A Teaching Focus Area - Coursework Example

Part The Lesson: Magnetism Science is an important part of human life. It offers a body of knowledge that provides explanations for a variety ofphenomena to help people understand the world they live in. “An understanding of science and its social and cultural contexts provides a basis for future choices and ethical decisions about local and global applications and implications of science” Board of Studies NSW, 2003, p. 8). In studying science, students develop various skills such as hypothesizing, investigating, predicting, analysis, and critical and creative thinking in problem-solving processes. They get to work individually or in groups to plan, conduct investigations and experiments, evaluate issues and problems and come up with questions for inquiry and investigation to draw evidence-based conclusions. They are also expected to communicate their findings to others and disseminate the information they have gathered in a scientific manner. The specific topic of study from the Key Learning Area of Science observed for this assignment is magnetism. It discusses the following concepts: What are magnets What are the properties of magnets What are attraction and repulsion? What are magnetic poles Observations were done in a Year 8 science class. There were 22 students in the classroom sitting in rows of two. Four children shared a table. The class was studying a unit on Magnetism and the class session observed is a continuation of discussions on the topic from the day before. The lesson objectives of the teacher included investigation of the strength of a magnet by counting the number of paperclips it can hold; recording data in bar graphs and in the students’ science journal; and opportunities for the students to observe, predict and conclude. The learning strategies she used were pairing off students to think and share their ideas to each other (think-pair-share), actual manipulation and exploration of materials, using of the word wall to remember new words for new concepts, and class discussions spurred by her effective use of questioning. The teacher began the class by asking children to share with their seatmate what they knew about magnets. As pairs began their conversations, the teacher walks around the room to supervise and listen in on what the children are talking about. Once in a while, she would probe the children’s discussions with questions like “What is magnetism?”, “Where is it found?”, “How do you know?”, “Do you have something to say about the magnets?” These questions give the teacher ideas about what the children already know about the topic. She probes them by asking questions such as: “Why do you think...?”, “Tell me about that.”, “How do you know?” Once in a while, she refers the children to the word wall where new words related to magnetism are written. It helps the children to use the language of science. When the teacher hears terms used that are not scientific, she would ask the children to think of another word for it and guides them to use the proper scientific word. For example, Student: Magnets are strong enough to… stick to… kind of…? Teacher: What’s another word for stick? Student: Attract? After the paired discussions, the teacher asks the children to share with the whole class what they know about magnets. As a whole group, teacher helps clear misconceptions some children hold about magnetism. She also uses the correct terms to model to the students: Student: I know the bar magnet.. if you put S and S together, they won’t stick. Teacher: So, if you put a south and a south together with the bar magnets, will it… show me.. Will it attract (points two thumbs together) or repel (points thumbs to opposite directions)? Students: repel! (points thumbs to opposite directions) Teacher: What will attract? Student: S and N Teacher: So the south and north poles will attract. Next, the teacher distributes some magnets for pairs to discover and explore that magnets have different sizes, shapes and strength. She instructs them: “I would like for you to look at each of the four magnets and tell me what’s different about them.” Again, as pairs work together, the teacher moves around the room. One time, she overheard some children discuss some misconceptions about magnets: Student: They’re kind of similar because they don’t have.. they don’t have any letters on them. Teacher: Well they don’t have any letters? What letters are you referring to? Student: It doesn’t have N or S. Teacher: And the S means the poles. Do you mean these… so you don’t think these have poles? Student: No. Teacher: You don’t think they have poles? Student: No. Teacher: Do magnets have poles? Student: Yeah. Some of them have. The teacher does not immediately correct the misconception and gives the children opportunity to discover by themselves. In the following activities, she uses questions to make children think more about the concepts….”How do we test that? What do we do? Have you tried it with others? What happened with those? What else? Anyone came up with another answer? How did you get that answer?” Eventually, upon more reflection and reviewing the data they have recorded in their journals and graphs, the children learned more about magnets and were able to correct misconceptions. Focus area observed for this assignment is the teacher’s use of questioning. “Questions serve many purposes, including assessing what students already know, setting the stage for a new lesson by piquing students’ curiosity, determining what factual information students have absorbed, and stimulating higher-order thinking so students can apply what they’ve learned to new situations” (Shalaway, 1998, p. 118). Questions need to be worded well, and with a non-threatening tone of voice so students are not intimidated to think freely. Bloom’s taxonomy is a model that features six levels of thinking, from the lowest one which is knowledge to the highest level which is evaluation. The first level, is the possession of knowledge characterized by rote memory. Thinking is stimulated by the questions what and where. The second level is comprehension which shows understanding of things. Tasks may be asked of students to show how they understood the lesson or story. The next level is application. This enables students to apply the principles, concepts or generalizations they have learned to life situations. The fourth level is analysis. Students get to see relationships among the parts of certain concepts logically. Next level is synthesis where students get to combine ideas, concepts or information into new patterns or structures. In the highest level, evaluation, students make judgments using set standards (Shalaway, 1998). Effective questioning helps students engage in different levels of thinking and ideally, they reach the highest order of thinking. Merely lecturing or asking students to recite facts is not enough to stimulate them into deep thinking. The teacher observed engages her students in higher order thinking with simple but effective questions or comments and encourages their participation in the discussions. Sometimes, she is able to redirect students’ investigations through her questions. She allows them to make their own discoveries rather than giving them the answers outright. It helps that she is sensitive to her student’s flow of thought so she is able to intervene when they are going the wrong direction. When students are given rein on their investigations and come up with successful findings, they derive fulfillment from the task and learning becomes motivating. The risk of using questioning and encouraging children’s ideas is deviating from a planned lesson by the teacher. This is acceptable and understandable if the teacher values her student’s ideas and is ready to adjust to their level of investigation while scaffolding their learning with guiding questions. Part B: Evaluation a) Teaching Practice From the observations, the teacher has demonstrated her effectiveness in drawing out the children not only in terms of thinking about the questions she threw them but also in communication and class participation. Her strategy of “think-pair-share” helps children especially the shy ones, feel safe in sharing their ideas to another child instead of being put on the spot in front of the whole class. She also uses this opportunity to walk around the classroom to give more personal attention to the children as she listens in on their discussions and sometimes inject her own inputs. When it is time for whole class discussion, the children are just eager with the ideas they armed themselves during the paired discussions. It takes a special teacher to be able to draw children out of their shells and give them opportunities to construct their own learning through exploration and discovery. The children are provided with the necessary tools to use in honing their critical thinking skills in pursuing knowledge, with the able supervision of a sensitive and efficient teacher. It is also humbling as a teacher to make children aware that she does not know all the answers to questions and is likewise a learner like them. It models a value to the children even adults continue to learn even if they are no longer students. b) Implications For Student Learning The theories of Piaget and Vygotsky have great implications in student learning. “Piaget believed that children create knowledge through interactions with the environment. Children are not passive receivers of knowledge; rather, they actively work at organizing their experience into more and more complex mental structures.” (Brewer, 2001, p.6). He insists that children need to use all their cognitive functions. These theories were designed to form minds which can be critical, can verify, and not accept everything they are offered. Such beliefs reflect his respect for children’s thinking. Vygotsky (1978) believed that children’s intellectual development is influenced more by social context than by individual experiences. His theory places a great deal of emphasis on effective social interaction. Interactions are likely to go through a process called intersubjectivity. This is when two people are engaged in a task and begin from different understandings but with interaction, comes to an agreed, shared understanding. This is usually manifested when children initially debate opposite arguments but upon more understanding of the concept because of listening to each other’s opinions, will both end up seeing the concept in one direction. This was evident in the “think-pair-share” activity. Students are motivated by questions. However, the questions must be phrased in such a way that it makes them think. If a teacher knows the art of questioning, she sets the minds of the children free to explore ideas and possibilities. She challenges them to go beyond known facts that are easily regurgitated. Children’s attention and interest are sustained by a series of thoughtful questioning. If a teacher’s questions only brings out lower level thinking, or worse, gives away the answers, then the children get easily bored. Students learn better with active engagement in the task. The observed class was always kept stimulated with the well planned activities – paired discussions, manipulation of materials, recording data, graphing and reporting their findings. Being able to accomplish challenging tasks gives them a sense of purpose and heightened self esteem. c) Learning Derived from the Observations Observing the class in action has provided much learning to the observers. For one thing, the idea of “think-pair-share” is a strategy we can employ in our classrooms not only to make children more comfortable sharing their ideas but also as a strategy for classroom management. When students are in paired discussions, they become engrossed in their sharing and with their partners. When children are busy, they do not fall into misbehaviour that idle times usually invite. Also, it builds up confidence in the children before they are called to share in front of the whole class. I also learned that children should not be underestimated in terms of their quest for knowledge. Constructivism premises on the belief that learners “construct” their own learning, and in effect, have better retention of it. “In the Constructivist theory the emphasis is placed on the learner or the student rather than the teacher or the instructor.  It is the learner who interacts with objects and events and thereby gains an understanding of the features held by such objects or events.  The learner, therefore, constructs his/her own conceptualizations and solutions to problems.  Learner autonomy and initiative is accepted and encouraged.” (Van Ryneveld, n.d.). They are capable of deriving their own conclusions from their investigations if only they are given the chance. Should their conclusions be erratic, then it only adds to their learning – because they learn that they did something wrong and will find ways to amend the mistake. References Board of Studies NSW (2003) Science (Years 7-10) Syllabus. Crown. Brewer, J.A. (2001) Introduction to Early Childhood Education. Boston: Allyn and Bacon Shalaway, L. (1998) Learning to Teach. Scholastic Professional Books. Van Ryneveld, L., (n.d.) What is constructivism?, Retrieved on March 30, 2009 from http://hagar.up.ac.za/catts/learner/lindavr/lindapg1.htm Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Read More