All right. Chill out. Hold on. So next one is Mandy Jansen with Jack Black from School of Rock. Uh-oh. Uh-oh.

Jack Black in School of Rock (11:09):
“What was your name?”

Kid in School of Rock (11:10):
“Katie.”

Jack Black in School of Rock (11:11):
“Katie. What was that thing you were playing today? The big thing.”

Kid in School of Rock (11:14):
“Cello.”

Jack Black in School of Rock (11:15):
“OK. This is a bass guitar and it’s the exact same thing, but instead of playing like this, you tip it on the side. Chellooooo! You’ve got a bass! <Laugh> Try it on.”

Mandy Jansen (11:25):
And I’m nominating for best teacher in a film Jack Black as Dewey Finn playing Mr. Ned Schneebly in the film School of Rock. So why this portrayal? First of all, playing a longterm sub. Those are so hard to find right now. <Audience laughs> Really hard. And then he teaches using class projects. That’s brilliant. Integrated learning. And then love this. He gives students roles and tasks that are differentiated and align to the specific strengths that each student has.

Kid 2 in School of Rock (12:05):
“I can also play clarinet, you know!”

Jack Black in School of Rock (12:06):
“I’ll find something for you when we get back from lunch. I’ll assign the rest of you killer positions.”

Mandy Jansen (12:13):
And the film culminates in a performance of a collaborative song that they all wrote and performed together. And the students experience that collaboration and teamwork and creating something beautiful is much more important than winning first place. And finally, one of the songs that the character sings in the film is “Math is a Wonderful Thing.” Can’t beat that.

Dan Meyer (12:40):
All right. That’s tough. That’s tough. So here’s the deal. What we have right now is just a quick minute—so Bethany, you ranked, we all ranked our own faves here outta the list of eight. And Bethany put Jack Black in School of Rock a bit higher than Tina Fey in Mean Girls.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (12:54):
Missed the piano part though.

Dan Meyer (12:55):
And Chris, vice versa here. So Bethany, would you start us off and just make a quick case here for Jack Black versus Tina Fey?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (13:01):
OK. So here’s what I’m thinking. There’s been rumor that maybe they’re putting less than credentialed people into classrooms to fill teaching gaps. I mean, just rumor. And so here’s this guy who is a rocker. He is not a substitute. He has no teaching training. And yet he goes in there and it turns out that he has the ability to see students’ potential and to recognize their unique abilities. And like Mandy said, he really tapped into, like, he saw them and said, “No, more is possible for you than what you think is possible.” And there’s like real sub anxiety. When you walk in, you can either be like, happy there’s a sub, but I was usually really nervous. Right? And he goes in and he makes that classroom into a home.

Dan Meyer (13:53):
Wow.

Chris Nho (13:54):
Wow.

Dan Meyer (13:56):
Chris, speak on it. Tina Fey needs you. Chris.

Chris Nho (13:59):
Tina Fey. Here we go. I’m gonna argue here that—when was that movie made?

Dan Meyer (14:03):
T is for terrific. I is for Interesting.

Chris Nho (14:06):
Decades ago. And I’m gonna argue that Tina Fey was very progressive for her time. OK, let’s talk about social emotional learning. Hello. <Audience laughs> Love that. Right? Stand up if, I mean, she’s getting people to talk about their emotions. And there’s a curriculum. But let’s just pause, because that’s not what’s really happening in the classroom right now. So social emotional learning, I think she’s, she’s got that a lot. And then number two, you know, if you remember the plot of Mean Girls a little bit, she gets her name written in that Burn Book. Like she sees what they say about her. Restorative justice. Let’s go. <Audience laughs>.

Dan Meyer (14:38):
Whom amongst us. Yes.

Chris Nho (14:40):
You write Mr. Nho in the Burn Book?? Well, your grade book is gonna look like a Burn Book! OK? <Audience laughs> Tina Fey, Tina Fey, she was like, “No, you know, know what? I’m actually gonna spend more time with you. You’re gonna become a mathlete.” And Lindsay Lohan discovers—she drops the most iconic line in all of math education. “The limit does not exist.” Thank you, Tina Fey, for that. For that gift.

Dan Meyer (15:04):
Bless. Bless you. Tina Fey. Wow.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:05):
Oh, man. Wow.

Dan Meyer (15:09):
Let’s see what the people say here. I do wanna just add one quick thing about—it’s interesting to me how often in these movies—just kind of go in a little bit, zoom out just a minute—how often it’s a teacher who has no training as a teacher. <Bethany laughs> I am kind of curious why it is. Like, those are the movies that get hot, that get made. Again, these are all kind of a mirror of the taste of the moviegoing public. You know what I’m saying? Like, these, these are not movies—I wanna believe they are made for me and for us as teachers. But they are not. There’s not enough of us to justify, you know, Jack Black’s, you know, M&M budget or whatever he’s got going on in his trailer or whatever. That needs to be for everybody in middle-class America. So what is it about middle-class America that wants to see teaching as something that anybody can do? Just like, you know, just, just run up there in your van and make it happen.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (15:54):
Magic magically manifests.

Dan Meyer (15:56):
Yeah. Manifest. Yeah. That’s just interesting to me. I just toss that out there as some red meat. Let’s see what the people say here. All right, OK, so you’re ready. Let’s get the bracket going here. The question is Tina Fey versus Jack Black. You had a moment here. Just whisper to someone real fast who you’re going for here real quick. What are you thinking here? <Crowd murmuring> All right. Crowd’s buzzing. Crowd’s buzzing. Would you folks…? All right. Bring it back. Go ahead and make some noise for Tina Fey. <Crowd cheers> OK. OK. Make some noise for Jack Black! <Crowd cheers> Judges say Tina Fey. Tina Fey moves on. All right. All right.

Chris Nho (16:44):
Stunned. I’m stunned. I’m speechless.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:46):
Tina Fey moves on. Wow.

Dan Meyer (16:48):
This has exceeded my expectations in terms of having some fun, but also getting deep, getting deep and real about teaching. I’m into this right here. Yeah. What’s up?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:54):
That’s the goal. That’s the goal. OK. You wanted blood? Oooh, this next matchup might just be where that blood comes forth! OK. Stretch. Warm up. Dan Meyer, who’s up next?

Dan Meyer (17:11):
We’ve got the animated/animatronic round here in the Southeast. And repping the two contestants here, who do we have? We have Allison Hintz, professor, author outta Washington, as one of the two nominators. And the other nominator is one of my heroes, though we’ll find out very wrong about this nomination, Jenna Laib, who’s in the crowd, and I’m trying not to make eye contact here. <Laugh> And here are the two nominations. A couple minutes each. And then we’ll chat about it. And one of us will probably die. But we’ll see how it goes.

Allison Hintz (17:50):
A long, long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away, MTL, we began learning from the Jedi Master of Teaching. With the Socratic and experiential approach. With unparalleled mindfulness, compassion, and humility. The best teacher in TV and film, Yoda is. <Audience laughs> Yoda lives the values we share as teachers and learners. He humbly comes alongside us as we construct new knowledge.

Yoda (18:29):
“You must unlearn what you have learned.”

Allison Hintz (18:32):
Yoda allows us to struggle and sees mistakes as critical to learning.

Yoda (18:39):
“The greatest teacher, failure is.”

Allison Hintz (18:43):
Yoda values curiosity and reminds us of the beauty and joy of teachers learning from children.

Yoda (18:52):
“Truly wonderful, the mind of a child is.”

Allison Hintz (18:59):
MTL! Join the Resistance! Let the force flow through you in declaring, the best teacher in TV and film, Yoda is.

Dan Meyer (19:18):
Give it up for Allison Hintz! All right! <Audience applauds>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:20):
Alison! And to have that on hand too, which Is kind of perfect.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:26):
Just to be clear, the helmet is not a part of a Zoom background.

Dan Meyer (19:29):
You may evaluate the quality of the nomination based on the costumes of the nominator. That is acceptable. That’s acceptable.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (19:35):
That is a REAL HELMET.

Dan Meyer (19:35):
All right. The next nominator here, this one is from Jenna Laib, math coach, all-around stellar human. Here we go. This is Ms. Frizzle.

Ms. Frizzle (19:42):
“Single file, class. Our rotten field trip has only just begun.”

Jenna Laib (19:47):
And I think that the best teacher from TV or movies is Ms .Valerie Frizzle from The Magic School Bus. First and foremost, Ms. Frizzle believes in her students. She encourages them to take an active role in their learning, and also to advocate for change in their local community. For example, there’s an episode where there is a logger who’s gonna cut down a rotting log that would benefit the local ecosystem. And the students figure out a way to convince him to leave the log so that all of the animals and the plant life can benefit. She orchestrates really challenging situations for these students, and she allows them the space to ask questions and engage in problem-solving and puzzle their way out of these really, really difficult scenarios. Ms. Frizzle has unmatched pedagogy. She’s bold, she’s innovative, and she’s a major proponent of experiential learning. So these students are heading straight into a storm to learn about weather systems. <Audience laughs> These students are heading into the human body to learn about digestion and disease. They literally get baked into a cake to learn about some chemistry and reactions.

Children in The Magic School Bus (20:54):
“What’s happening?” <Audience laughs> “Why is it suddenly getting so hot?” “Maybe it’s because the floor is on fire!” <Audience laughs>

Jenna Laib (21:02):
This pedagogy is all led by her outstanding catchphrase, which is:

Ms. Frizzle (21:06):
“Take chances; make mistakes; get messy!”

Jenna Laib (21:14):
From her pedagogy to the classroom community that she creates, Ms. Frizzle is an inspiration, and that is why I think that she is the best teacher from TV or film. <Audience applauds>

Dan Meyer (21:25):
Right on! Give it up for Jenna. Give it up for Jenna. All right. I’m gonna take first pass at this. Chris knows my argument already, so I’m gonna take this here. I see some of you are feeling how I’m feeling on this one. OK, so I don’t have tons to say in favor of Yoda. I think it was all true what Allison said. I think the costume was banging. It was awesome. So there’s all that, but I have more to say against Ms. Frizzle than for Yoda.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:48):
No, no, no. Wait a second!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:49):
Let’s let it happen. Bethany, I’ve come prepared.

Dan Meyer (21:54):
I may have made a misstep here, I realize.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (21:56):
I’ve come prepared.

Dan Meyer (21:56):
So I think Jenna is all correct. I think those clips spoke for themselves. I think that what they add up to, to me, is not “great teacher,” but more “someone who should be locked up.” <Audience laughs> Or at the very minimum, “someone who should be kept away from children.” <Audience laughs> Do not let that woman around children. I mean, check it out. Look, I don’t wanna throw down credentials. I’ve been to grad school, though. I know how this works. When your brain is stressed, you get these—all the cortisol happens. Your working memory shrinks up. You cannot learn when you’re stressed. And those kids, like whatever lesson Ms. Frizzle is teaching by sending them into an oven, I repeat, an oven <audience laughs>, like, they’re not gonna learn anything ’cause their brains are freaking out with stress and fear. OK?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (22:41):
“What’s happening??”

Dan Meyer (22:43):
“What’s happening? Am I on fire? Well…I’m learning lots, though! Sure is magical!” <Audience laughs> It’s like, “No. Get that woman out of a classroom.” That’s my opening and closing argument. Right? There’s all it is.

Chris Nho (23:01):
All right. All right. All right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (23:02):
Chris knows.

Chris Nho (23:03):
I’ve got, I’ve got lots to say. First off, I think Dan was in charge of the editing of those video clips. So let’s let that be—you know, let the record stand. <Audience laughs>

Dan Meyer (23:11):
Where’s the lie though? Where’s the lie?

Chris Nho (23:14):
And, you know, second, I think, um—this is the guy up here saying, “I wanna see blood.” You know? And then he has a teacher who literally takes the students into a blood cell and, and you get a little scared! You get a little worried for the students, you know? So I just don’t get it, Dan. This or that. OK? I think Ms. Frizzle—so I actually went to a project-based learning school. I taught at a project-based learning school. And the best thing about it is like, your learning, it doesn’t just stay in this box of math lesson or writing lesson, history lesson. And I think with Ms. Frizzle, like you can’t help but learn things because you are getting baked in a cake. <Audience laughs> Yeah, it is a little scary. And I imagine there’s cortisol and things happening, but guess what? Probably the next episode, they go into their own brains and explore what’s happening. That kind of thing. You know?

Dan Meyer (24:07):
The kids that survived, just be clear. <Audience laughs>

Chris Nho (24:10):
Yeah. OK. Would I want Nora, my three-month-old, to be babysat by Ms. Frizzle? Maybe not. <Audience laughs> But what I have to say about Yoda is Yoda maybe wins the best tutor award. Give it up for Yoda’s Best Tutor Award.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:24):
Oh, yeah…

Chris Nho (24:25):
That ratio’s looking really nice. I could teach the heck outta Luke Skywalker. OK? But 20 little Luke Skywalkers running around. I’m not sure. OK?

Dan Meyer (24:34):
Luke did survive the training, though. <Audience laughs> So that’s awfully nice to say about it. All right, Great words from Chris here. I’m still not convinced. We’ll see how you’re convinced here. Would you whisper to someone where you’re leaning here? Frizzle or Yoda? <Audience buzzing>

Chris Nho (24:47):
I tried. I tried.

Dan Meyer (24:53):
All right. That’s enough of that. Let’s hear it folks. Give it up for Yoda. <Audience cheers> Give it up. Give it up. You. Give. It. Up.

Chris Nho (25:05):
Hey, next. Next.

Dan Meyer (25:06):
All right. All right, all right. <Mutters> Give it up for Ms. Frizzle. <Audience cheers louder> I dunno, it’s pretty close. Call a tie. Maybe Yoda? Yoda by nose? <Audience laughs> All right. All right. Let’s…let me see who’s it. Let’s get the people advancing here. I’ll keep on moving here.

Chris Nho (25:26):
As you’re doing that. Um, Dan ranked Ms. Frizzle last in his personal ranking. And I ranked Ms. Frizzle very high, so we knew this one would be spicy,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (25:36):
<laugh> Spicy it was. Are you having a good time so far? <Audience cheers> So while we love seeing these images and we love seeing these video clips, at the core, what are these things about how teachers are portrayed? And how accurate is that to our real lives? I mean, besides the cake part, right? That my chemistry class did often feel like I was on fire. I was so stressed in it. Um, we’re ready?

Dan Meyer (26:05):
Yep. Great. We’re ready, we’re up here. So the next two nominees are coming to you folks from Tracy Zager, who is the editor of my book, forthcoming in 2027 at the earliest and 2032 at the latest. And also your very own Zak Champagne from Florida, here in the room. Hey, Zak. Zak, let’s see who the nominations are. I’m gonna skip past that, didn’t work out so well for me. Here it is. This is Marshall Kane from the TV show Community.

Michael K. Williams in Community (26:32):
“You two complete your case to the class and let them decide your grades.”

Joel McHale in Community (26:37):
“Professor, thank you.”

Michael K. Williams in Community (26:40):
“It’s not a favor, Mr. Winger. Man’s gotta have a code.”

Joel McHale in Community (26:44):
“Awesome.”

Zak Champagne (26:46):
This is a pitch for an underdog. This teacher didn’t stand on desks or encourage his students to follow their musical passions. In fact, this teacher was seen only in a few episodes of my favorite TV show of all time, Community, Community has set at Greendale Community College in Colorado. And in season three, we get to meet Dr. Marshall Kane, a biology professor whose story is an inspiration to anyone who just takes the time to look and listen. Dr. Marshall Kane slowly earned his PhD while in prison, serving a sentence of 25 to life. In his classroom, he inspires students to love biology, question why LEGO has become so complicated, and randomly pairs his students for group projects to ensure no one feels left out. His greatest performance comes when a group of students believe their yam project was intentionally sabotaged. Dr. Kane took this as an opportunity for some trans-disciplinary real-world learning. So yes, at community college, he felt that a middle-school mock trial was the best way to determine who killed the yam. So let’s all pick the underdog and vote for Dr. Marshall Kane. After all, man’s gotta have a code. <Audience goes “oh!” and applauds>

Dan Meyer (27:53):
Thank you, Zak.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:54):
I have a code.

Dan Meyer (27:56):
Next up is Tracy Zager, nominating an unusual nomination, not a single person, but an ensemble performance. A bunch of people from a movie called Searching for Bobby Fisher. Here we go.

Rapid-fire movie dialogue (28:11):
“What’s that?” “Schleimann attack.” “Schleimann attack? Where’d you learn that from, a book?” “No, my teacher taught me.” “Aw, your teacher. Well, forget it. Play like you used to, from the gut. Get your pawns rolling on the queen’s side.”

Tracy Zager (28:26):
Hey, Math Teacher Lounge. This is Tracy Zager. I’m excited to share my nominee for the best movie teacher. But I have to admit that when I first got the email, I thought, oh, who am I gonna nominate? Because most movies about teachers are highly problematic. They usually have like a saviorism thing, usually white saviors. And I just felt like I couldn’t suggest any of those. So rather than nominate a movie about a single teacher, I wanted to nominate a movie that taught me something about teaching. And that movie is a deep cut. It’s Searching for Bobby Fischer. It’s a movie about a chess prodigy. And what I love about it is that all of the different adults in the movie are in teacher roles in some way. And the student, Josh, the chess player, is a fully realized character, not an empty pail, who pulls from the strengths of each one of those adults while also dealing with their flaws and humanity. And there’s just beautiful synergy in the way he gets the best out of everybody, but also has to overcome some of the barriers that they put in front of him. So I feel like it’s a much more authentic and humbling, but also inspiring, movie about the power of teaching. So if you haven’t ever seen it, check it out. And I can’t wait to see who the other nominees are. Thanks so much.

Dan Meyer (29:53):
Right on. Thank you, Tracy. Wherever you are. <Applause> We’ll move a little quicker here. I’m curious, Bethany, you put Marshall Kane pretty high. I put Bobby Fischer pretty high. What do you have to say about Marshall Kane for us here?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (30:04):
Well, I just wanna say two things. One is that, like Zak said, he has this code of conduct that he brings in. And he stays true to it no matter what happens. If you saw him in in Community, you know that he held himself up to such high esteem, but not just himself, his students as well. And he took accountability when he felt he had done wrong, even though, well, that’s controversy. But first—oh, the other thing, rest in peace, Michael K. Williams. Oh my gosh. The actor who plays Marshall K. And the thing that I wanna say most of all about it is that he brings his whole self to the classroom. He was in prison for decades. He brings his whole self and says, “This is who I was. This is who I am today. And this is how we can work together as a community.”

Dan Meyer (30:58):
That’s big. I love your comments about code of conduct too. It makes me wish that Ms. Frizzle had a code of conduct also.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:05):
I knew that was coming back!

Chris Nho (31:06):
Two slides ago, Dan. That was two slides ago.

Dan Meyer (31:08):
Can’t let it go. So yeah, I love what you said there. I have no strong beef here either way. Bobby Fischer’s a movie I have loved dearly and can’t be objective about it. I love that the kid in that movie, more than any other movie here, the kid teaches the adults so much through his innocence and how he challenges them and how they’re treating him. Dig all that so much. Will not, will not begrudge anyone any vote either way here. I do begrudge many of you your vote in previous rounds. <Audience laughs> So let’s just, let’s hear. We’re not gonna ask you folks at all to chitchat. We’re gonna move on this one. So would you folks make some noise here for Marshall Kane in Community? OK. OK. And would you make some noise here for Bobby Fischer, the kid in Bobby Fischer, the ensemble? <Audience cheers, applauds>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (31:56):
Marshall Kane.

Dan Meyer (31:57):
Marshall Kane takes it. All right. Good job, Marshall Kane! All right. Zak’s feeling good. Moving on to the final four here, Zak, right on. OK. Our last—the Northwest Division here is also the large urban district division here. We have a couple different teachers in sets of large urban schools. They’re nominated, they’re advanced by a couple people here. One is past president of NCTM, Robert Berry. And another is Fawn Nguyen, Southern California phenom. Great teacher and friend of lots of us. Um, let’s see who they nominated here. First from Robert Berry, let’s see, who is it here? Janine Teagues from Abbott Elementary.

Abbott Elementary dialogue (32:37):
“Hey, you know what? I’m probably probably gonna be Kenny’s second-grade teacher. Why don’t you just let him get a head start with me today?” “That’d be great.” “Yeah? OK. Hey, Kenny, would you like to be in my group today?” “Not really.” “That’s the spirit.”

Robert Berry (32:54):
My nomination is gonna be Quinta Brunson, the Emmy Award-winning Quinta Brunson from Abbott Elementary. Janine Teagues is the character. She exemplifies care not only from an affect way, but she also exemplifies care in the things that she does for her students. While the scenes in the show are entertaining, they do represent the challenges that teachers experience when they’re trying to meet the needs of her students. So she goes, goes all out for her students and finding resources. She accesses other people to get resources for her students. But the care shows up in the way that she is mindful of their needs. And so, for me, when I think about teachers and teaching, sometimes we can talk about pedagogy, but sometimes we also can talk about those kind of intangibles that makes a teacher a great teacher. It is apparent from her students that she cares about them, she supports them, and she goes all out 100% for her students. Janine Teagues, Quinta Brunson is, I think, is my choice of the best teacher on television because of the realism and the representation that she brings to this character of what teaching is about. <Applause>

Dan Meyer (34:28):
Right on. Right on. OK. OK. Next up, we’ve got, Fawn Nguyen is nominating Erin Gruwell from Freedom Writers. Here we go.

