Another wonderful class, full of fun, skills to use in our own classroom, and science.
As we entered, we grabbed our “Discussion Preps” and handed our journals over to Jo Ann. Below are the prompts used to get us thinking/writing about the readings we had due for today.
Our topic of the day was “Big Ideas” of Science:
After everyone was done, Jo Ann made mention that Ceb (notice no training wheels) was the most quoted person in last week’s class. When asked to quote 3 classmates’ ideas from that class, ALL of the Cohorts used Ceb.
We went over some investigation concerns:
-We all agree the river looks dirty, but is also an untapped resource, that Rochester should be taking advantage of
-We want to bring awareness to the river, and have more people enjoy, what we have been fortunate enough to enjoy
-One question was “Is it possible to replicate this freedom in the classroom setting?”
Jo Ann mentioned a time when a planned class trip fell through, so they brought the investigation to the classroom. The water they were supposed to take samples from, Jo Ann collected and brought to the students to study.
Mike mentioned a time when someone who was running for office was bringing attention to “Raw Sewage” in the Genesee River. Mike let the students plan their own investigations around this topic and present it to the community.
Sean said he has given the most dramatic student of the classroom a goldfish in a wet paper towel, and told them they need to keep it alive.
All great ideas, and examples.
As always, the reading discussion was strong, and on point (for the most part). Everyone had a lot of great input. Some highlights:
Role of Arguing in the classroom-
Jillian said it was interactive and fun, and Eric feels it would encourage students to use science vocabulary. Ryan made mention on how it shows students that it is necessary to critique, and be critiqued.
A good debate is one where everyone takes something from it.
Ryan made reference to how old literacies were based on the some produce, and the majority consumed. Eric went off of that to say that now everyone has the ability to be the producer, so it is important to critique, and debate.
Helping Learners Engage in Text-
Ceb had a very strong opinion on how he didn’t like science terminology. He feels there are easier, more comprehendible explanations. Some agreed, some didn’t. In the end, I feel the class came to the agreement that the audience was a very important factor.
We had a quick lesson on interpretation (click on the link below). I personally liked this, because the commentator was relating American Football to Rugby (i.e. calling the QB a fly half).
While snacking, we looked at the Toulmin Logic Model, which is another great tool to use in the classroom, especially if you are preparing for a debate.
For this, we broke in to groups of two and took a test that was supposed to measure if we were scientifically literate or not. Most of the groups scored 78, and one scored 80. All were above average. However, everyone questioned if that test was really a good way to measure science literacy in an individual.
Sean went over what he feels makes a good debate.
He breaks his class in to 4 teams; the pros, the cons, the ones who ask questions, and the judges who decide the winner. Roles are important; they help everyone become engaged, and come away with something. This is just another way to argue scientifically.
Reminder: We should be filling in our Metamaps!
For the remainder of class, we worked with our partners, either writing the procedure, analyzing the rubric for the project, and/or figuring out any loose end to the investigations.
We finished with answering on cards naming 3 things we would take away from class today, and who said it, and of course the summary.
See everyone Thursday!