In my previous posts I have talked about how we as teachers can motivate students in the science classroom. Some key points to motivating students into liking and enjoying science is to use concrete examples, close to the "real thing" to help students explore their ideas. You also need to find student's schema in order to know where to start with your science content to make sure it's age appropriate. It is also important to understand that engagement and mental engagement are not the same thing. Students can be having fun doing an activity without learning anything, they could be engaged in the wrong way. It is important as a teacher to get your students to be mentally engaged while they explore, you can do this by asking extend-answer questions.
My next question is how do we get students motivated in the science classroom when we have administrators telling us to teach a certain way and teach to the content in a certain way. As a teacher this can be very difficult because you have to do what your administrators say but you also need to interest and motivate your studetns. By doing step by step experiments and reading out of a textbook, students will not be motivated becasue they aren't interested in the textbook, especially for younger studetns. They ned to be able to explore the topic and do hands on experiements. As a teacher you also need to respect the district and teach the content that your administrators tell you to. So how do you find a balance in between?
We talked in class about how some administrators can teach non effectively. Which is why sometimes they are administrators and not teachers, I am not saying this is for all administrators. As an administrator however, they may want you to teach noneffective things. One way to avoid this is to have them observe your classroom. Before they come to observe you, you can ask the administrator to look for something that you've been working on. That way you get the administrator to look for something that you've been working on with your students instead of the administrator looking for something that they wanted. This way you can still teach the content but in a way that motivates and engages you're students.
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Wednesday, October 20, 2010
Types of knowledges
Last blog post, I discussed how the absence of learning theories can affect how students construct understanding in science. In a nutshell: Students can't understand the overall concept of a science idea, or apply these concepts, if the student doesn't assimilate/accommodate new information being given to them.
For this blog post, I'll be discussing how different types of knowledge are needed for science understandings to be integrated and meaningful.
After browsing the web, and skimming a couple of text books, the types of knowledge a student should possess aren't set in stone. I found a variation of these types, based on the content areas in which they were referring too. This chart, which I feel best illustrates these types of knowledge, gives a helpful insight of how they can be broken down. The two main categories are: declarative and procedural . "Declarative knowledge is defined as the factual information stored in memory and known to be static in nature and procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to perform, or how to operate" (Uluogol, 2001).
Declarative knowledge actually describes how things/ideas/events/processes are (Uluogol, 2001). This could be a physical description, the relationship to other objects/idea, or details. Procedural knowledge refers to the process or operation of something (Uluogol, 2001). This type of knowledge helps to engage students and develop inquiries. Students use questions, experiments and background information to collect evidence and draw a valid conclusion for an inquiry (Berger, 2003).
Declarative knowledge is helpful in supporting procedural knowledge, by providing the details of which you base your procedural inquiries off of. Declarative knowledge helps you ask questions and design experiments aimed at certain idea. This concept, types of knowledge, fully supports learning theories that say the schema should be accessed and modified if learning should take place. The application of science ideas, or any ideas can not take place without the proper background knowledge. The more background knowledge that a student assimilates/accommodates, the more meaningful questions they can investigate during an experiment.
References:
Berger, C. F., & Czerniak, C. M., & Krajcik, J. K. (2003). Teaching Science in Elementary and Middle School Classrooms: A Project-Based Approach. New York, New York: Mc-Graw Hill.
Uluogol, B. (2001). Declarative / Procedural Knowledge. Retrieved from: http://www.designophy.com/designpedia/design-term-1000000001-declarative-.-procedural-knowledge.htm
For this blog post, I'll be discussing how different types of knowledge are needed for science understandings to be integrated and meaningful.
After browsing the web, and skimming a couple of text books, the types of knowledge a student should possess aren't set in stone. I found a variation of these types, based on the content areas in which they were referring too. This chart, which I feel best illustrates these types of knowledge, gives a helpful insight of how they can be broken down. The two main categories are: declarative and procedural . "Declarative knowledge is defined as the factual information stored in memory and known to be static in nature and procedural knowledge is the knowledge of how to perform, or how to operate" (Uluogol, 2001).