Hilary Swank in Freedom Writers movie (34:39):
“Look, you can either sit in your seats reading those workbooks or you can play a game. Either way, you’re in here till the bell rings. OK? This is called the Line Game. I’m gonna ask you a question. If that question applies to you, you step onto the line and then step back away for the next question. Easy, right? The first question. How many of you have the new Snoop Dog album? <kids move around> OK, back away. Next question. How many of you have seen Boys in the Hood?”

Fawn Nguyen (35:26):
We all learn about Miss G and her 150 students in the movie Freedom Writers starring Hilary Swank. All great teachers share a common set of traits. They care deeply about their students, have high expectations of them, and always believing wholeheartedly that they will succeed. Great teachers go above and beyond, not because they extraordinary—as Anne Gruwell would always refer to herself as an ordinary teacher—but because extraordinary things happen to people when we believe in them, give them hope, help them write their own story with a different ending. So what stood out for me with Miss G is the scope of her reach, the ever-expanding sphere of her humanity. The red tape she had placed on the classroom floor for the line game shows just how much we all have in common despite our differences. Her students didn’t just learn from her; they learned from one another. If you’d like to be part of this expanding sphere to give voice and hope, please check out Freedom Writers Foundation dot org.

Dan Meyer (36:38):
OK. This right here is a tough one for us. Thank you, Fawn. We collectively ranked—that’s our number one seed and number eight seed, which I hasten to say does not have to do with Erin Gruwell, a person, but the portrayal and the movie. So we don’t have like a whole lot of…there’s not a lot of defense we have to offer here of our eighth seed. And I heard like a kind of a little bit of a murmur over the crowd on Erin Gruwell. So I’m more interested than having a defense back and forth. I’d be curious what you, Bethany, think about what, like, what both movies have to say about like, what teaching is, especially teaching urban schools with black and brown kids and lower-class kids, for instance. They both have, I think, very different things to say about them. Do you have thoughts about that?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (37:19):
Well, it’s interesting because there is some overlap in the sense that the arguments that both Fawn and Robert Berry put out, they both care deeply about their students, right? We’re not gonna argue that. They care deeply. And something that I would say about Miss Teagues is there’s something about the way that she sees not only her classroom, her students, but she sees all of the students in the school as her students. And her idea of resource generation is really helping the teachers to generate resources from their community themselves, and to also realize that the students see themselves reflected in the teachers. And I think that—you know, again, this is not about the real person—but the movie portrayal, and we often see kind of this, for Freedom Writers, we often see this like, Great Last Hope whisked in and her personal sacrifices are what makes these students, these brown and black students’ transformation possible. Because of her sacrifices. Including her marriage. Including, you know, three jobs. And it’s just portrayed in a way that I think really celebrates her sacrifices rather than what the students have already brought—they already come into the room bringing so much as they are, already, without her intervention.

Dan Meyer (38:38):
I love the portrayal of the teacher as part of a community of teachers. Versus in so many of these movies, it’s the teacher as the only person who gets it, you know, oftentimes coming from outside of the world of teaching and everyone’s against them and wants ’em just to fall in line and do the thing we always do, and they’re the outlier. But in Abbott Elementary, it’s like we all rise and we fall together. And teachers are investing in each other’s success, especially with Gregory the longterm sub. We’re all rooting for his, you know, his flourishing. I love that. And yeah. That’s bigtime.

Chris Nho (39:09):
Yeah, I think one interesting thing is that Freedom Writers, when it came out, I think it was like a commercial success.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:17):
Oh, big time. Yeah. It was.

Chris Nho (39:18):
It probably influenced a lot of people to try teaching out. So I do wonder what it says about us, right? Like that we want teaching to fit this narrative, and we wanna be those people who could go into a classroom and <puts on “cool voice”> “Y’all listen to Snoop Dog?” and just have that question HIT. <laughter> And you know, I’ve taught in a large urban school district, and I’ve been that person and I’ve seen other people try and be that person. And I think stepping away from it a little bit, just—it’s a reflection of what people want out of teaching and what they think better education looks like.

Dan Meyer (39:57):
Yeah, yeah. This idea that, so I’m a middle-class person, let’s say, and like, there’s this idea, like, “I know what I would do if I was going into circumstances of impoverishment.” Like I have—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:06):
“All they really need is…”

Dan Meyer (40:07):
…for me to give ’em some real talk and tell ’em, you know, pull their pants up or whatever, listen to Snoop Dog, that kind of thing. And that will be the key. And that’s not how it is in, you know, in Jack Black in School of Rock or Tina Fey school, which are, you know, coded as largely like upper-class or largely white schools. And in those movies, it’s interesting, like how it’s about students discovering themselves, oftentimes. And the central figures are often students. And the students need to reject an oppressive parent figure or something and find themselves. But no, in Freedom Writers, it’s like, “You need to become more like the middle-class teachers who are coming in here to give you this wisdom.” It’s just interesting. I do find it—a pet peeve of mine is when movies portray teachers as only successful if you endure, for instance, the failure of your marriage, or even in Stand and Deliver, for instance, like Jaime Escalante, they depict him having a heart attack. And, like, the job oughta be…easier. <Audience laughs>

Chris Nho (41:04):
Truth.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:05):
That’s the barometer for how much….

Dan Meyer (41:09):
Like, no heart attacks and no divorces related to the job, that kind of thing. I do love how in Abbott—one last thing and we’ll vote and Abbott will win <audience laughs>—is like how, like there, there is a lot of degradation in Abbott, but it’s not a divorce or a heart attack—it’s the petty indignities of asking a student, “Do you wanna hang with me?” And a student says, “Nah, not really.” And that just spoke to me like how it’s not cinematic, but teaching, successful teaching, is like a collection of developing an immunity to students saying, “You’re not hot.” <Laugh> You know? And so I love that. I do wish that there was more depiction of students in Abbott Elementary. It’s a lot of adult stuff. Whatever. Give it up for Abbott, if you would, please. Let’s just get this done here. All right. That’s plenty. That’s plenty. Not gonna ask folks about Freedom Writers. OK, let’s move on to— all right, let’s hear it for Freedom Writers! Yeah. OK, cool. We go, yep.

Chris Nho (42:05):
Plot twist!

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:07):
OK, let’s see our final four. Cut and paste. Real time. Real time.

Audience member (42:12):
Where’s Dolores Umbridge?

Dan Meyer (42:14):
Oh….

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:16):
Hey, did you hear that? He said, “Where’s Dolores Umbridge?”

Dan Meyer (42:20):
All right. OK.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:20):
See, we missed so many. We could…

Dan Meyer (42:21):
So coming up here, we’ve got in the Eastern Conference, Tina Fey and Ms. Frizzle. Y’all know how I feel about that one. Let’s just get this one done. OK, let’s give it up for Tina Fey. Let’s hear it. <Audience cheers> OK. All right. Yes! Let’s give it up for menace to children everywhere, the terror, the Ms. Frizzle. <Audience cheers> One more time for Tina Fey. Let’s hear it. <Audience cheers> One more time for Ms. Frizzle. Let’s hear it. <Audience cheers>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:59):
Yeah. OK.

Dan Meyer (43:00):
It took ’em one round, but they made the right call in the end. <Laugh>

Chris Nho (43:04):
All it took was 10 minutes of constant Ms. Frizzle-bashing. <Laugh>

Dan Meyer (43:09):
Persevering and problem-solving, that’s my game. Yes. All right. So, do either of you want to influence the audience one way or the other?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (43:16):
That’s not how I play, Dan.

Dan Meyer (43:18):
Oh, OK. Yeah, that’s true. That’s true. You’re good. On Abbott versus Marshall Kane, should we just let ’em have it? All right. All right. Give it up For Abbott Elementary. Not bad. And for Marshall Kane. OK. OK. I hear Zak and five other people. All right, cool. <laugh> Right on. All right. We got our, we got our finals,

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (43:45):
We did it. We made it to two. And we know: We left out a lot of people. Right? And honestly, I kind of wish we could poll like everyone. I mean, think you put it on Twitter, right? Like, who would you pick? But I would say we had a pretty solid eight there. I’m excited to see who… Look at the little crown he put, you guys. Come on.

Dan Meyer (44:05):
I worked hard for you. For you. <Laugh> Yeah. I liked that it was a good bunch that had a lot of different kinds of qualities…and lack of qualities in some cases. And it allowed us that—I shouldn’t knock her while she’s down, and she IS down, it’s true. <Laugh> And I appreciate the conversation we’ve had, what they have revealed overall about teaching and what the world wants teaching to be versus what it actually is or actually should be. I appreciate that. So let’s settle this here. Give it up, if you would, for Abbott Elementary. <Audience cheers> And give it up for Tina Fey in Mean Girls. <Audience cheers>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (44:49):
Wow.

Dan Meyer (44:51):
That was close. I almost give that to Tina Fey.

Audience member (44:55):
Yeah, we do!

Dan Meyer (44:55):
I don’t know. That was a bracket-buster for me right there. Yeah. I lost money in the office pool off that right there. Maybe let’s just find out one more time here. One more time.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (45:03):
Last time.

Dan Meyer (45:03):
Time to summon up all your conviction on one or the other here. No half-measures right now. All right.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (45:07):
Emmy Award-winning Quinta Brunson.

Dan Meyer (45:09):
Yeah, you saw Robert Berry on that, right? He was like, “Oh, I got one more card to play. Emmy Award-winning.” That’s admissible. That’s admissible. We’ll take that. All right. So…give it up for Abbott Elementary, one last time. <Audience cheers> OK. All right. All right. And give it up for Tina Fey in Mean Girls. <Audience cheers>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (45:30):
Drumroll, please!

Chris Nho (45:33):
Best teacher is….

Dan Meyer (45:34):
Tina Fey in Mean Girls! Yeah. Not a bad pick.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (45:39):
I love it. And I think, too, I think we’re gonna have a little bit of a more reflective lens than we thought we did when we see depictions of teachers in film and television. And, you know, hopefully we’ll see some new tropes come in, right?

Dan Meyer (45:55):
Yep. Yeah. Every dollar we spend on movies with lousy teachers is just encouraging these people to make more lousy teacher movies, you know? Awesome. Thank you for being here for a live taping—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (46:06):
Thank you for being here.

Dan Meyer (46:06):
—of our podcast, Math Teacher Lounge, in a hot room. Appreciate that. Yeah, it’s been fun for us to have you here. Um, super-important, super-important final remark: Bethany loves Oprah and Oprah occasionally, in the show—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (46:18):
Is she coming?! Is she here?!

Dan Meyer (46:19):
Not here! Not here! Calm down. Calm down. Um, but we do have in Oprah fashion, not something—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (46:24):
Oh. Oh, OK. Oh, that’s, that’s OK. Sorry. I got, had really excited for a second. As if the Amplify playing cards, The Amplify t-shirts being chucked at you at high speed—I did try to get a t-shirt cannon, and that was quickly ruled out <laugh>. They didn’t know about my rocket arm, right?

Dan Meyer (46:46):
Yeah, you got a cannon. <Laugh>

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (46:47):
Yeah. Oh, that’s a compliment. Oh, is that a compliment? Thank you, Dan. Thank you. Look under your seat because we have five winners. We wanna thank you for being here in person. We wanna thank the folks who are listening. We wanna thank Amplify. Oh my God. Somebody just pulled off the chair tag. You get to take that chair home with you.

Dan Meyer (47:08):
Does anybody have a prize?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:10):
OK, stand up if you…stand up if you…Yes! Stand up if you have one!

Dan Meyer (47:16):
Free set of classroom dry-erase boards, right here. Congratulations.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:22):
And for you who pulled off the chair tag, I don’t know. We gotta we gotta find something for you.

Dan Meyer (47:27):
Put that in your backpack.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:30):
Thank you again for being here. Thank you. Amplify. Thank you, Desmos. Thank you. Dan Meyer.

Dan Meyer (47:36):
Thank you folks. Chris, thank you buddy.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:38):
Chris! Chris Nho, everybody!

Dan Meyer (47:40):
We will be, we will be at—Bethany and I will be at the booth, if you wanna chit-chat and hang out, sign some stuff. Whatever. You wanna have Bethany sign you, she’ll do that. Um, come on down to the Amplify booth and we’ll—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:50):
We’ll talk to you more about Ms. Frizzle.

Dan Meyer (47:52):
Fun and prizes. I will share with my real thoughts about Ms. Frizzle down there. I’d love to see you. Thanks for being here, folks.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (47:57):
Thanks for listening. Bye.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dan Meyer says about math teaching

“Teaching, more than other professions, is a generational profession. The kinds of joyful experiences we offer—or don’t offer—now affect the experiences students that haven’t even been born yet will have years later.”

– Dan Meyer

Meet the guests

Dan Meyer

Dan Meyer taught high school math to students who didn’t like high school math. He has advocated for better math instruction on CNN, Good Morning America, Everyday With Rachel Ray, and TED.com. He earned his doctorate from Stanford University in math education and is currently the Dean of Research at Desmos, where he explores the future of math, technology, and learning. Dan has worked with teachers internationally and in all 50 United States and was named one of Tech & Learning’s 30 Leaders of the Future.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson

Bethany Lockhart Johnson is an elementary school educator and author. Prior to serving as a multiple-subject teacher, she taught theater and dance and now loves incorporating movement and creative play into her classroom. Bethany is committed to helping students find joy in discovering their identities as mathematicians. In addition to her role as a full-time classroom teacher, Bethany is a Student Achievement Partners California Core Advocate and is active in national and local mathematics organizations. Bethany is a member of the Illustrative Mathematics Elementary Curriculum Steering Committee and serves as a consultant, creating materials to support families during distance learning.

A woman with curly hair and glasses smiles outdoors; a man with short dark hair smiles indoors in front of a blurred math teacher lounge, highlighting valuable math teacher resources.
A graphic with the text "Math Teacher Lounge with Bethany Lockhart Johnson and Dan Meyer" on colored overlapping circles.

About Math Teacher Lounge: The podcast

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

S5-04. Coaching tips for managing math anxiety in teachers

A blue graphic with text reading "Math Teacher Lounge" in multicolored letters and "Amplify." at the bottom, with abstract geometric shapes and lines as decoration.

So far this season, we’ve investigated math anxiety in students and its causes with passionate researchers and curriculum experts, including one from Sesame Workshop! Now we hear from Dr. Heidi Sabnani, consultant, coach, and co-host of Math 4 All, as she gives us research-based tips for teachers who are facing math anxiety themselves! Listen as we discuss Heidi’s own math anxiety and journey through math, the effects teacher math anxiety can have on instruction, and practices educators can implement right away for overcoming math anxiety.

Listen today and don’t forget to grab your MTL study guide to track your learning and make the most of this episode!

Download Transcript

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (00:00):

Coaching is the opportunity to provide that just-in-time kind of professional development for teachers, if we go at it in a slightly different way.

Dan Meyer (00:10):

Hey folks, welcome back to Math Teacher Lounge. I’m your host, Dan Meyer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:14):

And I’m Bethany Lockhart Johnson.

Dan Meyer (00:16):

Bethany, how are you doing, and how are you feeling about our current trajectory through this exploration of math anxiety?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:24):

Dan, I gotta tell you — let me make it about me for a second. <laugh>.

Dan Meyer (00:29):

Go. Do it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (00:30):

If only I had known that so many other people experienced math anxiety, and I wasn’t the only one. I mean, I’ve said it before, but you know, I hope that this series so far is helping to reframe math anxiety for folks who maybe have a narrow definition of it … and I guess expand, reframe. And also, for those folks who are working with students who have math anxiety, or who they themselves have experienced math anxiety, I hope they’ve found some tools, some resources. Right? Like, “Yes!”

Dan Meyer (01:04):

Yes! Same.

New Speaker (01:06):

And what about you? How are you feeling?

Dan Meyer (01:08):

Yeah, I hope this has been cathartic for all of our listeners who have experienced math anxiety, and not re-traumatizing, that there are lots of people who feel this way about math in particular. And that it’s so well-experienced, so broadly experienced, that people have decided to study it a whole bunch. Which is great. And now we’re moving into our kind of solutioning. You know, in my relationships, I’m sometimes told that I rush too quickly to solutions before trying to understand what’s going on. So I’ve loved our episodes that have been about what is going on. And now, with Dr. Truglio last episode and our guest today, we’re moving more into some solutions, which I’m excited about.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (01:49):

I don’t know, Dan, I think next time I see you I’m gonna bring a list of some concerns or worries I have, and I would love if you just get right to the solution. I’m actually OK with that.

Dan Meyer (02:01):

All right. Good to know. Good to know. I’ll say I am coming off of a day where I was feeling some teacher anxiety today, because I taught really real students. So just to let you know where I’m coming from here. I taught some seventh grade students at Montera Middle, here in Oakland Unified School District. Taught ’em a lesson outta the Desmos curriculum. And it was one of those lessons where some thorny stuff comes up. I’m talking students who are wrong for smart reasons, who are right for the wrong reasons, and their minds are working so hard trying to figure out inequalities. And I’m like trying to just step into that process as an educator with some curriculum and help shape those ideas. But it’s just … I don’t know, you want it to be as easy as like, “let me just show you how it’s done a few times, and now you got it.” But whew, some of these ideas, they take a long time to form up and they’re really easily reshaped by lots of stuff going on. So that’s where I’m at, anxiety-wise, right now. The teacher anxiety stuff.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (03:04):

I think there’s probably plenty of teachers who do kind of just say, this is how you do it. And so, from what I have seen of your teaching and what I know of the Desmos curriculum, it is such an opportunity to think hard about the things that we are assuming about our students, assuming about what we know about the math itself. And yeah, that requires some thought.

Dan Meyer (03:30):

Yeah, for sure. I came in ready, like, “When you multiply both sides of an inequality by a negative, this sign flips around.” And I could just say that to kids and say, “Hey, remember that! Write that down!” And a lot of them would do it really well, you know, provided the assessment problems looked like ones we’ve gone over in class. And they’re also learning — in addition to that math, they’re learning that math is a giant sack of tricks they gotta memorize, right? So there’s just these pros and cons. And at the end of the one period I’m gonna teach this week, I was like, “Well, your teacher’s gonna go over that tomorrow, when they’re with you instead of me.” So it felt a bit like I copped out on that one. And I’m just in in my feelings about that right now. And I’m gonna try to come on down here and be present in the math-anxiety world.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:25):

I appreciate you sharing that, Dan. And I think … I have a feeling that you could write a pretty catchy rhyme to allow the students to flip and <starting to rap> “multiply by negative. and dit-dit-dit-dit.” Can you feel it? You picking up that beat?

Dan Meyer (04:40):

Ooh, yeah. A nice little beat. Uh-huh. Yup.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (04:41):

Yeah. You know, you could come up with something pretty clever, and yet you did not lean on your wordsmithing skills. You said, “No, let us dive in.” So what are you gonna do with this lesson, by the way? What happens now? You popped in for one period, and then what happens?

Dan Meyer (05:03):

Yeah. So this is gonna be a blast. I hope you folks tune in. We’re gonna actually release the footage of me teaching this lesson live. You know, it’ll be replayed live. And on top of that, a couple of my favorite teacher coaches and just smart people about teaching are going to be giving commentary. They are gonna be giving the director’s commentary, the sports announcers’ commentary on what they’re seeing. I beg for their generosity in their commentary. But I think it’ll be a lot of fun. I’ve never seen anything like this before, a commentary track on top of a teaching lesson, in this way. So I’m just gonna gonna be excited to see what they noticed that I didn’t, what they might have done, the thoughts they might have. Maybe I’ll do a post-game interview, you know.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:50):

Ooh, yes!

Dan Meyer (05:50):

With my towel around my neck, <laugh> looking all sweaty.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (05:54):

Ready, set, grow!

Dan Meyer (05:55):

Like, “Yup, we gave it all out there, you know, just a real team effort.” You know, that kind of thing. We’ll see how that goes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:02):

I actually love that idea. I love that it’s not just this one random lesson that just kind of floats out there, and it’s about, you walk away with whatever feelings you have, and the students obviously walk away, but that this is gonna help other educators.

Dan Meyer (06:17):

Yeah. Yeah. We’ll multiply my anxiety and make it more people’s anxiety. We’ll see how that goes. So stay tuned on the Math Teacher Lounge feed for that. All right?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (06:25):

All right! And speaking of anxiety, Dan Meyer, we gotta get to today’s show. You know, last time we had some amazing strategies for helping students from Dr. Truglio from Sesame Workshop. I gotta tell you, I sent that episode to so many of my friends, like, “Listen to these ideas!” and have had some interesting follow-up conversations. And we would love to hear what you think about this season so far, at MTLShow on Twitter or in our Facebook group, Math Teacher Lounge. So today, we’re gonna focus on strategies for supporting teachers.

Dan Meyer (07:00):

Yes. Which is why we’re so excited to bring to you folks Heidi Sabnani, who — we’ve had researchers. We’ve had Sesame Workshoppers. And Heidi Sabnani has been a classroom teacher; she’s teacher-consultant; newly minted doctoral degree holder. We’re so pumped to bring to you folks: Heidi Sabnani.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:25):

Dr. Sabnani, thank you for being here. Can we call you Dr. Heidi? What would you. …

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (07:31):

You can just call me Heidi. Yeah. Heidi is good.

Dan Meyer (07:36):

Right on.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:36):

  1. Heidi, thank you for joining us in the Lounge. We’re so excited to talk with you.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (07:41):

I am super-honored to be here. It’s really exciting and I just really appreciate the opportunity.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (07:47):

I will say I don’t have a PhD, although the two people I’m talking with right now, both do, and you’re both like holding up your degrees as we speak and saying, “Wah-wah.” But I imagine that if I did, I’d wanna throw that doctor in more frequently, so.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (08:02):

Well—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:03):

If I sneak in a “Doctor,” Heidi, it’s only out of respect.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (08:05):

  1. I appreciate it.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:07):

Dan makes me call him Dr. Meyer all the time.

