In this project, we undertook a group-based action research approach to develop a vermicomposting module to promote environmental awareness. This activity was supported through funding from Memorial University of Newfoundland. Support in the forms of space, materials, time, and expertise also came from our school and district levels.
Our environmental unit addressed two global educational objectives: to enable students to experience "deep" learning, and to facilitate the development of transferable skills. It has long been recognized that traditional teaching techniques often fail to encourage "deep" learning of subject content. "Deep" learning is one that goes beyond short-term, rote memorization, and enables assimilation of new knowledge in a way that allows re-application to novel situations (Entwhistle, 1988). Strategies that help learners develop transferable skills in areas such as thinking and learning, self-management, communication, group work and information management, are intended to prepare students for work outside of the academic contexts in which they were initially learned.

We decided to use principles from both The Project Approach (Katz & Chard, 1991) and Constructivist Learning (Duffy & Jonassen, 1992). For much of the module, students were engaged in teacher-supported, group-based collaborative projects which utilized compost bins in the classroom. A range of individually-based learning activities further complemented our project. A major issue for us, as action researchers, was to reach an understanding of the nature and level of support required by students to gain the most from their learning activities. A key question associated with our project was: What is the necessary balance between externally imposed structure and control and the students= freedom to be self-directed?

Research Questions

Our action research project was conducted simultaneously across Kindergarten, grade one, and grade three classes. A desired goal was to determine if vermicomposting and recycling activities would translate into greater levels of environmental awareness amongst the students involved. This environmental wondering arose from observations and discussions amongst the teachers as to the Areal@ understanding of the recycling initiative associated with our AGreen School.@ We felt that our students would benefit greatly by engaging in experiences that could potentially broaden their knowledge and awareness of caring for our environment. These children had no prior involvement with composting at school, and initially expressed very little knowledge of what composting entailed. Through thoughtful analysis, we identified several science outcomes that were within the scope of our project. These outcomes were related to hands-on learning, animal care, soil exploration, plant growth and changes, life cycles, habitats, environmental awareness and stewardship, observations, diversity of living things, safety, and critical thinking. Aside from formal learning opportunities, many experiences emerged based on children=s preconceived ideas and group management of compost bins. These latter experiences provided very exciting results, which were mostly discovered through on-going, informal observations by the teachers. Sub-questions that emerged throughout the action research project were:

• How can we increase the students= desire to eat nutritious snacks during school?
• How do we best support children=s group management skills as they care for their worm bin?
• How can we support the model of a Caring Classroom Community of Learners as we prepare to work cooperatively to nurture our worms?
• How do we create a Ahands-on@ approach to scientific learning, particularly concerning vermicomposting?

Relevant Research Literature

A variety of methodologies were incorporated into our action research project and implemented throughout our research. One methodology was the Project Approach (Katz & Chard, 1991) which involves students completing projects that reflect an in-depth study of a particular topic. It aims to change knowledge and skills, as well as emotional, moral and aesthetic sensibilities, by encouraging students to pose wonderings, pursue questions, and make better sense of their experiences in context to the world around them. Children approached the vermicomposting project as emergent learners who, in theory, negotiated and selected the experiences they wished to explore. We believe this approach to be more advantageous than having students simply follow a preplanned curriculum. Philosophies of constructivist learning (Bruner, 1960) were also instrumental to our research by providing three insights into instruction. First, instruction must be concerned with the experiences and contexts that make the student willing and able to learn. Second, instruction must be structured so that students can easily grasp the intended concepts. Third, instruction should be designed to facilitate extrapolation in order to go beyond intended learning objectives. Our third research methodology was problem-based learning. According to White (1996), problem-based learning is introduced using complex, real world problems. The problem we posed in relation to our project was as follows: As a AGreen School,@ we need to raise our students= awareness of environmental issues in our school and community. We incorporated a problem-based learning approach and attempted to solve the problem through activities related to vermicomposting. The Context This section highlights teachers= experiences and reflections associated with the vermicomposting project in their respective classrooms.

Carol Ann: Kindergarten

I am presently in my tenth year of teaching. Although I began my teaching career at the high school level, I now find myself at the primary level, where I have been teaching Kindergarten for the past six years. My teaching background is French as a second language. Our school offers a dual track system, with both French and English. I have been the Kindergarten French Immersion teacher at Bishop Feild for three years.

