联系我们： 手动添加方式: 微信>添加朋友>企业微信联系人>13262280223 或者 QQ: 1483266981

EDST2003 Assignment 2 z Introduction This lesson plan will be focused on Science and will be conducted in a comprehensive, co- educational school in Western Sydney. The Western Sydney region has a linguistically and culturally diverse population, which is reflected in the demographic of the year 8 science classroom. The class consists of 22 students, with some students having the characteristic of English as a Second Language (EAL). The class is currently up to learning about “using the particle model to explain observed phenomena linking the energy of the particles to temperature changes,” which is under the ‘different states of matter’ topic (“Science”, n.d.). The results of their previous assessment highlighted gaps in their knowledge of year 7 scientific skills as some students were unable to differentiate between independent and dependent variables. Therefore, this lesson will also build upon their fundamental scientific skills from year 7, in both literacy and numeracy aspects. Lesson plan In this lesson plan, the students will be focusing on how water is able to change from liquid to gas, when energy is gained through heating. This lesson will be divided into the literacy and numeracy components and will be conducted in their 2-hour lesson on Thursday, since the lesson plan includes an experiment of boiling water. Activity 1- Literacy (around 50 minutes) The literacy component of this lesson plan will address the year 8 science curriculum requirement of being able to use technology to communicate scientific understanding through creation of text types (“Science”, n.d.). This will focus on key areas under the National Literacy Learning Progressions (NLLP) such as creating texts, listening, interaction and keyboarding, with some elements of speaking and grammar (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). To start the lesson, do a revision of the particle theory by using the simplified diagram that will be projected onto the board (look at image below). Then, provide an overview of today’s lesson, the first half of the lesson they will produce part of a scientific report, then in the second half, they will complete their experiment where the results will be tabulated and graphed. Additionally, divide the class into groups of 3 or 4, these groups will remain the same for the rest of the lesson. Then ask them the group to discuss what they think the structure of a scientific report is. Then draw on the white board the structure of a scientific report as a flowchart (look at the image below). After understanding the structure of the scientific report, allow the class to access their handout 1 (appendix item 1) from google classroom. Instruct them to type the title, ‘boiling water experiment.’ Then, proceed to explain that boiling water is the act of water turning into gas. Which will transition into the aim of the scientific report, make sure to explain that the sentence must start with ‘to,’ and must also type in third person. Additionally, explain what third person is with examples. Then dictate that the purpose of the assignment is ‘to determine the boiling point of water.’ Afterwards, for the hypothesis section, first explain what it is. Then, ask them to discuss in their groups what their prediction for the experiment will be. If they struggle, provide them an example that the water could possibly boil at 80°C. They will then express their answers to the class. For the equipment section ask them to type up the equipment they see set up at the front of the classroom. To ensure they typed up the correct names for the equipment, identify them individually afterwards along with the volumetric requirements for the glassware. Furthermore, for the risk assessment, ask the class to discuss in their group’s, the potential risks with the experiment, using their prior knowledge (PK) of the equipment. Afterwards, they will present their answers to the class. Finally, to attain the student’s attention request them to tilt their laptop screens, then provide an explanation of the experiment procedure. Additionally, inform the students that the method should have a similar format to a cooking procedure; it must be numbered and start with a verb. After the explanation, ask the class individually to type the method in their own words, but allow them to discuss in groups. Ensure to provide an example to start the method and remind students to refer to the checklist at the bottom of the page for self-assessment and emphasise students to submit handout 1 through google drive. Activity 2- Numeracy (around 70 minutes) The numeracy component will address the year 8 science curriculum requirement of being able to create tables and graphs to illustrate the trends and relationships in assembled data (“Science”, n.d.). This will focus on key areas under the National Numeracy Learning Progression (NNLP), including interpreting and representing data and number patterns and algebraic thinking with elements of quantifying numbers and measuring time (National Numeracy Learning Progression, n.d.). Before students conduct the experiment by following their methods, give out handout 2 (Appendix item 2). Verbally explain the difference between independent and dependent variables. During the explanation students can refer to the table at the top of handout 2, where the information is summarised, with the key differences in bold. Now that the concepts are fresh in their minds, allow groups to discuss and determine the independent and dependent variable be for the experiment. Ask the groups to express their reasoning