This study examined the effects of teaching style on 8th grade students' comprehension of lunar phases. Students were randomly assigned to either an experimental group that did a hands-on moon phase activity or a control group that completed a reading assignment. Both groups were given a pre-test and post-test, as well as a survey on their experience. The study found that students who did the hands-on activity scored higher on the post-test and generally had a more positive view of the instructional method. The results suggest hands-on learning may be more effective for teaching science concepts compared to traditional textbook and worksheet approaches.

1. The Effects of Teaching Style on Science
Comprehension
Prepared for:
Dr. Marcie Bober-Michel
ED 690
Department of Educational Technology
San Diego State
Spring 2009
Prepared by:
Mary Beth Laychak
Amber Lunde
ED 690/Sp 09—Lunde and Laychak

2. Table of Contents
The Effects of Teaching Style on Science Comprehension.................. i
Table of Contents.......................................................................................................................... ii
Overview........................................................................................................................................ 1
Impact of The Literature on Review........................................................................................... 2
Contextual Factors........................................................................................................................ 6
Methods.......................................................................................................................................... 7
Findings.......................................................................................................................................... 9
References.................................................................................................................................... 14
Appendix A: Moon Phases Pretest............................................................................................ 15
Appendix B: Moon Phases Post Test......................................................................................... 16
Appendix C: Student Survey...................................................................................................... 17
Appendix D: Moon Phases Activity .......................................................................................... 19
Appendix E: Moon Phases Reading Comprehension Assignment......................................... 22
ED 690/Sp 09—Lunde and Laychak ii

3. Overview
Are there optimal ways to teach science? Not many years ago, researchers and
practitioners alike advocated strongly for hands-on science activities that would allow the
students to learn experientially. “Lectures” were thus supplemented by lab activities that
students conducted themselves—either individually or as part of a team. The pendulum
has swung in the other direction and now science teachers see a push to use the textbook
with fidelity. For example, the La Mesa Spring Valley School district in California is now
requiring that subjects be taught using the textbook and the supplied materials with
fidelity 85% of the time. Teachers have gone back to a teaching method of reading
followed by comprehension worksheets. The question arises, which method results in
higher short- and long-term performance: hands-on activities or reading comprehension?
To explore this controversial issue, the researchers assessed knowledge retention
with 8th graders studying phases of the moon. Students were organized into two groups,
and both completed “regular” instruction. One group, however, extended their learning
by tackling a reading comprehension worksheet (control); the other group (experimental)
took part in a hands-on activity that covered the same concepts in a more interactive way.
With a limited number of days in a school year, and a push from the federal
government to increase student interest in and performance relative to complex scientific
topics, teachers want to use the most efficient forms of instruction. Using the information
from this study, teachers will be able to utilize their classroom instruction time in a way
that will maximize student learning.
ED 690/Sp 09—Lunde and Laychak

4. Impact of The Literature on Review
To launch their study, the researchers conducted a review of the literature that
primarily focused on differences between active and passive learning and the impact of
both on student understanding. As part of their review, they examined environmental and
procedural “barriers” that constrain the implementation of active learning in the
classroom.
The research associated with “experiential” v. “textbook” learning tends to focus
on two areas—a student’s initial comprehension of the subject matter as well as the
retention and recall of the material at a future date. Lord (2007) highlights two studies
completed two decades apart: Dale (1969) and Angelo and Cross (1988). Common to
them was the methodology. In each, college students were organized into groups exposed
to various kinds of instruction including lecture, reading, demonstration, activity and
peer-to-peer teaching. When tested six weeks later, lecture students retained only 5% of
the information they were taught, reading students 6 to 10%, lecture with visual students
12 to18%, demonstration students 20 to 45%, hands-on independent students 45 to 65%,
cooperative learning groups 60 to 80% and teaching another 80 to 98%. Dale’s results
led to a cone of knowledge. At the tip of the cone lies lecture due to the low knowledge
retention of that instructional method. As the cone widens, through reading, lecture with
visuals, demonstration, hands on individual learning, and co-operative learning,
progressively higher percentages of knowledge are retained at the six-week mark. At the
base of the cone lies the method with the greatest percentage of knowledge retention,
teaching another person (Lord 2007).
McCarthy and Anderson’s (2000) study also demonstrated the connection
between active learning and retention. Students (n=80) enrolled in a introductory
American history class were divided into two groups based on their pre-assigned and
smaller weekly discussion sections. One group, comprised of two discussion sections,
was used as a control group, the other six discussion sections comprised the test group.
All sections attended the normal class lectures, led by the class’s primary instructor, on
the subject of early contact and exploration of the Americas. Throughout, he hinted that
2

