Krajcik

One of the most important ideas from this article is that assessment should not only be summative. If students don't understand a concept, formative assessment allows this concept to be retaught. It's also important that there are several different types of assessment (portfolios, interviews, self evaluations, etc). That way, students will be better able to express their knowledge since there are so many different avenues. Some might be better in an interview than taking a test, for example. This reduces the text anxiety factor for many students. The chapter mentioned that when assessment is ongoing throughout the unit, there is less anxiety concentrated in just a few test experiences. I thought it was also interesting to include parents more in the assessment process. Their observations from the home can be very helpful, and this would make parents more receptive to the teacher's assessment methods.

Another thing I agreed with from this chapter was the importance of rubrics. When teachers use rubrics, students understand the expetations and later have a concrete understanding of what they need to work on. The idea of creating a portfolio also seemed very beneficial to me. Explaining how each piece demonstrates their learning is a great way for students to self-assess. However, assessment isn't all about these types of formal assessment. The chapter's section about informal observations was also very helpful. Using strategies like longer wait time and probing questions during discussions can help teachers make a better formative assessment. Longer wait time will give all students the chance to answer questions posed by the teacher, and probing questions stretch students so teachers can see what they really know--their reasonings behind a belief rather than just a one word answer. I also like the idea of giving students time to jot down their answer before calling on anyone. This gives the teacher a record of all the students' ideas in their science journal along with allowing students more time to think.

One thing which I didn't agree with in this chapter was that the writers included True/False questions as an acceptable form of assessment. I never thought it was a good idea for these questions to be included because students have a 50/50 chance if they simply guess. One way this problem could be remedied, however, is if students were required to supply an explanation for their thinking. This would make the grading process less simple, but teachers could actually assess much more deeply. Another issue I had with this chapter was the idea of peer-assessment. I do think this could potentially have merit, but it's very important to develop a trusting, collaborative classroom before implementing it. Otherwise, I think students could give their classmates a poor assessment just because they dislike them. Also, I don't think that the teamwork aspect shouldn't be emphasized a lot in the grading process because it strays away from assessing the student's actual science learning.

My favorite part of the chapter was the emphasis on performance assessment. I think that this is the most relevant form of assessment because students are doing something like they actually would in real life. Personally, I wouldn't like to take a performance assessment because I've been taking paper-and-pencil tests my whole life. But I think this aversion is a problem. I can do great on a standard test, but in real life, how is that going to help me? Assessments should be more relevant. I think the chapter was very accurate to say that students will remember their performance assessments much more. For instance, I still remember creating a covered wagon in 3rd grade and a volcano in 4th grade. These experiences are hands-on, interesting, and involve social collaboration, so students will remember the lessons that go along with them much better.

Pendulums

Day 1:

Personal Experience: I haven't had a great deal of experience with pendulums, but like most people, I have been on playground swings several times in my life. I've also used yo-yos , swung on monkey bars, and been on amusement park rides like the pirate ship.

Applications to Real Life: One application that pendulums have to real life is a wrecking ball used in demolition. Also, all the personal experience I mentioned relates pendulums back to real life.

My Prediction: I think that if 2 people are on one trapeze and only 1 person is on another one, the one with 2 people will swing faster (and therefore have more swings in 10 seconds) because of the extra weight. I think that the pendulum with 2 washers will fall faster because more force is being put on the pendulum due to the extra weight.

Understanding about the Science: I don't have much understanding of the science behind pendulums. I do know that the length of the pendulum's swing will decrease each time so that the pendulum eventually slows down completely.

Predictions after 1 Washer: I predict that 2 washers will have 10 swings, 3 will have 12, and 4 will have 14. I think this because I believe that the extra weight will make the pendulum go faster. Because it's moving faster, there will be more swings within 10 seconds.

Results: 1 washer--8.18 swings; 2 washers--8 swings; 3--7.93 swings; 4--8.75 swings
This shows that the weight doesn't actually matter because the number of swings was around 8 for all the differently weighted pendulums.

Questions that I still have about pendulums:
-Why doesn't the weight make a difference?
-Does a pendulum ever completely stop?
-Does the angle at which the pendulum starts make a difference?
-Does the length of the pendulum's arm make a difference?

Analysis of questions:
 
a. My 3rd and 4th questions could be answered using the materials we have in class. We could set up the pendulum at different angles by simply measuring different angles with the piece of paper (11.25, 22.5, 45, and 90). We could use different lengths of string to investigate the 4th question.

b. I think that my first question could potentially be answered through further experimentation Really, this question requires a knowledge of equations and other scientific laws. However, I could experiment to see if objects of different masses but the same size would hit the ground at the same time. This way, I could see how mass affects an object's acceleration, which would relate back to our pendulum activity. This would show me that mass also doesn't matter in this situation, but I still wouldn't understand why. For this experiment, I would need objects that are the same exact size but different masses, such as a ping pong ball and a golf ball. Having a stop watch to time how long each item took to fall separately would make it more objective as well. A slow motion video of the two objects hitting the ground at the same time would be helpful as well because it probably wouldn't work out perfectly in a normal setting.

c. I don't think my first or second questions could be completely answered using the materials we were given because it's more a law of nature for which I need an explanation. I couldn't understand why the two objects reach the ground at the same time by experimenting, and judging whether the pendulum was truly stopped would be difficult. I'm going to do another Internet search to evaluate our explanation that mass doesn't make a difference. I could also find out the answer to my second question through an Internet search. It's important that students understand that the evaluation stage should be about true understanding rather than just knowing that the results of your experiment were correct.

d. My question about why weight doesn't make a difference is most important to me because I don't like to just accept this answer as "just the way it is." This shows just how important it is to still teach students in an inquiry based learning environment. They can't understand everything just because they see it happening in real life. They will see that mass doesn't matter when working with pendulums because that's what happened in the experiment, but they won't understand why unless the teacher explains it directly. Another question which really interests me is whether or not a pendulum ever completely stops. It appears to stop, but we mentioned in class how Galileo saw the chandelier moving in church. Because the earth never stops moving, does the pendulum really never stop moving as well? The third question which I find interesting is whether or not the angle at which the pendulum starts makes a difference. It seems like this would make a difference to me, but in class we measured

Day 2:

Question we chose:
We decided to experiment to see if the length of the pendulum's arm made a difference in the number of swings in 10 seconds.

1.) I didn't find this question particularly interesting, but we chose it because it was one most people in our group had asked. Also, we knew we could test this with the materials given to us in class.

