Writing lesson sequences

With my supporting schools in science education, I tend to be asked to do some modelling of science teaching and this has progressed lately to teaching a sequence of lessons to explore the whole 'where to next' thinking.

Of course this can be quite difficult, particularly if the goal of science is to get students doing the science and not so much following a prescribed unit plan or lesson sequence. So how do you plan to have enough structure to show the class is actually doing science, leave enough space for the students to investigate, as well as ensure that the nature of science or the science capabilities are being developed and context strand concepts are introduced too?!?
Although my planning for modelling is a lot more detailed as I'm wanting to share what I'm thinking and how I hope to facilitate learning, the gist is fairly much the same with however I'm teaching. I thought I'd share my process and remind those schools I've worked with that you probably have some examples of this in a shared drive somewhere!
I start with my Big Idea. This will reflect a conversation with the teacher about both a context, in the above photo, Chemical Reactions, and a focus on developing some aspect of the science capabilities. The above plan is about developing the idea that in science, explanations will come from our noticing and gathering data. I might be focusing on how we gather data or critiquing or some general idea about the lens of science -how we think, communicate and act 'scientifically'. For this planning, the teacher asked me to integrate the school theme of 'conflict' as well. 
Next, I highlight the capabilities I'll be developing as part of the science teaching. I usually highlight the NZC's nature of science strand AOs too but for teachers I suggest they choose either the NOS or capabilities as they are both about the same thing. For me these are the important bits! This is the stuff that I'll be thinking about, assessing or evaluating, and demonstrating. Regardless of which way student investigations go, I'm reasonably certain that I can monitor how the capabilities are being shown and developed further. I would use my OTJs or rubric for assessment or however you want to do it (!) as part of my reporting back to parents -check earlier posts for further thinking about assessment.
Next the context strand, in this case it's the Material World: observing, describing and comparing the changes when materials are mixed. Because I like to have a robust context that is developing good scientific thinking, I'll investigate a bit further for me. I might use some of the ideas and knowledge with the children, it just depends what level and where I'm hoping to head. I might jot down some knowledge, vocabulary and perhaps some student misconceptions that I might have come across before. Usually these are geared more towards the knowledge ideas, for example that junior students may think of 'dissolving' as 'disappearing' but might include some misconceptions around, for example, observing -that students struggle to notice change over longer periods of time. 

At Omokoroa, the good ol' jellyfish warm up!

And then I'll put down a rough lesson sequence, linking to websites where I've found ideas and activities but also with opportunities for students to investigate further, to pose questions, and look for possible answers. I will have a sequence here but I am also open to student agency where I might need to adapt the lessons, add something to counter some concerns I might have, or include a new direction the children have taken off in. If I really want my lessons to happen, I can still do them -after all, I like to let children investigate their ideas but there is also space for teacher directed lessons!
Finally, I add integration with literacy and maths, areas where I may be able to include tikanga Maaori, and how I might assess the unit, usually with some indicators or a rubric. 
If I was a class teacher, I'd probably add an evaluation too, just in case I want to have a go at the lessons again, so I'll want to know what went well, what didn't, etc.

I hope this helps with your own planning! As always, add a comment below, and check out our new facebook page (science happening NZ)!

Keep on sciencing
Paul

Does coffee cool down faster than tea?

Kia ora koutou
Today I was playing with a supposition that I've had for a wee while, so I carried out a wee experiment with Anne looking on (she was in the midst of trying to eat lunch!). As we chatted and I gathered data, we ended up realising this could be quite an interesting one to share, about the process of our thinking, etc.
I had always thought that when I made myself a cup of tea (regular tea with milk), it always stayed hotter than if I made myself a jarrah coffee that doesn't have milk). These were my noticings, my observations. So today, I set up an experiment with a mug of hot water (for the pre-mix coffee) and a mug of hot water with some milk in (representing the tea). Now, I didn't write this up using a scientific method, this was the exploration period or, as Anne called it, the play. In my PLD sessions with teachers, I often talk about the benefit of letting students do the same experiment twice. There may be a few differences but the first session is the chance for students to have an explore, ask questions, and develop some thinking whilst the second session will build on this and perhaps have a more scientific bent, for example, we better measure the amount of milk carefully or we need to record how many stirs of the spoon.

The initial experiment. The feijoa is just an innocent bystander in all this. 

I recorded the data, a little haphazardly, and then we talked about what I had found out, whether what we were thinking was happening and where to from here. I found that as I did the 'play', I was starting to think more carefully about measuring, about other ideas to try out and what to do with the data. I also found out that my prediction that the hot water and milk mix would cool down at a slower rate wasn't really being reflected in my initial data. As more people tried to eat lunch (with one very concerned that her coffee would end up being experimented on), they started posing questions and wonderings too -the main one being about the milk and it's fat content, with the fat possibly retaining the heat, and how could we check that? We were discussing why the data might be reflecting certain results. Noone used google, we were just chatting about what might be happening.

