Cargo: E.D SUPERINTENDENTE GENERAL
SALDÍVAR SANTOSCOY GILDARDO E.D SUPTCIA EVALUA Y MEJORA
the activity activity per participation by each occurred instance student
Writing science 1 day/week 30 minutes 6 weeks Rap lyrics/video rap lyrics vignettes/video
recordings
Performing multiple times 15 minutes N/A Video vignettes/ science rap video recordings/
observational
data (field notes)
Survey 1 5 minutes 5 minutes Survey response Individual multiple times 5-30 minutes N/A Transcribed
Interview audio
Focus group 3 45-80 minutes 45-60 minutes Transcribed
audio
Journal entry 1/wk 5-10 minutes 50 minutes written notes
Tables 3.2 to 3.4 depict the activities that my research participants engaged in over the course of the 2.5 years that I spent with them respectfully. Please note that the hip-hop based science program began when the participants were enrolled in the Living Environment course and I was their classroom teacher. In the next academic when they entered the eleventh grade, they were enrolled in a chemistry course with another teacher who was gracious enough to allow me to observe the girls during class (once a week) and he also shared their assessments data with me. During their senior year and the final year of data collection, the students were not enrolled in any science course since they finished all their science requirements for graduation by the end of their junior year (consistent with their school’s course planning policy).
Table 3.2
Student Activities While Enrolled In Living Environment Science Course: Spring Semester 2015 ______________________________________________________________________________
Date Activity Duration
______________________________________________________________________________ March 5/6 Introduction of the Science 30 minutes
Genius program through
video and class discussions.
March 2 – Teacher began the unit on 6 weeks
April 2 Reproduction and Development.
March 11 – Participants met after school 45 minutes/weekly May 6 to collaborate/write science rap
lyrics. [Spring recess from
April 3 – 10].
March 26 First scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each
May 13 – Participants met to practice their 30 minutes; 2-3 times/week June 11 performance of their science rap
June 4 Second scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each June 12 Participants’ performance of their 45 minutes science rap song in the school’s
auditorium against another group. Participants won so were chosen to represent their school at the Science
Genius Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S.
June 16 Participants took the New York State 3 hours
Living Environment Regents
Examination (A New York State
mandated exam for graduation).
June 16/17/19 Attended practice sessions 2 hours/day
at Teachers College.
June 20 Last Dress Rehearsals at 2 hours
Teachers College
June 20 Science Genius Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S 4 hours
event at Teachers College.
June 25 Third scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each
______________________________________________________________________________
Table 3.3
Student Activities While Enrolled In Chemistry Course with another teacher: Fall 2015/Spring 2016
______________________________________________________________________________
Date Activity Duration
______________________________________________________________________________ October 9 Group reconvened for the first 20 minutes
time in for the first time during
after school hours (one participant had
transferred to another school).
October 16 – Observation of students’ in their 20 minutes/weekly May 20, 2016. chemistry classes.
October 23 Fourth scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each October 22 Trip to Rockefeller University for 3 hours
DNA Analysis Lab (with researcher).
February 29 Practical lab: Cells, Cells, Cells 50 minutes on the BioBase’s mobile BioBus
(with researcher).
March 31 Performed at a book launching event
at the Schomburg for Research in
Black Culture, NYC.
May 20 Attended the Science Genius Final 3 hours
B.A.T.T.L.E.S at the Jarvits Center
(with researcher) but did not perform.
June 20 Fifth scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each
______________________________________________________________________________
Table 3.4
Participants’ Science Activities – They were not enrolled in any academic science course: Fall 2016/Spring 2017
______________________________________________________________________________
Date Activity Duration
______________________________________________________________________________ September, 26 3 membered group reconvened for 30 minutes
the first time during after school hours
October 13 Trip to Rockefeller University 4 hours
(with researcher) for a practical lab
about bacterial immunity and a follow
up discussion about CRISPR technology.
November 18 Trip to Natural Museum of History’
Evolution Wing; engaged in practical lab 2 hours
activity: Biodiversity and evolution
(with researcher).
STEM Youth Summit at Teachers College
Columbia University (with researcher).
December 20 Practical lab: Particles and properties 50 minute
of food on the BioBase’s mobile BioBus
(with researcher).
