Week 7--Reflections on Inquiry-What Have I learned?

I learned that Inquiry is a student-centered process for learning in which the teacher acts more as a facilitator or guide. 

I learned the importance of establishing a sense of community in an Inquiry based classroom.  I need to develop a community where students feel their ideas are valued and where they feel inspired to take safe learning risks.

I learned about the Abilities Necessary to Do Inquiry, which are the abilities that students need to have developed, or need to be working to develop, in order to learn from Inquiry.  These abilities include: Identifying questions that can be answered through investigations, Designing and conducting an investigation, Using appropriate tools and techniques to gather, analyze, and interpret data, Developing descriptions, explanations, predictions, and models using evidence, Thinking critically and logically to make relationships between evidence and explanations, Recognizing and analyzing alternative explanations and predictions, and Communicating procedures and explanations.

I also learned the Understandings About Inquiry.   After learning what Inquiry really is, these Understandings seemed sort of like, “Well of course these are the understanding about inquiry.” They were not as much of a surprise or an “Aha!”

The Understandings about Inquiry are:    

• Different kinds of questions suggest different kinds of investigations. 
• Current knowledge and understanding guide investigations.
• Technology used to gather data enhances accuracy and allows us to analyze and quantify results of investigations.
• Explanations emphasize evidence, have logically consistent arguments, and use principles, models, and theories.
• New knowledge advances through legitimate skepticism.
• Investigations sometimes result in new ideas and phenomena for study, generate new methods or procedures for an investigation, or develop new technologies.

I think that it is this last Understanding that scared me the most about Inquiry.  I want my students to be curious and I want them to be interested in whatever we are learning, but like most teachers, while I want my students to have new ideas that lead to new investigations, I am mandated to teach a curriculum and skill set.  I worry that the new ideas and phenomena generated for study will take on a life of their own, and that we will get off track.  While I know my students will learn even if they are following a different set of rails, I still have a responsibility to teach the curriculum and grade level standards.

In addition to the abilities and understanding associated with Inquiry, I also learned that the process skills for Inquiry based learning are observing, questioning, planning and investigating, formulating explanations, making predictions, analyzing data, and communicating.  These process skills are skills that business leaders and higher education have determined most important for student success after high school.  These process skills connect with the 5 Essential Features of Classroom Inquiry:

• The learner engages in questions that can be investigated.
• The learner gives priority to evidence in responding to questions.
• The learner formulates explanations from evidence.
• The learner connects explanations to knowledge.
• The learner communicates and justifies explanations.

While all of these features do not need to be present in every lesson, if not one of them is addressed, then the lesson would not be inquiry based.

This class also challenged my understanding about facts and concepts.  I had no idea that I would have such a difficult time sorting through a list of concepts and facts.  One realization is that with knowledge and practical experience, some concepts seem to evolve into facts.  What was a concept for a first grader is now just a fact for the 10^th grader. For myself, I focused on facts being concrete pieces of information, and concepts being big and more abstract ideas.  A very practical experience in this course on Inquiry involved determining investigable and non-investigable questions, and also learning how to change a non-investigable question to an investigable question.  This was vey helpful to me as I work to improve my questioning strategies so that I can encourage my students to have a deeper engagement in their learning.

One of the most helpful aspects of this class was the lesson ideas and Web 2.0 tools shared by my classmates.  It is helpful to hear new ways to use the old familiar tools, and also exciting to have some new tools that have already been test-driven to try in my own classroom. 

In addition to exploring how Web 2.0 tools can be integrated into an inquiry classroom, I learned about the 5E Inquiry Instructional Planning Model.  I have been using backward design for planning, and the 5E’s (Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, and Evaluate) model was easy to incorporate into my existing plan.  Just as in backward design, the evaluation part of the 5Es is ongoing.  While I prefer a linear format, the purpose of the 5E continuous flow graphic was to help us see the cyclic nature of the inquiry process, and to remind us of our responsibility to continually formatively assess throughout a learning unit.  If formative assessment is ongoing, there are few surprises on a summative assessment, because teachers will have already responded to the misconceptions and misunderstandings.

Before this course I believed that Inquiry looked more like the student centered/open inquiry end of the Inquiry continuum, and I was not sure how I could implement something that I imagined to be so freewheeling with my students who have such significant emotional and behavioral disabilities.  I was relieved to learn that Inquiry IS on a continuum, and that while my lessons may need to fall somewhere between teacher centered/structured inquiry and guided inquiry most of the time, I can still use inquiry in my classroom.  Using the 5E Instructional Model and attending to the essential features of Inquiry, I believe that I can design inquiry based lessons that help my students to develop those process skills that are integral to their future success.   

And since I believe in diving in, tomorrow I will be starting the unit on particle movement in matter that I developed during this course.  Hopefully it will be a positive learning experience for my students, and also for me!

Week 6 Reflection--Planning for Inquiry

This week we were exposed to 2 lesson planning systems.  The first is a format that I am actually required to use which is backward design planning.  The planning template from Wiggins and McTighe is explained in an Understanding by Design presentation handout.

Newer for me was the 5E Instructional Model developed by the Biological Science Curriculum Study (BSCS).  Initially it looked simple.  It was shown in our Topic B course handouts as an uncomplicated graphic organizer.

