Core Decisions
(Taken from Revised Lesson Plan)
What?
This lesson represents an introduction for 3rd grade students to the study of rocks and minerals. Rather than introducing detailed content information, it provides students with an opportunity to investigate and experience concepts and skills that will be important for further investigation of this subject. In terms of content, the emphasis of the lesson is on laying the groundwork for future work with rocks and minerals by challenging students to reevaluate and solidify their understandings of the defining traits of rocks/minerals as a general category, and by exposing students to a variety of features which can be used to distinguish various rocks and minerals.
In terms of skills, students will work on three primary skills areas: observation, classification, and organization. For observation, students will not only have a period of time to observe individual rocks closely to determine significant features; they will also have multiple opportunities to consider their prior observations in the context of new observations, and recognize additional features. For classification, students will use observed characteristics as the basis for sorting specimens. Finally, the students will use organizational systems both to capture the data they have observed and to present their overall conclusions and understandings. As with the content knowledge of this lesson, work on all of these skills will lay the groundwork for future science work with rocks and minerals.
For the purposes of my personal inquiry, this lesson will also feature a few significant features. Because I am investigating strategies for differentiated instruction and working with learners at diverse skill/experience levels, I am including a variety of independent, partnered, and group activities, some of which are designed to allow for student differences. In order to allow me to focus primarily on the inquiry and learning portions of the lesson, I will be working with a very small group – likely 4, but possibly 6 students, so as to minimize classroom management issues. Finally, the lesson incorporates a wide variety of activities – writing, drawing, speaking, producing diagrams, etc. – which I hope will afford me an exercise in getting to know students better by observing the activities that seem most or least engaging to them.
How?
The lesson will be composed primarily of hands-on activities and experiences. It will consist of five activities, each of which is designed to build upon the previous while introducing new skills and/or connections to content; while this may seem like a lot, many of the activities are fairly brief and some transition easily into one another, which will hopefully minimize problems. Direct instruction will be minimal – for the most part, it will consist of providing directions and modeling the activities which the students will then undertake. Only at the end will there be guided discussion of concepts.
The first phase of the lesson plan will be independent – students will each receive individual rock/mineral specimens and magnifying glasses, as well as handouts in which to record observation. Students are expected to write and draw as many details and characteristics of their samples as possible, in order to begin creating a catalogue of salient features of rocks and minerals. This is then extended into the second phase, when students work with partners to identify differences between their rocks – and, by extension, to recognize more features of their own rocks which become apparent by contrast.
Students remain in partners for the third phase, where they will conduct an exercise in classification of rocks and minerals, inspired by our recent 521 classification activity: using the details they have identified in the previous activities as a starting point, pairs will now examine a larger group of samples, and practice classification skills by arranging groups depending on whether they fit specified criteria. They will also begin work with data tables, which they will use to record their findings.
As a whole group, students will play a “game” for the fourth phase, which is intended both to provide them a different context in which to practice classification, and to recognize an application for classification work. In the game, inspired by the version of “Twenty Questions” used in a study of strategic questioning by children (Courage, 1989),[1] the teacher chooses a rock sample that matches one of the students’ rock samples, and it is the students’ goal to determine which sample it matches by using categorical questions (based on their classification work and observations).
The final portion of the lesson will continue with the whole group, and seeks to expand students’ inquiry from “what distinguishes rocks?” to “what is a rock?” This portion will begin with some teacher questioning to elicit students’ current understandings; the teacher will then attempt to challenge that understanding by handing out “rock-like” objects that are not rocks (i.e., marbles, possibly including both glass and plastic); and finally, students will be asked to produce a web diagram and sentence that presents their understanding of “what is a rock?” at the time of the lesson’s conclusion.
Why?
First of all, context played a substantial role in my decision to teach this particular topic. “Rocks and Minerals” is the first science unit that students are supposed to engage with in 3rd grade at Henry C. Lea Elementary; given the constraints of this assignment (one isolated 45-60 minute lesson), it was important to me to choose a subject which could be reinforced and expanded upon, either in school or outside of school, in the near future. I also wanted to select a subject in which students would have clear opportunities to draw upon prior knowledge and experience; I was intrigued by the opportunity to study rocks, with which all students will be familiar but few will have explored in a deliberative and rigorous manner.
