Staying curious

Saturday was one of those wonderful days when my contributor copies landed in the mailbox. This time it was the March issue of Highlights for Children, which has an article I wrote about a scientist and her research on black howler monkeys.

Black howler monkey by LeaMaimone. (source)

She discovered that they can count, just by listening to the roars of other troops. Very cool stuff. Highlights isn't available online, but I have also written about her work (and research on many other clever critters) in this piece on Animal Cognition, if you'd like to learn more.

Many of the non-fiction pieces I write profile a scientist or scientists and their work--all of my Science News for Kids stories do this, and most of the ones I've written for Highlights, too.

I absolutely LOVE that part of my job. Scientists do the coolest stuff. I mean, who else would think to drag a sled filled with speakers, poles, a tape player, an amplifier, and a boat battery into the Belizian jungle to find out whether or not howler monkeys can count?

Who else would take life-sized stuffed-animal lions with removable, velcro-able manes into the Serengeti to find out why lions have manes at all? You can find out more about that one in the March issue of ASK (Arts and Sciences for Kids) magazine.

photo by Robek (source)

Scientists look at the world around them and see things they can't explain. They ask interesting questions and design fascinating experiments in their search for an answer. They are the most curious people on the planet, second only to kids. Some are probably more curious than your average kid.

And that's what makes science so much fun.

Which is why I have a hard time understanding why our school kids, who are naturally incredibly curious people, aren't doing well in science. I don't teach in K-12, so I'm not in the classroom to know what activities they're doing to learn about science. I do know that many elementary teachers don't have a background in the sciences, and perhaps that's a contributing factor. I really don't know.

Are we not letting kids observe and ask questions? Not giving them the directed freedom to figure out how to find an answer? Kids are good at that. It comes naturally to them. Just imagine what could happen if we harnessed that potential. All it takes is a creative mind and a supportive atmosphere. Science doesn't have to be costly. Some of the best experiments are incredibly simple.

So why aren't our students performing well on science tests? Scientists are just kids who never lost their curiosity about the world. How can we help our kids keep theirs?

---

Nurturing curiosity

Last weekend, I attended the Rocky Mountain SCBWI conference in Denver. It was a terrific meeting (such an enthusiastic, involved group!), and I had the opportunity to talk with agent Karen Grencik of Red Fox Literary, and editors Emily Clement of Arthur A. Levine Books and Sylvie Frank of Holiday House--gracious women, every one.

As a non-fiction writer, I paid close attention when the Common Core State Standards came up. Both Karen and Sylvie mentioned the importance of tying books to the Common Core. If a story has the potential to be used in the classroom, it will be much more likely to get published.

More and more, teachers are looking for books that allow them to "teach smarter, not harder," as a principal at a nearby school so eloquently put it. What does that mean? Teachers need books that teach literacy while providing curriculum-related content. Books that kill two birds with one stone, if you will.

(As an aside: If you teach science, Melissa Stewart has a terrific Pinterest board to help you find books to fit some of the Common Core standards.)

Teachers need to find ways to teach math and science simultaneously. Science and math are closely connected, and yet I get the sense that they're typically taught as completely distinct subjects. Do they have to be? Can't we interweave them, thereby increasing the amount of time available to dedicate to both?

For example, in a life cycles unit a class may order caterpillars. Watching them pupate and emerge as adult butterflies is a remarkable experience, but it can be so much more.

source

Order caterpillars that are smaller, those that have more time to grow. Then have the students measure them. Weigh them. Graph the change in size over time. Weigh plant material before it's given to the butterflies, then again a day later. How much weight was lost? Was the same amount gained by the caterpillars? Why or why not? If the plants lost more weight than the caterpillars gained, where could the rest have gone?

Think you don't have enough science time to extend the life cycles unit? That's the beauty of "teaching smarter"--you can squeeze science into the daily math routine. And numbers are so much more interesting when they mean something.

I think--or rather hope--that the Common Core will encourage just this kind of cross-over in the classroom. After meeting with the principal mentioned above, and one of the teachers at her school, I strongly believe that we can again foster a love of science--and math--by returning to a hands-on approach and blurring the lines between subjects.

Math is fun and cool when it has real-life application. And science is all about curiosity--after all, what is a scientist but a kid who never stopped asking "Why?" 

The possibilities for exploration and discovery, critical thinking and inquiry-based learning are endless if we can just start to see the curriculum in a new way. 

