·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
There are a number of sources of inspiration for developing action research questions. Thinking about problems you would like to solve in your classroom or school, talking with your colleagues and students, attending conferences, and reading the literature can all be helpful. Coming up with a good research question for action research takes time and effort but the reward is more manageable and meaningful research.
The Center for Collaborative Action research suggests a by recognizing a problem, identifying a possible solution, and anticipating outcomes.
A look at one school’s action research project provides a blueprint for using this model of collaborative teacher learning.
Your content has been saved!
When teachers redesign learning experiences to make school more relevant to students’ lives, they can’t ignore assessment. For many teachers, the most vexing question about real-world learning experiences such as project-based learning is: How will we know what students know and can do by the end of this project?
Teachers at the Siena School in Silver Spring, Maryland, decided to figure out the assessment question by investigating their classroom practices. As a result of their action research, they now have a much deeper understanding of authentic assessment and a renewed appreciation for the power of learning together.
Their research process offers a replicable model for other schools interested in designing their own immersive professional learning. The process began with a real-world challenge and an open-ended question, involved a deep dive into research, and ended with a public showcase of findings.
Siena School serves about 130 students in grades 4–12 who have mild to moderate language-based learning differences, including dyslexia. Most students are one to three grade levels behind in reading.
Teachers have introduced a variety of instructional strategies, including project-based learning, to better meet students’ learning needs and also help them develop skills like collaboration and creativity. Instead of taking tests and quizzes, students demonstrate what they know in a PBL unit by making products or generating solutions.
“We were already teaching this way,” explained Simon Kanter, Siena’s director of technology. “We needed a way to measure, was authentic assessment actually effective? Does it provide meaningful feedback? Can teachers grade it fairly?”
Across grade levels and departments, teachers considered what they wanted to learn about authentic assessment, which the late Grant Wiggins described as engaging, multisensory, feedback-oriented, and grounded in real-world tasks. That’s a contrast to traditional tests and quizzes, which tend to focus on recall rather than application and have little in common with how experts go about their work in disciplines like math or history.
The teachers generated a big research question: Is using authentic assessment an effective and engaging way to provide meaningful feedback for teachers and students about growth and proficiency in a variety of learning objectives, including 21st-century skills?
Next, teachers planned authentic assessments that would generate data for their study. For example, middle school science students created prototypes of genetically modified seeds and pitched their designs to a panel of potential investors. They had to not only understand the science of germination but also apply their knowledge and defend their thinking.
In other classes, teachers planned everything from mock trials to environmental stewardship projects to assess student learning and skill development. A shared rubric helped the teachers plan high-quality assessments.
During the data-gathering phase, students were surveyed after each project about the value of authentic assessments versus more traditional tools like tests and quizzes. Teachers also reflected after each assessment.
“We collated the data, looked for trends, and presented them back to the faculty,” Kanter said.
Among the takeaways:
To make their learning public, Siena hosted a colloquium on authentic assessment for other schools in the region. The school also submitted its research as part of an accreditation process with the Middle States Association.
For other schools interested in conducting action research, Kanter highlighted three key strategies.
For both students and staff, the deep dive into authentic assessment yielded “dramatic impact on the classroom,” Kanter added. “That’s the great part of this.”
In the past, he said, most teachers gave traditional final exams. To alleviate students’ test anxiety, teachers would support them with time for content review and strategies for study skills and test-taking.
“This year looks and feels different,” Kanter said. A week before the end of fall term, students were working hard on final products, but they weren’t cramming for exams. Teachers had time to give individual feedback to help students improve their work. “The whole climate feels way better.”
Want to create or adapt books like this? Learn more about how Pressbooks supports open publishing practices.
Things to Think About
This chapter will provide a vignette of a one teachers use of action research in her (Jobe) classroom. Her vignette will also illustrate important aspects of the action research process and link back to those aspects in the chapters. We hope this will provide some coherence across the preceding chapters!
Many teachers think of research as a cumbersome and meticulous process involving piles of data and hours of analysis. Further, teachers’ attitudes toward research can be complicated: while many teachers find value in research-supported systems and strategies, they often view researchers as being too far removed from classroom practice to really understand what teachers need. This is where teacher-driven Action Research comes in— teachers who act as researchers have the opportunity to be their own guide, potentially influencing teacher praxis in positive and practical ways.
If you find yourself feeling intimidated about conducting your own research, think of the process as very similar to what you already do every day as a teacher. When you consider the steps to Action Research (plan a change, take action, observe, reflect, repeat), it is easy to see correlations to the teaching cycle. First, teachers must consider their students and develop objectives for the growth they want to see over the course a unit ( plan a change ). Then, teachers must create a series of strategies to help students make progress ( take action ); during the learning process, teachers collect data on their students to understand what is working and what is not ( observe ). Finally, once a unit is over, teachers assess which students made progress and consider how they can help those students who are stuck ( reflect ). This cycle continues from one unit to the next with teachers modifying their actions to reflect their assessment of the students. Action Research follows in much the same way.
How Does Action Research Begin?
My first formal experience with Action Research emerged in the Teachers as Researchers course that I took during my master’s program. I used the weekly reflections on the required readings to identify issues to address in my classroom, either through pedagogical changes or adjustments to my curriculum, and I followed the outlined steps to action research to implement a plan, collect data, and develop a report. Yet, what this experience taught me was I was engaging in action research fairly regularly without realizing it. Similar to my experience in graduate school, the action research process in my own classroom often began from reflection—action steps naturally emerged as part of my own teaching cycle, or from yearly evaluations with administration, during which I identified challenges I was experiencing and problem-solved—usually through research—ways to overcome.
In one particular year, after reflecting on my own practice, I realized (rather, admitted) that my junior-level English students did not enjoy our classroom novel studies, resulting in a lack of engagement and poor performance for many of them. The ‘start and stop’ method—where students read a chapter, then stop to either discuss the chapter or take a quiz—did not replicate how people read books, and it seemed to be destroying my students’ desire to engage with the novels they were assigned. This is where action research emerged, though if you had asked me at the time, I would not have identified this experience that way.
While the research I conducted in my classroom was not part of formalized project and did not emerge in a linear fashion, I will describe it to you using the outlined steps provided in subsequent chapters to make it clear how your own previous questioning and problem-solving experiences might fit into the action research model.
Topic Development
The first important step in any action plan is choosing a topic and understanding what you are hoping to accomplish. If I consider the questions posed in Chapter 2 related to the processes of an action research project, here is what I understood about my chosen topic:
This particular research topic fit in the ‘ Improving Classroom Practice ’ context because my focus was on changing pedagogical strategies to improve student outcomes. From this point, I had to develop a research question to guide my thinking, knowing this question may change as the research process evolved. For this topic, my research question had three parts: How can I adapt whole novel studies to more closely reflect the natural reading process, take into account each student’s reading level, and improve overall reading performance and engagement? This question was complex, and multi-faceted, which meant it would likely change as the project developed, but it gave me a good place to start because it focused on the three challenges within my chosen topic.
Understanding the Research
In a formalized project, the literature review would be a compilation of several pieces of research from different sources that help you understand the research that already exists over your chosen topic. In this example, my next step in this process was to find research on whole novel studies in the classroom and use that information as a catalyst for my own research. I read several articles and one full-length book on alternative methods to whole novel studies, but most of what I could find was based on a middle school classroom. This was good news! It meant, on a large scale, my research would have a place in the broad educational context by filling an existing void in the information available to classroom teachers. On a small scale, this meant other teachers in my own department could benefit from what I design since a lack of resources existed in this area.
Researching Action
The action part of the research comes from the literature review and understanding your topic: what are you going to do in your classroom to address your question? In this example, after reading several examples of alternative methods, I settled on three new strategies I was interested in testing in my classroom:
I implemented these strategies in two different courses, one of which was considered an ‘advanced’ course, with students at all different reading levels. The three strategies allowed for differentiation while also keeping the class on pace to finish the unit at the same time.
Data Collection and Analysis
The data I collected naturally aligned with the three new strategies I adopted for the unit. Since these strategies were all new to the classes, I could isolate my observations on those interventions and compare the outcomes to previous novel studies that did not incorporate these strategies.
Data Collection Methods
I collected data using four different sources throughout the unit: sticky note annotations, reading progress checks, student reflections, and final essays. First, to track progress toward part one of my research question, I monitored student reading engagement by observing their reading in class. Using a scale of 1-4, I recorded student progress toward the daily 30-page reading goal on a spreadsheet. Second, to track students’ understanding of the text, I read their sticky notes for each chapter, noting their level of thinking based on their commentary (literal, inferential, or critical). The goal would be to see students move toward more consistent critical thinking as the novel progressed. Finally, to gauge student engagement and performance, I used a formative assessment in the form of their final essays, and I used a reflection to understand their own feelings about the new method and their progress. These four data sources reflect a combination of qualitative and quantitative data.
Data Triangulation & Analysis
To better understand the efficacy of the new strategies I implemented, I looked at all four sources of data and I discovered that the qualitative data supported what I saw in the quantitative data. When I read student reflections, many mentioned feeling a greater sense of enjoyment throughout the novel study–some of these students admitted to getting behind on the reading at a few points, but concluded that having the final deadline as the only looming one eased their anxiety and allowed them to engage more completely with the novel as they worked to get caught up. Other students mentioned that they usually disliked annotating texts, but the sticky note process was less intrusive, and actually helpful as they went to plan their own essays. Finally, students enjoyed choosing their own writing prompts because it made them feel more ownership of the unit.
When I looked at my spreadsheets tracking student progress, I could see that students improved on the 1-4 scale over the course of the unit—the few students who were sometimes behind on meeting the daily reading goal had gotten back on track by the end of the unit, and the majority of students had stayed on pace the whole time. Annotations on sticky notes showed an increase in students at the critical thinking level, and their essays were largely more comprehensive and thoughtful than essays for previous novel studies.
Still, like with most things in teaching, not every student showed progress because of these strategies. While the vast majority did improve, there were still students in each class who showed no improvement in meeting the goals of the unit, despite the change in strategies. If I was going to continue this research, my next question in the cycle would begin here.