Ecole Bishop Feild Elementary School in St. John's is part of the newly formed Eastern School District in Newfoundland and Labrador.

My class consists of 27 children: 12 males and 15 females. English is the first language of 26 children, with one Polish-speaking student. Most of the children turned age 5 by December. One boy turned 6 by December. Six children turned 5 in late November/early December, and one turned 5 on the 28th of December. The students vary in maturity and readiness for school. There are children who struggle in my class and children who are advanced.

Bishop Feild serves the needs of children from a variety of distinct socioeconomic classes. My role within this context is to use the French language as a vehicle to introduce the children to the beginnings of school life. My goals are for the children to respect one another, to participate to the best of their ability, and to have fun while immersed in the French language.

Norma: Grade One

I teach Grade One at an inner city school. In addition to offering a well-balanced curriculum, I am particularly interested in teaching good habits that students can bring to their home. It is important for me to project a Ado-good@ feeling in the classroom, with a hope that this feeling can be passed on to their homes, sparking a positive home life. I believe that environmental awareness is one of those Ado-good@ projects that can easily be carried over to the home. With regards to this project, my goal was to teach the concept effectively enough so that it would invoke a change at home.

Once composting was identified as the focus area, we began to research composting, as well as some teaching strategies I wanted to use. Local composting experts were contacted to assist us in acquiring the appropriate materials. With these concerns satisfied, the class completed a pre-survey to assess current knowledge and views on the subject. Each week I used a different approach/activity to teach composting and environmental awareness to my class. Along with my teaching, I used a variety of data sources to support my research (video, interviews, written work, and surveys - see appendix). Online journal reflection took place at the end of each week, which allowed for revision and modification of activities and data collection methods. When student projects had finished, the final survey was given and interviews were arranged with targeted students (see appendix). Finally, data analysis began and I was able to identify the main themes I wanted to convey.

I have learned to use a more project-oriented approach in my science classroom. When the science is teacher-directed, students are not inquiring, or using higher level thinking, and are therefore not as engaged. Even six- and seven-year-olds can become "thinkers" when directed by their teacher. Another valuable lesson was the importance of pre-assessing students. Prior to this project, I was unaware of the importance of gauging students' backgrounds and prior knowledge when introducing a new topic. This technique helped me to allot the appropriate amount of time for the different aspects of my project. This is a strategy I will use, not only in science classes, but in all subject areas.

I have found this action research experience to be a very positive one. The research question kept me focused, and, under the umbrella of research, I felt secure to try new and different things. With financial assistance, I was able to try something new with my students. Even after ten years of teaching, I felt this project provided an excellent opportunity to reflect on my teaching practice.

This project has accomplished everything that I hoped it would achieve. Not only did it improve my teaching, but it also changed my entire belief system on how science should be taught. I learned a very valuable lesson: science teaching is about the process, not the content. In retrospect, I believe I would have tightened up the time frame of the project to prevent some dips in enthusiasm throughout the project. All in all, it was an extremely positive experience!

Darlene: Grade Three

Teaching science in Grade Three has been a new experience for me. Committing to an action research project has been a major undertaking for me this year. Not only do I have a large class of 33 children with a variety of academic and socioeconomic backgrounds, but I also have limited classroom space. My enthusiasm for learning science in a hands-on, innovative manner, however, has not been compromised by these challenges. Onward we went with our 5000 worms housed in 5 compost bins. As I reflect upon the beginning days of this project, I see myself armed with my research question and a container of rotting apples and bananas as my class took the plunge. At first, the children were very excited about this caretaking, maternal responsibility. Children were grouped and then given total freedom to maintain the physical care of these worms. Fortunately, I had a few conscientious students who were eager to make their worm bin the happiest. I was surprised by the number of children who were squeamish about handling the worms and the rotting food, but I quickly discovered which individuals were willing to do the "dirty work".

