Compare SAE curriculum to AIMS or GEMS curriculum.
You have seen how the math and science is integrated within the SAE curriculum (Jet Toy). Compare this to an AIMS or GEMS curriculum (found in the TRC).
I checked out a K-1 AIMS Activity Booklet entitled Sense-able Science: Exploring and Discovering Our Five Senses. The booklet contains a series of lessons dealing with the 5 senses, the lesson I chose is called I see the Light, it deals with our sense of sight.
The lessons differ from each other in focus of science concepts. The Jet Toy lesson deals with Physics and Technology, while the lesson from AIMS deals with life and human sciences.
Though the lessons focus on different areas of science, they have some similar concepts. They both deal with observing, comparing and contrasting, recording data, interpreting data, and applying it to everyday life. The two lessons are also both inquiry based.
The math concepts in the Jet Toy lesson were measurement and graphing. There is little math involved with the I see the Light lesson, it is only broadly connected.
I checked out k-3 Primarily Physics AIMS activities. The lesson I found was Cold Tin and Hot Hands. This lessons focus was Physical Science using processes such as observing, communicating, collecting and recording data, and drawing conclusions. The main idea of this lesson is heat causes molecules to move faster. As with the jet toy lesson we as a class used these processes of observing, communicating, collecting and recording data. Also the area of science the jet toy activity falls under is physics. The class never came to a conclusion with the data we collected because the variance among each groups data. The math used in the Cold Tin and Hot Hands lesson focuses on comparing math skills. As with the jet toy activity, groups were comparing their data with the class. The jet toy activity involved more math because we used graphing and measuring.
This lesson focuses on sorting by attributes. The students listen to a story about elves. One elf steals shoes and the students use observation skills to figure out whether or not the elf will steal a particular shoe.
Unlike the jet toy activity, which used graphing and measuring as the math skills, the math skills in this lesson focus more on logical thinking, using observational skills, and making predictions. The math and science skills are related in this lesson, there is less of a distinction between them as with the Jet toy activity.
The science processes in the jet toy activity were observing, making predictions, and gathering and recording data. The science processes in the elf activity are observing and classifying, interpreting data, and applying and generalizing information.
The science and math overlap in the elf lesson, but it does use both skills.
I reviewed a math/science integrated lesson in the AIMS curriculum. The lesson is called "Whoa-That's Heavy!". It focuses on the concept of comparing and is meant for the K-1 grade level. The activity involves discussing the meaning of heavier and lighter. Then the children are given two cards. One card says "heavier" and the other says "lighter". Then, the student's look at two objects such as blocks and predict which one is heavier and which one is lighter. Once they have made the prediction the children test it by placing the objects on a scale and weighing them.
The math skills involved include estimating, observing, and predicting. The Science processes involved include classifying, comparing, and gathering data. Within this lesson, math and science are used simultaneously and the integration seems very natural.
I think the main difference between the AIMS curriculum lesson and the SAE lesson focused on in class is that the SAE lesson was much more inquiry based. In class we needed to figure out ourselves how to manipulate the car in order to receive certain data. In the AIMS lesson I am evaluating, the steps are very well defined and there is not much room for student inquiry. The teacher is asking student’s which one they think is heavier and the students are responding. The teacher is telling the student how to test their prediction. I think this lesson could be more inquiry based if you allowed the student’s to ask questions about the objects and to figure out how to test their own predictions.
I do like how the procedure for the AIMS lesson is very clear and concise (easy to read). The SAE activity we did in class was confusing at times. More concise directions would have added to the efficiency of the lesson.
The book that I observed was titled, "Seasoning: Math and Science, Fall and Winter" for 2nd grade. It is an AIMS book that explores different activities that deal with the seasons or weather.
I found that the lessons did a good job of integrating math and science. Most of the activities had the students doing hands-on processes, which is usually always positive, but it seemed that many of the activities were very similar. Many lessons had students counting seeds or beans which works on their counting skills, but doesn't seem to be too engaging. I found that many of the activities also did not support the information very well after the activity was finished.