Action Implications
The final step in the process is to consider what the data implies about your research question. What I learned from implementing these new strategies is that adapting the whole novel study process to be more reflective of the natural reading process allowed me the room to take into account students’ different reading levels, which kept them on pace and engaged. By giving students more ownership in the unit, they performed better on assigned tasks, like reading on pace, taking notes regularly, and analyzing the novel at the critical level.
The successful first attempt at changing my practice was exciting because it meant I could (and should) continue to adapt these strategies each year, refining the process until it meets the needs of all students and generates positive outcomes in all classes. When I set out to change these classroom practices, I did so to benefit my own students, without any plans for taking the research and its outcomes beyond my two walls. However, I have always found the most meaningful professional development for me as a teacher is when I get the opportunity to learn from my peers. It was important to share what was happening in my classroom to give my colleagues that same opportunity.
Dissemination
To share my research, I developed a small presentation for my ELA department. I drafted an outline of the strategies, including examples of student work, to provide each teacher, and I spoke at a department meeting about the positive outcomes I had achieved from making these changes. I had several teachers request more information about this process following the presentation.
Dissemination plans do not have to be extensive to be effective. In Chapter 4, we discussed the need to understand your capabilities and realize that change often happens slowly. My research addressed an issue that many teachers in my department were dealing with but it focused just on my classroom, making data collection and analysis manageable. The opportunity for my research to impact more classrooms in my school came from my dissemination plan. I could continue to develop my reach by presenting at a school-wide or district-wide in-service, or I could even plan to present at a local, state, or national conference.
Conclusions
Action research is a powerful professional learning tool because it asks you, the teacher, to take a critical look at your own classroom and theorize about your pedagogy, with the understanding that this process is both reflective and fluid. Because action research is unique to your own educational context, it does not look the same for everyone, and each educator’s learning will be distinctive.
Though the example of action research provided here does not reflect a formalized project, it speaks to how teachers naturally engage in the process of questioning and problem-solving to create change for their students. It also demonstrates the value in what teachers discover in their own classrooms. By thinking of the action research process as similar to the teaching cycle, you can more easily step into the role of Teacher Researcher and begin developing a plan to positively impact your classroom.
To review, the steps to action research and the corresponding examples presented here are as follows:
Action Research Copyright © by J. Spencer Clark; Suzanne Porath; Julie Thiele; and Morgan Jobe is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License , except where otherwise noted.
High school is such an exciting time for stretching your intellectual muscles. One awesome way to do that is through research projects. But picking the right topic can make all the difference. It should be something you’re passionate about and also practical to tackle. So, we’ve put together a list of engaging research topics for high school students across ten different subjects: physics, math, chemistry, biology, engineering, literature, psychology, political science, economics, and history. Each topic is crafted to spark your curiosity and help you grow those research skills.
Research topics for high school students in physics are an exciting way to enhance your understanding of the universe.
1. Gravitational Waves and Space-Time
How do gravitational waves distort space-time, and what can these distortions tell us about the origins of the universe?
2. Quantum Entanglement Applications
What are the potential technological applications of quantum entanglement, and how can it be harnessed for secure communication?
3. Dark Matter and Galaxy Formation
How does dark matter affect the formation and behavior of galaxies, and what evidence supports its existence?
4. Physics of Renewable Energy
What are the fundamental physical principles behind renewable energy sources, and how do they compare in terms of efficiency?
5. Superconductors in Technology
How are superconductors utilized in modern technology, and what advantages do they offer over traditional materials?
6. Particle Physics at the Large Hadron Collider
What significant discoveries have been made at the Large Hadron Collider, and how do they advance our understanding of particle physics?
7. Microgravity Effects on Organisms
How does microgravity affect the physiological and biological functions of organisms during space travel?
8. Thermodynamics and Engine Efficiency
How do the principles of thermodynamics improve the efficiency and performance of internal combustion engines?
9. Electromagnetism in Wireless Communication
How do principles of electromagnetism enable the functioning of wireless communication systems?
10. Cosmic Radiation and Human Space Travel
What are the effects of cosmic radiation on astronauts, and what measures can be taken to protect them during long-term space missions?
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your knowledge and prepare you for advanced studies and innovations in the field of physics.
Math research topics for high school students are a fantastic way to explore real-world problems through the lens of mathematical principles .
11. Graph Theory and Social Networks
How can graph theory be applied to identify influential nodes and optimize information flow in social networks?
12. Cryptography and Data Security
What cryptographic techniques are most effective in securing online communications and protecting sensitive data?
13. Mathematical Models in Disease Spread
How do SIR models predict the spread of infectious diseases, and what factors affect their accuracy?
14. Game Theory and Economic Decisions
How does game theory explain the strategic behavior of firms in competitive markets?
15. Calculus in Engineering Design
How is calculus used to optimize the structural integrity and efficiency of engineering designs?
16. Linear Algebra in Computer Graphics
How do matrices and vectors facilitate the creation and manipulation of digital images in computer graphics?
17. Statistical Methods in Public Health
What statistical methods are most effective in analyzing public health data to track disease outbreaks?
18. Differential Equations and Population Dynamics
How do differential equations model the population dynamics of endangered species in varying environments?
19. Probability Theory in Risk Management
How is probability theory applied to assess and mitigate financial risks in investment portfolios?
20. Mathematical Modeling in Climate Change Predictions
How do mathematical models simulate climate change scenarios, and what variables are most critical to their predictions?
These research topics for high school students are designed to spark your curiosity and help you build critical thinking skills and practical knowledge.
Chemistry research topics for high school students open up a world of molecular wonders and practical applications.
21. Photosynthesis Chemical Processes
How do the chemical reactions involved in photosynthesis convert light energy into chemical energy in plants?
22. Catalysts and Reaction Rates
How do different catalysts influence the rate of chemical reactions, and what factors affect their efficiency?
23. Environmental Pollutants and Atmospheric Chemistry
How do specific environmental pollutants alter chemical reactions in the atmosphere, and what are the consequences for air quality?
24. Green Chemistry Principles
How can green chemistry practices be applied to reduce chemical waste and promote sustainable industrial processes?
25. Nanotechnology in Drug Delivery
How does nanotechnology improve the targeted delivery and effectiveness of drugs within the human body?
26. Plastic Composition and Environmental Impact
How does the chemical composition of various plastics affect their environmental impact and degradation process?
27. Enzymes in Biochemical Reactions
How do enzymes catalyze biochemical reactions, and what factors influence their activity and specificity?
28. Electrochemistry in Battery Technology
How are electrochemical principles applied to improve the performance and sustainability of modern batteries?
29. Chemical Fertilizers and Soil Health
How do chemical fertilizers impact soil health and agricultural productivity, and what alternatives exist to minimize negative effects?
30. Spectroscopy in Compound Identification
How is spectroscopy used to identify and analyze the composition of chemical compounds in various fields?
These research topics for high school students are designed to enhance your understanding of chemical principles and their real-world applications.
Research topics for high school students in biology open up a fascinating window into the complexities of the living world.
31. Genetic Basis of Inherited Diseases
How do specific genetic mutations cause inherited diseases, and what are the mechanisms behind their transmission?
32. Climate Change and Biodiversity
How does climate change affect biodiversity in different ecosystems, and what species are most at risk?
33. Microbiomes and Human Health
How do microbiomes influence human health, and what roles do they play in disease prevention and treatment?
34. Habitat Destruction and Wildlife
How does habitat destruction impact wildlife populations and their behaviors, and what are the long-term ecological consequences?
35. Genetic Engineering in Agriculture
How can genetic engineering techniques improve crop yields and resistance to pests and diseases?
36. Pollution and Aquatic Ecosystems
How do various pollutants affect aquatic ecosystems, and what are the implications for water quality and marine life?
37. Stem Cells in Regenerative Medicine
How are stem cells used in regenerative medicine to repair and replace damaged tissues and organs?
38. Evolutionary Biology and Species Adaptation
How do evolutionary principles explain the adaptation of species to changing environmental conditions?
39. Diet and Human Health
How do different dietary choices impact human health, and what are the underlying mechanisms?
40. Bioinformatics in Genetic Research
How is bioinformatics used to analyze genetic data, and what insights can it provide into genetic disorders and evolution?
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your understanding of life sciences and prepare you for advanced studies and research in the field.
Engineering research topics give high school students practical insights into designing and creating innovative solutions.
41. 3D Printing in Manufacturing
How does 3D printing technology revolutionize manufacturing processes, and what are its key advantages over traditional methods?
42. Robotics in Modern Industry
How do robotics improve efficiency and productivity in modern industries, and what are some specific applications?
43. Sustainable Building Design
What principles of sustainable building design can be applied to reduce environmental impact and enhance energy efficiency?
44. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering
How is artificial intelligence integrated into engineering solutions to optimize processes and solve complex problems?
45. Renewable Energy Technologies
How do renewable energy technologies, such as solar and wind power, contribute to reducing carbon footprints?
46. Aerodynamics in Vehicle Design
How do aerodynamic principles enhance the performance and fuel efficiency of vehicles?
47. Material Science in Engineering Innovations
How do advancements in material science lead to innovative engineering solutions and improved product performance?
48. Civil Engineering in Urban Development
How does civil engineering contribute to urban development and infrastructure planning in growing cities?
49. Electrical Engineering in Modern Electronics
How are electrical engineering principles applied in the design and development of modern electronic devices?
50. Biomedical Engineering and Medical Devices
How does biomedical engineering contribute to the development of innovative medical devices and healthcare solutions?
These research topics for high school students are designed to broaden your understanding of engineering principles and their real-world applications, preparing you for future innovations and problem-solving in the field.
Literature research topics give high school students the chance to delve into the rich and varied world of written works and their broader implications.
51. Identity in Contemporary Young Adult Fiction
How do contemporary young adult fiction novels explore themes of identity and self-discovery among teenagers?
52. Historical Events and Literary Movements
How have significant historical events influenced and shaped various literary movements, such as Romanticism or Modernism?