2.) As I mentioned, I didn't find this question extremely interesting because I was pretty sure I knew the answer already. However, I knew that this wasn't a gurantee because I've found out during this semester that I have a lot of misconceptions. It's good to ask questions even if you think you know the answer. Knowing how pendulum arm length affects the number of swings would be helpful for someone trying to decide how long to make a rope swing or something similar. The number of swings is related to the width of the swing, and you wouldn't want the swing to be too long because it could run into another object.

3.) Our refined question is: How does the length of a pendulum's arm affect the number of swings it will complete in 10 seconds?

Data we found:

Quantitative Data:

4 inches
1st Trial: 14
2nd Trial: 14
3rd Trial: 13.5
4th Trial: 14

Average Swings =13.875

5 and 3/4 inches
1st Trial: 11.75
2nd Trial: 11.5
3rd Trial: 11.5
4th Trial: 11.5

Average Swings =11.5625

15 and 1/2 inches
1st Trial: 7.25
2nd Trial: 7.5
3rd Trial: 7.5
4th Trial: 7.5

Average Swings =7.4375

22 and 1/2 inches
1st Trial: 6.25
2nd Trial: 6.25
3rd Trial: 6.25
4th Trial: 6.25

Average Swings = 6.25

Qualitative Data:
The shortest string (4 in.) made the pendulum swing very quickly, and it got progressively slower up until the slowest pendulum (22 and 1/2 in.)

Claims based on the evidence:
The longer the string, the less swings the pendulum will complete in a given amount of time. This claim is based on our evidence because the shortest string had the greatest number of complete swings, and the number of swings got progressively larger as the string got longer.

Evaluation:
We did an Internet search and found that all the other sources we looked at agreed with our findings. I tried to do an Internet search to find out why exactly this is the case, and I couldn't find much of a real explanation. However, after thinking about it a little longer, I realized that the speed of the pendulum is faster if the string is shorter because speed is distance/time, and this pendulum is going a shorter distance due to its shorter string. The time stays the same, so this means that the speed increases as the length of the arm increases, resulting in more complete swings in a given amount of time.

Quiz Question:
The swinging experience would be very uneven because the 2 different strings are not the same length. The longer the string, the longer the period (meaning the longer string is going slower than the shorter string, so the swing couldn't have a smooth swinging motion).

Batteries, Bulbs, and Wires

Standards and Benchmarks:
Content Standard: B-Physical Science: Light, Heat, Electricity, and Magnetism

Benchmarks: Electricity in circuits can produce light, heat, sound, and magnetic effects;

Electrical circuits require a complete loop through which an electrical current can pass.

Learning Goals:
Students will understand that a circuit is a complete loop where electric current can pass (so it can therefore be created with just one wire).

Formative Assessment:
"Kirsten has a battery and a small bulb. She wonders how many strips of wire she will need to connect the battery and the bulb so that the bulb will light. What is the SMALLEST NUMBER of wire strips Kirsten needs to make the bulb light up? Explain your answer."

Most of the students in our class thought the answer was 2 wires, but the real answer is actually 1 wire. Most of us know how to create a simple series circuit by attaching one wire to the positive side of the battery and another wire to the negative side of the battery and attaching both to the lighbulb.

Learning Performance:
The strengths of the learning performance used in the "Exploring Together" worksheet are that the students are making all the circuits and identifying the differences (see the 1st three pictures below). However, this lab is weak in its inquiry because students are told exactly what to do and don't get a chance to explore on their own.

The strength of the learning performance used in the "Exploring Independenly" worksheet is that it provides much more room for exploration. We had to figure out on our own how to create a circuit using just one wire (4th picture). However, this worksheet still does not meet all the requirements of inquiry. How to create this one wire circuit wasn't necessarily meaningful to the students because the question was provided by the teacher.

                                                            

                                                   Simple Circuit (Exploring Together lab)

                                                                  


                                                   Series Circuit (Exploring Together Lab)

                                                 Parallel Circuit (Exploring Together lab)

Circuit Using One Wire (Exloring Independently lab)

Reflection:
I thought that the description of Ms. Travis's classroom in the article was a very good example of inquiry. She did a great job starting the students off with an experiment to build their knowledge base. It was a more basic experiment, but she did not tell them exactly what to do like Ms. Stone did. She did a lot more scaffolding instead of outright telling the students the answer. Ms. Travis's lessons on electricity were closer to the "Exploring Independently" lab we did in class, and Ms. Stone's lessons were like the "Exploring Together" lab. However, neither lab from class was as inquiry-based as Ms. Travis' lessons. She moved more towards the student-centered side of inquiry by letting students ask their own questions about electricity. Each group was carrying out a separate experiment, and they were able to share their findings with the class. I especially liked how she tied environmental problems into the lesson through fluorescent bulbs. This would be a great way to make the communication of results much more meaningful.

I think it would also be beneficial to start this inquiry lesson with the idea of fluorescent bulbs using less energy because kids are often very interested in the environment. This would get students engaged because they could be guided to ask their own question: "how do we know that incandescent light bulbs use more energy?" They could collect their evidence through developing their own experiments with different variables, explain their data through charts and graphs, evaluate it by looking at other sources or hearing from an expert, and then finally communicate it by giving persuasive presentations to parents about why they should use fluorescent bulbs or sending letters to companies. Being able to develop their own experiments would require the students to be very comfortable with inquiry, however. Ms. Travis's method is helpful because it gives the students more structure.

Cool It!

Inquiry Criteria: Engage

Inquiry Specific Statement from Continuum: Learner engages in question provided by teacher, materials, or other source

Why it Fits: The lab tells students the exact question: "How does the temperature of a hot liquid change with stirring?" The students don't get to pick the topic or the variable.

How Could Improve: I don't think the students would ask this question on their own because "how to make a hot liquid cooler" isn't an extremely intriguing question on its own. Maybe if the teacher gave students some hot chocolate to drink but told them it was much too hot, this would make the experiment more relevant to their own lives. Another interesting avenue could be the McDonald's lawsuit about hot coffee. By discussing these ideas, the teacher would be more able to guide students towards the desired question.

Inquiry Criteria: Evidence

Inquiry Specific Statement from Continuum: Learner directed to collect certain data

Why it Fits: It isn't all the way to the right on the continuum because the students aren't given the data, but the students are told to gather a specific kind of data--the temperature every 3 minutes of the stirred and unstirred water.

How Could Improve: The teacher could have students decide on their own what would be a good variable to test.

Inquiry Criteria: Explain

Inquiry Specific Statement from Continuum: Learner given possible ways to use evidence to formulate explanation

Why it Fits: This isn't all the way to the right on the continuum because the students aren't given the evidence and a description of how to explain it. However, they are given several questions which guide their explanation. 