Dan Meyer (08:10):

You don’t call me Dr. Dan or Dr. Meyer, ever. So—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:13):

I will now!

Dan Meyer (08:14):

—this respect only goes towards Dr. Heidi, it seems. But yeah, we’ll take that off the air.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (08:19):

Well, we are going to delve into your research on math anxiety soon, because I actually — speaking of becoming a doctor, a new doctor, I have some questions. We have questions about your research, but on a personal level, I really appreciated the way that you share that you yourself experienced math anxiety as a student. So I’m wondering if you could tell us a bit about your own math anxiety, your <laugh> journey through math.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (08:50):

Yeah, so much like the people in the research that I did, and with the research that I read by others, many of us can tie the beginnings — or like the evil villain origin story of math anxiety — to a particular event, or series of events. And my series of events started, the big blow-up, I guess, in fourth grade. And I had had some struggles in school — I have mild dyslexia and dyscalculia. And so I had always been in the special group of kids who got some extra attention <laugh> from the teacher, or from an aide, or whoever happened to be in the room. But in fourth grade — at that time, they taught multiplication and division facts in fourth grade. Many, many moons ago. And I struggled greatly with just understanding what was happening and why we were moving so quickly. And, my teacher was probably not the best person to be entrusted with my learning at the time. Like, her style may have been OK for others, but it was obvious that she felt like kind of wasting her time with some people in the classroom. And I happened to be one of those people.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:26):

Mmm. You said that really diplomatically, though. <Laugh>

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (10:30):

Well, you know, you look back at things from the perspective of many years. And having made lots of mistakes myself in the classroom as a teacher, I try to give some grace to things that happened, and how you remember them. Yeah, that’s my story, but maybe she had a different one, right?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (10:55):

Yeah. But fourth grade Heidi was still, you know, still experiencing that. Yeah.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (11:01):

Yeah. Fourth-grade Heidi didn’t like being in the “dumb group” and didn’t like being told that she would probably not graduate from high school. So that was kind of the general environment. And I got further and further behind in math. The dyslexia was less and less of an issue the older I got, because I had great comprehension. And so I could figure out the fluency thing just by the pattern of language, because mine is mild in comparison to so many who struggle with that. But math was not working in that same way. And I got more and more behind and to the point where I was having to stay in every day at recess. And I had had it after like a month. Like, I’m not staying in at recess anymore to do this math that I don’t understand, by myself. Like, not doing it. So I—

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (11:53):

Which, by the way, if there’s one way to make you hate it, <laugh> like, to engender, to endear you to a subject, could it be, “Let’s have you stay in at recess”?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (12:07):

Right. And so one day I just stormed out of the classroom, I was like, “I’m not coming. I’m not staying, I’m not doing this anymore. I’m done.” And I can remember her standing up at the top of the hill screaming at me to come back, and I was like, “No way. Not doing it. Done with this.” I went to a parochial school, though, and my dad is a pastor. So that whole little incident blew up in the greater community in a way that I didn’t really anticipate as a fourth grader. And my parents had no idea that this was going on. And so they were shocked and dismayed that their — up until that point — oldest child, rule-follower, had done this. But then even more upset when they found out what was happening with my math understanding, or lack thereof. And they did what they knew best at the time. So my mom was a great memorizer. She has a brain like an elephant. And my dad grew up in the British system in India and Singapore, and it was at that time very much based on memorization. And so they were like, “We are gonna just work really hard. We’re gonna buckle down and do this thing <laugh>.” And so that’s what we did, and that’s where all of it began. It was not — it was just about “We’re gonna learn the facts. We’re not gonna ask questions; we’re not gonna think about it, because it’s just the rules. And if you can figure out the rules or the system or what the teacher wants, and mimic what the teacher is doing, then you’ll be successful.” And it was really successful for me, once I figured that out all the way through. My whole goal in high school when I took high school math was to take enough math courses with a high-enough GPA that when I got my BA in college, that I would never have to take math again. And I succeeded in that and got an English degree and a Master’s in world lit. And I was in no way doing math ever again.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (14:31):

But little did you know that Future You was going to be researching math anxiety. How did you wind up researching it then? How did you wind up researching math anxiety?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (14:43):

So I took a job in school improvement when I was working in Ohio, after a number of years teaching high school English in Southern California and Guatemala and Michigan, all over the place. And I took a job in school improvement with a co-consultant who was gonna be doing the math end, and I was gonna be doing the literacy end, and we were just gonna go in, and I was gonna make kids love reading, and she was gonna make kids love math, and it was gonna be so fun. And then she decided she didn’t like working with adults and they couldn’t find anyone else. And my boss said, “So you’re just gonna do both for the rest of the year.” After that year, I got requested to go back and, and do this again. I said, “Well, if I’m gonna do this, I’m going to go back and reteach myself the math in ways that I wish that fourth-grade Heidi had learned it, and fourth-grade-and-up Heidi had learned it.” And so that was like the, the beginning of the switch. And so now equal amounts of time in my career have been spent in both. But when I started, when I continued working, when I left the classroom to continue working with teachers, and when I transitioned more into an elementary setting, I began to notice the same behaviors that I had in high school of avoiding math, and avoiding teaching math, were happening in the classrooms that I was supporting. And so I would have teachers come and say, “Oh, can we talk about this literacy thing?” And even if it was like a math meeting, or we were supposed to split the time evenly, and ohhh, for some reason the literacy time talk would just like move over <laugh>. And then there was no time to talk about math at the end. And “Oh, that’s just too bad.” Like, we’re just gonna move on to this next thing. Funny how that happens, right?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (16:32):

Yeah. <laugh>.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (16:34):

And noticing teachers’ behaviors around going to and or avoiding math professional development that I was giving. Or getting sick. Or like having to leave the room for a long period of time. And so I began to notice these behaviors. And initially I thought I wanted to look at math anxiety in children, which is one branch of the research that I started with. But as I got into things more, the people that I have the most influence in are adults right now.

Dan Meyer (17:09):

Right.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (17:09):

And so as I started looking at the research that had already been done, I feel like we do a really nice job of admiring the problem of math anxiety, and we do less in the “what to do about” phase. And so I was like, “Well, if I’m going to continue to be in this career and in this profession, then I need to be doing something in the space of ‘what are we gonna do about it?’” And so that’s how I switched to looking at “what do we do to help teachers?” Particularly elementary school teachers, because that’s the area of greatest need, based on previous research that we could at least do something to help.

Dan Meyer (17:51):

Yeah. A previous guest mentioned that a lot of research is better understood as me-search, especially in this kind of arena, where we’re going back in to try to understand what it was that happened for us and how to prevent it for future generations. And I have nothing but respect for that motivation right there. And your point is well-put, that it is very possible to spend a ton of time examining math anxiety from every angle, every facet, you know, put it up there on a mounted board and admire it … and there’s a lot of value there, but I appreciate that you’re moving into, “So, now what?”

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (18:27):

Yep.

Dan Meyer (18:28):

And so I’d love if you’d share with us and our listeners the broad details of your study, and what you ultimately found. Like, if there are any large takeaways here, what were they?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (18:40):

Yeah. So a couple of things to kind of just lay a little bit of the groundwork. One out of four teachers say that they have math anxiety. Those numbers increase rapidly, the younger of the grades that the teachers teach. So if we think about preK to two, it’s about 88%, based on other people’s research. So I was like, “Well that’s a lot of people <laugh>!” And so, that’s the scope of the problem. And so I was thinking, “OK, what do we do in these moments?” Because other researchers had said they’re spending — when they don’t like it, they’re spending less time teaching math and avoiding it, or relying on methods that were done to us. Just out of fear of trying something different, at many times. And so one thing that has become more prominent in math education since I transitioned 16 years ago into this has been the role of coaches in school systems. And so one of the questions I wanted to think about was, “What can coaches or math specialists who work with adults as well do to help the teachers that they work with?” So that was kind of the lens that I was looking at. Like, let’s think about the systems that we currently have in place. Is there something that we could be doing that would help teachers, that wouldn’t be so huge or so monumental that with little shifts in our own behavior as coaches or professional development providers that we could make that would make a difference? So that being said, this was a qualitative study, so a small group of people in very intense settings. So I kind of always wanna preface that, because in academic world, you know, there’s <laugh> all sorts of thoughts about that. So I had asked teachers from districts that I work with who self-identified as having math anxiety if they would be interested in the study. So, this is what we’re thinking of, this is what it would look like, and the scope of the support they would have.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (20:50):

So basically you’re tracking these four teachers who self-identified as math anxious. And were you serving as their coach and kind of seeing what was working?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (21:00):

I was serving as their coach. Yeah. I was serving as their coach during that time period. And some fairly recent research that had been done was in the idea of “Can we do some reflective conversations or reflective writing around where your math anxiety started, and how that makes you feel both as a teacher of mathematics now, because you are teaching math, and how that affects your identity as a mathematician?” And so that was the first starting point. And that was a really critical moment that I’m glad that I had stumbled across the research on, because it turned out that having someone hear and acknowledge that what happened to them was both wrong and inappropriate, in many cases, and in a couple instances, was traumatic and also abusive — that that mattered. That it was OK to feel anger and hurt and frustration based on what happened to you in the past. And then have that moment to reflect on, “OK, so what do you want the classroom environment that you’re building as a teacher to feel like for your students?” So it was turning that moment of how they felt to thinking about, then, what kind of environment do we wanna make within the math classroom? And what steps can we take to ensure that happens? So that was like, Step One is just thinking about what that looks like. What kind of math identities then do you want to create for your students? Because all of the teachers were very concerned with not continuing the cyclical nature that often happens with math anxiety, from teacher to student and back again.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (22:54):

Well, and even that validation, right? Like, how many of them hadn’t even had, like you said, had that? We had another, when in our first episode, Dr. Gerardo Ramirez talked about that validation and how key.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (23:09):

Yeah. That was the first thing. The next step of it, which very different from what I often do — I don’t generally go in and model for teachers — just me, taking over your classroom. I really like to co-plan with teachers and co-teach with teachers and have it not feel like they’re losing control over what’s happening in that moment. And that’s generally the way that I go in when I’m doing professional development in a classroom, right? Like, I’m working with the teacher and we’re a team; we’re doing this together. But in these four cases, these teachers were very, very resistant <laughs> to co-teaching. And so I said, “OK, well, let’s throw everything out. Let’s try whatever it happens to be.” So the modeling aspect turned out to be really important, in part when three out of the four cases, because they were like, “Oh, I can do that.” <laugh> like, Well, yeah, I know you can! Like, it was that having a moment to sit back and see someone else doing it — which is harder to do when you’re co-teaching, right? It’s harder to be reflective in the moment when you’re still thinking about the teaching choices you’re making, because you’re both co-teaching.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:24):

Right. Or sometimes you see, like in co-teaching, it falls into “one teach, one manage,” you know, or something like that.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (24:31):

Yes.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (24:31):

I have definitely fallen into that. But you, by modeling … it was almost, I don’t know, it feels like you’re kind of holding their hand. Like, “I’ll show you!” And not that it has to exactly look like that, right? But you found if a coach is coming in and the teacher gets to sit back and basically watch their students learn, they’re probably gettinga ton of information about their students, and they’re really learning some teaching strategies for mathematics that they can then like dip their toe in. I think? <Laugh> Am I kind of thinking of this? I’m trying to picture this and it feels rich and rife with possibilities <laugh>.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (25:16):

Well, and it, it turned it from … I think sometimes, when I go into a classroom, I learn so much from watching teachers and being able to sit and listen to students, that you don’t always have the luxury of when you’re the teacher. <Laugh> Right? It’s so much harder to be like, “OK, I’m gonna be watching what a kid does, because I’m hoping someone uses this strategy, so I can connect it to this other person’s strategy, so that we can take that apart and look at it and really have immediate discussion around it.” Those are all so many things that are happening in the moment as a teacher. You don’t get to sit back and look at it from a researcher kind of lens. Or look, you know, from the up-above lens. And when I had these conversations with teachers, I was like, “That’s what I want you to do. I want you to be able to sit back and look at all the things that are happening.” Because then you begin to notice not only the moves that the teacher — in this case, me — who was modeling for them was doing, but also the student conversations. And it was almost like having a case study within that moment, where they got to sit back and just experience, versus thinking about all the decisions that they would make at the moment. So that was something that was really surprising to me.

Dan Meyer (26:33):

Yeah. And I love the idea that they’re seeing the pedagogical moves, but they’re also experiencing perhaps a sense of math that’s de-stressed. You know, they are allowing themselves to sit next to students and feel as though they are a student, in ways that if you’re co-teaching, you are still like enmeshed in the gears of the whole lesson. I wonder if that’s a part of this too. So I’m hearing from you that we’re taking these teachers who have all admitted to some math anxiety, and that one of the interventions, or one of the findings, was that modeling worked really well for, again, this set of teachers. But you modeling lessons that highlighted mathematics, that was less anxious, that helped the teachers see that students were engaging in really productive un-anxious ways, brave ways. Were there other kinds of takeaways that you experienced there?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (27:24):

Yeah. So in addition to that, we had to think about and start at Step One. One of the teachers that I worked with had done her student teaching with a teacher who had math anxiety, and who never taught math. And so she entered her teaching career, never having taught math before or seen it taught. And so in her situation, she had had one course in her teacher preparation program, that was on fractions.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (27:54):

That’s often the case, right? One math methods course! Help, we have to get it all in in this semester! <Laugh>

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (28:01):

<Laugh> Yes. And so she came in and said, “I feel like I have to start at the beginning.” And so there was no question that was inappropriate, or that we weren’t going to explore or think about. And so that was, I think, the starting place with that particular teacher. And then one other, who was kind of in her same age range, where we had to start thinking about, “OK, how did you learn as a learner? What ways are you seeing your students learn as learners? And then let’s focus on those first as the areas that you wanna explore in your teaching.” And so a lot of that ended up being much more visual and hands-on ways of exploring. And so those were some of the changes in, I think, pedagogy that were the most significant. In a couple of cases, these are early elementary teachers who had had one experience with manipulatives in their whole teaching career up until that point. And so one teacher brought me a bucket of Cuisenaire rods and said, “These are in my room. I don’t know what they are. <Laugh> Are we building things with them? Are they blocks that are just small? <Laugh> Like what are they for?”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:20):

Yes!

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (29:21):

And so, <laugh> it was that idea of, “OK, let’s, let’s explore all the different ways that we can use these, and that we can think about how your students might learn best with this particular tool that you have in your room.”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:34):

So hearing you talk about this research — which by the way, I know, you’re like, for our listeners, it’s all, “Quick, boil down your years and hours of research and synthesize it for us.”

Dan Meyer (29:50):

Your life’s work.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (29:50):

In a little tiny neat package. But really though, even though I know there’s so many layers to your research, and your work with these teachers, I wanna flag for our listeners that even the things that you’ve identified for us, you were giving teachers space — as coach, giving teachers space, and validating their experience as a mathematician, as you know, as a young student, right? Making space for that experience and validating “Yeah, that was really lousy and your math anxiety is real.” Like, Step One is already powerful. And then you’re creating space where they get to be in their classroom as a learner, right? And have a lesson modeled. And then you’re creating more <laugh> space for them to learn and ask questions. And I have absolutely seen teachers like, “I don’t know what to do with these,” and kind of shove aside the district-provided tools or the curriculum-provided tools. And so even those things, Heidi — Dr. Heidi <laugh> — you know, even if … I don’t know, for me, I am listening to you and just holding those points in mind and feeling like that, alone, if a coach did even just that … I know there’s so much more to it, but what a powerful opportunity for reclaiming math as an educator, right? That’s what I’m feeling.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (31:25):

Well, and I was hoping that there wouldn’t be … I mean, OK, it’s a double-sided hope. If there was something like so novel and so fantastic that was so different from the things that we have already at our disposal, that would’ve made a much better book or dissertation. <Laugh> But the reality is, there are things that we already know work. And we don’t often take the time or, or are given the time to be able to explore those things. Right? So even as coaches, you have district initiatives or things like, “this is what we’re working on this year,” and that’s fantastic, right? We keep those things moving forward. But if we’re thinking about coaching teachers with math anxiety, no teacher with math anxiety is going to be coming to NCTM.

Dan Meyer (32:16):

Right. Right. Or the training.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (32:19):

Or the training. They’re like, “Oh, PD day? Literacy! Yes, please! Bye!” You know, it’s that piece of it. So when we have these moments, the coaching is the opportunity to provide that just-in-time kind of professional development for teachers, if we go at it in a slightly different way. It does not have to be huge. It can be things like, they feel that they’re stronger in literacy. Well, then, let’s explore some of the ideas around math, anxiety and math identity and examples of people who’ve overcome either those things or other barriers in their life. And how can those things help form not only your students’ math identity, but your math identity. And it gives entry points in ways that you have access to if you’re a person’s coach.

Dan Meyer (33:18):

So in that sense, I’d love to know from you, if someone came to you at a coach’s meeting at NCSM and asked you, “What is something I can do right now to support the teachers at my site and my district, who are commonly experiencing math anxiety?” What is something that you would offer them in that brief moment you had with that coach?

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (33:40):

So it is hearing their story first. That’s the big one. And then, can you, in your coaching, provide opportunities to slow down? We all have these pacing guides in some form or another, that drive the things that are coming. Is there a way that you can set up meetings a month or more in advance of the content that those teachers are going to teach? Can we explore a month in advance, that content? And ways to teach it and understand it? There’s the ways to teach it, but there’s also like, “What is this math and how do kids experience this math?” What kind of experiences do we want to have ourselves as learners and then have as kids? If we can create cycles like that, that then don’t feel so rushed. It’s so hard when we’re like, “Oh, we have a planning meeting and we’re meeting with our coach!” And you’re teaching this lesson tomorrow. “Learn all this stuff about adding and subtracting on a number line. Go!” It’s so fast. And so if we had those opportunities to build in cycles, where we could slow down that process, it would make a huge difference in the lives of so many teachers. And it’s finding that time and the willingness. If you listen to teachers, they will work with you. If you validate what happens to them, and acknowledge that sometimes that still happens to us. I mean, I still have experiences like that. Sometimes I’ll walk into a classroom and I’m like, “Oh, I forgot how to do that!” You know, like, “I’ve not reached that far in my remaking of my own education!”

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (35:24):

Yehhhh, heh heh heh.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (35:25):

<laugh>. And you think, “I don’t wanna look like an idiot. I’m the math consultant who’s here to duh duh duh.” All of those things still come up. Yeah. And stopping and saying like, “OK, everybody, this is what’s happening to me right now.” <laugh> The vulnerability you have, you have to think about that. Even if you don’t have experiences of math anxiety in your own life. Let’s say you always rocked out in math, and you’re now a math specialist and you love it. You think it’s the most spectacular thing. There’s some other element in your life where you face some anxiety. All of us do. So it’s about thinking about, “OK, this is where I experience anxiety. Can I find that in the teachers that I work with? And then, can my teachers find that in the students they work with?” You know, the teachers, as they begin to reflect on their own experiences, began noticing which students always went to the nurse during math time, always asked to go to the bathroom during math time, always couldn’t find a pencil, or whatever it happened to be. And they began to be more aware of their students’ behaviors as well, and could then say, “Hey, let’s sit and talk about how you feel in math class. Like, I’ve been noticing that when it’s time for math, like your stomach hurts. Can we talk about like why that might be?” Because those teachers with math are more attuned, often, to those students. And so it just … the time factor, I guess is, is the bottom line.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (36:59):

I just wanna say, it’s so great to have you in the Lounge. Because I think you’re really bringing this perspective that we haven’t talked about, which … we are not expecting coaches to walk in and know it all. That’s actually the exact opposite. You are allowed to be vulnerable. We are not saying, “Come,” quote-unquote, “Fix this.” It’s like, “Hey, how can you facilitate and make space?” And I feel like you have given us just a taste of like how that might be possible. And you know, I think even if it’s just a chance for teachers to reflect on their own experience in math, even that would probably be kind of revolutionary for — and I don’t say that word lightly — for some PD spaces, especially if they have another peer in their team that is like quote-unquote, “a whiz,” or like, “Oh, I don’t feel like I can be vulnerable in my math anxiety because this teacher seems to know it all.” But you’re creating space where it’s like, “Hey, we all have strengths. We all have areas where we could support each other.” And I love that invitation for coaches. I love that invitation for teachers. And … yeah. I’m just, I’m so glad we get a snapshot of your research. Again, I know, I respect that this is not the whole thing!

Dan Meyer (38:22):

Can we find … is there a link to your dissertation in the show notes, for those of us who peruse dissertations? Can we add something here? Think about —

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (38:29):

Oh, I have no idea!

Dan Meyer (38:30):

Just think about it. Just think about it. But —

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (38:34):

It’s somewhere on ProQuest. It did get some. …

Dan Meyer (38:36):

Right on.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (38:36):

Is that a thing, Dan? Could I go, like, Google your dissertation?

Dan Meyer (38:39):

You definitely could. Yeah, for sure. It’s around. Yeah, same way. Well, that’s awesome. And I think it’s so helpful for those who write those enormous unwieldy essays to, you know, distill it in different ways. I hope it’s been … we’ve enjoyed so much, hearing you carve up a huge project into pieces that were really helpful for us to think about here in the Lounge. Thank you so much for coming on and hanging out with us. Dr. Sabnani, it’s been a pleasure.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (39:06):

Hey, I’m happy to do it any time. Always the biggest joy in the work that I do is little changes in a positive direction.

Dan Meyer (39:18):

Right on.