Version Two!

I tried the experiment again with actual tea and jarrah coffee (and yes, I'm not sure why I didn't start with that either!) and again measured the temperatures of the two liquids. I tried to make them the same way I normally would and that threw up questions -you stir the coffee a lot more than the tea and did you add the same amount of milk to the first cup?
At the end, we talked about the data I had gathered and critiqued some of the recordings. Had I made sure it was exactly every 30 seconds? No, but reasonably close (and is that good enough?). How will you show the data -bar graph or line graph? Bar graph but you could use a line graph as it is measuring time... (which I ended up doing as well!)

 Because I started thinking about this as a science experiment and an opportunity to get critiquing happening, I decided to leave it a little messy... Is the line graph clear enough? Does it need more information? Do children know how to read a line graph and summarise what they can see? Do they understand the function of all the parts of the graph -the table, axis, etc... and now we have maths happening!
Wrapping this all up, we discovered that our initial results seemed to suggest that tea was getting colder faster and that it was all in my head. You can see I'm using tentative language as we haven't tried all the variables -was it the amount of stirring, the type of milk, the coffee powder itself, etc. We needed to have this preliminary activity to start our thinking, to begin to consider the variables at play and develop more wonderings from this. I like the idea of sharing the data with students and perhaps the graph and getting them to critique what I had done -was it scientific enough? Does it matter about the anomalies? From here, I might choose to experiment with a bit more purpose and in a more scientific way, ensuring that the procedure could be replicated by others.
This science idea came from my own wonderings, which I'm hoping we all have... why does tea slop in the cup when I'm walking along or the suitcase wheel around madly when I'm rushing to the terminal at the airport...
What are your wonderings?

Have a great term break, and see some of you next term!

PS, I'm on Facebook... look for science happening NZ and you should find me... I hope! If not, sing out because it means I've done something wrong! 

Inferences vs Explanations... one point of view!

Kia ora
I hope you have all had a lovely short week and about to start the weekend, ready for the last week of the term! First, a correction from Anne... I wrote about 'phylus' as part of classification -and it should have been 'phylum' -it's good that I have science experts keeping an eye on me!
This week I've been let loose in classrooms and doing the good ol' soda water and raisins experiment. Feel free to email me if you'd like a copy (a comment here won't help as I might not know your email address!).

https://www.giftofcuriosity.com/states-matter-dancing-raisins-experiment/

As we were talking about the experiment afterwards, the teachers and I were discussing whether what the students were saying were explanations or not. At first glance they were: I'm noticing the raisins and there are lots of bubbles all over them and all the bubbles make the raisins go up and down... If we think about this from the science capabilities (head over to TKI to check them out!), then explanations come under the Using Evidence capability quite nicely... children use evidence to build an explanation, it's not just I notice this, I'm thinking this is why...
And this got me thinking... is the above example more of an inference? I know it is sort of an explanation but if I'm thinking about the science capabilities, the student has gathered data by noticing the raisins, the bubbles ,and the movement, and then interpreted the data by inferring that the bubbles are making the raisins float. I wonder if we teachers are often happy with this inference come explanation without realising that, for an actual explanation, we might need to go deeper.
I might need to scaffold with the students and use my wonderful questioning skills to help develop these explanations: How do we know it's the bubbles? Could it be because of the type of fizzy liquid? Could it be the temperature of the raisins or the liquid? Could it be the raisins? Or their sugar level? Would other objects go up and down? Of course, I'm not going to bombard the student with all of these questions, but I might get the whole class investigating different ideas.
At the end, we might have this as an explanation: I believe that because of the wrinkles on the raisins, they get more bubbles to form from the fizzy liquid and this causes the raisins to float up (yes it might be buoyancy but that's okay for now!). I checked different objects and smoother ones didn't float up and down as well as the raisins did even though they were the same weight. I also tried different liquids with raisins and they needed to have fizz in them so that the bubbles could form around the raisins. For me, I'm thinking that this is more of an explanation as it's the result of further investigation, gathering more data and information to build that thinking... I can prove this is happening because I tried out this and that... Now I wrote "at the end" but this may not be the case. With our older students, we might like to critique evidence, challenge each other's findings... how many different textured objects did you try? What liquids did you try that might have gas? Only fizzies, or vinegar and baking soda too? How many times did you try each experiment?

https://littlebinsforlittlehands.com/dancing-corn-thanksgiving-science-activity/dancing-corn-thanksgiving-science-fall-activity-for-kids/

Inferences or interpreting data are still really important. We can use student thinking to delve deeper, investigate further and to prove that what they are thinking might actually be the explanation. They might even use some prior knowledge too. It's what we do with all this that is important -are we happy to stop with an inference and call it an explanation, or do we want the students to pursue a little more?

Keep sciencing on!
Paul