In addition to drawing upon the context of the school curriculum, I also wanted to make use of standards – both PA Common Core and NGSS. However, neither of these sets of standards has a standard directly regarding rocks and minerals. The fact that even the NGSS standards (and also the Framework for K-12 Science Education, which I reviewed but did not pull directly from) does not have an explicit “rocks and minerals” unit did not take me entirely by surprise – while I have clear memories of studying rocks and minerals in 3rd grade myself, it was hardly a subject that was built upon in future lessons. Nevertheless, the fact that I remember this lesson 18 years later – something that is true for few other lessons from elementary school – demonstrates that, for me at least, there was something particularly intriguing about this subject. Further, I believe quite strongly that, at young ages, specific science content is secondary in importance to the skills and habits of mind that strong science lessons can support. Therefore, while my lesson is about rocks and minerals and serves as an introduction into a broader unit of study, I wanted to minimize direct instruction and focus on hands-on exercises connected directly to specific skills (observation, classification, organization) and habits of mind (collaboration, inquiry, extrapolation).
Although I was unable to draw on standards relating to content, I decided to search for standards to guide the skills development embedded in the lesson. I did this partially for inspiration, but mostly to practice for the future, when I will likely be in the position of needing to use literacy and math objectives to justify the incorporation of science activities into the classroom. In this case, I came upon three standards that helped guide some of the specific work used in the lesson. From the PA Common Core Standards for 3rd grade, I drew upon two standards that proved relevant: CC.1.5.3.A, which asks students to have “collaborative discussions of grade-level topics,” something that I hope will take place in both the partner and the full group sections of the activity; and CC.1.4.3.D, which asks students to produce logically organized representations of information, tied together with a concluding statement, which is reflected in the final product from the lesson (the information web and definition of what a rock is). From the NGSS, I found the most relevant standard in 2nd grade: 2-PS1-1, which calls upon students to investigate, describe, and “classify different kinds of materials by their observable properties,” all of which are directly incorporated particularly into the individual and partnered activities.
In addition to the above considerations, another factor which I incorporated was that I wanted my lesson to be hands-on. In part, this is rooted in my core beliefs about science education – I believe that hands-on investigation makes scientific exploration more engaging and memorable, and also that it gives students a context for developing their own personal inquiry that is unlikely to happen in the case of a lesson from which the student feels personally removed. I also wanted to provide a hands-on activity for the reason that the students in my class have hardly had any opportunities to do hands-on work; not only do I want to do a hands on lesson in order to provide them with a different type of learning opportunity, but I also wanted to experience developing and administering a hands-on lesson because that is the sort of lesson I would like to be able to draw upon as a teacher.
My final major consideration was that I wanted to conduct an activity that allows for differentiation, particularly through the use of partner-based collaboration. This connects to my overarching Term III inquiry question, which I developed in response to the concept (discussed in one form or another in practically all of my courses) that collaboration between students of differing abilities & experiences can have benefits for all involved. For this lesson, I attempted to incorporate a few different ways in which students could collaborate, such as sharing previous observations and conducting new observations; the most direct opportunity to take on different roles comes in the classification activity, which carries the expectation that, for each time the students sort the samples, one student will do the sorting and the other will record the results. I am curious to see how students delegate these tasks – whether the students who are more comfortable writing will do more of the writing, whether they will do more of the early writing and the less-proficient writers will take over after seeing it modeled, whether the students will adhere to certain norms of fairness and create a policy governing division of work (e.g., taking turns; each student who names a criteria for sorting gets to sort it; etc.). In addition, there is another form of differentiation embedded in the structure of the assignment, which draws upon several different modes of learning (observation, discussion) and expression (writing, drawing, conversing).
[1] Courage’s version of Twenty Questions is similar to the traditional game, except that students have visible access to all of the possible items which the researcher could be thinking of. I read this study as part of my research for my final paper in Human Development. Courage, M.L. (1989). Children's Inquiry Strategies in Referential Communication and in the Game of Twenty Questions. Child Development, Vol. 60, No. 4, 877-886.
