Planning for this term...

As Term Three planning for science topics is upon us (and yes, I wrote Term Two and had to think, "Are we that far into the year?"!), I'm doing some planning with some schools whilst I'm also writing up some interviews around culturally responsive practice so all this is bubbling around together! I thought I'd share some notes that I hope can help you in your planning.
Why?
I want to start with this -we tend to say "We're doing 'energy' or 'the river'" but what does that mean? If science is about developing students' science capabilities, shouldn't this be at least part of the focus? And if we are about improving student achievement, we really need to know what students are able to do so we can plan for the 'where to next' bits!
Assessment is critical and I've been on a bit of a journey this year with another one of our Te Whai Toi Tangata (IPL) facilitators who's a whiz with formative assessment... We can't simply go on just doing science units without knowing where the students are at and what I'm aiming for! Imagine doing that in reading or maths... should we do it in science?
What capability would you like to focus on? What elements of that capability? Are there literacy or maths bits that could be a part of the unit? Can children help construct the success criteria?
In terms of resources out there, the NMSSA have put out some levelled capabilities resources that can help as can the Assessment Resource Bank activities. I also have levelled indicators for the science capabilities that I'm trialling which are a bit more complex.

NMSSA levelled Capabilities resource

The school!
The more I read about schools that seem to be doing amazing things for their students (and getting a reciprocal response from them), the more I see the need to connect to the culture of students as well as the culture of the school. What does the school value and how can this be shown in planning? Most schools have clever anagrams which show eg manaakitanga, respect, attitudes, etc -can these be developed in a science unit? Could there be group work where we can encourage school values? I wrote the word "developed" above because I don't believe that school values can just be told at children, we need deliberate acts of teaching.
What cultures are reflected in the classroom? We do need to ensure that there is a bicultural element so, for me, that's straight in there, but what about the other ethnicities in the class? I was looking at the food topic yesterday, and thought about using the Building Science Concepts resources "Making Bread" and "Preserving Food". I know one school I work with is predominantly Māori, so I thought about using rawena paraoa. I could then ask if there are whānau folk who could come in and help too. I might head off and look at what other cultures in the room use as bread and perhaps we could make those, or better still, ask families to make this food. Yes, it might mean providing some money for this to happen but we're now involving families in school, honouring cultures and engaging students!

The science capability Gather and Interpret Data comes into play now with the students observing, tasting, smelling and older students exploring the recipes: what's going on here? Some use yeast and others don't, why? How do the different ingredients 'work' together? 
If I'm looking at preserving food, I could explore ways that Māori preserved food, and we could explore other cultures' ways to do this. We could experiment ourselves as well as look at current methods and compare -a good chance to experiment! Do all foods preserve? 
The curriculum
Those of you who work with me know I'm mad on the front half of the NZC... Can you develop a Key Competency or Value with this science unit. Again, I'm talking about deliberate actions, not just Oh yeah, the kids are doing lots of thinking so I can tick off that KC! It's about working with the children to better develop that competency..
The NZC is all about the nature of science and we can know we're covering those AOs through focusing on the capabilities. The context strands, eg Living World, are just that -a context... they're just a vehicle for growing student understanding of science. That's not to say there isn't a place for science knowledge development too, there is! As long as it's alongside rather than instead of. 
Sometimes what we think is a science unit is instead a literacy unit researching a science theme. I try to differentiate the two by calling one 'science' and one 'science education'. It doesn't mean the first can't happen, for example, children reading about the moon landings and doing a small project, but unless there's clear capabilities work, it's not really science education. I know that children love reading about science and learning facts, so don't chuck those activities out! In fact, you might even want to think about how you could do something within the activities, perhaps explore how scientists work, how the information was gathered, critique diagrams, etc.   
The resources
I know I talk a bit about the Science Learning Hub, but it is a good place to start! If you're having trouble finding something, email them -they'd love to help. TKI also are a good place to start for capabilities teaching. I still think those arbs are a good resource too -quite a few times I've adapted an assessment task into a learning one! The Building Science Concepts resource, and Making Better Sense books are also good... just remember that those resources were all about knowledge and may need a bit of tweaking to match up with a student agency-type thinking, where the teacher doesn't need to be the font of all knowledge!

I think the community is also vital -they probably know better than Google or I about favourite dishes or how to grow plants in a particular way, what karakia to say, etc.

Anyway, I think that's enough! Have fun planning and do share your ideas with me, I'd love to hear what you're doing. 

Paul

The dreaded science fair... or is that really fair to say (see what I did there?!?!)