Declarative knowledge actually describes how things/ideas/events/processes are (Uluogol, 2001). This could be a physical description, the relationship to other objects/idea, or details. Procedural knowledge refers to the process or operation of something (Uluogol, 2001). This type of knowledge helps to engage students and develop inquiries. Students use questions, experiments and background information to collect evidence and draw a valid conclusion for an inquiry (Berger, 2003).
Declarative knowledge is helpful in supporting procedural knowledge, by providing the details of which you base your procedural inquiries off of. Declarative knowledge helps you ask questions and design experiments aimed at certain idea. This concept, types of knowledge, fully supports learning theories that say the schema should be accessed and modified if learning should take place. The application of science ideas, or any ideas can not take place without the proper background knowledge. The more background knowledge that a student assimilates/accommodates, the more meaningful questions they can investigate during an experiment.
References:
Berger, C. F., & Czerniak, C. M., & Krajcik, J. K. (2003). Teaching Science in Elementary and Middle School Classrooms: A Project-Based Approach. New York, New York: Mc-Graw Hill.
Uluogol, B. (2001). Declarative / Procedural Knowledge. Retrieved from: http://www.designophy.com/designpedia/design-term-1000000001-declarative-.-procedural-knowledge.htm
What does a research based classroom look like? blog 3
I am exploring what a research based classroom looks like and have already discussed the topics of guided questioning and the process of interaction within the classroom. I have introduced the website by Wilfred Fanklin located here. Near the bottom of the website Franklin addresses how to put the inquiry based classroom into practice. The key is three important factors: risk, trust, and power (Hubbard 2001).
The teacher is taking a risk in moving to a guided inquiry classroom. The risk is tied closely to the power component as the teacher is no longer going to dictate the content through lecture. The teacher must be flexible enough to take the risk of turning the content over to the students. The teacher must trust the students to give meaningful answers to move the class forward. That being said, the teacher will still have control of the class by guiding the questions, but the teacher does not have the same authority over the content that they do in a lecture based classroom. The students may want to go in a different direction than the teacher planned and the teacher needs to be able to mold the new direction into the same classroom goal.
For example, if the content is understanding that the surface of the earth changes over time and the teacher starts by asking the question: how has the surface of the earth changed over time? The students may go the melting of the polar ice caps because they saw it on television while the lesson that the teacher planned had to do with soil erosion. The teacher can continue to ask open ended questions regarding the polar ice caps until the students reach an area that can apply to soil erosion as well. Then the teacher can ask: other than the polar ice caps, what other areas of the earth's surface has changed? The conversation that the students had regarding the polar ice caps is still beneficial as they are actively thinking about how the earth's surface changes. Going down this path does involve risk as there are only so many hours in the classroom each day. If the students get sidetracked or off topic, the teacher needs to make the students feel that their conversations are meaningful while the teacher guides the class back on task.
Risk, trust, and power are three of the reasons why teachers do not move towards an inquiry based classroom. Existing teachers know that if they lecture and practice skills, the class will move forward on time. The problem is that the students are not truly learning, rather they are recycling facts and basic skills without really understanding why they are important. Knowing that teachers will be taking a risk, turning the power over to the students, and trusting the students to have meaningful discussions are all aspects that need to be carefully considered before a teacher moves to the inquiry based classroom. By creating a detailed plan on how this change will take place and how the teacher will keep the class on task, the transition from a lecture based classroom to an inquiry based classroom can be successful.
Source: http://www.brynmawr.edu/biology/franklin/InquiryBasedScience.html
The teacher is taking a risk in moving to a guided inquiry classroom. The risk is tied closely to the power component as the teacher is no longer going to dictate the content through lecture. The teacher must be flexible enough to take the risk of turning the content over to the students. The teacher must trust the students to give meaningful answers to move the class forward. That being said, the teacher will still have control of the class by guiding the questions, but the teacher does not have the same authority over the content that they do in a lecture based classroom. The students may want to go in a different direction than the teacher planned and the teacher needs to be able to mold the new direction into the same classroom goal.