53. Symbolism in Classic Literature
How do authors use symbolism in classic literature to convey deeper meanings and themes?
54. Narrative Structure in Modern Storytelling
How do modern authors utilize narrative structures to enhance the storytelling experience and engage readers?
55. Literary Devices in Poetry
How do poets employ literary devices like metaphor, simile, and alliteration to enrich the meaning and emotional impact of their work?
56. Dystopian Themes in Science Fiction
How do science fiction authors use dystopian themes to comment on contemporary social and political issues?
57. Cultural Diversity and Literary Expression
How does cultural diversity influence literary expression and contribute to the richness of global literature?
58. Feminist Theory in Literary Analysis
How is feminist theory applied to analyze and interpret the representation of women and gender roles in literature?
59. Postcolonial Literature Principles
How does postcolonial literature address themes of colonization, identity, and resistance, and what are its key characteristics?
60. Intertextuality in Modern Novels
How do modern novelists use intertextuality to create layers of meaning and connect their works with other literary texts?
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your understanding of literary techniques and themes. They prepare you for advanced literary analysis and appreciation.
Psychology research topics offer high school students a fascinating journey into the complexities of human behavior and mental processes.
61. Social Media and Adolescent Mental Health
How does social media usage affect the mental health and well-being of adolescents, particularly in terms of anxiety and depression?
62. Stress and Cognitive Function
How does chronic stress impact cognitive functions such as memory, attention, and decision-making?
63. Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy and Anxiety Disorders
How effective is cognitive-behavioral therapy (CBT) in treating various anxiety disorders, and what mechanisms underlie its success?
64. Early Childhood Experiences and Personality Development
How do early childhood experiences shape personality traits and influence long-term behavioral patterns?
65. Sleep and Memory Retention
How does the quality and quantity of sleep affect the retention and recall of memories?
66. Neuroplasticity in Brain Recovery
How does neuroplasticity facilitate brain recovery and adaptation following injury or neurological illness?
67. Mindfulness Practices and Emotional Regulation
How do mindfulness practices help individuals regulate their emotions and reduce symptoms of stress and anxiety?
68. Genetic Factors in Mental Health Disorders
How do genetic predispositions contribute to the development of mental health disorders, such as schizophrenia and bipolar disorder?
69. Group Dynamics and Decision-Making
How do group dynamics influence individual decision-making processes and outcomes in collaborative settings?
70. Psychological Assessments in Educational Settings
How are psychological assessments used to support student learning and development in educational environments?
These research topics for high school students are designed to enhance your understanding of mental processes and behavior. They prepare you for advanced studies and practical applications in the field.
Political science research topics offer high school students an exciting opportunity to dive into the complexities of political systems and their impact on society.
71. Social Media and Political Campaigns
How does social media influence the strategies and outcomes of political campaigns, particularly in terms of voter engagement and misinformation?
72. International Organizations and Global Governance
How do international organizations, such as the United Nations, contribute to global governance and conflict resolution?
73. Political Corruption and Economic Development
How does political corruption affect economic development and stability in different countries?
74. Democracy in Political Systems
How do the principles of democracy vary across different political systems, and what impact do these differences have on governance?
75. Public Opinion and Policy-Making
How does public opinion shape government policy-making processes and legislative decisions?
76. Political Ideology and Government Policies
How do different political ideologies influence the formulation and implementation of government policies?
77. Electoral Systems and Political Representation
How do various electoral systems impact political representation and voter behavior?
78. Political Communication in Media
How do media and communication strategies shape public perception of political issues and candidates?
79. Globalization and National Sovereignty
How does globalization affect national sovereignty and the ability of states to maintain independent policies?
80. Political Theory and Social Movements
How can political theory be used to understand the origins, development, and impact of social movements?
These research topics for high school students are designed to enhance your understanding of political processes and theories. They prepare you for advanced studies and informed civic participation.
Economics research topics give high school students valuable insights into how economic systems and policies shape our world.
81. Minimum Wage Laws and Employment Rates
How do changes in minimum wage laws impact employment rates across different sectors and demographics?
82. Fiscal Policy in Economic Recessions
How do government fiscal policies, such as stimulus packages, help manage and mitigate the effects of economic recessions?
83. Globalization and Local Economies
How does globalization influence local economies, particularly in terms of job creation and market competition?
84. Behavioral Economics and Consumer Decisions
How do psychological factors and cognitive biases affect consumer decision-making and market trends?
85. Trade Policies and International Relations
How do specific trade policies impact international relations and global trade dynamics?
86. Technology in Economic Growth
How do technological advancements drive economic growth and productivity in various industries?
87. Taxation and Income Distribution
How do different taxation policies affect income distribution and economic inequality within a society?
88. Economic Modeling and Market Predictions
How are economic models used to predict market trends, and what are the limitations of these models?
89. Inflation and Purchasing Power
How does inflation impact purchasing power and the cost of living for consumers?
90. Econometrics in Economic Data Analysis
How is econometrics used to analyze and interpret complex economic data, and what insights can it provide?
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your understanding of economic principles and their real-world applications, preparing you for further studies and informed decision-making in the field.
History research topics for high school students offer a deep dive into the past. They help you understand how it shapes our present and future.
91. Industrial Revolution: Causes and Consequences
What were the key factors that led to the Industrial Revolution, and how did it impact society and the economy?
92. Colonialism and Indigenous Populations
How did colonial rule affect the cultural, social, and economic lives of indigenous populations?
93. Women in Historical Social Movements
What roles did women play in various social movements throughout history, and what were their contributions?
94. Historical Revisionism in Modern Historiography
What are the principles and controversies surrounding historical revisionism in contemporary historiography?
95. Technological Advancements and Historical Events
How have technological innovations influenced significant historical events and driven societal changes?
96. Major Wars: Causes and Effects
What were the primary causes, key events, and consequences of major wars in history?
97. Religion in Shaping Historical Narratives
How has religion influenced the crafting and interpretation of historical narratives across different cultures?
98. Historiography and Documenting Events
What methods and principles are used in historiography to accurately record and analyze historical events?
99. Economic Changes and Historical Societies
How have economic shifts impacted social structures and historical developments in various societies?
100. Primary Sources in Historical Research
Why are primary sources important in historical research, and how are they used to ensure accuracy and depth in historical analysis?
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your understanding of past events and their significance, preparing you for advanced studies and critical historical inquiry.
Choosing the right research topic involves considering your interests, the availability of resources, and the relevance of the topic to current issues. Start by identifying subjects you are passionate about. Then, look for specific questions within those subjects that spark your curiosity. It’s also important to consider the feasibility of the research, including access to necessary materials and data.
High-demand research topics for high school students today often align with current global challenges and advancements. In science and technology, areas such as renewable energy, artificial intelligence , and genetic engineering are popular. In social sciences, topics like the impact of social media, political polarization, and mental health are highly relevant. Keeping up with current events and scientific journals can help you identify trending topics.
Effective research requires a mix of resources. Start with your school library and online databases like JSTOR or Google Scholar for academic papers. Utilize books, reputable websites, and expert interviews to gather diverse perspectives. Don’t overlook primary sources, such as historical documents or scientific data, which provide firsthand information. Additionally, consider using software tools for data analysis and project management.
Publishing and presenting your research can enhance its impact and your academic profile. Consider submitting your work to high school research journals , science fairs , and local or national competitions. You can also present at school or community events, or create a blog or website to share your findings. Networking with teachers and professors can provide guidance and additional opportunities for publication and presentation.
High school research demonstrates your ability to undertake independent projects, critical thinking, and problem-solving skills. Colleges value these attributes as they indicate readiness for college-level work. Including research experience in your application can set you apart from other applicants. It shows your commitment to learning and your ability to contribute to academic and extracurricular activities at the college level.
Want to assess your chances of admission? Take our FREE chances calculator today!
Difference between early decision 1 and 2.
Leave a comment cancel reply.
Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Difference between early decision 1....
Sign up now to receive insights on how to navigate the college admissions process..
Copyright © AdmissionSight 2024
Privacy Policy - Terms and Conditions
Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.
npj Science of Learning volume 5 , Article number: 17 ( 2020 ) Cite this article
47k Accesses
6 Citations
13 Altmetric
Metrics details
The multi-disciplinary nature of science, technology, engineering, and math (STEM) careers often renders difficulty for high school students navigating from classroom knowledge to post-secondary pursuits. Discrepancies between the knowledge-based high school learning approach and the experiential approach of future studies leaves some students disillusioned by STEM. We present Discovery , a term-long inquiry-focused learning model delivered by STEM graduate students in collaboration with high school teachers, in the context of biomedical engineering. Entire classes of high school STEM students representing diverse cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds engaged in iterative, problem-based learning designed to emphasize critical thinking concomitantly within the secondary school and university environments. Assessment of grades and survey data suggested positive impact of this learning model on students’ STEM interests and engagement, notably in under-performing cohorts, as well as repeating cohorts that engage in the program on more than one occasion. Discovery presents a scalable platform that stimulates persistence in STEM learning, providing valuable learning opportunities and capturing cohorts of students that might otherwise be under-engaged in STEM.
Introduction.
High school students with diverse STEM interests often struggle to understand the STEM experience outside the classroom 1 . The multi-disciplinary nature of many career fields can foster a challenge for students in their decision to enroll in appropriate high school courses while maintaining persistence in study, particularly when these courses are not mandatory 2 . Furthermore, this challenge is amplified by the known discrepancy between the knowledge-based learning approach common in high schools and the experiential, mastery-based approaches afforded by the subsequent undergraduate model 3 . In the latter, focused classes, interdisciplinary concepts, and laboratory experiences allow for the application of accumulated knowledge, practice in problem solving, and development of both general and technical skills 4 . Such immersive cooperative learning environments are difficult to establish in the secondary school setting and high school teachers often struggle to implement within their classroom 5 . As such, high school students may become disillusioned before graduation and never experience an enriched learning environment, despite their inherent interests in STEM 6 .