What I really enjoyed about the jet toy lesson was that it taught very deep concepts in a fun way that would help students get an introduction to those concepts. With the AIM lessons, they didn't seem as deep conceptually and didn't really follow up the activity with a review and discussion of the information that was supposed to be taught.
The similarities betweeen the two types of lessons was that they were heavily anchored to observation and recording data and then using that data to explore the scientific ideas behind the lesson. I found both types of lessons to be fairly inquiry-based (sometimes it's harder with younger students), and there were very few teacher-centered moments. It seemed though that the jet toy lesson was more inquiry-based, with students having to figure out for themselves what they were measuring, whereas the AIM lessons were more structured. That might just be because of the age group though.
Although both types of lessons were fairly good teaching practices, I found the jet toy lesson to be more engaging, more thought-provoking, deeper conceptually, and just more fun.
I looked at an GEMS lesson book for preschool-1st grade. This book has the students investigate all aspects of ladybugs from the egg stage to the adult stage through observation. The lessons are mainly science based but incorporate math with counting, measurement, symmetry, and pattern. The students can count how many days it takes the egg to hatch into larvae, go through the pupal stage and finally reach the adult stage. They could add all these days together to find how long it takes a ladybug to go from egg to adult. There are many other parts of the bug to count or compare. The curriculum could be used with older students by adapting the information to a variety of learning levels. Literature can also be integrated by using the books listed in the back of the GEMS booklet. They include stories, poems, and rhymes. This could lead to the students composing or dictating their own writings. The book also includes a small glossary to help define some of the parts and stages of life of the ladybug. Art is added into the lessons with many projects pertaining to ladybugs and their life stages. The GEMS lessons were easy to read and adapt to different learning levels. There were many suggestions for how to teach about ladybugs which is something that the students can continue to learn about and observe on their own when it's ladybug season.
I looked at the AIMS lesson called “Electric Breakfast I”. The overall purpose of this lesson is to learn how friction causes static electricity, using the question, “How can you move the banana without touching it?” Using a banana, balloon, and some friction, students predict and record the movement of the banana. The math skills are graphing, comparing, predicting, observing, and controlling variables. The science processes are observing classifying, gathering and recording data, interpreting data, applying and generalizing, and controlling variables.
Compared to the “Jet Toy” lesson, some of the many of the same skills and processes are used. Like “Electric Breakfast I”, the “Jet Toy” lesson used graphing, comparing, predicting, observing and controlling variables. In addition, it used some simple algebra and measuring. Regarding science, the two lessons use observing, gathering and recording data, interpreting data, applying and generalizing, and controlling variables. The “Electric Breakfast I”” lesson does not use classifying.
The lesson I reviewed is from an AIMS booklet for K-1 titled "Fall into Math and Science". There are many lessons based around the fall season, and the one I selected (which wasn't season specific necessarily) is called "Goody Goody Gumballs".
In this lesson, students are asked to look at a jar of gumballs and a jar of jawbreakers and estimate how many each jar contains. After discussing the estimates, the 2 jars are combined and the students are asked to describe what they see. Each student gets to take a sample of the pile to come up with their own classification system for the gumballs and jawbreakers.
This lesson varies pretty significantly from the Jet Toy activity, but there are some similar principles between the two. Both activities deal with observation, estimation, and logical thinking. Inquiry is also a major factor in both lessons.
Another major difference to consider in the comparison of the two lessons is the intended grade level. The Jet Toy activity was geared more toward actual measurement of distances and speeds for upper elementary students, whereas the gumball activity is meant for kindgergarten and first grade students. The Jet Toy activity uses a greater vocabulary and the gumball activity uses more basic vocabulary, such as color and size.