For example, if the content is understanding that the surface of the earth changes over time and the teacher starts by asking the question: how has the surface of the earth changed over time? The students may go the melting of the polar ice caps because they saw it on television while the lesson that the teacher planned had to do with soil erosion. The teacher can continue to ask open ended questions regarding the polar ice caps until the students reach an area that can apply to soil erosion as well. Then the teacher can ask: other than the polar ice caps, what other areas of the earth's surface has changed? The conversation that the students had regarding the polar ice caps is still beneficial as they are actively thinking about how the earth's surface changes. Going down this path does involve risk as there are only so many hours in the classroom each day. If the students get sidetracked or off topic, the teacher needs to make the students feel that their conversations are meaningful while the teacher guides the class back on task.
Risk, trust, and power are three of the reasons why teachers do not move towards an inquiry based classroom. Existing teachers know that if they lecture and practice skills, the class will move forward on time. The problem is that the students are not truly learning, rather they are recycling facts and basic skills without really understanding why they are important. Knowing that teachers will be taking a risk, turning the power over to the students, and trusting the students to have meaningful discussions are all aspects that need to be carefully considered before a teacher moves to the inquiry based classroom. By creating a detailed plan on how this change will take place and how the teacher will keep the class on task, the transition from a lecture based classroom to an inquiry based classroom can be successful.
Source: http://www.brynmawr.edu/biology/franklin/InquiryBasedScience.html
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
#SCICHAT NUMBER 3
My third #scichat… Tonight’s subject was “open brainstorm.” It was kind of a slow night, but the subject of revlearn was introduced. Revlearn is where the traditional lecture is sent home with the student (a video, podcast, etc.) to watch the night before. The next day, the teacher can reinforce the concepts via activities or assignments in class. It is “home” lecture and class “work”. Articles about this concept can be found at the following websites provided in tonight’s #scichat:
The concept of watching videos at home and doing the work in class seems to be a great idea to help motivate students. The only issue I would see is that sometimes it is good to struggle a bit in order to solve a problem or to get the right answer. (Something that is often done when trying to do work on assingments at home without teacher assistance.) The process teaches students how to troubleshoot and how to work through the problem on their own to get a solution. I imagine that in a classroom setting, where the class works on problems via collaboration, some students may just sit back and wait for the punch line rather than trying to figure things out on his or her own.
However, I do like the concept and feel that it could be a very effective way to teach.
Science Fairs?
As an elementary level student, there was never a mention of a science fair or another outlet for those students who excelled in science at my school. In fact, I never thought much of it until I saw this clip on YouTube (and after some investigation, I also found out how cool some of Steve Spangler’s Videos were too – look up videos by stevespanglerscience if you’re curious).
Simple things like using dish soap to repel food coloring in milk can inspire kids to investigate and learn why things happen. If kids need help coming up with ideas to investigate there is a great PBS website http://pbskids.org/dragonflytv/scifair/index.html that is interactive and lets kids play around while looking for science fair ideas. Not only does the site come up with some pretty interesting ideas, (Is my dog smarter than your dog? What smells good to animals? How does the shape of a kite affect its ability to perform stunts?) but it gives a link to find more information your topic. There doesn’t have to be an official science fair: if your school doesn’t offer one make it a classroom event and invite your student’s families to come in one night and let your students show off what they’ve explored during their own science experiment.
Simple things like using dish soap to repel food coloring in milk can inspire kids to investigate and learn why things happen. If kids need help coming up with ideas to investigate there is a great PBS website http://pbskids.org/dragonflytv/scifair/index.html that is interactive and lets kids play around while looking for science fair ideas. Not only does the site come up with some pretty interesting ideas, (Is my dog smarter than your dog? What smells good to animals? How does the shape of a kite affect its ability to perform stunts?) but it gives a link to find more information your topic. There doesn’t have to be an official science fair: if your school doesn’t offer one make it a classroom event and invite your student’s families to come in one night and let your students show off what they’ve explored during their own science experiment.
