This is the second post for my Step blog. This week has been interesting. We had to create a Padlet that addresses a Georgia Standard in our field that would fit into one of the E’s in the 5E framework. I chose to create an activity for the Engage section of a lesson that would address real-world applications of rates of change. I was fortunate to think of an idea that students would relate to in this part of a hypothetical lesson: the Olympics. I spent a lot of time looking over the Georgia DoE website as I prepared my Padlet looking for ideas and examples. In the process of brainstorming, I realized that creating 5E lesson plans is tough. Fortunately, the 100-meter sprint and the ideas of velocity and acceleration fit well.
I think that the way in which I implemented the Padlet for C.FGR.9 (and C.FGR.5) works well. Students collaborate in groups to answer a sequence of engagement exercises that combine the ideas of derivatives and real-world applications. Finally, I think that the engagement exercise concludes with something that shows students that these multiple verbally described situations link together to form a coherent picture (that is to say, a graph) of a 100-meter sprint. This is an idea that students will be exposed to in assessments of their knowledge and I feel that exposing them to this idea in a novel and culturally relevant way increases engagement with the topic.
Later in the week, we did a classroom activity to determine the patterns of droplets and distance. The distribution that my group got was strange in that there were droplets in a close range and then a gap where no droplets appeared followed by another zone in which droplets appeared again. I think that this is a result of the varied sizes of the droplets creating a buffer region between the two. The exercise was meant to introduce us to our weekend's reading which details the modes of inquiry-based learning.
There are two articles that we read. I list APA citations for both for future reference:
Colburn, A. (2000). An Inquiry Primer. Science Scope, 23(6), 42-44. Available from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ612058​:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}.
Martin-Hansen, L. (2002). Defining inquiry: Exploring the many types of inquiry in the science classroom. The Science Teacher, 69(2), 34-37. Available from https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ659939​:contentReference[oaicite:0]{index=0}.
The first article gives its readers a sense of the categories of inquiry-based learning. There is structured, guided, and open inquiry as well as learning cycle methods. The categories can be ordered in terms of structure: the amount of direction provided by the teacher to the students.
The first is likely familiar to anyone who has taken a college-level science lab where a lab manual details the steps that are to be taken and measurements to be made. As we progress through the lists of inquiry-based learning techniques, the instruction becomes sparser, and inquiry becomes more student-centered. The learning cycle model seems to be the synthesis of inquiry-based pedagogy where student and teacher interaction forms the basis for subsequent inquiry. Indeed, Lisa Martin-Hansen's article provides a rubric that allows student-teachers to visualize the level of teacher and student control within the inquiry-based framework.
Hansen's category names for inquiry-based learning differ from Colburn's but thematically they align under teacher guidance. Both papers name the highest level of teacher-controlled inquiry-based learning as structured.
In learning about the inquiry and its use in the classroom, I was motivated to look at studies of its efficacy. I found that there is a large body of literature that points to higher acheivement among students that are exposed to an inquiry-based learning environment. I hope that as we UTeach students progress, we become exposed to evidence that supports its use and the scientific basis for the pedagogy this technique enshrines.
The experience of creating a Padlet for math that addresses state standards and learning of inquiry-based learning has made one thing clear. The creation of such lessons requires significant time from the teacher to find exercises that address standards and meet student needs. I look forward to seeing examples of other lessons in action particularly in my field.
Comments
Post a Comment