Forums

Please read the Concept Development article and post a respond. (250 works and respond to at least 2 classmates' posts)

The first thing that hit me about this article is that it was incorporating three things into good science instruction: Inquiry based approach(ie, providing the experience), Concept maps (figuring out what needs to be taught and then attacking ways to teach it) and the 5E lesson plan format (hitting the same bit of information in 5 different ways). This would’ve been helpful when we were expecting to dream up a concept map on the topic we were doing for our Pedagogy unit. It was helpful to see her follow her “logic flow” as she started planning this unit for her fourth graders! I also like that she has a working concept map on her bulletin board for her class! I noticed that most of her processes could probably have fit inside of an hour-long lab block, too. However, parsing out the time involved with this means it will go WAY beyond the hour-long block. Since most people are fighting for the 30 minutes the state requires, how does this translate into the standard classroom? With the amount of things crammed into the standards at the upper levels, translating multiple experiences into usable class time is not only difficult, it’s almost impossible! My next problem with this is the other big issue in teaching today… where is the money coming from? She chose pill bugs and earthworms and, apparently, did it all with only pictures to use as a guide (not how I would’ve attacked it, but perhaps that’s more my problem than hers). That can’t be done with every aspect of the science curriculum. Part of the standard for 5th grade electricity was to build an electromagnet. If you have a science kit that’s a few years old and has been well loved (ie, used!), the pieces for meeting this standard are long gone! Most of the pieces for the electromagnet are cheap, but you’ll spend a large chunk of your pay check on batteries! Throw in that classroom supply money (when we get it) has to be ear marked for certain types of items and can’t be used to buy batteries for a science kit… we have some issues here! Then throw in approaching that lab multiple ways… my wallet hurts! Don’t get me wrong, I wholly support her approach. I do most of what she does in class every day! My problems are the standard issues with just about everything that is out there these days… time and money! Would that we all had enough of both!

Concept development comes about as a result of understanding from multiple experiences. The students should have many chances to explore a subject so they can make sense of it properly. All of these steps move towards an understanding of the big idea. The article stressed that application of what was learned at the end of the unit should be slightly different and more challenging. I was surprised to see that introducing the vocabulary before the concept development phase was frowned upon because I usually preview the vocabulary of our upcoming unit. The article concluded with how teachers can “deliberately plan” their concept developments. This part seemed really similar to “unpacking” the standards. You first determine what the students need to understand, come up with the progression in which you will teach it, and then plan your activities. I liked the example sentence starters that were provided in this article. These seem like a good way to maintain general thinking early on in the process. I think most grade levels could use sentence starters in both science notebooks and classroom conversations. Much like articles we were given in the reading endorsement cohort, this article suggests teachers need to use open-ended questions, and give the students increased wait time in order to determine what the student is thinking. The sample given seemed very effective, but hearing wording like, “at the end of the day” worried me. Having large chunks of time everyday is not possible for everyone…much less multiple hours. I have an hour for science everyday and I still feel like I am squeezing it in. Still, this article had some good ideas.

Hey, Craig! Isn't it cool how the things brought up through one Endorsement class are found in another and are totally applicable? I loved the repitition from the Reading Endorsement class, too!

I understand the materials and time issues very well. As we move towards ALL core content areas being a part of the accountability formulas, we must work to integrate content areas. This is one of the major initiatives of the district as we look to create an integrated STEM curriculum.

As I began to read this article, my first thoughts were that of time and materials being an issue to being able to implement a balanced approach to science instruction. So many time teachers are pressed for time and do not use a balanced approach for instruction. We spend time reading and discussing material from a textbook and leave out the hand on experiences that make the material more concrete or we have the opposite. We spend a lot of time on hands on activities that we neglect to give them the basic content for understanding. It is a struggle for providing this balanced approach to science instruction. As I read the part of the article about Unit Logic Flow, it reminds me of Wiggins and McTighe book Understanding by Design. This is very much like unpacking the standards. You are breaking the standard down into the different aspects (nouns & verbs) that the students have to know by the end of the lesson or unit. This article focuses on reaching the application stage whereas when you unpack the standard you focus on the assessment before you begin planning your strategies and activities. These two thoughts of how to plan are very similar. Most teachers will take the time to learn the standards and what is to be taught. Then make a plan as to how they will go about teaching the content to students. It is important to have a balanced approach, that students have the content knowledge as well as time to participate in hands on activities that will enhance their understanding.

Sean, Will it ever be that time and materials is not an issue in education? I know that my grade level team tries to integrate across subjects but it difficult. We always run into not having the materials to make it happen or there just doesn't seem to be enough time to get it done. It will be interesting to see how the STEM curriculum helps teachers and will there be professional development to help us with this. Kym

Tiffany, You made an interesting connection with the 5E lesson plan format that I had not thought of. You're right about teaching content using this format, but doing it in different ways. This certainly helps us with differeniating our lesson plans to meet the needs of our students. Kym

Tiffany, I also like the idea of a work-in-progress bulletin board in the classroom to display the concept map. The concept map and 5 E lesson plans (or multiple experiences) is a great way to plan. I was wondering if your grade levels are departmentalized. It is so much easier to guarantee daily science instruction when that is the case.