for their determination and correct their understanding to the appropriate units for the variables. Moreover, now that they understand the variables, advance to explaining which axis each variable would be noted on using a rough example on the board (look at image below). Furthermore, give the groups 30 minutes to conduct the experiment, using the method they created in handout 1. The students are required to also be creating a table in handout 2 during the experiment time to record their results. Check to confirm that each group is able to correctly read the time on the stopwatch and are able to correctly read the decimal places off the thermometer. Finally, allow them around 20 minutes to complete the graph and answer the remaining questions. Once they are done, discuss the answers to the questions with the class. Conclusion To finish up, ask the class “what would happen if ice was used instead of water in the experiment ” This question will further their knowledge for the state of matter topic using their funds of knowledge, that ice melts into water and water evaporates into gas. But this process will take longer than just going from liquid to gas. Analytical paper Introduction The literacy and numeracy activities aim to meet the year 8 science curriculum syllabus while also meeting the NLLP and NNLP requirements. This segment of the paper will explore the strengths and limitations of the planned activities in part 1. 1. Literacy The literacy activity is a multiliteracy task as it requires students to type their answers on a digital scientific report template. Since, it will be the student’s first experience in writing a scientific report, the task is purposely broken down into sections, to ensure the students are able to understand each component. The class will be divided into small groups of 3 or 4, this will ensure the majority of students are able to engage in discussions with their group members and will create a shared understanding of the task. This will allow the students to address the NLLP requirement of being able to interact by discussing in small groups to share their ideas and complete tasks (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). Thereafter, the class will then listen to the explanation of third person and its use in scientific reports. This will allow students to meet the NLLP requirement of appropriate use of voice in creating text (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). The class will then type the title of the report from the teacher’s dictation, which will address the NLLP requirement of being able to respond to simple commands by typing words being dictated to them (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). After the students will need to listen to the teacher explaining the textual requirements of starting the aim with ‘to.’ And then use their listening and keyboarding skills again when typing the aim dictated by the teacher. This would be addressing the NLLP requirement of teaching students to express their ideas appropriately to the requirements of the task (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). Moreover, the class will use their listening skills again to listen to the explanation of what a hypothesis is. The students in each group will address the NLLP requirement of being able to engage in discussions within groups by verbally articulating their ideas when they collaboratively discuss the hypothesis (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). Furthermore, the class will then identify equipment to be typed down in list format on the handout, thus addressing the NLLP requirement of typing terms specific to scientific vocabulary and format (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). The discussion of risk assessments requires students to use their PK of risks experienced before. Since this section has been scaffolded, the NLLP focus addressed here is the use of technical words to express cause and effect (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). Finally, the students will listen to the explanation of the method of the experiment. The teacher will draw upon their PK of a procedure in cooking to explain the format for the method, such as ensuring the method is numbered, with each step starting with a verb. Then, the students will individually type the method using their own understanding but are allowed to discuss in groups. This will allow the students to address the NLLP requirement of being able to structure their ideas, using numeral keys to sequence their sentences, while also being able to use basic verbs appropriate in creating text (National Literacy Learning Progression, n.d.). The students will be reminded to refer to the checklist for self-assessment and recollection of the requirements of a report before submitting the task online. At the end of the literacy task students should be able to understand the structure and requirements of a science report and be able to use technology to communicate scientific understanding through creation of their creation of the report (“Science”, n.d.). 