The project took off with great enthusiasm. Each group developed its own schedule, responsibilities and roles. Roles within each group included feeders, sprayers, recorders and food preparers, to name a few. In the early weeks, the groups kept the momentum and the responsibilities were met. I used this time to get myself accustomed to the expectations of the project, review the literature surrounding my teaching approaches, and learn as much as I could about "Red Wigglers". Time had passed and our worms were quite Acreature-sufficient,@ requiring very little care from myself or the children. Then, Criterion Reference Tests (CRT), Heritage Projects, Midterm Reports, and, of course, Easter Break came upon us and seemed to take up much of the project time. Under these circumstances, the motivation and enthusiasm for composting was flat for all of us. Through consultation with my colleagues, I got myself back on track. I pondered over my research question to help me refocus. I also worked closely with the grade one teacher to build momentum once again through the "Buddy Writing/Sharing the Pen" experiences with our classes. It was evident, as I reviewed the videotape, that the eagerness to acquire more information about the project was beginning to re-emerge. I recall that during one of my morning classroom meetings, a class discussion concerning the next steps in the project took place. I shared with the students my original research question and we began a very enthusiastic brainstorming session on how we could achieve this goal. Through this group discussion and my Abest facilitation@ practices, the children moved towards a more achievable means of gathering research that could best reflect their learning. We decided we could spend more time reading our books, looking at the worms, and using the Internet to help us learn more about vermicomposting. I put together a Research Map booklet to give structure to the sub-headings within this topic. We worked diligently for one week to gather and record our research data (See appendix: Research Map). The final step involved taking this completed map and putting in the final stages of presentation. Children eagerly prepared posters at home using the information gathered in the classroom. We proudly displayed these in and around our classroom, and then videotaped most of the children presenting their posters to the various primary classrooms - a very proud moment for many of them.

Study Design

The research methods used to collect data were very similar in each classroom and consisted of informal observations, video recordings, digital photos of engagement, pre- and post-surveys, activity booklets, collaborative story writing, research map, poster presentations, and sculpture/art. These data collection methods were chosen for each classroom to provide consistency when analyzing our results. We felt that it would be most beneficial if we could conclude our research by making some generalized conclusions about our project as a whole.
Working with young children permits us the luxury of teaching science through a cross-curricular model, which utilizes many domains of learning at once. This was evident when students in grades one and three worked closely to write stories using the Ashare the pen@ model. It was through this model that we were given an opportunity to observe and assess science learning through a formalized writing experience. Through the informal observation process, we were able to witness that children were now seeing themselves not only as science explorers, but also as recorders of data who shared the responsibility of representing their knowledge in a higher form. In this context, the teacher's role became that of facilitator. In this role, it is essential for teachers to provide opportunities for children to gain understandings of their physical world so that they develop the necessary science process skills.

Several common threads were discovered across the grades. One very significant theme was student engagement. Throughout the research process, we noticed that children's motivation dipped due to the length of the project. However, once teachers rekindled their interest in the project, the students responded similarly. For example, in kindergarten, the introduction of a clay art project recaptured students' interest in the worms and composting. In grade one, we re-introduced the beginning survey and called it a "middle survey". Students completed it and we went over our beginning survey to see how much more they knew. The grade ones were very excited to see how much they had learned and wanted to learn more. In grade three, we introduced a research map, which provided the students with an opportunity to closely examine the compost bins, collect their own data, and perform further research related to the worms via the Internet and library. The grade three students later used this data to create a worm poster, which further renewed their interest in worms. As a result of these initiatives, student engagement increased and the classrooms were squirming with excitement! As action researchers, we cannot make claims about student involvement without supporting our claims with valid and reliable data. Triangulation is a commonly employed research technique to help support knowledge claims (Toope & Hammett, 2004). Three reliable and valid sources used in our project include student surveys, artifacts (student booklets), and video recording/observations.

Outcomes and Conclusions

Kindergarten

Various data were collected and analyzed throughout the action research project. I found that discussing the data with my colleagues helped me to learn from the project. The pre- and post-surveys demonstrated that the children=s general knowledge of worms increased. Results of twenty-four completed surveys were tallied and all but two showed dramatic improvement. A second data source was our Worm Booklet (see appendix). Approximately every second day children were asked to complete a page or two from the booklet. Activities were cross-curricular. During our worm observation days, children were encouraged to draw what they had seen in the compost bin in their booklets. So much interest could be seen on the childrens' faces! Their enthusiasm could not be mistaken!