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (39:19):

That’s all that this is about. Right? Whether it’s kids, whether it’s teachers, whether it’s administration. The work that we all do is so valuable, and it is more and more difficult over time. And just giving ourselves a little bit of space to think about and acknowledge that, I think, is really important. So I appreciate you all making space as well. And thinking about this idea. Because <laugh> we’re math people! And we don’t have math anxiety! Right?

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:51):

<laugh>

Dan Meyer (39:51):

So people would assume

Dr. Heidi Sabnani (39:54):

<laugh>. Yeah.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (39:54):

Thank you so much. You’re welcome back in the Lounge anytime. <laugh> Thanks so much for listening to our conversation with Dr. Heidi Sabnani, consultant and co-host of the show “Math for All.” I can’t get enough about talking about math anxiety!

Dan Meyer (40:13):

Especially from people who are working with teachers so closely.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (40:18):

Yes, totally. I loved that lens of, “Hey, look at what happens if we actually focus on the teacher’s experience and help them kind of reclaim this comfort, this sense of identity, relationship with math that’s positive. How does that impact their teaching?” I loved talking about it, and I’m really interested in how that work continues to evolve. So thank you so much Dr. Sabnani, for your time. And you know, listeners, please keep in touch with us on our Facebook, in our discussion group, Math Teacher Lounge Community, or you can find us on Twitter at MTL show.

Dan Meyer (40:58):

If you haven’t already, please subscribe to Math Teacher Lounge, wherever you get podcasts. Also, if you like what you’re hearing, please rate us and leave us a review. It will help more listeners find the show. And it just makes me and Bethany feel good about ourselves, too. You can find more information on all of Amplify’s shows at our new podcast hub. Go to Amplify.com/hub.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (41:20):

You know, Dan, I also always like to say, I find most of my podcasts through recommendations from other listeners, friends, folks. So if you like what you’re hearing, share it in your teacher lounge. Just, like, on break, turn it up and start vibing and having the conversation right there.

Dan Meyer (41:40):

Yep. Yep. I got a better idea. Take the link to this podcast and then copy it and find the longest — the thread in your inbox with the most people on it. One of those ones that’s like, someone accidentally cc’d like 500 people, everyone at your school. Press “reply.” This is crucial. Not “reply,” but “reply all.” Paste that link in. Press “send.” Watch what happens.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:04):

Nothing but good —

Dan Meyer (42:04):

Good fortune will be yours.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:06):

Nothing but good things can happen when you send this to 500 people in the next 10 minutes. Next time on Math Teacher Lounge, we’re gonna be joined by Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer of St. Mary’s College for a conversation about math anxiety, and specifically Dan, how parents and caregivers, how their disposition influences the way their kiddos feel about math.

Dr. Marjorie Schaeffer (42:29):

I think the most important thing we know from literature right now is that high-math-anxious parents, when they interact with their children, their children learn less math over the course of the school year.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:40):

And get this, she’s gonna talk to us about an app that just might be something worth, you know, heading over to the app store for.

Dan Meyer (42:49):

I’ve used some apps, I have opinions, and I can’t wait. We just share recommendations on apps with Dr. Schaeffer.

Bethany Lockhart Johnson (42:56):

That’s next time on Math Teacher Lounge. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Tuesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month.

What Dr. Heidi Sabnani says about math

“Much like the people in my research, many of us can tie the beginnings or the ‘evil villain origin story’ of our own math anxiety to an event or series of events.”

– Dr. Heidi Sabnani

Consultant and Co-host of Math 4 All

Meet the guest

Heidi Sabnani is always surprised that she works in math education. She developed math anxiety as a young student and spent much of her school life and early career avoiding math. After teaching English in the United States and Guatemala, and earning her MA in World Literature, she found herself in the uncomfortable position of working in math classrooms as a school improvement consultant. Once she realized that her life was going to involve math, Heidi decided to relearn math in the ways she wished she had learned the first time around. 18 years later she is still learning with and from the students and teachers she has the privilege to serve.

Heidi’s doctoral research at Northeastern University focused on interventions for math anxiety in elementary teachers. She currently works as a consultant, speaker, and author.

Portrait of a woman with long dark hair, wearing a light gray sweater, smiling in front of a blurred outdoor background, with graphic elements framing the photo—perfect for math teacher resources or a welcoming math teacher lounge.
A laptop displaying a Facebook group page for "Math Teacher Lounge Community," featuring profile photos, a group banner, and geometric shapes in the image background.

About Math Teacher Lounge

Math Teacher Lounge is a biweekly podcast created specifically for K–12 math educators. In each episode co-hosts Bethany Lockhart Johnson (@lockhartedu) and Dan Meyer (@ddmeyer) chat with guests, taking a deep dive into the math and educational topics you care about.

Join the Math Teacher Lounge Facebook group to continue the conversation, view exclusive content, interact with fellow educators, participate in giveaways, and more!

Amplify Science

A new core curriculum designed from the ground up for the NGSS.

Preview the Student Books and Student Investigation Notebooks

Grades 6–8 Integrated Model

Spanish Student Books and Student Investigation Notebooks

Amplify Science

A new core curriculum designed from the ground up for the NGSS.

Grades 6–8 Integrated Model

Spanish Student Books and Student Investigation Notebooks

Amplify Science

A new core curriculum designed from the ground up for the NGSS.

Preview the Student Books and Student Investigation Notebooks

Grades 6–8 Integrated Model

NGSS Benchmark Assessments

The Amplify NGSS Benchmark Assessments were authored by Amplify and were not developed as part of the Amplify Science program or created by the Lawrence Hall of Science.

Kindergarten

Needs of Plants and Animals

Pushes and Pulls

Sunlight and Weather

Grade 1

Animal and Plant Defenses

Light and Sound

Spinning Earth

Grade 2

Plant and Animal Relationships

Properties of Materials

Changing Landforms

Grade 3

Balancing Forces

Environments and Survival

Inheritance and Traits

Weather and Climate

Grade 4

Energy Conversions

Earth’s Features

Vision and Light

Waves, Energy, and Information

Grade 5

Patterns of Earth and Sky

Ecosystem Restoration

The Earth System

Modeling Matter

Grade 6

Grade 7

Grade 8

S3-05: Thinking is power

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

Join us as we sit down with Melanie Trecek-King, college professor and creator of Thinking is Power, to explore how much of an asset science can truly be in developing the skills students need to navigate the real world. You’ll learn about “fooling” students and the importance of developing critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy in the classroom. We’ll also share real strategies and lesson examples that help build these essential skills and engage students in learning.

And don’t forget to grab your Science Connections study guide to track your learning and find additional resources!

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Melanie Trecek-King (00:00):

We say knowledge is power, but it’s not enough to know things. And there’s too much to know. So being able to think and not fall for someone’s bunk is my goal for my students.

Eric Cross (00:12):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. On this third season, we’ve been talking about science’s underdog status. And just this past March at the NSTA conference in Atlanta, I had the chance to speak with science educators from around the country about this very topic.

Hermia Simanu (00:28):

Right now, there’s only two teachers in our high school teaching science.

Shane Dongilli (00:32):

I have 45 minutes once a week with each class. The focus is reading and math.

Alexis Tharpe (00:38):

Oftentimes science gets put by the wayside. And you know, I love math and I love my language arts, but I also think science needs to place be placed on that high pedestal as well.

Askia Little (00:46):

In fifth grade, oh, they teach science, because that’s the only grade that it’s tested.

Eric Cross (00:50):

That was Hermia Simanu from American Samoa. Her team flew for three days to make it to the conference. You also heard from Shane Dongilli from North Carolina, Alexis Tharpe from Virginia, and Askia Little from Texas. All of these teachers were excited to be at the conference and had a lot to say about the state of science education in their local schools. Throughout this season, we’ve been trying to make the case for science, showing how science can be utilized more effectively in the classroom. We’ve explored the evidence showing that science supports literacy instruction. We’ve talked about science and the responsible use of technology like AI. My hope is that all of you listeners out there can use some of this evidence to feel empowered to make the case for science in your own communities. And on this episode, we’re going to examine how science can help develop what might be the most important skill that we try to develop in our students: Good thinking. On this episode, I’m joined by a biologist who actually advocated for eliminating the Intro to Bio course at her college. Instead, Professor Trecek-King created a new course focused on critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy skills. In this conversation, we discuss why the science classroom is such a good environment for helping students become better thinkers. Now, I don’t think that you can make a much stronger argument for science than using it to develop the skills that Melanie describes in this conversation. So, without further ado, I’m thrilled to bring you this conversation with Melanie Trecek-King, Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College, and creator of Thinking Is Power. Here’s Melanie.

Eric Cross (02:29):

Well, Melanie, thank you for joining us on the show. It’s so good to have you.

Melanie Trecek-King (02:34):

I am so happy to be here.

Eric Cross (02:35):

Now, I went to your session at NSTA in Chicago … I think it was two years ago. A couple years ago. And I was listening to your session, and as I was listening to you, I started Reverse Engineering in my mind what you were doing with your college students. I started reverse engineering the K–8. I was like, “This is amazing.” Where has what you’ve been doing been hiding? We need this not just in the college, higher ed. We need this all the way up and down. Because I hadn’t seen it before. So I think a good place for us to start is gonna be like the story of how and why you as a biologist wound up making the case to actually eliminate the Intro to Biology course at your college. So can you start off and tell us a little bit about that story?

Melanie Trecek-King (03:20):

Sure. So I started teaching at a community college in Massachusetts. And I absolutely love teaching at a community college. And I was teaching the courses that people who don’t wanna be scientists when they grow up have to take to fulfill their science requirement. And that course was Intro Bio. And I tried every way I could figure out to make that class be useful,] relevant to students. I mean, the thing is, our world is based on science and you have to understand science to be a good consumer of information, to make good decisions. And I’m a biologist, so it pains me to say this, but you know, somewhere in the middle of teaching students about the stages of mitosis and protein synthesis, I thought, “Is this really — like, if I have one semester that’s gonna be the last chance that someone’s gonna get a science education, is this really what they need?” And I just decided, “No.” So, to my college’s credit, they were very supportive. I went to them and said, “You know, I think we should assess the non-majors courses. Like, why do we teach non-majors science?” And we all agreed, well, it was for science literacy. OK, great. Do our existing non-majors courses do that? And so we evaluated each of the courses. I made a case that Intro Bio was not doing it. And so we actually replaced it with a course that I call Science for Life. And the whole course is designed to teach science literacy, critical thinking, and information literacy skills.

Eric Cross (04:48):

And so you did this while you were looking at mitosis. And you’re looking at students who may or may not be science majors. And then kind of asking that question. I know every educator asks this, and whether or not it’s welcomed or supported is a different question: “Is what I’m teaching actually gonna be relevant and useful later on down the road for this group of students?” And you actually got to run with it and then create this course, this new course. So, what were the skills that you were hoping to achieve with the new course you developed, and and why were those skills so important?

Melanie Trecek-King (05:21):

Well, if I just go back for a second to what you said, ’cause it, really hit me: I remember the actual moment — it had been building up to that point, but the actual moment that it hit me — I was teaching students the stages of mitosis. And I was applying it to cancer, because the thought is that if we use issues that are relevant to students to teach concepts, that it will be more meaningful to them. They’ll learn it better; they’ll be able to apply it. And they just looked absolutely deflated. They didn’t wanna be there. And I had this moment where I thought, “You know, if, if these students ever have cancer somewhere in their lives, is what I taught them going to be something that they remember? Is it going to be useful to them?” And quite frankly, like, no. <Laugh> They’re not gonna remember proto-oncogenes. And quite frankly, is that really what they need to know at that moment? What they need to know is, “What does this mean? Who is a reliable source of information here? If these treatments are recommended, what is the evidence for them? What are the cost-benefit analyses? Where do I go to find reliable information?” And in that space, cancer in particular, we have this whole field of — I wanna say charlatans, ’cause they may not actually be lying, but they’re pedaling false cures, false hopes. And people need that kind of hope, and so in their time of need, they’re more likely to fall for that kind of thing. Which leads me to the skills that I teach students. I call them this tree of skills. And the order is important. I start — and there’s a lot of overlap to be fair — but critical thinking, and then information literacy, and science literacy. The idea is that students carry in their pockets access to basically all of human’s knowledge at this moment in time. And if they needed to access it, they could. The question is, do they know what they’re looking for? Are they aware of their own biases that are leading them to certain sources, or certain false hopes? Are there certain things that are making them more vulnerable to the people that might prey on them? Are they able to use that information to make good decisions? There’s a great Carl Sagan quote, and it’s something like, “If we teach people only the findings of science, no matter how useful or even inspiring they may be, without communicating the method, then how is anyone to be able to tell the difference between science and pseudoscience?” So yes, the process of science is a process of critical thinking. However, we do tend to present science most of the time. Like, here’s what science has learned. And to be fair, those things that we’ve learned from science are really useful and inspiring. But if we don’t teach the process, so you’ve got somebody now who let’s say has been diagnosed with cancer and is on their phone and they’re scrolling through social media and everything looks the same. And of course the algorithms learn who you are. Next thing you know, there’s all of these like pseudo-treatments popping up. It all looks the same. Somebody who says that acupuncture can be used to cure cancer can feel the same, from someone who doesn’t understand the process of science, as a medical fact. And so the process is the process of critical thinking. My class everything is open note. The quizzes are open note. The exams — and I say open note, they’re also open online, because I know for the rest of their life they’re gonna have resources available to them; I want them to be good consumers with that information, which to me requires metacognition and critical thinking and information literacy and all those skills that I’m trying to teach them.

Eric Cross (08:58):

You’re basically taking what … we’ve taught science for so long. And more recently, it’s changed to more focusing on skills. At least in K through 12. But a lot of it was just memorization of a ton of different things that now we can pull up our phone, go on the internet. You can pull up a lot of those facts. But those facts don’t necessarily translate to actual real-world skills. When I listen to… I kind of make this analogy sometimes: students say … it’s funny, I have 12-year-olds that say this. They go, “How come they don’t teach us how to do our taxes?” And you know they’re regurgitating what they hear from adults, right? “Teach us real-world skills!” And I was like, really, if we taught you right now how to do your taxes, how many of you would really be like, “Oh, this is an awesome lesson! We’re really engaged!” But their point is that “I wanna learn something that I could actually use later on, that’s that I’m gonna carry on.” And in your course, you’re talking about these skills that actually can apply. Like you said, if I had cancer and I’m looking at different types of medical procedures, do I have the skills to really be able to evaluate and make informed decisions on that? And that’s, that’s not something that I’ve seen explicitly taught really anywhere. And I hadn’t heard anybody talk about it, really, until I heard your session, where you’ve kind of unpacked this, and over the last couple of years, have created some programs or resources for educators, where they can take this into their classroom. So what were some of those skills, again? What were were some of the skills that you thought, “I wanna make sure that my students can walk out and they know how to do this and apply it to maybe several different fields”?

Melanie Trecek-King (10:35):

Oh, that’s a really good question. Because the whole thing was a process for me. Like, when I finally let go of Intro Bio, I was so glad to see that class go, by the way. ‘Cause I just felt like I was beating a dead horse. So when I let go of it, I thought, “What do they need instead?” And for me, what I realized was I was trying to make the class I would’ve wanted to take. I realized the things that I personally didn’t know, that my own education maybe let me down a bit. But things that I thought were important. So then I took all of those, synthesized them, tried to figure out the best order. The class is currently in its third iteration. And I hope every iteration is an improvement. But I’m thinking about the students that I taught before the pandemic. It was Intro Bio. Up to just maybe the couple years before the pandemic, and during the pandemic, we had a new virus and we had a new vaccine and we had new treatments. There was hydroxychloroquine and there was ivermectin and then there’s masks. Are masks effective? Well, you know, in what circumstances? What kind of mask? There are all of these questions. And that whole thing was we saw science playing out in real time.

Eric Cross (11:50):

Absolutely.

Melanie Trecek-King (11:51):

And so were my students able to follow that? And then what happened in that process is that science became politicized. And in a time where things are uncertain and we need answers, ’cause it’s scary, people want certainty and science doesn’t tend to provide that. Especially when it’s just starting out. And then when it becomes politicized, people decide that they’re going to — it’s not necessarily a conscious decision — but they retreat into what people in their camps are saying or their groups are saying. Which actually leads me to one of the more important parts of information literacy skills in there, which is most of our knowledge is shared. We tend to have overinflated senses of what we individually know. And studies actually show that with Google, if you have access to Google, you think you’re smarter than if you don’t have access to Google. But we all have access to knowledge in our communities, and that’s one of the reasons humans are so successful, is that we can each specialize in different things and share our expertise and become greater than the sum of our parts. The problem with that, of course, is that we forget what we don’t know, and we assume that we know what the community knows. And so recognizing the limits of your own knowledge and how different communities produce knowledge, like the different epistemic processes that communities use to come to knowledge. When it comes down to it, an important part of knowing is knowing who to trust, right? Knowing where the source of knowledge lives. And in order to do that, you have to understand the processes that they’re using to come to that knowledge and the limits of your own knowledge. And then how to find who has that knowledge so that you can use that to make better decisions.

Eric Cross (13:38):

So, when I hear what you’re doing with your college students, and I think about what I’m doing in the classroom, in the middle school, we are really focusing on literacy as skills. Reading, writing, speaking, listening. And then when I think of the next step of the journey, your information literacy and the literacy you’re teaching is really the application of those things in the real world. And the examples that you gave are very critical examples. Evaluating claims about Covid. Making informed decisions about a medical procedure that you might need. And we all get that applied to us. We’re scrolling through social media and somehow social media is listening. It’s figuring out exactly what I’m doing, because all of a sudden the ads are telling me … how did you know I was alking about KitchenAid mixers now? I just said KitchenAid mixers and it’s gonna show up in my feed! But <laugh> I take that in the same way from the same place that I take in maybe an oncologist. So it’s it’s coming through the same channels. So now I kind of wanna pivot. So we’ve talked about what you’re doing, why you’re doing it, the connection between “am I really teaching the skills that my students need in the science class? Is it really critical thinking explicitly or is it just kind of implied?” Now I wanna ask you how you do it. What’s the annotated, abbreviated kind of syllabus of your course?

Melanie Trecek-King (15:03):

So the course is called Science for Life. And the premise behind it is the kinds of skills and understanding of the process of science that they would need to make good decisions to be empowered in a world based on science. And so the very first lecture, I say, “OK, I’m gonna tell you a story and I just want you to listen to the story. And at the end I’m gonna ask you why I told the story.” And the story that I tell them is some of the history of the witchcraft trials in Europe. And I start with the Malleus Maleficarum, or the Hammer of Witches, from the Pope, and about how people would accuse witches of causing birth defects or storms or crops dying. And, the best evidence that they had to absolutely know somebody was a witch was if somebody accused them, and then if they were accused, if they confessed. OK? But the problem is, to get them to confess, they would torture them. Roasting over coals, or splitting until somebody broke. And so I tell my students, “OK, this was absolute proof that someone was guilty of witchcraft. I don’t know about you; I would confess to anything, right? Make it stop!” So this is where I get to ask students, “Why would I ask you this? Why would I tell you this story? And traumatize you on the very first day of lecture?” And they see the reasoning, right? They thought they had evidence. The question was, is that good evidence? And so, you know, I’m getting students to have a basic understanding of epistemology, right? Without calling it that, or without going into all of the philosophical background of epistemology. Apply this to your own reasoning. What are you wrong about? Well, you probably wouldn’t know. OK, how would you know if you were wrong? Like what kinds of things do you feel that you’re so right about? How good is your evidence for that? So what I want them to do is internalize the thinking about thinking, and analyzing how they come to conclusions, and proportioning how strongly they believe. Their confidence in how right they are. So I think starting with that kind of misinformation, and getting students to internalize that process is important. But I think the example is really useful, because most of my students don’t believe in witchcraft. Right? So it’s not an issue that would immediately threaten them in some way. So when, when a belief is tied to identity or how we see ourselves or is really important to us, then it’s very difficult to be objective about that belief. And so by starting with witchcraft, it’s not triggering. I get them to think about thinking and practice that muscle so that when we get to those more important issues, they have the skills they need to evaluate them.

Eric Cross (17:55):

So would it be fair to say that your Science for Life class is really applied scientific thinking for the real world?

Melanie Trecek-King (18:01):

Absolutely. That’s the idea. I mean, science is too good to keep to ourselves, right? And it’s everywhere. So how can you understand the world through a scientific lens?

Eric Cross (18:10):

What are the nuts and bolts of how you teach your students these strategies? What do you do? What are some strategies and techniques that we can maybe share with listeners? And then where I want to go after that is I wanna ask you, how early do you think this can be started? So lemme start off first with, what do you do?

