comp day

I dropped the ball so to speak during the year on keeping up with a post each six weeks. I’m hoping my teacher will overlook this and give me course credit anyway.

I’ll blame him for my stopping of posting anyway. Craig assessed the study findings earlier and I think he hit the nail on the head. I believe there is no”one glove fits all” curriculum.

I believe that one of the coaches I worked for had it best figured out. Create a folder of the topics in your content area. When new curriculum comes your way, evaluate it and decide if it is worth the effort required to yield equal or (preferably) better results.  I would argue that if it isn’t better there isn’t a need for change for the sake of change, don’t worry with that new lesson and move on.  If the lesson seems promising take that and put it into your folder for the given topic.

I understand that I need multiple ways to teach a concept. Year to year and even class period to class period might dictate a different methodology. One of the labs I do each year, and would argue that it is the best one I have found for that particular concept, was in a textbook published in 1991.  I have seen other labs, but continue to use this one.

I have started scanning in overhead transparencies, I have some really great ones, so that I can use them digitally in the future.  I’m not even sure my overhead projector still works.   I have a set of slides that I use each year, I really need to convert them to some digital image because there is exactly one slide projector on my campus.  I am attempting to begin migration from a hard copy folder to an electronic copy as the electronic seems easier to organize and maybe easier to pick and choose from.

Maybe I’ll be able to create the perfect science curriculum and make a fortune.  On second thought, I think I’ll just work up some sort of semi-entertaining and semi-improve your TAKS scores staff development show, take it on the road because… the road goes on forever

Through my agreement to participate in the STAR grant I received a macbook this week.  There are seemingly an endless number of differences between the mac and pc world.  Most of them do not seem to be great barriers, but more along the lines of annoyances to me.  I have spent the last I don’t know how many years in the pc world and have grown somewhat adept in navigating through windows eccentricities.  Now I have entered the mac side and catch myself wondering how to do so many of the things that I mindlessly did before.

I also find myself pleasantly surprised with some of the “cool” things that I am able to do and play with now that I have not before.

I would like to use this space to share my experiences and certainly welcome / beg for others to post their findings, joys, and frustrations here too.

Here’s my results from the second six weeks curriculum comparison:

TEK objectives 9 BC
obtaining, transforming, and distributing energy

IS: ???mentions energy transformations in a telecast and discuss using solar panels to power cars in another

C-Scope: Explore your World Share-A-Thon and Tonight in the News

PH: Cooking with Sunshine lab

C-Scope had the students research a renewable energy source and create a poster discussing that topic.  The second portion was to have the kids share their findings in a news show format.  I have never been a big fan of posters, it is painful (for me) to try and get everyone to bring one in and then I have to decide what kind of grade to give based on the kid’s portion of the work.  I think the tonight in the news sounds like it could be interesting with the proper class.  I don’t see it faring well with my classes. 

The Prentice Hall book had a lab in which students built a solar oven and then used the oven to toast marshmallows.  This doesn’t sound bad, but is limited only to solar energy.  The text of the book did have a pretty good section discussing each of the renewable energy sources.

I used neither of the activities mentioned above.  I did show the few minutes of an inventor with his solar powered call video.  I did discuss the forms of energy the way they were described in the textbook.  I had the kids complete a webquest that I have modified to suit me over the years.  The kids were given a renewable resource topic and then did internet research according to the guidelines that I had given them. 

TEK objectives 8B,C
Energy

IS: Owl Pellets, ??

C-Scope: Owl Pellets compost column

PH: pictures of and discussion of food web and compost bin

IS: had a four minute video clip of the barn owl with instructions on how to dissect the pellet.  There was nothing that I could find about compost bins/piles

C-Scope: called for owl pellet dissection and creation of a compost column from two liter bottles. 

PH: had pictures of and a discussion of food webs and compost bins

The owl pellets are an excellent lab and help to show how energy moves through different organisms.  This is one of my (and I think the kid’s) favorite labs.  We also constructed a food web to show flow of energy. 

 We discussed compost bins/piles.  Last year I watched a demonstration of the compost column and it didn’t work properly.  I used temperature probes and laptops to demonstrate it with my classes and it didn’t work well.  The construction involves cutting of the bottles with a razor blade, I don’t think this is a good idea for 6^th graders to use.  Implementation on a “per group” basis would require a great number of thermometers and storage space over a period of days.  I’m not totally discarding the idea, just trying to figure out how to make it work.    

Side study finale;

We attended a day of staff development during the second six weeks featuring Dr. John Crane.  He commented on the writing of the objectives.  His opinion was that the procedure was worthless and did nothing for the students.  The only thing it did was help out administration in trying to determine what was being taught. 

I continued my study to see what my results would be. 

During this time all classes except for one had the objectives posted.

The range between highest class average and lowest was 6.6 points.  The class with the highest average this time did not have the “advantage” of the objective written, it was the same class as last six weeks.  They finished at +3 above the average.  The class that had the lowest class average last time (without objectives) had the next to lowest average this time (and did have objectives).  They were at -3 from the entire group average.

