Great model application

Kind of a review of what I tried this morning that seems to have worked.

We started by reviewing the models that we have covered so far in the class. I asked what we have learned about motion so far and what models we have derived. The students began by listing some of the big ideas that came out of the models we have derived and so I steered them away from ideas involved in creating the models to labeling the model. We determined the first to be about constant velocity and so named it that. (I probably should have done that particular step in formalizing the model with a name earlier, but now I know that when we finish with a new model, we need to formalize it with a name.) We then noted the equations the we developed and the graphs we used to develop that math model. Then we did the same with the Constant Acceleration model, listing its equations and graphs as well.

We are moving into projectile motion so I gave a quick demo throwing a ball back and forth with a student. I then asked the class to discuss what restrictions we placed on previous models. I did not ask them to compare the previous models to the demo, but the first statement was about the fact that our previous models have all been 1D motion. There were a few other great observations relating graphs and our observations being "ideal" which I did not address immediately, but will return to when time permits. Then we moved on to Video analysis of projectile motion because the Sonic rangers would not take into account the second dimension.

During the discussion of the results in the lab, the students determined that the horizontal velocity was constant and the vertical acceleration was constant and "g". So I asked them incredulously if we could separate the vertical motion from the horizontal motion and there was a resounding "well I think so?" So I asked them what their graphs told them about the motion in either direction. They went back to their data and were more confident that this separation could happen. So they decided that we could apply both of our models to this new motion.

Let them do it!

You just have to step back and get out of the way sometimes. It seems that students who are driven to learn will do all of the work if their teachers just get out of the way! I simply had to show my AP class a phenomenon today and told them to explore it and they went of to figure things out. All I did was to come around and ask a few questions about why they were doing things and what they were finding. They were still worried about being wrong when I was asking them questions but much less so when I simply told them to explore. Some of the students wanted to know what they were supposed to be measuring so I simply returned the ball to their court by asking what they could measure.

The most important part of the lab was the discussion afterwards. This is where I slipped a bit. I questioned them and had them talking to me and answering my questions. I have since thought "What about I ask what questions they have about the experiment? Then they can group a few groups together and discuss what they found with each other and ask each other questions. Maybe put a few questions on the board and have them discuss them." I should do this before taking down the lab equipment so that they can see and demonstrate what they were questioning. Then come back together as a class to pull it all together.

I am seriously thinking of running my next new topic in this manner. It seems that they are then allowed to fail and question themselves but with the support needed to bring everything together. They want to learn, I just have to learn to get out of their way.

Edit: I just spoke with a colleague and he started his class getting out of the way. So far, in fact, he left the classroom while I stay to observer the girls in action. It was a genetics class so I could not possibly interfere or answer any questions and the students took over and started asking each other questions and hashing out any misunderstanding from the webcast the previous evening. When they ran out of questions to ask each other, he came back in to make any adjustments and things started going back to teacher led discussion. Still a lot of discussion but more focused on the expert in the room. Perhaps the nature of Genetics?

What I learned today.

This post is inspired by edu180nyc.org as tweeted by Frank Noschese. Their's is a website devoted to simple things learned during the day. The people who post are teachers, students,and as evidenced by the latest post, hipsters and apply to be able to post. It is a good practice to get into, I think, to go back over your day and find something that you learned. I am actually thinking of using it in my class a bit, but that is for another day.

Today, I learned, or rather relearned, to let things go and not over think them. During my first period class, I felt I was working very hard at helping my students to reach a solution. I felt I was working too hard. That rubbed off on them and they then over thought the whole situation and couldn't come up with basic answers that I know they had. It began to degrade quickly and in the end we never got to the point I wanted them to see.

By my third class of the day, I had made some changes. We were looking at a graph and had to switch between them to make sense of things. I started asking what the original graph looked like and then proceeded through. After the second graph with no end in sight, I simply told them we would have to look somewhere else for the answer to our problem. So we moved on to the third graph because the first two didn't suit our purposes. The third graph did the trick and they actually connected it to the first two. I finished with time to spare and so we went on to other things.

Therefore, I learned that if I simply let things lie and move forward as if we had made a mistake, then things will work out. And maybe it is not such a bad idea if they stray down the wrong path once in a while.

Good teaching day

Today, in class, I realized that I was not being a good teacher. I would ask a question and then scan the class looking for an answer. I drew a Voltage vs. current graph on the board for a ohmic resistor and asked the class to describe the graph. It was a simple question about a linear graph. As my class is a semicircle, I could then scan the faces of all of the students looking for a glimmer of hope. I heard nothing from even the more active students. I realized that by scanning the room, I was challenging them and they are not going to rise to the challenge if they think they are wrong. The trials of teaching 9th graders.

I turned away. I looked back at the board and erased some errant marks and moved out of the power position in the front of the room and futzed with some stuff at my computer. Still nothing.

I then turned to the class and suggested that they talk to their neighbor. Their partner. Now they are invested as a partner and not left out alone. When they answer, they are not alone in their position. After about 2 minutes, they all had something to say about the graph. We then placed the group understanding of the graphical qualities above the "right" answer.

It also hit me that those 2 minutes I "gave up" for partner discussion saved me 10 minutes of trying to ask the right questions to get a sense of their understanding. I hope this makes the class more about what they know and understand than what they can get right.

Now the bad thing I did.

I made a terrible mistake that may have unraveled the work we did to come together. We were discussing qualitative velocity time graphs and discussing the idealized graphs versus real world graphs. The idealized graphs change velocities instantaneously whereas real world graphs don't make those types of jumps. After some discussion on this, I made my fatal mistake. I said "I am not looking for... "

All of that work we did to make it about them was undone in a single sentence where I just turned it right back around and made it about me! What was I thinking? I can tell you I wasn't. Now it is all about how I will be grading them instead of what they understand. I hope this doesn't do irreparable harm to the culture that we are building in the classroom.

My glimmer of hope.

So with about 15 minutes left in class I started our next lab. On the previous lab, I showed a rolling cart and we went through a couple of steps to determine the variables we were going to test and arrive at a purpose statement. So this time I set up a ramp and started the cart at the high end and let it roll down. I let them know what area we were interested in observing and everyone took out their lab notebooks and started jotting down observations. Once I noticed this was happening organically, I let it happen and rolled the cart down the slope a few more times to give them time to observe.

Since they were already observing the motion, I decided to let them go through the next few steps with their partner as well and come up with some sort of purpose. I had expected to lead them through the procedure once or twice more but they seemed to get it so, let it happen. I then wrote on the smartboard, "variable pairs", a term I had never used before, and then looked at the class. There were a couple of people done so I asked what their variable pair was and they decided that they would like to do what we did in the last lab and relate position and time. YES!! GOT IT IN ONE!!! I didn't let my elation show and went to the rest of the groups and we ended up listing about 6 or 7 variable pairs. I then asked which one would be the easiest in their opinion. They voted on position and time! Again I did the little internal happy dance and we made a statement of purpose.

Purpose: To determine the relationship between Position and time. (of a cart rolling down an incline.)

The initial purpose stopped at time. I then asked if there was anything else they wanted to say and someone then volunteered the part in parentheses which we then added to our purpose. Another little happy dance.

We then talked about procedure. They suggested video analysis and sonic rangers. As soon as sonic rangers came up, there was some discussion about not having a wall to bounce the sound against. Several solutions were suggested and I kept my mouth shut. Then the bell rang and no one moved. I had to tell them to go but we would pick up here and complete the lab next class.

I had a good day teaching.