I was in a school yesterday and saw the beginnings of planning for science fair projects. We talked briefly about them –how it’s so much work, the ones that get parental help do better, and some children would rather do anything else!

Science is always messy! If it isn't, I'm not sure you're actually doing science!

It made me think about my own science lessons with students… why are they keen to investigate further? Why are they happy to share predictions, record data and posit explanations? I can’t help wondering if the issue is how prepared are children for science fairs? When I was chatting to a Year 9 science teacher (and this is a while ago now!), we talked about how ill-prepared some Year 8 students are coming into college science. I assumed they were referring to science knowledge but they weren’t! It was about the skills and concepts, about children knowing how to measure carefully, gather accurate data, understand variables and share findings in a form of writing that reflects scientific thinking. They felt that children may be doing science, for example, volcanoes or native birds but they don’t know about science. Studying native birds by looking up a bird on the internet or reading a book may not really develop the science capabilities.

The art of catching bubbles so they don't pop!

I was given the opportunity to work with a small country school supporting the children with their own science fair projects. We were already doing some capabilities PLD work so teachers knew what I was talking about but the students had lost interest in their own efforts. I spent a very nice couple of days talking to students, getting them to share their ideas and what they had done. I was struck by the thought that the children weren’t really sure what they were doing! By the end of our chats all were enthused and keen to continue. We had discussed how to investigate, what they were wanting to find out and how they would know if their hypothesis was right.

bubble snakes in action!

Doing a lot of one-off lessons may support students developing the capabilities. However, I know that doing a 2 to 3 lesson sequence, giving children the chance to investigate, hypothesize, collate data and generate explanations may be more motivational and effective. Today I was modelling in one school and I talked to one teacher about a good science lesson… could having a question to frame the lesson/ investigation engage students more? For example, “I wonder if a larger bubble blower will always create the best bubbles” … or challenging students (and we all know how boys enjoy competition!), for example, “who could create the best bubble blower and prove it?” This second one is a neat question because it’s ambiguous! Is “best” biggest? Or 3-dimensional? Or longest lasting? Do small bubbles last longer so are best?

This kind of science (and longer topics that engage students by them leading the inquiry and not being given a lesson to complete!) may prepare students for science fairs. Although a lot of us seem to be allergic to science fairs, I think that they can be a great assessment tool… my science capability indicators could be used for children to self-assess, teachers to conference assess or even for judgement criteria! If children know about science and understand how science itself works (NZC Science essence statement) then they could be more excited about carrying out investigations in science… like a scientist.

Oh, and by the way, juniors can do science fairs too! They're a great whole class activity!

Keep sciencing on! And have a fantastic, refreshing break!

Interpreting Rivers

I'm working with a school in the south of Taranaki where it is VERY cold! I do like being away from data and wi-fi and TV although I'm ready to head home for my creature comforts!!!

The school is doing a great job with involving scientists (the students are monitoring pH, clarity and river flow), DT experts (students are flying drones weekly to take photos of their local river) and the regional council. The mission is monitoring their local river that flows straight past their school. I'm really impressed with their efforts (and it is a lot of work for the school) and then the principal showed me these fantastic graphics their scientist had emailed them and I fell in love!

They're showing catchments of different rivers in the Taranaki region and just look spectacular. We were talking yesterday about how to use these images (I'm wondering if students could even work out what these images are showing!) and thought about older children modelling their river and valley with clay. The images also show the mountains, hills and obviously valleys -can children spot these?

Looking through these images, I have lots of questions! This one above which shows an interesting view of Taranaki -it does look like a flower! Does this also show lava flows? I also wonder how accurate the images are, especially the tiny branches -are they just a representation or accurate? Could children identify particular rivers? I'm working in a school along the green river lower right corner!

I know these images are a little blurry but I was really showing them more as an idea than 'use these!'. The focus here is the capability Interpreting Representations. If you click on the link, it'll take you to the TKI website where there's a lot of information and activities to support teachers learning about this capability. It's one I like as it links nicely into the Writing and Reading components of literacy so I can tick off a couple of boxes at once! It's an important skill to have, to read information shown in different ways as well as critique these representations.

From the TKI site, these are good focus questions to share with the children:

• What does this representation tell us?
• What is left out?
• How does this representation get the message across?
• Why is it presented in this particular way?

And here's my own thinking about what we could expect to see from students -I've also used Rose Hipkins' Coherent Pathways and the TKI site for ideas too. Remember, it's just my thinking, not a standardised assessment tool! I'm really not sure why it's blurry but it's sort of legible! The first column is Y1-3, second column Y4-6 and the last one is Y7-8.