1.1 Strength 1- Challenging nature of activity The activity is broken down into sections of a scientific report where the requirements are explained at each section, this benefits students in all backgrounds as the high challenge of writing the report for the first time is equated to sufficient support. This would increase academic outcomes as it would allow students to be at the zone of proximal development (ZPD) because it encourages student thinking without reducing the cognitive demands of the task (Gibbons, 2002; Muir, 2018). Therefore, the activity being challenging benefits students as it is equated to high support allowing students to be at the ZPD. Science has a distinctive language form and literacy practice from English (Gleeson & Davison, 2019). Therefore, the activity challenges students to assimilate their PK of verbs and third person voice from their English class into the scientific report. However, students are supported with dealing with this challenge, as the task is broken down from simple to complex tasks. This allows for explicit teaching of grammatical forms required in the report and allows students to comprehend the metalanguage required for the task as they are supported in assimilating the information into their existing schemas (Unsworth, 2002). 1.2 Strength 2- Multiliteracy The activity is a multiliteracy task as it requires students to use technology to create a scientific report. The use of technology would assist in teaching students about the structure of a scientific report as it allows them to interact and manipulate the scientific report template to suit the needs of their investigation. Thus, allowing the task to focus on understanding the requirements of each section of the report rather than wasting cognitive resources in multitasking between writing the report and trying to comprehend verbal explanations of the grammatical forms required in each section. This incorporation of verbal and visual elements for meaning making has been proven by Unsworth’s (2002) study to be effective as it allows for equal student engagement by allowing them to comprehend, articulate and compose text. For example, the risk section allows students to manipulate the text for greater comprehension, as they are able to structure their answers under relevant columns in the table. This might require the creation of more rows, which will develop their technological skills while also preventing time wasted into creating a table on paper. Therefore, the multiliteracy task allows for greater engagement and comprehension of the scientific report by allowing the task to be within the student’s capacity. 1.3 Strength 3- Self-assessment The students are provided with a checklist at the end of the task for self-assessment. This would allow them to assess their work against identified requirements of each section before submitting their work online. Dearnley and Meddings (2007) argue that self-assessment empowers students by allowing for increased interaction between the teachers and assists in developing reflective and critical awareness skills. Furthermore, Sullivan (2011) emphasises that the use of prompts, such as checklists allows students experiencing difficulty in engaging with the task to feel included in learning. Therefore, the inclusion of a checklist for self- assessment allows for enhanced learning and achievement. Additionally, Shatri and Zabeli (2018) highlight that self-assessment creates a positive environment where mistakes are considered as advantageous to identify problematic areas which require more focus and explanation. This would also allow the teacher to assess the student’s understanding against the year 8 science curriculum requirement of being able to use technology to communicate scientific understanding through creation of text types (“Science”, n.d.). 1.4 Limitation 1- EAL students Since the task focuses on verbal explanations, articulation of information through technology and group discussions could prove difficult for EAL learners. This is because EAL students struggle to learn through the English language and when learning about academic English (Hammond, 2012). Since the task assumes all students are able to transform explained concepts from spoken language into a typed format, this can become a disadvantage for EAL students. As a result, this could cause EAL students to struggle to keep up with their English- speaking peers as they are unable to accurately incorporate oral language into typed academic English (Gibbons, 2002). Furthermore, the task fails to consider EAL learners that come from an educational system that emphasises independent over collaborative learning. This as a result, could prevent EAL students from engaging in discussions in the class, as this ideology may be deeply embedded (EAL/D teacher resource, 2014). Therefore, since the task requires students to discuss with peers to come to a solution, this may cause EAL students to disengage with the task, due to the difference in cultures. Thus, since the task fails to consider ingrained cultural ideologies of independent learning, it may cause EAL students to be demotivated in the classroom as they may feel unable to keep up with their English-speaking peers. 1.5 Limitation 2- Assumed universal experience The activity assumes universal experiences of students and fails to acknowledge that students’ experiences are individual and are a result of a student’s differing social, cultural and linguistic backgrounds, which directly impact learning (Sellars, 2018). Furthermore, Unsworth (1999) emphasises that the lack of experience with scientific reports and the understanding of the grammatical requirements of creating reports may take long for students to grasp the metalanguage required, despite the task being broken down. This may be because Gibbons’ (2009) study highlights that some students especially EAL students write mainly in recounts which primarily use first or second person voices. Therefore, they may struggle to write the method due to lack of previous exposure into writing formative texts that require third person voice (Gibbons, 2009). Additionally, Gleeson and Davison (2019) emphasise that the metalanguage required for science may be difficult for all students to grasp easily due to the “subject-specific nature of language and literacy requirement” (p. 303) of science. Therefore, the task may require greater individualised assistance in ensuring proper comprehension of the grammatical forms required in the report as students’ experiences are not universal. 