Melanie Trecek-King (18:28):

So I use three different strategies. One is, I provide students with a toolkit. And the toolkit is one that I created and it is like my one toolkit to rule them all. It is trying to apply critical thinking and science reasoning all together in one place. So that if students are met with a claim, they’ve got the toolkit with an acronym. They can now start and have somewhere to go. In that if I gave you a claim and said, “Just critically think through this claim,” I mean, that’s a mighty task. But if you have a structured toolkit, then it’s hopefully a systemic way that’s helpful. The toolkit is summarized by FLOATER. I have published it on Skeptical Inquirer. It’s free. So it’s Falsifiability, Logical, Objectivity, Alternative Explanations, Tentative Conclusions, Evidence, and Reproducibility. So I provide students with a toolkit. The next thing I do is I use a lot of misinformation in class. Back to what Carl Sagan says: What I heard was we should use pseudoscience to teach students the difference between a pseudo-scientific process and a scientific process. So, I use science denial, conspiracy theories, and give my students a lot of opportunities to practice evaluating claims with the toolkit. And the other thing I do is, I use inoculation activities. So inoculation theory is based on William McGuire’s original research in the ’60s, which is basically like a vaccine analogy. Where you can inject a small amount of a virus or bacterium into the body, so that it creates an immune response, so that it can learn the real thing. And so in the real world, it can fight it off. Inoculation theory does the same thing, but with misinformation. So, what we can do is, in controlled environments, expose students to little bits of misinformation so that they can recognize it in the real world. There’s different kinds of inoculation, but I’m a big fan of what’s called active and technique-based inoculation. So technique-based means that students are learning not the facts of misinformation, not factually why this thing is wrong, but about the technique used to deceive. So maybe the use of fake experts. Or maybe the use of anecdotes. Or the use of logical fallacies. The other part of that is active, which is where students create the misinformation. So for example, my students, just now, we finished covering pseudoscience. And I teach students the characteristics of pseudoscience. And basically we have fun with it. Where they pretend to be grifters and they sell a pseudoscience product. And so they have to make an ad like they’d see on social media, using the different techniques. And the point there is that it’s supposed to be funny, right? And lighthearted. But in a real way, by using the techniques used to sell something like pseudoscience, it’s opening their eyes. You can’t unsee how every alternative product has, “it’s an all-natural and used for centuries and millions use it and look at this person who says, ‘Wow, it worked for me!’ And it’s certified by some society that doesn’t exist, but this doctor behind it says that it’s really great!” I mean, it’s all the same stuff. So they create the misinformation using their own techniques.

Eric Cross (22:02):

That’s one of my favorite things that you’ve talked about, and I want to dive in that a little bit more. But when you’re teaching the toolkit, FLOATER, what does that look like in the classroom, when you’re actually breaking all of those things down? What does it look like as you’re walking your students through this, and you’re kind of coaching them on all of those different things? ‘Cause I feel like some things might be like, “Oh yeah, I got that.” And then some of them might be, “Oh, what is that?”

Melanie Trecek-King (22:24):

Yeah, it takes me probably a good solid lecture to get through the basis of the toolkit. But then over the rest of the semester, I’ll spend more time going into different parts, different rules, a bit more in-depth. So, for example, logical fallacies and objectivity. So the rule of objectivity basically states that you need to be honest with yourself. I’m gonna quote Feynman here, so: “The first principle is that you must not fool yourself — and you are the easiest person to fool.” We don’t tend to think that we can be fooled. But of course we can. So actually, if you wanna talk about it, I start class by fooling my students.

Eric Cross (23:03):

Wait, what do you do? What do you do for that?

Melanie Trecek-King (23:05):

Oh, so this is really fun. Day 1 of class, after the syllabus, I tell my … so you’re in my class now, Eric. “So I have a friend, and she’s a psychic. She’s an astrologer and she’s pretty good at what she does. I mean, she’s got books and she’s been on TV and stuff. She knows I teach this course about skepticism. And so she’s agreed to test how effective she is by providing personality assessments to students in class. So if you wanna participate, what I need from you is your birthday, your full name, answer a few questions. Like, if your house was on fire and you could take one thing, what would it be? Or if you could get paid for anything to do anything for a living, what would it be? Um, there’s a third one. Oh! If you could have any superpower, what would it be?” So the next class, it’s usually over a weekend. The next class I say, “OK, I’ve got your personality assessments back, but remember, we wanna test how effective she is. So in order to do that, I need you to read your profile as quietly as possible. And then I’m gonna have you rate her accuracy on a scale of 1 to 5. OK? So close your eyes; rate her.” Over the years doing this, it’s about a 4.3 to 4.5 out of 5. They think she’s pretty accurate. OK? “So now, if you feel comfortable, get with a person next to you. And I want you to talk about what parts of the personality assessment really spoke to you and, and why, and why you thought she was accurate or not.” And it takes them 5, 10 minutes before they realize they all got the same one. So, this is not my original experiment. It was first done by Bertram Forer in … I think it was the ’50s. And it’s done in psychology classrooms. James Randi made it famous. But the personality assessment itself is full of what are called Barnum statements. So, named after P.T. Barnum. These are statements that are very generic. So, “You have a need to be liked and admired by people. You are often quiet and reserved, but there are times where you can be the life of the party.”

Eric Cross (25:13):

How do you know this about me, by the way? This is a — I feel like you know me right now.

Melanie Trecek-King (25:17):

“There are times where you’ve wondered whether you’ve done the right thing.”

Eric Cross (25:19):

This is getting weird.

Melanie Trecek-King (25:21):

I’m just on fire, right? So these are Barnum statements. They’re the basis of personality assessment.

Eric Cross (25:29):

Mel, can I pause you right there? You said Barnum. Is that the same Barnum, like Barnum & Bailey Circus?

Melanie Trecek-King (25:34):

Yeah. P.T. Barnum, who didn’t actually say “There’s a sucker born every minute,” but we attribute him with that kind of ethos. These statements though, if you read a horoscope or even like personality indicators, like the MBTI, it is basically pseudo-scientific. And it ends up with lots of these Barnum statements. They produce what’s called the Barnum Effect, which is, “Wow, that’s so me! How did you know me?” I could even do more. Like, you have a box of photos in your house that need to be sorted. Or unused prescriptions. And these can apply to nearly everyone, but they produce this effect where we go, “Wow, that is so me!” Right? So by fooling them this way, I get to … well, so the next thing is, “Yes, I lied to you. And I’d like to tell you I won’t do that again. But I’m not going to, ’cause I might. So be on your guard.” But I did it for free. And why did I do it? “I did it because I could tell you ‘I could fool you,’ but you wouldn’t necessarily believe me. So I fooled you, so that you would learn what it feels like to be fooled.” It’s not fun. But we’re gonna make a joke outta this. And students are almost never upset about this ’cause it’s a fun process and they’re all fooled. And again, the point is, I didn’t disprove psychic powers. I didn’t just disprove psychics with this exercise. But I did show you how easy it was to fake. So if somebody is gonna tell you that they can know these things about you through some way, hopefully the evidence they provide should be stronger than something that’s easily faked. Right? Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. If you claim to be able to read my personality based on my birthdate, then I need more than something that you can be taught to do in 15 minutes. So, I fool them to convince them that they could be fooled.

Eric Cross (27:27):

You’re giving them a practice scenario for thinking. And I was thinking about basketball. I grew up playing basketball. And my coach would have our own team be the defenders of the next team we were gonna play, so that we can be prepared for the defense. We were gonna see. Now, when I’m thinking about education, and what you just said reminded me of this, it’s like we’re often just teaching offense. We’re always teaching the plays. We’re always teaching what to do. But we rarely teach defense. What happens when someone comes towards you and, and they challenge you or they come at you with claims? How do we evaluate this? And I think in pockets we do it. We do claim-evidence-reasoning. We present claims and evidence and reasoning. But we don’t always have practice defending them. And I think there’s great resources. There’s Argumentation Toolkit and there’s all these awesome resources that do this. But does that fit? You’re kind of having them practice defense?

Melanie Trecek-King (28:26):

Yeah. You know, that’s brilliant. I never considered that analogy. But, yeah, in the real world, you don’t just get to always try to score all the time. Someone’s gonna challenge you and give you a claim that maybe you haven’t heard before. So how do you think through it?

Eric Cross (28:41):

Yeah. And you become better. So now I’m thinking about how early could we start doing this? For one, I love the idea of lying to your students, because I do that. And it’s just such a fun scenario. How early could we start implementing these strategies or these ideas or these toolkits? In your mind, what do you imagine? How early could we start this with young people?

Melanie Trecek-King (29:07):

Yeah. I’m so glad you asked that question, ’cause honestly, by the time they get to me, it’s almost too late. And I don’t wanna say it’s too late, ’cause it’s never too late. But, oh, we need to start so much earlier! That example that I gave about the selling pseudoscience argument? I have a wonderful colleague, Bertha Vasquez, who’s a middle school teacher in Miami and the director of TIES at CFI. She did this with her middle school students. And quite frankly, their examples were just as good, or in some cases better, than my college students. And they had so much fun with it, too. And she just said that, you know, <laugh>, they actually are more savvy with the kinds of things that they see online than we — I don’t wanna say give them credit for. But almost that we want to believe. My students give me examples of things that are from corners of the internet that I didn’t know existed. And quite frankly, that’s probably a good thing for my own mental health. But students are on there too, like middle school students, and we need to prepare them for the kinds of things that they see in the wild.

Eric Cross (30:13):

So in middle school, definitely. Now, you’ve also done some work in high school as well, right? In Oklahoma? Did you do some. …?

Melanie Trecek-King (30:17):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (30:18):

…some work with high schoolers? What was that like? Did you see any impact there?

Melanie Trecek-King (30:21):

So I didn’t actually do it in Oklahoma. I have taught the course … actually, you were talking about younger kids. I’ve taught the course to high schoolers in my area that are parts of dual enrollment. And they absolutely ate up the curriculum. And they were wonderful, wonderful students. And it was completely appropriate for … they were juniors, actually. But the course has also been taught in Oklahoma, through a dual enrollment program as well. And it was a small sample size. But we have pre-post testing that showed that it improved their critical thinking, their acceptance of science. But anecdotally the head of the program there said that in his years doing this, he’d never seen a course that helped them improve in their other courses so well. So, I felt very rewarded by hearing this. But apparently their critical thinking skills and information literacy skills helped them succeed in their other courses that they were taking. And I love that the students were transferring those skills to other classes. That’s the whole point.

Eric Cross (31:23):

And that’s a big … I think that what you just said is really the core, especially of what we’ve been talking about this season: What you’re talking about and what you’re teaching can transfer and supports literacy. And this is an example of science doing that across all other content areas. So I think that that’s huge, that that was said. What do people say about this course? I know I went on your website, and I looked at some of the comments that some folks were saying, and I know it’s just a snippet, but what do you hear from the education world about this? Because I don’t see it in many places. I see it kind of embedded, sprinkled into different content areas. But you’re actually teaching it explicitly. Do you tend to find positive feedback, overwhelmingly? Or do you get pushback on on some of this? What’s it been like for you?

Melanie Trecek-King (32:16):

I think the biggest pushback — and it’s good pushback, and I would agree entirely — is with inoculation activities, you do need to be careful to, when you debrief students, you wanna tell them why you did what you did and to use their powers for good and not for fooling other people. And I think importantly, for not putting misinformation out into the wild without having context around it. So if you do these kinds of inoculation activities, like if you have your students create pseudoscience ads, don’t just let them put them on social media. Obviously, you can’t control everything that they’re doing. But explain to them why you wouldn’t wanna do that. As far as everything else, I’ve heard really great feedback. You’re referencing my website. So, when I put together the course, I was trying to find resources for students to read. Textbooks are ridiculously expensive and I couldn’t find anything that I really wanted students to buy. So I just started writing, and I put it on my site. I have a site that’s basically the core of the curriculum. More in progress. And then I’ve got some of the topics that we explore and those are all assigned readings. My students are captive, in that I know they want a grade, and for four months they have to sit with me for the entire semester, in that I’ve specifically ordered the content in a way that would be most conducive to them learning these things. On the internet, though, and on social media, ’cause I post on there as well, people come in from all kinds of entry points, and so the goal would be to have them start at the beginning and go to the end. But people … I’m pleasantly surprised that there is an audience for critical thinking and science literacy content out there. And so that really warms my heart. But I am doing more and more for educators. And so I have a section for educators. I put content on there. I put assignments, the assignments that we’ve talked about and more, are on there. And the educators that I’ve had use it have just been really wonderful. Like, I hear great things. If I might, the biggest issue that I’m having is actually reaching educators. I’ve gone to — I met you at NSCA, actually, that was only last summer.

Eric Cross (34:30):

Oh, wow. Wow.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:32):

Right?

Eric Cross (34:32):

Yeah, you’re right. It wasn’t even a year.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:35):

Yeah, I think it was like July last year. So, um, you’ve been to the conferences. And I just went to the last one as well. But I have yet to figure out a way to really get in front of enough educators to share the content. So if anybody’s listening and is interested in learning more, please let me know! <Laugh>

Eric Cross (34:52):

Yes. And we talked about your website, but I didn’t say what the website was. So it’s ThinkingIsPower.com.

Melanie Trecek-King (34:57):

Yes.

Eric Cross (34:58):

And on there, there’s tons of resources. There is the toolkit. And it’s all free.

Melanie Trecek-King (35:06):

Yes.

Eric Cross (35:07):

And there’s a dope t-shirt on there that I just bought today, that Melanie’s actually wearing right now. It says, “Be curious, be skeptical, and be humble.” And I love that. Because I think one of the things that we can’t forget about teaching people how to think and critically evaluating information, sometimes those conversations can become very dehumanizing. And what I mean by that is it sometimes can become, like, intellectual sport, where we forget that there’s a human being on the other other side. And we lose that empathy and compassion. We can kind of see that. It just becomes this intellectual jousting and arguing. And one of the things I know about you, and when you talk about this or you talk about the work that you do, and even the shirt that you’re wearing, there’s this, “be humble.” There’s this human that is never lost in this. And you said it, too: When you’re teaching your students and you’re equipping them with all of these intellectual skills and all of these tools, to use it for good. So to maintain your humanity, to maintain your character, and then to use it to edify and lift people up, not to go out and do harm. That balance, I think, is so, so important. So it’s something that I really appreciate about you and how you teach.

Melanie Trecek-King (36:19):

I appreciate those kind words. Actually—

Eric Cross (36:21):

Oh, of course!

Melanie Trecek-King (36:22):

—and if I might, I sometimes see people using critical thinking like a weapon. It’s like, “I have learned fallacies and I’m just gonna use the tools of critical thinking to tell you why you’re stupid, or why you’re wrong, and why my position is right!” But real critical thinking involves applying those same standards to your own thought processes. And even something like argumentation: the goal of our argumentation is not to BE right; it’s to GET it right. And so we’re on the same team. If we’re arguing about something, if the idea is in scientific argumentation we’re trying to find the truth, which one of us is making a better argument based on the evidence? Can your perspective help me see my own blind spots and vice versa? And the more different perspectives that we have, the more able we are to find whatever reality is. But we are in this together. And so, yeah, I think … I’m glad to hear that that’s coming through. But if you don’t have the kind of humility that says, “You know, I could be wrong,” then you’re never gonna change your mind anyway. So having the humility to say, I’m wrong. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (37:33):

Yeah. You end up just seeing people just defend turf, as opposed to support “look for truth.” And I know for me, my own education journey, I end up with more questions than answers anyways. So I go in trying to find an answer for something and I end up with 10 more questions. And I go, “OK, this is kind of how it is.” You go down this rabbit hole and you just end up with all these different questions. And it forces the humility, because you’re like, “I don’t know! I think this is what it could be, but it could also be these other answers or explanations. So this is just where I’m at, based on what we know right now, at this present time, which might shift.”

Melanie Trecek-King (38:07):

And that sounds reasonable. Yes. Which might shift. Yes.

Eric Cross (38:11):

And especially for us as life-science biology teachers, our content is something that definitely shifts. I know some of the things I teach now are not things that I learned when I was even in middle school. Just because things evolve. They change. We learn, we get new data. That’s just the way it is.

Melanie Trecek-King (38:24):

<Sighs> And Pluto is no longer a planet.

Eric Cross (38:26):

I know. Rest in — well, no, Pluto’s still there. Yeah. It’s no longer a planet. But that was one part of my kindergarten memorizations <laugh> is Pluto being in there.

Melanie Trecek-King (38:36):

Gotta change your mind.

Eric Cross (38:38):

I know. Any words of advice for science educators out there who want to focus more on honing these critical thinking skills and strategies with their own students, but they don’t know where to start? Where would you point them? Or what advice would you give them?

Melanie Trecek-King (38:52):

I think start with what you want the students to know. And not necessarily the FACTS that you want students to know, but start with the skills that you want them to know. And then really be honest with your process. When I designed Science for Life, I started with, “these are the skills that I want students to know.” And everything was in service of that. So this sort of backwards design, I think, helped me follow a path that was more likely to be useful, if that makes any sense. But it really required doing it all over again. So don’t be afraid to question the things that you’re currently doing, even if that’s all you’ve been taught or all you know.

Eric Cross (39:41):

What I’m hearing is, don’t be afraid to question your own assumptions about what you’re doing. And don’t be afraid to adapt or change or modify. Kinda, pivot. Be flexible.

Melanie Trecek-King (39:51):

Yes, be flexible and pivot. And this is where I’m in a different position than middle school and high school educators. Because I have complete freedom over what I teach in my class.

Eric Cross (40:01):

Sure.

Melanie Trecek-King (40:01):

At the end of the semester, I always joke with non-majors that there’s nothing they have to know, which actually gives me a lot of flexibility, because I could teach ’em a lot of different things. So if there are things that you have to teach students, obviously that’s one thing. But I personally think that the way that we’ve been teaching science needs a refresher. A rethinking. And so I would say, “If you want your students to learn science literacy, honestly ask, what does that mean to you? And what would that look like to get to that point?” For me, though, it was also keeping in mind that maybe I didn’t already know the best way to do that.

Eric Cross (40:43):

One of the things you mentioned earlier is trying to reach out to educators. And I know that when we work together, it’s a force multiplier. And what you’re doing is developing skills. And there’s these skills that are happening right now in academia that you’re doing. And then how do we transfer that into middle and high school. Or, I’m sorry, middle and elementary school, high school. We need to get more people into this conversation to kind of brainstorm and figure that out. We have a Facebook group, Science Connections: The Community, where we have educators that gather. That can be one place we start the conversation. And again, I know on your website you’ve been super active on social media; you’ve grown your presence on Twitter and all these different places, engaging with folks. Which is awesome. ‘Cause I know I see your posts and I’m saving the things that you’re posting and I’m thinking of ways that I can do it in my classroom. I’m gonna take that product. By the way, is that on your website, the lesson that you do with the product?

Melanie Trecek-King (41:43):

No, actually. So the article, “How to Sell Pseudoscience” is … I know Bertha Vasquez wrote up a version of it.

Eric Cross (41:50):

Maybe we can grab that. ‘Cause we might be able to put that into the show notes for folks, because she’s a middle school educator. If there’s already something that’s been done for teachers like us, we’re like, “Yeah, let me get that and let me remix it and make it my own!” if there’s already a exemplar out there.

Melanie Trecek-King (42:04):

Yeah, she’s done it. And so I will absolutely share that with you.

Eric Cross (42:08):

So, all season long, we’ve been talking about science as the underdog. We kind of framed it, you know, science oftentimes takes a back seat to math and English. It’s kinda the first thing to go. Or the first area where time can get cut. Because of what gets tested gets focused on, oftentimes. And then in addition to that, when you’re a multi-subject teacher, elementary science isn’t just one thing — it’s every field. You know, you’re a biologist, which is different than a geologist. And when you’re teaching every subject, that’s a lot. And you might not have had a science class for years. And the realities that we’re seeing over and over with different researchers and practitioners is that science could actually enhance literacy, and building those skills. And I think you really talked about it with the critical thinking skills. Those can transfer. Or the administrator that said, “This is one of the only courses I’ve seen where it transfers to other areas.” Could you share maybe with our listeners, just any advice for advocating for science in their own world?

Melanie Trecek-King (43:13):

Wow, I’m not sure I’m qualified to answer that question! One of the things that comes to mind though — because I was listening to your last episode and educators … I honestly didn’t realize how little time they had for science. And how often science was then the first to go, to allow room for other subjects. But science overlaps with a lot of other issues. And so I feel like there could be a way to bring in science when teaching these other subjects. So, for example, argumentation and logical fallacies are easy to apply to reading and writing. Information literacy, and being able to find good information online, teaching students how to laterally read, to be able to check a source, or how to use Google effectively, to put in neutral search terms to find sources, or teaching students how to recognize the characteristics of conspiratorial thinking: All of these things can overlap with so many other subjects. So the scientist in me is a little biased towards science being important enough to do this. But try to bring it into the other subjects. It doesn’t have to be completely separate.

Eric Cross (44:43):

So integrating science into other things. And I … big believer. And a hundred percent agree with you. Now I’m gonna ask a question that kinda like takes us backwards. You shared an app with me when we first met that I thought was really cool. And I know it’s a friend or colleague of yours. But as a middle school teacher, I thought it was great, because it was something that my students could download and practice some of the skills that you’re talking about. Would you talk a little bit about the cranky uncle? Is it the Cranky Uncle app?

Melanie Trecek-King (45:17):

Cranky Uncle.

Eric Cross (45:18):

Could you share a little bit about that?