The GEMS lesson plan book about Ladybugs (preschool-1) is filled with ideas and information about ladybugs. The lessons are not only about science, they incorporate literature, math, art, and even drama. Activity 1 has children painting spots on 1/2 of a ladybug's body, they are asked to predict how many spots will appear when it is folded in 1/2. This is where the concept of symmetry is introduced. This concept is expanded later in a "symmetry hunt" which has children looking for other symmetrical objects in the classroom and recording the findings. Activity 3 has children counting legs, wings, antennae, spots, and talks about colors. These are all basic skills that need reinforcement and repeat many times in this age group. Activity 4 uses the life cycle of the ladybugs to point out patterns for the students. In comparision with the jet toy lesson, there were a few common threads. The observation of the ladybugs, gathering of data, and predictions were used with both lessons. The lady bug activities involve actual living creatures which brings a measure of wonder to the activities. Both lessons will be interesting to most children and will stimulate their desire to learn.
I looked at an AIMS activity book for K-3rd grade called Priliminary Physics: Investigation in Sound, Light, and Heat Energy. These lessons incorporated several math skills and science processes, much like the jet joy curiculum. I was amazed to see the variations in the AIMS book. There were numerous lessons and they all seemed to do a good job of involving both math and science. One particular lesson I looked at was called "Melt an Ice Cube." This particular lesson used some of the same math skills used in the jet toy curriculum such as measuring, comparing, graphing, estimating, timing, and problem solving. Some of the same processes of science were used as well. These were observing, communicating, and collecting and recording data. So, even though the actual lesson focus is different (force and motion for the jet toy vs. heat energy for the ice cube lesson) they require similar skills.
Science and math in the SAE curriculum, with our Jet Toys, were integrated by having math involved in the science experiment to help execute the experiment and then using math to help formulate conclusions about what our experiment did.
In the AIMS lessons I examined, in “Primarily Physics”, the investigations were about sound and how it travels. There was minimal math and it was primarily used as a necessity to execute the science lesson. After the experiment was done little math was involved at all, not even to draw conclusions from the data presented.
Overall the SAE curriculum seemed to actually involve math as an integral part of the overall investigation, whereas the AIMS lesson used math where it was necessary to continue the science involved, but otherwise it was primarily just a science lesson.
In the TRC I looked at an AIMS book titled Primarily Physics. It seemed to have some great ideas and lessons, but didn't always incorporate science and math.
The specific lesson I looked at was Light Rays Slow Down. It was having students explore what happens when light travels from one medium to another. They mainly view objects and how they look bent inside a glass of water.
Once finished there is some discussion with small groups and the class, but really very little math at all during this lesson. I would say the SAE curriculum seems to incorporate both subjects a little more.
I checked out the AIMS activity book titled Water precious Water. Down the Drain I. pg. 39 In this activity students are estimating the amount of time it takes for the water to warm, and an optional part of how much water was wasted waiting for the water to warm. Then the students are to do the same thing with the bathroom sink. Then the students take those numbers and multiply them by the population of the city, state, and country to see the amount of water wasted. This part would probably have to be done with the help of calculators or the teacher. The water lesson and the jet toy lesson focus on different curriculum areas and process areas. While both these activities involve measurement what is eventually done with those measurements is different. The jet toy activity has the students graph the results and the water activity has them use multiplication. In both activities math and science are very interlinked. Though they use different processes and curriculum area they have successfully integrated the math and science in a way to keep the kids interested.
I looked through the AIMS curriculum entitled Primarily Plants for K-3. The lesson that I chose to review is called "A Seed Grows" and focuses around an experiment in which students observe and record the growth of a seed within a ziplock baggie.
Like the jet toy activity, the integrated math and science processes of prediction, observation, gathering of data through measuring, and graphing of data were all present.
However, unlike the jet toy activity, in which students were able to alter the variables of the experiment in order to determine the best conditions for distance, speed, and weight carried, the variables within the seed growth lesson were the same for each child. Indeed, within this lesson inquiry was lacking because students were not able to change the variables of sunlight, heat, water, etc. to see what the prime conditions for best overall plant growth would be. Instead every child was expected to do the same exact thing.
I looked at a GEMS math and science book titled Buzzing a Hive. This book has multiple lessons, all having to do with bees. The lesson I specifically looked at was Bees and Flowers, Pollen and Nectar.