February 22 – Participated in an Afterschool Science 55 minutes/weekly June 7 Club: High School Science Research
Pathways in affiliation with NYC
Department of Education STEM
programs. (Club was run by researcher).
March 24 Trip to National Museum of Mathematics. 3 hours April 21 Trip to Harlem DNA Lab in affiliation 4 hours
With Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory.
Practical Lab: Students learned about
Polymerase Chain Reaction and Bacterial
Transformation.
May 26 Attended the Science Genius Final 3 hours
B.A.T.T.L.E.S at the Loews Paradise Theater
(with researcher) but did not perform.
June 9 Presented their research Posters at Annual 3:30pm to 6pm
High School Science Research
Symposium at the Fort Washington
Armory in NYC.
June 16 Sixth scheduled individual interviews 30 minutes each ______________________________________________________________________________
To sustain the study participants’ continued interest and exposure to science, they accompanied me to several STEM oriented activities around NYC (Table 3.4). Furthermore, they joined an afterschool science research club that I initiated in conjunction with the NYC Department of Education, Division of STEM programs (Table 3.4).
1 (strongly agree) to 5 (strongly disagree). The participants were allowed to elaborate on their answer choices. The purpose of the questionnaire was to find out whether they appreciated and adhered to hip-hop music and culture (hip-hop pedagogy) and how they felt about the use of hip- hop in the science classroom. The researcher produced the questionnaire (see Appendix A). Videotape vignettes/videotape recordings. The participants were recorded during their group sessions while they were putting together their science bars (rap lyrics). They were also recorded during their practice performance sessions and during their on-stage performances. The recordings provided insight into how well they grasped the science content and how well they worked together as a group. The participants also used the recordings to access their progress with the science content and how they sounded together. Additionally, I collected all their writings, including drafts and the final product, and analyzed them to assess comprehension of science content and their sociopolitical viewpoints and to further gain insight into their
progressive effort to put together their lyrics.
Individual interviews. The participants were interviewed at least six times during the course of the study. Each of the major interview sessions ranged from about 25 minutes to half an hour. I also conducted impromptu interviews over the course of the study as a mechanism for understanding events as they unfolded in the lives of the participants. These unplanned
interviews took about 3 minutes to complete and typically occurred right after a major performance. Extensive and planned/scheduled interviews normally occurred multiple times over the course of the study. The 3-minute interviews were meant to capture the participants’ state of mind right after a major performance or attendance at an important event. I will provide information about the events later on in the findings.
the inception of the study, a week before they were to perform their rap song (at their local school), and within a week after their rap performance at their school and a few days after the Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S – which they had been selected by their peers to represent the school in. (One of the mandates of the Science Genus Program is that, participating groups or individuals must compete with each other at their local schools and their school will determine the winning group or individual to represent at the Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S). The first, second and third planned interviews occurred on March 26, June 4 and June 25, 2015 consecutively (Table 3.2). The purpose of the initial interview was to assess the confidence and excitement level of the participants in relation to science and the use of hip-hop to engage them in science. The first interview also served as a baseline to assess their science content knowledge. The second
interview served as a tool to investigate once again the confidence level of the participants with a particular emphasis on the progression of their science content knowledge acquisition and their readiness to showcase their work to the public.
I also inquired about their perspectives on using a hip-hop based science program as a platform (for females, and Black and Brown students) to express their science knowledge and their thoughts on the concept of science for all Americans (Lee, 1997). The third interview took place nearly a week (due to scheduling conflicts and availabilities) after their rap performance at the Science Genius Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S (Table 3.2). The intent was to find out how the
participants felt about their experience with the Science Genius program so far, their outlook on science in their future, and also their perception about science education through hip-hop in urban high schools.
A fourth interview (Table 3.3) was scheduled on October 23, 2015 after a thorough analysis of the participants’ science rap lyrics from the final event (which were infused with a
number of sociopolitical messages). The reason was to find out more about their messages and what they were hoping to convey to their audience or society at large. Subsequent interviews occurred a year (June 20, 2016) and two years (June 16, 2017) after their participation in the Science Genius B.A.T.T.L.E.S (Table 3.3 and 3.4 respectfully). The motivation for these later interviews was to gauge how the girls’ perspective on science evolved a year and then two years after their participation in the hip-hop based science program. Furthermore, these interviews were used to access or affirm the participants’ feelings about using hip-hop as a culturally relevant tool to engage urban Black and Brown girls in science education (Alim, 2007; Emdin, 2010a, 2010b, 2016; Ladson-Billings, 1995; Paris & Alim, 2014). The interview questions presented in Appendix B are sample questions that the researcher used as a starting point to conduct the interviews. More questions came about as each interview progressed and new revelations were made as a result of the participants’ responses.