Do have a play with students interpreting representations but also get them to make their own! What do they want to share? How well have they shared that information? Can others understand it?

Have a great rest of the week, keep on sciencing... and now in literacy time!

Paul

Assessing Diagrams

Playing with desk-bubbles... my own term, I think!

Almost the end of another term! I have had a lovely time this past week exploring junior concepts at Level 3 and 4, for example, floating and sinking, bubbles, etc. I really like the idea of this so we can ensure that at least some concepts can be extended and developed further. Of course there is space for topics to be introduced at a senior level only but children will have all the processes and skills in place to grab hold of brand new concepts! I had to share a lovely diagram one of the students created to show how a bubble snake is 'made'... it fits with today, as the topic is diagrams!

A junior student's diagram of how to form a bubble snake -nice labelling!

This week's post is a little different. I've written it all as a google slides presentation (click the link) as I could add photos and ideas a little easier. I'm also curious as to whether this is helpful as I'm hoping that schools could use these in a staff or team meeting, or at least some of the slides! I think we need to be discussing ideas like this to be able to collaborate and extend their thinking.

Anyway, do tell me if this is useful. This is the second slides document I've done -the first was on cicadas or kihikihi, and I'd love to hear if you have used it, or topics for another one, or even improvements! As always, if you do use it, please acknowledge the author... me!

Keep sciencing
Paul

So why we doing this?

I have chatted about this I think once or twice but it struck me again this week after reading a blog about the science capabilities. When people ask me what my job is, I usually joke that it's driving to beautiful parts of the country, invading a classroom, terrorising the teachers and hyping the kids! I know it's a bit more than this but sometimes I do wonder! 
Anyway, I was struck by the thought that actually PLD is about raising student achievement. For me, this starts with supporting teachers in looking at science education which can often be content driven and encouraging a more nature of science based curriculum. This means watching me teach science, exploring the science capabilities and thinking more deeply about the purpose of science... As you can see, it's really a focus on the teachers which I sort of hope feeds back to the students. 
The end result of the PLD is communicated back to the Ministry of Education by looking at whether there has been change in the staff in certain categories but also the students themselves. We could use the Science Thinking with Evidence assessment for this or teacher judgement and evaluations but the big thing I've been thinking about is do we think about raising student achievement in science?

a snail hatchling

Even more so, the PLD reports the school send in about student achievement are more focused on target groups, so now I can ask even more specifically do we think about raising student achievement in science for our target groups. When I was a teacher, I was all about ensuring that my lessons were suited to the different levels and sometimes the cultures of my classroom (depending on the topic... and yes, it would be different now!). I made sure that there were practical elements and that all would be able to complete the activity with extension bits for the quick finishers. If it had been reading or maths, then I had lots of assessment data, ideas for next steps and pathways mapped out but I don't recall doing this for science! In fact, I'm not even sure I had a 'target group' for science! I certainly was mad on assessment (it's one of my OCD bits) but it really wasn't for thinking ahead as it was all content based. 
The essence statement in the NZC says that science plays a significant role in society, so should this be steering our thinking a wee bit more? How significant is science? How 'good' should children be at science -and here I'm thinking about the nature of science rather than content although we do need good content to have good nature of science! How do we measure improvement? And importantly, how do we support our target groups to achieve in science (and at a growing rate)?

Seen in Whakatane and still one of my favourite fungus

To support students and to give quite effective feedback for the teacher and child, the arbs are a good stop. There are a lot of activities that will give a quick snapshot that has good quality information and is levelled. Another place is team meetings and staff meetings. What if everyone gathered some information and discussed it together? I really like the literacy and maths progressions and I use these when thinking about student efforts. Often, by putting work out on a table, teachers automatically start creating a science progression! From this, we can work out what we expect a particular year level to look like -you could even write up indicators. A good whole school activity can be observational drawings of candles in jars.

Although I know that assessment should not be the be-all end-all and we can get a bit too carried away with assessment, especially if it is Ministry-driven (!), I think it's an important conversation to have with other teachers. How do we really know that children are improving -and because of good teaching not children simply growing up!? 
Anyway, there's my thought for today.