Kymberly, I know there is a struggle to find that balance between the lab experiences, and presentation of information. Those hands-on experiences are so essential to science instruction, but sometimes the materials aren’t there. I highly recommend www.donorschoose.org as a way of getting materials that would usually be impossible. We have had a lot of success by using this site at my school. Also, there are a lot of great web-based simulations that could help fill in the gaps when you don’t have materials. At one point the county was considering a science material distribution center…we even toured one in Delaware that was fantastic. It was a way to check out materials much like a library. The problem was, with the pacing guide, all of us would need the same materials at the same time. I guess we just need to keep being creative.

This article makes me feel like a totally incompetent teacher. This would be the ideal way to teach every science concept (Would it work for other subjects?). It makes perfect sense to have the children explore concepts first, and then guide them through the concept development process. I'm lucky if I get in one juicy exploration per concept. Multiple explorations would solve the differentiation problem. I have always introduced vocabulary at the beginning of a unit. I can see how the vocabulary would be much more meaningful if taught after the kids have had time to "play around" with a concept. I found the statement,"Students will likely not develop accurate concepts on their own from the exploration..." to be interesting. My first thought was if this is the case, then why have them explore the concept? I see that the hands-on experience helps them process the new concept with the teacher's guidance. I would like to learn more about the specifics of the discussions, charts, mapping, etc. that this teacher uses to teach the concept. I see a need, especially in my case, for training in the area of concept development. I appreciate that the lessons can't be scripted, because the students' misconceptions can't be entirely anticipated. Scaffolding students' understanding of the Big Idea will take knowledge, skill and finesse on the part of the teacher.

Tiffany, Regarding the Concept Development article, I also liked the work-in-progress bulletin board. I find I run out of room quickly in my room because I put everything in writing (or the students do). My second graders need a visual for everything :-) Time and money constraints are two very real concerns for adequate hands-on experiences.

Catherine, I agree there is a need for training in the concept map development area....just like my students, the more comfortable I am with it, the better I will be at it.

Article Review of Being Deliberate About Concept Development How do we learn? It is scientific knowledge that repeated exposure to a stimulus causes one to learn. Ivan Pavlov learned this when he repeatedly rang a bell while presenting a hungry dog with its dinner. After a repetition, the dog learned to associate the bell with food. Then it began to salivate whenever the bell rang, even in the absence of food. People are much the same way. We learn through repeated exposure to a stimulus. However, we are slightly different too because that exposure has to be interesting or we get bored and tune out. In her article, Being Deliberate about Concept Development, Joanne K. Olson, refers to these multiple exploration phases as concept development phases. Instead of a dog and a bell, we have students and a Big Idea. Every phase or cycle of learning, leads the students towards grasping the Big Idea. The key to all of this is effective planning. Olson calls this the “logic flow.” She develops key points and transitions from experiences to concepts that she needs to focus on to guide students towards the Big Idea. That makes sense. Afterwards, she compares her Big Idea with the standard to insure that the logic flows from simple ideas to more complex ones. Next, she plans her unit with activities focused on this logic flow. Throughout the unit, Olson, repeats phases of exploration and then concept development. (I have also seen this in our 5th grade Houghton Mifflin Georgia Science Text – a lesson begins with a hands-on activity before the reading section.) Logic flow is also similar to Bloom’s Taxonomy and a number of other things. You seem to start with the simple and move to more complex levels of thinking and doing. You can call it what you want, it’s just effective planning and teaching. ~Natalie Mercer

Catherine - I also found the statement, "Students will likely not develop accurate concepts on their own from the exploration..." to be interesting. I think that it depends on what they are exploring. If I give them a wire, a battery and a lightbulb, my students are going to accurately figure out how a circuit works. Yet, I'm not going to expect them to be able to accurately figure out the flow of electrons because they cant see it in that case. Yet, my next step would be to take them to the phet.colorodo website so they can play with the virtual circuits and see the flow of "electrons." But how are they going to understand what an electron is? I feel like teaching is one big cycle of exploring and reflecting. I disagree with the blanket statement that Olson made. Given the right circumstances, students can learn things through exploring on their own. Does this always happen? No. We have to set them up to learn what we want them to through their explorations. If they do, then we are successful. I'm thinking baby steps towards the Big Idea here.

Kymberly- I have to agree with you. I'm going broke trying to effectively teach my students and provide them with hands on activities. I work in a school where the parents can't help or send very much in because they are having a hard time keeping food on their tables. If I don't buy stuff, we don't do experiments. I have raided the FOSS kits, even from other grade levels, and there simply is not enough stuff to teach the right way all of the time. Sad but true.

I always feel like I am being rushed through topics so that I can be sure to squeeze them all in. The article starts with something we all know, that students cannot develop true understanding with just one teaching. I try really hard to introduce a topic in a way that makes them want to move on to the exploratory phase, but like others have said, there are not always the resources to do that. To get my students interested in rocks this year I busted out the most colorful, interesting rocks I had, and that seemed to be enough to hold their attention and have them want to learn more. Without the fun colors and catchy introduction they would have rolled their eyes and groaned (as they do most of the time). I was also surprised that the article says not to introduce vocabulary ahead of time. I always feel like it is a nice preview, and then when they hear the word in discussion it rings a bell that says, "Hey! I'm supposed to know that!". I like letting students explore on their own, and feel like it has been effective so far. Sometimes they discover things that the lesson didn't intend and it makes things even more interesting. I like the idea of creating a logic flow for units, but I can also see that it would be very time consuming and require a good bit of resources. I have a pretty supportive parent community, but I feel like asking them for contributions too often would be burdensome.