2. Numeracy The numeracy activity utilises scaffolding and requires students to first listen to explanations of independent and dependent variables. Then they are required to discuss with their groups what the possible example of the variables would be from the experiment they will be doing, ensuring they also mention appropriate units of measurement. After they will listen to an explanation of which axis the variables would go on a graph and note down the answer. This aims to relate it with their PK of graphing from maths in an xy axis into a scientific context. Then they will be given time to conduct their experiment, this will incorporate tactile mode of learning into their lesson. During the experiment, they will be using a stopwatch and a thermometer. This will address the NNLP requirement of being able to interpret time and display their understanding of decimal places, because the lines on the thermometer represent decimals for accurate reading (National Numeracy Learning Progression, n.d.). Thereafter, they will then be graphing their results based on their designed table. This will be addressing the NNLP requirement of being able to represent collected data through graphing and being able to recognise that they are graphing continuous variables that represent change of temperature over time (National Numeracy Learning Progression, n.d.). Finally, they will then answer questions relating to their graphed results to test whether they are able to meet the NNLP requirement of being able to interpret and represent data using a multi-unit scale and being able to read between marked values (National Numeracy Learning Progression, n.d.). 2.1 Strength 1- Scaffolding The numeracy activity utilises scaffolding, as it transitions between model where the teacher explains the variables, then guide when the teacher guides the discussions, to gradual release when they tabulate and graph their results and then finally to independent when they discuss answers amongst their group members and the answers are checked at the end (Collet, 2012). This scaffolding allows the gradual development of the students’ data representation and analysis skills through the construction of the knowledge of variables. Which is done by enabling students to produce a table using their tabulated data. This is then analysed to allow students to connect their numeracy skills with their content knowledge. Furthermore, Gibbons (2002) argues that when teachers have high expectations and provide adequate scaffolding, students are able to complete tasks successfully, as high expectations have proven to result in high achievements regardless of background. Therefore, scaffolding allows for students that lack fundamental year 7 scientific skills to be at the expected year 8 scientific skill level. 2.2 Strength 2- Prior knowledge The numeracy task allows for students to be able to connect their PK from early high school mathematics into a scientific context. For example, when the teacher explains which axis that the variables are situated on a graph, this would relate to their PK of graphing from maths in an xy axis into a scientific context. Thus, students can utilise their PK of representing data through tables and graphs to do the part a and b of the activity. Additionally, this supports Sullivan’s (2011) argument that building assessments based on students’ PK through scaffolding encourages engagement and allows for assimilation of content into their existing schemas. Furthermore, Muir (2018) argues that creating connections with PK allows for greater comprehension of content. Therefore, this allows students to transition from their year 7 knowledge of recognising independent and dependent variables to being able to identify and explain independent and dependent variables (“Science”, n.d.). 2.3 Strength 3- Multimodality The task utilises multimodal learning through the integration of oral, spatial and tactile components through group discussions, representing data and conducting an experiment. The activity requires students to utilise tactile modes when conducting the experiment in groups before they can incorporate spatial modes when tabulating and graphing data. Sullivan (2011) argues that utilising various modes would allow students to see the relevance of the task and would result in promoting engagement. The task also incorporates oral modes as the students discuss answers for problem solving. Gibbons (2002) highlights the importance of group discussions in problem solving activities, as it is proven beneficial for cognitive development and is pivotal for learning. Therefore, the use of multimodal learning promotes student engagement as the relevance of the task is made clear and allows for greater comprehension through collaboration. 