GEMS stands for Great Explorations in Math and Science, however I found no math in this particular lesson at all. So in comparing this lesson's math objective to that of the jet toy acitivity, there is obviously no comparison. This lesson does provide some opportunity to share some math in its context but math was absent for whatever reason.
I comparing the science part of the GEMS lesson to the jet toy lesson I found the GEMS to be very robotic in its approach. The jet toy lesson was very inquiry based in observation, data gathering and recording, and prediction. In other words child centered. GEMS on the other hand, followed a step by step teacher guided lesson with emphasis on facts about bees and pollen. This lesson was essentially force feeding the children that bees collect pollen from flowers to make honey. The lesson did include an activity whereby the students made paper flowers, collected pollen on cotton balls, and walked around the room with straws pretending to be bees sucking nectar from the paper flowers. I could not recommend the GEMS book of lessons to develop inquiry based scientific students.
I checked out the "Sense-able Science" for Grades K-1. The activites in the book all relate to learning about the five senses. The jet-toy experiment introduced difficult physics concepts in a way the children would enjoy and could be engaged. The AIMS lessons are mostly hands-on as well, however I feel they don't appropriately assess what the children have learned. The students are being taught concepts but never reflect too much to make sure the students knew why they were doing this lesson, not just for fun.
The jet-toy lesson and AIMS lesson are similar because they both integrate math and science by observing something, recording data, and then interpreting the data to gain knowledge. Both of these sources require the students to work hands-on which I believe keeps students interested and engaged where conceptual knowledge is gained.
1) I looked at Melissa's google earth tour. She marked some of the places she has recently lived, including Boston, Santa Fe, and Missoula. One of the things that I noticed about her tour was that she moved from a crowded city area to somewhere that is sparsely inhabited to another place that has a lot of open space. Where she lives now, however, has more water around than where she lived in Santa Fe.
2. I really enjoyed Google Earth and the Place Names Project curriculum. I took the Salish Place Names tour. I liked the fact that you can add pictures and video to the tours. Hearing and seeing the elders was very interesting and a great learning tool. As a teacher, I may not have connections with anyone from the Salish tribe, so this would be a great way for my students to hear the perspective of an elder without having one physically come in the classroom.
I would definitely use Google Earth in my classroom. If I stay in the Missoula area, I would use the Place Names Project curriculum- I loved it. The Coastal Salish is a tribe in western Washington, where I used to live. I think it would be interesting to use PNP with students as a way to compare similarities and differences between the Coastal Salish in Washington and the Salish here in Missoula.
3. I am working in a first grade classroom this semester. Our students are just beginning to learn how to count by fives and tens. I would use the red calculators (TI-10) we used in class for practice on counting by fives and tens. This was a pretty fun, but simple process that I think my first graders could handle. It would also be helpful to use the calculators to introduce the idea of counting by twos. A hundred's chart would assist the students with their comprehension.
Google Earth..... 1) I viewed Bryn's google earth tour. Her tour went around various places in Missoula and Montana. Some of the places were where her grandparents lived and Hellgate School. All of the places in Bryn's tour had some significants to her.
2) I viewed both the Salish placenames tour and the Flathead reservation tour. It amazed me how much information can be gained from each of these tours. Pictures can be pulled up and important facts about various subjects, areas, or objects like the Bitteroot flower can be easily read about.
I feel that these tours as well as any others like them would be very useful in a classroom setting. Not only can students become aware of where specific places of importance are in terms of location, but they can also gain a better understanding about why certain places are important. Google Earth is simply an amazing tool and being able to create tours on it seems to make it even more of a learning tool. In the classroom, students could develop tours based on routes of explorors. One tour that I felt students could easily develop would be to track and mark different places that Lewis and Clark traveled. As a future teacher, I definetly see myself using Google Earth.
3) On the Every Day Mathematics website, I found a lesson using calculators that I feel first graders could do and that would benefit them. The lesson was simply using a calculator to count by 2's. I thought that this was a very age appropriate lesson and that it would not only be a great inroduction to using calculators, but could also be a intro into number patterns, as well as using a hundreds chart.