It cannot be argued that early introduction to varied math and science disciplines throughout high school is vital if students are to pursue STEM fields, especially within engineering 7 . However, the majority of literature focused on student interest and retention in STEM highlights outcomes in US high school learning environments, where the sciences are often subject-specific from the onset of enrollment 8 . In contrast, students in the Ontario (Canada) high school system are required to complete Level 1 and 2 core courses in science and math during Grades 9 and 10; these courses are offered as ‘applied’ or ‘academic’ versions and present broad topics of content 9 . It is not until Levels 3 and 4 (generally Grades 11 and 12, respectively) that STEM classes become subject-specific (i.e., Biology, Chemistry, and/or Physics) and are offered as “university”, “college”, or “mixed” versions, designed to best prepare students for their desired post-secondary pursuits 9 . Given that Levels 3 and 4 science courses are not mandatory for graduation, enrollment identifies an innate student interest in continued learning. Furthermore, engagement in these post-secondary preparatory courses is also dependent upon achieving successful grades in preceding courses, but as curriculum becomes more subject-specific, students often yield lower degrees of success in achieving course credit 2 . Therefore, it is imperative that learning supports are best focused on ensuring that those students with an innate interest are able to achieve success in learning.
When given opportunity and focused support, high school students are capable of successfully completing rigorous programs at STEM-focused schools 10 . Specialized STEM schools have existed in the US for over 100 years; generally, students are admitted after their sophomore year of high school experience (equivalent to Grade 10) based on standardized test scores, essays, portfolios, references, and/or interviews 11 . Common elements to this learning framework include a diverse array of advanced STEM courses, paired with opportunities to engage in and disseminate cutting-edge research 12 . Therein, said research experience is inherently based in the processes of critical thinking, problem solving, and collaboration. This learning framework supports translation of core curricular concepts to practice and is fundamental in allowing students to develop better understanding and appreciation of STEM career fields.
Despite the described positive attributes, many students do not have the ability or resources to engage within STEM-focused schools, particularly given that they are not prevalent across Canada, and other countries across the world. Consequently, many public institutions support the idea that post-secondary led engineering education programs are effective ways to expose high school students to engineering education and relevant career options, and also increase engineering awareness 13 . Although singular class field trips are used extensively to accomplish such programs, these may not allow immersive experiences for application of knowledge and practice of skills that are proven to impact long-term learning and influence career choices 14 , 15 . Longer-term immersive research experiences, such as after-school programs or summer camps, have shown successful at recruiting students into STEM degree programs and careers, where longevity of experience helps foster self-determination and interest-led, inquiry-based projects 4 , 16 , 17 , 18 , 19 .
Such activities convey the elements that are suggested to make a post-secondary led high school education programs successful: hands-on experience, self-motivated learning, real-life application, immediate feedback, and problem-based projects 20 , 21 . In combination with immersion in university teaching facilities, learning is authentic and relevant, similar to the STEM school-focused framework, and consequently representative of an experience found in actual STEM practice 22 . These outcomes may further be a consequence of student engagement and attitude: Brown et al. studied the relationships between STEM curriculum and student attitudes, and found the latter played a more important role in intention to persist in STEM when compared to self-efficacy 23 . This is interesting given that student self-efficacy has been identified to influence ‘motivation, persistence, and determination’ in overcoming challenges in a career pathway 24 . Taken together, this suggests that creation and delivery of modern, exciting curriculum that supports positive student attitudes is fundamental to engage and retain students in STEM programs.
Supported by the outcomes of identified effective learning strategies, University of Toronto (U of T) graduate trainees created a novel high school education program Discovery , to develop a comfortable yet stimulating environment of inquiry-focused iterative learning for senior high school students (Grades 11 & 12; Levels 3 & 4) at non-specialized schools. Built in strong collaboration with science teachers from George Harvey Collegiate Institute (Toronto District School Board), Discovery stimulates application of STEM concepts within a unique term-long applied curriculum delivered iteratively within both U of T undergraduate teaching facilities and collaborating high school classrooms 25 . Based on the volume of medically-themed news and entertainment that is communicated to the population at large, the rapidly-growing and diverse field of biomedical engineering (BME) were considered an ideal program context 26 . In its definition, BME necessitates cross-disciplinary STEM knowledge focused on the betterment of human health, wherein Discovery facilitates broadening student perspective through engaging inquiry-based projects. Importantly, Discovery allows all students within a class cohort to work together with their classroom teacher, stimulating continued development of a relevant learning community that is deemed essential for meaningful context and important for transforming student perspectives and understandings 27 , 28 . Multiple studies support the concept that relevant learning communities improve student attitudes towards learning, significantly increasing student motivation in STEM courses, and consequently improving the overall learning experience 29 . Learning communities, such as that provided by Discovery , also promote the formation of self-supporting groups, greater active involvement in class, and higher persistence rates for participating students 30 .
The objective of Discovery , through structure and dissemination, is to engage senior high school science students in challenging, inquiry-based practical BME activities as a mechanism to stimulate comprehension of STEM curriculum application to real-world concepts. Consequent focus is placed on critical thinking skill development through an atmosphere of perseverance in ambiguity, something not common in a secondary school knowledge-focused delivery but highly relevant in post-secondary STEM education strategies. Herein, we describe the observed impact of the differential project-based learning environment of Discovery on student performance and engagement. We identify the value of an inquiry-focused learning model that is tangible for students who struggle in a knowledge-focused delivery structure, where engagement in conceptual critical thinking in the relevant subject area stimulates student interest, attitudes, and resulting academic performance. Assessment of study outcomes suggests that when provided with a differential learning opportunity, student performance and interest in STEM increased. Consequently, Discovery provides an effective teaching and learning framework within a non-specialized school that motivates students, provides opportunity for critical thinking and problem-solving practice, and better prepares them for persistence in future STEM programs.
The outcomes of the current study result from execution of Discovery over five independent academic terms as a collaboration between Institute of Biomedical Engineering (graduate students, faculty, and support staff) and George Harvey Collegiate Institute (science teachers and administration) stakeholders. Each term, the program allowed senior secondary STEM students (Grades 11 and 12) opportunity to engage in a novel project-based learning environment. The program structure uses the problem-based engineering capstone framework as a tool of inquiry-focused learning objectives, motivated by a central BME global research topic, with research questions that are inter-related but specific to the curriculum of each STEM course subject (Fig. 1 ). Over each 12-week term, students worked in teams (3–4 students) within their class cohorts to execute projects with the guidance of U of T trainees ( Discovery instructors) and their own high school teacher(s). Student experimental work was conducted in U of T teaching facilities relevant to the research study of interest (i.e., Biology and Chemistry-based projects executed within Undergraduate Teaching Laboratories; Physics projects executed within Undergraduate Design Studios). Students were introduced to relevant techniques and safety procedures in advance of iterative experimentation. Importantly, this experience served as a course term project for students, who were assessed at several points throughout the program for performance in an inquiry-focused environment as well as within the regular classroom (Fig. 1 ). To instill the atmosphere of STEM, student teams delivered their outcomes in research poster format at a final symposium, sharing their results and recommendations with other post-secondary students, faculty, and community in an open environment.
The general program concept (blue background; top left ) highlights a global research topic examined through student dissemination of subject-specific research questions, yielding multifaceted student outcomes (orange background; top right ). Each program term (term workflow, yellow background; bottom panel ), students work on program deliverables in class (blue), iterate experimental outcomes within university facilities (orange), and are assessed accordingly at numerous deliverables in an inquiry-focused learning model.
Over the course of five terms there were 268 instances of tracked student participation, representing 170 individual students. Specifically, 94 students participated during only one term of programming, 57 students participated in two terms, 16 students participated in three terms, and 3 students participated in four terms. Multiple instances of participation represent students that enrol in more than one STEM class during their senior years of high school, or who participated in Grade 11 and subsequently Grade 12. Students were surveyed before and after each term to assess program effects on STEM interest and engagement. All grade-based assessments were performed by high school teachers for their respective STEM class cohorts using consistent grading rubrics and assignment structure. Here, we discuss the outcomes of student involvement in this experiential curriculum model.
Student grades were assigned, collected, and anonymized by teachers for each Discovery deliverable (background essay, client meeting, proposal, progress report, poster, and final presentation). Teachers anonymized collective Discovery grades, the component deliverable grades thereof, final course grades, attendance in class and during programming, as well as incomplete classroom assignments, for comparative study purposes. Students performed significantly higher in their cumulative Discovery grade than in their cumulative classroom grade (final course grade less the Discovery contribution; p < 0.0001). Nevertheless, there was a highly significant correlation ( p < 0.0001) observed between the grade representing combined Discovery deliverables and the final course grade (Fig. 2a ). Further examination of the full dataset revealed two student cohorts of interest: the “Exceeds Expectations” (EE) subset (defined as those students who achieved ≥1 SD [18.0%] grade differential in Discovery over their final course grade; N = 99 instances), and the “Multiple Term” (MT) subset (defined as those students who participated in Discovery more than once; 76 individual students that collectively accounted for 174 single terms of assessment out of the 268 total student-terms delivered) (Fig. 2b, c ). These subsets were not unrelated; 46 individual students who had multiple experiences (60.5% of total MTs) exhibited at least one occasion in achieving a ≥18.0% grade differential. As students participated in group work, there was concern that lower-performing students might negatively influence the Discovery grade of higher-performing students (or vice versa). However, students were observed to self-organize into groups where all individuals received similar final overall course grades (Fig. 2d ), thereby alleviating these concerns.
a Linear regression of student grades reveals a significant correlation ( p = 0.0009) between Discovery performance and final course grade less the Discovery contribution to grade, as assessed by teachers. The dashed red line and intervals represent the theoretical 1:1 correlation between Discovery and course grades and standard deviation of the Discovery -course grade differential, respectively. b , c Identification of subgroups of interest, Exceeds Expectations (EE; N = 99, orange ) who were ≥+1 SD in Discovery -course grade differential and Multi-Term (MT; N = 174, teal ), of which N = 65 students were present in both subgroups. d Students tended to self-assemble in working groups according to their final course performance; data presented as mean ± SEM. e For MT students participating at least 3 terms in Discovery , there was no significant correlation between course grade and time, while ( f ) there was a significant correlation between Discovery grade and cumulative terms in the program. Histograms of total absences per student in ( g ) Discovery and ( h ) class (binned by 4 days to be equivalent in time to a single Discovery absence).