Focus groups. The purpose of the focus groups was to gain clarification on the students' responses to the Likert-scale questionnaire and their science rap lyrics, as well as the researcher's observations and field notes. The goal was to gain insight into the participants’ thought
processes as they engaged in this pedagogical space. The focus group sessions were comprised of the three remaining participants with the exception of the first focus group that took place at the end of the first year of the study. To draw a correlation between the struggles of women in hip-hop and women in science, I used this opportunity to have the participants share their perceptions about women in these two dynamic domains.
Research Questions
Table 3.5 lists each Research Question and the sources of the evidence, including qualitative and quantitative methods.
Table 3.5
Research Questions and the Evidence Procedures Used to Answer Them
Research Question Evidence collection procedure
1. How does participation in a hip-hop based science Quizzes, test scores,
program impact Black and Brown girls’ scientific questionnaire, video vignettes content knowledge? rap lyrics, observations
2. How do participants in the hip-hop based science, Rap lyrics, focus group program construct their science/scientific identity? interviews, journals
3. To what extent does participation in a hip-hop Rap lyrics, observations, science program afford Black and Brown girls the individual interviews, space to resist negative Black and Brown female focus group, field notes stereotypes in STEM and hip-hop?
___________________________________________________________________________________________________ Consent and Ethical Considerations
I identified students whom I felt would benefit from the program based on their in class grades and their affinity toward rap music and culture. However, participation in the program was voluntary, and it also involved time after regular school hours. Participants stayed after school for about an hour each week to continue work on their rap lyrics composition and to practice for their performances. Additionally, a week or 2 leading up to the Science Genius Final Battle, the participants and I (their coach) attended a 3-day practice session from 4:30 to 6:30 pm at Teachers College, Columbia University.
Participants were at liberty to drop out of the program at any time with no negative consequences. None of the participants were given any preferential treatment such as extra credit, monetary gifts, and the like. Participation was expected to involve minimal to no risk, with participants not being exposed to anything New York public school students wouldn't be exposed to as part of daily living. For the most part, I used data that I had collected while the
students participated in the Science Genius program as part of the inquiry project by the science department. This was supplemented by subsequent interviews.
Lastly, all video tape recordings, field notes, and interview transcripts were stored on a computer with a secure password, and the participants were given the opportunity to review all collected data (Boeije, 2009; Creswell, 2013; Denzin & Lincoln, 1994).
Reliability and Validity
The study employed multiple qualitative data collection approaches to ensure reliability and validity. The multiple data collection such as focus group interviews, field notes, in class and after school observations, video tape recordings of group sessions, video vignettes, and a questionnaire provided a rich data set for analysis and also substantiated the study results (Boeije, 2009; Creswell, 2013; Denzin & Lincoln, 1994).
Process/Procedure
Much of this study was born out of an inquiry analysis project that I spearheaded as the chairperson for the science department at my current school of employment. The motivation behind the inquiry analysis was to identify hurdles that students encountered in the science classroom and then highlight possible ways to increase students' engagement with science to hopefully improve students’ performance on the New York State Living Environment Regents Examination and increase their interest in STEM. Since my longstanding research interest had been to look into the challenges facing women in science, I went a step further (beyond the requirements of the inquiry analysis) by exploring ways to improve Black and Brown girls’ participation in science education at an urban public school.
The content focus of the study was centered on a unit from the biology classroom on reproduction and development. From previous years of teaching this unit, I had come to the
realization that although my students were fairly interested in the topic (they asked a lot of questions), they struggled with grasping the content because they held many misconceptions about human reproduction and development. The unit was comprised of six distinct lessons ranging from “What is Reproduction?” What is difference Between Asexual and Sexual Reproduction? What are the Advantages and Disadvantages of Asexual and Sexual
Reproduction? What is the Purpose of Mitosis and Meiosis for Multicellular Organisms?; to How do Human Reproduction and Development Take Place? In the unit, there were six
quizzes–a quiz was administered at the end of each lesson. In addition, two separate exams were administered: one after the first three lessons and then another at the end of the unit. It took 4 weeks to complete the unit (Table 3.2).