What?
This lesson represents an introduction for 3rd grade students to the study of rocks and minerals. Rather than introducing detailed content information, it provides students with an opportunity to investigate and experience concepts and skills that will be important for further investigation of this subject. In terms of content, the emphasis of the lesson is on laying the groundwork for future work with rocks and minerals by challenging students to reevaluate and solidify their understandings of the defining traits of rocks/minerals as a general category, and by exposing students to a variety of features which can be used to distinguish various rocks and minerals.
In terms of skills, students will work on three primary skills areas: observation, classification, and organization. For observation, students will not only have a period of time to observe individual rocks closely to determine significant features; they will also have multiple opportunities to consider their prior observations in the context of new observations, and recognize additional features. For classification, students will use observed characteristics as the basis for sorting specimens. Finally, the students will use organizational systems both to capture the data they have observed and to present their overall conclusions and understandings. As with the content knowledge of this lesson, work on all of these skills will lay the groundwork for future science work with rocks and minerals.
For the purposes of my personal inquiry, this lesson will also feature a few significant features. Because I am investigating strategies for differentiated instruction and working with learners at diverse skill/experience levels, I am including a variety of independent, partnered, and group activities, some of which are designed to allow for student differences. In order to allow me to focus primarily on the inquiry and learning portions of the lesson, I will be working with a very small group – likely 4, but possibly 6 students, so as to minimize classroom management issues. Finally, the lesson incorporates a wide variety of activities – writing, drawing, speaking, producing diagrams, etc. – which I hope will afford me an exercise in getting to know students better by observing the activities that seem most or least engaging to them.
How?
The lesson will be composed primarily of hands-on activities and experiences. It will consist of five activities, each of which is designed to build upon the previous while introducing new skills and/or connections to content; while this may seem like a lot, many of the activities are fairly brief and some transition easily into one another, which will hopefully minimize problems. Direct instruction will be minimal – for the most part, it will consist of providing directions and modeling the activities which the students will then undertake. Only at the end will there be guided discussion of concepts.
The first phase of the lesson plan will be independent – students will each receive individual rock/mineral specimens and magnifying glasses, as well as handouts in which to record observation. Students are expected to write and draw as many details and characteristics of their samples as possible, in order to begin creating a catalogue of salient features of rocks and minerals. This is then extended into the second phase, when students work with partners to identify differences between their rocks – and, by extension, to recognize more features of their own rocks which become apparent by contrast.
Students remain in partners for the third phase, where they will conduct an exercise in classification of rocks and minerals, inspired by our recent 521 classification activity: using the details they have identified in the previous activities as a starting point, pairs will now examine a larger group of samples, and practice classification skills by arranging groups depending on whether they fit specified criteria. They will also begin work with data tables, which they will use to record their findings.
As a whole group, students will play a “game” for the fourth phase, which is intended both to provide them a different context in which to practice classification, and to recognize an application for classification work. In the game, inspired by the version of “Twenty Questions” used in a study of strategic questioning by children (Courage, 1989),[1] the teacher chooses a rock sample that matches one of the students’ rock samples, and it is the students’ goal to determine which sample it matches by using categorical questions (based on their classification work and observations).
The final portion of the lesson will continue with the whole group, and seeks to expand students’ inquiry from “what distinguishes rocks?” to “what is a rock?” This portion will begin with some teacher questioning to elicit students’ current understandings; the teacher will then attempt to challenge that understanding by handing out “rock-like” objects that are not rocks (i.e., marbles, possibly including both glass and plastic); and finally, students will be asked to produce a web diagram and sentence that presents their understanding of “what is a rock?” at the time of the lesson’s conclusion.
Why?
First of all, context played a substantial role in my decision to teach this particular topic. “Rocks and Minerals” is the first science unit that students are supposed to engage with in 3rd grade at Henry C. Lea Elementary; given the constraints of this assignment (one isolated 45-60 minute lesson), it was important to me to choose a subject which could be reinforced and expanded upon, either in school or outside of school, in the near future. I also wanted to select a subject in which students would have clear opportunities to draw upon prior knowledge and experience; I was intrigued by the opportunity to study rocks, with which all students will be familiar but few will have explored in a deliberative and rigorous manner.