---

Library Fun

I love when I get to experience something unexpected. Most days go by, relatively the same, but every now and then something comes along to shake things up. Like this.

Look who came to our local library:

There's a great horned owl in the children's fiction section. How awesome is that?

The raptor rehabilitators brought others, too, including this screech owl, a European barn owl, and a peregrine falcon. Gorgeous birds that have all been injured in some way (most were hit by a car while hunting). They were rescued but unable to be re-released into the wild.

It was an incredible afternoon with rarely-seen hunters. I'd do it again in a heart-beat.

When was the last time you got close to an animal that wasn't a pet?

---

Hooking teachers and librarians

One of the terrific things about Chautauqua was having a chance to meet with lots of teachers and librarians (on the faculty and among the attendees) and hear what they look for when they select trade books for the classroom and library.

Guess what? It's not just about content. (Obviously that's important, but content alone won't do it.)

source

Most teachers at the elementary level choose books that complement their curriculum. Fiction or non, the books need to dovetail in some way with the concepts that are being taught. And if the books connect different areas? Even better. (Think multicultural issues and geography, for example.)

How do you know whether your book will complement the curriculum? Do a google search for "state curriculum standards." Start with your state, then check out others. How do they compare? Can you make a case in your query/cover letter that your book could be used by schools in a number of states?

How books are written is also important: books that assume background knowledge kids don't have will NOT be used in the classroom. Background needs to be built into the text, so the readers can understand without having to fetch a dictionary.

Illustrations? They're terrific! But they need to appear on the same page spread as the relevant text. If the reader has to flip a page (or two) to find the illustrations, teachers will skip the book. Make the information easily accessible to your readers. Ask to see page proofs and make it clear that you want a layout that enhances readability and retention of information.

Teachers and librarians also need to teach study skills. How? By choosing books that have a table of contents, a glossary, an index, and a list of additional resources. List of possible discussion questions? Bring 'em on! Anything to make a teacher's life easier will be greatly appreciated.

If your book would work well in the classroom, be sure to mention how it addresses these kinds of things in your query letter. Many schools use the SQ3R reading method. Describe how your book can be used in this way. Not only will you impress the editor reading your submission, you vastly increase the chances of getting your books into schools and libraries.

What is your favorite book that was/is used in the classroom? Why?

---

Making your writing accessible to the reader

I'm reading Noah Lukeman's The First Five Pages (thank you, Justine!), and I had to laugh when I got to his chapter on style, particularly the standard academic style.  Noah gives fabulous (if exaggerated) examples of each of the issues he discusses in the book. Here's one sentence (yes, just one) from his example of the academic style:

The internal structure of the bureaucracy, as witnessed by Chief Councilor Spiros Andros an documented by Epilos, was not unlike the Cartesian dynasty of the 6th century, under the little-known Habacus of Southern France (ibid, p. 899), not in its want of a political head, that is to say, a leader, but rather in its seeming tolerance and perhaps even inclination towards that one desire man has been struggling to conquer since the earliest days of Scripture.

Makes you want to get out the blue pencil, doesn't it? As an academic, I found this hilarious because... it's true. This is what reading academic papers is like (not all, there are some fabulous writers in academia, but they are rare and their writing should be treasured). I always wondered why I fell asleep when doing research as a grad student—why I couldn't remember what a paper was about for the group discussion just one hour later—but now it's crystal clear: it's because academics write like this.

I've been writing for Nature Education Knowledge, which is an online educational resource geared toward undergraduates (but also applicable to the advanced high school student). I've contributed to the Ecology topics, both as a writer and as a reviewer. All papers are peer-reviewed: reviewed by other members of the academic community for readability and accuracy. 

I've noticed two main problems in the papers I've reviewed. One is a lack of accessible vocabulary; the use of jargon that only other scientists would know. The other is the tendency of academics to write long, convoluted sentences (see above) that are nearly impossible to follow unless you are already intimately familiar with the subject matter.

This doesn't work for an educational publication. More often that not, I find myself suggesting that the author cut long sentences into two, sometimes three separate sentences. If the reader can grasp the concept within one short sentence, then s/he will be prepared to take on the next one. But if the concept is wrapped within another concept, this task becomes nearly impossible. Particularly when the reader must understand the terminology in order to understand the concept (authors can mark terms for inclusion in the glossary, but readers must look up the terms before they can continue reading).

