Hands On Science

What does 'hands on' mean?

The drive for more 'hands on' activities in science has been a largely misunderstood cliché for decades.
The notion may come from the old saying 'idle hands, idle minds', but really isn't reflective of
the processes of much of science. Is there a 'hands on' cosmology, DNA strand or bacteria? Much of what we know is from models of what we can't see or encompass and from extrapolations based on inferential experiments. At the least, very elaborate instruments are needed to enhance our senses so we can observe the micro and macro scale. So, what is the bridge between the obscure realities of hard science and the most basic introductions to understanding the world that we face in elementary science? My sense, after many years experimenting on students, is that a person needs a real solid grounding in the skills of sensing, observing, and measuring at the most basic level so that one can make the leap to the inferential and abstract world of science models. I would prefer to refer to my lessons as 'directed multi-sensory engagements' (a bit cumbersome) rather than 'hands on' . I've always tried to engage my students with projects, challenges, and unusual experiences. Some of them may have accidentally qualified as 'hands on'. On reflection, the best experiences have been the closest to
a real world situation, condition or scenario. Challenging students in this way provides a lasting
framework for thinking which persists for a long time. Sensory stimulation of this sort involves all of the senses, skills involving design and fabrication, and artistic rendering. Reducing all this to 'hands on'
is akin to teaching math by only using worksheets. How about 'senses on'?

Returning to full time work has kept me from writing until a bit of forced convalescence provided some time!

There are stirrings of real change in the way that science education will proceed in the
next few years. There is a recognition that STEM (science-technology-engineering-math) is crucial to recovering our leadership in the world economy and to solving critical environmental challenges. Restoring funding to primary research will provide an incentive for our students to be on STEM tracks in high school and college. Funding ‘green’ initiatives will provide an economic pull which will hopefully get curricular juices flowing at all levels.

With all this excitement, I’m hoping the K-5 realm will be remembered in the deliberations of where to expend resources. Science is a natural complement to the native exploratory bent of elementary students. Piggybacking literacy, writing, and math on this native interest only helps streamline the complicated curricular challenge of the teacher. Did I mention the natural rhythms of sound, or the skills of drawing and design? There is huge potential in STEM as a focus for what we do with early learners.

In order to achieve some of this potential, K-5 teachers deserve the same intense support that NCLB has engendered. A regional model for supporting teachers is the Maine Math and Science Alliance which as its name implies, provides a wide range of workshops and leadership support to teachers and administrators. The past director of MMSA, Dr. Francis Ebersole, is now the Exec. Director of the NSTA, and another MMSA leader is President of NSTA this year! Bringing experienced STEM educators into the planning, inservicing, and modeling of good teaching practice requires resources
and support from administrative leadership at district, state, and national levels. There is a huge talent pool capable of providing the support K-5 teachers need.

Science can no longer be considered a vestigial appendix - I hope losing mine will be a harbinger of STEM curricula
becoming part of the core of elementary education!

Maine Math and Science Alliance http://www.mmsa.org/index.php

At the national level, the NSTA has begun a campaign to promote ‘Leadership, Learning, and Advocacy’ http://www.nsta.org/involved/cse/learningcenter.aspx