The benefits experienced by MT students seemed progressive; MT students that participated in 3 or 4 terms ( N = 16 and 3, respectively ) showed no significant increase by linear regression in their course grade over time ( p = 0.15, Fig. 2e ), but did show a significant increase in their Discovery grades ( p = 0.0011, Fig. 2f ). Finally, students demonstrated excellent Discovery attendance; at least 91% of participants attended all Discovery sessions in a given term (Fig. 2g ). In contrast, class attendance rates reveal a much wider distribution where 60.8% (163 out of 268 students) missed more than 4 classes (equivalent in learning time to one Discovery session) and 14.6% (39 out of 268 students) missed 16 or more classes (equivalent in learning time to an entire program of Discovery ) in a term (Fig. 2h ).
Discovery EE students (Fig. 3 ), roughly by definition, obtained lower course grades ( p < 0.0001, Fig. 3a ) and higher final Discovery grades ( p = 0.0004, Fig. 3b ) than non-EE students. This cohort of students exhibited program grades higher than classmates (Fig. 3c–h ); these differences were significant in every category with the exception of essays, where they outperformed to a significantly lesser degree ( p = 0.097; Fig. 3c ). There was no statistically significant difference in EE vs. non-EE student classroom attendance ( p = 0.85; Fig. 3i, j ). There were only four single day absences in Discovery within the EE subset; however, this difference was not statistically significant ( p = 0.074).
The “Exceeds Expectations” (EE) subset of students (defined as those who received a combined Discovery grade ≥1 SD (18.0%) higher than their final course grade) performed ( a ) lower on their final course grade and ( b ) higher in the Discovery program as a whole when compared to their classmates. d – h EE students received significantly higher grades on each Discovery deliverable than their classmates, except for their ( c ) introductory essays and ( h ) final presentations. The EE subset also tended ( i ) to have a higher relative rate of attendance during Discovery sessions but no difference in ( j ) classroom attendance. N = 99 EE students and 169 non-EE students (268 total). Grade data expressed as mean ± SEM.
Discovery MT students (Fig. 4 ), although not receiving significantly higher grades in class than students participating in the program only one time ( p = 0.29, Fig. 4a ), were observed to obtain higher final Discovery grades than single-term students ( p = 0.0067, Fig. 4b ). Although trends were less pronounced for individual MT student deliverables (Fig. 4c–h ), this student group performed significantly better on the progress report ( p = 0.0021; Fig. 4f ). Trends of higher performance were observed for initial proposals and final presentations ( p = 0.081 and 0.056, respectively; Fig. 4e, h ); all other deliverables were not significantly different between MT and non-MT students (Fig. 4c, d, g ). Attendance in Discovery ( p = 0.22) was also not significantly different between MT and non-MT students, although MT students did miss significantly less class time ( p = 0.010) (Fig. 4i, j ). Longitudinal assessment of individual deliverables for MT students that participated in three or more Discovery terms (Fig. 5 ) further highlights trend in improvement (Fig. 2f ). Greater performance over terms of participation was observed for essay ( p = 0.0295, Fig. 5a ), client meeting ( p = 0.0003, Fig. 5b ), proposal ( p = 0.0004, Fig. 5c ), progress report ( p = 0.16, Fig. 5d ), poster ( p = 0.0005, Fig. 5e ), and presentation ( p = 0.0295, Fig. 5f ) deliverable grades; these trends were all significant with the exception of the progress report ( p = 0.16, Fig. 5d ) owing to strong performance in this deliverable in all terms.
The “multi-term” (MT) subset of students (defined as having attended more than one term of Discovery ) demonstrated favorable performance in Discovery , ( a ) showing no difference in course grade compared to single-term students, but ( b outperforming them in final Discovery grade. Independent of the number of times participating in Discovery , MT students did not score significantly differently on their ( c ) essay, ( d ) client meeting, or ( g ) poster. They tended to outperform their single-term classmates on the ( e ) proposal and ( h ) final presentation and scored significantly higher on their ( f ) progress report. MT students showed no statistical difference in ( i ) Discovery attendance but did show ( j ) higher rates of classroom attendance than single-term students. N = 174 MT instances of student participation (76 individual students) and 94 single-term students. Grade data expressed as mean ± SEM.
Longitudinal assessment of a subset of MT student participants that participated in three ( N = 16) or four ( N = 3) terms presents a significant trend of improvement in their ( a ) essay, ( b ) client meeting, ( c ) proposal, ( e ) poster, and ( f ) presentation grade. d Progress report grades present a trend in improvement but demonstrate strong performance in all terms, limiting potential for student improvement. Grade data are presented as individual student performance; each student is represented by one color; data is fitted with a linear trendline (black).
Finally, the expansion of Discovery to a second school of lower LOI (i.e., nominally higher aggregate SES) allowed for the assessment of program impact in a new population over 2 terms of programming. A significant ( p = 0.040) divergence in Discovery vs. course grade distribution from the theoretical 1:1 relationship was found in the new cohort (S 1 Appendix , Fig. S 1 ), in keeping with the pattern established in this study.
Qualitative observation in the classroom by high school teachers emphasized the value students independently placed on program participation and deliverables. Throughout the term, students often prioritized Discovery group assignments over other tasks for their STEM courses, regardless of academic weight and/or due date. Comparing within this student population, teachers spoke of difficulties with late and incomplete assignments in the regular curriculum but found very few such instances with respect to Discovery -associated deliverables. Further, teachers speculated on the good behavior and focus of students in Discovery programming in contrast to attentiveness and behavior issues in their school classrooms. Multiple anecdotal examples were shared of renewed perception of student potential; students that exhibited poor academic performance in the classroom often engaged with high performance in this inquiry-focused atmosphere. Students appeared to take a sense of ownership, excitement, and pride in the setting of group projects oriented around scientific inquiry, discovery, and dissemination.
Students were asked to consider and rank the academic difficulty (scale of 1–5, with 1 = not challenging and 5 = highly challenging) of the work they conducted within the Discovery learning model. Considering individual Discovery terms, at least 91% of students felt the curriculum to be sufficiently challenging with a 3/5 or higher ranking (Term 1: 87.5%, Term 2: 93.4%, Term 3: 85%, Term 4: 93.3%, Term 5: 100%), and a minimum of 58% of students indicating a 4/5 or higher ranking (Term 1: 58.3%, Term 2: 70.5%, Term 3: 67.5%, Term 4: 69.1%, Term 5: 86.4%) (Fig. 6a ).
a Histogram of relative frequency of perceived Discovery programming academic difficulty ranked from not challenging (1) to highly challenging (5) for each session demonstrated the consistently perceived high degree of difficulty for Discovery programming (total responses: 223). b Program participation increased student comfort (94.6%) with navigating lab work in a university or college setting (total responses: 220). c Considering participation in Discovery programming, students indicated their increased (72.4%) or decreased (10.1%) likelihood to pursue future experiences in STEM as a measure of program impact (total responses: 217). d Large majority of participating students (84.9%) indicated their interest for future participation in Discovery (total responses: 212). Students were given the opportunity to opt out of individual survey questions, partially completed surveys were included in totals.
The majority of students (94.6%) indicated they felt more comfortable with the idea of performing future work in a university STEM laboratory environment given exposure to university teaching facilities throughout the program (Fig. 6b ). Students were also queried whether they were (i) more likely, (ii) less likely, or (iii) not impacted by their experience in the pursuit of STEM in the future. The majority of participants (>82%) perceived impact on STEM interests, with 72.4% indicating they were more likely to pursue these interests in the future (Fig. 6c ). When surveyed at the end of term, 84.9% of students indicated they would participate in the program again (Fig. 6d ).
We have described an inquiry-based framework for implementing experiential STEM education in a BME setting. Using this model, we engaged 268 instances of student participation (170 individual students who participated 1–4 times) over five terms in project-based learning wherein students worked in peer-based teams under the mentorship of U of T trainees to design and execute the scientific method in answering a relevant research question. Collaboration between high school teachers and Discovery instructors allowed for high school student exposure to cutting-edge BME research topics, participation in facilitated inquiry, and acquisition of knowledge through scientific discovery. All assessments were conducted by high school teachers and constituted a fraction (10–15%) of the overall course grade, instilling academic value for participating students. As such, students exhibited excitement to learn as well as commitment to their studies in the program.
Through our observations and analysis, we suggest there is value in differential learning environments for students that struggle in a knowledge acquisition-focused classroom setting. In general, we observed a high level of academic performance in Discovery programming (Fig. 2a ), which was highlighted exceptionally in EE students who exhibited greater academic performance in Discovery deliverables compared to normal coursework (>18% grade improvement in relevant deliverables). We initially considered whether this was the result of strong students influencing weaker students; however, group organization within each course suggests this is not the case (Fig. 2d ). With the exception of one class in one term (24 participants assigned by their teacher), students were allowed to self-organize into working groups and they chose to work with other students of relatively similar academic performance (as indicated by course grade), a trend observed in other studies 31 , 32 . Remarkably, EE students not only excelled during Discovery when compared to their own performance in class, but this cohort also achieved significantly higher average grades in each of the deliverables throughout the program when compared to the remaining Discovery cohort (Fig. 3 ). This data demonstrates the value of an inquiry-based learning environment compared to knowledge-focused delivery in the classroom in allowing students to excel. We expect that part of this engagement was resultant of student excitement with a novel learning opportunity. It is however a well-supported concept that students who struggle in traditional settings tend to demonstrate improved interest and motivation in STEM when given opportunity to interact in a hands-on fashion, which supports our outcomes 4 , 33 . Furthermore, these outcomes clearly represent variable student learning styles, where some students benefit from a greater exchange of information, knowledge and skills in a cooperative learning environment 34 . The performance of the EE group may not be by itself surprising, as the identification of the subset by definition required high performers in Discovery who did not have exceptionally high course grades; in addition, the final Discovery grade is dependent on the component assignment grades. However, the discrepancies between EE and non-EE groups attendance suggests that students were engaged by Discovery in a way that they were not by regular classroom curriculum.