Monday, October 18, 2010
Literacy in Science
My science methods professor Eric Brunsell, told me about one of his blogs ( http://www.edutopia.org/blog/engaging-students-science-tradebooks ) that is a good resource for teachers who are trying to incorporate more trade books and literacy into their science units. In the blog he states that there are newly released standards that have literacy built right into the science standards. This is because later in college, students will be required to read "sophisticated nonfiction" so in primary and secondary school students should be learning the skill necessary to read these types of texts as well as gaining the confidence to tackle them.
He also outlines a great way to get students reading a variety of science tradebooks in class. His idea is to have a mock book prize election. This is based off of the criteria from the journal Science Books and Films. Doing this will get the children excited about reading different science tradebooks so they can pick a "winner" and then they can see if the book they picked is also picked by SB & F. More details about this can be found using the url above.
There are also links to the winning books from SB & F which gives examples of picture books as well as young adult books. It is really important to find tradebooks that are high quality and that also are targeted to the correct age group. There are many important lessons that can be taught through these books, and that is not limited to content, but also to the literacy mentioned above.
He also outlines a great way to get students reading a variety of science tradebooks in class. His idea is to have a mock book prize election. This is based off of the criteria from the journal Science Books and Films. Doing this will get the children excited about reading different science tradebooks so they can pick a "winner" and then they can see if the book they picked is also picked by SB & F. More details about this can be found using the url above.
There are also links to the winning books from SB & F which gives examples of picture books as well as young adult books. It is really important to find tradebooks that are high quality and that also are targeted to the correct age group. There are many important lessons that can be taught through these books, and that is not limited to content, but also to the literacy mentioned above.
Science and Standardized Testing- Blog 3
In my past two blogs, I have been thinking and writing about the role of science on standardized tests. In my research, I have found that it is sometimes a struggle to teach successfully and to also have students do well on the tests. We want to still teach hands-on and inquiry based activities, but we also want the students to succeed on those multiple choice, vocabulary heavy tests. Where is the happy medium? I was lucky to come across an article here that followed a teacher who still led a hands-on science classroom and had students perform well on standardized tests. The two ideas do not have to be in conflict with each other.
Linda Whren, the teacher in the article, acknowledged that her students were not being tested on their thinking skills. Her students learn about observing, classifying, and predicting as well as cross-curricular lessons. Whren introduces her students to new vocabulary and has perform research on topics in order for students to further their knowledge from a hands-on activity done in class. Just as her students perform well on standardized tests in a hands-on classroom, similarly the article discusses research performed that showed that students from a hands-on classroom outperformed text-based classroom students on tests. The article also states that down the road, more performance or process based skill questions will be added to standardized tests.
It is a relief to know that students in hands-on classrooms are not at a disadvantage for standardized tests. Teachers are still able to teach their students without directly teaching to the tests in order for their students to succeed. This article and study gave many more positives and advantages for hands-on classrooms.
Work Consulted:
http://www2.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=4321
Linda Whren, the teacher in the article, acknowledged that her students were not being tested on their thinking skills. Her students learn about observing, classifying, and predicting as well as cross-curricular lessons. Whren introduces her students to new vocabulary and has perform research on topics in order for students to further their knowledge from a hands-on activity done in class. Just as her students perform well on standardized tests in a hands-on classroom, similarly the article discusses research performed that showed that students from a hands-on classroom outperformed text-based classroom students on tests. The article also states that down the road, more performance or process based skill questions will be added to standardized tests.
It is a relief to know that students in hands-on classrooms are not at a disadvantage for standardized tests. Teachers are still able to teach their students without directly teaching to the tests in order for their students to succeed. This article and study gave many more positives and advantages for hands-on classrooms.
Work Consulted:
http://www2.scholastic.com/browse/article.jsp?id=4321
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)