Craig, I also appreciated the examples of sentence starters given in the article, especially since they helped the students summarize prior learning. I would like to come up with a list of sentence starters for each unit myself for use with science journals.

Natalie, I never thought about the fact that our science text does the same explore first/then read cycle that Olson describes in the article. I like your point about Bloom's Taxonomy: move from the concrete to the abstract.

Tiffany, I completely agree with you about reading this article along with the Concept Maps. This article gives a better insight to breaking down the concept. Hopefully the “guinea pig cohort” will help smooth things over for the next group.

The opening line of this article caught my attention, “A common mistake in the science classroom is to expect students to develop understanding from one activity or experience.” I always believed that, but working in Chatham County has really made me comprehend that statement. Sometimes a one day lesson turns into a four day festivity because a concept needs to be explained again and investigated in a different way. As we complete various activities in class or watch virtual representations, the true understanding of the concept becomes ingrained within the students. I wish that I was able to read this article before trying to create a concept map. After reading the teacher’s thought process of creating her Unit Logic Flow chart, I feel like I would have had a more concrete idea of how to plan the Concept Map for the Pedagogy Unit. It would also be awesome for the students to build the Concept Map on a bulletin board in the room. Since I am in a wishing kind of mood… I also wish that Chatham County would design our District PLC’s around unit development using the strategies outline in the article. Planning is the more crucial element of the unit. It needs to be well thought out and designed to focus on students misconceptions and steadily build the students’ understanding of the Big Idea. Time seems to evaporate away as a teacher, it would be great to sit down with grade levels and do some deliberately plan and create together.

Craig, I am also one of the lucky ones who is able to teach science for an hour to THREE classes. But the time! The time flies by in science! I just can’t seem to stop the students from exploring and questioning. We get so wrapped up, on developing our concept; it’s hard to stop the students. Then there are the days were nobody is getting along and is having a hard time basic rules, let alone focusing.

Amber, focusing on unit development at each grade level would be fabulous for all Sav'h Cha teachers. Creating meaningful explorations as well as follow-up with the resources we have would help us all.

Deliberate concept development is a great way to offer ever increasingly complex explorations and discussions to increase student knowledge of big ideas. In Kindergarten we only have 7 areas of investigation. For example we investigate living things in October with pumpkins, spiders, and bats; again in November with farm animals and vegetables; in January we investigate polar animals; March finds us exploring monarchs, tadpoles and flowers. May brings earthworms. Each time we add to our knowledge of needs and life cycles. Students learn to make generalizations about living things. K teachers are good about linking previous knowledge and getting students to compare and contrast units of study. Adding more open-ended questions and allowing more student discussion are 2 things I will try from Olson’s article. I would like to be as good at building concept development with some of the trickier K standards, like gravity.

Amber- I like your idea of having SCCPSS provide workshops for unit development. A lot of time those professional development days are a joke. That would be a good way to spend a day!

Natalie- I too am going BROKE trying to keep our lessons hands-on, and fun. It takes a lot of materials to make things happen. FOSS kits are nice (we don't have them at our school), but it would be amazing if someone could come up with kids that don't need to be replenished every year...classic materials that are durable and can be used to teach year after year (or include it in the school budget to replace the things that need replaced?!).

do not put all your eggs in one basket yes anyone knows doing something once is not mastery what is the saying do something for at least 10,000 hours and you are a pro as any racer knows you approach each corner slow and gradually build speed at that corner until you about crash, that is your limit at that corner now move on to and focus on the other 11 or 12 corners @ that track, and yes some corners are more important, you cannot lose much in a slow corner with another slow corner around the bend, but you lose a ton in any corner before a long straight (so read some lessons provide critical stuff, others not so much) so yes one lesson will not mean mastery (but it might for some) but what about tangents? mistakes? trying stuff on a whim, don't these often lead to great discoveries? x rays were invented by accident if i remember correctly, yes i just researched it and viagra, penicillin, small pox vaccine, and coumadin all discovered by accident! haven't you watched the news @ 7 am, hear of something cool and neat and simply go teach that topic that day so what i am getting at is do your lessons have to be super planned and scripted trying to guide @ a perfect pace all people are different, is their a perfect gap of knowledge you try to connect in each lesson for all 20-26 kids? what about differentiation? what if every kid had a 504? can you still plan a whole group lab in these scenarios? what is wrong with a lesson that stretches those gaps and to then see who made the leap and who now needs some baby steps? would this be good teaching to lose a bunch but get a few far ahead quickly? then go back with some life rafts for the others? just some thoughts i plan to keep my style loose, i think it serves it place in school so that after 13 years in the school system we have a balanced bunch of students due to varied teachers and teaching styles

