Whiz bang experiments and the power o the science capabilities

I can sometimes seem a bit dismissive of the good ol' whiz bang experiments like gobstoppers or the paper flower petals experiments as on paper (or on the internet!), they are 'do this, do this, you'll see this and this is why' type experiments.

However tweaking them can turn them into great opportunities for science capabilities development, asking rich questions, and getting students really thinking! I use them a lot for modelling as they are good for a one-off activity as well as having the scope to turn into a three or four day experiment if the teacher is willing -which sometimes they are, yay!

For example I got this email from science sparks (https://www.science-sparks.com/candy-chromatography/), which is very much a 'do this and see this' experiment website, however they have some great ideas to extend student thinking and this one is similar. Anyway, I had left the experiment for a freer day but was keen to see if it worked as I do the gobstoppers/M&M experiments quite regularly.

I set up the experiment as is written... And then put a couple of drops of water on each M&M. Lots to observe -you could see the outer coating had disappeared ("I notice") and I assumed that those colours were now in the drop of water on the op of the lolly ("I think", the inference).

I already had some filter paper which I cut up but I did wonder about the size of the pieces to cut so guesstimated. For our students, these are valid questions to ask: if it's a science experiment, should it be precise? I then sucked up the drops and encountered two problems! One, there wasn't enough water to suck and then put on the filter paper and secondly, I hadn't read the experiment this far and just assumed a drop was sufficient, as well as guessing the filter paper size! This is all great critiquing for children. I had already decided there wasn't enough water so added more to the M&Ms, left it a while and sucked up that coloured water. Because I wanted to see if there was a difference, I put these drops on the other end of a couple of the filter papers.

You can see some colour separation on this one.

 One worked! The brown lolly shows 2 maybe three colours. However, the others didn't work... or didn't seem to...
And here's the chance for a bit more science. Often, if things don't work out, we might give up! I always encourage teachers to try the experiment at home first just to make sure something is going to happen and as I write this, I'm thinking, why not let it not work? Why not get the kids doing what I was thinking to do?
You see, science is about the processes, the questions, the wonderings and those 'aha' moments, much more than about 'answers'. Although actually reading the whole page would have let me realise I needed more water, it was one of my own wonderings. I thought about setting up each lolly in its own cup and then using more water, but then I worried about how much, which could be an experiment in itself -how much water will give us the most concentrated dye? I also realised (when I actually read the blimmin' experiment!) that they hung their filter papers up -I didn't! I am wondering whether this was my issue, so now I might try some lying down and some hanging on paperclips on a pencil or something. Finally I noticed they used peanut M&Ms (my favourite just in case you're thinking about my Christmas pressie!) whilst I used chocolate ones -does that make a difference? Oh, and if I didn't have filter paper, I might try tissue or thin paper.
Yes, if I gave out this experiment to a class, I'm certain there would be some groups who would do it correctly as well as others who may be just like me! But all of the results are data! What have we found out with all our different experiments? We've also learnt the need to carry out the experiment as is writ -a great literacy lesson! I must admit I quite like the idea of just handing out only a written version vaguely worded and then using the results to think about where to next, how well the experiment was written, and whether children can identify the features of what a good science experiment might look like. I know I talk a bit about literacy but giving children the opportunities to read well planned out experiments as well as poorly written ones is ideal, as is letting children read science articles, looking for how the experiment was carried out in a scientific way and applying this to their own experiments.
Critiquing evidence is a capability more suited towards our older students. It can focus on the evidence gathered and how the evidence was gathered. I've had lots of fun using this capability with Year 7-8 children and I always encourage students to critique one another only with questions rather than statements or accusations! The first few times, they may need scaffolding and I'm happy to ask questions:

• Did you measure carefully?
• You used the word 'about' and also said 'some'... what do you mean?
• How many times did you do the experiment?
• How did you make sure there was the right amount of liquid on each lolly?
• Are you sure that's why your data looks like that?

Usually students get this very quickly. I use it as an interuption very early on in the investigations. I get all the students back in and 'pick on' 1 or 2 groups that I've observed. Others get wriggly when they realise theirs is no different and when I ask, who needs to get back, they all rush off!

So how would I put this into Digital Technology? Obviously photos or videos could be used and shared but I like the idea of children asking questions of other groups' results. I might use google docs instead so there's space for others' comments. I also use docs when children plan their experiment. I'll ask them to have a look at what others are doing -although maybe one group doing the same would be good, think about a different question you could investigate ("I wonder"). We also put data and photos here. I like the idea of brainstorming so might use padlets for children to post why they think the experiment didn't work or pose questions to investigate (this last one is good because it can stimulate others with their questions). They could also write up their experiment on Book Creator with more expected from older students and this is a good point: do students know how to write up an experiment, or write a mini report? I love it when it's the children wanting to share their findings rather than me endorsing the fact that the number one reason students don't like science is because of the writing!

