Purpose?

Article: How to Teach Students to Think Like Scientist by Eric Brunsell

Is there a meaningful purpose/goal to the activity or experiment? If not, then what is the point? Some may say because it’s fun or easy (or in this article, Halloween). Most activities or experiments can be turned into meaningful higher level thinking, but it may require more work. I believe if teachers go the extra mile to make instruction meaningful, creative, or engaging; students will put that much plus some into learning.

I agree that the scientific method is restrictive and not realistic. However, I had not thought about that concept before this class or article. I was taught the scientific method and it worked when I was instructed to use it. At the time that logic seemed sound. I think the scientific method could be more useful as a guideline rather than established procedure. The scientific method can be useful if modified for different situations. The method as it is, infers a right or wrong answer. Science is much greater than a right or wrong answer, so why are we teaching students that? The linear thinking of the scientific method hinders creativity and curiosity which is essential to cognitive development. The article also touched upon science being collaborative and not done in isolation. The isolation aspect may come from how scientists are portrayed through media. My schema of a scientist used to be based off of Doc Brown, from the movie Back to the Future. However, a more realistic portrayal can be seen on the Discovery Channel’s MythBusters (even though they are not scientists.) My point being collaboration, curiosity, creativity, and discovery are essential in developing students’ higher level thinking skills. Which leads into Alison Gopnik’s article, Why Preschool Shouldn’t Be like School.

Discovery learning and direct instruction are building blocks for children to continue to grow and learn cognitively. They are different types of instruction, not better or worse. Each type accomplishes different factors of learning. I come back to the purpose. The type of instruction is determined by the purpose. What is the purpose or goal you are trying to accomplish during instruction? Children can benefit from both types of instruction not only in preschool, but throughout their educational and personal lives. Children are brilliant and deserve more credit than they are given. Let’s not limit them in their capabilities, but given them different means to succeed!

Goals vs. Videos

One:  Students clearly communicated their excitement during the outside experiment. However, a discussion (I assumed held before and/or after in the classroom), would have been a great opportunity for students to elaborate on their thoughts, predictions, and connections. The classroom video allowed the students to communicate effectively with notecards. Although a discussion following each answer may have been beneficial in solidifying the content or bridging the gap for student (especially those who did not know the answer, but raised the same card as the rest of their classmates.) A small group discussion in selecting the answer may have also been a valuable learning experience.

Two: Neither video had students demonstrate critical thinking skills. The outdoor experiment could have had students predict what would happen when the two materials were mixed or if different materials were used? The classroom video could have had students discuss the effects of fire for higher level thinking skills.

Three: The classroom video may have shown students’ confidence by how high the students displayed their answers. Students holding their notecard high may represent higher confidence and students holding their notecard lower may represent lower confidence (or boredom).

Four: Students’ creativity and innovation was not displayed. Predictions or hands-on activities for studetns may have encouraged creativity in either video.

Five: Students appeared respectful during the experiment video. Most students stayed in the line even when their excitement rose by standing and yelling.

Six: The videos did not address the content deeply. Small or large group discussions may have helped students understand the content in more depth.