Melanie Trecek-King (45:20):

Yeah. Cranky Uncle is awesome. So, Cranky Uncle is the brainchild of John Cook, who is the founder of Skeptical Science and the author of the 97% Consensus study on climate change. Cranky Uncle … so he’s also a cartoonist. And Cranky Uncle is a cartoon game where … I don’t even have to explain who Cranky Uncle is to my students. Everybody inherently gets the, the character, right? So he’s like the guy at Thanksgiving that you don’t wanna talk to because he denies climate change and he’s just really cranky. But Cranky Uncle uses the techniques of science denial, which are summarized by the acronym FLICC: So it’s Fake experts, Logical fallacies, Impossible expectations, Cherry-picking, and Conspiratorial thinking. So he uses those techniques. Again, this is technique-based inoculation. So they recognize the techniques in the game, and you earn cranky points. And as you make Cranky crankier and crankier because you’re recognizing his techniques, you learn the techniques of science denial, and level up and open up other techniques. This is another one of those examples where climate change has a lot of science behind it, right? And if you wanted to get to the science behind climate change for any particular issue … so let’s say it’s cold today, so I’m gonna say there’s no climate change. OK? If I’m gonna unpack that at a factual level, and with science, we could be here for a while. But if I told you, “That’s like saying, ‘I just ate a sandwich so there’s no global hunger.’” OK? So that’s a parallel argument. Humorous. Love to use this kind of argumentation, ’cause it makes for some … I mean, it’s funny, but you get the point. It’s an anecdote. And anecdotes aren’t good evidence. So just like that, you could teach the technique of using an anecdotal fallacy for climate-change denial. So, I have my students play this game. You could do it when you’re studying argumentation. You could do it for science denial. I use an inoculation extension with that, where I have my students pretend that … um, actually, back up for a second. So I teach a class on critical thinking. And at the end of semesters I would get emails from students on, well, they’re failing the class, but they really shouldn’t, for all of these reasons. And reading these emails, I’m like, “If you think that’s a good argument, you clearly didn’t learn what I was hoping you would learn.” So I now have my students, early in the semester, after they play Cranky, pretend that it is the end of the semester and you’re failing the class and you’re failing because you didn’t do the work. Use at least four of the fallacies from class to argue for why you should pass. So they have to put it on a discussion forum, and they’ll say things like, “Well, if you fail me, then I won’t get into graduate school and then people will die and it will all be your fault.” Or, “My dog died, and so I was really sad.” Or, um, “You’re just a terrible teacher. And you’re short. So I don’t like you.” Or that kind of thing. So, oh, they love to attack my character. It’s really funny. But it’s supposed to be funny. And the point is, the students are using those arguments, they’re using the fallacies, to argue for something. And so by creating that misinformation themselves, they learn how those fallacies work. But taken together, I mean, everything that we just talked about there, Cranky Uncle, and the fallacy assignment, or whatever iteration you want that to be in, that doesn’t have to be in a purely science unit. Right? That could be sociology. It could be argumentation. It could be English.

Eric Cross (49:01):

Absolutely. That could be totally a prompt in an English class. And practiced in there. And then this could be an interdisciplinary thing, going back and forth between English and and science. Just having these discussions and looking at it from different angles. And you’re practicing the skills in two different contexts. So you get into argumentation. And then that app, I know I had fun with it. And the questions on there definitely resonate with people in my own family. I’m like, “I feel like I’m talking to exactly somebody that I’m related to right now.” <Laugh> Melanie, anything else that you wanna share, or discuss or highlight, before we wrap up?

Melanie Trecek-King (49:39):

So we could talk about lateral reading, if you like. ‘Cause I know a lot of educators use the crap test.

Eric Cross (49:45):

Please, please, please talk about that.

Melanie Trecek-King (49:47):

So, when evaluating sources, a lot of educators teach what’s called the CRAP test. And I wish I remembered what it stood for. But basically what you do, a lot of us have been taught when you go to a website, to figure out if it’s reliable, you wanna go to the about page. Read the mission; see who they are; maybe read some of the content; evaluate the language. So is it inflammatory? Are they making logical arguments? Are the links to reputable sources as well? And the problem is that if a site wants to mislead you, they’re not going to tell you that it’s a bunk site, right? They’re just gonna do a good job of misleading you. And so, what you wanna do instead … the CRAP test basically is an evaluation of a site. And that’s what’s called vertical reading. So you’re looking through a site to determine if it’s reliable. Uh, I think his name’s Sam Wineberg at Stanford, proposed something called lateral reading. Where, instead of on the site, what you wanna do is literally open a new tab and into the search engine type the source. You could do the claim, too. And then something like Reliability or FactCheck or whatever it’s that you’re checking, and then see what other reputable sites have to say about it. So, in their study, actually, they did a really interesting study where they compared professional fact checkers to PhD historians to Stanford undergrads. And they evaluated — I wish you could … um, there’s two pediatrician organizations. One’s like the American Association of Pediatrics and the American Academy of Pediatricians, something like that. They’re very similar sounding. So you give them to students. I do this with my students as well, the same study. So I give my students those two websites. And I say, “Which one of these is more reliable?” And they do exactly what most of us do, which is spend time on the site looking around. And most of the time, if not nearly all the time, they come to the wrong conclusion. And so then I tell them what lateral reading is: “OK, instead of looking through the site, open a new tab, search the organization and reliability.” Something like that. And it takes probably 30 seconds before they realize one of them has been dubbed by the Southern Poverty Law Center as a hate group. As opposed to the other one, which is like a hundred year old huge pediatrician organization that produces their own journals and so on. But nearly all my students are fooled. And in the study, none of the fact checkers were fooled. I’m gonna get the number right. It’s something like 50% of the historians and 20% of the Stanford undergraduates got the correct answer. And they spent a lot more time on it. So it’s a great way to teach students how to use the power of the internet to evaluate sources much more quickly and, effectively. And yes, use Wikipedia, right? Wikipedia is not a final answer, but Wikipedia is actually pretty accurate. So if Wikipedia is the first place you stop, then yes, go there, see what Wikipedia says, and then follow some of their sources.

Eric Cross (52:47):

What popped in my head was like, Yelp reviews for websites. That almost sounds like what it was. It’s like when I search for a product, I don’t go and read the product description marketing. ‘Cause that’s all designed to sell me on something. But I’ll go and look in Reliability, if it’s like a car, or just other sites to cross-reference. And that sounds like what you were talking about is like cross-referencing. Seeing what FactChecker [sic] said about this site, versus seeing what a site says about itself.

Melanie Trecek-King (53:14):

Well, that’s a great analogy. Because if I wanted to know if a product was effective, what the manufacturer says about the product, clearly there’s a strong chance of bias. Right? They’re going to be on their best, um, put their best foot forward. Versus, what do independent reviewers say about this product?

Eric Cross (53:35):

Yep. And I am known to research something to death. And I get something called “paralysis by analysis.”

Melanie Trecek-King (53:42):

Ohhhh, yeah.

Eric Cross (53:44):

And it’s so bad that even if I’m trying to buy, like, towels, I need to find the best-bang-for-the-buck towel. I have to defer some of these decisions out, because I’m on the internet for three hours now. I’ll be a pseudo-expert in towels, and thread count, and all of that stuff. But yeah, that maybe that’s just the science person.

Melanie Trecek-King (54:03):

I mean, I feel your pain. I do the same thing. <Laugh> It’s annoying. Like, it’s just towels. What does it really matter? But yeah.

Eric Cross (54:10):

Coffee! It doesn’t matter what it is. I just need to go, “OK, I have to use these powers for good. Otherwise I’m gonna be researching forever.”

Melanie Trecek-King (54:16):

I wanna say one other thing. So, again, this is a college class and I have a lot of freedom. But one of the driving philosophies behind the class is a wonderful quote in a book, Schick and Vaughn, How to Think about Weird Things. And they said, “The quality of your life is determined by the quality of your decisions, and the quality of your decisions is determined by the quality of your thinking.” And I know my students want a grade. But I’m really trying to teach them how to be empowered through better thinking. That’s where the name “Thinking is Power” came from. I mean, we say “Knowledge is Power,” but it’s not enough to know things. And there’s too much to know. So being able to think and be empowered to have your own agency and not fall for someone’s bunk is my goal for my students.

Eric Cross (55:07):

And doing that is gonna help them through the rest of their lives. Not be swindled, not be taken advantage of, be able to make better decisions. There’s so many benefits to building that skill. And I know your students have definitely grown and benefited. I’m sure you’ve heard, long after you’ve taught them, heard back from them and how they’ve applied that course to their lives. Melanie, thank you so much for being here. For a few things. One, for providing and filling this space where there’s such a need. Again, the critical thinking resources, the tools that you used, are so, so important. If we ever lived in a time where they were critical, it was really what we experienced during the pandemic in the last few years. We watched people’s information literacy and science literacy play out in real time. And we literally saw life-and-death decisions being made based off those skills. That highlighted, I think how important this is. And then, taking the time to generate resources for educators like myself, that we can take and adapt and put into our classroom and start teaching our students. ‘Cause like you said, by the time they get to you, they’re, they’re so far downstream or so far in a system that, depending on the teachers that they’ve had and the education system they’ve been in, may or may not have even touched on these things. They might have learned a lot of facts, but they may not have built their muscle to be able to critically analyze and interpret the world around them. And you’ve just — even the last year, it hasn’t even been a year since we talked the first time — I’ve watched your resources continue to grow, and you share them. And so I, on behalf of those of us in K–12, thank you. And thank you for being here.

Melanie Trecek-King (56:49):

Oh, well, thank you so much for this opportunity. Thank you for everything that you do, reaching out to other educators and for giving me a platform to hopefully reach other educators.

Eric Cross (57:00):

Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Melanie Trecek-King, Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College and creator of Thinking Is Power. Make sure you don’t miss any new episodes of Science Connections by subscribing to the show, wherever you get podcasts. And while you’re there, we’d really appreciate it if you can leave us a review. It’ll help more listeners to find the show. You can find more information on all of Amplify shows at our podcast hub, Amplify.com/Hub. Thanks again for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Melanie Trecek-King says about science

“Students carry in their pocket access to basically all of humanity’s knowledge at this moment in time. The question is: do they know what they’re looking for?”

– Melanie Trecek-King

Associate Professor of Biology at Massasoit Community College and creator of Thinking is Power

Meet the guest

Melanie Trecek-King is the creator of Thinking is Power, an online resource that provides critical thinking education to the general public. She is currently an associate professor of biology at Massasoit Community College, where she teaches a general-education science course designed to equip students with empowering critical thinking, information literacy, and science literacy skills. An active speaker and consultant, Trecek-King loves to share her “teach skills, not facts” approach with other science educators, and help schools and organizations meet their goals through better thinking. Trecek-King is also the education director for the Mental Immunity Project and CIRCE (Cognitive Immunology Research Collaborative), which aim to advance and apply the science of mental immunity to inoculate minds against misinformation.

A woman with long blonde hair and a black top is shown in front of a blue background, framed by a circular graphic with an illustrated flask in the corner.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

S3-01: Science as the underdog, and the research behind it

A graphic with the text "Science Connections" and "Amplify" features colorful circles and curved lines on a dark gray background.

Get ready for season 3 of Science Connections: The Podcast!

In our first episode, we unpack the research around our season theme of science as the underdog with Horizon Research, Inc. Vice President Eric R. Banilower and  Senior Researcher Courtney Plumley. Eric and Courtney dive into the research they’ve found and their experiences as former educators to show how science is often overlooked in K–12 classrooms. We discuss how the science classroom compares to other subjects in terms of time and resources, how schools are a reflection of society, and what’s needed to change science and its impact on a larger scale.

We hope you enjoy this episode and explore more from Science Connections by visiting our main page!

DOWNLOAD TRANSCRIPT

Courtney Plumley (00:00):

We asked teachers how much science, professional development, they’ve had in the last three years, and nearly half of elementary teachers said none.

Eric Cross (00:10):

Welcome to Science Connections. I’m your host, Eric Cross. I am super-excited to be kicking off the third season with the show. This entire season will be exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And we’re gonna make the case for science, by showing how and why it can be used more effectively. In the coming episodes, we’re gonna talk about how science can be better integrated into other content areas like literacy and math, and explore some of the benefits that you might not be thinking about good science instruction. But first, science as the underdog. I bet some of you out there feel like science is the underdog in your community at school. I know I have at times. To kick off this season, I’m gonna talk to two people who really studied this question by looking at the state of science instruction across the US. Eric Banilower is Vice President of Horizon Research and Courtney Plumley is Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. Eric was the principal investigator and Courtney an author of the latest in a series of studies called “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” We’re gonna dive into the findings of their most recent report to see what the data’s showing us. Please enjoy my discussion with Eric Banilower and Courtney Plumley. Courtney, hello. And thank you so much for joining us.

Courtney Plumley (01:25):

Hi Eric. It’s nice to be here.

Eric Cross (01:26):

And Eric, welcome.

Eric R. Banilower (01:27):

We’re thrilled to be here, so thank you for having us.

Eric Cross (01:30):

I was reading through the report. Four hundred…a very thorough report, 471 pages, I think, as I got it?

Eric R. Banilower (01:37):

And that’s only one of the many reports from that study.

Eric Cross (01:40):

Yeah. You all have done your work, so I’m really excited to to talk to you about this. And on this season of the show, we’re exploring the theme of science as the underdog. And I think a lot of our listeners, we feel like science is an underdog either in their school or in their district. But you’ve actually done some research on this, in a 2018 study, “The National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education.” So I wanna talk about this report. But first I was hoping you can kind of set the stage. How did you come to work on this report, and then, big picture, what were you hoping to find out?

Eric R. Banilower (02:10):

So the 2018 study that you just mentioned was actually the sixth iteration of a series of studies dating back to 1977. And we collect data every decade or so—you know, plus or minus a few years. And really, what we’re trying to do is get a snapshot of what the science and math education system looks like in in the nation. So my role grew. I started working at Horizon in about 1998, after teaching high school for five years in California. And then going to graduate school. And right about that time, the company was doing the 2000 iteration of the survey. And I worked on it with the team here at Horizon. And then we did it again in 2012. And I had a much more prominent role in that study, and became the kind of leader of the study. And in 2018, the most recent version, we just did it again. So the goal of this study is really to kind of examine key aspects of the K–12 STEM education system. And the main audience of the work has traditionally been policy makers, researchers, and practitioners who work at the federal, state, and district level.

Eric Cross (03:30):

So this study, you took kind of a sample size, but it’s reflective of trends that we tend to see across the nation as a whole. Would that be fair to say?

Eric R. Banilower (03:38):

Yes, definitely it is. It is a random sample of schools in the country. So we start with a list of all the public and private schools in the nation, and then do a random sample of those schools, and then work really, really hard to recruit schools to agree to be in the study. And that has gotten harder every time we’ve done the study, for many understandable reasons. And then once we have schools on board, we sample teachers within schools. So we don’t even survey every teacher in a school. It’s really a sub-sample. So that we can make inferences about the nation as a whole.

Eric Cross (04:14):

Makes sense. And so Courtney, what did you find out about the time spent on science instruction in US schools?

Courtney Plumley (04:22):

So, I’m gonna talk about elementary teachers to begin with.

Eric Cross (04:26):

Because that was your past life, right?

Courtney Plumley (04:28):

I am a former elementary teacher, yeah. So that’s kind of where my head is. And that’s relatable for me. Right? So we asked teachers, like, how many days of the week or weeks of the year that they teach elementary school. And fewer than 20% teach science every day of the school year. They kind of do one or two things, for the most part. They teach a couple days a week or they teach every day of the week, but only for, like, maybe six weeks, and then they swap with social studies and they kind of do that across the school year. Which is really different from, like, math, right? We also asked elementary teachers, how often do they teach math, and it’s every day of the year. Then we also asked them how many minutes they teach when they’re teaching, and we kind of did the math to figure out, all right, if they taught science every day of the school year, how many minutes would it be in a single day, so that we could make a more comparable comparison with math and ELA. If you were to work it out, how many minutes of science an elementary teacher teaches across the year, and break it down to per day, it’s like 18 minutes for the lower elementary grades, 27 for the upper elementary grades. Which is not a lot. But it’s pretty much an hour a day in math, and 80 plus minutes in ELA. So, a lot less. And then, you know, when I was teaching, the first thing to go was always science, right? If there was an assembly, if there was early release or whatever, that was the first thing to go. So those numbers might even be higher. Just because they aren’t factoring that kind of thing in, too.

Eric Cross (06:05):

So, now I’m curious. That is something that I’ve seen just anecdotally, science being the first thing to go. I feel like I’ve seen that almost…it’s almost become a meme, that I’ve heard that so often. Just in your experience, why do you think that is that huge disparity between the two?

Courtney Plumley (06:26):

Well, I mean, when I was teaching, I was teaching third grade. I had an end-of-grade test in math and ELA for my kids. I didn’t have one in science. So the administration said, “Hey, if you’re gonna drop something, drop something that’s not tested.”

Eric Cross (06:41):

Simple as that. And Eric, you, past life: physics teacher. High school. What did you see? ‘Cause our listeners run the gamut from elementary all the way up to high school. What did you see, as far as relative science instruction in the secondary level?

Eric R. Banilower (07:00):

Sure. You know, secondary is just a whole different situation than elementary. Rght? Because you have departmentalization. I taught science. I didn’t have to teach other subjects. And students had periods, and they still do, sorry, they still have periods, even though it’s been a long time since I taught. And you know, they rotate from one class to another. So all the classes were essentially the same length. So, you know, when I was teaching, it was about 50-minute periods. So in terms of minutes of a class or minutes on a subject, it’s not really different. But what is different is what students are required to take in order to graduate high school. One of the things we asked schools about in this study was how many years of a subject do students have to take in order to graduate? And what we saw was in mathematics, over half the schools in the nation require students to take four years of mathematics to graduate. OK? And the vast majority of the rest, about 44%, require three years in science. Most schools require three years. Very few require four years. And many, or a fair number, still only require two years to graduate. So the expectation of what students are taking is lower in science than it is in mathematics.

Eric Cross (08:20):

So you were seeing the same trend in secondary, essentially.

Eric R. Banilower (08:24):

Yes.

Eric Cross (08:24):

The amount of time devoted to the instruction of science…we’re kind of seeing it mirrored just across K–12 across the board.

Eric R. Banilower (08:33):

That’s correct.

Eric Cross (08:34):

And that’s across the country. ‘Cause the sample size represents teachers from Alaska, Hawaii, the South, SoCal, everywhere. So what’s been the reaction to that number? Like 18 to 20 minutes is…I mean, it’s, it’s half of my lunch at our school. What’s been the reaction to that number since this data has been published?

Eric R. Banilower (08:58):

I don’t know, Courtney, if you want to take that…

Courtney Plumley (09:00):

It’s a lot of what you just did. Like, what??? Like, how is it possible to teach all the things you need to teach in such a little amount of time?

Eric R. Banilower (09:08):

What’s really kind of surprising to me, though — though now that I’ve worked on three iterations of the study, it no longer surprises me, but it did at first — is that these numbers really aren’t changing since we’ve started doing this study. You know, people thought maybe with No Child Left Behind and the increase in accountability, time on science might actually go down, because there was more testing in math and English Language Arts. It didn’t happen. It was pretty much constant, that this has been kind of the state of science education for a long time.

Eric Cross (09:44):

So Eric, if I’m hearing you right: The past studies, we’re not seeing an increase or a decline. This has been this way for how many years, roughly, would you say? Since it’s been studied?

Eric R. Banilower (09:54):

You know, I’d have to go back to the 1977 report to get the numbers, but I’m gonna say since then, it has not changed much, if at all.

Eric Cross (10:03):

So this has kind of been entrenched. This has been the norm for almost for the career of a teacher, almost generationally. We’re looking at anyone who’s been in the highest levels of leadership to someone just entering the classroom, this has been the way it’s always been. This is kind of for many people what they’ve only known.

Eric R. Banilower (10:20):

Right.

Eric Cross (10:21):

Kind of become the norm.

Courtney Plumley (10:21):

We didn’t even have science when I was in elementary school. We had science on a cart that came by, you know, every other week.

Eric Cross (10:28):

Was that like a food truck, but like the science version of it? It shows up and does quick science and takes off?

Courtney Plumley (10:35):

And New York was, I mean — we always watched Voyage of the Mimi. I don’t know if you ever watched that. But that’s what we watched every single time the Science on the Cart came. So it’s like a marine biology show. Ben Affleck was on it when he was a kid.

Eric Cross (10:48):

<laugh> Really? For me it was, Mr. Wizard. For some of my students, even now, Bill Nye. You know, the Bill Nye show or something would come on. So what happens when you look at less wealthy districts? Is there a relationship between community resources and science instruction, or is it pretty much equal no matter what the district resources are, the school’s resources are? Did you see any data there?

Eric R. Banilower (11:12):

Yes. We actually did a lot of disaggregating the data by community type, student demographics in the schools, to look to see whether there were areas of inequities across the country. And, you know, one of the factors we looked at was kind of a measure of socioeconomic status. You know, wealth in the community. By looking at percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. And interestingly, in terms of time on science instruction, there is actually not a relationship between income level and how much time is spent at the elementary level on science, which actually surprised us.

Eric Cross (11:54):

Because you might have expected it to be the other way now. And granted, it’s 18 to 20 minutes, there isn’t much more to shave off off of that. But were there other differences, like when you compared those communities? Maybe it wasn’t the amount of science instruction, but was there anything else, like teacher preparedness, resources? Were there anything else that you did see discrepancies in? Or was it equal across the board?

Eric R. Banilower (12:13):

No, unfortunately there, there have been, and still are, a number of areas where community resources are related to pretty substantial differences in educational opportunities that students have. So, you know, we’re talking about the high school science requirements. One of the things that we saw was that high schools in less wealthy communities tend to offer less rigorous science courses than high schools in better-off-financially communities. So they may not be AP courses or second year advanced courses to the same extent that there are in the wealthier communities. That’s one big difference that we saw. Another one was what you were just saying about, sort of, the teachers who teach in these communities. You know, I think that for many years people have had a feeling that the best teachers go to the better off schools because it’s easier to teach there. Well, we see that the schools with the most poverty, they tend to have the newer teachers, who are just starting their career. They tend to have teachers who are less well prepared to teach their subject. And there’s a host of other differences we found. And you know, you mentioned the report being 400 pages. This other report that looks at these differences is also quite long, and, you know, identified a number of areas where there are these disparities in the system.

Eric Cross (13:43):

Well, we appreciate you synthesizing this for us, because this is super-important. And you’ve fleshed out a lot of things. And the fact that it’s driven by data, we as science teachers, we as scientists, being objective, really, really value that. Because this is actually validating a lot of the things that our listeners and myself, we experience anecdotally. But you don’t have a lot of things to network you. And sometimes, when you see this, you wonder if it’s just you, or is are other people experiencing this? And so as you start talking about this data, realizing, oh wow, this is not something in isolation. This is systemic. This is something that’s impacted. And then Eric, what you said about schools that were lower-income, that were under-resourced, and didn’t offer those advanced classes, what are some of the impacts of that, maybe downstream, of doing that? Not having those AP classes? I just kind of wanted to put that out there and ask you.