Might we still want the explanation bit? Yes! Sometimes I might leave it on the experiment and then ask children to prove the explanation is right (if we're able to). Other times we might discuss it as part of the wrap up. Unless the experiment's part of a series where we're developing our understanding of a particular context strand, I might get the discussing the 'why' aspect and then share. Personally, I hate doing this but I also understand children want to know, just like I do! Sometimes I'd like to give the children more of a chance for them to figure out why with more experiments but other times, I know this is it!
Anyway, give it a try with your class!
Keep sciencing on... almost the end of the year! Those of you who applied for DT or science PLD (thanky thank you thank you!), these details should be out soon -and I did hear that more hours were available for schools than what we were originally told -good news! If you do want PLD, apply in June as Term 2 applications have been cancelled.

thanks for reading, and your comments are always welcome!

Questioning... Who? What? Why? When?

Kia ora koutou! Halfway or so through the term and I imagine many of you are busy with school reports, camps and production practice! I've come across a few schools that are already swimming, and some of these are in outdoors pools! There are some tough kids out there!

I get asked to model science in many classes to support teachers with seeing what science lessons could look like. It's really difficult walking into a random class with not much idea of what science has been happening or where the children are in terms of their science thinking and understanding and then expected to run a quality 45 minute lesson! Students get really excited when I do turn up in a classroom and I'm always a bit intrigued with this. In fact, when we used to record student voice as part of the PLD (seems to be less wanted these days), most children would say the two lessons with me were the highlight -even if it was looking at shells or rocks or investigating sugar cubes. It used to embarrass me a little when sharing the data back to staff and leaders but it seems to be expected -apparently, I'm a mad man with a box (to quote one of my favourite TV shows, Doctor Who) that gets the class engaged and enthusiastic!

This isn't a 'Isn't Paul an amazing person' blog -I'll leave that for you all to write! Rather, after the lesson and during the teacher discussions, the topic of how I question comes up. I've had teachers recording this component of my lessons and I'm sometimes at a loss to explain what I do. I really don't think I do anything in particular. I just listen to the student and then challenge with a question based on what they've said. I try hard to let them say all that they want to say (which can sometimes be really hard!) and then ask them a question or two from what they've said. I try not to have preconceived questions set up and I also try really hard to not ask a question that I can guess what the student will say. Sometimes I will if I'm leading somewhere with the conversation but I really want the student to own the conversation too!

Here's the PDF link (although the new version is a
little more boring! And the reader is here!

A few places that I've gone to over the years has also been of benefit. Google "nine talk moves" and you'll come across a PDF with the questions on as well as a PDF called Talk Science Primer. Both have been invaluable! The talk moves move through a progression and the Primer unpacks these. As I write this, I'm thinking that it would be worth a read again for me! It's a good read and not too technical. My dream is working in a classroom where the fourth goal is happening: students thinking with others. If this floats your boat, there are videos and PLD on the TERC website to support the talk moves. As I'm reading through the talk moves right now, I'm aware that they have really impacted my questioning skills! 

I know I go on a bit about the TKI website but my first stop was recording the questions the website suggests asking with each capability. My colleague, Anne Barker, wrote these all up onto one side of an A4 piece of paper and I always suggest teachers laminate them. I worked on turning them into questions that would be suitable for juniors. Of course, you are very welcome to a copy, just ask!

From the TKI website... and yes, that's my own colouring in!

One of the other big keys is I don't ask every child. I don't even try. Part of it is that I want to model good questioning so try to focus on a couple of children so that teachers can observe me without chasing me around the room. When I've had more freedom (for example, the teacher isn't watching me or has headed out the door to do something else which does happen!), I tend to ask a group of 3 or 4 students the questions and pose to individuals to attempt to get them working together and learning off of one another. I'll also grab individuals too but again, I don't try to work with every child -it'd be crazy! I think I've talked about this before... Pick one group per science lesson (or two if you're extra keen) and ensure that everyone knows that whilst you're working with those two groups, try to not disturb the teacher! In between you could wander around and talk to other children.

If I think back to when I was a shiny new facilitator, Ally Bull, who did work with the NZCER and helped write the science capabilities, was someone I looked up to in terms of her own questioning techniques, usually during hui and usually directed at me! Well, that's what it felt like! She now works for a different crowd and wrote a blogpost about the capabilities that's a great read. She challenges the reader that the questions you ask show what's valued. Is it about recall? Is it about deeper thinking? Is it about behaviour (I'm asking a question to prove you weren't listening...)? 