How Could Improve: The teacher could simply tell students to collect data and give an explanation for this data, without including any guiding questions.

Inquiry Criteria: Evaluate

Inquiry Specific Statement from Continuum: Not included

Why it Fits: Evaluating means that students go to other sources to see if their explanations are supported, and this step is not included. The lab ends when students explain their data.

How Could Improve: The students could explain their evidence and then go to other resources (such as books, the internet, pamphlets, or expert scientists) to see if their explanation matches up with other explanations.

Inquiry Critera: Communicate

Inquiry Specific Statement from Continuum: Not included

Why it Fits: The lab doesn't say anything about telling others about the results. There is graphing included, but the instructions say this is for data analysis and don't mention anything about display ing or justifying the evidence.

How Could Improve: As an easy improvement, the students could present their findings to the rest of the class. Another more interesting idea could be to write letters/give a presentation to McDonald's or other businesses with hot beverages in order to persuade them to adopt certain practices to prevent customers from getting burned.

Weather

Standards and Benchmarks:

Content Standard: K-4 Earth and Space Science
Content Standard: D-Changes in Earth and Sky

Benchmark: Weather changes from day to day and over the seasons

Learning Goals:

Students will understand that the underlying element of higher temperatures is the increase in directness of the sun's rays based on geographic location.

Formative Assessment:

The results of this formative assessment show that most of the students already know that there are several factors associated with high temperatures--they answered that two or more of the weather conditions would be present. The next most popular answer was that it would be sunny, which makes a lot of sense. Most students have a lifetime of personal experience telling them that when it's sunnier, it gets hotter.  The next most popular answer was that it would be humid. Some of the students also may have used personal experience to know that humidity can be associated with higher temperatures. The least popular answer was that there would be no wind, but from this, we see that some students have made this general association as well. I think students struggled with this formative assessment because they didn't understand the difference between causation and correlation. The three factors do not cause higher temperatures; they are simply often correlated with higher temperatures. When someone says that it's 90 degrees, one can make assumptions about the weather conditions, but weather is too complex for 100 percent confidence in those assumptions.

Learning Performance:

The question we are trying to answer as a class is "How are high temperatures created?" (The how question is evidence of an engaging activity). I will ask the class again what they think causes high temperatures in case there are other answers besides those offered in the probe. Based on their answers, students will be put into different groups according to what each student thinks (unless groups need to be rearranged based on ability level or the need to even out numbers). Each group will collect data about weather patterns in 5 or 6 different cities (which the class will decide on in order to have a good survey of all areas of the U.S.). These observations will lead us to a fuller picture of America's weather. Each day for about 1 school week, the students will split into their groups and go to the computer lab to visit www.weather.com. Here, they will record their group's variable and temperature in each city. (This is the evidence collection portion of the 5 step inquiry.) The data will be from approximately the same time in each location since everyone will be accessing the computers together. Directly after this, we will also take the temperature and measure the variables for our own area as a class by stepping outside. If some variables can't be physically assessed by the class, we can check those on www.weather.com as well. (If possible, the students could also have a correspondence with students from a different state to see what the data is like where  they live). The students will record their data, and the class will create charts so the data can be compared and some ideas can be formed. (Here is where the students will be explaining their evidence). After some tentative conclusions have been developed, it would be really interesting to have a weather man come into the classroom to discuss weather patterns in different parts of the United States. Along with this, students can look to other sources (books, Internet, etc.) to evaluate their explanations. Finally, the students could communicate their knowledge by giving a weather report to the school during the morning announcements. They could explain their learning about how high temperatures are created during this weather report. In order to make sure students achieve the original learning goal, I will scaffold them along the way to see that the differences between location of the cities plays a major role in temperature.

Inquiry in Science Classrooms

I thought this reading was very helpful because it explicitly demonstrated the connection between real science in practice and inquiry in a science classroom. Humans are innately curious, so if students discover they have unanswered questions, they will be more involved in searching for the answers. However, I have to admit that I found myself wondering why the geologist cared so much about some dead trees along a coastline. I feel like it's the same for many students, especially in traditional science classrooms that don't include an inquiry aspect. They wonder, "What is the point behind learning all this information?" I was very happy to see that there was, in fact, a point behind the geologist's work. Similarly, the students saw a solution to their tree problem. Showing students that science has practicality makes it even less removed from their everyday lives. As a teacher, I want my students to experience this connection to real world problems.

Secondly, this text addressed some of the concerns I've been having about constructivism. After reading our other articles, I felt a little lost about exactly how to set up a constructivist classroom. I liked that this reading talked about Mrs. Graham's class because this discussion included specific details of her instruction--making a list of hypotheses, splitting the students up into groups based on their ideas, scaffolding while the students designed experiments, showcasing the findings to the entire group at the end, deciding on the best answer, and "publishing" their work in a letter to the custodian. This organization made sense to me, and it could also help with differentiation based on students' ability levels if I adjusted the groups a little.

Finally, the myths section of this reading answered so many of my questions about inquiry in the science classroom. The distinction between "guided" (teacher-led) and "open" (student-led) inquiry helped me realize that not all inquiry lessons have to be centered on the students' questions. I think it would be best to have instruction on how to ask questions by starting the year out with more structured inquiry lessons. Also, it's important that students have background knowledge before they can ask questions, so every topic does not need to be taught through inquiry. These ideas made an inquiry-based classroom seem more realistic to me.

Shifting from Activitymania to Inquiry

This article was useful because it pointed out the difference between isolated activites and true inquiry-based instruction. Using activities is a step in the right direction because it's a departure from the teacher-centered approach and gets the students more involved in their learning. However, the author stresses that it's important to "clearly define conceptual goals and the relationships to students' lives and interests prior to selecting classroom activities" (16). If the activity is relatable and helps answer a question that students have in their day-to-day lives, the learning achieved from that activity will be more relevant and meaningful (and therefore, stronger). Another important aspect of this type of learning is that it places science in the hands of everyone--not just those who are "highly intelligent"--because science is less isolated from everyday life.

Along with being relevant, the activity must also be stimulating for the students. I like the idea of providing an activity which will summon up a lot of questions and spark inquiry. Our class did this when we confronted our misconceptions about the solar system and magnets, and for that reason, people seemed much more invested in the learning process. By choosing activities carefully so they spark interest, teachers can encourage a long term inquiry project. However, I do still have concerns about this method. It seems like it woud be difficult to plan out your days, and you would have to make a lot of last minute changes. Maybe it wouldn't bother me to have a flexible classroom, though, because I'm a last minute type of person.