Eric R. Banilower (14:31):

You know, this is a really…this is a current debate right now, about what the goals of schooling K–12 should be. You know, are all kids meant to go to college? Should there be alternative paths? And you know, I know when I was teaching, I would have students say, “Why do I need to know this? I’m not gonna go into science. I’m not gonna study physics. Why do I need to take this?” And, you know, the answer I used to give them was, “You never know where your life is gonna end up and what opportunities you’ll have. And by having these educational experiences, you have more opportunities available to you. Whether or not you choose to go down those paths, you have opportunities. And when you don’t take this kind of coursework, you know, even if you don’t want to go to college, you limit your potential careers. Because so many careers nowadays require some technical knowledge, some knowledge of science, even if it’s not explicitly a science job. It is embedded in our society now. We are a technological and science-based society.”

Eric Cross (15:37):

It reminds me of something that I’ve told my students, that if you become a scientist, that’s awesome. I love that. But if you don’t, and you want to be a dancer or an actor or a lawyer or anything that may not be directly related to STEM, I want you to choose it because it was a choice, and not a lack of options. So as long as you’re choosing not to go in STEM, and you don’t make that decision because you can’t, or because you weren’t given the opportunity. So that’s how I’ve always had this mindset as a teacher. And I’ve explained it to my students. So if you say, “Cross, you know what I want to do, I wanna be an awesome chef,” which, you know, low-key that’s science, right? <laugh> Molecular gastronomy, we know that. But like, you be the best chef. But as long as you’re being a chef because you choose that, and you’re like, “I love science, but I don’t wanna go that direction,” we’re good.

Eric R. Banilower (16:26):

Right. And if you think about, a lot of social justice issues with pollution and climate change, and you look at which communities are more affected by some of these larger environmental problems and challenges, it tends to be the lower socioeconomic communities, the more poverty-stricken communities have worse water, have worse air quality. And so if, if people from these communities are going to make informed decisions about who they’re gonna vote for, about what policies they’re gonna support, those are science topics that you have to have some understanding in order to make informed decisions in your life.

Eric Cross (17:09):

Courtney, you were one of the Swiss Army Knife teachers. This is how I perceive it for elementary. You had to teach everything. And shout out to all of my elementary school teachers that have to be mathematicians and grammar whizzes and scientists and PE instructors and social emotional, all of those different things. you also looked at teacher preparedness. How did teachers feel about teaching science compared to other subjects like language arts and math? Did you see anything there?

Courtney Plumley (17:39):

We did, we did. And I’m glad you said, “How did they feel about it?” Because one thing that, you know, in a survey you can’t really do is capture how someone actually…how good someone actually…the quality of someone’s instruction. But you can ask them how prepared they feel. And you can even ask them like stats, like, “What did you major in in college?” You know. But you really are going on based on what what they say. So we ask them how prepared they feel to teach all the core subjects. And two-thirds of elementary teachers felt very well prepared to teach reading. They felt very well prepared to teach math. But when it comes to science, it’s less than a third felt very well prepared. And you know, like you said, when you’re teaching elementary school, you’re teaching all the subjects. But also in science, there’s usually four main instructional units in a school year. And they’re all from different science disciplines. So not only are you going on, like, “Maybe in college took a lot of bio classes, but I didn’t take any physics classes, and now I have to teach physics to my kids and I have no experience there.” So, you know, we also ask them how well-prepared they felt in these different disciplines. And the numbers are even smaller, you know. Fewer than a quarter felt very well-prepared in life science. And like 13% felt very well-prepared in physical science. So there’s definitely a big difference between how much teachers feel prepared for ELA and math versus science.

Eric Cross (19:08):

And just from a human perspective, when we don’t feel prepared for something, we’re not really gonna probably lean into it as much as we are into our strengths. Like, that’s just kind of how we are across the board.

Courtney Plumley (19:18):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (19:18):

I’m even like that with my own chores in the house. Or when I have things I need to get done, and I might not be as good at doing those things—it’s gonna be a heavy cognitive load; I’m gonna have to do some background research—I tend to find other areas to excel in. Like, I’m gonna be productive in this other area. I’m gonna really crush it here. But this other thing gets put to the back burner.

Courtney Plumley (19:36):

Totally. And the same reason I might skip science today, <laugh> ’cause it’s scary.

Eric Cross (19:41):

Yeah, exactly. But I love this book. <Laugh> Or we could do this math, and let’s really, really dive deep into it. Now, did you also look at professional development and instructional resources that are being provided?

Courtney Plumley (19:53):

We did.

Eric Cross (19:54):

And on the whole, how was the amount—and I’m seeing a trend here, so I’m kind of feeling like I know where this might go—but I wanted to ask it, did the amount of professional development and resources for science, was there much of a difference between that and other subjects?

Eric R. Banilower (20:10):

Well, I’ll start on this, and Courtney, feel free to jump in. You know, one of the things that we asked was how much kind of discretionary funding do schools devote to science and how much to mathematics? So, for consumables or equipment and supplies or computer software for teachers to use in the classroom. And it’s hard to compare, I think, across subjects because the demands for this kind of supplies, et cetera, is very different, I think, in science than it is in mathematics. Right? We have a lot of, you know, equipment for doing investigations, consumable supplies in science. And those things need to be replenished on a regular basis. It turns out, when we look at the data for school discretionary spending on this kind of stuff, the median school spends less than $2 per student at the elementary level on science, compared to over $6 for mathematics. At the high school level, it’s kind of reversed. Schools spend more money on high school science than they do on high school math. but even still, at the high school, it’s less than $7 per student. Which is not a lot of money being devoted to thinking about all the materials, supplies, chemicals, et cetera, that you need to teach science well, at the high school level. More disturbing is the fact that, you know, we were talking about inequities before, schools that serve less well-off communities spend less than schools that serve wealthier communities, by quite a big amount.

Eric Cross (21:46):

So essentially the per-student thing just kind of popped out to me: So, like, an expensive Starbucks drink is what we’re spending on science per student.

Eric R. Banilower (21:57):

At the high school level. Yes.

Eric Cross (21:58):

At the high school level. And I get those catalogs in the mail, from all of those big science companies. You can’t get much for seven bucks. At least, nothing high-level. And I know I do a lot of 99-cent store science. I go down the street, go to the 99-cent store. Thankfully we could do a lot of awesome science with just, you know, cheap things. But a lot of the higher level experiences, they’re pricey. But the experiences are so rich! And $7 at the high school level is nothing. It’s not much at all.

Eric R. Banilower (22:28):

Yeah. It is definitely, you know, kind of shocking to think about what we’re investing in our children’s future.

Eric Cross (22:37):

Now, just to put you both on the spot, ’cause I feel like that we’ve identified some…we’re seeing a trend here, we’re seeing a pattern. We’re talking about, you know, being science teachers. There’s a pattern going on here. Do you think it’s fair to characterize science as the underdog?

Courtney Plumley (22:52):

I think in elementary school, it is a fair statement. Because, like we said before, I mean they’re gonna preference math and ELA almost all the time. I mean, the other thing you’d asked a little bit ago was about professional development, too. And we do have some data on that. And we ask teachers, you know, how much science professional development they’ve had in the last three years. And nearly half of elementary teachers said none. And I know I didn’t have any science professional development. If I was gonna pick from among the catalog, I was picking one that I needed more, like math. Math and ELA. I keep making that statement, but just over and over, it’s the truth.

Eric Cross (23:31):

And going back to what you said earlier, because that’s where the accountability was, right? And that kind of came top-down.

Courtney Plumley (23:38):

Yes.

Eric Cross (23:38):

And influenced everything else.

Eric R. Banilower (23:40):

Yeah. Now, really interesting thing that we did, a year or so ago, ’cause someone asked us, you know, “Hey, could you look at this?” is we compared elementary science instructional time among states where science counted towards accountability versus states where science doesn’t count towards accountability. And at the upper elementary grades, more time was spent on science in schools in states where they had science accountability. Now I’m not arguing for adding science to accountability systems. But that’s a pretty telling piece of data.

Eric Cross (24:19):

What gets measured gets done.

Eric R. Banilower (24:20):

Yeah.

Eric Cross (24:20):

Or what was getting evaluated was getting done. And that raises, that opens up a myriad of other questions about testing, and what that reveals, and all of those different things. But at the end of the day, what you’re finding is that the things that were getting tested were the things that were getting the priority.

Eric R. Banilower (24:36):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (24:37):

How did we get to this point? And Eric, you said it goes back at least to ’77, but we look at society and we’re…I wanna say we’re post-pandemic, but we’re we’re not. but we’re trying to, we’re trying to get past that. But we’re looking at…we had innovations in biology, we have innovations right now in green energy and electric cars and all of these things that are STEM-based. We know that these are things that have moved humanity forward. And we look at the pipeline of people who are in STEM and we, we see the disparities and things like that. Why was science given less of a priority? I’m just curious. Maybe, Courtney, we could start with you, if you have any ideas. Or Eric. Either one. But how did we get here?

Eric R. Banilower (25:22):

<laugh> I think Courtney wants me to take that one. I’m older so I’ve seen more <laugh>. So, you know, I have the gray hair. She doesn’t. I think it’s complicated. And I know this sounds cliche, but but schools are a reflection of society, right? And, and so science education, you know, if you think back when Sputnik was launched, there became this great demand in America to improve and produce more scientists and engineers in response to this Cold War threat. Right? And then in the ’80s there was rising, oh, the gathering storm was an economic argument that we needed to increase science and math, you know, education and people going into those fields in order to compete economically against the global competitors. And I think that America has always produced a fair number, a large number, of high-quality scientists and engineers, you know. And we still lead the world in many ways. But where we’ve identified as a problem is who has those opportunities to go into those fields. You know, it used to be a very select, a very male-dominated, white male-dominated field. Right? And other people didn’t have the opportunity, or they were shown the way out pretty early. And we, I think, have come to realize as a country that, you know, the, the greater the diversity of thought that we can get into these discussions, the more innovative we can be and the more productive as a society we can be. And so I think we’ve had this shift in the country to, instead of thinking about just the quality for the select few, but to be thinking about the quality for everyone. And so that makes it seem like some of these challenges are greater than they used to be. And I think they’re different challenges, right? We’ve evolved as a society and I think schools have evolved.

Eric Cross (27:40):

There is a conversation I was in on a plane with a person who was a materials manager for a company that made the adhesive for sandpaper. And we were flying…I was flying to Denmark and he was flying to some other Scandinavian country. And we were just talking about it. And he came from another industry, and somehow the conversation led to science. I don’t know how that happened. But somehow I just started talking about science and I asked him about, Eric, kind of what you said about the US kind of leading the way in science innovation versus the rest of the world. And I asked him why. And he said one of the reasons why is because the heterogeneous thought. The different groups of people that are coming to a problem actually create more innovative and novel solutions. Versus when it’s more homogeneous. And everyone’s either culturally or just for whatever reason, kind of thinks a certain way. While they might have a more efficient way, the variety of solutions are not as varied and not as novel. I was reminded of that story based on what you just said. So it’s really interesting. So it seems to be that it benefits if we have more heterogeneous groups, more folks who are contributing to STEM, because that’s gonna be solving the next problem more efficiently. Or I guess maybe in my head it seems like the next we need…we do really well when we have a dragon to slay. I mean, it seems like we come together when that’s the case, right? Like, I dunno.

Eric R. Banilower (29:06):

No, I think that’s…I think that’s accurate.

Eric Cross (29:09):

Later on the season of the podcast, we’re gonna explore ways to better integrate science with other subjects like literacy and math. Were you able to study at all any more integrated approaches to science instruction? Does any of your research support that approach?

Courtney Plumley (29:25):

Not on the national survey, we didn’t study that. And it’s something that we’ve talked about before, because it’s difficult to get teachers to…we were talking about instructional time. It’s hard for teachers to put a number on it when they’re integrating, because, you know, it’s not like I have my science block from 3 to 3:30 anymore. Now it’s kind of scattered about. But it’s something that has been in the ether. We’ve been looking at it in a couple of projects. So there’s some evidence that it can be effective, especially for getting more, you know…the idea is you can get more time for science if you are integrating with other subjects. But one thing to kind of caution is like, students need to have opportunities to learn each discipline when they’re doing integrated instruction. So you don’t wanna just have, like, math in your science. Kids already know to just, like, support it. Then it’s hard to take time from math to put it into science when they’re not actually learning anything new. That’s the easy thing to do, though, is say, “Oh, my kids already know how to measure. We did that in a previous unit. So now we’ll we’ll do it as part of our science instruction.” So it’s a lot of work to make it so they’re learning something new, mathematics and science, at the same time. And it’s not really something that we think that teachers should be having to do on their own, with all the other things that teachers have to do. The last thing they need to do is be creating their own, you know, curriculum. Something that’s already…you know, it’s not straightforward. So we’ve been talking about it, we think it’s really something that instructional materials maybe need to be focusing on instead of teachers having to do that on their own,

Eric Cross (31:01):

Teachers would implement it, but asking them to create it is a whole different thing, and it’s a huge ask.

Courtney Plumley (31:08):

Yes.

Eric Cross (31:08):

Yeah. And, did I hear you right? So the ideal situation would’ve been the students learning a newer math concept, but embedded in a science kind of context? Or was that the better way? Versus, “I’m gonna take a math concept they already know and then just put it into the science setting?”

Courtney Plumley (31:26):

Well, if the idea is that you can get more science time if you’re, you know, integrating things, so you can maybe take time away from a specific math block by putting it with science, or whatever, then if the math is something that the kids already know, now you’re just taking away. I think that that has to be new in both cases, in order to justify having more time.

Eric Cross (31:49):

Right. Eric, in the secondary level, any thoughts on that? On integrating these disciplines together?

Eric R. Banilower (31:56):

I think, you know, just like at the elementary level, it can be challenging to do it well. When I taught, I taught my last couple years in a kind of school-within-a-school kind of situation, where our goal was to try to integrate science, mathematics, and language arts. And it’s hard to do that in a meaningful way. And we did not have curriculum materials given to us to help us do this. We were trying to figure out how to do this on our own, while we were teaching 200 kids a day in our subjects. Right? And five preparations. And you know, it’s a big ask of any teacher. And there are teachers who thrive on this and are great at this. And, you know, that’s one thing I wanna, make clear: our data is about the system, and we are former teachers. Almost everyone who works at Horizon is a former teacher. We have the greatest respect for teachers and what they do. And what our data is showing is are kind of like areas where the system isn’t providing teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things. I think at the high school level, there has been this idea of project-based learning where students are bringing together different skills, different ideas from across disciplines. And I think there’s, again, a lot of potential in doing that. But trying to develop those experiences so that they are doing service to the different subjects, so students are learning what they’re supposed to learn in English Language Arts, that they’re learning, important mathematics, and that this is in a science context, where they are getting to do and understand what science is and how science, as a discipline, operates…that’s just a really hard thing to develop.

Eric Cross (33:53):

So what I’m hearing—and I really appreciate the nuance in this, because it’s not a simple “Yes. Integrated is better,”—I’m hearing “Yes. Quality control.” “Yes. It needs to be written not by teachers; they’re the practitioners.” It’s “Yes. And,” not just simply binary. Which…it’s so easy to wanna chunk things and say yes or no on things. But this one seems a much more nuanced approach. And in a future episode, you mentioned project-based learning, we’re gonna try and talk to people who have thoughts on this. And I really appreciate that you talked about project-based learning, because also, how do you evaluate that? How do you evaluate whether or not it is high quality? Is this is something I see? You know, high-quality standards, highest quality science teaching, highly qualified teachers. It’s something that I see often. Now, based on all your research, this is kind of the 30,000-foot view. What advice might you have for people who are thinking about changing the way science is taught in this country? Which hasn’t changed since 1977, at least since we’ve been measuring it. Any advice for people who do want to act? Another way to ask, it might be, if you were given a magic wand, <laugh>, you have all power, what might you do if you can control the entire vertical system?

Eric R. Banilower (35:07):

Yeah, so a clarification, I do think science instruction has changed. It has evolved. I think there’s a lot of really good things going on in different pockets of the country. One of the challenges is bringing those good ideas and good practices to scale. Right? There are approximately 1.2 million teachers of science K–12 in this country. That’s a lot of people. And about 80% of those are elementary teachers who are responsible for teaching other subjects as well. So my thinking is often about, “How do we take what we know and that we’ve learned through decades of research is effective, and impact a large number of teachers, and therefore a large number of students?” And you know, Courtney I think has hinted at this already. And you’ve mentioned it too, Eric, is that teaching is a profession, right? And it’s a craft. But in no other profession do practitioners have the expectation that they’re developing their own tools and methods for their work. I know when I was in my teacher preparation program, and it’s still extremely common, one of the assignments perspective teachers are given is to develop a unit and develop a lesson, right? You don’t have doctors being asked to develop new treatments and new tests to use. Their job is to get to know their patient, assess what’s going on, and then using research-based methods to develop a plan of action, right? And I think that analogy works really well in education and is a way that we could have a scalable approach for kind of raising the floor across the country for the quality of science education. Giving teachers research-based materials, high-quality instructional materials, that they can then use and adapt to meet the needs of their students, would allow them to focus on getting to know their students, seeing what their strengths are, seeing where they have room for growth, and using the materials they’re given to help those students progress. And I think that is definitely a way where we could have a big impact at a large scale.

Eric Cross (37:39):

Courtney, same question: Magic wand, all power. You can change systems from the elementary perspective. What would you do? I’m assuming part of it’s gonna be changing that 18 to 20 minute time. But even for that to happen, what would you do? What would you change?

Courtney Plumley (37:57):

Well, I don’t know. Like, for it to change, I don’t know the answer to that. But yes, increasing the time would be great. And like Eric was saying, giving teachers— ’cause again, I’m coming in, not enough probably background in science—and then, you know, when I was, when I was teaching, we had one set of textbooks for the entire grade. Six classes, right? Like, share them. But third graders aren’t gonna read textbooks anyway, right? So instead I’m going to the teacher store. I’m pulling things off the shelf. And like, “OK, yeah, sure, I’ll use this.” And nowadays, teachers are going to Teachers Pay Teachers or whatever. Because I didn’t have anything good to use. So like Eric is saying, if I had instructional materials that were good instructional materials that were gonna teach my kids, that they were gonna be engaged, that they weren’t sitting and listening to science, but they were doing science, you know, and I had professional development to actually help me do it? That’s what I think we need to have. And I mean, I know there are some people out there that are working on that, but it’s not a lot. I mean, if you look at Ed Reports, they rate how well-aligned science curriculum are to standards. And there are two right now that have Ed Reports green lights. There’s Amplify and there’s OpenSciEd. You know, so there’s not much out there for teachers to use. And, so it’s hard. It’s hard. Where am I gonna go and get this stuff if it doesn’t exist? And so I’m making it up by myself. Which we already said is not the best use of teachers’ time, when they’ve got so many other demands on their time.

Eric Cross (39:27):

Eric and Courtney, listening to both of your responses, it created a visual in my mind. And Eric, I loved your analogy of…I started thinking of a chef, a welder, and a farmer. And I thought about the chef saying like, “You’re a great chef! Now, can you go farm, and make your own food, so that you can cook it?” Or the welder who has to make his own welding tools and go smelting. You know, making the different rods. I’m not a welder. But you know, all those different parts. Or the farmer who has to build his own tractor and innovate all that stuff. You’re absolutely right, the way you articulated that. And then Courtney, you essentially said, “Give them the tools and then teach them how to use it so they can go and actually be effective with it, because you’re in front of kids doing so many different things.” There’s only so much time in the day, and teachers want to do these things; they want to, but you end up having to triage when you’re asked to. Going back to Eric’s analogy, if you’re in the ER, but you’re also creating the vaccines and you’re also doing the research on which types of vaccines are gonna be the most effective, that’s, that’s a lot to ask. And so, I appreciate both your responses on that. Now, last question, what are you both working on now? This report came out in 2018. What’s, what’s next on the horizon? Actually literally, that’s no pun intended. <laugh> What’s next? <laugh> What’s next for, for you both? What are you working on?

Eric R. Banilower (40:42):

Well, you know, we would love to do another national survey, in a few years. We have to get funding to do it. And you know, that’s always something that takes effort and isn’t a guarantee. We’ve written grants to do these studies in the past, and there’s also the dealing with the reality of the situation. I think a lot of schools, still coming off the tail end of dealing with Covid, are overwhelmed. And we’ve had a hard time, I mentioned before, recruiting schools, and it gets harder every time, just ’cause they have so much on their plate. And I couldn’t see going to a school now and saying, “Hey, one more thing. Do you mind?” So I think we have to kind of wait a little bit for things to settle down before we can do another one of these studies. It just doesn’t seem feasible right now. But we’d love to in the not-too-distant future. Other than that, Courtney and I actually work on some projects together and some projects not together. One of the things that we’re working on together is a study of a fifth grade science curriculum that was developed by Okhee Lee at NYU and her colleagues, that is both aligned with the NGSS and purposely designed to support multilingual learners in developing both their science knowledge and skills as well as their language skills. And we’ve been working with the crew at NYU to study this curriculum and try to figure out, how well it’s working and under what circumstances. So that’s been a really interesting project that’s going on right now.

