Recall the question that your group recorded (see Science Talks dropbox file for images of posters) and respond to the following question individually:
How does the chapter respond to the question? (150 word minimum)
September 2: Class, I enjoyed reading your posts; the quality of responses is thoughful and articulate. RAR
Our (Group 3's) question relates to how one goes about breaking the barriers put up by shy students during science talks. Ms. Rizzuto responded to this in her account of how she re-evaluated her science talk participation requirement. What she found was that, while some of her students did not speak up, they were nonetheless fascinated by the ideas and rationalizations of their peers. Apart from shyness, these students were quiet because they were trying to make sense of the science talks in their own minds – their silence was an opportunity to solve problems and connect dots. To force her requirement on them would be to take said opportunity away from them and stifle their enthusiasm. Ms. Rizzuto realized that there was no real pressure to break the barriers of silence, because said silence represented deep thought and a genuine, quiet interest in what her more vocal students had to say.
ReplyDeleteThis is an interesting perspective, Brandon. The notion of talk assumes open dialogue but your argument is that students were connecting ideas non-verbally.
DeleteI am in agreement with Brandon (we also happened to be in the same group). I was interested to read that Rizzuto addressed the issue of shy students. I think it is certainly important to note that this teacher opens the door for freedom in learning. She does not facilitate or dictate a certain method for the learning process as the students engage in science talk, but rather allows them to experience for themselves the material in their own way. Even beyond that, she encourages them to learn from one another and to create a scientific mindset for themselves which happens naturally when they are allowed to "think out loud" and process their experiments and observations. For me, this really cleared up the issue of shy children being unengaged or even insecure in their shyness in these moments. Because Rizzuto de-enforced the participation policy, students were able to relax; unhindered by the anxiety of speaking up if they don’t like to, and therefore were able to fully engage in the subject at hand. I really like what Rizzuto said about the science talk circles being a place where students can verbalize, explore, and extend their learning.
ReplyDeleteIs this what a 'democatic classroom"?
DeleteGroup 1: Our group’s question was: “How do you think “science talk” could benefit a middle school class and why?” Rizzuto discussed how she implemented science talk into her third, fourth, and fifth grade classrooms and what she found was remarkable. Science talk has made her children’s thinking richer and more exciting. The children not only participated in the conversation, they began to direct the flow of the “science talk”, conveying their thoughts and ideas so that the entire class could understand where they were coming from. A middle school class could benefit through these discussions through the words of their peers, resulting in a better scientific understanding. A lot of middle school students have confidence issues and have a hard time speaking up in the classroom. Rizzuto stated that implementing science talk in the classroom could result in an important “equalizer” among the students. Talking about each other’s ideas also provides “equal academic access” to all students. They learn the skills needed to excel in the subject. The students not only learn academically through science talk, but they also learn to listen carefully to one another’s ideas and opinions.
ReplyDeleteThe notion of students directing the flow of the science talk says a lot about their learning; what do you think that might be?
DeleteMy group’s question was, “How accurate is her research after only seven years, and what if she build a theory out of inaccuracy?” After completing the chapter, I began to realize that the “accuracy” of the experiment was not the main objective. The young student, Emily, was able to relate their science experiment to math. Emily first tested her hypothesis by playing with distance and light. She then attempted to make a formula. The formula was not correct, but that wasn’t the goal. The success of the experiment came for Emily being able to make a connection the other kids could not fathom. She was able to connect another discipline to better understand her project. It is impossible to get everything right on the first try, but she got the concept. It is possible that the class could go back and refine her research in order to come out with an accurate formula. However, the goal was conceptualizing shadows, not being able to create a formula about them. The formula, or accuracy, is the next step the class could choose to explore, not the main objective.
ReplyDeleteIs this what scientists do?
DeleteMy group's question was about the drawbacks that Science Talk may have in the classroom. Specific drawbacks were not directly mentioned but I thought it was important to note how Rizzuto changed certain aspects of Science Talk as she saw fit in her classroom. If she discovered something wasn't working as planned, she changed the rules. An example was her reevaluation of student participation in Science Talk. She noticed the drawback of forcing everyone to participate verbally and readjusted accordingly. With constant reevaluation, teachers can overcome drawbacks of Science Talk they may experience. Every classroom is different and without regular evaluation Science Talk could lead to unfocused, off-topic conversations. On another note, before reading this chapter entirely, one drawback in my mind was the issue with shy students and their lack of participation. Through this article, Rizzuto completely gave me new perspective on that issue. I no longer see shyness as a drawback but as an opportunity to learn more. Rizzuto's constant reevaluation facilitated in eliminating drawbacks of Science Talk.
ReplyDeleteIt appears that Ms. Ruzzito was invoking Formative Assessments to ensure the best outcomes for her class. what experiences have you had with your teachers using techniques to evaluate learning in the classroom?