It is so true that students will not "develop accurate concepts on their own from the exploration". Planning must go into the "concept development phase" so students are not just enjoying their science explorations but making meaningful sense out of them. I think it's so much fun for us to come up with "cool" activities we want to do with our students to make learning hands-on, but it's easy to forget that those supposedly "obvious" concepts that students should get out of an activity, are not always so obvious to the students. This goes back to the concept map again or some "logic flow" as the article states. We find out what is most important with the big idea and supporting concepts and then plan a sequence of activities/experiences that follow and build upon each other. Using a "backward design" we know where we want to end up and then how we are going to get there taking into account that planning might have to change along the way. "Deliberately planning" concept development after each exploration/activity or series of activities seems like such the correct thing to do to help our students make sense of things along the way. It takes time, but I think time well spent. My students collect data all the time in the lab. I feel good when they can fill in a data table and graph the data. Data doesn't tell them what to think as the article says, though. Our students must have experiences interpreting the data and help along the way as to how to do this. I find that I look at the graphs they have made and it seems like most any student could "read" the graph and extrapolate from there to the bigger picture of what the data says. This is definitely not the case, even with the most simple of graphs. I like how the article talked about questioning the students after an exploration and then using sentence starters, small and whole group discussion, concept mapping, and journaling that get the students thinking towards the bigger picture/generalities. Putting key ideas on the board keeps the concepts in full view (sentence strips or concept map) of where the class has been along the different concept phases of the big idea. So often it's easy for students to get caught up in the details of an activity/experience. It's important for me to always keep that big idea and supporting concepts out there for the students. For me, it's always reminding myself to leave time during an active lab to make sure students "make sense" of what they have experienced.

Craig, I too questioned the fact that the author said introducing vocabulary before students understand concepts was not appropriate. I think there is nothing at all wrong with having vocabulary in front of the class at the start of a new concept. Many won't know the meanings, but they will soon after they have experiences where they are used. The author was probably referring to teachers not stressing the vocubulary too much before students have had explorations using the vocabulary.

This article reinforces the idea of focused concept development during science lessons. Students need several opportunities for exploration that is followed immediately by concept development. Ideally, then students would be able to have more exploration time and further concept development. Basically students need lots of exploration and understanding in science lessons. We all see this as students struggle to really undestand and see the concept they read about in science textbooks or hear about in Brain Pop videos. Of course, for teachers time and materials can be an issue. However, effective planning could solve those two problems (although, we often run out of time for this some weeks!). The part of the article that listed all of the ways a concept development phase would be ineffective was pretty alarming. I am sure I am guilty of doing those things- introducing vocabulary too soon, telling the students what they should have found, and so on. Also, I know I am guilty of expecting students to make some of the logical statements and understand the concept in the "logical" way that is expected with the lesson. They will need guidance and we will need to understand the misconceptions that they will definitely have. This article just hit home on how tricky effective science lessons can be to deliver!

Amber, I think that's a great idea to have district PLCs where teachers can work on planning units with other grade level teachers. Developing the concept map together with my group in class made it go so easily with everyone contributing and helping the "logic flow" of the concepts. Sean, how about getting that seed planted for some PLCs next year! :)

White I agree with most of this article about concept development, I do take exception to a few key ideas. I do think you need to introduce, identify, and discuss vocabulary with students before beginning a new concept. Students are just not exposed to science words much less understand their meaning. Children can't build and incorporate new concepts without understanding what they are talking about. I also think planning is key to any new ideas. This author calls it "logic flow" but in reality good planning is key to making sure ideas flow smoothly and the teacher can get maximum results. The author talks about using chart paper, charts, and concept maps to build the unit. Most of us do this as a matter of course. Fourth graders are old enought to know that each species of animal has different needs and can transfer the data from the pill bugs to other species. This reminds me of "hands on, minds on' of years ago where students use observation and compare/contrast skills to construct new ideas. I believe that we do these things in the classroom in order to look for the big idea. I don't know that we call is logic transfer or any of the terms used in this article. I also think that due to the nature of our particular learner, much of this should be presented in small increments over a period of time. We want them to enjoy looking at the pill bugs. We also want them to grasp the idea without talking over their heads.

Amber, I wish we could do the multi grade level units in science. It is difficult to get cooperation from other grades. I still find teachers who only teach math and reading and science as an incidental subject. Maybe this will change when science scores are looked at next year.

Craig, I also wrote about introducing vocabulary at the beginning of a unit. So many students have no idea what the concept it if they can't understand the vocabulary. I don't use the glossary. We often draw concept maps and sometimes pictures of what they think the word is. I also ask students to journal the activity using vocabulary in the appropriate context.

to all those tiffany/ sean with comments on time (or should we say gravity) how I long to be a regular elementary classroom teacher again (save for grades, purchase orders, rti's, parent conferences of negative starts etc), time is easy for me here. I would many a year refuse to put out a schedule that says 9-9:50 science, 10 -11: 00 reading, if they purport you should with good teaching teach across the curriculum, why lie and say you are just doing math (and then only truly arithmatic) for those 40 minutes? this is where we need some with it head strong administrators to support the teacher with their political performance art agendas. yes there is a ton of stuff you have to teach, but the beauty of elementary school is you can often teach stuff while even walking to lunch, review to send em into line, eat lunch in the class and watch instructional videos, do a day of celebration of end products in the room with parents to view. nowadays with our school doing this stupid differentiation stuff, the nonsense that we think will help, mr math only teach math and mrs social stud only teach this, etc I became a elementary teacher because i like the beauty and art of doing it all, connecting the dots, with non paint by the numbers formulas, thomas kincaide is not art!