I’ll call the study over.  I bow to Dr. Crain’s expert opinion.

My results are in! There are so many different ways that you could evaluate this little study. I suppose the quickest easiest way to do it is to look at a class average. This would seem to work well enough if it weren’t for the makeup of my classes.

The difference in class averages for all six periods was only 7 points. One of my non-posted objectives groups average was -3 points from group average. The other without objectives was -2. Classes with objectives were at +4, +2, -2, and +0 from the total average of all classes.

My lowest grade average does come from a class with the largest number of kids with a special ed and inclusion label. They did not have the advantage(?) of written TEKS objectives. My highest group average has a very high number of “accelerated” kids. They did have posted TEKS objectives. Does the makeup of the class have any bearing on the average, or is the posting of objectives?

My other class without posted objectives did score higher than a class with posted objectives.

I think that for the next six weeks I’ll not post the objective in what was my highest and will post in what was my lowest average and see what the results are for the next six weeks. The other four classes I will continue doing what I have been doing.

I think I need more data.

I am going to try and review a couple of labs/activities/methods of covering objectives each six weeks.

Here’s my results from the first six weeks:

TEK objectives 7AB

physical and chemical changes/properties, observations, inferences

IS: Clever Kitchen Chemist

C-Scope: “Mystery” powders

PH: Sharpen your skills pg 31
and Try This pg 26

The IS and C-Scope had very similar labs involving observations and inferences made from physical and chemical changes. The major difference (and it isn’t really a major one) being in the lab sheets with grids for the different powders. The IS had larger boxes in which the kids would place the different powders in to complete the lab.

The Prentice Hall book involved a combination of two labs to do the same thing. One of which was a small part of the labs from the other groups. The second part was designed to demonstrate chemical changes. I was going to use that as a demonstration, but the results were difficult to see/read for me so I didn’t use it in class.

I will give the slight edge to IS here if for nothing else the “user friendliness” of the IS paperwork.

TEK objectives 6 A,B

Motion/forces

IS: Show of Force

C-Scope: Walking Lab

PH: Inclined to Roll

IS: kids build a race car from a meat tray, a balloon, and a straw. They race the cars and record distance, time, calculate speed, and graph results

C-Scope: kids walk on a track at different speeds and are timed. They then calculate speed and graph results.

PH: an inclined plane is created and kids roll a skateboard down the plane while recording time and measuring distance. They then calculate speed and graph results.

If you are pressed for time C-Scope gets it covered pretty quickly. If you have a day or two extra to spare the show of force is much more enjoyable to all and allows for some design discussion by the teams and then a re-visit to the cars and discussion of pros and cons of different designs. PH; I have never tried and probably never will try.

my kids finished a test Thursday and were going to be introduced to a new chapter on Friday. I started with one class by having them do a bit of “guided reading” from the book to give them some knowledge about upcoming discussions in class on states of matter and phase changes. The kids for the most part did o.k. they plodded along and answered questions from the book.

with my second period class I showed them a video from IS that was 18 minutes long. during that time a chemistry professor was interviewed. during his interview he did probably a dozen simple (if you have access to the chemicals and equipment (I don’t)) experiments explaining and demonstrating phase changes. We had a difficult time completing the video in a 50+ minute class because of the discussions that went on due to the video.

c-scope called for running a fan and having the kids try and catch the air, showing a piece of ice melt, and leaving a container of water open overnight, and making a tri-fold about plasma.

all of my classes except for first period went the IS route.

I started my side study this week. I am posting teks objectives for classes after my conference period. This gives me the break to post them on the board and at the end of the day I erase so that my morning classes aren’t “contaminated.”

I think I have wrapped my mind about what I wish to study. As you may, or may not know, middle school science adopted new textbooks in 2002. Paris chose the Prentice Hall Science Explorer series. Prior to that Paris was running with a program from the University of Alabama called Integrated Science. Currently we are told that the next book adoption will be around 2010.

Our regional service center is pushing their curriculum developer (C-Scope) on us. Curiously enough, we have been given choices previously about what vendor we would use for our curriculum requirements.

All of this being said, we have taught basically the same thing over the last ten years. We have followed pretty close to the national science standards that Bill Clinton had a hand in having written. Since then Texas followed suit with their TEKS.

Since the three are simply different packages/products to present the same information I thought I would compare the three to each other as I go through the year. I’ll try to give my professional opinion on the quality, effectiveness, and ease of teaching similar topics from the three different sources. Of course my ratings and thoughts of each of these will be very subjective. But, someone at some point has or is currently saying that their program is superior to others.

I feel that since I am certified by the state of Texas to teach this course and our fair district has deemed me highly qualified to teach the course, who better to evaluate them?

I feel confident that I will be able to compare IS (Integrated Science) to Science Explorer on most any TEK/topic that I choose. I do NOT have that same confidence with having access to C-Scope’s curriculum through the year based on their past performance. That being said, I reserve the right to drop Region 8’s product in my comparison throughout the year if their product is not kept up to date and made available to me.