The article also mentioned that the students should create their own rubrics, and I thought this was a very interesting idea. At first, I was unsure because students don't necessarily know the criteria. However, if they had seen one of my rubrics from a previous project, I feel like this could be helpful. I could also create my own rubric to use along with theirs. In my Social Studies Methods class we discussed the concept of "backward design," which involves creating assessments before deciding on the instructional activities. That way, the instruction is more likely to line up with your learning goals. Therefore, students should create their rubrics before they begin their investigation. I think this would give them a sense of direction and even more ownership of their project.

Planning a Benchmark Lesson

One of the most important points of this reading was that teachers should make it clear how students will demonstrate learning while they are writing their objectives. The article even went as far as to say that the term "objectives" should be changed to "learning performances," but I don't think the terminology really matters as long as the perfomance outcome is specified. This is important because if objectives require students to show their learning in a more concrete way, they will be more likely to learn and put their learning to practical use.

Another important point of this reading was that there are different kinds of knowledge and levels of cognitive processes. Factual knowledge is basic details, conceptual knowledge focuses more on interpretations and theories, procedural knowledge involves knowing how to do something, and metacognitive knowledge is knowledge of one's own cognition. I will use all of these in my classroom at different times. Metacognitive is important to focus on because otherwise I think it might not have enough attention, whereas the others happen more naturally. Science notebooks are a great place to write about your own learning. The different cognitive processes start with simply remembering facts and progress all the way up to creating something. It's important to include this highest level of cognitive processing to make the learning experience more meaningful for students.

Finally, this reading provided a lesson plan format that is useful for a project-based science classroom. I like the idea of everything relating back to a central question. Then there is a sense of continuity and also relevance because that broad question is more easily relatable to everyday life. I also liked the fact that this lesson plan format included the idea of safety. I've never seen that in a lesson plan format before, and I think it's very important to think about--especially in a science classroom.

Iowa Core Science Curriculum

The Iowa Core Curriculum in science includes standards about Science as Inquiry, Earth and Space, Life Science, and Physical Science. I looked at the standards for 3rd-5th grade classrooms, and I saw a lot of connections to what we've been discussing in class. The fact that there is an entire section dedicated to Science as Inquiry shows the importance of the constructivist method of instruction. Students are expected to ask questions on their own and design experiments, not just accept what the teacher tells them is scientific truth. I also noticed that this section mentioned the use of computers in investigations. As we've been discussing in class, technology is very important in today's classrooms. I like the idea of using Google Documents like we've been doing to record data in our class. Finally, this section discussed critiquing and analyzing their own work. I think it's very important to make students comfortable with self-evaluation because it's a great method of formative assessment that increases independence. I always hated evaluating my own work, but I think if I had been exposed to it more, I would have had less trouble. Science notebooks would be a good place for monitoring their own progress.

In the other three sections of standards, I found some other areas of interest. The Earth and Space section discussed changes of earth's land and oceans (which can result in earthquakes, floods, etc.) and weather patterns. I thought that it would be very meaningful to integrate social studies and science together by discussing the science behind natural disasters, discussing a recent natural disaster, and raising money or doing a food/clothing drive to help the victims. Another focus area in this section was ideas about the solar system. As we've learned in class, this is a topic that is shrouded in many misconceptions, so I will make sure to address those misconceptions in my future classroom. In the Life Science section, there was a standard about environmental stewardship, and I was reminded of the School of the Wild. I think going to a camp like this, or even just doing a one-day field trip to a nature center, is a good way to make lessons about the environment more meaningful. Also, one could incorporate this subject with social studies by teaching environmental history or talking more indepth about policy. Developing a project to help alleviate an environmental problem in the community would be a very relevant learning experience as well. The standard about sound, light, electricty, etc. in the Physical Science section made me think of another cross-curricular idea--learning about sound through the musical instruments. The standards also mentions the use of math, so this is another area that should be integrated. I think that integrating the content areas like this would be a very meaningful way to learn (even though it might be a little tricky to implement) because real life isn't compartmentalized like school subjects.

Mosart

I can definitely see myself using the Mosart assessments with my students in the future. They seem to be a great way to uncover misconceptions before starting science units. However, I may consider changing the format a little. The tutorial mentioned that the multiple choice questions helped teachers save time and were actually sufficient for understanding students' misconceptions, but I'm not convinced. I liked the format that Keeley used in her book of probes--multiple choice along with an explanation for why you chose your answer. I think this would help with the problem of students randomly choosing answers. I could even tell students that they should write "I guessed a random answer" as their reasoning if they have no understanding of the question at all. They could also explain their "ruling out" strategies in this explanation portion. If I don't include this, I think it would be a good idea to interview some of the students after they took the test to find out more information.

Overall, though, I think that these Mosart assessments would be very helpful for understanding the misconceptions of the entire class and also of individuals. There might be a misconception that basically every student has, and then I would know to address this with the entire class. However, one student could have a good understanding of some standards and have misconceptions in other standards, while another student is the exact opposite. Analyzing these tests would help me see how to differentiate my science classroom to address that problem. I'm not sure if it would be too chaotic, but perhaps different group experiments could be going on at once in order to address different students' misconceptions. The students could share their results to the entire class by a certain due date.

Another interesting point brought up by the tutorial was that misconceptions can actually be a sign of learning. Sometimes more advanced students are the ones who have the most complex personal theories. This is because they actually took time to consider how the world works. A student may have randomly chosen an answer in the pre-test, but if he specifically chooses a misconception answer in the post-test, this shows he has grown intellectually. For that reason, I will make sure to examine the pre-tests and post-tests carefully to look for those hidden improvements. I also like the idea of giving the pre-test again after the post-test to see if the learning has been retained, but I wasn't sure when this should happen. In my opinion, it may be best to do this towards the end of the school year but still allow enough time to reteach some concepts if necessary.

The Sweater Article

This was an interesting article because it was based on the experience of a teacher using constructivism for the first time. Therefore, it touched on a lot of the questions I've been having about this method of science instruction. The students in O'brien's classroom believed that sweaters kept them warm in the winter because the sweaters themselves emitted heat. After discovering this misconception, O'brien decided to have the students test their idea. It's important to have this "let's find out!" attitude in the science classroom because it shows students that science can help them understand real world problems. Experimentation also makes it easier for students to change their misconceptions. Simply reading or hearing the teacher talk about the science won't be strong enough. Afterwards, the result is often a subconscious split of scientific ideas at school and the real scientific ideas at home.

