BSCS, Biology: A Human Approach (Kendall-Hunt, Dubuque, 1997)
Using the BSCS Biology: A Human Approach , or "AHA" as it is affectionately known, is a very different experience for those used to a traditional text, especially the students! As I monitored the hall, I overheard one of my students saying, "This isn't a textbook, look, "Process and Procedures, Explain, Explore--there's no information in this stupid book!"
Like the student, it is at first a bit disconcerting not to have a vocabulary list, questions to fill in, multiple choice questions for review, nicely organized into bite-sized lessons. There is no teacher's edition of the text, only two large spiral bound books with supplemental materials for activities in the book. There is also a wonderful collection of videodiscs with images and movies appropriately keyed to the activities.
At first, students were asked to confront the evidence for evolution and explain it, use it and find patterns in the evidence. Big Problem. My school is in a "Bible Belt," with most of the students fundamentalists Armed with the NSTA position statement, Evolution and the Book of Genesis, I attempted to do several of the activities in the first chapter, carefully avoiding the overuse of the term, "evolution." I find the euphemism, "change over time" to be much less offensive. Many were outright hostile that they were being asked to view the evidence for EVOLUTION, and argue from a scientist's point of view. I promised that alternative views to the theory of evolution could be expressed, and one day after most of the activities, I allowed one group from two of the classes express the "creationist" point of view. I carefully explained that there are many beliefs, and that there were other stories of creation as well, held by other cultures. I emphasized that no disrepect should be given to any point of view, restated the definition of a theory, and had no further problems.
All through the activities in the first chapter, we discovered the wealth of information in the back portion of the text, the "E" readings (E for "essay"). And the images and information on the videodisc provided at least as much if not more than conventional texts. The difference is that the students were USING this information to solve problems or create presentations to express particular points of view. We began to talk critically about comparisons of similarity and differences about things, honing their descriptions about observations to be more objective, and their ability to make better and better observations.
Towards the end of the third week, despite our differences over the "E" word, I stood back during student presentations, and was awed at the level of thinking going on, and the skills they had acquired. They were applying the scientific method better than any group I had previous at this point in the year. These students thought they weren't "learning anything" because I hadn't given them a written worksheet, test, review sheet, vocabulary list, etc. They had been evaluated only with rubrics. They complained that they didn't understand the class, and many were frustrated with this way of "learning." Week 10: After designing their own organisms, students presented a fairly lengthy description of environmental effects on the organism, and the homeostatic mechanisms they devised to deal with a number of imbalances between internal and external environments. Many used descriptions of how hormones work, negative feedback, and system interactions. Again, I sat back and realized to my amazement, they really understood these concepts, and were more confident and sophisticated in their presentations. They don't have all the hormones memorized, and they don't know the taxonomy of all five kingdoms, but they can find and use this information to explain a concept.
Week 20: Students are accustomed to group work, expect it, and function much more efficiently within a group; all group members know they have to contribute to the group, or it will suffer when they give their presentations. Students have become more sophisticated in their oral presentations, and think in terms of how their ideas will come across, and whether they have met all the rubric requirements. I am amazed at how well they group problem-solve. Their time is more efficiently used. Now that we regularly use the information in the Essay pages, there are no complaints that they aren't learning anything.
I asked them to present as special interest groups on the topics of genetic engineering and cloning, then give limits to both technologies, and to give rationales for those limits. The complexity of thinking astonished me; their answers were much more well thought through than I expected, and documented with their research (both from the E sections and library research). Debates between interest groups were both lively, and close to what could be expected from adult interest groups of similar composition!
This is only my first year using the text, but the bottom line is: 1) This textbook meets and exceeds all the current and future science education standards recommendations for critical thinking, problem-solving, group work, etc. 2) The information in the E sections is more than adequate for any level high school biology course. The information is not only well-written, the diagrams and illustrations are excellent, and the information is enough to convince most "traditional" Biology teachers that the content is still there! 3) The activities suggested in the text in each section are extremely well-written and taken sequentially, lead students to a deeper understanding of concepts in Biology. The one I was most impressed with was "Homeostasis". 4) The information and images on the videodisc are rich visually, and informationally. The material illustrates the concepts with greater clarity than traditional approaches alone. 5) The text allows the teacher a great deal of flexibility. Using the text as a reference, the teacher can choose to use their own tried and true activities within a unit, or use the wonderful activities within the chapters.
- Toni L. Miller
(Editor's Note: Toni Miller previously contributed to our Spring 1988 issue. She lives and teaches in Uniontown, OH, and has been part of one of the teams presenting Woodrow Wilson TORCH Institutes in biology.)
Home Spring 97 Full Screen
Spring 97 - Reviews: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10The TEACHERS CLEARINGHOUSE FOR SCIENCE AND SOCIETY EDUCATION