Exceeded Expectations: Biome Projects

After a week of working hard, the Biome Projects have been turned in and I am quite pleased with the results.

Here's the rubric I created: BiomeProjectRubric.pdf
I didn't want to scribble all over the students' work so I'll be printing off the rubrics to communicate back with the students.

Work In Class

In retrospect, we should have given the students more time to work on the project in class.  We asked that they worked with their lab-table partners; they couldn't choose their own groups.  This mitigated a great deal of laziness but because the students didn't know their groups well they weren't ready to work outside of class together.

One student used glue and sand to write "Desert" on the top of his poster.  Then, he donated the rest of the sand to the class.  It was very generous.

The Results

I was very pleased with the final products.  Many of the students went above and beyond the expectations on the rubric.

Not only is this a tri-fold poster, but the parrot is hand painted onto it.  I was expecting good posters, but I was very glad to see the amount of effort put into the project.

So, now comes the fun part: grading!  I hope as much work went into the research/writing part of the projects as went into making the projects look great.

Reflection

Here's a few things I'll do differently next time around:

1. Because I didn't let them pick their own partners I'll give the students more time in class.  Not knowing your partner makes working during lunch more difficult.  Plus, the project allowed a great deal of freedom; I found myself walking students through their own questions and helping them make decisions about their biomes.  
2. Emphasize communication when dealing with lazy partners.  I had one situation with a student who didn't do any of the project and relied on the effort of his partner.  But, he didn't say anything until after the project was turned in.  Had I known about the problem earlier I may have been able to intervene.  
3. Emphasize communication when encountering problems.  In the real world, stuff comes up and deadlines are somewhat flexible.  If students told me that their printer doesn't have ink or that their email wasn't working we could have found a work-around.

Here's what I'll keep:

1. The flexibility.  The ability to make decisions within parameters is a key aspect to one's education.  The parameters of this project were nice and broad and the students exceeded my expectations.  This is good.
2. Encouraging students to use cell phones for research.  Students know how to entertain themselves with cell phones but they don't realize that they have access to most of the world's knowledge through this device.  Like other technology, students need to be taught how to use their cell phones as a tool.
3. The rubric.  Students seemed satisfied with the idea that they need to communicate knowledge to me.  If they did so adequately, they would receive full credit.  This eliminates the "how many sentences do I need" questions and reduces the tension between giving high marks for excellent responses with fewer sentences and giving lower marks for responses that meet the sentence requirement.  

So, for my first big project of my career, I am very pleased.  Grading the projects should be quite exciting.

Grading: Two Thoughts

We started a new unit and there hasn't been much to grade.  I am itching to know what the students know.

Grading papers helps me in two ways.  First, it gives me an opportunity to see what the students are learning and, secondly, it's another way to communicate with students.  Grading 186 papers is difficult work, but thinking about these two things keeps the grading engaging.

What do You Know?

I have determined that informing students to the purpose of an assignment helps them produce work that is complete and thorough.  Over the past two weeks I have stressed that assignments are a tool for me to know what you know; if you don't write it down, I don't know that you know the material.

Over the course of grading I can find weaknesses in the students' understandings and address them the next day.  I can also see where the students are excelling or what topics interest them the most.  Knowing students' strengths and weaknesses helps drive future instruction.

Communication

Grading is also a time to communicate back to students.  It takes a bit longer, but I want to make comments that will help students.  Even if I don't mark points off, I want them to know how they can do better work.  I may refine my ideas on grading, but it seems like the students deserve thoughtful comments on things they spent significant time on.  Unless students are given time to research stuff they got wrong, checks and "-1" next to answers doesn't communicate much to a student.


Today is a good day.  Students are turning in their first assignments and I am looking forward to grading them.

Next Generation Science Standards: Hart District Teacher Symposium

While the students started their 4-day weekend, the teachers of the Hart District were at a buy-back day.  The theme of the Hart District Teacher Symposium was Common Core and, for science teachers, the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS).

Dean Gilbert, Science Director for the Orange County Department of Education, ran the first session.  He spent a fair amount of time talking about the history of NGSS and its implementation.  I have heard some of what he talked about; we've been introduced to a lot of the NGSS theory in my credential classes.