O'brien found out just how strongly her students were rooted in their conviction, because they stuck to their original idea even after three days of experimentation which seemed to prove them wrong. In her journal, she wondered (as I often have) how long students should be allowed to "construct" the knowledge on their own. (As a side note, I thought it was great that O'brien had her own science notebook which she wrote in at the same time as the children. This emphasized that it was an activity that was very real to life outside of schoolwork.) The article explains that in a constructivist classroom, the teacher should not be passive. Students at the elementary age will often revert back to earlier stages of development and not believe the evidence that is before their eyes. Therefore, teachers need to step in to introduce the true information.

I was sort of confused, however, on when this information should be presented. In one part of the article, there is a quote from Pasteur: "understanding favors the prepared mind." For that reason, I thought maybe it would be better to tell the students the correct information before they experiemented. However, later the article made it seem like the sweater lesson was a good example--that you should start with an experiment that contradicts students' misconceptions, then provide the correct information, and finally do another experiment to show that this information was correct. I think that this latter method is more effective because students are experiencing scientific inquiry that is more real.

I was really glad that the article pointed out the problem of time. Learning in a constructivist classroom creates a dilemma. On one hand, you can't cover as much material, but on the other hand, the students will truly understand the material you do cover. As we've discussed in class, oftentimes we learn the same things over and over every year but never truly understand the concepts. If students truly understand the topic the first time, perhaps we don't need to cover as much material in one schoolyear. However, it's still something that makes me hesitant about constructivism.

Keeley et al

This is an introduction chapter to a book that focuses on formative assessment, specifically on the "probes" or questioning techniques which can be applied by teachers. These probes are designed to bring students' misconceptions out into the open. Research has pointed to the most commonly held misconceptions, and these are included as possible answers to the probing questions. In order to be considered formative, findings about student preconceptions must then be used to make changes in teaching methods or provide feedback to students.

I will definitely use formative assessment probes in my classroom. The reason they are so important is because teachers need to know students' background knowledge in order to teach them something new. Based on their prior experiences, students' ideas about science are very strong, so it is best for teachers to build from those ideas and address unscientific ideas head-on if needed.

One thing I didn't agree with in this chapter was the idea that misconceptions should be considered "alternate frameworks" instead. The authors argue that students' ideas may conflict with a scientist's formal ideas but might not be completely incorrect. Even though it's important to stress that science is all about testing unproven theories, I feel like this terminology just gives students more reason to continue believing in their misconceptions.

At first, I was also concerned with how the chapter presented the idea of "probing questions" as part of a paper-and-pencil pre-test. I remember doing this throughout all my years in school and never truly understanding the purpose. It was usually just a multiple choice test that we never saw again after the first day of class. I think that it could be helpful to inform students about the idea of misconceptions so they have a better understanding of the pre-test. Maybe a teacher could even demonstrate how misconceptions are often carried with students throughout all their schooling (as we saw in the video about astronomy concepts).

Another important thing that was missing from these pre-tests was the reasoning behind our answers. Without this information, my teachers didn't understand the details of my misconceptions, so how could they effectively work to change them? The conversation between student and teacher is what brings out the child's ideas. I was glad that the chapter mentioned other ways to use probes--through journaling or discussions, for instance--because I think the paper-and-pencil pre-test can get old. Talking or journaling can lead to more engagement and deep thinking about the topic as well.

Peters

This article discussed the views of Piaget and Vygotsky and how they can be implemented in a constructivist classroom. The differences between Piaget and Vygotsky's ideas were specified as well, and this is important because I think it's a good idea to find what you like from each point of view and use that in combination in your classroom. Piaget focused on cognitive constructivism and the different stages of development. He thought that students had to be at the correct stage of development in order to enhance their learning. Vygotsky, on the other hand, focused on sociocultural constructivism. This has more to do with how the environment around a student contributes to learning, and he believed that learning led to development.

In my opinion, it's important as a teacher to pay attention to Piaget's stages of development for a general outline of how to teach your students. For instance, in the concrete operational stage (upper elementary school), students are able to do more thinking processes but still can't think abstractly. Therefore, it's important to include a lot of concrete materials and real life experiences to make their learning more meaningful. I think that it's also important to stretch students in this stage to think abstractly so that they can move on easily to the formal operational stage (especially if they are 11 or 12 years old).

Personally, I think it's more important to focus on Vygotsky's ideas because he placed more emphasis on learning being constructed through social situations. I think that it's very important for students to share their thoughts with each other in class and to encourage social collaboration. Peer tutoring is also a good idea because students at a lower learning level can benefit from being scaffolded by a more capable peer. The problem with this, as I mentioned in my response to the Krajcik article, is that teachers need to make sure that higher level students still have a chance to be challenged. Ideally, students would be switching the role of teacher and learner so that everyone benefits in the end.

The ideas presented in the article about the scientific language were also interesting to me. The whole language approach has the merit of being more in context, but I wonder how I would approach teaching difficult words. It seems like students would struggle to read something if they didn't know many of the scientific terms. Maybe we could discuss them as a class when students come across those words.

Overall, the constructivist approach seems very beneficial and like it would make learning meaningful, but I'd really like to see it in action to know how to make it flow smoothly.

Krajcik

Overall, social constructivism says that when students are involved in constructing their own knowledge, they will have a better understanding of science concepts.The most important features of the social constructivist model are that students are able to be actively engaged, apply their knowledge, represent their knowledge in multiple ways, learn in a community, and partake in authentic tasks. These features all relate back to students being involved in their own learning instead of just passively taking in what the teacher says. By making the learning experience their own, it is more meaningful, therefore resulting in more learning.

There were a lot of ideas in this article, but some of them really stuck out to me as ones I would like to use in my future classroom. However, several questions also arose while I contemplated which ideas I would implement.  I like the idea of a problem-based classroom where students are searching for the answer to a relevant question. Encouraging discourse with students to help them understand what they know and to realize what questions they have is important as the first step towards beginning this project. I was unsure, however, of how to make this work smoothly. The question must be relevant to the student, but it also must facilitate the achievement of learning standards. Teachers can guide students towards a question about a certain topic, but it seems like this would result in students asking about something they don't really care about. Perhaps some projects throughout the year could be completely student-initiated, whereas others would require the teacher to spark some curiosity about an otherwise uninteresting topic.

I really like the idea of students using this project method to take action to improve their world. The Science Technology Society movement focuses on topics like health, population, resources, and the environment--all of these are avenues for projects which could have a real impact in the world. I think this provides for some of the most meaningful learning because students see a true purpose behind their lessons. Finding out the answer to a question is great if you're a curious person, but projects that improve the world show students that the lessons they learn in school can be applied to real-life siutations to promote change. One problem with the project method and a constructivist classroom, however, is that it takes up a lot of time. It's worrisome to think that important topics might not be covered, but I think that it's possible to integrate many science topics into one project.

