|
|
Today I began a unit on Computer-Aided Design (CAD) with my engineering students. Because a background in CAD was not a prerequisite for the class, but many of the students have expertise given various roles on our school's competitive FRC Robotics Team (Ellipse 6814), my goal was to curate resources and develop a learning cycle that could engage all students. Below is the workflow for this unit that I plan to implement with the goal of continuing to use the current COVID-19 Pandemic as a lens.
Today I have been reflecting a lot on assessment. Specifically, whether or not there is place for a traditional "paper" assessment in my chemistry course. One of my colleagues is doing creative work around having students print copies of assessments, solve problems, take images, and submit back as PDF to be annotated and graded. The students take the assessment over Zoom in "gallery" view.
I have been using Google Forms (as I have rambled on and on about) for formative assessment, and for weekly summative assessments, doing a similar thing to my colleague mentioned above. Rather than printing assessments and doing them live over Zoom, I have been pushing out Google Doc Templates with spaces in "blue" for students to submit images of their work. "Do What's in Blue". Click here for an example template and here for a student response using the template. Although both systems seem to being work well, mine having significantly less oversight, I wondering if there isn't a much better way? I wonder if I am completely missing something here? If I'm trying to fit F2F assessment in an online learning environment? Should I be doing live video interviews for assessments? I am having great success in my Biochemistry course doing medical case studies as as the process lends itself much more to engaged critical thinking given the task (click here for case template and here for student response to template). Is there a way I could do case study analysis in chemistry? Apologies for the rambling post today that reads more like a journal entry. I am currently developing a unit on the structure and function of Hemoglobin in my Biochemistry class. Keeping this in mind, in the current online learning structure I have been slipping back into some old habits of teaching as they seem "easier", or more "efficient" in this structure. However, they do not align with my personal philosophy regarding how to surface student curiosity, interest, and motivation.
For example, falling back on a traditional approach would embrace the following work flow:
Implementing an approach guided by student curiosity COULD could follow the below format:
In the later example, direct instruction is delayed, but delivered in a way that compliments an initial activity. Students have plenty of related prior knowledge, and more importantly, false confidence, around the case study, but lacked true understandings of the biochemical mechanisms. Essentially, this example is designed to "prime" students for a moment of direct instruction, and aligns well with current research on the relationships between curiosity and learning: "It's very in vogue to talk about curiosity as a strategy to increase learning, but it's unclear how to engage people's curiosity...Our study suggests it's the uncertainty -- when you think you know something and discover you don't -- that leads to the most curiosity and learning." The above quote is a good reminder when designing this lesson, or those to follow, that it is not about HOW direct instruction is delivered by about WHEN. What can I do as an educator to provide enough information to not demotivate, but withhold enough to instill a sense of false confidence? Such a fun task... It's the "Tip of the Tongue" effect, that Loewenstein discusses here, or in a more tangible way, the "Mystery Box" that Abrams shares here. I will share the complete lesson plan when done in the coming days. 5 Reasons Why Online Teaching was Crummy for Me Last Week#1: Slow Internet
Keeping with the "Rube Goldberg" theme over the past two days, below are a few submissions from students I have received. These clips reinforce the use of Rube Goldberg machines as simple STEM activities to engage student and bring families into the fun. Not necessary the most rigorous or "standards-based", but perhaps we are missing an opportunity to bring families together if we do not take time to break from the curriculum. Food for thought.
|
Categories
All
Archives
February 2024
|