Braus & Wood: Environmental Education in Schools

I welcome the idea of using environmental education to not only teach science. Honestly it had not occurred to me before. You always go outside for science lessons. And mostly only in Primary grades to walk around the school grounds. If science can teach reading (journals) and math (measuring, calculating, experimenting) IN the classroom, why not teach all those things in the environment? It had also not occurred to me to teach social studies through the environment -- politics, economics, class debates.

I have to say, I'm sure all teachers were told at some point to use environmental education (if not by another name) and thought it was great. And never did it. I hope to carry out at least some of these ideas for a few reasons. No 1. I find Iowa's environment fascinating! I'm certainly used to the wildlife and geography of my home, but Iowa! Iowa has different animals, birds, (corn) plants. Things grow when you put them in the ground. Right before your eyes. And for goodness sakes. There are not two, not three, but FOUR seasons. What's not to love? I will want to go play  discover and learn in the snow just as much as my students. At the same time, I'd probably be in the same old never-go-outside rut as other teachers if I was in Texas. Because to me it is boring. To kids in Iowa, this is the normal and un-interesting for them. I know better. My glee at crunching through snow in boots will either wear off or not be enough to get me out of the classroom on a frigid day. Much less actually plan activities for outside. No, love of Iowa's seasons won't be enough. I need to make a conscious concerted effort to plan environmental lessons throughout the school year. I will have to set standards for myself like, once a month spend a day (or most of it), outside. After the snow melts, spend a week outside. That's the only way it's going to happen, because I know I'm not any better or magically enlightened than all the teachers who don't.

Challenge Me

How is your view of science teaching changing as a result of viewing the “Challenge Me” videos and thinking/making posters about National Science Education Standards about teaching?


I am definitely getting a more solid checklist of science classroom best practices, if not a great mental image. The National Science Education Standards were helpful to me because they reminded me that learning environment, special guests, technology, and classroom community are necessary for science too. I know the topics: earth science, life science, space, physics, chemistry, but these videos are helping me put together the HOW, not just the WHAT.

Iowa CORE Curriculum: Key Concepts

In order to determine the (professed) most important science concepts in the Iowa CORE Curriculum, I check the Performance Standards. What does the state want 8th graders to be able to do?
The "High Performance Level" is evaluated as follows.

High Performance Level: Understands ideas related to Earth, the universe, and the life sciences. Understands ideas related to the physical sciences and often can demonstrate the skills of scientific inquiry.

• Distinguished: Understands ideas related to Earth, the universe, and the life sciences. Understands ideas related to the physical sciences and can demonstrate the skills of scientific inquiry. 

Wow. Thank you, Iowa. That was clear. Ok, I'm not being completely fair. That was a Performance Standard. Essential Concepts and Skills are clearer:

	Understand and apply knowledge of processes and changes on or in the earth’s land, oceans, and atmosphere.
The surface of the earth changes. Some changes are due to slow processes, such as erosion and weathering, and some changes are due to rapid processes such as landslides, volcanic eruptions, floods and earthquakes.

That's it? That's all I need to teach in grades three through five ?(Category: Earth & Space/ Subcategory: Land, oceans, atmosphere).
I am still adjusting to Iowa CORE. I can't help it. I'm used to Texas state standards, which are very detailed and probably closer to individual district or area curriculum guidelines in Iowa. So, I'm trying to re-order my thinking to "Thank you Iowa, for giving broad guidelines and allowing me flexibility" instead of "That's not enough information!"

Ahem. On to those Key Concepts
Primary Students (K-2) focus on observing and identifying big concepts. Not much analysis or evaluation going on yet, but understanding concepts and being able to regurgitate or represent their knowledge. This is not to say that K-2 students shouldn't engage in Inquiry. They still need the inquiry process to supplant prior "pre-conceptions" with new facts. Math used is mostly for measurement.-

3rd-5th grade students move forward to deeper processes and understanding that experiments can have different variables and different outcomes. Mathematics in science increase from measurements to equations.

Although I won't* be teaching Science to 6th-8th graders, I immediately notice a spike in vocabulary. Students are expected to know the terminology for processes and phenomena, not just understand how they work. (Although that is certainly a pre-requisite!)

*Yes, I know, never say never. I just mean "won't" based on my current endorsements and foreseeable future.

Common Misconceptions in Physical Science: Force

Isabelle hurt her ankle while climbing in the mountains. To get to the road, her friends had to get her up a steep cliff. They have one long rope and one pulley. Her friend's discussed the easiest way to pull Isabelle up the cliff. This is what they said:

Jace: "We should tie the rope around Isabelle and pull her up to the road."