Many art outcomes were subsequently achieved when children were involved in activities based on their knowledge of worms and composting. Their delightful creations decorated our bulletin boards and hallways throughout the project. The children used modeling clay to form worms. The worms were measured, thus meeting math outcomes. Tempera paint was used for a Worm Mural. A local artist, a parent of one Kindergarten child, introduced the boys and girls to working with clay. Each child created a clay worm pin that was fired in a kiln at a local craft shop.

Grade One

Survey results (Table 1) indicate that the children were engaged by the worm-composting project and applied their environmental knowledge in their everyday lives. I was pleased with these results because they demonstrated that my students were engaged in the project and had transferred their knowledge to their homes.

General knowledge surveys, video data, and booklets were not as specific as the multiple choice surveys, which prompted me to re-examine the data. I made jot notes on the level of knowledge of each student, as well as the level excitement in their writing/reading. All students improved in knowledge content, voice, and excitement.

Table 1. Student Responses to Questions from Pre and Post-Surveys
Question

These findings were encouraging, as they reaffirmed my beliefs that my students were engaged and learning. Data from the students' written output continued to support my claims of increased engagement and environmental awareness. Another very interesting theme that emerged from the data was that students began to treat their worms as pets, and spent a lot of their free writing time Ahumanizing@ their worms, rather than speaking of their environmental effectiveness.

Grade Three

Collecting data was an interesting experience. As teachers, we require children to produce written work in many curriculum areas. The means of collecting data for specific science research was focused and deliberate, and included surveys, buddy writing, research booklets, and poster presentations. Some data were captured on video or digital photos. Upon examination of my data, I discovered that the surveys were most interesting (see appendix). Categories were created for the questions to determine the change in knowledge, habits, and attitudes, which can be seen in Tables 2 and 3.

Table 2. Student responses to Knowledge Questions from Pre- and Post-Survey
* Two were invalid.

The Research Map process was most enlightening since it provided observational evidence from each child. For one week, the classroom was turned into a research lab, where children worked collaboratively in centres to explore and gather data for themselves. The research booklet (see appendix) provided children with a guideline to follow as they compiled their work. Once booklets were completed, children were expected to prepare a poster with the help of their parents, identifying what they had learned from the vermicomposting experience. Poster presentations were given to various primary classrooms, as well as to our resource teachers from MUN Botanical Gardens. They were also videotaped. A copy of the poster rubric is included in the appendix.

Buddy writing between the grade one and the grade three classes provided a means of data collection. Children were partnered for three weeks (once per week) to develop a story about worms and/or composting. Their excitement was contagious. This data, documented in a book, and captured on video as well as digital photos, solidified our views on student engagement. Not only were they writing, but we could hear their exchanges of knowledge about worms, composting, and environmental awareness during the recordings. Our experiences with interactive writing led us to concur with McCarrier, Pinnell and Fountas (2000), who characterized interactive writing as a dynamic literacy event. And what an event it was!

Table 3. Student Responses to Attitude and Habit Questions from Pre- and Post-Survey

* Two were invalid

** I was expecting to see an increase in composting at home. Through informal discussions with students, I discovered that they mistakenly interpreted this question as recycling for the pre-survey, but interpreted it correctly as composting for the post-survey.

 

Implications and Recommendations

Through conducting research in our own classrooms, all three of us have enhanced our personal and professional knowledge and practice. Not only did we become comfortable with action research, but we also found it to be a valuable teaching tool for individual teachers. We have collectively found this project to be a valuable experience and we will continue to engage in activities and strategies developed through this action research project.

Carol Ann: Kindergarten

I have always believed that a teacher should not spend a great deal of time telling children about science. Instead, children should be provided with hands-on experiences in order to derive their own understandings of science. As well, I have rarely encountered a Kindergarten child who did not show a great deal of interest in and affection for animals, especially bugs and insects. Part of my professional growth plan involved enhancing my teaching practice of science, and I felt that providing a space in our classroom for 2000 red wigglers would get the children excited and involved.

My subject knowledge increased with time as I read various articles on composting, spoke with experts, and viewed composting sites on the Internet. I found it necessary to become more familiar with the learning outcomes for science. Instead of reviewing outcomes two or three times a year, I found it necessary to regularly evaluate them as the project unfolded.

