For those of us who are in the classroom doing NGSS work every day, we realize how simple what's written on paper is compared to how it actually looks in the classroom. Let's look at HS-PS 2-6, for example. Please keep in mind that this could have never been possible without all of the stuff we did leading up to this. Check out my blog about the first part of our lesson progression in order to understand what I mean.
HS-PS 2-6: Communicate scientific and technical information about why the molecular-level structure is important in the functioning of designed materials.
HS-PS 2-6: Communicate scientific and technical information about why the molecular-level structure is important in the functioning of designed materials.
So at this point our students have gained the understanding of Coulombic Attraction, intermolecular forces, and kinetic energy. So they know that particles move, they attract to each other with varying strengths and amounts, and they know that protons in the nucleus have an attraction to the electrons, and this is based on distance and magnitude.
To start you off, here's one of the final products from our process that I'll walk you through. Please keep in mind that not all of the complicated information will be correct in these projects due to the complexity of what they're talking about, but they are only being assessed on the DCI - interactions of matter with a focus on IMFs.
So this is how we walked them through this.
1. Article about the dilemma in Arizona this summer when airplanes couldn't take off.
After the students finished their summative assessment, we gave them an article that I've linked above. This article goes into the issue that happened this summer when temperatures reached 120 degrees and the planes couldn't take off. The students had to model why this was the case. What information have we learned in class that could help you visualize just what was happening?
2. Discuss the airplane scenario.
The next class we discussed what was going on and what our models included. I showed them a video that was a news broadcast about the issue, as well as a video that tries to explain what is going on. The point to drive home in this is that particle motion and interactions are impacting our lives in so many ways. What other ways could we possibly be impacted by interactions of matter?
3. Introduce other things that are so dependent on molecular level activity.
We showed a series of videos that explain molecular level structures to bulk scale properties. Here are a few we used:
After each video we had a brief discussion of how the functioning of these materials are completely related to their structures and properties at the molecular level.
4. Allow students to wonder about other materials.
I started by asking the kids what kind of things they're interested in. Answers ranged from playing guitar to sailing to working out to playing with electronics. I asked them what kinds of materials they encounter when they do what they love? Answers were things like guitar strings, wet suits, pre-workout mix, and display screens. Then I asked what materials these things were made out of. Some students could answer this question, some couldn't. I told them to look it up.
5. Forming a researchable question.
Once the students have decided on the substance that they're interested in, they formed a question around it. For example, the student in the video asked "What about paraffin wax's molecular structure made it a good fuel for candles?" When the students had their question, they signed up via a google form. I would be monitoring to make sure there weren't any duplicates.
6. Introduction to the project.
After everyone had a substance, I explained what we would be doing. I gave them the rubric, a set of criteria, and a pacing guide. We were assessing 4 standards in this project:
1. Disciplinary Core Idea 2: Interactions of Matter
2. Sense-Making Practice 1: Developing Models
3. Sense-Making Practice 3: Constructing Explanations
4. Critiquing Practice 2: Obtaining, Evaluating, and Communicating Information
I know our rubrics are not perfect, and they're in a constant work in progress, but as I was working with my instructional coach a few weeks ago, he explained to me what Tom Schimmer explained to him in a conference last year - formative rubrics are extremely detailed. I think these are almost more like a checklist on a sliding scale. Summative rubrics are brief, inclusive, and simple. If the students want more detail, they can refer back to their formative feedback. These are the rubrics we use for these standards:
DCI 2: Interactions of Matter
Exemplary
|
Proficient
|
Adequate
|
Limited
|
N/D
|
The student constructs an accurate explanation of the structure and properties of matter AND correctly relates it to its interactions at the atomic level and the function at the macroscopic level.
|
The student constructs an accurate explanation of the structure and properties of matter AND attempts to relate it to its interactions at the atomic level and the function at the macroscopic level.
|
The student constructs an explanation of the structure and properties of matter, BUT fails to relate it to its interactions at the atomic level and function at the macroscopic level.