18 comments:
I checked out a K-1 AIMS Activity Booklet entitled Sense-able Science: Exploring and Discovering Our Five Senses. The booklet contains a series of lessons dealing with the 5 senses, the lesson I chose is called I see the Light, it deals with our sense of sight.
The lessons differ from each other in focus of science concepts. The Jet Toy lesson deals with Physics and Technology, while the lesson from AIMS deals with life and human sciences.
Though the lessons focus on different areas of science, they have some similar concepts. They both deal with observing, comparing and contrasting, recording data, interpreting data, and applying it to everyday life. The two lessons are also both inquiry based.
The math concepts in the Jet Toy lesson were measurement and graphing. There is little math involved with the I see the Light lesson, it is only broadly connected.
I checked out k-3 Primarily Physics AIMS activities. The lesson I found was Cold Tin and Hot Hands. This lessons focus was Physical Science using processes such as observing, communicating, collecting and recording data, and drawing conclusions. The main idea of this lesson is heat causes molecules to move faster.
As with the jet toy lesson we as a class used these processes of observing, communicating, collecting and recording data. Also the area of science the jet toy activity falls under is physics. The class never came to a conclusion with the data we collected because the variance among each groups data.
The math used in the Cold Tin and Hot Hands lesson focuses on comparing math skills. As with the jet toy activity, groups were comparing their data with the class. The jet toy activity involved more math because we used graphing and measuring.
This lesson focuses on sorting by attributes. The students listen to a story about elves. One elf steals shoes and the students use observation skills to figure out whether or not the elf will steal a particular shoe.
Unlike the jet toy activity, which used graphing and measuring as the math skills, the math skills in this lesson focus more on logical thinking, using observational skills, and making predictions. The math and science skills are related in this lesson, there is less of a distinction between them as with the Jet toy activity.
The science processes in the jet toy activity were observing, making predictions, and gathering and recording data. The science processes in the elf activity are observing and classifying, interpreting data, and applying and generalizing information.
The science and math overlap in the elf lesson, but it does use both skills.
I reviewed a math/science integrated lesson in the AIMS curriculum. The lesson is called "Whoa-That's Heavy!". It focuses on the concept of comparing and is meant for the K-1 grade level. The activity involves discussing the meaning of heavier and lighter. Then the children are given two cards. One card says "heavier" and the other says "lighter". Then, the student's look at two objects such as blocks and predict which one is heavier and which one is lighter. Once they have made the prediction the children test it by placing the objects on a scale and weighing them.
The math skills involved include estimating, observing, and predicting. The Science processes involved include classifying, comparing, and gathering data.
Within this lesson, math and science are used simultaneously and the integration seems very natural.
I think the main difference between the AIMS curriculum lesson and the SAE lesson focused on in class is that the SAE lesson was much more inquiry based. In class we needed to figure out ourselves how to manipulate the car in order to receive certain data. In the AIMS lesson I am evaluating, the steps are very well defined and there is not much room for student inquiry. The teacher is asking student’s which one they think is heavier and the students are responding. The teacher is telling the student how to test their prediction. I think this lesson could be more inquiry based if you allowed the student’s to ask questions about the objects and to figure out how to test their own predictions.
I do like how the procedure for the AIMS lesson is very clear and concise (easy to read). The SAE activity we did in class was confusing at times. More concise directions would have added to the efficiency of the lesson.
The book that I observed was titled, "Seasoning: Math and Science, Fall and Winter" for 2nd grade. It is an AIMS book that explores different activities that deal with the seasons or weather.
I found that the lessons did a good job of integrating math and science. Most of the activities had the students doing hands-on processes, which is usually always positive, but it seemed that many of the activities were very similar. Many lessons had students counting seeds or beans which works on their counting skills, but doesn't seem to be too engaging. I found that many of the activities also did not support the information very well after the activity was finished.