I used a method of collecting information from the children that I had never thought of using in Kindergarten before. The boys and girls were asked to complete a Yes/No survey, which used pictures instead of words. I modeled how to complete the questionnaire; yet several children encountered difficulty with it. However, the second time we completed the survey, it was a great deal easier. I was able to evaluate their knowledge in an effective manner, and in a way that I have never used before. I would definitely consider using pre- and post-surveys again with Kindergarten children. It truly was a powerful learning experience.

Having completed only one project, I hope to continue with action research and I know that there is a lot more to learn about the topic. I do not feel confident enough to undertake an action research project individually, and being part of a research team was essential for me. Action research gave me the opportunity to plan a project of my choosing. I was able to read more on a topic that interested me, interact with external resource people, adhere to a timeline, collect and analyze data, engage my students, and meet or exceed science outcomes.

Norma: Grade One

Summarizing and reflecting upon my experiences in the weekly on-line journal forum was a beneficial aspect of our project. This exercise helped me to better understand and monitor the developments that unfolded in my teaching, as well as student learning, as the project progressed. For instance, I found that I referenced the curriculum outcomes much more than I would normally have, which served to increase my comfort level. Another valuable learning that was previously unrealized was the importance of assessing students= backgrounds and prior knowledge before the introduction of a new topic. This technique was invaluable in allotting class time for the different aspects of my project, and is something that I can apply to all subject areas. I found reflection to be an enlightening learning experience, and I continue to reflect on a personal level.

My knowledge of multiple teaching strategies and their effects on student engagement was enhanced. The data collected showed varying levels of student engagement in response to the different strategies. I can conclusively say that science is as much about process as it is product. Student learning is powerfully influenced by the instructional approach used, and not as much by the material taught. This realization was huge for me! I have learned the effectiveness of a more project-approach style in teaching science. When the teacher is the primary director, the children are less likely to inquire or use higher-level thinking and are therefore, not as engaged in the lesson. Students must think and reason, both individually and in groups, in order for scientific knowledge to truly be learned. Once they acquire these skills and develop their own strategies and conclusions, they can transfer these tools to other aspects of the curriculum and their own lives! Even six- and seven-year-olds are capable of becoming "thinkers" when guided by their teacher.

Darlene: Grade Three

The project approach is a very useful methodology in teaching science. Science teaching requires manipulatives and discovery through experimentation. These conditions are sufficiently met by having live creatures in the classroom and learning how to properly care for them. Class dynamics and size need to be monitored more closely since these factors can really impact the progress of the project. In grade three, class size was an issue, which challenged cooperative learning. In grade one and Kindergarten, maturity issues were the major cause of concern. Such issues can negatively impact some of the indirect teaching methodologies. Insight into students It was evident that children were quite content in acquiring knowledge that was transmitted to them directly, instead of them taking the initiative to seek out their own in-depth understanding.

Possible reasons for this include:

1. Access to information beyond the classroom materials was problematic due to technological and scheduling constraints.
2. The timeline was too long to maintain the motivation of students and for them to learn more than was required by the project.
3. CRT examinations, concerts, heritage projects, and Easter break came in the middle of this project directing a great deal of teaching towards Language Arts.
4. A large and very needy classroom, with limited space and resources, inhibited freedom of movement and manipulation.
   

Our pedagogical content knowledge was strengthened through our vermicomposting research, providing a more vivid image of our curriculum outcomes. We had numerous opportunities to observe, record, and assess children=s understanding of science and how they saw themselves as consumers of science processes. Varied instructional strategies were focused on the project approach, whereby children were given more autonomy to take control of their learning. Our role as teacher-facilitators of science was both personally and professionally gratifying. This confirmation reaffirmed our beliefs about how children learn. Hands-on and experiential/discovery methods work best for science. Students that had greater opportunity to explore as independent learners grew more confident in their abilities. Digital forms of assessment were much more informative than we imagined. Classroom observations of interactions and conversations provided great insight into knowledge levels and learning needs.