DeleteGroup 1: "Why and how do you think 'science talk' could help a middle school class?" Rizzuto's discussion and evaluation of her use of science talks in her third, fourth and fifth grade classes precisely answers my discussion group's question. Although her students were a little younger than middle schoolers, I believe that a science talk in a sixth-eighth grade class would get the same reaction. Science talks allow students to explore science at their own pace by listening to what their classmates have observed and concluded and also by sharing what they have learned. By incorporating science talks in a middle school class, students are able to interact freely with topics at hand which in turn make them self-motivated to continue to research and discuss such topics. At any age, this process allows learners to react, discuss, argue (etc.) within their comfort zone. Rizzuto made the best decision by relieving her students of being forced into discussion by allowing them to come into conversation when comfortable. As she mentioned, this made the discussions better and the learning extend farther than she anticipated. Students become more familiar with scientific language which helps them engage in further conversation with one another and leads to more individual discovery inside and outside the classroom. Science talks also allow the teacher to expand horizons as a learner and observer of their class rather than just the explainer and discussion leader. These elements of science talks will greaten the learning experience inside a middle school classroom.
ReplyDeleteMy groups question dealt with some of the drawbacks a science talk may have in the classroom. After reading the chapter one of the major topics that stands out as a concern to me is class participation. Rizutto began her journey through science talks with a participation rule, where everyone had to share at least one thing with the group, yet she changed this rule when she realized varying degrees of sharing. She felt the abandonment of the participation rule would better help the discussions flow. Though I think that a required participation quota might be a little extreme, it is very important to try to include everyone as equals in the discussion. Though some students are more eager to talk to the group, and share the thing they know, it is just as important to try to actively involve those who are less likely to leave their comfort zone and talk out during class. When the entire class is active during the talks then I feel like more ideas and insights are able to make their way to the table to be explored.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading over the rest of the chapter, I started to realize, which Azaria found out also, that the main objective of science talks were to have the students a better developing mind of science. Through the science talks, the students leave the classroom with a different perspective in science. Students are willing to take more risks in asking questions and saying answers in order to understand the material. Students investigate into the material more in depth to depict if it is opinion or fact. Among the science talk among their classmates, the students are willing to listen to the peers and take what they say during the science talks. Even though that science talks develop the students mind for the scientific aspect, I still believe that there are flaws in the accuracy in the teaching method. For example, Emily notices that there is a mathematical relationship between the distance of the light source and the resulting area of a shadow; after she investigates the numbers involved and predicts how the process works, she recognizes the pattern and gets a “handle” on what it meant. However, Emily’s formulas were not correct, and this is where I believe that science talks has flaws because students, like Emily, has some areas in these talks were the formulas or concepts are incorrect. In general, I do believe science talks help develop a student’s mind by investigating the material more in depth and build the confidence in speaking among their peers.
ReplyDeleteIn my group with all read the passage individually to see what we would find about Rizzuto’s experience with science talks. We then conversed amongst each other I order to answer the questions provided. From reading the short 4 paragraphs we were all concerned about the drawbacks that may be encountered within science talks. We came up with questions such as: 1. How would students that didn’t interact in science be affected. 2. Do you force those that are timid or shy and/or have no knowledge of the topic to participate? 3. What do you do when false information is being provided? These questions made learning more about Rizzuto’s science talks quite interesting. In less than a minute the questions aroused by my peers, in regards to the concerns on how students who were shy or refused to participate be affected, were answered in the second paragraph under the section, Science Talks as a Teacher. Rizzuto also had concerns about the4 drawbacks of science talks until she concluded that she didn’t have to force student to participate because the topics discussed in class fascinated the students were not speaking in class. The “silent” students were usually captivated as they tried figuring out what there classmates were saying. Either their frustration of being silent or eager to respond to something they disagreed on would cause them to speak up and give their opinions or factual information they may have retained from ther teachers, parents, or whomever. I was at ease when I found out that the concerns I had for “silent” students not interacting would soon become an insight on learning about the great ideas or knowledge they have lingering in their minds waiting to make a breakthrough in class. Rizzuto has really encouraged me to use science talks when I have the opportunity to teach such a spontaneous subjects amongst middle grade students. I feel that science talks will truly make a bug impact on students learning not only in science, but all subjects at both the secondary and high school grade levels.
ReplyDeleteMy grouped questioned how accurate Rizzuto's research was after only seven years, and what if she is building her theory off of inaccuracy? After reading further into the chapter, I realized that the teachers level of accuracy was irrelevant to her story. The importance of her story is in what she was able to accomplish with her students. She was able to get them build their confidence in discussion the subject matter, and to have more than just an understanding of the material. Azaria, also in my group, mentioned Emily, the student who was able to voice her understanding of distance and light by using numbers. Although her equations were incorrect, she was able to use the materials and information in front of her, along with her knowledge and confidence inside of her to come up with an idea the rest of the classroom had not thought of.
ReplyDelete