What I really enjoyed about the jet toy lesson was that it taught very deep concepts in a fun way that would help students get an introduction to those concepts. With the AIM lessons, they didn't seem as deep conceptually and didn't really follow up the activity with a review and discussion of the information that was supposed to be taught.
The similarities betweeen the two types of lessons was that they were heavily anchored to observation and recording data and then using that data to explore the scientific ideas behind the lesson. I found both types of lessons to be fairly inquiry-based (sometimes it's harder with younger students), and there were very few teacher-centered moments. It seemed though that the jet toy lesson was more inquiry-based, with students having to figure out for themselves what they were measuring, whereas the AIM lessons were more structured. That might just be because of the age group though.
Although both types of lessons were fairly good teaching practices, I found the jet toy lesson to be more engaging, more thought-provoking, deeper conceptually, and just more fun.
I looked at an GEMS lesson book for preschool-1st grade. This book has the students investigate all aspects of ladybugs from the egg stage to the adult stage through observation. The lessons are mainly science based but incorporate math with counting, measurement, symmetry, and pattern. The students can count how many days it takes the egg to hatch into larvae, go through the pupal stage and finally reach the adult stage. They could add all these days together to find how long it takes a ladybug to go from egg to adult. There are many other parts of the bug to count or compare. The curriculum could be used with older students by adapting the information to a variety of learning levels.
Literature can also be integrated by using the books listed in the back of the GEMS booklet. They include stories, poems, and rhymes. This could lead to the students composing or dictating their own writings. The book also includes a small glossary to help define some of the parts and stages of life of the ladybug. Art is added into the lessons with many projects pertaining to ladybugs and their life stages.
The GEMS lessons were easy to read and adapt to different learning levels. There were many suggestions for how to teach about ladybugs which is something that the students can continue to learn about and observe on their own when it's ladybug season.
I looked at the AIMS lesson called “Electric Breakfast I”. The overall purpose of this lesson is to learn how friction causes static electricity, using the question, “How can you move the banana without touching it?” Using a banana, balloon, and some friction, students predict and record the movement of the banana. The math skills are graphing, comparing, predicting, observing, and controlling variables. The science processes are observing classifying, gathering and recording data, interpreting data, applying and generalizing, and controlling variables.
Compared to the “Jet Toy” lesson, some of the many of the same skills and processes are used. Like “Electric Breakfast I”, the “Jet Toy” lesson used graphing, comparing, predicting, observing and controlling variables. In addition, it used some simple algebra and measuring. Regarding science, the two lessons use observing, gathering and recording data, interpreting data, applying and generalizing, and controlling variables. The “Electric Breakfast I”” lesson does not use classifying.
The lesson I reviewed is from an AIMS booklet for K-1 titled "Fall into Math and Science". There are many lessons based around the fall season, and the one I selected (which wasn't season specific necessarily) is called "Goody Goody Gumballs".
In this lesson, students are asked to look at a jar of gumballs and a jar of jawbreakers and estimate how many each jar contains. After discussing the estimates, the 2 jars are combined and the students are asked to describe what they see. Each student gets to take a sample of the pile to come up with their own classification system for the gumballs and jawbreakers.
This lesson varies pretty significantly from the Jet Toy activity, but there are some similar principles between the two. Both activities deal with observation, estimation, and logical thinking. Inquiry is also a major factor in both lessons.
Another major difference to consider in the comparison of the two lessons is the intended grade level. The Jet Toy activity was geared more toward actual measurement of distances and speeds for upper elementary students, whereas the gumball activity is meant for kindgergarten and first grade students. The Jet Toy activity uses a greater vocabulary and the gumball activity uses more basic vocabulary, such as color and size.
The GEMS lesson plan book about Ladybugs (preschool-1) is filled with ideas and information about ladybugs. The lessons are not only about science, they incorporate literature, math, art, and even drama.
Activity 1 has children painting spots on 1/2 of a ladybug's body, they are asked to predict how many spots will appear when it is folded in 1/2. This is where the concept of symmetry is introduced. This concept is expanded later in a "symmetry hunt" which has children looking for other symmetrical objects in the classroom and recording the findings.
