II. COURSE DESCRIPTION

A capstone experience that requires students to participate in a full semester, integrated research project. Projects will be based on contemporary issues in science. Students will work on multidisciplinary research teams to explore possible solutions to the semester project. Solutions will be presented in a public forum. All areas of science are welcome.

III. RATIONALE

This course has been specifically developed to ensure all adolescent science education candidates have the opportunity to demonstrate performance in distinct areas of the National Science Teachers Associations (NSTA) Standards for Teacher Education. The performance standards addressed by this course are:

Content Standard

1. a. Know and understand the major concepts and principles of the teaching disciplines as defined by

state and national standards of the science education community.

1. b. Know and understand the major concepts and principles unifying science disciplines.

1. c. Design, conduct and report investigations within a science discipline.

1. d. Apply mathematics in problem solving and scientific investigations.

Inquiry Standard

3. a. Know and understand scientific inquiry and its relationship to the development of

scientific knowledge.

Context of Science Standard

4. a Know and understand the relationship of science to other human values and endeavors.

Additionally, this course meets National Science Education Standards and American Association for the Advancement of Science requirements for open-ended inquiry and long-term research into new and novel problems.

IV. COURSE OBJECTIVES AND OUTCOMES

As a result of participation in this course, students in SCIN 390 will:

1. Engage in self-directed inquiry.

2. Communicate research processes and findings at a scientific meeting.

3. Display understanding of the central concepts, tools of inquiry, critical thinking and structure of the disciplines taught. [CF II]

4. Use knowledge and communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration and supportive interaction. [CF IV, INTASC Principle 6]

1. V. COURSE TOPICS The topics covered will vary based on the research project selected. Successful completion of projects will require students to:

a) Engage in library research.

b) Understand and apply research design methods.

c) Communicate both orally and in writing the findings of their research.

d) Demonstrate competence in the use of scientific tools

e) Apply statistics to data analysis

VI. Instructional Methods and Activities

a) Cooperative group research. b) Student presentations. C) Active inquiry.

VII. EVALUATION AND GRADE ASSIGNMENT: COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Course is graded A-E. Rubrics used in evaluating b-f are attached.

a) A written examination on experimental design procedures and statistical analysis of data.	15 points--February 10th.
b) Electronic presentation of research proposal.	33 points, February 17th.
c) Submit a written paper detailing the research project.	28 points, April 28th
d) Present research at the SUNY College at Oneonta Student Research Day.	25 points-April 21
e) Write a post presentation reflection.	5-points-April 22
f. Final Exam	10 points May 7th, Thursday 2-4:30
g. Individual Contribution	20 points

a) A written examination on experimental design procedures and statistical analysis of data. 15 Points

b) Electronic presentation of research proposal. 33 Points

c) Submit a written paper detailing the research project. 28 Points

d) Present research at the SUNY College at Oneonta Student

Research Day. 25 Points

e) Write a post presentation reflection. 5 Points

f. Final Exam 10 Points

g. Individual Contribution* 20 Points 15

136 Points Total

* You will be scored on your individual contribution to the group project. If you are an outstanding research partner you will earn 20 points. Characteristics of Outstanding are: creativity, data collection and analysis, application of statistics, writing skills, oral presentation skills, problem solving skills, and your ability to work effectively with a research group. There are many other characteristics as well.

Rubric used to evaluate candidates performance on presentation of research proposal. The maximum score on this project is 33 Points--You will have about 30 minutes to present your proposal to the class. You are required to submit a written copy of the proposal to Dr. Bischoff according to the rubric. The written copy is more detailed than the powerpoint presentation. The powerpoint presentation is a clear presentation of your research plan. Due February 26th .

Rubric used to evaluate: c) Written paper detailing the research project. The maximum score on this part is 28 points. Considering there are at least 8 references and each review will take about 1-page, this paper will be about 15 pages. But, quality is far more important than quantity.

Rubric used to grade d) Research presentation at the SUNY College at Oneonta Student Research Day. Maximum 25-Points. This is scheduled April 21st.

Rubric used to evaluate e). Post presentation reflection. Maximum 5-Points.

http://www.oneonta.edu/academics/frc/Student%20Research%20Day/SRD%20Abstracts%202003.htm