The New

 Here a few of the things I learned:

1. NGSS is a system of delivering science for all students.  NGSS does not address those students headed for a STEM careers (doctors, scientists, nursing, etc.)  Students pursuing those careers will still take honors and AP classes.
2. Implementing NGSS will cost the state 3 times what it's costing to implement Common Core.
3. There is a debate about how junior high teachers will implement NGSS.  Gilbert is leaning on teachers to adopt an integrated approach where teachers will deliver physical, earth, and life sciences in an integrated class.  Due to some backlash from teachers, the option to continue teaching the differentiated fields is on the table.  The decision will be voted on by current science teachers.
4. What we have been calling "standards" (.pdf) will be replaced by "performance expectations."
5. A body of experts are being gathered as I type to create the framework on which the curriculum will be based.  Should nothing go wrong, it will take at least 12 months to establish the science framework.  Add another 17 months for materials preparation, and we're looking at the earliest possible date for NGSS implementation is fall 2017.  

The Exciting

From Gilbert's talk, here are the things I'm really looking forward to:

1. Anything not deemed important for all students to know about science will be removed from the curriculum.  No memorizing the details of the Kreb's Cycle anymore.  The voting public doesn't need to know this information to make informed decisions about science or environmental policy. The Kreb's Cycle will still be studied in honors and AP biology courses, so it won't totally be eliminated.  But, again, this course of study will be for those students pursuing STEM careers.
2. By eliminating superfluous material in our courses, we can spend more time on inquiry, problem solving, and scientific literacy.  This is exciting.  Normal folks don't care much about the "mighty mitochondria," but most people have stuff they're curious about.  Helping students figure out how to do research, solve real-world problems, and communicate effectively is why I'm in the game. All this involves time, and it appears that by eliminating overly technical stuff, we've got some time back.
3. The NGSS seems pretty student-oriented.  The needs of the 21st Century student came up a lot, and I think that NGSS should meet them nicely.
4. Data and reflection are major drivers of NGSS.  One of the major problems with the current standards is that you've got to cover them all in a limited time frame; covering the standards trumps mastery of the standards.  And, anything you do to meet the standards is just fine.  This has led to a culture of "set it and forget it": teachers prepare lessons once and then they're on cruise-control until retirement. NGSS finally allows teachers the time to act on information gathered by good assessments.  When students display that they misunderstand a concept, the lesson for the next day can address it. Sadly, this type of teaching is rare, and I expect that this will be a point of contention for the old guard.
5. Backwards planning is a major part of NGSS.  This is huge in the credential program, but is not done a lot in classrooms I have observed.  We do stuff because it's always been done that way.  

The Concerns

Here's what makes me hesitant about NGSS:

1. Computer-based Testing - Gilbert was really excited about computer based testing.  Apparently Smarter Balanced didn't get the contract, and NGSS is looking at other options.  He mentioned that the California Department of Education would like to have lab simulations where students could virtually pour liquids into beakers.  I'm all about computer-based testing, but students who have not used computers regularly will be at a major disadvantage.  Students need to practice and be familiar with the technology to get the best results. Current computer labs are slow.  iPads and netbooks are expensive.  One major part of NGSS is equity, and I hope that lack of resources doesn't hinder scores on the computerized exams.
2. Professional Development - There is concern about how to get teachers out of the old way of thinking and into the new.  Gilbert mentioned training programs and certifications, but these cost money and I don't see the public being that eager to foot the bill.
3. Credentialing - There is a major emphasis on integration across fields of science.  Physical, earth, and life science are all interrelated, and the NGSS standards wants them integrated.  How they're integrated is a point of contention.  This will eventually change the credentials required of teachers.  No one has answers to these questions yet.
4. NGSS and College Requirements - The subject of how high school science courses meet the requirements of colleges is squishy.  In my conversations with those who have dealings with curriculum development, the answers are not yet there.

But, when it's all said and done, I learned quite a bit today.  I have a better grasp of the near future and the goals of NGSS, and I'm optimistic about implementation.  There are unknowns and I'm okay with that.

Here, we're making Oobleck, a non-Newtonian fluid, to simulate an inquiry-based, NGSS-compliant task.

The Most Dangerous Phrase

The most dangerous phrase a person can say is, "We've always done it that way."

Today the students will sit down to an exam that has been given to students since the 90's.  The review worksheet is a copy of a copy of a copy and only mostly legible.  The multiple choice part of the exam has been literally cut and pasted together before being sent to the copy center.

I have been rather surprised at the lack of reflection from a lot of seasoned teachers.  When students do poorly on an assessment, teachers are quick to say, "Well, they just need to study more."  This may be the case, but conversation about reevaluating a quiz or ensuring the material delivered in class match questions on a quiz has been anathema.

Naturally, students are scared of exams.  Some do well and some do poorly.  The part that concerns me is that students are surprised.  Even worse, teachers are surprised.  If assessments given during a unit are well-planned, and if the teacher has done a good job communicating with the students, the results of a unit exam or other summative assessment should not be a surprise.