|
The student attempts to construct an explanation of the relationship between the structure and properties of matter AND fails to relate it to its interactions at the atomic level and function at the macroscopic level.
|
The student did not demonstrate any understanding of interactions of matter.
|
Sense-Making Practice 1: Developing & Using Models
Exemplary
|
Proficient
|
Adequate
|
Limited
|
DND
|
The student’s model completely and accurately represents the components of the phenomenon AND includes a completely correct representation of the relationships associated with the phenomenon.
|
The student’s model correctly represents the components of the phenomenon AND includes a mostly correct representation of the relationships associated with the phenomenon.
|
The student’s model represents components of the phenomenon AND includes a partially correct representation of the relationships associated with the phenomenon.
|
The student’s model represents components of the phenomenon BUT provides little or no evidence of the relationships associated with the phenomenon.
|
Model is nonexistent or irrelevant.
|
Sense-Making Practice 2: Constructing Explanations & Designing Solutions
Exemplary
|
Proficient
|
Adequate
|
Limited
|
DND
|
The student provides a correct claim AND the evidence and reasoning completely support the claim.
|
The student provides a correct claim AND the evidence and reasoning mostly supports the claim.
|
The student provides a claim AND there is a partially correct connection to the evidence and reasoning.
|
The student provides a claim, BUT there is little or no connection to the evidence and reasoning.
|
CER is nonexistent or irrelevant.
|
Critiquing Practice 2: Obtaining, Evaluating and Communicating Information
Exemplary
|
Proficient
|
Adequate
|
Limited
|
N/D
|
The student completely AND accurately communicated the appropriate information to others by obtaining AND evaluating a sufficient amount of reliable sources.
|
The student accurately communicated the appropriate information to others by obtaining AND evaluating multiple reliable sources.
|
The student communicated information to others by obtaining multiple sources.
|
The student attempted to communicate information BUT sources were unreliable.
|
The student did not obtain, evaluate and communicate information.
|
This is the Checklist (without levels of proficiency) that was given for this project:
Your visual display should include the following components:
Component
|
Details
|
Visual Prop
|
Can be:
|
Researchable Question
|
Turn the material you are studying into a researchable question.
Example: “How does the molecular structure of asphalt allow it to act as a high impact road surface?”
|
Bulk scale picture
|
This should be an original photo unless it is totally impractical.
|
Model of molecular structure
(zoom in of the bulk scale)
|
Hand drawn or original digital creation.
Must connect how the molecular structure explains the bulk-scale properties.
|
Bulk scale properties
|
This can be in list form.
Examples: rigidity, malleability, etc.
|
Molecular scale properties
|
This can be in list form.
Components can include: atoms present, arrangement of atoms, bonding orientation, intermolecular forces, etc.
|
CER
|
This should answer your question that you have posed.
Your evidence should be information you have gathered which should be visible in your model or lists of properties.
Your reasoning must have scientific principles that you have either learned in class or through your own research.
|
Works Cited
|
All of your references need to be represented on one document as a works cited page. This should be in MLA format, or some sort of consistent format.
ONE of your resources will need to be physically handed in, with the highlighted portions that you used in your presentation/visual
|
And this is the timeline information that was given:
Materials Research Project Checklist
Day 1:
Choose a material with properties that interest you. One material per student.
|
Your material
|
Read a brief article about the substance and identify one or two, “bulk scale” properties that makes your material special.
|
Your material’s property (ies)
Generate a question that connects your material to its property, for example, “Why does fluoride prevent tooth decay?”
|
Gather references - Your goal should be to have a minimum of three references. Try for a variety of media: one online article, one video and one printed reference.
Check each source for its validity. Are these reliable publications?
|
References
1.
2.
3.
Please provide one of your references to the teacher.
|
Day 2:
What is it about your substance’s molecular or atomic structure that allows it to exhibit these properties at the bulk scale?
You may take time to read your references, or replace them with more valid sources if they are of low quality, or even too technical.
| |
Produce a rough draft of a model that explains how this property connects to the molecular level.
| |
Share your model with your classmates. Ask them to tell you what it means. If they are unable to explain parts of it, please revise.
|
Day 3:
Complete the text portion (CER) of your project. Your writing must connect the interactions at the atomic level to the function at the visible level.
|
This should be a CER. It should answer the question that is in Day 1. For example, “Why does fluoride prevent tooth decay?”
|
List your resources, and with each resource, address the following:
| |
Lay out your visual presentation.
| |
Practice presenting to your classmates. For this practice, you will be grouped with people of the same category. Your presentation should be 2-4 minutes long, then you will have some time for questioning and discussion. You will have questions to guide you through this process. For your final presentation, you will be grouped with others that are researching other categories. Nobody from your category group will be in your share-out group.
| |
If you did a Google Slides presentation, please email a link to your teacher so that they can load it on their laptop for quick transitions during your presentation next class. (It doesn’t need to be complete at this point, but you do need to send a link to the live document.)
|
Day 4:
Students take turns presenting their materials research. (About 40 minutes in total for four presenters)
| |
Students pair up and create a vlog of their presentation and upload to their instructor.
|
In the future, I would LOVE to see the students creating these documents with us!
7. Research - How to do it well.
Thanks to our english and history departments, this was easy for us. After asking a few questions about what is a good source, and how do we make sure we're giving credit where credit is due, it was extremely obvious that our kids are great at researching. They took off and began digging in. I wish that I could post photos of students fully engaged in this process. I take photos all of the time, but for the sake of privacy, I avoid posting photos and videos that would make it easy to identify the student. I really think because the students were given complete freedom, they were genuinely interested in what they were doing.
8. Using the research to develop the components of the project.
From the research, the students are expected to produce a list of molecular properties, bulk scale properties, a model at the molecular level that connects the bulk scale to the molecular scale, and a CER that answers their question. They also need an original bulk scale photo.
9. Peer Review
By this time, the students should have first drafts of their work. I strategically paired students with someone who was doing a similar research project. For example, I would put cotton with wool, or diesel with butane, or spider web with silkworm silk. I also provided the students with some question stems to help them with their discussions.
Clarifying Questions
|
Probing Questions
|
Extension Questions
|
10. Revise from Feedback
Once the student had feedback to work with, they went back to revise. Through this revision, they could always go back to their partner for more feedback until they felt that their project was complete. This obviously works best when the students have most of their work done.
11. Mock Presentation Protocol
I worked with my instructional coach on creating a protocol for these presentations. My hopes were that everyone was engaged all of the time, and that each of the presenters felt that their presentation and hard work was valued. I did NOT want this to be a traditional, get up and watch 20 presentations kind of thing. So we melded a few Adaptive Schools protocols together, and came up with this:
Presentation Protocol
Role
|
Responsibility
| |
1
|
Presenter
|
|
2
|
Discusser
|
|
3
|
Celebrator
|
|
4
|
Scribe
|
|
4 minutes: presentations by presenter
5 minutes: discussion between presenter and discusser
1 minute: celebrations
2 minutes: recap of presentation and discussion
1 minute: clarifications/last words by presenter
I asked a student who I knew what pretty much done with their project to be the presenter, and asked for volunteers to fill the rest of the roles. After each part, we analyzed what happened during these steps and what we liked. This also allowed students to asked questions about the process. I originally wanted everyone to practice this, but felt that I wouldn't be able to monitor if people were doing it correctly, so instead we only watched one group. I video taped this process to share with my instructional coach. If you're interested in watching it, send me a message and I'll share it with you privately. I won't post it publicly since students are in it.
12. Final Touches
The timing of this allowed for students to have about 15 minutes to revise any last things before the end of class. The idea is that none of this project has to be done at home. It allows for better collaboration and monitoring whenever they have ample class time to do this. I did have a few students in each class that had to do a little bit of work at home due to more complicated projects. I discovered that cocoons are quite complicated!
13. Presentations!
For the presentations, I had groups of 4. I had a few groups of three in which I had the celebrator and scribe be the same person. I strategically groups the students to have different categories within the groups. These categories were:
- biological
- polymers
- hydrocarbons
- metals and alloys
- carbon
- other
So in a group I would have 4 students all in different categories.
I paced the students as the presentations were happening to make sure nobody got too carried away with a presentation. I noticed that the discussions were pretty short, but I think as the students improve their ability to ask good questions, these discussion will continue to become more rich throughout the year.
I had all of the scribes populate a document so I have all of the information in one place while I'm grading. This is a snapshot of what that looks like:
Presenter
|
Saad
|
Aerogel (5)
|
Discusser
|
Alexys
| |
Celebrator
|
Fatima
| |
Scribe
|
Fatima
|
14. Screencasts
Because the presentations were happening simultaneously, I wanted the kids to videotape themselves. Originally, they were going to pair up and video each other, but then one of my students totally outsmarted me and asked why we aren't just doing screencasts, so we did screencasts instead. This is really what I'll be looking at as I assess them. Here are two more examples:
Like I said before, their descriptions aren't perfect, but I think they're pretty amazing!
15. Reflection on the process.
One of the most important things (and probably one of the most neglected) in science is reflecting on the process instead of obsessing about the product. After they were finished, I had them reflect by asking them some basic questions. Here are some examples of answers they gave:
Q: How would you rate yourself on the quality of your project? Do you think that you found sufficient, valid information, were able to make sense of it and present it in a way that connected to the big idea (molecular scale structure determining bulk scale properties) and made sense to your audience?
A: I feel as though I wanted a bit more information related to the car itself rather than just carbon. However my information was valid and was almost always able to easily connect it back to the molecular structure. I also made it easy for the audience to understand by only addressing the factors that we learned in class and how they relate to my material.
I would not rate myself the highest or the lowest but just average because of the fact that it was very hard to gather enough information for my subject. I think I did find valid sources but very few. I was very limited to my sources on the internet and in books which made it harder for me to prove my claim in my CER and explain enough to show how my Material works. I was able to make sense of my own presentation but I am not sure if my audience was able to fully understand.
I think my project was good in terms of quality with the resources I had. I found a lot of information on the product but not too much on the molecular structure, therefore I had to work with what I had and had to make inferences.
Q: If you were to complete this project again, what would you do differently next time (time management, topic, method of research, collaboration with peers, etc...)?
A: I would take the time to research more in depth. Also graphene is a new substance that is currently being developed and so I would choose a relevant, already existing/in use substance next time.
I managed my time really well in my opinion as I got everything done before Sunday, and that helped me a lot to get good feedback from my peers during the class on Sunday. I am happy with my method of research as I got 2 websites and many videos explaining the structure and everything and that made it very easy for me to understand the interactions and answer my competing question.
Next time, I would perhaps choose a different topic. My topic was: 'How do yeast cells make bread rise?'. Although this required a lot of research and I learnt some very interesting things from it, I think it would have been better to choose a topic that focused more on molecules rather than cells, as the units we did in class dealt with intermolecular forces rather than anything to do with cells, and I think I would have found a project on this more relevant. Another thing I would do differently is practice my presentation beforehand to make it more fluid.
Q: Reflect on the process of the protocol for the presentation. (presenter, discusser, celebrator, scribe). How did this help you communicate and engage better?
A: I thought that this was really well organised because it helped me focus more on my peer's presentations and helped me connect their work to the big idea of the unit.
The discusser and the celebrator helped a lot as they asked clarifying questions and questions out of curiosity which made the presentation more interesting and made it easier for them to understand the whole process. The scribe had an important job as the recap at the end is very important. You get the chance to see how your peers viewed your presentation, what they learnt and what they understood from my presentation
The process of protocol for the presentation definitely helped me communicate and engage better. As a presenter, it is great to have someone asking clarifying questions, because it gives you another chance to discuss the topic we have researched. Also, the person asking questions gets an opportunity to further learn about the presented topic or even get a better understanding of the topic. As a scribe, you are forced to both listen attentively and record the most important aspects/ the main idea in the presentation, which helps build understanding. Additionally, for the presenter, it is very nice to have your work complimented. Also, it is helps keep the audience more engaged when you need to identify the specific parts of the presentation that are exceptionally good.
Q: Reflect on the process of the protocol for the presentation. (presenter, discusser, celebrator, scribe). How was this more difficult than other ways you've presented in the past?
A: This was slightly more difficult because, in the past, there was always just one presenter and the other people who were listening might not be engaged because they knew they would not be held accountable for anything that was said. This was more difficult because you really had to listen and understand what was going on in the presentation, but it was very effective for engagement.
In my opinion this was a very good way of organizing a presentation and I think that it was executed very well. The only problem I found was that not everyone could do every job, so for example the whole audience couldn't discuss and ask many questions or say what was done well. But it was very organized and it helped with getting the presentation done quickly and the discussion done quickly too.
This process gave us each more responsibility of generating valid, appropriate questions as a discusser, made us pay full attention to summarize and create a understanding of the content as the scribe, and also positively aided us through the result of feedback and appreciation as the celebrator.
I am incredibly happy with the way this turned out. Our next unit is HS-PS 1-1 & 1-2. I would love to do something like this with basic chemical reactions but still including the level of engagement the students had. Any ideas??
To tie this back to my original idea of posting about the SEPs in depth, I'd like to relate this one to the obvious one, CP2: Obtaining, Evaluating & Communicating Information:
I think my students hit every single one of these markers for this SEP. At the beginning of the year, and during our planning stages last year, I was a bit nervous about the critiquing practices, but this has turned out to be one of the best activities we've done so far.
What other ways to do you implement this SEP in your classroom? I'd love to hear your ideas!
Like I said before, their descriptions aren't perfect, but I think they're pretty amazing!
15. Reflection on the process.
One of the most important things (and probably one of the most neglected) in science is reflecting on the process instead of obsessing about the product. After they were finished, I had them reflect by asking them some basic questions. Here are some examples of answers they gave:
Q: How would you rate yourself on the quality of your project? Do you think that you found sufficient, valid information, were able to make sense of it and present it in a way that connected to the big idea (molecular scale structure determining bulk scale properties) and made sense to your audience?
A: I feel as though I wanted a bit more information related to the car itself rather than just carbon. However my information was valid and was almost always able to easily connect it back to the molecular structure. I also made it easy for the audience to understand by only addressing the factors that we learned in class and how they relate to my material.
I would not rate myself the highest or the lowest but just average because of the fact that it was very hard to gather enough information for my subject. I think I did find valid sources but very few. I was very limited to my sources on the internet and in books which made it harder for me to prove my claim in my CER and explain enough to show how my Material works. I was able to make sense of my own presentation but I am not sure if my audience was able to fully understand.
I think my project was good in terms of quality with the resources I had. I found a lot of information on the product but not too much on the molecular structure, therefore I had to work with what I had and had to make inferences.
Q: If you were to complete this project again, what would you do differently next time (time management, topic, method of research, collaboration with peers, etc...)?
A: I would take the time to research more in depth. Also graphene is a new substance that is currently being developed and so I would choose a relevant, already existing/in use substance next time.
I managed my time really well in my opinion as I got everything done before Sunday, and that helped me a lot to get good feedback from my peers during the class on Sunday. I am happy with my method of research as I got 2 websites and many videos explaining the structure and everything and that made it very easy for me to understand the interactions and answer my competing question.