Component	0-points	1-point	4-points
Title	Does not clearly describe project	Does clearly describe project-including but not limited to independent and dependent variables-example-An analysis of the abundance and diversity of gymnamoebae in relation to soil depth in NY.
Research Summary-An extremely important part of this proposal presentation. Many of the decisions you make as you progress through your project will be guided by the literature review.	Weak or non-existent research summaries. Perhaps not relevant, of poor quality, relying too heavily on internet sources and insufficient evidence that the candidate has read and understands the content.	3-relevant source presented and summarized. Summaries include identification of research questions, rationale for the study, review of methods employed, discussion of how data was analyzed, discussion of results, and discussion of conclusions or implications.	More than 3 relevant sources presented and summarized. Summaries include identification of research questions, rationale for the study, review of methods employed, discussion of how data was analyzed, discussion of results, and discussion of conclusions or implications.
Research Questions	Not clearly stated or likely to largely repeat another study and not add to the current body of scientific knowledge.	Stated in measurable terms. Variables are clearly identified in research questions.	Stated in measurable terms with clarity. Variables are clearly identified in research questions. Evidence that the research questions are logical outcomes of the research review and are likely to lead to further scientific understanding.
Hypothesis	Poorly written, inconsistent with research questions and literature review.	Consistent with research questions and logical outcomes of the literature review.	Consistent with R.Q and substantiated with relevant research. Also, hypothesis statements should be either directional, non-directional or null depending on the research review and the intended statistical analysis of data.
Variables	Unable to distinguish independent and dependent variables and controls.	Independent, dependent, and control variables identified.	Fully defined in the context of the study-including operational definitions, identification of independent and dependent variables.
Materials and Methods	Unclear or poorly planned. Highly unlikely that the plan will yield useful data.	Partially clear but with some ambiguities. This project can be done with the equipment available. Yu have read related research and adapted ideas as necessary.	Completely clear -materials identified, each step of the project carefully planned. Reader can follow the flow of the plan. You have utilized information from your literature review to enhance the creativeness and elegance of your plan.
Data Collection plan	Tables are not developed or are poorly developed. There are unanswered questions as to how the data will be collected, organized and presented.	Beginning stages-data collection tables need work, but you are on the right track. They may lack creativity, or may present non-essential information.	Complete system in place to collect data (tables, time-line, etc). Tables are made and ready for data input. They will lend enable you to report clear, accurate data.
Data Analysis	Wrong statistics planned for the hypotheses statements and data.	Simple statistics-or dubious statistics planned. No indication that you have explored the software (SPSS), and related research in planning your statistics.	Accurate statistics and mathematical analysis planned. You can defend the decisions you made to use selected statistics.
Overall quality-Primarily I am looking for an investigation that is challenging and that draws on the resources of the research team and the resources of the college. Investigate a topic that will require you to learn and apply concept, methods and theories from several science disciplines.	Topic to simple for college level work. Lacks challenge. Perhaps it has been done many times before and the outcome will not lead to any further understanding. The topic may also be one-dimensional. That is, it may not require you to learn and employ methods or ideas from other science disciplines. For example, a soil study that simply compared porosity would be insufficient. Better would be a soil study that investigated soil chemistry, soil history, and its impact on the ecology of the region.	Appropriate topic -can be done in one semester. Will enable you to learn new science and apply that which you already know. The study connects more that one field of science.	Successful research within the topic requires unification of science processes or themes from different disciplines For example, if primarily an Environmental science study, you include ecology, earth science, and probably analytical chemistry. Topic, clearly presented and team capable of answering class questions. Researchers are totally prepared for the presentation and have obviously rehearsed it.

Component	0-Points	1-Point	4-Points
Title page		Includes title, names, contact information, and course number.
Abstract: Look carefully at how professional scientists write abstracts and model after those.	None	Contains most of what is in the next column but leaves the reader guessing as to what the research is about.	A good abstract usually: a) describes the objectives of the research. b) states the research questions. c). briefly describes the main methods used. d.) describes the results including statistical significance. e.) describes some implications of the study.
Literature review: A particularly important part of the project. The literature review informs every aspect of the study.	Less than 4 sources and you have failed to draw out and describe the scientific meaning of some or several of the studies.	5-7 relevant sources. At least 5 of the sources are from peer reviewed journals. Refer to the next column to about how to write the reviews. It is important that you write clearly and convey full scientific understanding of the studies. The mechanics of the written presentation and the quality of the science are equally important.	8 or more good sources. Summaries include identification of research questions, rationale for the study, review of methods employed, discussion of how data was analyzed, discussion of results, and discussion of conclusions or implications. The reviews are usually logically sequenced starting with the least related and ending with the most closely related. Usually the literature review ends in a short summary where you tie the papers together.
Research Questions	Not clearly stated or likely to largely repeat another study and not add to the current body of scientific knowledge.	Stated in measurable terms. Variables are clearly identified in research questions.	Stated in measurable terms with clarity. They lend themselves to a quantitative study and statistical analysis of data. Variables are clearly identified in research questions. Evidence that the research questions are logical outcomes of the research review, and will lead to further scientific understanding.
Hypotheses statements	Poorly written, inconsistent with research questions and literature review.	Consistent with research questions and logical outcomes of the literature review.	Consistent with R.Q and substantiated with relevant research. Also, hypothesis statements should be either directional, non-directional or null depending on the research review and the intended statistical analysis of data.
Materials and Methods	Unclear or poorly planned. Highly unlikely that the plan will yield useful data.	Partially clear but with some ambiguities. This project can be done with the equipment available. Yu have read related research and adapted ideas as necessary.	Completely clear -materials identified, each step of the project carefully planned. Reader can follow the flow of the plan. You have utilized information from your literature review to enhance the creativeness and elegance of your plan.
Results-Look carefully at how professional scientific papers present the results and model those.	Do not address R.Qs and hypothesis statements.	Address R.Q and hypothesis statements. Charts and tables mostly clear. Proper use of statistics and applications of mathematics. You will get this rubric score if the section is acceptable but still leaves the reader with unanswered questions or if there is a lack of clarity that obscures the findings.	Elements of a good results presentation. a. Respond to each question parallel to their initial presentation in the introduction. b. Respond fully but do not exceed the data. c. Do not offer conjecture of anecdotes beyond the defendable facts. d. Refer to tables and figures as needed in text. e. Present the important information and use correct scientific language and statistics.
Discussion	Inadequate. Fails to revisit the findings and offer explanations. Fails to refer to related scientific research.	Contains most or all of the elements in the next column but lacks clarity or style of presentation.	Elements of a good discussion presentation. a. provide a general overview of the findings. b. offer explanations on findings that may not be completely defendable in the study. c. refer to research cited and compare these findings to related research. d. offer ideas for possible follow up studies. e. describe any possible flaws or elements of this study that may cause you to be cautious in generalizing the data.

Parts of Reflection	0-Points	1-3 Points	4-5 Points
Scholarship	Poorly written	Focuses on the scientific process from creating to carrying out a research study. Identifies the strengths and weaknesses of the project but some issues are addressed superficially.	Focuses on the science content. Identifies what you learned as a scientist. What were the scientific strengths and weaknesses of the research, the written paper and the presentation.