Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: Entry 3

Expand Messages
  • thescienceteacher
    It almost sounds like you are describing entry 2. However, remember it is how you get them to analyze data on entry 3. If you believe that your
    Message 1 of 20 , Jan 30, 2006
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      It almost sounds like you are describing entry 2. However, remember
      it is how you get them to analyze data on entry 3. If you believe
      that your activity/discussion didn't allow for enough probing
      leading to or validating their conclusion based on data, you may
      want to re-think the entry
      --- In EASCI@yahoogroups.com, "Kristi" <bateman_kristi@y...> wrote:
      >
      > Thanks. I didn't feel it went well because the students had
      > quantitative data that had obvious conclusions. I didn't have to
      > help them interpret at all. What you see is me asking about their
      > hypotheses, their procedures, what happened, and what they
      concluded
      > based on that. I didn't have to lead them to their conclusions.
      > That makes me think that I need to redo the entry, though I really
      > don't have time. My goal for the lesson was to have my students
      > become more familiar with inquiry, and to basically go through the
      > entire scientific process from question to conclusion based on a
      > question that the cooperative groups came up with. I walked them
      > through each step of the process reinforcing how to write a good
      > question, a good hypothesis, a procedure that would produce valid
      > and reliable data, and to come to a conclusion based on that
      data.
      > I modeled each step with my own investigation. Our state has
      > specific standards that the kids are expected to know and follow,
      > and I modeled the investigation after those specifications. I
      don't
      > know. I still think I need to redo the entry. It just doesn't
      feel
      > right, you know? Again, thank you for your help.
      >
      > --- In EASCI@yahoogroups.com, "thescienceteacher"
      > <sciquest2000@y...> wrote:
      > >
      > > Kristi, where there any specific process skills you were trying
      to
      > > teach based on their data? I am not quite sure why you feel the
      > > discussion didn't go well if students had numeric data. Numeric
      > data
      > > is quantitative data so this should be okay. This entry looks
      at
      > how
      > > you help students in there interpretation of data. I guess you
      > may
      > > need to ask yourself the purpose of your activity in terms of
      what
      > the
      > > students should be learning and experiencing.
      > >
      > > --- In EASCI@yahoogroups.com, "Kristi" <bateman_kristi@y...>
      wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Can someone out there help me? For entry 3, I had my kids
      > working
      > > in
      > > > small groups, each group working on a different investigation
      > based
      > > on
      > > > scientific questions they came up with. Some were doing
      physics
      > > > questions, some life science, and so on. The discussion wasn't
      > that
      > > > great because all of the kids had numeric data, the
      conclusions
      > were
      > > > obvious. For the video, I started with a whole-group
      discussion
      > > about
      > > > the investigation I did as a model, then I talked to each
      > individual
      > > > group about their data. What do you think?
      > > >
      > >
      >
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.