Courtney Plumley (42:26):

I recently worked on a report with the Carnegie Corporation in New York that actually I think, compliments what we’ve been talking about a lot. It’s about the status of K–12 education in the US—or science education in the US! <Laugh>—and so as part of that report we interviewed like 50 science education experts across the country. We surveyed teachers, people in the university settings, researchers, and everything to kind of get a little bit more update of the state of science education right now. And so a lot of the things we’ve been talking about, we still are talking about with the people in this report four years later. So, work in progress. <Laugh>

Eric Cross (43:09):

And again, going back to 1977, based on what Eric was saying earlier, we’re looking at these large systems, these systemic changes don’t happen overnight.

Eric R. Banilower (43:20):

That’s right.

Eric Cross (43:21):

It’s very slow-moving.

Eric R. Banilower (43:22):

That’s right. I would say there is progress. I think we’ve learned a lot. We are getting better. Are we there yet? No, we’re not happy with where we are. But I think, you know, I think it’s important to be hopeful about the direction things are going in.

Eric Cross (43:37):

Well-said. I agree. Courtney. Eric, thank you so much for unpacking that report that speaks to, that validates what so many teachers across the country are experiencing. And thank you for your advocacy for high-quality science education and your passion for supporting teachers and being that voice from a data-driven perspective of what teachers experience and then advocating for solutions for them. It’s super-encouraging for me, and I know it’s gonna be really encouraging for a lot of our listeners. So thank you.

Eric R. Banilower (44:10):

Thank you for having us.

Courtney Plumley (44:12):

Yeah. Thank you, Eric.

Eric Cross (44:15):

Thanks so much for listening to my conversation with Eric Banilower, Vice President of Horizon Research, and Courtney Plumley, Senior Researcher at Horizon Research. For much more, check out the show notes for a link to the 2018 National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education. And please remember to subscribe to Science Connections wherever you get podcasts, so that you’re not missing any of the upcoming episodes in Season three. Next time on the show, we’re gonna start laying out the road map for using science more effectively. And we’ll start by looking at the how and the why of integrating literacy instruction.

Susan Gomez Zwiep (44:49):

When we look at Science First and build language development around it, the experience tends to be more authentic and organic.

Eric Cross (44:58):

That’s next time on Science Connections: The Podcast. Thanks so much for listening.

Stay connected!

Join our community and get new episodes every other Wednesday!

We’ll also share new and exciting free resources for your classroom every month!

What Eric R. Banilower says about science

“Our data is showing us places where the system needs to provide teachers and their students the opportunities to do great things.”

– Eric R. Banilower

Vice President of Horizon Research, Inc.

Meet the guests

Eric R. Banilower is a Vice President at Horizon Research, Inc. (HRI), and has worked in education for over 30 years. Eric was previously a high school physics and physical science teacher before he joined HRI in 1997, where he has worked on a number of research and evaluation projects. Most recently, he has been the Principal Investigator of the 2012 and 2018 iterations of the National Survey of Science and Mathematics Education, a nationally representative survey focusing on the status of the K–12 STEM education system.

A middle-aged man with light hair, glasses, and a short beard is smiling, wearing a plaid shirt. The photo has a circular frame with a star and decorative lines.

Courtney Plumley is a Senior Researcher at Horizon Research, Inc. She began her career in education as an elementary school teacher before starting at HRI in 2009. In her time at HRI she has worked on many K-12 STEM research and evaluation projects. Most recently, Ms. Plumley has worked with Carnegie Corporation of New York on mapping the landscape of K-12 science education in the US and is managing the field test for the OpenSciEd elementary materials.

A woman with wavy brown hair and a red top smiles at the camera, framed by a circular graphic with a star and accent lines.
A laptop screen displays the “Science Connections: The Community” private group page, with science-themed icons decorating the background and edges.

About Science Connections

Welcome to Science Connections! Science is changing before our eyes, now more than ever. So…how do we help kids figure that out? We will bring on educators, scientists, and more to discuss the importance of high-quality science instruction. In this episode, hear from our host Eric Cross about his work engaging students as a K-8 science teacher. 

Welcome to Transitional Kindergarten

BACK TO MAIN TK–5 PAGE

Amplify Science California jump-starts a lifelong love of science with developmentally and pedagogically appropriate instruction featuring:

  • Real-world problems and scientific phenomena.
  • An experiential approach with lots of hands-on.
  • Explicit support for building oral language and early literacy skills.
A collage of four images: children doing a science experiment, a tree in a park, stacked building blocks and toys, and a child splashing water near a storm drain.

What students learn

Our program is comprised of three units: one life science, one physical science, one Earth science.

As students take on the role of a scientist or engineer to figure out real-world phenomenon, each unit:

  • Sparks curiosity and engagement.
  • Encourages students to wonder, think, and talk.
  • Builds a solid foundation for future success with science.

Look below for a summary of each unit.

A person helps a child with a ponytail. Another child examines a yellow flower using a magnifying glass. Caption reads Story of the Noisy Tree and describes children's curiosity and exploration.
Unit 1
Illustration of a vibrant park with a winding path, lush trees, and animals like squirrels and birds in a large tree.

Unit: Wondering About Noises in Trees

Student role: Life scientists

Phenomenon: Strange noises appear to be coming from the trees outside.

Unit 2
Colorful 3d illustration of various imaginative structures built with blocks, rings, and other toy components on a grassy area with a blue sky and clouds background.

Unit: Wondering About Buildings

Student role: Building engineers

Phenomenon: One class made a play city. Some of the buildings stayed up, while others fell down.

Unit 3
A child in yellow shirt and orange boots skipping over a puddle on a sidewalk next to a grassy area and a stream.

Unit: Wondering About Puddles

Student role: Weather scientists

Phenomenon: Puddles exist in some places but not in other places along a girl’s walk to school

Program structure

To meet the unique needs of little learners, our program follows a unique structure.

Each unit:

  • Begins with an Introductory Activity that
    introduces the phenomenon.
  • Includes a series of three Explorations that are comprised of a Kickoff Discussion, four activities, and a Shared Drawing and Discussion.
  • Ends with a Culminating Activity that consolidates students’ understanding.

Each activity is designed to span 15 minutes. Depending on how the program is implemented, an entire unit generally takes 4–6 weeks.

Diagram of tk curriculum structure, including life science, physical science, and earth science units, with detailed breakdowns of unit and exploration structures.

How teachers teach

When you’re ready, scroll down to take a closer look at sample resources.

Cover of a transitional kindergarten teacher guide for a life science module titled "wondering about noises in trees," featuring an illustrated scene with trees and animals.

Printed Teacher’s Guide

Our unit-specific Teacher’s Guides are chock full of helpful resources, including scientific background knowledge, planning information and resources, detailed lesson plans, tips for delivering instruction, differentiation strategies, additional classroom resources, and copymasters.

Teacher’s Guide

Girl listening to a tree trunk, book cover titled the noisy tree by ashley chose, with an orange background.

Big Books

Big Books contain vivid photographs and are used to introduce topics, facilitate group discussions, and support students’ firsthand investigations. Each Big Book is an integral part of instruction and is used multiple times for multiple purposes across a unit.

Big Book

Stack of white papers with a primary visible one labeled science question 1: why are so many noises coming from the tree? in black text.

Science Questions

Each unit includes three printed Science Question cards, one for each Exploration of the unit. The cards can be posted on classroom walls and support the class as they are introduced to and revisit the focus of their investigations over the course of an Exploration and, ultimately, the unit.

Two magazine cover mockups with the word scientist on the left and a tree photo on the right, both against a white background.

Vocabulary and Picture Cards

Each unit includes six or seven printed Vocabulary Cards and a set of colorful Picture Cards that can be posted on classroom word walls and concept walls. Cards are used for a variety of purposes, including gathering evidence, building background knowledge, and introducing the focal phenomenon.

Welcome to Grade 6

BACK TO MAIN 6–8 PAGE

Amplify Science California is so effective you can cover 100% of the NGSS in half the time of other programs.

Plus, you can breathe a sigh of relief knowing we give you enough materials to support 200 students. In fact, our material kits:

  • Support small groups of 4-5 students.
  • Make organization and finding materials easy.
  • Last longer with only one of the nine kits requiring refills.
Collage showing children doing science activities: flying a paper plane, using a microscope, building models, and an illustration of a polar bear on melting ice.

What students learn

When you’re ready:

  • Find a summary of each unit below including each unit’s student role and anchor phenomenon.
  • Click on the orange “See how the unit works” link to download a helpful Unit Guide. These guides make great companions to busy reviewers looking for a big-picture understanding of how each unit works.
Abstract art with vibrant colors featuring a yellow silhouette of a person holding a book against a background of geometric shapes, swirling patterns, and bold textures.

Unit 1

Microbiome

Student role: Microbiological researchers

Phenomenon: The presence of 100 trillion microorganisms living on and in the human body keeps the body healthy.

Abstract artwork of a person's side profile with geometric shapes and colorful patterns flowing from the head, holding a small sledgehammer. A vision chart is visible in the corner.

Unit 2

Metabolism

Student role: Medical students

Phenomenon: Elisa, a teenager, is tired all the time. In fact, she can’t get through the day without feeling exhausted.

See how this unit works

Orange abstract background with hexagonal shapes featuring icons of a bar chart, plant, safety vest, test tube, peach, and stethoscope.

Unit 3

Spinning Earth

Student role: Sky scientists

Phenomenon: The sky looks different to Sai and his grandma when they talk on the phone at night.

An image showing a graphic of spiders of different colors with distinct leg and body patterns, including brown, yellow, and blue variations. The background is a dark, textured surface.

Unit 4

Traits and Reproduction

Student role: Biomedical students

Phenomenon: Darwin’s bark spider offspring have different silk flexibility traits, even though they have the same parents.

See how this unit works

Illustration of a person in a red hat and fur-lined coat with eyes closed, surrounded by large orange circles on a dark background.

Unit 5

Thermal Energy

Student role: Thermal scientists

Phenomenon: Riverdale School needs a new heating system. Only one of two proposed systems is the best choice.

See how this unit works

Abstract artwork depicting a bright sun with blue and orange swirling patterns next to green hills under a sky with shades of blue, orange, and red.

Unit 6

Ocean, Atmosphere, and Climate

Student role: Climatologists

Phenomenon: During El Niño years, the air temperature in Christchurch, New Zealand is cooler than usual.

Illustration of a village with houses, fields and mountains under a cloudy sky with waves of wind or rain.

Unit 7

Weather Patterns

Student role: Forensic meteorologists

Phenomenon: The strong storms in Galetown didn’t just begin. They have become more and more severe over the years.

See how this unit works

A polar bear stands on a small ice floe in the ocean with an orange sun in the sky and distant icy mountains in the background.

Unit 8

Earth’s Changing Climate

Student role: Climatologists

Phenomenon: The ice on Earth’s surface is melting.

See how this unit works

Abstract geometric design in shades of blue and purple featuring a hexagon with icons of a building, wrench, molecules, sun, paint can, and screwdriver.

Unit 9

Earth’s Changing Climate Engineering Internship

Student role: Civil engineers

Phenomenon: Designing rooftops with different modifications can reduce a city’s impact on climate change.

How teachers teach

When you’re ready:

  • Scroll down and take a closer look at your classroom resources.
  • Click on the orange links below each component to see grade-specific samples.
A laptop displays a PowerPoint presentation in presenter view, with slides about observing objects in plastic containers and related sensory instructions.

Classroom Slides

These customizable PowerPoints are available for every lesson of the program and make delivering instruction a snap with visual prompts, colorful activity instructions, investigation set-up videos and animations, and suggested teacher talk in the notes section of each slide.

Video introduction to Classroom Slides

Sample Classroom Slides

A printed teacher’s guide labeled “Plate Motion: Mystery of the Mesosaurus Fossils” is displayed next to a laptop showing the same curriculum’s digital interface.

Teacher’s Reference Guide

Available digitally and in print, our unit-specific reference guides are chock full of helpful resources, including scientific background knowledge, planning information and resources, color-coded 3-D Statements, detailed lesson plans, tips for delivering instruction, and differentiation strategies.

Login to platform below to access

Assorted laboratory supplies including beakers, measuring cylinders, test tubes, pipettes, thermometers, and chemical reagents on a white background.

Materials Kits

Our kits include enough non-consumable materials to support 200 student uses. In other words, you have enough materials to support all five periods and small groups of 4-5 students each. Plus, our unit-specific kits mean you just grab the tub you need and then put it all back with ease.

List of materials by unit

List of investigations by unit

A laptop screen displaying a map with three ecosystem options, each illustrated by different animal icons and accompanied by relevant data lists.

Simulations and Practice Tools

Our digital Simulations and Practice Tools are powerful resources for exploration, data collection, and student collaboration. They allow students the ability to explore scientific concepts that might otherwise be invisible or impossible to see with the naked eye.

Video overview of digital tools

List of digital tools by unit

Device calendars by unit

Two Amplify Science books titled "Metabolismo: hacer la diagnosis" and "Metabolism: Making the Diagnosis" with colorful artwork and purple labels at the bottom.

Consumable Notebooks

Available for every unit, our Student Investigation Notebooks contain instructions for activities and space for students to record data and observations, reflect on ideas from texts and investigations, and construct explanations and arguments.

Sample Student Investigation Notebook

Sample Student Investigation Notebook (Spanish)

Illustrated cover showing a polar bear on ice, various animals, and silhouettes of people running and biking; titled "Amplify Science California Student Edition Grade 6 Integrated.

Mystery Science

Our exclusive partnership with Mystery Science means you get our NGSS core curriculum plus two years of free access to Mystery Doug and his extensive library of captivating videos that deepen students’ understanding of each unit’s phenomenon.

A person with headphones works on a laptop; a line from their head transforms into a rocket, symbolizing imagination, innovation, and the foundational skills essential for multilingual learners.

Coming Soon

Unlike other publishers, we don’t make you wait until your next adoption to get the latest and greatest from Amplify. We’re always launching new and exciting features. What’s more, we’ll push them out to you even after you adopt us!

See what’s coming for 2020-2021

  • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
  • Choose the resources you’d like to review.
  • Pick your grade level from the drop-down menu.
  • Scroll down to find additional grade-level resources.

Navigating a Launch Unit

Launch units are the first units taught in each year of the program. The goal of a Launch unit is to introduce students to norms, routines, and practices that will be built on throughout the year.

Navigating an Engineering Internship

Engineering Internship units invite students to design solutions for real-world problems as interns for a fictional company called Futura. In the process, they apply and deepen their learning from Core units.

Navigating a Core Unit

Core units introduce a real-world problem and support students as they figure out the anchoring phenomenon and gain an understanding of the unit’s DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs.

Navigating Classwork and Reporting

Classwork is our new online grading tool that gives you quick and easy access to unreviewed work, student portfolios of work, and automatically generated differentiation groups.

Welcome to Earth and Space Science

BACK TO MAIN 6–8 PAGE

Amplify Science California is so effective you can cover 100% of the NGSS in fewer lessons than other programs.
 
Plus, you can breathe a sigh of relief knowing we give you enough materials to support 200 students. In fact, our material kits:

  • Support small groups of 4-5 students.
  • Make organization and finding materials easy.
  • Last longer with only one of the nine kits requiring refills.
A collage of images: top left, digital art of a desert scene; top right, three kids doing a science experiment; bottom left, a hand holding a jar and two others beside; bottom right, digital art of a person and child in a field.

What students learn

When you’re ready:

  • Find a summary of each unit below including each unit’s student role and anchor phenomenon.
  • Click on the orange “See how the unit works” link to download a helpful Unit Guide. These guides make great companions to busy reviewers looking for a big-picture understanding of how each unit works.
A barren, rocky desert landscape with rover tracks leading to a distant vehicle on a hill under a hazy sky.

Unit 1

Geology on Mars

Student role: Planetary geologists

Phenomenon: Analyzing data about landforms on Mars can provide evidence that Mars may have once been habitable.

Two prehistoric reptiles with long snouts and tails are near the shore, one on land and one in water, with plants, rocks, and an island in the background.

Unit 2

Plate Motion

Student role: Geologists

Phenomenon: Mesosaurus fossils have been found on continents separated by thousands of kilometers of ocean.

See how this unit works

Geometric design featuring a telescope, mountain, sound waves, and cosmic elements on a purple hexagonal background.

Unit 3

Plate Motion Engineering Internship

Student role: Mechanical engineering interns

Phenomenon: Patterns in earthquake data can be used to design an effective tsunami warning system.

Illustration of a cross-section of Earth showing a volcano near the ocean. Trees, mountains, and clouds are visible above, with subterranean layers below.

Unit 4

Rock Transformations

Student role: Geologists


Phenomenon: Rock samples from different U.S. regions look different, but have similar mineral compositions.

See how this unit works

A city skyline at night with a prominent full moon, stars in the sky, and a bridge silhouette on the left.

Unit 5

Earth, Moon, and Sun

Student role: Astronomers

Phenomenon: Pictures of specific features on the Moon can only be taken by an astrophotographer at certain times.

See how this unit works

Abstract artwork depicting a bright sun with blue and orange swirling patterns next to green hills under a sky with shades of blue, orange, and red.

Unit 6

Ocean, Atmosphere, and Climate

Student role: Climatologists

Phenomenon: During El Niño years, the air temperature in Christchurch, New Zealand is cooler than usual.

Ilustración de un pueblo con casas, campos y montañas bajo un cielo nublado con olas de viento o lluvia.

Unit 7

Weather Patterns

Student role: Forensic meteorologists

Phenomenon: The strong storms in Galetown didn’t just begin. They have become more and more severe over the years.

See how this unit works

Un oso polar se encuentra sobre un pequeño témpano de hielo en el océano con un sol naranja en el cielo y lejanas montañas heladas al fondo.

Unit 8

Earth’s Changing Climate

Student role: Climatologists

Phenomenon: The ice on Earth’s surface is melting.

See how this unit works

Abstract geometric design in shades of blue and purple featuring a hexagon with icons of a building, wrench, molecules, sun, paint can, and screwdriver.

Unit 9

Earth’s Changing Climate Engineering Internship

Student role: Civil engineers

Phenomenon: Designing rooftops with different modifications can reduce a city’s impact on climate change.

How teachers teach

When you’re ready:

  • Scroll down and take a closer look at your classroom resources.
  • Click on the orange links below each component to see grade-specific samples.
A laptop displays a PowerPoint presentation in presenter view, with slides about observing objects in plastic containers and related sensory instructions.
Classroom Slides

These customizable PowerPoints are available for every lesson of the program and make delivering instruction a snap with visual prompts, colorful activity instructions, investigation set-up videos and animations, and suggested teacher talk in the notes section of each slide.

Video introduction to Classroom Slides

A printed teacher’s guide labeled “Plate Motion: Mystery of the Mesosaurus Fossils” is displayed next to a laptop showing the same curriculum’s digital interface.
Teacher’s Reference Guide

Available digitally and in print, our unit-specific reference guides are chock full of helpful resources, including scientific background knowledge, planning information and resources, color-coded 3-D Statements, detailed lesson plans, tips for delivering instruction, and differentiation strategies.

Login to platform below to access

Assorted rocks, plastic jars, stacks of clear plastic cups, wrapped candies, and scattered dice laid out on a white background.
Materials Kits

Our kits include enough non-consumable materials to support 200 student uses. In other words, you have enough materials to support all five periods and small groups of 4-5 students each. Plus, our unit-specific kits mean you just grab the tub you need and then put it all back with ease.

A laptop screen displaying a map with three ecosystem options, each illustrated by different animal icons and accompanied by relevant data lists.
Simulations and Practice Tools

Our digital Simulations and Practice Tools are powerful resources for exploration, data collection, and student collaboration. They allow students the ability to explore scientific concepts that might otherwise be invisible or impossible to see with the naked eye.

Video overview of digital tools

Two booklets titled "El clima cambiante de la Tierra: la desaparición del hielo" and "Earth’s Changing Climate: Vanishing Ice" with landscape illustrations on the covers.
Consumable Notebooks

Available for every unit, our Student Investigation Notebooks contain instructions for activities and space for students to record data and observations, reflect on ideas from texts and investigations, and construct explanations and arguments.

Cover of the "Amplify Science" Grade 8 textbook featuring illustrations of space, insects, technology, crowds, and scientific diagrams.
Student Edition Hardcover

This durable Student Edition is grade-level specific and contains all of the articles that students refer to throughout the year. Districts may choose to pair these traditional student texts with our digital student experience or new 2-volume consumable notebook set.

A person with headphones works on a laptop; a line from their head transforms into a rocket, symbolizing imagination, innovation, and the foundational skills essential for multilingual learners.
Coming Soon

Unlike other publishers, we don’t make you wait until your next adoption to get the latest and greatest from Amplify. We’re always launching new and exciting features. What’s more, we’ll push them out to you even after you adopt us!

See what’s coming for 2020-2021

Navigating the program

  • Click the orange button below to access the platform.
  • Choose the resources you’d like to review.
  • Pick your grade level from the drop-down menu.
  • Scroll down to find additional grade-level resources.

Navigating a Launch Unit

Launch units are the first units taught in each year of the program. The goal of a Launch unit is to introduce students to norms, routines, and practices that will be built on throughout the year.

Navigating an Engineering Internship

Engineering Internship units invite students to design solutions for real-world problems as interns for a fictional company called Futura. In the process, they apply and deepen their learning from Core units.

Navigating a Core Unit

Core units introduce a real-world problem and support students as they figure out the anchoring phenomenon and gain an understanding of the unit’s DCIs, SEPs, and CCCs.

Navigating Classwork and Reporting

Classwork is our new online grading tool that gives you quick and easy access to unreviewed work, student portfolios of work, and automatically generated differentiation groups.

S5.E6. Why skepticism is essential to the Science of Reading, with Dr. Claude Goldenberg

To view this protected page, enter the password below: