Teamwork Is Dreamwork/ Doing What Scientists Do

 It’s often hard to realize that you’re making progress. Especially when there’s so much left that you want to accomplish. As a teacher, you become painfully aware of what skills and knowledge your students lack, and it’s frustrating to not be able to help them improve. However, when I think back to the first couple weeks of teaching here, I don’t think I would have imagined that my students could do what they’re doing now. First of all, I didn’t think that we would ever be able to understand each other’s accents, so I have to be thankful that we finally did. But I think I realized that I was making progress when I was proud of my lesson plans, when a CT came up to me and said, “You’ve really made a change in the pupils. They are thinking…”, and when my students began observing things I didn’t notice and asking questions to which I didn’t know the answer!

Teamwork is Dreamwork

Group assessment of vertebrates

It all began with my wrap-up of vertebrates. Of course we had been doing fun things before, but this was the first lesson that I was really proud of. So I had them sit in 6 groups, and at this point, they’d become used to that, because it’s convenient to turn the desks in that arrangement, given how the desks are made. At each “station” was  a different class of vertebrates: birds, mammals, fish, reptiles, and amphibians, and at one station was “compare/contrast.” The groups had 10 minutes at each station to answer 3 questions about each group; questions were usually complex, like “how does an embryo breathe inside the egg?” or “what are two characteristics of chameleons that make them different from other lizards?” At the mammal station, I had them put pieces of paper with different species (goat, chimpanzee) into the correct ziplock bag, each of which had the name of a placental mammal group (ungulates, primates). This activity worked so well because the students were up and moving every ten minutes, which kept them engaged. They had to answer different kinds of questions, which drew on the different strengths of group members. I also had students change the “writer” each time they rotated, so each student had a chance to write. I found that this spread the “talking time,” too. The test did not go perfectly, because they did not get everything right, but what happened was that I saw very clear gaps in understanding. There were about 3 questions that every group got wrong. This showed me that the teaching of these concepts was not successful, and I needed to teach them again.

Waiting for the picture to be over so they can move to the next station haha

 

#3 for the mammal station- placental mammal groups

In English, I began using a different format for debates because I found that about 15 kids were dominating the conversations (it’s impressive to have 15 kids involved in a debate, but with a class of 34, it’s not good). I divided the room in two, and then in each made 2 groups, intentionally mixing quiet students with louder ones and carefully accounting for different personalities. We called it “Inside/Outside” because on the left side of the room, I would have one group face each other at two tables pushed together, while a group on the outside circled around them and watched, and then the same on the right side of the room. So about 8 students would debate a topic while the outside group watched (it’s usually best to give them some sort of task to accomplish by listening). We would then switch, but only after every person talked at least once (or twice, increasing their participation each time the exercise was carried out). I found that this got everyone talking and really increased the level of conversation, but only if the students found the topic really engaging.

I also found that with debates, it’s best to start with specific situations and then work your way to the more general. For example, if you ask students “is stealing wrong?” some students will be engaged and others will not be. Some students will naturally bring examples of different situations into their arguments, but others will not. Most will make confusing and meandering arguments. But if you give them a specific situation, particularly one that they can relate to, the debate becomes much more animated and advanced. To explore stealing, I asked them about a few different situations: a man stealing out of revenge for his goat being stolen, a mother stealing medicine for her dying child… these situations are actually seen in Lawerence Kohlberg’s work and are highly debated by adults, but they’re adapted to students’ thinking capacities and experiences.

I eventually was able to get to debating the death penalty. I was so glad to get there, because I had noticed many troubling remarks from students about killing wrongdoers. They’re entitled to their opinions, but I found many contradictions and flaws in their logic, so I wanted to hash those out. I don’t believe that teachers indoctrinate students or push their own beliefs as unquestionably right, but I think they should encourage moral development, because even though there are no right answers in life, there are more advanced arguments and levels of thinking. Anyways, I adapted a lesson that one of my professors in education used on my own class. It was a character-driven seminar, which means that students adapt a certain character and must argue from their perspective. This gives them practice in stepping in others’ shoes as well as forming arguments. So I divided the kids into 8 groups and had them read their character description and summarize what they believe. They then went around and “interviewed” other characters and asked them what they believed about the death penalty and why, and put the information in chart. Next, they returned to their groups and formulated questions for the people who disagreed with them. Finally, we held the debate and I divided the room based on “yes/no” and had students sit with their groups. I also gave only 3 “talking tickets” per person, so that the “big talkers” would run out of tickets and others would have to speak.

 

Interviewing each other

A notebook after 2 interviews

In all these examples, students worked wonderfully together. I can’t claim that as entirely my design; much of their teamwork can be attributed to the fact that they have known each other for years and their school has an excellent sense of community. But I exploited this fact and students were able to teach and learn from each other, which is especially important when the teacher, as one person, is unable to reach 34 students. Most importantly, though, I wasn’t standing up at front, lecturing at them, only getting participation from a few, and risking misunderstanding. I only circulated while kids were enacting the activities, helping individuals or groups understand.

Doing what scientists do

But I think the best lessons so far happened when I told students that they were scientists and showed them how to act as such. As I was planning to teach the rest of invertebrates, I realized that examples of all the land-dwelling invertebrates could be found within feet of of our classroom. It clicked when I heard Matt talking about his lessons about plants out in the garden, and realized that worms would be there, too. So the next day, I had students make a chart with “I notice,” “I think,” “I learned,” and “I wonder” in their “science journals.” They were to record their observations, their ideas, notes from a mini-lecture, and then remaining questions. We went to the garden and had an awesome time looking at slimy, squirming worms. I then gathered everyone in a circle and told them some defining characteristics and interesting facts about worms, such as the fact that they are hermaphrodites (which shocked the kids!). I intentionally deviated from the typical lecture format here, in which teachers make kids dictate exactly what they say and give them the spellings of difficult words. I find that this robs the children of real understanding, an ability to paraphrase, and the capacity to figure out the spelling of words themselves.

 

These kids were surprisingly skilled at catching butterflies

I repeated this format for investigating insects, myriapods (millipedes & centipedes), and arachnids (for our purposes, spiders) over the next two days. Students became more independent as they became more familiar with the note-taking format. They were really excited to catch butterflies, crickets, and spiders, and it was adorable to see them run over to me, saying “Madame! Look at this one!” I had a mini-lesson on making observations complete enough for the reader to recognize the animal described, which helped, but they will need more practice, and more vocabulary words. But most importantly, their ability to ask questions has sky-rocketed. They are so critical! “Do worms have blood?” “How do spiders fertilize?” “How do myriapods see?” 

Scientists hard at work!

Observing a millipede together

I just hope that students will continue to ask these questions, especially when their teachers feed them information that’s incomplete, unexplained, or just total bologna. And I hope that one day they will be able to find the answers themselves.