5. there would be a test—a subtle encouragement for them to take the lecture seriously.
The two control groups participated in the normal teacher centered discussions on the
colonization of the Americas led by their discussion section leader—a graduate level
teaching assistant. The other group covered the same material as the control group, but
via debate in their smaller sections lead by their graduate student teaching assistant.
In the group lecture two weeks after either the debate or teacher lead discussion,
the students in both groups were required to complete a essay test that called for them to
select four cultural groups (out of those they studied) and then compare/contrast them on
a variety of factors or elements. The essays were graded on a very simply scale that
ranged from 1 (poor) to 10 (excellent). The mean score on the test for debate students
was 7.7 out of 10, while the control group scored 6.7 out of 10. Additionally, the
students from the debate sections were three times more likely to participate in the large
lecture class post debate, than students who were in one of the control groups.
Barriers for Schools in Becoming More Inquiry-based
Pine postulates that the space race and subsequent national push for students
stronger in science caused the National Science Foundation to re-write the national
science curriculum towards inquiry based learning (Pine et al., 2006). After conducting a
meta-analysis of data from NSF supported elementary curricula, Bredderman (1983)
wrote that if activity based learning was adopted “performance on tests of science
process, creativity, and perhaps intelligence would show increases of 10–20 percentile
units”.
Despite research that repetitively shows its value, few school districts have moved
to inquiry-based curriculum. In fact, Pine et al. (2006) asserts that throughout the 1980s,
the use of inquiry based declined due in part to influences from pro-textbook educational
specialists. Such specialists advocate direct instruction as received from textbooks. In
1999, based in part on the efforts of these pro-textbook educational specialists, California
removed the NSF sponsored hands-on materials from the state’s approved instructional
materials list. California also went on to create state standards that directly match
textbook curricula (Pine et al., 2006). Pine states that these specialists suggest, despite
3

6. the research done by the National Science Foundation, that more research into inquiry-
based learning is necessary before school districts switch to an inquiry based curriculum.
At least in California, school districts may be hesitant to move towards an inquiry-based
curriculum when the state’s educational standards are tied so tightly to textbooks (Pine et
al, 2006).
Educational standards are not the only reason schools and districts have found the
move from textbook to inquiry to be challenging. Teacher perception also plays a role in
the slow migration of classrooms to inquiry-based learning. In 2003, Michael conducted
a workshop at Niagara University on the topic of active learning. Twenty-nine teachers,
attended the workshop; while most were from Niagara University, other institutions were
represented as well. The participants represented a mix of disciplines/content areas, but
all had a common interest in active learning. At the onset of the workshop, Michael
broke the teachers into four groups and asked each one to create a list of perceived
barriers to inquiry-based learning. Common themes emerged as the teachers were
primarily concerned about three areas: student attributes, teacher issues, and pedagogical
issues. The teachers felt that students were not equipped to deal with active learning.
They were concerned that students would not come to class prepared, would not be
willing to engage in active learning nor had the maturity to deal with the freedom that
accompanies active learning. When it came to teacher issues, many feared that active
learning would require more preparation time and that both peers and students would
judge the teachers unfavorably. The teachers also believed that pedagogical issues like
classroom size and setup, lack of resources, and inability to properly control the
classrooms made active learning inaccessible to the average teacher. Michael found that
despite the teacher’s concerns, none of the participants cited satisfaction with the current
educational methods as a barrier to active learning. Additionally, Michael discovered
that no difference existed between the concerns of science and non science teachers
regarding barriers to active learning.
Michael suggests that the best way to over come teacher’s resistance to active
learning is simple discussions of new teaching strategies between colleagues. He also
4

