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

Re: [EASCI] Entry 3

Expand Messages
  • Jennifer Lynch
    I just finished getting a tape that I think will work. First try the kids looked bored becasue they were just telling about their data. Today I had them get
    Message 1 of 20 , Feb 8, 2005
      I just finished getting a tape that I think will work.
      First try the kids looked bored becasue they were
      just telling about their data. Today I had them get
      up in front of the class and explain their position,
      each person telling why they took the position. I
      encouraged the rest of the class to ask them questions
      about their explanation. Students enjoyed this and the
      quality of their responses was good.
      --- Cinnamon Frame <cframe@...> wrote:

      > I am having a hard time getting a good discussion
      > for Entry 3...Entry 2 rocked, it was great, but the
      > Entry 3 discussions I have tried have been much too
      > teacher-centered...it is frustrating, to say the
      > least. I mean...I can ask the kids to participate,
      > but I have to call on them. My other entries are
      > strong, but I fear I may fail this one.
      >
      > Cinnamon in NC> No virus found in this outgoing
      message.
      > Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
      > Version: 7.0.300 / Virus Database: 265.8.6 - Release
      > Date: 2/7/2005
      >




      __________________________________
      Do you Yahoo!?
      The all-new My Yahoo! - What will yours do?
      http://my.yahoo.com
    • Kristi
      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
      Message 2 of 20 , Jan 24, 2006
        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?
      • thescienceteacher
        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
        Message 3 of 20 , Jan 28, 2006
          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?
          >
        • Kristi
          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.
          Message 4 of 20 , Jan 28, 2006
            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?
            > >
            >
          • Kristi
            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.
            Message 5 of 20 , Jan 28, 2006
              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?
              > >
              >
            • 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 6 of 20 , Jan 30, 2006
                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.