Not unlike the Cardboard Challenge project, the room is a big mess as students craft simple machine marble mazes. Students are using cardboard boxes, plastic sheets, string, plastic containers, and more to weave six simple machines into one marble run.
At any moment during the project you'll hear a lot of negotiation some peaceful and some not so peaceful as design teams make decisions about their mazes. There's lots of trial and error as children connect the recyclables. And of course, there's the spread of good ideas such as how to make a good screw, pulley, or inclined plane for that just right marble movement.
One child asked, "How is this science today?" I responded that it was science in action since students were doing science and math as they build their mazes by measuring, creating and adjusting simple machines, and adapting materials.
Today every team got their own maze "home" spot--a place for their equipment and project. The marble mazes are housed safely around the rim of the room.
Next week I'll introduce a rubric that outlines the project parameters. The rubric is less for grading and more for guidance as they reach the final stages of the project. I hope to take some pictures of the work in action and copy down some of their incredible learning quotes too to document the building stage.
Project base learning is messy, but important work. An open ended activity like this calls students to use creativity, communication, collaboration, and critical thinking skills to craft a project that solves a problem and helps them learn valuable content principles. With that in mind, I'll accept the mess, and continue to support and develop the wonderful learning possible with a project like this.
Friday, March 20, 2015
Test Taking: Diagnose or Defeat?
Yesterday students took a practice test.
It was a "one size fits all" test.
Some tackled the task with ease while others became very frustrated. There was a real range.
I found myself wishing that every student could have a test at their "just right level of challenge" because that kind of test would serve to diagnose a student's current needs well.
For many reasons children at the same grade level fall into many levels of achievement related to specific subject areas.
A child might be "behind" or "ahead" due to multiple factors including:
It was a "one size fits all" test.
Some tackled the task with ease while others became very frustrated. There was a real range.
I found myself wishing that every student could have a test at their "just right level of challenge" because that kind of test would serve to diagnose a student's current needs well.
For many reasons children at the same grade level fall into many levels of achievement related to specific subject areas.
A child might be "behind" or "ahead" due to multiple factors including:
- extra study
- recent move or immigration
- physical or emotional issues
- age
- the impact of other interests
- home routines and support
- self concept and confidence
- willingness to risk
- ability to focus
- education opportunity
In time, I hope testing improves so that children take the online test they're ready for and move up the skill, concept, knowledge ladder in ways that fit their learning needs and style.
I remain a fan of streamlined standardized testing, perhaps one or two tests a year, that help us understand a child's achievement with a broad lens. I see this kind of testing as one measure of a child's overall learning profile.
For example, as I reviewed students' tests last night, I did learn a lot about the children. A few quiet children who don't speak up often demonstrated excellence and depth with problem solving. A couple of others showed need in very discrete, but important ways. One child's explanations were extraordinary. Many others demonstrated similar needs to one another, needs for later teaching related to writing concise targeted mathematical explanations and using tables to display their work. There were a few, however, who found the test to be too challenging and defeating--the test in a sense zapped their enthusiasm for the subject. These children who are just as capable of successful learning as their peers, but for various reasons, are not at grade-level yet.
Defeating students with tests that are inaccessible to them only serve to turn those students off to learning. It is very difficult to explain to a young nine or ten year old that it's not their fault that the test is too difficult for them, but instead it's the fault of a test that is years beyond their current level of learning.
If we're going to continue with a standardized testing routine, I suggest that children take a diagnostic test in the fall that levels them and demonstrates their learning path since we know that reading, writing, and math knowledge begins with the basics and builds in a somewhat predictable way. Then we can use that diagnostic as one piece of data to inform a child's overall learning plan. After that the child gets to learn in engaging, holistic ways--ways that make a child want to invest time and energy into their studies. During the year we can assess with formative, more informal, assessments. Then at the end-of-the-year the child takes one or two tests as one way to chart growth and need. I hope we simplify, streamline, and target tests to a child's needs if we're to continue on this path.
To diagnose or defeat is an important consideration as we look at the effect of testing. I think we can test better with greater personalization in this regard.
In the meantime, I'll use last night's assessment to renew the teaching path once again. For those who find the tests defeating, I'll meet them at their readiness level with more concrete models and engaging investigations, and for the rest, I'll work to fill in the gaps related to the fifth grade standards by teaching the material which students have yet to solidify in deep, memorable ways.
Thursday, March 19, 2015
Don't Underline Key Words? Why Not?
Many math education experts say, "Don't tell students to underline key words!"
I disagree.
Those math experts think of key words as words that determine a specific algorithm or thinking about a problem. I define key words differently. I think of key words as any important words in a problem or text.
As one who gets quickly swayed and confused by too much text, it's so helpful for me to read with a pencil underlining as I go along. I underline the words that help me solve a problem or decipher the text for deeper meaning.