7. states that once teachers determine which barriers truly exist in their own classrooms,
they, with the help of colleagues, will be able to develop creative solutions to the barriers.
The Need for Science Vocabulary: A Disadvantage of Inquiry-based Learning.
St. Omer (2002) writes of the importance of science vocabulary in the
understanding of scientific concepts. She asserts that in science labs, the scientific
method is frequently emphasized while the supporting vocabulary is not. And when
vocabulary is not equally emphasized, the students lack the foundation for more complex
scientific concepts. She suggests educators need to give time to the students after the lab
to retain the vocabulary and concepts learned in the experiment.
Passive Assignments vs. Active Assignments
Ueckert and Gess-Newsome (2008) believe that learning science is more than just
learning vocabulary and isolated “pieces” of information for testing purposes. Students
have a deeper understanding of the concepts behind science, they argue, when they are
able to apply those ideas to different situations, in different contexts, etc. The scientific
process is active, but science is frequently presented passively in educational settings.
Ultimately, students lose interest. Ueckert and Gess-Newsome focused in particular on
three teaching methods (bell work, worksheets, and labs) and derived several suggestions
for making each more interactive.
• Bell work: Ueckert and Gess-Newsome found many teachers have an assignment
or question on the board for the students to answer while class is settling/taking
role, etc. Frequently, the teacher never looks at the assignment and doesn’t get a
good idea of what the student understands. Two ways to reduce the “natural”
passivity of bell work is to reorganize the activity into a cooperative exercise or
have students create a concept map. The teacher can review these assignments to
get an idea of where the students lack understanding.
• Worksheets: Worksheets are inherently passive. The student is asked to read a
passage, fill in the blanks, connect vocabulary, etc. In many cases, the studenthe
or she is able to get the correct answers less by their own insight and
5

8. understanding and more by searching for the appropriate information within the
worksheet itself. Uecker and Gess-Newsome suggest worksheets that require the
students to create conceptual flow graphics. In these, students connect ideas via
arrows. They work similarly to concept maps, except the students connect full
statements of concepts rather than simple terms. Students can also be asked to
apply the knowledge they’ve learned by answering more of a short essay
question, rather than matching or filling in a blank.
• Labs: Intuitively, labs seem to fall into the active learning category, but Uecker
and Gess-Newsome believe that many are little more than procedures followed by
data tables. The students follow the procedure, fill in the tables and the lab is
finished. In an active lab, students are given a simple question, then expected to
figure out how to get the answer. The learner is engaged in the whole process and
gets a greater understanding of how science works.
The active lab strategies of Ueckert and Gess-Newsome tie in with the vocabulary
rich ideas of St. Omer (2002). In both cases, the authors point out one major issue with
active learning in science: the potential misuse of laboratory activities. On the surface,
lab activities appear to be active learning. However, if an emphasis is not placed on
learning science vocabulary or if the lab does not require student engagement, then the
results are the same as passive learning.
Contextual Factors
The researchers were aware of three potentially confounding factors: time, sample
size and topic.
• Subjects were comprised of students enrolled in classes that one of the researchers
taught. The sample contained a total of 114 students or four classes. Utilizing
existing science classes provided already established divisions for the sections. In
some regards, the classes were already randomized because students were not
placed in the class due to ability level. However, this is not a true randomization.
6

9. The researchers do not know if the four classes contain comparable percentages of
students at various ability levels. The results could be compromised if one
classroom contains students more students at high or low ability levels than the
other three.
• Another disadvantage was a limited timeframe for data collection. Data collection
was to fit within the time already allotted for the teacher to cover the material on
phases of the moon. Any further time would have interfered with the normal
classroom learning. Additionally, the student’s spring break recess fell in the
middle of the data collection process. As a result, the researchers had to work
quickly in order to prepare the assessments and surveys and collect all the
necessary data.
• One must also consider that the topic of the lesson, lunar phases, impacts the data.
It is possible that by nature, the subject of lunar phases lends itself to one
instructional method over the other. Additionally, the students have learned
about lunar phases in previous science classes. They may remember information
about the topic from previous instruction, skewing the scores on the pre-test
upwards. – Not really an issue –that’s why you pretested … In truth, there’s very
limited content about which you could say with assurance that students knew
“nothing.”
•
Methods
Design:
The study employed a pretest-posttest control group design. As earlier mentioned,
all four classes, organized into two groups, were exposed to the same initial instruction.
What distinguished them was the follow-up activity in which they were engaged. The
control group read the material from the textbook and completed a reading
comprehension worksheet (Appendix E), while the experimental groups were given an
activity with moon models to explore, followed by some analysis questions that referred
to their textbooks (Appendix D).
7