now yes money is a prob the cure for batteries, teach why they are not that good to begin with, heavy toxic messes, how many broken calculator solar panels do you need for a electro magnet? what about those little spinny hand generators, what about the shake em "batteries" in flash lights, connect an old car alternator to a belt connected to a stationary bike, get an old stator off of a lawn mower, there are cool ways but yes these also take time and money and often no where near as easy, but is teaches a lot but every year second grade wants to order catepillar larvae, are we crazy? they are everywhere (we live in the subtropical south people!), find a white sack in a local pecan tree and get a million, dig in the dirt for moth pupae, find a mulberry tree, plant some milkweed and have monarchs everyyear go paperless, i am considering having kids next year use these google sites, free, easy, nothing lost yet so many cool ways to not buy stuff

Concept Development Of course, few students will develop understanding from just one activity or experience. It is important to build on concepts and help students get it. As a teacher of four, five & six year olds, it is sometimes comical, sometimes sad, to hear the misconceptions they have. But those misconceptions have to be addressed in learning the new concepts. My favorite way to do this is just talking to my students and discussing new vocabulary and ideas. Wrapping concepts across curriculum is important to help students make connections. We tend to see much of the world in a fragmented way and are no longer able to see the connections. Our antiquated factory model of education has broken up learning into compartmentable bits and pieces and we need to take a more holistic view of education and look for connections. Teaching across the curriculum and making connections is necessary. “Teachers must effectively develop and use questions during the act of teaching that can respond to and work with students’ erroneous ideas.” I think this is very important – but not just questioning, dialogue is an important tool that we can use to see what our students think and where they have wrong ideas. We should have dialogue with our students as much as possible to learn about them so that we can help them learn.

Ellen - I agree that teaching new vocabulary is important before a lesson - maybe just in lower grades when we are still teaching them how to think reflexively

Craig The students should have many chances to explore a subject so they can make sense of it properly - yes! and they can do that across curriculum.

Catherine, I agree with you - this article made me feel incompetent, as well. While I was reading it, I could not help but think - ok, I do hands on but it doesn't matter, I teach vocabulary beforehand - shouldn't have done that. I do understand what the author is trying to say - we need to make those connections between the hands-on and the concepts. However, I did find the tone of the article to be a little condescending rather than informative. Becky

Tiffany, I really liked the idea of the concept map (or flow) being posted on the bulletin board, too. It seems to serve as an agenda of sorts, as well as a concept map. There is something comforting about knowing what you've learned and where you're going in the next step. Becky

Response - Concept Development I was very mixed about this article. There were a few things that I thought I needed a reminder about, and it made me feel a little bad about how I sometimes think when I'm teaching these concepts. For example, sometimes I do plan exploratory or hands-on lessons where I expect the students to understand more than they probably do. Also, I like to talk, so I know that at the end of the lesson I will probably tell students what they should have found in their investigation. I do emphasize that labs and experiments do not always work as planned, and that is ok. However, I do tell them what they should take away from it. Oops! Finally, I have made the mistake of introducing vocabulary before studying units. Do I expect them to fully understand it at the beginning? No, but I do want them to be on the lookout for these terms as our activities and reading unfolds. These items made me feel somewhat of a bad teacher. There were some good points made in this article, as well. It is so important to have a concept map to show you where you're going. However, I don't always think how lost the students may feel without this. I loved the idea of displaying it on a bulletin board to show where we've been and where we're going. Secondly, I like the point made about planning for the part of the lesson where the students' misconceptions will become evident and be ready to challenge them. I was teaching a unit on matter for 2nd graders when I realized they seemed to understand water representing a change in state. However, they did not think of ice as water, nor did they think that water vapor was still water. So the next day we did an experiment just based on changes in the states of matter of water. Overall, I thought the article had some really good points, especially concerning the concept map. However, I thought the author was a little condescending and rigid with some finer points. Becky

This was a great article to read. Because my school is an International Bachelorette school, our approach is to let the students inquire or explore a new concept before we teach. When this concept was first proposed to me I didn’t like the idea at all. As many other teachers I struggle with the fact of letting go. Over the past few months I have learned to loosen the reigns a little and let my students discover new things and then lead into the concept I am trying to teach. I used to introduce the vocabulary before the lesson as well but learned through the IB method to stop doing that. After the students have had the opportunity to explore and experience hands-on opportunities, their experiences can be tied into the new vocabulary. The part that stood out to me most was the fact teachers need to know what it is they want their students to know at the end of the lesson or unit before they start planning the lesson or unit. I also liked the idea of using sentence starters. I teach kindergarten but this would be a great way to integrate science journals in the class. The article suggests teachers use open-ended questions and allow the students to have wait time in order to communicate their thinking. This is very difficult for me at times because I teach kindergarten and I’m never sure if the student actually has something to say or if they just put their hand up because everyone else did. Is it wrong to coach the student along to speed up the process?

Catherine you shouldn’t feel like you are incompetent after reading this article. There is always room for improvement. This article just suggests another way for your students to be successful. Like you, I thought the comment about students not likely to develop accurate concepts on their own from exploration to be interesting as well. This thought is not new to me. In fact I’ve said it several times, but never saw the actual words in print. It’s nice to know there are some people out there not trying to sugarcoat real experiences in the classroom.