I also thought that Dale's Cone of Experience was interesting, and I will pay attention to how I present concepts in class. The use of more concrete materials and less simple lecturing will help students be more active learners.  Self-evaluations and revising was another area of social constructionism that I found interesting because I know that a lot of kids hate these activities. It's probably a good idea to do self evaluations and revisions often so students get more used to them. Another important aspect of revisions is that students will be more willing to revise when their work will be public. If they are partaking in a meaningful, real-to-life project (such as organizing a recycling campaign for the school), other people will often see their work and they will want it to be good.

I will also strive to create a learning community in my classroom because kids learn best when they are discussing their ideas. The classroom needs to be a very social, comfortable place because otherwise some students will feel like they can't speak up. Another important idea is that students should be peer mentors working within each others' zones of proximal development. I love the idea of finding something that each student is good at and posting a sign which tells students who to go to with questions about certain topics or tasks. There is one problem with this, however. Even though lower level students benefit from the exchange, higher level students may be held back. They benefit from explaining topics because they get an increased understanding from talking about them, but it's important that they don't get stuck in a tutor role all the time.

Misconceptions Die Hard

The main point of this article is that students will dress up an incorrect idea instead of abandoing it. "Dressing up" an idea means that it is the same notion expressed with different, more complex terminology as the student gets older. Even though their explanations sound more sophisticated, students still don't truly understand the concept.

 I was really surprised to see just how true this was when I read about the study of students at the primary, intermediate, junior high, and college level. College students, especially those majoring in elementary education who will be educating young people, should have had much more understanding than students in the younger grades. However, their understanding was only slightly better; the real difference was in the complexity of their vocabularies. But the use of more complex terms didn't mean they actually understood what they were talking about.

This article made me see that misconceptions at all ages are far more common than is acceptable.That information is important to me as a future teacher for many different reasons. First of all, I need to make sure I don't have any misconceptions. I need to completely understand my teaching topics. Therefore, before each lesson, I should research the topic further if I have any doubts. Otherwise, I'll be passing on those misconceptions to my students.

Another reason this information is important is because I will need to work to prevent misconceptions in my students. The article mentions that one of the reasons misconceptions die hard in science is because science is not taught enough at the elementary level. I think that science education has been greatly increased since this article was written, but many would argue that we still need more, especially in the K-2 grades. It makes sense that without enough early education in scientific ideas, students would use their intuition more heavily and form misconceptions which are hard to break later on.

The article also mentioned several good strategies for catching and correcting misconceptions. Communication is key because through asking probing questions, the teacher can observe students' true levels of understanding. Another way that this could be accomplished is through science journals. Reading students' entries give teachers a direct window into their students' thinking. Using labwork is another important way to catch misconceptions because students have to have a more meaningful understandning to use the concepts in a real experiment. I will use all these methods to be on the lookout for misconceptions in my classroom.

Diffendoofer Day

1. What does it mean when someone knows how to think? It means that someone is able to be creative and come up with their own ideas instead of just memorizing facts. If someone has a lot of knowledge but isn't able to actually utilize it practically, there isn't as much of a point to that learning. 2. How does a teacher teach a student how to think? Teachers teach students how to think by making them be more creative. They don't just use rote memorization in their classrooms. Instead, they help students to ask questions about the world around them and connect their learning to their real lives. They also help them synthesize new creations like stories or ideas for a science experiment so that their learning has an actual purpose. 3. Have you ever been in a class where you really had to think? I have been in classes where I've really had to think. One class that made me really think was a philosophy class I took last year. I actually had to analyze what I thought about abstract concepts like morality. There were thought experiments like "would you kill your mother if you wouldn't get caught and would be reborn in a perfect life and have no knowledge of what you did?"

Line of Learning

1/19/12

It is of course necessary to have some teacher-directed lectures to help students learn facts, but overall, I think that elementary students learn science best through discovery. A lot of experiments are important because this makes the lesson more hands-on and interesting. When students make their own discoveries, the learning experience is much more meaningful.

The environment that best facilitates elementary students’ science learning is very interactive, as I mentioned already. It also should be an environment where questions are greatly encouraged. No one should ever feel dumb for asking a question. Instead, students should know that this is what good scientists do.

I think teachers should know how to capture the students’ attention by designing experiments that will peak their interest and make them want to ask questions. I think that teachers should also know how to implement a science notebook because this is a good place for students to express those questions, along with other observations.



1/31/12

Another thing that I would like to add is that elementary students learn through talking about their learning. Social collaboration, as Vygotsky points out, is what helps students develop. Class discussions and dialogue between student and teacher are really important because they allow for more explanation of what students think. Teachers need to watch out for students' misconceptions through the use of probing questions along the way instead of just using summative assessment at the end of a unit. Through discussions and the use of journaling, misconceptions come out more clearly. Then, through experimentation in a constructivist environment and scaffolding in the students' zones of proximal development, the students are better able to break these misconceptions. It's important also that the experiences in science are authentic tasks so that students feel like school isn't completely isolated from the real world.



2/7/12

This week, I've added even more understanding about how hard it is for students to let go of their misconceptions. The Sweater Article showed that the best way for students to work towards breaking their misconceptions is through constructing their own learning. Also, it's a good idea for teachers to use probes so they can identify these misconceptions early on. It's important for students to explain their reasoning behind the answers given during these pretests so that their preconceived notions are clear. The environment that best facilitates science learning might be one that goes deeper into fewer topics so that misconceptions are less likely to stick in kids' minds. One other thing I learned in class this week is that it's always important to make learning fun. Teachers can do this through funny stories that relate to science.



2/14/12

This week, I've added more understanding about objectives. Instead of thinking about objectives, it's important for science teachers to consider "learning performances" so that the students' specific learning will be shown. They must be able to perform in some way, not just have a general "understanding." These descriptive goals should be written AFTER formative assessment because then teachers can understand where students are at the beginning of the lesson. We also talked about standards this week. Standards are important because they set up a system of accountability in our schools, but if there aren't good standards established, this can be detrimental to students' science learning. Newer standards are potentially on the way in Iowa which will measure creativity and higher order thinking skills more than rote memorization. There will possibly be less content that needs to be covered so topics can be dug into more deeply. I like the idea of incorporating science with all the subjects to create a very cross curricular school system, and I've learned that students would benefit from this. Science is everywhere, so it should be related to the rest of the curriculum so that students can see its relevance.