10. Sample:
A total of four 8th grade science classes (114 students in all), were tracked as they
learned about the phases of the moon. These specific classes were selected because one
of the researchers is the regular science teacher for the students. Each class was
randomly assigned to either hands-on activity or reading comprehension, to create a
cluster sampled study.
Instruments:
The researchers relied on three instruments for their data collection: a pretest
(Appendix A), a posttest (Appendix B), and a survey (Appendix C). Collectively, they
measured student-learning attitudes towards each form of instruction. The pretest
provided a baseline of student knowledge—and it was administered immediately after the
phases of the moon lecture. The second instrument was a posttest administered after
students completed either the activity or the reading worksheet.
Both tests were a combination of existing materials and questions created by one
of the researchers (the regular teacher for the science classes in the study). She is a
subject matter expert on science teaching, and students were accustomed to her style of
testing. Half the test questions were original; the other half were drawn from the
publisher’s test bank questions.
The researchers created a two-part survey to assess student attitudes toward each
form of instruction. Part one featured five Likert-style questions that called for students to
rate how the instruction helped them understand the concepts presented in the lesson.
Part two focused on the student’s general perceptions of the activity in which they had
been engaged. They were asked to choose two words from a selection of positive,
negative and neutral words that best described their opinion of the instruction. The
students were then given the opportunity to write in their own words what they liked best
about the activity and what they would change.
The hands-on activity and reading comprehension worksheets used in the study
8

11. were taken from the science textbook used in the class.
Procedure:
All students received the same instruction given by the same teacher followed by
a pretest. The control group (2 classes comprised of a total of 61 students), participated in
a hands-on activity augmenting the teacher’s instruction. The students completed an
activity that required them to use a yardstick and two balls to model the phases of the
moon. Upon completion, the students answered several questions included in the
activity. The next class period, the students completed both the post-test and survey.
The other section, comprised of the remaining two classes 57, completed a
reading/worksheet assignment. The reading comprehension required the students to read
from their textbook, then answer a series of questions related to the reading. The next
class period, the students completed both the post-test and survey.
Note: To avoid any ethical complications, the students in each section participated
in the opposite learning method after the posttest.
Data Analysis:
Data were analyzed with SPSS, a statistical software program. The researchers
chose to use the standard scores the students for the numerical data. Only four classes of
students were studied and all at the same school, thus no age/grade equivalents exist.
Findings
A total of 114 students participated in the survey. Two classes comprised of 58
students worked on the phases of the moon activity, then took a post-test to assess their
retention the following day. Two more classes totaling 56 students read their books,
completed a worksheet based on the reading and were also tested the following day on
their retention. All four classes completed surveys after the post-tests to allow the
researchers to evaluate the perceptions of the students on their respective instructional
methods.
The following sections will first examine the aggregate pre-post test scores for all
114 students followed by an examination of the two individual methods. Once the
performance is discussed, the student’s perceptions will be scrutinized. Interestingly, the
9