Most of us addressed each component in a linear format for our first discussion.  From the model, I understood that we were supposed to connect everything to the evaluation of our overarching concept.  Either as part of the other Es, or after each E it would be important to have some way to formatively assess, or summatively assess, student learning.

For the second discussion, we were to combine what we learned about backward design and the 5E Instructional model with a Conceptual Flow Graphic. This is where it all fell apart for me.  We were provided with the following example and a blank pdf template.

Many of my classmates had difficulty with this model too, but for a different reason.  There were students who commented on having difficulty manipulating the template. I was fine annotating the blank template and adding my own text.  My bigger issue was with the flow graphic and all of the arrows, combined with text.

My instructional plans are for me to follow, but they are also designed to communicate a plan for learning to the various school districts my students are from, to my instructional aides, and to my principal and program director.  I think that it would also be very hard for me to use this planning system to communicate to a substitute teacher.  

That being said, the exercise was a good one for me.  It forced me to think about subject matter in a new way, and it reminded me to be flexible with my students.  Just as it was uncomfortable, slow, and frustrating for me to think and learn in this assigned format, my students may find the structures that I impose on them to be out of line with their thinking and learning styles.  It is important for me to watch and listen to my students.  They are young and may not be able to articulate yet how they make sense out of new information, or how they learn best.

We also had the opportunity to infuse technology; more specifically web 2.0 tools, into the 5Es.  This task was very enjoyable for me. I especially like reading the different ways my classmates use these tools since they always think of a way to use a familiar tool like Prezi that I had never considered.

I guess that after this week’s lessons about planning for inquiry, I would want to know if I can stick with my original backward design planning template and address the 5Es within that format, or do I have to use the Conceptual Flow Graphic model of the 5Es to plan inquiry based lessons?

Johnson, K. (2013). Unit 6 Designing Lessons that are Inquiry Based-Introduction. [Course Handout]. Wilkes, Pennsylvania: Wilkes University.

Johnson, K. (2013). Topic B: The 5E-An Instructional Model. [Course Handout]. Wilkes, Pennsylvania: Wilkes University.

Johnson, K. (2013). Topic C: Lesson Plan Development. [Course Handout]. Wilkes, Pennsylvania: Wilkes University.

Wiggins, G. (2005). Understanding by Design. Available from: http://www.grantwiggins.org/documents/UbDQuikvue1005.pdf.

Week 5 Reflection

This week we explored Web 2.0 tools that could be used to engage students in learning. I watched the series of Web 2.0 videos on the Discovery Education website. The tools are broken down into categories of application such as Presentation, Video, Mobile, and Community. Additionally the site provided an overview of resources known as The Best of the Best. This video shared Web 2.0 tools that could be used in numerous ways in the classroom. I explored the tools that I had not used recently or that were new to me. I found that, as they mentioned in their video, some of the Web 2.0 sites were no longer in existence. Some of the tools that were free now have fees associated with different levels of services, and still others had been bought or merged with other tools. For example, Gizmoz is gone, GlogsterEDU that was originally free now has a small but reasonable charge, and JOTT has been integrated into Nuance, which offers speech to text services such as Dragon Dictation.

More importantly this week however, was reading about the different ways that my classmates incorporate web 2.0 tools. Many of the students are obviously using iPads or other tablets in the classroom, because many of them recommended apps such as ShowMe or StoryKit. My students are not allowed to use personal devices, and their screens have to be large enough for an adult to fully supervise 2-3 students 100% of the time. There are often computer based Web 2.0 tools that are similar to the apps that were suggested. I use http://awwapp.com/, which is sort of like ShowMe, and www.StoryJumper.com, which is a digital storytelling tool that my students can use on laptops or desktop computers. One new tool shared by classmate, Jennifer Barcavage, was Popplet. Using Popplet groups, a teacher could set up accounts for the school year for as little as $2.00 per student. It is basically a visual organizer or presentation tool, or a place to curate ideas, images, and videos. I could see many uses for this tool. Students could use it to present what they have learned about a particular subject, as a pre-writing tool, to summarize something they have learned or read, or even as a note-taking device during lectures or movies. Teachers could use it to introduce new concepts, to help students develop meaning for new vocabulary, or as a review at the end of a unit.

Another learning point this week was on communicating for inquiry based learning. The way to communicate is based on the scientific method, but could be applied to any content area. A question is created, the students form a hypothesis or make a claim, the students collect data and supporting evidence, and then, based on the evidence, students formulate a conclusion. Our activities this week asked how we might use Web 2.0 tools to communicate a scientific explanation. Again my classmates provided several explanations for how this could be done including using Prezi, Blabberize, and Animoto. Many also suggested uploading the work to be published on class Edmodo sites, Blogs, or wikis. I already use many of these tools regularly for my students to communicate in various ways, so the real lesson for me was on how to apply what I have always seen as the scientific method to other content areas. Corinne Altham shared how to use what she calls Power Answers to respond to literature, and Darryl Chriss shared ideas for how the method could be applied to a social science theme.

I know that we will move into designing inquiry based lessons this next week. I am hopeful that the plans that we use will be easily integrated with the formats of planning that I am expected to use to address and communicate learning to 8 different Massachusetts districts.