Craig, I liked the idea of using sentence starters as well. Although I teach kindergarten I think it can be applied in my class. It will take some work, especially at the beginning of the school year when they are learning basic things such as letter and sounds but it can be done. I understand how you feel about the time allotment for science. Squeezing anything in at the end of the day is almost always a challenge. To solve this issue I try to integrate whatever I’m working on in science with my other subjects. I find I can accomplish a lot more when I teach this way.

Plannning well when we develp our units and using the concept maps to plan the unit around what you want the big idea to be in the end. You must ask yourself what do students need to know to meet that standard before you leave that unit and go on to the next one. I think somethimes, especially when you teach all the subjects and have to plan all the subjects, you don't spend as much time planning as you need to. Replies: Kimberly: That is so true. It is hard to combine the two. Cathrine: This would be the ideal way to teach and I agree that we need more training on how to plant his way.

Science concepts are often difficult to understand, for both children and adults. Misconceptions are rife, an they are passed down among the generations at home. In addition, teachers often have a hard time squeezing in science content with the other "units" subjects: social studies and health. There is usually too little time to do enough justice to all of these worthy subjects. When teachers are attacking their science content, the activities teachers choose must be clear and concise. These activities must become more complex as the student begins to understand the concept at hand, but the problem of time constraints keeps everything at a rushed pace. Further complicating the issue, common student misconceptions must be addressed before real learning can take place. Misconceptions must be treated carefully, as some are passed down from family members (ex. religious explanations for scientific occurences) and others seem, to the student, as common sense explanations (ex. the sun moves across the sky because the sun moves, not the earth). Teachers must extend their knowledge, and their wisdom, to their students. Information must be broken into small pieces that eventually build into the big idea of a scientific concept. Students should be allowed to explore these small pieces of information to ultimately determine for themselves how they fit into the big idea. Excellent ways to allow students to find their own knowledge include concept maps and open-ended question (teacher or peer-led). This approach also allows teachers to assess what students have learned...and how far students still need to go down the path to knowledge.

Thea- I also feel like I am being rushed when teaching the "units" content. Kym- I agree there is a flow to logic that students must master...baby steps!

In order to move students' thinking from the exploration experiences to concept understanding teachers must deliberately consider students misconceptions, the immediate steps to the accurate conception, and how to scaffold students understanding step by step to the desired outcome is an awesome task. The teacher role in this process is very critical in order for the students to become successful in the classroom. The teacher is needed to carefully scaffold students' thinking from their current ideas to the new concepts. We must deliberately plan for the concept developmental phase, as it is the crucial point in the lesson where students' misconceptions are challenged and they try to make sense of new information.Concept development requires not only a strong grasp of the content and logical progression of the unit but also very well orchestrated teacher behaviors. The teacher must be adept at using open-ended questions and extended wait time to gain a strong sense of student thinking. Student misconceptions are likely to arise at unexpected moments for this reason, no lesson can ever be fully scripted. Teachers must effectively develop and use questions during the act of teaching that can respond to and work with students' erroneous ideas. But working with logical progression of the unit helps the teacher ensure that he or she has a road map of where to go, so as stusdents' thinking roams the landscape, we can more clearly see where they are and where they need to be at each step of the way. Being deliberate about concept development is vital in effectively moving students from experience to understanding.

Melissa it is so true that adults as well as children have a lot of misconceptions about scientific concepts. The article allowed me to gain an understanding of the importance of being deliberate about concept development. The common mistake that we make when we think that children develop an understanding from one activity or experience is very short sighted. The article has opened my eyes to that.

Kymberly, so many times we are pressed for time and especially materials to implement a balanced approach to science instruction. As a result of being pressed it is difficult to effectively move students from experience to understanding. However, the article was an eye opener for we as teachers must be able to help our students over come the misconceptions that are common among us concerning science.

Kymberly and Craig, I enjoyed the suggestions you had for the way to get materials. We need a link on ACORN providing us with a resource idea section. I know I always throw someithing in the grocery cart each week for the labs. Luckily I have a general idea of the items so I watch for sales and use coupons. After the holidays (Easter, halloween, Christmas) you can always get certain items dirt cheap.

When reading this article, Project Based Learning came to mind. It slowly scaffolds the concepts. Each base idea is presented, discussed, handled and understood prior to moving on to the next idea. The end result is a project which utilizes all these concepts in a real world application. If only we did this initially, ideas would not need to be reviewed and remediated. It takes time to really learn and understand something. Less is more. This is what STEM is all about. I like how this article really slowed the teaching process down and gave step by step examples of how to do this. Often as teachers, we think the children should get it the first time. Think about when we are taught something new. We need to see it, interact with it, discuss it and play with it before we can truly understand and say we know something. Students are no different. This takes a deeper understanding by the teacher and the guts to leave the text book. Also, our pacing guides do not always embrace the idea of taking extended time on concepts. If, as a district, we embrace deliberate concept development, we may need to adjust the pacing guides and suggested lesson plans to coordinate.