12. perceptions of the students were at odds with their performance.
Performance
Scores in the aggregate. Performance (retention) was significant pre to post
(p<.01) regardless of the intervention to which students were assigned after “lecture.”
The mean score on the pretest was 5.57 (SD=1.83), and the posttest mean was 6.05
(SD=1.76).
The more interesting story, however, unfolds when each group’s performance is
detailed—and then compared to members’ stated learning preferences and reactions to
the tasks they completed.
Worksheet group. (n=56) The “worksheet” students (n=56) averaged 5.30
(SD=2.02) on the pre-test and 5.89 (SD=2.04) on the post-test. This level of increased
performance indicated a significant level of growth for the students (p<0.46). The
standard deviation (SD=2.16) on the pre-post test shows that not all the students retained
the knowledge at the same level.
Activity group. The activity group (n=58) performed solidly as well—although
growth pre to post was not significant (5.83 and 6.21, respectively; p=.10). Important to
note, however, was that the groups were not equivalent at pre-test, with the activity
students’ scores more than half a point higher (5.30 v. 5.89). This is interesting, given
that the classes themselves are not structured around ability level and were randomly
assigned to treatments. Despite a higher mean on the post-test, the activity students
gained less than the worksheet students. Also noteworthy is the different in-group
variability (as measured by standard deviation). The standard deviation for the activity
group (SD=1.77) measured almost 0.4 less than the worksheet group. Table 1 shows the
percentage difference between the two instructional methods. Activity students increased
their scores by 6.5% between tests. The worksheet students demonstrated a greater
10

13. percentage difference, improving their mean performance by over 11%.
Table 1: summary of Mean Pre- and post-test scores for both groups
Standard
Standard Mean
Mean pre- deviation % Change
deviation post-test
test score on prost- in Score
on pre-test score
test
Activity 5.83 1.591 6.21 1.460 6.50
Reading
Comprehension 5.30 2.026 5.89 2.042 11.1
Assignment
Perceptions
For the overall group of both students, significant growth existed in their scores
with the mean pre-test score being 5.57 and the mean post-test score being 6.05 (p <
0.010). When looked at separately, a significant growth factor did not exist in the activity
group with the mean scores going from 5.83 to 6.21 (p < 0.109). The students who
participated in the book assignment did show a significant growth with mean scores
going from 5.30 to 5.89 (p < 0.046).
Universally, students in both groups indicated that they felt they had learned from
their respective activities. However, despite the greater increase in retention for the
students who completed the worksheet, the perceptions of the students did not match the
performance results. Table 2 shows a summary of how students rated their learning
experience on a Likert scale. The students who were assigned the hands-on activity rated
the learning experience more positively than the students who preformed the reading
comprehension, Over 58% of the activity students indicated they felt the activity helped
them understand the phases of the moon well or extremely well. Conversely, the
majority of the worksheet students responded neutrally when asked how the reading
worksheet helped them understand the concepts.
Table 2: summary of how students felt the assignment helped them understand the moon phases and eclipses.
Extremely Well Well Neutral
Activity 6.9% 51.7% 36.2%
Reading 0% 39.3% 55.4%
11

14. Comprehension
In addition to the Likert scale questions, the students were asked (1) what they
liked best about the instruction, (2) what they would change about the instruction and (3)
to select two words from a list of eight that the student felt best described their feelings
regarding their instructional method.
Worksheet group. As indicated in Table 3, 55% of the worksheet students described the
bookwork assignment as dull or boring. The next most common responses, easy and
simple, are innocuous in their connotations. When asked what they liked about the
reading assignment, ten percent of the students to the bookwork survey responded with
“nothing”. When asked what they would change about the worksheet, ten percent would
have liked to “ (have) done an activity or lab” or “made it more exciting”.
Table 3: words chosen to describe the activity
Number and %
Number and % Responses from
Responses from Reading
Total responses
Activity Assignment Comprehension
Participants Assignment
Participants
Simple 63 37, 58.7.% 26, 41.3%
Easy 44 25, 56.8% 19, 43.2%
Interesting 38 22, 57.9% 16, 42.1%
Boring 30 11, 36.7% 19, 63.3%
Dull 25 13, 52% 12, 48%
Difficult 10 2, 20% 8, 80%
Exciting 7 4, 57.1% 3, 42.9%
Complicated 4 0, 0% 4, 100%
Activity Group. As indicated by Table 3, the activity students tended to pick the
more positive words such as interesting and exciting. When the students that completed
the activity were asked they would change thirty-eight percent of the respondents stated
“nothing”. A common response for activity students (19%) regarding what they liked best
about the activity was that they liked how they “could see” what is happening and how
moon reflects the suns light. Students that were assigned the activity also reported that
they liked it because it was they were using objects, it was fun, and interactive.
Though the students showed more growth on their scores after they completed the
12

