Try one out in class if you can and tell us what you did and how it worked.
If you can't fit one in this week, explain how you could use one in an upcoming unit.
Post a response by Friday January 9th and respond to one or two of your colleagues posts by Monday January 12th.
Also, if you need to catch up on posting/commenting from previous weeks, please continue to do so.
Thanks,
Carrie
I read the other sections but didn't find any that I would use in my classroom at this point. I would use #35. Missed Conception. This is used near the end of teaching a unit to address any misconceptions that students are still hanging on to. For 8th grade this would be easy due to the fact that our new curriculum has common misconceptions stated PLUS distractors that the state may use to reinforce wrong answers on the state test based on the misconceptions. We would have to write questions for students to think about WHY someone would still hold on to these misconceptions but it should not be very time consuming to create. We used to have a pre-test that all the statements were false. These would have been easy to address during seasons.
ReplyDelete1 1/2 hours
I agree that this one would really be perfect with the misconceptions already given to us in our standards. I personally don't look at those as much as I should! This would be a great FACt in which to do so.
DeleteOne week behind with the FACT selection... sorry. I planned on trying the "I used to think, but now I know" FACT #28 as a post-lab activity on Friday, Jan. 9 to gauge student understanding of concepts related to biological magnification of mercury in an aquatic food web. I appreciate how this FACT encourages students to think about their preconceptions and how their thinking has changed after participation in the lab. I had a productive discussion with students on Friday concerning their lab analysis questions and related concepts (hopefully reinforcing proper understanding of increased concentrations of toxin moving up each feeding level), and wanted to finish this experience with the FACT. I think their self-reflective writing would really cap off the learning experience, and give me a good read on whether we can move on or need to revisit concepts. One quick peek at the clock nudged me to shift gears quickly however and jump into the planned photosynthesis lesson, which we barely got through. Darn snow day and 2 hr. delay.
ReplyDeleteWe definitely should have the students do some type of reflective writing about this lab after we do it. I think this one would be great. I'm reading a book for Brunk's book study and it stresses more reading and writing. Maybe find an article about a real-life example of this and then some authentic writing after the lab.
DeleteI could see me using #35 Missed Conception for the upcoming lesson on groundwater contamination. Recalling from the last time I taught this lesson, the kids were convinced that all you had to do with contaminated water was run the water through a filter. I even dyed the water blue to simulate a contaminant, and they will still convinced that as long as you filtered it, the water would be clean.
ReplyDeleteI think with the misconceptions addressed in our standards, this would be a great one to do a few times, before the unit test, to make sure students are not still confused. Let's keep this one in mind.
DeleteI did not do it yet but I would like to use #33, Learning Goals Inventory. I think this would particularly work for a unit where kids might come to us with a lot of misconceptions like astronomy. I would pick a specific learning target and, as we were going over all of them at the beginning of the unit I would give this for the one I am most interested in hearing about their prior knowledge. It really breaks it down and asks about the terminology they know, experiences they've had, etc.
ReplyDeleteSo I tried this with our first learning target of our biomes unit last Tuesday. I was hoping for some quality information because most (?) students reported that they have studied biomes before. However, the information they provided was fairly vague. It WAS helpful to see that, despite the fact that they have studied biomes, they did not have a strong knowledge base.
Delete