2/21/12

One very useful thing to include in an engaging science classroom is coupled inquiry. This is an experiment which gets the students intrigued about a topic they might not have been interested in before. That way, students don't always have to generate their own questions but they are still engaged in the task at hand. Subject matter is important as well because students can't learn everything they need to through inquiry. Through more direct teacher instruction, they can gain a foundation before they start experimenting. Along with this, students need both "guided" and "open" inquiry. "Guided" inquiry helps them better understand particular concepts, and "open" inquiry helps them with their scientific reasoning. I think as the year goes on, more and more open inquiry can be included as kids get the hang of the process.

Another important concept we learned this week is the 5 steps of inquiry--learners are engaged, collect evidence, explain evidence, evaluate the evidence, and communicate their learning in a way that justifies what they learned. A lot of times, teachers leave one or more of these ideas out, especially the evaluation stage (which involves looking to other sources after an experiment to see if their conclusions are supported). Communicating the learning is also very important because it makes the learning have a purpose. If students are going to show their learning to someone a more public audience, this can really increase the quality of work. If teachers make their instruction meet all of these requirements, students will have a much more meaningful learning experience.



2/28/12

This week, we learned that there is a continuum for inquiry learning. On one end, the classroom is very structured around the teacher's ideas. The teacher will provide the scientific question for students and even possibly provide them with the data and tell them how to analyze it. On the other end, the classroom is very student-centered. Students come up with their own questions and are working towards analysis on their own with only scaffolding by the teacher. It's beneficial to consider your specific teaching situation in order to decide which part of the continuum you should strive for. Some students may not be able to handle completely inquiry based learning because it takes a lot of higher order thinking skills. It's necessary to work up to a true inquiry situation. Students will need modeling and guidance about how to ask their own questions and design their own experiments in the beginning of the year. Overall, though, the more inquiry you can include, the more deeply students will learn. They will be more engaged and committed to the process of science learning. As we've mentioned in class, they will be less likely to cause classroom management problems because of this higher level of engagement. We've also talked about the importance of specifying learning performances so we can actually see evidence of students' science learning.



3/26/12 (Discussing the weeks of 2/28-3/6 and 3/6-3/13; skipping 3/13-3/20 b/c was spring break)

One thing I learned from the week of 2/28-3/6 is how powerful it can be when you integrate science with other subjects. We discussed pendulums and tied Galileo into the lesson because he made a pendulum-based clock. Then, we discussed how this clock did not work as well on a ship because the ship was always moving. In this way, we were able to tie our study of pendulums into a study of colonization since the colonizers used the pendulum-based clocks.

We also discussed assessment this week. The most important idea is that you must ALWAYS be assessing. Assessment should be formative and measure the students' progress. Even summative assessments at the end of the unit should actually have a formative element to them so that students will be given the chance to grow. It is unproductive when teachers simply move on after a test without re-teaching concepts that students still don't understand. Assessment can take many different forms, and it's important to include a variety so that all students can demonstrate what they know in the way that best suits them. Another element of assessment which I considered more this week was grading based on improvement and effort. If a student receives the same high score at the end of the year as he did at the beginning, without any improvement, this should be taken into account in his grade.

During the week of 3/6-3/13, we were focused on our midterm test. Even though we didn't have our normal class discussions, I did learn some important ideas that could transfer to my future classroom. Since we were focused on our exam, these ideas relate to the prior week's ideas about assessment. I think that allowing as much time as needed on some assessments is a good way to help students truly show everything they have learned. Sometimes there are concepts which need to be tested based on time because being able to complete them quickly is integral to their mastery. However, respecting students' different test-taking styles is a good way to have a student-centered, individualized science classroom.



3/27/12

This past week, we were focused on our LTI presentations, but I still learned some ideas which can be applied to my future classroom. In my group, we didn't focus on our data enough in the explanation of our experiment. For a science classroom to represent real science, students should be encouraged to look only at their data before they search for their evaluation using other sources. That way, they can see the legitimacy of their own experiment. Also, as I saw with several of the other presentations, more learning can come about when students try harder to discover why they didn't come up with the scientifically accepted explanation. Another important idea is that students should be encouraged to investigate topics further even if they don't align with their original question. One of the groups became interested in several other ideas related to mold as they did their research, and I thought that was a great example of scientific inquiry breaking away from stagnant and boring investigations.



5/5/12

Over the last month of this class, I've learned a lot which I'd like to address. First of all, we had a very interesting discussion about creativity in schools after watching a Sir Education video. This video highlighted how the history of education has resulted in schools that are like factories. Our students are trained to listen to bells to tell them what to do, and they take standardized tests that lack any kind of excitement. There isn't any life in the schooling process, and we're telling our students that there is only one right answer. But divergent thinking--creativity--is what is most important to solve the problems of our current world. Students start off with amazing creativity skills in Kindergarten, but those skills are just stripped away as they progress through the grades. Also, schools should move away from compartmentalizing students into "academic" and "non-academic" groups so they feel less distant from each other and more able to collaborate. Through more inquiry-based science classrooms, we can help our children achieve divergent, collaborative thinking.

After this, we focused on technology. We watched a video about Khan Academy which made me think about teaching in an entirely different way. This program is a combination of thousands of instructional videos focusing on all different school subjects at different levels. Some students have actually said they enjoy learning more through this program than through a regular teacher because they are able to learn at their own pace, in private. They can pause and replay the video until they reach mastery--whereas, with a normal teacher, they might get embarrassed or feel like a burden if they ask a lot of questions. The video also mentioned a "flipped" classroom, and this was very intriguing. The students watch the Khan Academy videos at home to learn the lessons, and then they do their "homework" and other more enriching activities at school. This makes a lot of sense because the teacher is there to help them as they practice. A flipped classroom could also allow for a lot more inquiry-oriented learning at school because teachers wouldn't be taking the time to formally teach the hard factual information. One problem I could foresee is that children wouldn't have a teacher there for asking questions while they learned the material. But these questions could be addressed the next day on a more personal level. This would make the class much more individualized so that some students don't get held back and others don't get lost. It's a very interesting idea that I would like to try in my future classroom in order to make in school science learning more meaningful.

We also discussed several other technology ideas that our class researched. One of my classmates told us about a program called CyberScience 3D. This program allows you to manipulate plants, animals, machines, etc. in 3D for a very hands-on experience when it wouldn't otherwise be possible. Another classmate discussed the NASA website. There are several inquiry-based lesson plans available for educators' use. Another really exciting aspect of this website is that classes can send in a suggestion for an experiment, and the NASA scientists pick one to actually perform. This would be a great way to connect learning from the classroom to the real world. It could be part of the "communicate" stage of inquiry, and this would be a great justification for the importance and relevance of their topic of study. The technology that I researched was GPS and the activity of geocaching. This can make learning about the coordinate system and the environment much more engaging for students. It's very important for teachers to look into new technologies because these tools can make learning more meaningful, and technology can make the teacher's job more efficient as well.