This may sound like it's only applicable to academic writing, but it's not. In writing for children, one of the reasons non-fiction articles are rejected by magazines is because they are written at an inappropriate level for the intended reader. The same goes for writing books for children. New terms must be explained in an understandable way, using short sentences that the readers (or listeners) can understand. Knowledge is built, step by step.

And this all applies to fiction just as much as it does to non-fiction. Know what farandolae are? Or what kything is? Did you know what a pensieve was before you read Harry Potter? These are all fictional objects from fabulous books, terms that may become commonplace, but only because the authors who coined them explained them in an accessible way. So think about the vocabulary you use. Pay careful attention to sentence length. And see if your writing doesn't improve.

What is your favorite object from a work of fiction? What does it do?

---

Tools of the mind

"The more of you that gets involved — the body, the emotions, everything — the more you get out of it in many ways because it changes the brain. Nurtures the brain. The social nurtures the brain. The joy nurtures the brain. The physical activity nurtures the brain. And it also nurtures your physical health. You're going to be more physically healthy if you're socially connected, if you're physically fit, if you're using your mind actively." 

The above quote is by Adele Diamond, a researcher studying developmental cognitive neuroscience at the University of British Columbia. A friend of mine sent me a Speaking of Faith transcript of an interview with Prof. Diamond titled Learning, Doing, Being: a new science of education. Diamond offered fascinating insight into the methods we use to educate our children and how those methods affect their performance on tests, their development of a life-long love of learning, and their ability to be creative and solve problems.

Prof. Diamond argues that we need to reevaluate the way we teach our children. That education should emphasize activities that help foster a love of learning and promote problem-solving skills. In particular, she argues that we need to increase the exposure of children to activities such as music, dance, storytelling, sports, and play (all of which have been on the decline in public schools), and reduce our emphasis on memorizing "content." Details are forgotten, but knowing how to find the information you need and apply it in a novel situation is a skill that serves us every day of our lives.

"[T]he schools are tending to think, 'Oh, my god. We don't have time for play. And we don't have time for the arts…. And we have to focus on the academic content, because you're going to get tested at the end of the year and we have to make sure they do well on these tests.' But our research and others' is showing that if the children have more time to play, they do better on these academic outcome measures than if they spend more time in direct academic instruction.

[T]hings like the arts or sports or any of these other things, they develop your cognitive skills dependent on prefrontal cortex. Like sustaining attention, like being able to hold information in mind. They speak to your social aspect because you're part of a group.... Which is terribly important to doing well. They also use your body and we know that if you're physically healthy, your prefrontal cortex and brain work better, specifically your prefrontal cortex. And leading a sedentary life is terrible for your brain health or your cognitive health."

Here we have a researcher arguing that we are taking our educational methods in the wrong direction. That we need to bring back physical education, music and art classes, and give children time to play. Depriving them of these activities in favor of academic instruction actually hurts their ability to perform well on standardized tests. Not to mention their ability to deal with problems they encounter later in life. Sure, pursuit of a career in the arts may seem superfluous to most people, but every single one of us needs to be able to interact with others and handle difficult problems when they arise.

Interviewer Krista Tippett explains that Diamond's research focuses on executive function, "... the brain's capacity to coordinate the many kinds of mental activity that are involved in any human experience and certainly in learning, from how we focus to how we feel. Executive function enables us to take charge of our responses and actions."

Executive function involves three fundamental aspects:

• inhibitory control "You need inhibitory control to stay on task when you're bored or when you meet initial failure. You need inhibitory control to focus in on something in the environment so that you're not overwhelmed by all the other things around."
• working memory  "It's holding information in mind and playing with it, and you need working memory for anything that unfolds over time. You also need working memory for creativity because the essence of creativity is holding things in mind and disassembling them and putting them together in new ways"
• cognitive flexibility "It's being able to switch your perspective or switching the way you're thinking about things, being able to think outside the box. And of course, that's also an aspect of creativity." 

 Taken together, these three aspects allow us to be more creative people, better planners, and better problem solvers.

 I have written before about the effect of exercise on mental function and creative problem solving skills, and on the importance of giving children (and ourselves) time for free play. The information here may seem paradoxical, in that free play is often lost in pursuit of extracurricular activities, such as sports, music, art, or dance lessons. I think the solution, however, is to return those activities (or at least a good subset of them) to schools. They needn't take up all of our children's after-school and weekend time. As Diamond argues, they should be integrated into the learning process. Everyone will benefit.

How do you think education should be structured to best serve children (and future adults)?