Fear and poor grades kill a students' interest in a subject.  If we're serious about our subject, we must improve on the things we've always done.

Here are a few ideas I have now:

1. Rewrite test questions that students repetitively ask about.  
2. Develop instructional plans directly from the summative assessment.  
3. Teach test-taking skills during the unit.
4. Analyze common mistakes on formative assessments and make sure to change future instruction.
5. Ensure questions accurately assess what you want the students to know.  
6. Heavily comment on formative assessments.  Communication, though it takes a lot of time, is something the students deserve.
7. Do a review of an assessment after the quiz or test with the students.  All assessments should help students understand the content.
8. Do an evaluation of all assessments, making sure the assessment was an accurate portrayal of students' understanding.  If not, change something.  

That's a lot, but making improvements, even small ones, has the potential to increase student understanding.  That's what we're here for, right?

Squeezing In Points: Academic Purgatory

Here's a note for Future Dan: better planning reduces student stress.

This week will be a stressful week for the students.  5 Week Grades are due on Thursday, and there is a pressure to finish the unit on evolution before starting the next 5-week session.  The pressure is only coming from a planning calendar loosely based on the effectively defunct California Science Standards.

This week: The Perfect Storm:

1. Tuesday: Quiz on Chapter 17
2. Wednesday: Essay Exam on Unit 5 - Evolution
3. Thursday: Multiple Choice Exam on Unit 5 - Evolution

I am growing increasingly skeptical of the massive unit exam typical of science courses.  The ability to assess the students' higher level learning in an intense examination in 90 minutes seems counter-productive.  Unit exams seems to promote cramming and really hinder long-term understanding.

Unit exams may have their place, but they should be more application, synthesis, or evaluation-type assessments.  

I would like to find or develop a system where there's a capstone assignment for the unit rather than a massive exam.  The capstone project would be supported by better assessments during lesson delivery. All assessments would involve an activity or a section of reading from something that piques students' interests. 

Better planning before a unit built on better assessment types can avoid cramming and the test anxiety common with antique testing methods.  Sadly, these methods are perpetuated by the always dangerous mindset of "that's always the way we've done it."

Grading Style: Hard but Fair

There are a good amount of written analysis questions asked of students in our honors biology class, and before I give an assignment, I usually answer the first question with the students.  I outline my expectations and have a discussion before turning the students loose on the rest of an assignment.  When papers are collected, I grade according to those expectations.

Before grading, my master teacher and I get together to calibrate expectations, and then I show her my grading after I've finished a stack.

Despite the hours of grading, I have really enjoyed the process.  I admit that it's frustrating to see students rush through questions and miss major pieces of the question.  I take off points and make comments about what they missed.

I was glad to hear from a student.  He said, "Mr. Davis, you're a hard grader."
"Fair?" I asked.

"Yeah.  But, hard."

I was happy.

Passing Period: The Best Time to Fix a Lesson

During first period, the review of Hardy-Weinberg equations garnered a bunch of blank stares.  We expected that students would come into class with questions, but we got nothing.  I was completely unable to assess the students' comprehension.  The students who understood the concepts answered the questions quickly and got the correct answers.  The students who didn't understand it copied the answers from their sharing neighbors.  At the end of the period, my master teacher and I looked at each other and we knew that we had 5 minutes to come up with something better.

So, in the next 300 seconds, we floated a bunch of ideas ranging from more practice problems to short essays explaining each step of the equation.  But we didn't know where the students were having problems.

Then, I recommended a pop quiz.  At first, my master teacher wasn't thrilled.  She said that we didn't need more papers to grade, Scantron forms are too expensive for a super-quick assessment, and that we didn't really have time for a quiz.  I countered:  the students didn't know it wouldn't be for points, and I promised to keep it short.  I got the green light.  I was about to give the first pop quiz of my life!

It worked.

Each "question" was a logical step of a rather basic Hardy Weinberg equation.  The "quiz" part of "pop quiz" set the right tone in class.  After the initial wave of groans, the students were quiet and attentive.  As the students wrote out out their answers, I was able to walk around and look at their work.

I got the information I needed and spent about 10 minutes addressing the weak points in the students' problem solving.

Reflection
I realized on the way home that this is something I'll not be able to do every day.  This was an emergency assessment piece and a pop quiz will lose its "pop" if done too much.  It worked in a pinch and it's something I'll come back to if I manage to get myself into a bind again.

The students needed another set of practice problems to really solidify the concept.  They wouldn't like it, but it would have been best for them.