Activity 3 has children counting legs, wings, antennae, spots, and talks about colors. These are all basic skills that need reinforcement and repeat many times in this age group.
Activity 4 uses the life cycle of the ladybugs to point out patterns for the students.
In comparision with the jet toy lesson, there were a few common threads. The observation of the ladybugs, gathering of data, and predictions were used with both lessons. The lady bug activities involve actual living creatures which brings a measure of wonder to the activities. Both lessons will be interesting to most children and will stimulate their desire to learn.
I looked at an AIMS activity book for K-3rd grade called Priliminary Physics: Investigation in Sound, Light, and Heat Energy. These lessons incorporated several math skills and science processes, much like the jet joy curiculum.
I was amazed to see the variations in the AIMS book. There were numerous lessons and they all seemed to do a good job of involving both math and science.
One particular lesson I looked at was called "Melt an Ice Cube." This particular lesson used some of the same math skills used in the jet toy curriculum such as measuring, comparing, graphing, estimating, timing, and problem solving. Some of the same processes of science were used as well. These were observing, communicating, and collecting and recording data.
So, even though the actual lesson focus is different (force and motion for the jet toy vs. heat energy for the ice cube lesson) they require similar skills.
Science and math in the SAE curriculum, with our Jet Toys, were integrated by having math involved in the science experiment to help execute the experiment and then using math to help formulate conclusions about what our experiment did.
In the AIMS lessons I examined, in “Primarily Physics”, the investigations were about sound and how it travels. There was minimal math and it was primarily used as a necessity to execute the science lesson. After the experiment was done little math was involved at all, not even to draw conclusions from the data presented.
Overall the SAE curriculum seemed to actually involve math as an integral part of the overall investigation, whereas the AIMS lesson used math where it was necessary to continue the science involved, but otherwise it was primarily just a science lesson.
In the TRC I looked at an AIMS book titled Primarily Physics. It seemed to have some great ideas and lessons, but didn't always incorporate science and math.
The specific lesson I looked at was Light Rays Slow Down. It was having students explore what happens when light travels from one medium to another. They mainly view objects and how they look bent inside a glass of water.
Once finished there is some discussion with small groups and the class, but really very little math at all during this lesson. I would say the SAE curriculum seems to incorporate both subjects a little more.
I checked out the AIMS activity book titled Water precious Water. Down the Drain I. pg. 39 In this activity students are estimating the amount of time it takes for the water to warm, and an optional part of how much water was wasted waiting for the water to warm. Then the students are to do the same thing with the bathroom sink. Then the students take those numbers and multiply them by the population of the city, state, and country to see the amount of water wasted. This part would probably have to be done with the help of calculators or the teacher.
The water lesson and the jet toy lesson focus on different curriculum areas and process areas. While both these activities involve measurement what is eventually done with those measurements is different. The jet toy activity has the students graph the results and the water activity has them use multiplication.
In both activities math and science are very interlinked. Though they use different processes and curriculum area they have successfully integrated the math and science in a way to keep the kids interested.
I looked through the AIMS curriculum entitled Primarily Plants for K-3. The lesson that I chose to review is called "A Seed Grows" and focuses around an experiment in which students observe and record the growth of a seed within a ziplock baggie.
Like the jet toy activity, the integrated math and science processes of prediction, observation, gathering of data through measuring, and graphing of data were all present.
However, unlike the jet toy activity, in which students were able to alter the variables of the experiment in order to determine the best conditions for distance, speed, and weight carried, the variables within the seed growth lesson were the same for each child. Indeed, within this lesson inquiry was lacking because students were not able to change the variables of sunlight, heat, water, etc. to see what the prime conditions for best overall plant growth would be. Instead every child was expected to do the same exact thing.
I looked at a GEMS math and science book titled Buzzing a Hive. This book has multiple lessons, all having to do with bees. The lesson I specifically looked at was Bees and Flowers, Pollen and Nectar.