I've pinched a whole paragraph to talk about the other side... the answers:

It’s also important to be aware of what behaviours you are noticing and providing feedback on. Is your feedback to students focused on when they get an answer correct or is it when they generate new questions, question other students’ ideas, or change their minds when new evidence comes to light? Do you use, and encourage students to use, tentative language such as might, could be, perhaps, likely? Openness, suspending judgment and accepting science’s provisional nature are all at the heart of scientific inquiry and if you are using this sort of language you are modelling an aspect of what it means to engage with science.

I know that a tentative question generates a lot more guesses, informed guesses and an effort to contribute... except for the NE/Y1 classes where I find direct questions work best.It also works best when I'm talking with teachers too, which is the point -we all feel better when it's not a recall question!

Oh, almost forgot... well actually I did and had to go back! My ultimate goal is that children are doing all this stuff! Not me! I use question dice with students to support them to ask both themselves and each other good questions. And sometimes I just write the words up in two columns and challenge them to come up with questions! One has the typical 'who', 'what', 'why', etc and the other has some verbs. My version is a bit tacky but does the trick!

Anyway, have a read through those resources, ask if you'd like a copy of the capabilities questions and get out there! I reckon that practising and improving questioning will pay off in every curriculum area. 

Keep sciencing,
Paul

A bit on assessment...

Last week, I was working in a couple of classrooms with some crazy science lessons... who says children shouldn't eat sugar!?! As I chatted with the teacher after the lesson, we talked about expectations of student work.

Although there's not a lot out there in terms of supporting teachers to assess from an official point of view -after all, the curriculum has basically one set of objectives for four years (Levels 1 and 2, Levels 3 and 4), there are places you can go for support. I've shared before about the NMSSA resource that seem popular -you can find it on the TKI science capabilities page. There are a few commercial products out there too. At one stage, I was using the Real Science resources as one of those has some good examples that teachers could use (as well as experiments). And of course, I have my capabilities indicators that I share with schools that I work with. Lately, I've been working on some ideas for leveling the indicators based on the capabilities which the Coherent Pathways also have. Their PDF is an interesting read, although I do struggle with how we would put this into the curriculum alongside Key Competencies, Values, ELAs, etc! I like them but...!

If I was putting on my stern voice, I would point out that every essential learning area needs to have some form of assessment or evaluation. If we're teaching so that students can learn, how do we know they have? Our education system has some great resources regarding literacy and mathematics support. We have the progressions as well as reading and writing assessment tools. Teachers are very aware of where children are at, what they are capable of doing, as well as where to next. What if we thought about some of our topic areas in the same way? I don't think I would ever go as far as the depth of maths, reading and writing, but should we have some assessment system in place?

If we don't assess in science, why are we teaching it? I know we could say that the children enjoy it, but is that enough? They also enjoy lunchtime and playing outside (well some of them!)! If I'm doing an experiment with the students, why? Is it just an activity trap -children are doing activities but there's no real learning sought? If we're looking at shadows with the five year olds, why? What do we want them to learn or understand? What do they know already and what do I want to develop further? And if I'm only going to explore shadows for a couple of days, will they have learnt anything?

As I'm writing this, I'm feeling this is all a bit loud-sounding and perhaps judgemental. It's not meant to be, more, wanting to encourage teachers to start to think a little deeper about science. Yeah, we could continue to have fun experiments, or grab a House of Science kit, but are we certain that these sessions are valuable? Have students developed further their understanding of the Nature of Science or the science capabilities? Have they a greater understanding of a context strand?

As the end of the year draws near, and report writing is upon us, I sometimes wonder how science progress is shared with parents. Is it part of the 'topic' paragraph or does it have its own place? Are comments based on knowledge: Paul knows the names of the planets or is it based on the capabilities or nature of science: Paul asks questions that he can investigate. He is learning to plan an experiment and carry it out carefully, sharing the results with others? It's an interesting point to muse, and I am aware how busy teachers are already -but surely there are clever ways of working on this! For example, yesterday I was doing some Digital Technology scratch coding with a class of year 5 and 6 students. They wrote up a three levelled rubric with me and then wrote their names where they thought they might be. And on top of that, had a lovely discussion about which level 'making a game' should be -lovely jubbly! At the end of the lesson, they all shared what they had done in the lesson and what they learnt -without needing to write it was fun!

As always, I'm interested in your ideas too! By the way, I have written on this topic before in the blog -if you'd like to read a bit more, have a look or ask me!
Keep sciencing, 
Paul