The simple act of underlining seems to send a message to the brain that says, "This is important--don't forget it!" Recent research on hand-brain connection seems to affirm this.
Another good reason for underlining is that it slows you down and makes you focus on the text.
Once I started using my pen to read well, my reading speed and comprehension increased tenfold. Not only do I underline key words but I follow this common process:
I disagree.
Those math experts think of key words as words that determine a specific algorithm or thinking about a problem. I define key words differently. I think of key words as any important words in a problem or text.
As one who gets quickly swayed and confused by too much text, it's so helpful for me to read with a pencil underlining as I go along. I underline the words that help me solve a problem or decipher the text for deeper meaning.
The simple act of underlining seems to send a message to the brain that says, "This is important--don't forget it!" Recent research on hand-brain connection seems to affirm this.
Another good reason for underlining is that it slows you down and makes you focus on the text.
Once I started using my pen to read well, my reading speed and comprehension increased tenfold. Not only do I underline key words but I follow this common process:
- Focus on the question or problem. Understand what the job is.
- Read with care; underline and write notes that pertain to the job, goal, problem, or solution.
- Read over and organize the notes to inform your solution.
- Check over your work.
Hence, I disagree with those who tell students not to underline key words--underlining slows you down and helps you to find your way through complex text which better prepares you for finding the desired solution and/or information. That's been my experience.
Let me know if and why you disagree.
More PARCC Practice
We've been using the PARCC practice test to practice for the upcoming math test.
Problem by problem we've been analyzing questions, making models, and practicing responses.
The explicit teaching is a bit dull, but productive, as we navigate each problem, trying out online tools, and thinking about ways students can use the scrap paper to organize their thinking and find answers. I continue to favor the depth the new common core standards create for learning at the fifth grade level, and I know that the teaching related to the tests will improve as we incorporate successful, blended units of study for each standards-base content area.
The practice problems vary in format, needed thinking, and math skill, knowledge, and concept.
If our State continues to use PARCC next year, I'll think about how we can employ more of these question types into our typical math units and formative assessments. I did a bit of that this year, but not enough as the problems were new.
It's also likely that some of these question types will be short-lived as some of the practice questions seem ill-fitted for young minds and mathematical understanding. Time will tell in this regard.
The PARCC journey continues.
Next week we'll begin the tests. I'm not allowed to look at the questions or report on that process, but hopefully, sooner than later in the year, I'll be able to analyze the published results and look carefully at the published questions asked to help me prepare for next year's teaching/learning expectations and goals.
Problem by problem we've been analyzing questions, making models, and practicing responses.
The explicit teaching is a bit dull, but productive, as we navigate each problem, trying out online tools, and thinking about ways students can use the scrap paper to organize their thinking and find answers. I continue to favor the depth the new common core standards create for learning at the fifth grade level, and I know that the teaching related to the tests will improve as we incorporate successful, blended units of study for each standards-base content area.
The practice problems vary in format, needed thinking, and math skill, knowledge, and concept.
If our State continues to use PARCC next year, I'll think about how we can employ more of these question types into our typical math units and formative assessments. I did a bit of that this year, but not enough as the problems were new.
It's also likely that some of these question types will be short-lived as some of the practice questions seem ill-fitted for young minds and mathematical understanding. Time will tell in this regard.
The PARCC journey continues.
Next week we'll begin the tests. I'm not allowed to look at the questions or report on that process, but hopefully, sooner than later in the year, I'll be able to analyze the published results and look carefully at the published questions asked to help me prepare for next year's teaching/learning expectations and goals.
Teacher as Coach and Mentor
Every morning I write.
I mainly write to coach myself forward in order to teach well.
Teaching takes that kind of daily instruction, motivation, and effort.
As an educator, I see my main role as that of coach and mentor.
I want to coach each student with sensitivity, care, and apt learning--the kind of learning that prepares a child well for his/her future of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," our democratic call.
As I coach and mentor, I succeed and err--no two days are the same and there's always something more to learn. Sometimes I feel like a rock being chiseled as I continually refine my practice and delivery.
It is work very similar to parenting:
Mission driven work that focuses on the happy, successful growth and development of children.
I mainly write to coach myself forward in order to teach well.
Teaching takes that kind of daily instruction, motivation, and effort.
As an educator, I see my main role as that of coach and mentor.
I want to coach each student with sensitivity, care, and apt learning--the kind of learning that prepares a child well for his/her future of "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness," our democratic call.
As I coach and mentor, I succeed and err--no two days are the same and there's always something more to learn. Sometimes I feel like a rock being chiseled as I continually refine my practice and delivery.
It is work very similar to parenting:
Mission driven work that focuses on the happy, successful growth and development of children.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)