In addition to quantified engagement in Discovery observed in academic performance, we believe remarkable attendance rates are indicative of the value students place in the differential learning structure. Given the differences in number of Discovery days and implications of missing one day of regular class compared to this immersive program, we acknowledge it is challenging to directly compare attendance data and therefore approximate this comparison with consideration of learning time equivalence. When combined with other subjective data including student focus, requests to work on Discovery during class time, and lack of discipline/behavior issues, the attendance data importantly suggests that students were especially engaged by the Discovery model. Further, we believe the increased commute time to the university campus (students are responsible for independent transit to campus, a much longer endeavour than the normal school commute), early program start time, and students’ lack of familiarity with the location are non-trivial considerations when determining the propensity of students to participate enthusiastically in Discovery . We feel this suggests the students place value on this team-focused learning and find it to be more applicable and meaningful to their interests.
Given post-secondary admission requirements for STEM programs, it would be prudent to think that students participating in multiple STEM classes across terms are the ones with the most inherent interest in post-secondary STEM programs. The MT subset, representing students who participated in Discovery for more than one term, averaged significantly higher final Discovery grades. The increase in the final Discovery grade was observed to result from a general confluence of improved performance over multiple deliverables and a continuous effort to improve in a STEM curriculum. This was reflected in longitudinal tracking of Discovery performance, where we observed a significant trend of improved performance. Interestingly, the high number of MT students who were included in the EE group suggests that students who had a keen interest in science enrolled in more than one course and in general responded well to the inquiry-based teaching method of Discovery , where scientific method was put into action. It stands to reason that students interested in science will continue to take STEM courses and will respond favorably to opportunities to put classroom theory to practical application.
The true value of an inquiry-based program such as Discovery may not be based in inspiring students to perform at a higher standard in STEM within the high school setting, as skills in critical thinking do not necessarily translate to knowledge-based assessment. Notably, students found the programming equally challenging throughout each of the sequential sessions, perhaps somewhat surprising considering the increasing number of repeat attendees in successive sessions (Fig. 6a ). Regardless of sub-discipline, there was an emphasis of perceived value demonstrated through student surveys where we observed indicated interest in STEM and comfort with laboratory work environments, and desire to engage in future iterations given the opportunity. Although non-quantitative, we perceive this as an indicator of significant student engagement, even though some participants did not yield academic success in the program and found it highly challenging given its ambiguity.
Although we observed that students become more certain of their direction in STEM, further longitudinal study is warranted to make claim of this outcome. Additionally, at this point in our assessment we cannot effectively assess the practical outcomes of participation, understanding that the immediate effects observed are subject to a number of factors associated with performance in the high school learning environment. Future studies that track graduates from this program will be prudent, in conjunction with an ever-growing dataset of assessment as well as surveys designed to better elucidate underlying perceptions and attitudes, to continue to understand the expected benefits of this inquiry-focused and partnered approach. Altogether, a multifaceted assessment of our early outcomes suggests significant value of an immersive and iterative interaction with STEM as part of the high school experience. A well-defined divergence from knowledge-based learning, focused on engagement in critical thinking development framed in the cutting-edge of STEM, may be an important step to broadening student perspectives.
In this study, we describe the short-term effects of an inquiry-based STEM educational experience on a cohort of secondary students attending a non-specialized school, and suggest that the framework can be widely applied across virtually all subjects where inquiry-driven and mentored projects can be undertaken. Although we have demonstrated replication in a second cohort of nominally higher SES (S 1 Appendix , Supplementary Fig. 1 ), a larger collection period with more students will be necessary to conclusively determine impact independent of both SES and specific cohort effects. Teachers may also find this framework difficult to implement depending on resources and/or institutional investment and support, particularly if post-secondary collaboration is inaccessible. Offerings to a specific subject (e.g., physics) where experiments yielding empirical data are logistically or financially simpler to perform may be valid routes of adoption as opposed to the current study where all subject cohorts were included.
As we consider Discovery in a bigger picture context, expansion and implementation of this model is translatable. Execution of the scientific method is an important aspect of citizen science, as the concepts of critical thing become ever-more important in a landscape of changing technological landscapes. Giving students critical thinking and problem-solving skills in their primary and secondary education provides value in the context of any career path. Further, we feel that this model is scalable across disciplines, STEM or otherwise, as a means of building the tools of inquiry. We have observed here the value of differential inclusive student engagement and critical thinking through an inquiry-focused model for a subset of students, but further to this an engagement, interest, and excitement across the body of student participants. As we educate the leaders of tomorrow, we suggest that use of an inquiry-focused model such as Discovery could facilitate growth of a data-driven critical thinking framework.
In conclusion, we have presented a model of inquiry-based STEM education for secondary students that emphasizes inclusion, quantitative analysis, and critical thinking. Student grades suggest significant performance benefits, and engagement data suggests positive student attitude despite the perceived challenges of the program. We also note a particular performance benefit to students who repeatedly engage in the program. This framework may carry benefits in a wide variety of settings and disciplines for enhancing student engagement and performance, particularly in non-specialized school environments.
Participants in Discovery include all students enrolled in university-stream Grade 11 or 12 biology, chemistry, or physics at the participating school over five consecutive terms (cohort summary shown in Table 1 ). Although student participation in educational content was mandatory, student grades and survey responses (administered by high school teachers) were collected from only those students with parent or guardian consent. Teachers replaced each student name with a unique coded identifier to preserve anonymity but enable individual student tracking over multiple terms. All data collected were analyzed without any exclusions save for missing survey responses; no power analysis was performed prior to data collection.
This study was approved by the University of Toronto Health Sciences Research Ethics Board (Protocol # 34825) and the Toronto District School Board External Research Review Committee (Protocol # 2017-2018-20). Written informed consent was collected from parents or guardians of participating students prior to the acquisition of student data (both post-hoc academic data and survey administration). Data were anonymized by high school teachers for maintenance of academic confidentiality of individual students prior to release to U of T researchers.
Students enrolled in university-preparatory STEM classes at the participating school completed a term-long project under the guidance of graduate student instructors and undergraduate student mentors as a mandatory component of their respective course. Project curriculum developed collaboratively between graduate students and participating high school teachers was delivered within U of T Faculty of Applied Science & Engineering (FASE) teaching facilities. Participation allows high school students to garner a better understanding as to how undergraduate learning and career workflows in STEM vary from traditional high school classroom learning, meanwhile reinforcing the benefits of problem solving, perseverance, teamwork, and creative thinking competencies. Given that Discovery was a mandatory component of course curriculum, students participated as class cohorts and addressed questions specific to their course subject knowledge base but related to the defined global health research topic (Fig. 1 ). Assessment of program deliverables was collectively assigned to represent 10–15% of the final course grade for each subject at the discretion of the respective STEM teacher.
The Discovery program framework was developed, prior to initiation of student assessment, in collaboration with one high school selected from the local public school board over a 1.5 year period of time. This partner school consistently scores highly (top decile) in the school board’s Learning Opportunities Index (LOI). The LOI ranks each school based on measures of external challenges affecting its student population therefore schools with the greatest level of external challenge receive a higher ranking 35 . A high LOI ranking is inversely correlated with socioeconomic status (SES); therefore, participating students are identified as having a significant number of external challenges that may affect their academic success. The mandatory nature of program participation was established to reach highly capable students who may be reluctant to engage on their own initiative, as a means of enhancing the inclusivity and impact of the program. The selected school partner is located within a reasonable geographical radius of our campus (i.e., ~40 min transit time from school to campus). This is relevant as participating students are required to independently commute to campus for Discovery hands-on experiences.
Each program term of Discovery corresponds with a five-month high school term. Lead university trainee instructors (3–6 each term) engaged with high school teachers 1–2 months in advance of high school student engagement to discern a relevant overarching global healthcare theme. Each theme was selected with consideration of (a) topics that university faculty identify as cutting-edge biomedical research, (b) expertise that Discovery instructors provide, and (c) capacity to showcase the diversity of BME. Each theme was sub-divided into STEM subject-specific research questions aligning with provincial Ministry of Education curriculum concepts for university-preparatory Biology, Chemistry, and Physics 9 that students worked to address, both on-campus and in-class, during a term-long project. The Discovery framework therefore provides students a problem-based learning experience reflective of an engineering capstone design project, including a motivating scientific problem (i.e., global topic), subject-specific research question, and systematic determination of a professional recommendation addressing the needs of the presented problem.
Discovery instructors were volunteers recruited primarily from graduate and undergraduate BME programs in the FASE. Instructors were organized into subject-specific instructional teams based on laboratory skills, teaching experience, and research expertise. The lead instructors of each subject (the identified 1–2 trainees that built curriculum with high school teachers) were responsible to organize the remaining team members as mentors for specific student groups over the course of the program term (~1:8 mentor to student ratio).
All Discovery instructors were familiarized with program expectations and trained in relevant workspace safety, in addition to engagement at a teaching workshop delivered by the Faculty Advisor (a Teaching Stream faculty member) at the onset of term. This workshop was designed to provide practical information on teaching and was co-developed with high school teachers based on their extensive training and experience in fundamental teaching methods. In addition, group mentors received hands-on training and guidance from lead instructors regarding the specific activities outlined for their respective subject programming (an exemplary term of student programming is available in S 2 Appendix) .
Discovery instructors were responsible for introducing relevant STEM skills and mentoring high school students for the duration of their projects, with support and mentorship from the Faculty Mentor. Each instructor worked exclusively throughout the term with the student groups to which they had been assigned, ensuring consistent mentorship across all disciplinary components of the project. In addition to further supporting university trainees in on-campus mentorship, high school teachers were responsible for academic assessment of all student program deliverables (Fig. 1 ; the standardized grade distribution available in S 3 Appendix ). Importantly, trainees never engaged in deliverable assessment; for continuity of overall course assessment, this remained the responsibility of the relevant teacher for each student cohort.