From group work on the SLPE project, I learned that often the best ideas for a science lesson come from collaboration. Our group needed to think of a way to compare other life cycles to the butterfly's life cycle, so we decided we would all come with ideas to our next class. I thought it would be good to talk about the human's life cycle because we could make it very relevant for the kids. They could bring in baby photos, measure each other's heights, and even go to other classrooms in the upper grades to measure their heights. As I explained this idea to my group, they liked it, but they pointed out something important--these were second graders, and we wouldn't want to risk having a discussion about human reproduction with them. In the end, we decided that each of us would focus on a different non-human organism and relate it back to humans on occasion to make it relevant. This worked out very well. We were able to make the kids' learning very personalized and possibly more in-depth because we each had a small group.

From peer teaching and watching other groups peer teach, I learned that collaboration in the education profession is also very important because of the constructive feedback you can receive. Teachers can improve their teaching to better serve their students in this way. Practicing the lesson was very important because it helped my group get much more prepared. Even if teachers have a great, inquiry-based lesson idea, knowing how to handle the details is what makes that lesson actually work out in the classroom. While peer teaching, and even more so while actually teaching in the 2nd grade classroom, I learned that even though students learn best through inquiry, sometimes a little direct teaching is required to guide the students--especially when the children are younger. It requires a great deal of teacher preparation to scaffold the students effectively. Teachers also need to be prepared by knowing that anything can happen while they are teaching, so teacher flexibility is a great asset to the students' learning. Sometimes, your lesson is going to be too short (which happened to one of the groups), so you need to improvise. In an inquiry-based classroom, it's very likely that this would happen since it isn't completely teacher-directed. One extra activity that sounds like a good learning tool for students is the "5 Minute Mystery" because this helps students to think critically even if they are finished with their science learning for the day. Great science classrooms are guided by a very prepared teacher who is able to adjust to his or her students' learning needs and create a atmosphere where science is a relevant and justified inquiry process.

Five Good Reasons to Use Science Notebooks

Having science notebooks in the classroom seems like a very beneficial practice that I would like to incorporate into my teaching. To get started, I liked how the teacher in the beginning of the article guided the first observation in order to model how students should write and get them excited. It reminded me of a discussion in my Language Arts Methods class when we talked about getting kids started in a writer's notebook. The teacher would tell a personal narrative (one which all the students could relate to their lives) and then told the children to think of their own stories about this topic. Before everyone was able to unleash their narrative verbally, the teacher said, "Now I want everyone go back to your desks and write down your story." Without this excitement, students often just stare at a blank sheet of paper with no idea what to write, and the same would probably be true for a science notebook.

I think that the first benefit listed by the article--that science notebooks are thinking tools--is the most important. The science notebook is a great place for students to express their "wonderings" and practice writing accurate observations. Since all the students have to write in their notebooks, they will be more likely to be really engaged in thinking about science (which may not happen if the teacher just called on a few students). Also, if students simply fill out a worksheet, they are not required to do as much of their own scientific thinking. When students think about how to word and organize their own observations, the concepts are much more meaningful. Also, their attention to the topic is heightened because the notebook is tailored to their own unique interests.

I also agree that notebooks would be very useful for the teacher because he or she can see the level of understanding of each student. Misconceptions will be more likely to show themselves and get cleared up. Another important benefit listed in the article was that science notebooks enhance literacy skills. Last semester, I had a reading and writing buddy who absolutely hated writing. Science, however, was his favorite subject. For a student like my buddy, science notebooks would be a great way to ease into the writing process through nonfiction writing. Differentiation is also supported through science notebooks. Students can write at their own level, and I really liked the idea about allowing ELLs to write in their native language and slowly work towards switching to English. That way, these students aren't losing any valuable scientific information while they learn English. Finally, I thought that meeting with a group of teachers would be very helpful for exchanging ideas about organization. That way, students have more possibilities and are more likely to find the organizational strategy that best facilitates their learning.

One thing I wondered about as I read this article was how I would incorporate a science notebook if my students already used a writer's notebook during another part of the day. I think it might actually be beneficial to have both notebooks (or to include them in the same notebook) because students need to understand that writing is not just confined to language arts. Writing extends to the descriptive, procedural, and explanatory texts one writes for science and other subjects. The two could even overlap when, for instance, a student decides to write a fictional story about one of his or her scientific "wonderings," creating a science fiction tale.

Rising to Greatness

The main point of this report is that Iowa needs to commit to improving its education system in order to produce graduates who are more career- and college-ready. In the early 1990s, Iowa led the nation in NAEP and ITBS scores. Today, our scores in fourth grade reading and eighth grade math are equal to (or sometimes below) the national average. Also, the percentage of our eighth graders in advanced math classes is one of the lowest in the country. I was actually very surprised while reading this article because I thought that Iowa still had one of the best education systems in the country. I knew that Governor Branstad introduced a new plan for improving education, but I did not know the extent of the problem.

Some people point to the changing demographics of the state as a factor that contributes to this problem. The number of minority students has increased, along with the number of English Language Learners and students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch. But one very important point from this article is that demographic change has very little to do with the problem. In fact, the average scores of non-poor, white students of Iowa still fall below the national average of similar students. This shows that the entire student population is being affected by our lackluster education system. However, there are still signficant and unacceptable achievement gaps for minorities, the economically disadvantaged, and also students with disabilities. I was shocked to read that Iowa has the largest gap in achievement between non-disabled and disabled students.

The root cause of the problem is that Iowans, as demonstrated by my own incorrect understanding, have become complacent about education because of our prior successes. In the meantime, many other states have been improving their education systems and testing scores while Iowa has stagnated. Now that changes will be taking place in our education system, my students and I will be greatly affected if I teach in Iowa. I've often considered moving, but after reading this report, I see there is a sense of urgency for improvement here in my own state.

Because reading and math seem to be the focus of this article, I'm sure there will be a renewed emphasis placed on these subjects in order to boost performance and get more students on the advanced track. This may result in less time for other content areas, so I will have to be aware of this in order to creatively integrate the subjects. It seems like there could be even more emphasis on testing, so I will have to make sure I support my students' learning and innovation by not simply "teaching to the test." I will also have to work hard to accommodate all students in order to lessen the achievement gaps. By thoroughly understanding how to implement Response to Intervention, I can help to increase achievement for students with disabilities. Also, including technology in my classroom whenever possible will be very important as children need these skills in our global economy. Finally, high expectations for my students will be needed in order to help them break out of mediocrity.