GEMS stands for Great Explorations in Math and Science, however I found no math in this particular lesson at all. So in comparing this lesson's math objective to that of the jet toy acitivity, there is obviously no comparison. This lesson does provide some opportunity to share some math in its context but math was absent for whatever reason.
I comparing the science part of the GEMS lesson to the jet toy lesson I found the GEMS to be very robotic in its approach. The jet toy lesson was very inquiry based in observation, data gathering and recording, and prediction. In other words child centered. GEMS on the other hand, followed a step by step teacher guided lesson with emphasis on facts about bees and pollen. This lesson was essentially force feeding the children that bees collect pollen from flowers to make honey. The lesson did include an activity whereby the students made paper flowers, collected pollen on cotton balls, and walked around the room with straws pretending to be bees sucking nectar from the paper flowers. I could not recommend the GEMS book of lessons to develop inquiry based scientific students.
I checked out the "Sense-able Science" for Grades K-1. The activites in the book all relate to learning about the five senses. The jet-toy experiment introduced difficult physics concepts in a way the children would enjoy and could be engaged. The AIMS lessons are mostly hands-on as well, however I feel they don't appropriately assess what the children have learned. The students are being taught concepts but never reflect too much to make sure the students knew why they were doing this lesson, not just for fun.
The jet-toy lesson and AIMS lesson are similar because they both integrate math and science by observing something, recording data, and then interpreting the data to gain knowledge. Both of these sources require the students to work hands-on which I believe keeps students interested and engaged where conceptual knowledge is gained.
Google Earth
1) I looked at Melissa's google earth tour. She marked some of the places she has recently lived, including Boston, Santa Fe, and Missoula. One of the things that I noticed about her tour was that she moved from a crowded city area to somewhere that is sparsely inhabited to another place that has a lot of open space. Where she lives now, however, has more water around than where she lived in Santa Fe.
2. I really enjoyed Google Earth and the Place Names Project curriculum. I took the Salish Place Names tour. I liked the fact that you can add pictures and video to the tours. Hearing and seeing the elders was very interesting and a great learning tool. As a teacher, I may not have connections with anyone from the Salish tribe, so this would be a great way for my students to hear the perspective of an elder without having one physically come in the classroom.
I would definitely use Google Earth in my classroom. If I stay in the Missoula area, I would use the Place Names Project curriculum- I loved it. The Coastal Salish is a tribe in western Washington, where I used to live. I think it would be interesting to use PNP with students as a way to compare similarities and differences between the Coastal Salish in Washington and the Salish here in Missoula.
3. I am working in a first grade classroom this semester. Our students are just beginning to learn how to count by fives and tens. I would use the red calculators (TI-10) we used in class for practice on counting by fives and tens. This was a pretty fun, but simple process that I think my first graders could handle. It would also be helpful to use the calculators to introduce the idea of counting by twos. A hundred's chart would assist the students with their comprehension.
Google Earth.....
1) I viewed Bryn's google earth tour. Her tour went around various places in Missoula and Montana. Some of the places were where her grandparents lived and Hellgate School. All of the places in Bryn's tour had some significants to her.
2) I viewed both the Salish placenames tour and the Flathead reservation tour. It amazed me how much information can be gained from each of these tours. Pictures can be pulled up and important facts about various subjects, areas, or objects like the Bitteroot flower can be easily read about.
I feel that these tours as well as any others like them would be very useful in a classroom setting. Not only can students become aware of where specific places of importance are in terms of location, but they can also gain a better understanding about why certain places are important. Google Earth is simply an amazing tool and being able to create tours on it seems to make it even more of a learning tool. In the classroom, students could develop tours based on routes of explorors. One tour that I felt students could easily develop would be to track and mark different places that Lewis and Clark traveled. As a future teacher, I definetly see myself using Google Earth.
3) On the Every Day Mathematics website, I found a lesson using calculators that I feel first graders could do and that would benefit them. The lesson was simply using a calculator to count by 2's. I thought that this was a very age appropriate lesson and that it would not only be a great inroduction to using calculators, but could also be a intro into number patterns, as well as using a hundreds chart.
Post a Comment