In addition to drawing upon the context of the school curriculum, I also wanted to make use of standards – both PA Common Core and NGSS. However, neither of these sets of standards has a standard directly regarding rocks and minerals. The fact that even the NGSS standards (and also the Framework for K-12 Science Education, which I reviewed but did not pull directly from) does not have an explicit “rocks and minerals” unit did not take me entirely by surprise – while I have clear memories of studying rocks and minerals in 3rd grade myself, it was hardly a subject that was built upon in future lessons. Nevertheless, the fact that I remember this lesson 18 years later – something that is true for few other lessons from elementary school – demonstrates that, for me at least, there was something particularly intriguing about this subject. Further, I believe quite strongly that, at young ages, specific science content is secondary in importance to the skills and habits of mind that strong science lessons can support. Therefore, while my lesson is about rocks and minerals and serves as an introduction into a broader unit of study, I wanted to minimize direct instruction and focus on hands-on exercises connected directly to specific skills (observation, classification, organization) and habits of mind (collaboration, inquiry, extrapolation).
Although I was unable to draw on standards relating to content, I decided to search for standards to guide the skills development embedded in the lesson. I did this partially for inspiration, but mostly to practice for the future, when I will likely be in the position of needing to use literacy and math objectives to justify the incorporation of science activities into the classroom. In this case, I came upon three standards that helped guide some of the specific work used in the lesson. From the PA Common Core Standards for 3rd grade, I drew upon two standards that proved relevant: CC.1.5.3.A, which asks students to have “collaborative discussions of grade-level topics,” something that I hope will take place in both the partner and the full group sections of the activity; and CC.1.4.3.D, which asks students to produce logically organized representations of information, tied together with a concluding statement, which is reflected in the final product from the lesson (the information web and definition of what a rock is). From the NGSS, I found the most relevant standard in 2nd grade: 2-PS1-1, which calls upon students to investigate, describe, and “classify different kinds of materials by their observable properties,” all of which are directly incorporated particularly into the individual and partnered activities.
In addition to the above considerations, another factor which I incorporated was that I wanted my lesson to be hands-on. In part, this is rooted in my core beliefs about science education – I believe that hands-on investigation makes scientific exploration more engaging and memorable, and also that it gives students a context for developing their own personal inquiry that is unlikely to happen in the case of a lesson from which the student feels personally removed. I also wanted to provide a hands-on activity for the reason that the students in my class have hardly had any opportunities to do hands-on work; not only do I want to do a hands on lesson in order to provide them with a different type of learning opportunity, but I also wanted to experience developing and administering a hands-on lesson because that is the sort of lesson I would like to be able to draw upon as a teacher.
My final major consideration was that I wanted to conduct an activity that allows for differentiation, particularly through the use of partner-based collaboration. This connects to my overarching Term III inquiry question, which I developed in response to the concept (discussed in one form or another in practically all of my courses) that collaboration between students of differing abilities & experiences can have benefits for all involved. For this lesson, I attempted to incorporate a few different ways in which students could collaborate, such as sharing previous observations and conducting new observations; the most direct opportunity to take on different roles comes in the classification activity, which carries the expectation that, for each time the students sort the samples, one student will do the sorting and the other will record the results. I am curious to see how students delegate these tasks – whether the students who are more comfortable writing will do more of the writing, whether they will do more of the early writing and the less-proficient writers will take over after seeing it modeled, whether the students will adhere to certain norms of fairness and create a policy governing division of work (e.g., taking turns; each student who names a criteria for sorting gets to sort it; etc.). In addition, there is another form of differentiation embedded in the structure of the assignment, which draws upon several different modes of learning (observation, discussion) and expression (writing, drawing, conversing).
[1] Courage’s version of Twenty Questions is similar to the traditional game, except that students have visible access to all of the possible items which the researcher could be thinking of. I read this study as part of my research for my final paper in Human Development. Courage, M.L. (1989). Children's Inquiry Strategies in Referential Communication and in the Game of Twenty Questions. Child Development, Vol. 60, No. 4, 877-886.