Penn: "We should tie the pulley to a tree at the top of the cliff and then pull the rope down through the pulley."

Zoey: "We should tie the pulley to Isabelle. Then we should tie one end of the rope to a tree at the top of the cliff and pull the rope up through the pulley."

Create interactive meetings at Poll Everywhere

Mosart

Misconceptions-Oriented Standards-Based Assessment Resources for Teachers

Let me say first, that the training leading up to receiving the Mosart Tests was excellently designed. I don't know if I was just in a different mood when I read the introduction to 25 Assessment Probes, but the equivalent for the Mosart tools was much easier to understand! 4 tutorials made up the "training" and each tutorial was broken into explanation, real examples, and reading for further understanding. It was probably just the nature of going through online tutorials that made the difference for me, but now I feel much more comfortable using Mosart.
 
After requesting a Life Science pre-test for for grades 7 & 8, I was able to see how Mosart helps teachers analyze their data. HOWEVER, I'm not a big fan of grading and graphing all those pre-tests! I think combining Mosart's tools with something like what Cedar Rapids schools use or Google forms, would make it easier for students to take the pre-test at home and for me to analyze the data.
 
I also applaud Mosart for including a minimum reading level in their tests. For example the 5-8 test (geared toward 7th-8th graders? I haven't quite figured that part out yet) requires a minimum reading "level" of 7th grade. Although is drilled into teacher education programs that ELL students do not aquire academic language proficiency (CALP) for 6+ years, teachers still forget. ELL students may have great social language in English (BICS), but not be able to test on academic subjects. I have every confidence that I could get around decently in a French-speaking country (or even mime my way through a Spanish-speaking one), but I would not be able to take a science test in French.
 
Finally, if I had a way to give the pre-test electronically, I love that simple way that Mosart shows which incorrect answers were most common, and what misconceptions that represents. I will have to go back and look at the 25 Assessment Probes books to see how they explain the misconceptions after each Probe. I think they are more narrative, but that would be helpful if I share my students' misconception!

Keeley et al: Uncovering Student Ideas in Science

This article was incredibly frustrating for me. As an introduction to a larger work, I kept wishing I could skip ahead to Chapter 1! (and then flip back and read the Introduction of course). If I read "the probes in this book" one more time I was about to pop. I kept reading and reading expecting an example any time now to make sense of all the theories and reasons behind "assessment probes." I'm afraid I totally missed the content, since others seem to have gathered much better information from the article/chapter. Maybe the theories and reasons behind Assessment Probes were the content? but the way everything was worded looking forward to the Assessment Probes behind the curtain, I just couldn't understand the introduction without a glimpse of the real thing.

I do agree that assessment probes (from what I gathered) are a good idea. They don't really sound like a novel concept though. We have already been talking about determining students' prior knowledge and misconceptions before constructing new knowledge and learning.
What makes an "assessment probe" different from pre-assessment (informal or formal)? Maybe if there was an explicit example I would know!

I'm sure that the whole book is great, and I'm surprisingly curious to read it because the Introduction seemed so geared to the monster at the end of this book. However, when authors go back to write an introduction, they seem to subconsciously forget that the Reader has NOT read the book yet...in their nuances of language. Dear Writer, Please oh please do not  expound upon topics that have been defined but not seen yet.

*hmph*

Watson & Konicek: Teaching for Conceptual Change

aka. The Sweater Article

I love that O'Brien (the teacher) had to work really hard to not tell students the secret of the hot sweaters after several days of frustrating experiments. It really helped me to see a teacher trying out inquiry for the first time, and struggling with it. Most examples of inquiry-based learning seem to flow happily from one question and project to another. Students are motivated, curious and magically coming up with terrific ideas. I know that in real life, sometimes students don't come up with high quality activities. They might come up with fantastic questions, but need a little direction in the application/experimentation department.

Deb O'Brien had to resist the instinct to "give away the answer" after one...or two...or three...failed experiments. The kids were frustrated, but since they still clung to their misconceptions about sweaters and hats creating heat, she had to let them experience total disequilibrium with their understanding. Even still, a few students stubbornly (and bravely) stuck to their theories when O'Brien drew a line in the sand.

O'Brien's classroom gave me a look into the first steps of creating an inquiry-based classroom. She did not re-vamp her whole curriculum. She did not even try to bring in other teachers for cross-curricular involvement. She just spent a week, or less than a week, letting students come to terms with their misconceptions. She probably followed her original curriculum once they were "ready." But now, she knew exactly where they were coming from, and how strongly they felt about it!

I could do this. Most inquiry-based lessons honestly freak me out, but this is a nice balance - a starting point.