15. book assignment, their feelings about the assignments should be considered. In the long
run having the learners engaged in the lesson will affect their learning. If they have a
negative feeling about how the material is presented to them, they will not be focused on
the content. While this study only looks at one topic, constantly learning by bookwork
may have a different effect as they show a tendency to feel that bookwork is boring.
Presenting material in a way that the students find boring everyday could have a more
adverse effect in the scores.
Recommendations
While the study suggests that there is some increased retention in learning when using
reading comprehension, no conclusive evidence shows that either method is superior over
the other. As a result, further studies should be conducted. Studies should be done:
• On various topics: it would be best if topics were used that the students had no
previous knowledge in. This would allow for more learning growth and stronger
data to support where the students gained the knowledge.
• Conducting studies using a counterbalanced design.
• Consider the effects if individual student learning style on the research data.
• Long term retention: The literature review indicated that the long-term retention
on active learning was greater than the retention on reading-based learning
practices. This study did not look at the long term retention, future studies
should.
The dichotomy between student preference and retention should also be explored.
Researchers should try to determine if a way exists to create learning strategies that
engage the students, while providing additional comprehension.
Further work on the topic of learning comprehension is beneficial to educators in
many content areas. In a world where testing plays an increasingly important role,
determining what is the best teaching practice for increased comprehension is important
to educators around the world.
13

16. References
Bredderman, T. (1983). Effect of activity-based elementary science on student outcomes:
A quantitative synthesis. Review of Educational Research, 53, 499–518.
Lord, T. (2007). Revisiting the cone of learning: Is it a reliable way to link instruction
Method with Real Knowledge? The Science Teacher. 37(2), 14-17
Michael, J. (2007). Faculty perceptions about barriers to active learning. College
Teaching. 55(2), 42-47
Molenda, M. (2003). Cone of experience. In A. Kovalchick and D. Dawson (eds)
Educational technology: An encyclopedia. Santa Barbara, CA: ABCClio.
McCarthy, J.P., & Anderson, L. (2000). Active learning techniques versus traditional
teaching styles: Two experiments from history and political science. Innovative
Higher Education, 24(4), 279-293,
Pine, J., Aschbacher, P., Roth, E., Jones, M., McPhee, C., Martin, C., et al (2006). Fifth
graders’ science inquiry abilities: A comparative study of students in hands-on
and Textbook Curricula. Journal of Research on Science Teaching, 42(5)
647-684.
St. Omer, L. (2002). Successful scientific instruction involves more than just discovering
concepts though inquiry based activities. Education, 123(2). 318-321. – etc.
Thalheimer, W. (2006). Practical wisdom from learning research. Somerville, MA:
Work-Learn Research.
Ueckert, C.W., & Gess-Newsome, J. (2008). Active learning strategies: Three activities
to increase student schievement in learning. The Science Teacher. 75(9). 47-52.
14

17. Appendix A: Moon Phases Pretest
Identify the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.
____ 1. What causes the phases of the moon?
a. the relative positions of the moon, Earth, and the sun
b. the tilted orbit of the moon
c. the moon’s period of revolution equaling its period of rotation
d. sunlight reflecting off Earth’s surface
____ 2. What happens during a total solar eclipse?
a. The shadow of Earth falls on the moon.
b. A thin ring of the sun shows through.
c. The moon completely covers the sun.
d. The sun completely covers the moon.
____ 3. What are the different appearances of the moon as it revolves around Earth called?
a. satellites c. nebulas
b. phases d. eclipses
____ 4. When the shadow of one celestial body falls on another, a(n) ____________________
occurs.
a. satellite c. nebula
b. phase d. eclipse
____ 5. Where does the moon get its light?
a. moon flares c. nuclear fusion
b. fires on the moon d. reflection of the sun’s light
____ 6. What happens during a solar eclipse?
a. the moon comes between the Earth and c. the Earth comes between the sun and
the Sun the moon
b. the sun comes between the Earth and d. the sun is the only visible object in the
the Moon sky
____ 7. What happens during a lunar eclipse?
a. the moon comes between the Earth and c. the Earth comes between the sun and
the Sun the moon
b. the sun comes between the Earth and d. the moon is the only visible object in
the Moon the sky
____ 8. Why do we see different shapes of the moon during the month?
a. The sun’s light outshines the moon’s c. the Earth blocks the moon’s light
light
b. the amount of sunlight on the side of d. the moon s on the shadow of the Earth
the moon that faces the Earth changes
____ 9. In a waxing moon we see the lit portion getting _________, while in a waning moon we
see the lit portion getting ____________.
a. larger, larger c. smaller larger
b. smaller, smaller d. larger, smaller
15