Keep sciencing
Paul

Making Better Sense of Ancient Resources

I'm busy working with a lovely school in the Wairoa region and we're just starting our journey exploring the science capabilities. If your school is thinking of revisiting science as a PLD area, even if you're doing this internally without a lovely science facilitator, I really do recommend beginning with the TKI website and focusing on building understanding around these capabilities.
Anyway, the preplanned (and levelled!) lessons on the TKI science online website do use those older Ministry science resources but change the focus a little. I was busy scanning the recipes for the slimes and oozes lesson and was struck again by this gold sitting in our resource rooms!
The big issue is that balancing act between the thrust of the 90's curriculum's focus on children will learn stuff and our current curriculum's focus of children will explore how the natural physical world and science itself work. Both bits are important -we can't explore how to gather and interpret data, plan an investigation, and share results without students knowing more and more at each level of their science development. For children to know how the natural physical world 'works', they need to know some of that 'stuff'! I do worry that teachers may either go all out on knowing stuff or stay well away from asking any questions that may reflect whether students do know stuff!

Making Better Sense of the Material World

I've just taken a photo of the Assessment Outcomes for the lesson from the Making Better Sense lesson and wanted to show how these could reflect the science capabilities. There's a bit here that talks about listing physical properties --> this could fit very nicely into gather and interpret data with students working with the teacher to decide the success criteria -how do we list/find these properties? How many senses will we use? Another assessment outcome is about design, draw and label and that could reflect the interpret representations capability. Other outcomes here talk about investigating, describing and discovering which could also reflect a pedagogy about the nature of science.
With all the above examples, students will need some content knowledge as they develop ideas! I know that many teachers are focusing on the students need to know about magnets... but if I have that as my focus, I'm back to children learning stuff! Instead, I might think about assessing how students use their knowledge to develop the science capabilities. My teaching focus will be how diagrams are drawn or investigations are carried out. I might talk about repeated testing, recording results/data carefully, asking good questions to investigate, and how we share our results. If children understand how science works, then their results will be deeper as well as them knowing more 'stuff' which can often end up with more questions being asked!
The other side of this coin is that I will be using scientific vocabulary, science concepts and 'knowledge' to make sense of data. We can't throw out all the 'students learning stuff' but it does need to be within the context of actually we're all about children understanding how science works through rich science themes.
So, have another look at those old Building Science Concepts or Making Better Sense resources. Photocopy the assessment pages and then discuss how the capabilities could be more deliberately focused on along with what teachers may expect from students. Talk about the balance between the natural physical world and science itself explorations -what would happen if we only did 'knowledge'? What about if we only did 'science itself'? How could either of these questions impact the future for students (as that is the capabilities focus)?

Anyway, that's all for now! Keep sciencing.
Paul

Science Week

Kia ora koutou!
A really brief post today as I'm mad busy and about to rush off for a week down in Wairoa and Mahia. And once again Rocket Lab launches a rocket the week I'm down there and once again gets the day wrong... well played Rocket Lab, well played! The night launch last night certainly looked spectacular!

From stuff.co.nz

Anyway, next week is Science Week and the theme is "the Periodic Table". That's because of it being the 150th year of when the Periodic Table was created. It's a topic that I've really struggled to get excited about as students really come across this generally at Year 9 rather than at Primary School. I sort of have the same issues when I think about 'doing' stars or the Solar System... I'm just not sure how I can get the capabilities and nature of science into this...

That's my initial thinking but when I am challenged like this, I head straight back to the capabilities and the nature of science components to see how I could use the periodic table and there is a wee bit! For this blog I'm thinking more of the Year 7 and 8 students, although certainly year 5 and 6 children could have a play with these ideas. For juniors, some of the elements could be interesting to say -you know how they love big words (!), and the idea of all these elements making us up is quite fascinating to introduce at this level.

We don't tend to look at the science history aspect of the NOS strand, Understanding about Science, and this topic is a great one for this. Have a read up of Mendeleev and how he came up with the table. What did other scientists think? How did his work support others'? Because of the table, some scientists were able to find elements because of the spaces for elements that had not yet been found but Mendeleev was sure were there. This is a bit like finding the planet Neptune because the maths said it was there and when astronomers looked, it was!

Here at the IPL, the science team (Anne Barker, Stephen Ross and myself) have written blog posts and I've written a lesson for introducing the periodic table that you are most welcome to use. The link is: https://www.waikato.ac.nz/professionallearning/ and they'll be added this week. Other places to go is the Royal Society page and NZAPSE page. Of course, I have to add my colleagues up the hill here at the university, Science Learning Hub, who have collated ideas too!

If you're on my Facebook page (just search for science happening NZ), I'll post bits each day... hopefully!

Have a fantastic week! And next week too!

Keep sciencing on!