Throughout each term, students engaged within the university facilities four times. The first three sessions included hands-on lab sessions while the fourth visit included a culminating symposium for students to present their scientific findings (Fig. 1 ). On average, there were 4–5 groups of students per subject (3–4 students per group; ~20 students/class). Discovery instructors worked exclusively with 1–2 groups each term in the capacity of mentor to monitor and guide student progress in all project deliverables.
After introducing the selected global research topic in class, teachers led students in completion of background research essays. Students subsequently engaged in a subject-relevant skill-building protocol during their first visit to university teaching laboratory facilities, allowing opportunity to understand analysis techniques and equipment relevant for their assessment projects. At completion of this session, student groups were presented with a subject-specific research question as well as the relevant laboratory inventory available for use during their projects. Armed with this information, student groups continued to work in their classroom setting to develop group-specific experimental plans. Teachers and Discovery instructors provided written and oral feedback, respectively , allowing students an opportunity to revise their plans in class prior to on-campus experimental execution.
Once at the relevant laboratory environment, student groups executed their protocols in an effort to collect experimental data. Data analysis was performed in the classroom and students learned by trial & error to optimize their protocols before returning to the university lab for a second opportunity of data collection. All methods and data were re-analyzed in class in order for students to create a scientific poster for the purpose of study/experience dissemination. During a final visit to campus, all groups presented their findings at a research symposium, allowing students to verbally defend their process, analyses, interpretations, and design recommendations to a diverse audience including peers, STEM teachers, undergraduate and graduate university students, postdoctoral fellows and U of T faculty.
Teachers evaluated their students on the following associated deliverables: (i) global theme background research essay; (ii) experimental plan; (iii) progress report; (iv) final poster content and presentation; and (v) attendance. For research purposes, these grades were examined individually and also as a collective Discovery program grade for each student. For students consenting to participation in the research study, all Discovery grades were anonymized by the classroom teacher before being shared with study authors. Each student was assigned a code by the teacher for direct comparison of deliverable outcomes and survey responses. All instances of “Final course grade” represent the prorated course grade without the Discovery component, to prevent confounding of quantitative analyses.
Survey instruments were used to gain insight into student attitudes and perceptions of STEM and post-secondary study, as well as Discovery program experience and impact (S 4 Appendix ). High school teachers administered surveys in the classroom only to students supported by parental permission. Pre-program surveys were completed at minimum 1 week prior to program initiation each term and exit surveys were completed at maximum 2 weeks post- Discovery term completion. Surveys results were validated using a principal component analysis (S 1 Appendix , Supplementary Fig. 2 ).
From initial analysis, we identified two student subpopulations of particular interest: students who performed ≥1 SD [18.0%] or greater in the collective Discovery components of the course compared to their final course grade (“EE”), and students who participated in Discovery more than once (“MT”). These groups were compared individually against the rest of the respective Discovery population (“non-EE” and “non-MT”, respectively ). Additionally, MT students who participated in three or four (the maximum observed) terms of Discovery were assessed for longitudinal changes to performance in their course and Discovery grades. Comparisons were made for all Discovery deliverables (introductory essay, client meeting, proposal, progress report, poster, and presentation), final Discovery grade, final course grade, Discovery attendance, and overall attendance.
Student course grades were analyzed in all instances without the Discovery contribution (calculated from all deliverable component grades and ranging from 10 to 15% of final course grade depending on class and year) to prevent correlation. Aggregate course grades and Discovery grades were first compared by paired t-test, matching each student’s course grade to their Discovery grade for the term. Student performance in Discovery ( N = 268 instances of student participation, comprising 170 individual students that participated 1–4 times) was initially assessed in a linear regression of Discovery grade vs. final course grade. Trends in course and Discovery performance over time for students participating 3 or 4 terms ( N = 16 and 3 individuals, respectively ) were also assessed by linear regression. For subpopulation analysis (EE and MT, N = 99 instances from 81 individuals and 174 instances from 76 individuals, respectively ), each dataset was tested for normality using the D’Agostino and Pearson omnibus normality test. All subgroup comparisons vs. the remaining population were performed by Mann–Whitney U -test. Data are plotted as individual points with mean ± SEM overlaid (grades), or in histogram bins of 1 and 4 days, respectively , for Discovery and class attendance. Significance was set at α ≤ 0.05.
Further information on research design is available in the Nature Research Reporting Summary linked to this article.
The data that support the findings of this study are available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author DMK. These data are not publicly available due to privacy concerns of personal data according to the ethical research agreements supporting this study.
Holmes, K., Gore, J., Smith, M. & Lloyd, A. An integrated analysis of school students’ aspirations for STEM careers: Which student and school factors are most predictive? Int. J. Sci. Math. Educ. 16 , 655–675 (2018).
Article Google Scholar
Dooley, M., Payne, A., Steffler, M. & Wagner, J. Understanding the STEM path through high school and into university programs. Can. Public Policy 43 , 1–16 (2017).
Gilmore, M. W. Improvement of STEM education: experiential learning is the key. Mod. Chem. Appl. 1, e109. https://doi.org/10.4172/2329-6798.1000e109 (2013).
Roberts, T. et al. Students’ perceptions of STEM learning after participating in a summer informal learning experience. Int. J. STEM Educ. 5 , 35 (2018).
Gillies, R. M. & Boyle, M. Teachers’ reflections on cooperative learning: Issues of implementation. Teach. Teach. Educ. 26 , 933–940 (2010).
Nasir, M., Seta, J. & Meyer, E.G. Introducing high school students to biomedical engineering through summer camps. Paper presented at the ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Indianapolis, IN. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2-20701 (2014).
Sadler, P. M., Sonnert, G., Hazari, Z. & Tai, R. Stability and volatility of STEM career interest in high school: a gender study. Sci. Educ. 96 , 411–427 (2012).
Sarikas, C. The High School Science Classes You Should Take . https://blog.prepscholar.com/the-high-school-science-classes-you-should-take (2020).
Ontario, G. o. The ontario curriculum grades 11 and 12. Science http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/curriculum/secondary/2009science11_12.pdf (2008).
Scott, C. An investigation of science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) focused high schools in the US. J. STEM Educ.: Innov. Res. 13 , 30 (2012).
Google Scholar
Erdogan, N. & Stuessy, C. L. Modeling successful STEM high schools in the United States: an ecology framework. Int. J. Educ. Math., Sci. Technol. 3 , 77–92 (2015).
Pfeiffer, S. I., Overstreet, J. M. & Park, A. The state of science and mathematics education in state-supported residential academies: a nationwide survey. Roeper Rev. 32 , 25–31 (2009).
Anthony, A. B., Greene, H., Post, P. E., Parkhurst, A. & Zhan, X. Preparing university students to lead K-12 engineering outreach programmes: a design experiment. Eur. J. Eng. Educ. 41 , 623–637 (2016).
Brown, J. S., Collins, A. & Duguid, P. Situated cognition and the culture of learning. Educ. researcher 18 , 32–42 (1989).
Reveles, J. M. & Brown, B. A. Contextual shifting: teachers emphasizing students’ academic identity to promote scientific literacy. Sci. Educ. 92 , 1015–1041 (2008).
Adedokun, O. A., Bessenbacher, A. B., Parker, L. C., Kirkham, L. L. & Burgess, W. D. Research skills and STEM undergraduate research students’ aspirations for research careers: mediating effects of research self-efficacy. J. Res. Sci. Teach. 50 , 940–951 (2013).
Boekaerts, M. Self-regulated learning: a new concept embraced by researchers, policy makers, educators, teachers, and students. Learn. Instr. 7 , 161–186 (1997).
Honey, M., Pearson, G. & Schweingruber, H. STEM Integration in K-12 Education: Status, Prospects, and An Agenda for Research . (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, 2014).
Moote, J. K., Williams, J. M. & Sproule, J. When students take control: investigating the impact of the crest inquiry-based learning program on self-regulated processes and related motivations in young science students. J. Cogn. Educ. Psychol. 12 , 178–196 (2013).
Fantz, T. D., Siller, T. J. & Demiranda, M. A. Pre-collegiate factors influencing the self-efficacy of engineering students. J. Eng. Educ. 100 , 604–623 (2011).
Ralston, P. A., Hieb, J. L. & Rivoli, G. Partnerships and experience in building STEM pipelines. J. Professional Issues Eng. Educ. Pract. 139 , 156–162 (2012).
Kelley, T. R. & Knowles, J. G. A conceptual framework for integrated STEM education. Int. J. STEM Educ. 3 , 11 (2016).
Brown, P. L., Concannon, J. P., Marx, D., Donaldson, C. W. & Black, A. An examination of middle school students’ STEM self-efficacy with relation to interest and perceptions of STEM. J. STEM Educ.: Innov. Res. 17 , 27–38 (2016).
Bandura, A., Barbaranelli, C., Caprara, G. V. & Pastorelli, C. Self-efficacy beliefs as shapers of children’s aspirations and career trajectories. Child Dev. 72 , 187–206 (2001).
Article CAS Google Scholar
Davenport Huyer, L. et al. IBBME discovery: biomedical engineering-based iterative learning in a high school STEM curriculum (evaluation). Paper presented at ASEE Annual Conference & Exposition, Salt Lake City, UT. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2-30591 (2018).
Abu-Faraj, Ziad O., ed. Handbook of research on biomedical engineering education and advanced bioengineering learning: interdisciplinary concepts: interdisciplinary concepts. Vol. 2. IGI Global (2012).
Johri, A. & Olds, B. M. Situated engineering learning: bridging engineering education research and the learning sciences. J. Eng. Educ. 100 , 151–185 (2011).
O’Connell, K. B., Keys, B. & Storksdieck, M. Taking stock of oregon STEM hubs: accomplishments and challenges. Corvallis: Oregon State University https://ir.library.oregonstate.edu/concern/articles/hq37vt23t (2017).