Assignment review is an essential part of the learning process.  The next time I teach a difficult concept, I'll need to be much more rigid, providing a step-by-step guide.  Once students get -a- method, they can then take the logical leaps that streamline the process.  Once this happens, they're ready for the next application.  This will be in the back of my mind when I get together with my peers to review the pacing calendar.

Handing Back Papers: A Strategy

Before I ever stepped foot into a classroom, I knew that strategy was key and that I'd need to think through everything.  Little did I know how much this "everything" would entail.  Today I learned that, yes, I even needed a strategy for handing back assignments.

I was eager to hand my first batch of graded lab reports back to the students, and I was interested to see how they would react.  As is the custom of the class, I handed the papers back at the beginning of the period.  This may not be the best method.  There was a sense of frustration in the class and we hadn't even started class yet.  Most of the students did well; the bell curve was toward the higher B, low A range.  But, not all of the students performed as they expected.

The next time we have papers to hand back, I think I will wait until the end of class.  Even if the students did well and their grades met their expectation, there's an element of distraction where the students are eager to review and compare results.

I may have found an even better way.  Despite being graded and recorded, the assignment still has instructional value.

Even though I added comments to their papers, there may be an even greater benefit to explaining answers in class once the papers are handed back.

There is a lot of instruction that happens before and during the lab, but simply because the papers are turned in and the students can't update their answers doesn't mean that the assignment has no further instructional value.  Sometimes that "Aha!" moment comes after a failure; it is often here that the student is ready to learn.

For next time, here's the plan:

• Low-Point Assignments - Hand back at the end of the period and be available for questions.
• Mid- to High-Point Assignment - Make the time in my next lesson plan to spend a few minutes reviewing questions, especially the ones that were commonly missed.

First Grade - 190 Papers!

I graded my first batch of papers!  While students were working on a lab, I graded their assignments.

There were two parts of the assignment.  The first part was a paragraph on five of the major contributors to the thoughts of Charles Darwin.  In each paragraph, I was looking for the name of the scientist, the contribution to science in general, and the specific influence the scientist had on Charles Darwin.  The second part was 10 vocabulary word definitions; this part was credit/no credit.

I took a look at each paragraph and made sure the student had what I was looking for.  It took about 5-6 assignments before I began to get an eye for it and grading got a lot faster.  Eventually, each paper took about 15-20 seconds and I was able to get through each period's work before the bell rang.  The grading time investment seemed to fit the scope of the assignment; 15 seconds didn't seem like a fair amount of time until I thought about the importance and purpose of the assignment.

Assignment Purpose: Independent Practice
Assessment: Low Assessment Value
Literacy Level: Low - Looking for specific pieces of information; less stress on paragraph structure and syntax.  Made marks on several papers with egregious errors but these didn't impact grades.

The only issues I had was with students who simply didn't do the work.  I spoke to each of these students and it was more that the student didn't want to do the work than forgetting to do the work.  This was rather disappointing but not surprising.

I also got to use my new Stipula Calamo Red fountain pen ink I got for Christmas.  It looks sharp!  An "A" looks particularly nice on lined paper.

Also, my Master Teacher is back!  She's not 100%, but I'm glad she's on the mend.

A Surprise Artistic Assessment

Still no master teacher, but we're trekking along just fine.  She'll hopefully be back tomorrow.

Today's lesson:  Finish the Evidence of Evolution video and do a Homologous Structures coloring-page for the remainder of the period.  We had a collaboration meeting this morning that pushed back the school's start time, shortening classes from 57 minutes to 41 minutes.

The video went along without a hitch, and I found that the simple act of coloring not only met with a great deal of approval by the students, but also that the worksheet was a terrific assessment.  My goal was to have the students make the connection from the definition of a homologous structure to actually see and color the homologous structures of mammalian forelimbs.

The students took to the worksheet quickly and began coloring.  I quickly graded a completion assignment and made my rounds to take a look a the students' work.  I was surprised to see some of the students incorrectly coloring some of the bones.  After questioning the students, I realized that they could define the "homologous structures" but they couldn't quite apply the concepts to the diagrams of mammalian forelimbs on the worksheet.

I used students' own hands to connect the diagram of a whale's fin and bat's wings.  Oh, how the lights came on.  Like people who saw the magician's trick, the students made the connection between the definition from the textbook and the bones that they were coloring on the worksheet.

Next time I'll do a better job of including discussions and ask for examples for vocabulary before turning them loose on a worksheet, but I was glad that we did the coloring page.  It turned out to be more of an assessment piece than an enrichment piece.