18. Appendix B: Moon Phases Post Test
Identify the choice that best completes the statement or answers the question.
____ 1. When the shadow of one celestial body falls on another, a(n) ____________________
occurs.
a. eclipse c. nebula
b. phase d. satellite
____ 2. What causes the phases of the moon?
a. the tilted orbit of the moon
b. the moon’s period of revolution equaling its period of rotation
c. sunlight reflecting off Earth’s surface
d. the relative positions of the moon, Earth, and the sun
____ 3. In a waxing moon we see the lit portion getting _________, while in a waning moon we
see the lit portion getting ____________.
a. smaller larger c. smaller, smaller
b. larger, larger d. larger, smaller
____ 4. What happens during a solar eclipse?
a. the sun comes between the Earth and c. the Earth comes between the sun and
the Moon the moon
b. the moon comes between the Earth and d. the sun is the only visible object in the
the Sun sky
____ 5. Where does the moon get its light?
a. nuclear fusion c. reflection of the sun’s light
b. moon flares d. fires on the moon
____ 6. Why do we see different shapes of the moon during the month?
a. the Earth blocks the moon’s light c. The sun’s light outshines the moon’s
light
b. the amount of sunlight on the side of d. the moon is on the shadow of the Earth
the moon that faces the Earth changes
____ 7. What happens during a total solar eclipse?
a. A thin ring of the sun shows through.
b. The shadow of Earth falls on the moon.
c. The moon completely covers the sun.
d. The sun completely covers the moon.
____ 8. What are the different appearances of the moon as it revolves around Earth called?
a. eclipses c. nebulas
b. phases d. satellites
____ 9. What happens during a lunar eclipse?
a. the moon is the only visible object in c. the Earth comes between the sun and
the sky the moon
b. the moon comes between the Earth and d. the sun comes between the Earth and
the Sun the Moon
16

19. Appendix C: Student Survey
Please answer the following questions about the assignment that you completed on
the phases of the moon:
1. Overall, how well did the moon phase assignment help you understand the phases of
the moon and eclipses?
Extremely Well Well Neutral Not Well Not Well at
All
2. How well do you understand the 6 phases of the moon, now that you’ve completed
the moon phase assignment?
Extremely Well Well Neutral Not Well Not Well at
All
3. How well did the moon phase assignment help you understand why we don’t see
eclipses every month?
Extremely Well Well Neutral Not Well Not Well at
All
4. How well did the moon phases assignment helped me visualize the phases of the
moon and eclipses?
Extremely Well Well Neutral Not Well Not Well at
All
5. How well were you able to understand how to do the assignment on my own.
Extremely Well Well Neutral Not Well Not Well at
All
What did you like best about the moon phase assignment?
What would you change about the moon phase assignment if you could?
Pick two words from this list that best describe this assignment:
Easy
Difficult
Boring
Interesting
Exciting
Dull
17