Freeman, K. E., Alston, S. T. & Winborne, D. G. Do learning communities enhance the quality of students’ learning and motivation in STEM? J. Negro Educ. 77 , 227–240 (2008).
Weaver, R. R. & Qi, J. Classroom organization and participation: college students’ perceptions. J. High. Educ. 76 , 570–601 (2005).
Chapman, K. J., Meuter, M., Toy, D. & Wright, L. Can’t we pick our own groups? The influence of group selection method on group dynamics and outcomes. J. Manag. Educ. 30 , 557–569 (2006).
Hassaskhah, J. & Mozaffari, H. The impact of group formation method (student-selected vs. teacher-assigned) on group dynamics and group outcome in EFL creative writing. J. Lang. Teach. Res. 6 , 147–156 (2015).
Ma, V. J. & Ma, X. A comparative analysis of the relationship between learning styles and mathematics performance. Int. J. STEM Educ. 1 , 3 (2014).
Weinstein, C. E. & Hume, L. M. Study Strategies for Lifelong Learning . (American Psychological Association, 1998).
Toronto District School Board. The 2017 Learning Opportunities Index: Questions and Answers. https://www.tdsb.on.ca/Portals/research/docs/reports/LOI2017v2.pdf (2017).
Download references
This study has been possible due to the support of many University of Toronto trainee volunteers, including Genevieve Conant, Sherif Ramadan, Daniel Smieja, Rami Saab, Andrew Effat, Serena Mandla, Cindy Bui, Janice Wong, Dawn Bannerman, Allison Clement, Shouka Parvin Nejad, Nicolas Ivanov, Jose Cardenas, Huntley Chang, Romario Regeenes, Dr. Henrik Persson, Ali Mojdeh, Nhien Tran-Nguyen, Ileana Co, and Jonathan Rubianto. We further acknowledge the staff and administration of George Harvey Collegiate Institute and the Institute of Biomedical Engineering (IBME), as well as Benjamin Rocheleau and Madeleine Rocheleau for contributions to data collation. Discovery has grown with continued support of Dean Christopher Yip (Faculty of Applied Science and Engineering, U of T), and the financial support of the IBME and the National Science and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) PromoScience program (PROSC 515876-2017; IBME “Igniting Youth Curiosity in STEM” initiative co-directed by DMK and Dr. Penney Gilbert). LDH and NIC were supported by Vanier Canada graduate scholarships from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and NSERC, respectively . DMK holds a Dean’s Emerging Innovation in Teaching Professorship in the Faculty of Engineering & Applied Science, U of T.
These authors contributed equally: Locke Davenport Huyer, Neal I. Callaghan.
Institute of Biomedical Engineering, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Locke Davenport Huyer, Neal I. Callaghan, Andrey I. Shukalyuk & Dawn M. Kilkenny
Chemical Engineering and Applied Chemistry, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Locke Davenport Huyer
Translational Biology and Engineering Program, Ted Rogers Centre for Heart Research, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Neal I. Callaghan
George Harvey Collegiate Institute, Toronto District School Board, Toronto, ON, Canada
Sara Dicks, Edward Scherer & Margaret Jou
Institute for Studies in Transdisciplinary Engineering Education & Practice, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada
Dawn M. Kilkenny
You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar
LDH, NIC and DMK conceived the program structure, designed the study, and interpreted the data. LDH and NIC ideated programming, coordinated execution, and performed all data analysis. SD, ES, and MJ designed and assessed student deliverables, collected data, and anonymized data for assessment. SD assisted in data interpretation. AIS assisted in programming ideation and design. All authors provided feedback and approved the manuscript that was written by LDH, NIC and DMK.
Correspondence to Dawn M. Kilkenny .
Competing interests.
The authors declare no competing interests.
Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Supplemental material, reporting summary, rights and permissions.
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ .
Reprints and permissions
Cite this article.
Davenport Huyer, L., Callaghan, N.I., Dicks, S. et al. Enhancing senior high school student engagement and academic performance using an inclusive and scalable inquiry-based program. npj Sci. Learn. 5 , 17 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-00076-2
Download citation
Received : 05 December 2019
Accepted : 08 October 2020
Published : 02 December 2020
DOI : https://doi.org/10.1038/s41539-020-00076-2
Anyone you share the following link with will be able to read this content:
Sorry, a shareable link is not currently available for this article.
Provided by the Springer Nature SharedIt content-sharing initiative
Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
Tips for Conducting Action Research in the Classroom. Setting Clear Research Goals and Objectives: Clearly define the goals and objectives of the research to ensure a focused and purposeful investigation. Involving Stakeholders in the Research Process: Engage students, parents, and colleagues in the research process to gather diverse perspectives and insights.
Action research in education offers a powerful tool for educators to actively engage in improving their teaching practices and student outcomes. By combining research and action, this approach encourages teachers to become reflective practitioners and agents of change within their classrooms and schools. Action research topics in education ...
The methods of action research in education include: conducting in-class observations. taking field notes. surveying or interviewing teachers, administrators, or parents. using audio and video recordings. The goal is to identify problematic issues, test possible solutions, or simply carry-out continuous improvement.
The program pairs high-school students with Ph.D. mentors to work 1-on-1 on an independent research project. The program actually does not require you to have a research topic in mind when you apply, but pro tip: the more specific you can be the more likely you are to get in! Elements of a Strong Research Paper Introduction
Importance of Research Topics For High School Students. Develop Research And Critical Thinking Skills. Explore Passions and Interests. Learn Time Management and Responsibility. Build Knowledge. Practice Academic Writing. Develop Presentation Skills. Gain Credibility and Recognition. Elements of a Strong Research Paper.
Social Issues and Sociology Research Topics. The Impact of Social Media on Interpersonal Relationships: Social media is shaking up the way we interact with others. The Role of Education in Reducing Inequality: Education is the number one way to reduce inequality. Explore strategies and policies that can help with this.
A great research essay topic is one that is feasible to research and write about within the given time and resource constraints. It should have accessible sources and available data for investigation. 5. Controversy or Debate. A great research essay topic sparks controversy or debate within the field of study.
The use of student data to inform instruction. The role of parental involvement in education. The effects of mindfulness practices in the classroom. The use of technology in the classroom. The role of critical thinking in education. The use of formative and summative assessments in the classroom.
Good Research Paper Topics (Continued) 5) Analyze the themes, symbolic representations, and societal critiques of the American Dream as depicted in F. Scott Fitzgerald's The Great Gatsby. 6) Provide a comprehensive explication of a renowned Shakespearean sonnet or soliloquy, such as this one from Hamlet. 7) Choose a poem such as Robert Frost ...
An action research project is a practical endeavor that will ultimately be shaped by your educational context and practice. Now that you have developed a literature review, you are ready to revise your initial plans and begin to plan your project. This chapter will provide some advice about your considerations when undertaking an action ...
teachers can conduct school-based Action Research projects that result in positive changes in their schools. Specific goals of this handbook are to help educators do the following: Define and explain Action Research. Demonstrate an understanding of how to use the recursive nature of Action Research to improve their teaching of instructional
1. Introduction. The current developments in science and technology, the changing needs of the individuals and the society, and the advancements in learning-teaching theories and approaches have directly affected the roles expected from educated individuals [].Because, education holds a key role in dealing with the problems that emerge with the rapidly changing world conditions.
Action research is a process for improving educational practice. Its methods involve action, evaluation, and reflection. It is a process to gather evidence to implement change in practices. Action research is participative and collaborative. It is undertaken by individuals with a common purpose.
3.3 Use Resources and Guides. 4 Best Research Paper Topics for High School Students. 4.1 Education Research Topics. 4.2 Research Topics About World History. 4.3 Healthcare Research Topics. 4.4 Research Topics on Finance. 4.5 Research Topics on Mental Health. 4.6 Science Research Projects. 4.7 Music Research Topics.
The following Action Research Projects (ARPs) provide just that. These practical ideas and strategies are the result of classroom action research conducted by teachers in. schools and classrooms. To use this site, simply identify a grade level or topic of interest and click on it. This will take you to a list of ARPs for your review.
The Center for Collaborative Action research suggests a process of framing questions by recognizing a problem, identifying a possible solution, and anticipating outcomes. Examples, sample topics, and discussion about action research in education using drawings, interviews, and other data sources to study teaching and learning.
45 Good Research Topics for High School Students. Here are 45 topics that can be used as they are, or adapted easily by changing one of the keywords. Profits of the Montessori School Model. Commercial communication strategies and their implications in social media. Causes and effects of childhood hunger.
Abstract and Figures. Classroom participation is must for the enhancement of the academic learning. This paper looks specifically on the strategy on how to improve the learners' classroom ...
For other schools interested in conducting action research, Kanter highlighted three key strategies. Focus on areas of growth, not deficiency: "This would have been less successful if we had said, 'Our math scores are down. We need a new program to get scores up,' Kanter said. "That puts the onus on teachers.
Impress Your Teacher (and Yourself!): 42 of the Best Research Topics for High School Students. Consumerism and Its Effect on Sustainable Economics and Environmental Sustainability. Passion Projects: How Pursuing Personal Passions Can Drive Innovation and Creativity in Students.
When you consider the steps to Action Research (plan a change, take action, observe, reflect, repeat), it is easy to see correlations to the teaching cycle. First, teachers must consider their students and develop objectives for the growth they want to see over the course a unit (plan a change). Then, teachers must create a series of strategies ...
These research topics for high school students are designed to deepen your knowledge and prepare you for advanced studies and innovations in the field of physics. Math Research Topics. Math research topics for high school students are a fantastic way to explore real-world problems through the lens of mathematical principles. 11.
Collaboration between high school teachers and Discovery instructors allowed for high school student exposure to cutting-edge BME research topics, participation in facilitated inquiry, and ...
Controversial Topics. Lastly, some consider these topics controversial, yet they may be of great interest to some students. Topics include: Human health, health issues, access to healthcare, medicine costs (especially in the US) Birth control. Teen pregnancy. Abortion rights, laws, limitations. Animal rights.