“Concept development requires not only a strong grasp of the content and logical progression of the unit but also very well-orchestrated teacher behaviors.” I think this statement sums up the entire article. Effective concept development requires teachers to plan lesson and encounters that students are able to explore and make applications. Unfortunately, time plays an essential part on if students get both. Students have to be taught how to make application or make sense of exploration activities. When I first started teaching, I can remember focusing more on exploration phase without adequately tying in how to use the information obtained from observation and introducing vocabulary before students understand the concepts. Using those techniques made it hard for all of my students to be successful. Revising my teaching techniques helped me focus more on the big picture and the importance of me guiding my students to the concepts I want them to retain. A well-designed lesson encourages students to encounter the big ideas and generalize how these concepts apply or do not apply to other situations. The article demonstrated how the teacher will guide learning opportunities without becoming the center of instruction. This may take time to acquire; however, students and teachers benefit. All three articles have stressed the importance of well-planned lessons and encouraging critical thinking. Effective questioning and allowing students to see their responses on the board assist with critical thinking and may help students to think about the concept in a new way by what one of the classmates shared. Once again, the planning stage has surfaced to the top and stands to identify itself as an integral part of each lesson.

• This article reminded me a lot of the article we read about concept maps and taking the Big Idea and breaking it up into smaller pieces. Being in the science lab and only seeing students once a week for 45 minutes of lab, I am guilty of trying to cover a topic in one lesson. I hope that the homeroom teachers are also doing lessons to help students get the big idea, but I feel like I really only have one shot at trying to get students to understand the concept we are working on at present. I am so guilty of telling students what “should have happened “in a lab, especially if we are running out of time. I understand the importance of understanding student misconceptions an correcting them as early as possible so they do not carry those ideas with them and I liked the referencing to the data and open ended questions to assess what students understand. I always make a point to collect and post data to discuss as a class when we do a lab and try to have conversations about different results and why we think they occurred. When results are hugely varied however, and time is short, I worry that the kids will leave with the “wrong” idea so I quickly try to explain what should have happened in the lab. If we have time the following week I will let the students do the lab again and compare to the previous weeks results, but this rarely happens. I feel like I am always in such a time crunch that it’s hard to go back or spend multiple weeks one concept. One of my goals for next year is to communicate better with the homeroom teachers so we can clear up student misconceptions and work on better concept development.

Thea, I too feel like I am constantly being rushed from one topic to another. One of my favorite things to do in a lab is to give students something like rocks or sand or a light bulb and ask them to make their own discoveries based on what they observe. This often leads to discussions where students are leading and are just more fun. Supplies are always hard to come by but I have learned to borrow a lot from the rest of the teachers at school and those cereal bowls the kids get for breakfast, make for great containers for lessons.

Catherine, this article made me feel a little incompetent too, especially when she listed all the things you shouldn’t do and I found myself thinking “oops.” I spend more of my time in science lab doing hands on explorations and often forget about/run out of time for the follow up. I realize how important it is to find misconceptions and deal with them but I often find myself missing this part. I also like to introduce to vocabulary first, and then I hope that they will notice it when it comes up later in a lesson. It takes careful planning to achieve such a balance and that is something that I know I need to work on.

AS i was reading this I kept saying "yea, I do that." in the part about developing the "logical flow" of the unit. It just seemed like a logical progression, kind of common sense, to set up your unit this way based on the standard. Then I got to the part about how much time is to be spent on the experiences. I do not have that kind of time - so "Nope, don't do that". I really liked the idea of the bulletin board sized concept map. I was thinking it would be a good jumping off point for a pre and pst assessment.

I too spend more time on the lab, wanting my students to get that "lab" experience. I find my concept development part of the lab lacking. I should be more prepared with good questions to lead the students in discussion about the lab.

@ Susan I agree with you when you say the pacing guides do not always embrace the idea of taking extended time on concepts. Hopefully, with the common core this will change.

Do we have a time line for common core for science? Sean mentioned a Georgia group tackling a redo of standards. Is this for CCPS?

Katrina, I agree that concept development is about letting students have that inquiry component first then leading them to make sense of their explorations but it all goes back to time. I think about the owl lab we watched in class that was a four day lab! That's a lot of time to gently lead students to a full and independent grasp of one big idea. Less standards and more time to teach will be welcome!

John, I have tried raising enough Milkweed, but no matter how many little plants I purchase and seeds I plant the monarch caterpillars are way too hungry. They eat the plants down to nubs! I was begging neighbors last year to let me dig up their milkweed plants just to feed the caterpillars I'd found on my few plants. Their are a few fundraising sites on line I am getting info sent, but I need a large, inexhaustible source! Any ideas?

I feel that this article has helped me to understand I need direction for the students to understand what they are learning. I found that concept maps, 5 E lesson plan and formative and summative lesson plans are very important for the guidance of understanding inquiry based learning. I personally felt that I have learned a lot from this approach. I feel that my students have enjoyed their science experiences as well. I am still trying to learn open ended questions. I hope student misconceptions have decreased by my approach to teaching this way. I hope they have gained a more thorough knowledge of science.

In response to Tiffany's response, I do understand her delimma about time and money constraints. I try to be as creative as possible and try to get parents and businesses to help with this issue.So far it has been very helpful. There is never enough time to get everything done. I just do my best to get as much done as possible and integrate when I can

Becky I do want my students get more experiences with lab which causes a time constraint.

Nalie I agree you can't put everything on just one activity. Try a variety of things. One thing does not always work and the students come with many different learning modalities.