20. Complicated
Simple
18

21. Appendix D: Moon Phases Activity
Half Dark, Half Light
Models are used to recreate observations that we make. We try to use the simplest model possible.
In this activity a ball that is half black and half white will model the moon. This is because the
moon, and everything else in our solar system gets its light from the sun. Only half of the object
can be lit up because the other half is not facing the sun. Shade the dark half of the moon on the
diagram.
Sun
Light Rays
Moon
Materials:
1-meter stick
1 black and white ball attached to a stick
Student sheet: Observations of moon model
Procedure:
1.Position the black and white ball as close to you can to the 0 cm mark of your meter stick and
place it between you and your partner as shown in the diagram below.
2. Sit directly across from the 50 cm mark of the meter mark of the meter and look straight at it.
Without turning your head, move only your eyes so that you can see the black and white ball.
3. Use the circle for observation 1 on your student sheet and fill in the amount of black you
observe.
4. Move the ball to the 50 cm mark while keeping the meter stick in the same place.
5. View the black and white ball the same way you did in step 2.
6. Use the circle for observation 2 on your student sheet to fill in the amount of black you observe.
7.view the black and white ball the same way you did in step 2.
8. Move the ball close to the 100 cm mark as you can while keeping the meter stick in the same
place.
9.Use the circle for observation 3 o9n your student sheet to fill in the amount of black you observe.
10.Switch positions with your partner and repeat steps 1-9. Draw your sketches in the circles for
observations 4-6.

22. Close to the 0 cm mark:
Observation 1 Observation 4
Close to the 50 cm mark:
Observation 2 Observation 5
Close to the 100 cm mark:
Observation 3 Observation 6

23. When you observed the black and white ball for from the first three places:
a. How did the amount of black change? Explain.
b. How did the amount of white change? Explain.
2. Judging from your observations of this model, why does the moon appear to change shape?
3. Using your textbook page 465, label the six phases represented by the drawings. (Remember,
yours will differ from your partner.)
4. Do you think the model we used in this activity is a good one? Why or why not?

24. Appendix E: Moon Phases Reading Comprehension Assignment
Section: Moons
1. Natural or artificial bodies that revolve around larger bodies such as planets
are called ____________________________ .
2. Except for Mercury and Venus, all the planets have natural satellites
called __________________________ .
LUNA: THE MOON OF EARTH
______ 3. What is Earth’s moon also called?
a. Luna c. maria
b. terrae d. Galilean satellite
______ 4. How old were the lunar rocks brought back by the Apollo missions?
a. 3 billion years c. about 4.5 billion years
b. about 3.8 billion years d. more than 5 billion years
5. What does the age of the lunar rocks tell us about our solar system?
6. What happens to the surfaces of bodies without an atmosphere and no
erosion?
7. What two features is the moon’s surface composed of?
8. What is the current theory about the origin of the moon?
9. What evidence supports the current theory about the origin of the moon?
10. Why is the moon a sphere?
11. What causes the moon to shine?
12. Why do you always see the same side of the moon from Earth?
13. Describe how the moon’s face changes during the month.
14. The different appearances of the moon due to its changing position are
called _______________ .

25. 15. What causes the different appearances of the moon?
16. When the moon is _____________, the sunlit fraction that we
can see from Earth is getting larger.
17. When the moon is _______________ , the sunlit fraction that we can
see from Earth is getting smaller.
18. When the shadow of one celestial body falls on another,
a(n) _______________________ occurs.
Match the correct description with the correct term. Write the letter in the space
provided.
______ 19. when the shadow of the moon falls on part a. solar eclipse
of Earth b. lunar eclipse
______ 20. when the shadow of Earth falls on the moon c. total solar eclipse
______ 21. when a thin ring of the sun shows around d. annular eclipse
the moon’s outer edge
______ 22. when the disk of the moon completely
covers the disk of the sun
23. Why don’t we see solar and lunar eclipses every month?
THE MOONS OF OTHER PLANETS
______ 24. Which of the following statements about moons in our solar system
is NOT correct?
a. Some moons orbit their planet backward.
b. Many moons may be captured asteroids.
c. Some moons have very elliptical orbits.
d. There are no moons as large as the
terrestrial planets.

26. 25. Name the two moons of Mars.
26. Jupiter’s four largest moons are known as the ___________________.
27. Which of Jupiter’s moons is the most volcanically active body in the solar
system?
28. What evidence supports the idea that life could exist on Europa?
29. How does Titan’s atmosphere compare with the atmospheres of other
satellites in the solar system?
30. What effect did an impact have on Uranus’s moon Miranda?
31. In what kind of orbit does Triton revolve around Neptune?
32. Why does one side of Pluto always face its moon, Charon?
Copyright © by Holt, Rinehart and Winston. All rights reserved.
Holt California Physical Science 158 Our Solar System
TEACHER RESOURCES