I used the following steps to guide the investigation:
. I identified the girls who engaged in/with hip-hop music/culture through a Likert scale questionnaire (Appendix A).
. I identified girls in science (among those enrolled in my science classes).
. I introduced these girls to a hip-hop based science program (Science Genius program). . I identified other students and introduced them to the hip-hop science program.
. I taught all my students the same science content.
. As part of their in-class formative assessment, the students interested in the hip-hop based science program (including my targeted girls) created rap lyrics to demonstrate their science content knowledge and understanding.
. The students with science based rap lyrics were given the opportunity to compete in the Science Genius Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S after an initial competition on campus. The prospect of
work harder. (The participants of this study, won the initial Science Genius competition at their local school. Consequently, they were chosen to represent their school at the Science Genius Final B.A.T.T.L.E.S). I observed the targeted girls over a period of 2.5 academic years both on and off campus (during their practices/performances outside of the school grounds) and made notes of any changes and/or patterns of behavior that particularly pertained to their science education (Tables 3.1 - 3.4).
Data Analysis Methods
To ensure the effectiveness of the analysis, several qualitative analytical tools were employed. All audio/video recordings during interview sessions were transcribed and coded. Field notes and classroom and group session observations were also coded for recurring themes. All videotaped vignettes were analyzed to track participants’ progressive science understanding from creating their science rap lyrics to their stage performances. The rap lyrics served as a cultural artifact that was analyzed for its science content. All interview recordings were coded to show possibly repeated themes. The transcription was initially entered into a Microsoft Word document to categorize the themes, and then the noted categories were further analyzed and organized using NVivo (Boeije, 2009; Creswell, 2013; Denzin & Lincoln, 1994).
Chapter IV FINDINGS
According to Ogbu (1995), “There is growing evidence that strong, continual
engagement among diverse students requires a holistic approach—that is, an approach where the how, what, and why of teaching are unified and meaningful” (p. 584). My first year as a
classroom teacher was in an intermediate school in the Washington Heights section of Upper Manhattan. I then transferred to my current school, a high school in the South Bronx. After 15 years of teaching in urban public schools, I have come to realize that Black and Brown public school students love to listen to hip-hop music and they are drawn to the hip-hop culture. The latest hip-hop fashion trends, the music, and the up-and-coming hip-hop artists, consume most of my students’ conversations in and out of the classroom. My dissertation was born out of my consideration of these dynamics and a desire to try something different in my science classroom, that is, a culturally relevant pedagogical teaching mechanism that I believed could excite my students to be more engaged in learning science.
This research undertaking was a continuum of an inquiry project I was entrusted to spearhead as the chairperson of the science department at my current school of employment. The initial objectives of the project were to critically analyze students’ New York State Living Environment Regents scores for the past 3 years at the school. The science department was to (a) examine the performance ranges of the students on a particular topic; (b) identify possible reasons why a very small percentage of students scored low on a particular question (e.g., was the low percentage due to the difficulty of the vocabulary or was the question on an unfamiliar content topic); and (c) come up with possible solutions to increase student science engagement, such as increase project/group based learning, introduce more practical laboratory experiences
for the students, and augment our pedagogical styles to be culturally inclusive. Based on the findings and suggestions that we gathered from the inquiry project, I realized that I needed to not only make changes to my style of teaching, but I also needed to make changes to the curriculum and provide more experiential science opportunities for my students.
Consequently, leaning on my background in basic science research (I spent 7 years conducting research at the Columbia Genome Center with two publications, including one in the journal Science) and educational research, I collaborated with the New York Department of Education’s division of High School Science Research Pathways (HSSRP) and started an afterschool science research program at my school. I also linked up with the Rockefeller
University Science Outreach Program for high school students and sent some students to conduct basic science research with expert scientists both during afterschool hours and over summer breaks. Last Spring (2017), my students in the afterschool science program showcased their research projects at the annual Research Science Symposium in Manhattan. Additionally, for the past few years, my students have been visiting the Harlem DNA Lab (in affiliation with Cold