Conclusions

As classroom teachers, we continually strive towards creating a learning environment that is constructive, engaging, and dynamic. This project will have a long-term effect on our classroom practice for the simple fact that it turned out to be a positive experience for everyone involved. We tried something new and that engaged the children. Through data collection and analysis, we were able to document student learning and engagement. "I think they got something out of it," and "I suppose they learned a bit about worms" were not statements that we needed to make. The "proof" is in the data! Was it a positive learning experience? Absolutely! Conducting action research was a very worthwhile experience. No doubt this project would not have been as successful without the collaborative efforts of my colleagues. Observing action research that takes place in your school opens doors to discussing varied teaching approaches. Moving science to the forefront of teaching was interesting. The opportunity to examine children interacting with living things and question their wondering was very satisfying. Integrating science with other subject areas was easier than we thought. It was definitely an enlightening experience.

References

Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Duffy, T. M., & Jonassen, D. J. (Eds.). (1992). Constructivism and the technology of
instruction: A conversation. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Entwhistle, N. J. (1988). Styles of learning and teaching: An integrated outline of
educational psychology. London: David Fulton.

Katz, L., & Chard, S. C. (1989). Engaging children's minds: The project approach.
Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publishing Corp.

McCarrier, A., Pinnell, G. S., &. Fountas, I. C. (2000). Interactive writing: How language
and literacy come together, K-2. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Toope, D., & Hammett,R. (2004). Professional development through action research: A handbook for teachers. St. John=s, NL: Avalon West School District and Memorial University of Newfoundland. White, H. B. (1996). Problem based learning: A case study. In L. Richlin (Ed.), To improve the academy, vol. 15 (pp. 75 - 91). Stillwater, OK: New Forums Press and the Professional and Organizational Network in Higher Education.

Project Resources

Alberta Teachers Association. (2000). Action research guide for Alberta educators. Edmonton: Alberta Teachers Association.

Barwin, G., & Macaulay, K. (1998). The racing worm brothers. Ontario: Firefly Books.

Beyer, E. C., & Madden, D. (1967). The story of lengthwise. New York: Follett Publishing.

Cole, J., & Degen, B. (1995). The magic school bus meets the rot squad. New York: Scholastic

Cronin, D. (2003). Diary of a worm. New York: Harper-Collins.

Darling, L., & Darling, L. (1972). Worms. New York: William Morrow & Co.

Earth day at TeachersFirst. (2001). Retrieved May 10, 2005, from www.teachersfirst.com/earth_day.htm

Ehlert, L. (2002). In my world. New York: Harcourt Inc.

Glaser, L., & Hariton, A. (1996). Compost! Growing gardens from your garbage. Brookfield, CT: Millbrook Press.

Grant, J. E. (1991). The green classroom. Toronto: Pembroke Publishers.

Jennings, T. (1988). Junior science earthworms. New York: BLA Publishing.

Kalman, B., & Schaub, J. (1992). Squirmy wormy composters. Toronto: Crabtree Publishing.

Lauber, P. (1976). Earthworms understand farmers. Champaign,IL: Garrard Publishing.

Lionni, L. (1960). Inch by inch. New York: Astor-Honor.

Louisiana Depratment of Environmental Quality. (2005). Want to make a worm compost? Retrieved May 10, 2005 from www.deq.state.la.us/assistance/recycling/school/wormfarm.htm

Mahar, R. D. (2001). Successful school composting. Green Teacher, 64, 15-18.

Mansfield Middle School. (2001). Benefits of a composting program. Retrieved May 10, 2005, from www.mansfieldct.org/schools/mms/compost/benefits.htm

Pfeiffer, W., & Jenkins, S. (2004). Wiggling worms at work. New York: Harper Collins.

Pollard-Smith, J., & Brath, V. (1991). The magic in my backyard. Houston, TX: Barclay Recycling.

Rhine, R., & Wrigley, E. (1972). Life in a bucket of soil. New York: Lothrop, Lee & Shepard Company.

Rockwell, T., & Roettger, D. (1989). How to eat fried worms. Logan, IA: The Perfection Form Co.

Simon, S. (1969). Discovering what earthworms. Toronto: McGraw Hill.

Stinson, K., & McLoughlin. (1996). Those green things. Toronto: Annick Press.

Tomlinson, C. A. (1999). The differentiated classroom: Responding to the needs of all learners. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Watts, F. (1933). How to eat fried worms. New York: Thomas Rockwell & Emily McCully.

White, W. (1976). An earthworm is born. New York: Sterling Publishing.