Next time, I would perhaps choose a different topic. My topic was: 'How do yeast cells make bread rise?'. Although this required a lot of research and I learnt some very interesting things from it, I think it would have been better to choose a topic that focused more on molecules rather than cells, as the units we did in class dealt with intermolecular forces rather than anything to do with cells, and I think I would have found a project on this more relevant. Another thing I would do differently is practice my presentation beforehand to make it more fluid.
Q: Reflect on the process of the protocol for the presentation. (presenter, discusser, celebrator, scribe). How did this help you communicate and engage better?
A: I thought that this was really well organised because it helped me focus more on my peer's presentations and helped me connect their work to the big idea of the unit.
The discusser and the celebrator helped a lot as they asked clarifying questions and questions out of curiosity which made the presentation more interesting and made it easier for them to understand the whole process. The scribe had an important job as the recap at the end is very important. You get the chance to see how your peers viewed your presentation, what they learnt and what they understood from my presentation
The process of protocol for the presentation definitely helped me communicate and engage better. As a presenter, it is great to have someone asking clarifying questions, because it gives you another chance to discuss the topic we have researched. Also, the person asking questions gets an opportunity to further learn about the presented topic or even get a better understanding of the topic. As a scribe, you are forced to both listen attentively and record the most important aspects/ the main idea in the presentation, which helps build understanding. Additionally, for the presenter, it is very nice to have your work complimented. Also, it is helps keep the audience more engaged when you need to identify the specific parts of the presentation that are exceptionally good.
A: This was slightly more difficult because, in the past, there was always just one presenter and the other people who were listening might not be engaged because they knew they would not be held accountable for anything that was said. This was more difficult because you really had to listen and understand what was going on in the presentation, but it was very effective for engagement.
In my opinion this was a very good way of organizing a presentation and I think that it was executed very well. The only problem I found was that not everyone could do every job, so for example the whole audience couldn't discuss and ask many questions or say what was done well. But it was very organized and it helped with getting the presentation done quickly and the discussion done quickly too.
This process gave us each more responsibility of generating valid, appropriate questions as a discusser, made us pay full attention to summarize and create a understanding of the content as the scribe, and also positively aided us through the result of feedback and appreciation as the celebrator.
I am incredibly happy with the way this turned out. Our next unit is HS-PS 1-1 & 1-2. I would love to do something like this with basic chemical reactions but still including the level of engagement the students had. Any ideas??
To tie this back to my original idea of posting about the SEPs in depth, I'd like to relate this one to the obvious one, CP2: Obtaining, Evaluating & Communicating Information:
Scientists and engineers must be able to communicate clearly and persuasively the ideas and methods they generate. Critiquing and communicating ideas individually and in groups is a critical professional activity. Obtaining, evaluating, and communicating information in 9–12 builds on K–8 experiences and progresses to evaluating the validity and reliability of the claims, methods, and designs.
| |
Critically read scientific literature adapted for classroom use to determine the central ideas or conclusions and/or to obtain scientific and/or technical information to summarize complex evidence, concepts, processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms.
|
Compare, integrate and evaluate sources of information presented in different media or formats (e.g., visually, quantitatively) as well as in words in order to address a scientific question or solve a problem.
|
Gather, read, and evaluate scientific and/or technical information from multiple authoritative sources, assessing the evidence and usefulness of each source.
|
Evaluate the validity and reliability of and/or synthesize multiple claims, methods, and/or designs that appear in scientific and technical texts or media reports, verifying the data when possible.
|
Communicate scientific and/or technical information or ideas (e.g. about phenomena and/or the process of development and the design and performance of a proposed process or system) in multiple formats (including orally, graphically, textually, and mathematically).
| |
I think my students hit every single one of these markers for this SEP. At the beginning of the year, and during our planning stages last year, I was a bit nervous about the critiquing practices, but this has turned out to be one of the best activities we've done so far.
What other ways to do you implement this SEP in your classroom? I'd love to hear your ideas!
Comments
Post a Comment