John, I have to disagree with you about the departmentalization a little bit. While I would love to have the time to blend a large unit that covers many other subjects, I find that, since I can focus my attention on one subject (with the help of other subjects, of course) and do a much better job at it. While I was self-contained, I had to put a lot of effort into my lesson plans, focusing on Reading and Math and, if I was lucky, I could do Reading or Math (sometimes both) with some Science or Social Studies involved. I didn't have time to plan Science the way it needs to be planned, with fore-thought to vocabulary, lesson development, etc. This way, I can focus on all of those small details and dedicate what I need to them, which also involves incorporating other subject areas in. While there are many things I miss about being self-contained, I've found student mastery of the things I'm teaching (even when it was Reading, Language Arts & Science instead of just Science) to be MUCH greater when I have the time to devote to planning appropriately.

Amber, this article would've been interesting to read before developing the concept map. Also, I would love for us to have District PLCS. I know that last school year my grade level did try to meet every so often and share ideas in science. I would like to see us work together more across the school district to build lessons, concept maps, ect. together.

Kymberly, it does sound like unpacking the standards. Also, money definitly is an issue with getting supplies!

Generating a Concept Map to keep everyone flowing in the direction we want to take them is a great idea. What I have found necessary in the process is for me to begin with my ending outcome and the "what do I need to do to get students where I want them to be?" I hit the high points of my goals in my mapping strategies but after reading the article I have concluded that I build a skeletal map. By this I mean that I generalize in my map because I want the students to plug in their learning experiences and outcomes as they progress through the unit lessons and experiments. I do not necessairly agree with the author when it comes to vocabulary. I believe vocabulary needs to be one of the core elements to effectively delivering information. I believe this to be especially true when it comes to Science specific vocabulary. When I first came to my current school I thought, "what do I need to start with to begin to build a successful science lab?" My thoughts were continually drawn back to "building a common vocabulary for successful communication." I could not begin concept development if the students had no scientific background. So, brick by brick we built a common core vocabulary, necessary to the evolution of the discipline. Never was this basic need more evident to me than when the Board implemented re-districting. Suddenly I was faced with students in 3rd - 5th grade with a working knowledge and supporting vocabulary to communicate findings, the ability to ask and pose questions to the teacher and peers, exposure to handling materials and equipment appropriately; grouped with students who had never been in a lab setting, had no marine science vocabulary or recordkeeping training, and had not had a steady diet of investigation and experimentation. What a nightmare! Juggling audiences this diverse was maddening. My fifth graders had 6 years of marine science. They wanted to keep progressing forward. Peers with no experience thought they were sitting in a foreign language classroom... I say all of this to support vocabulary development from the onset. I want a clear picture of where I am going, but I want to take the seanic route for student understanding. I want the concept map to grow as the concept understanding becomes clearer to each individual student.

This is a reply to Marilyn: I think because we want to excite the students in the experimentation process the follow-through portion of the lesson gets lost. What I have found helpful is to do the experiment on one day, have the students give feed back on another day, group the feedback (I do that part) so that I can get an accurate picture of what the students are perceiving, then work on conceptions and mis-conceptions... over a period of days. This way I do not suck up time I do not have and it keeps the students cozinant of the concept. I limit discussion to the last 15 minutes of the day and we discuss our topic all week.

I smiled to myself, in fact I'm still smiling as I read Susan, Kymberly, John, Amber, and Rebecca's posts about time, materials, and monies. Susan made me laugh out loud with the weekly grocery shopping... seems as though these issues have been plaguing teachers since the beginning of time. To "do" hands-on science, you must have materials and resources readily available. Not always the case in every school's budget. I am hoping and silently praying the new core curriculum standards will allow for a slower pace to accomodate processing and actively engage students in depth of knowledge rather than broadness of topic exposure. Yes Susan, I do believe that is what STEM is all about.

“Being Deliberate About Concept Development Wow! What an eye opener! As I read this article (three times), I realize I have been working harder not smarter. Although some students understood the concept of various topics discussed before and after explorations, other students struggled to understand. Olson (2009) identified the ways that concept development can be made ineffective (these are ones I’ve used) (a) having a class discussion and expecting students to get it; and, (b) introducing vocabulary before students understand the concepts. I have always introduced the vocabulary. I thought knowing and understanding the meaning of the vocabulary will help the students better understand the concept. And if they use the vocabulary in context during discussion they have demonstrated knowledge of the concept. My strategy of concept development may not have been the strategy to use for the below level students and/or those students who did not master the benchmark quarterly assessments. After reading the Unit Logic Flow, I can see my below level students grasping and understanding the concepts being taught easier. I can also see ways to use the Unit Logic Flow with all science content. Time is definitely needed for teams to meet and deliberately plan for student success.

Rebecca Day, if you read my posting, you will see that I, too, thought it was important to introduce the vocabulary before students understood the concepts. I thought learning the vocabulary will help them learn the concept; especially when the students use the vocabulary correctly in context as they summarize their learning.

Jill, I have trouble as well agreeing with the author about the vocabulary as well. I believe the students need to know the vocabulary to make the necessary connections to concept development. How would them successful begin to understand a concept if they don’t have any background knowledge of “the big words” if we don’t introduce the vocabulary?