2.4 Limitation 1- High achievers (HA) Through scaffolding, the task ensures through scaffolding that all students, regardless of background, are able to improve academically as it ensures students that lack fundamental year 7 scientific skills to be at the expected year 8 scientific skill level. However, as noted in part 1, only some students seemed unable to differentiate between independent and dependent variables. Therefore, the task would not be challenging and might be too easy for HA students that already have fundamental year 7 scientific skills and are able to tabulate and graph. Gibbons (2002) argues tasks need to be challenging in order to ensure student engagement. Therefore, HA students may feel disengaged as they may find the task simple. Hence, HA students should be supplied with a differentiated task that is challenging and would further their existing knowledge (Gibbons, 2002). Sullivan (2011) suggests giving extra challenging exercises for students that finish the task early and giving them the option to individually complete the task, which will ensure engagement. Therefore, the task fails to consider and may cause HA students that already have fundamental year 7 scientific skills to disengage in the lesson as it focuses on students that lack fundamental skills. 2.5 Limitation 2- Individual assessment Since the task allows students to collaboratively problem solve, this may cause issues for the teacher to assess individual numeracy skills. Sullivan (2011) argues it is fundamental for teachers to be able to assess individual strengths and weaknesses to be able to ensure tasks are suited to their needs. Olivera and Straus (2004) further argues that group activities sometimes do not equate to positive individual performance and does not affirm comprehension of content as all members may not actively interact. Therefore, the task requiring group collaboration may be problematic as it is difficult to be able to assess individual performance and understanding. Conclusion In conclusion, these strengths highlight the key focuses in the activities that promote learning and the limitations mention areas that require attention and improvement. Appendix Handout 1 (For Literacy Task) – Appendix item 1 Title: ______________________________________________________________________________________ Aim: What is the purpose of the experiment ______________________________________________________________________________________ Hypothesis: What do you think will happen in the experiment ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Equipment: Risk assessment: What is the risk What can the risk do How to prevent the risk Fire Glassware Method: ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Checklist: □ Every sentence is in third person (There is no “you,” “I,” and “we” in the report) □ The answer for aim starts with “To” □ Include volume of glassware equipment □ Method is numbered, e.g. 1)____ 2)____ □ Sentences in method start with a verb (action words) Appendix Handout 2 (For Numeracy Task) – Appendix item 2 Variable Independent variable Dependent variable Explanation of variable What are you changing in the experiment What are you measuring in the experiment State variable from experiment with units Axis on graph (x or y) a) Draw a table of your results below: b) Draw a graph on the grid below, using the results recorded in part c. 1) What is the relationship shown on the graph ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 2) What would the temperature increase of water be from 2- 5 minutes ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ 3) Describe what happens to the graph once the water reaches its boiling point (around 100°C) ______________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________________ Reference list acara. (2014). EAL/D teacher resource [Ebook] (pp. 1-47). Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/student-diversity/students-for- whom-eald/ acara. National Literacy Learning Progression [Ebook] (pp. 1-57). Retrieved from https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/national-literacy-and-numeracy- learning-progressions/ acara. National Numeracy Learning Progression [Ebook] (pp. 1-43). Retrieved from https://australiancurriculum.edu.au/resources/national-literacy-and-numeracy- learning-progressions/ Collet, V. (2012). The Gradual Increase of Responsibility Model: Coaching for Teacher Change. Literacy Research And Instruction, 51(1), 27-47. doi: 10.1080/19388071.2010.549548 Dearnley, C., & Meddings, F. (2007). Student self-assessment and its impact on learning – A pilot study. Nurse Education Today, 27(4), 333-340. doi: 10.1016/j.nedt.2006.05.014 Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning : teaching English language learners in the mainstream classroom (2nd ed., pp. 1-21). Greenwood Publishing Group Gibbons, P. (2009). Scaffolding EL Learners to Be Successful Writers [Ebook] (pp. 106-129). US: Heinemann Educational Books. Retrieved from https://trove.nla.gov.au/work/35129119 q&versionId=44936754 Gleeson, M., & Davison, C. (2019). Teaching in linguistically and culturally diverse secondary schools. Australian Review Of Applied Linguistics, 42(3), 301-321. doi: 10.1075/aral.17093.gle Hammond, J. (2012). Hope and challenge in Australian Curriculum: Implications for EAL students and their teachers. Australian Journal Of Language And Literacy, 35(2), 223- 240. Muir, T. (2008). Principles of practice and teacher actions: Influences on effective teaching of numeracy. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 20(3), 78-101. doi: 10.1007/bf03217531 Olivera, F., & Straus, S. (2004). Group-to-Individual Transfer of Learning. Small Group Research, 35(4), 440-465. doi: 10.1177/1046496404263765 Science. Retrieved 27 April 2020, from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10- curriculum/science/ year=12007&year=12008&strand=Science+Understanding&stra nd=Science+as+a+Human+Endeavour&strand=Science+Inquiry+Skills&capability= Literacy&capability=Numeracy&priority=ignore&priority=Aboriginal+and+Torres+ Strait+Islander+Histories+and+Cultures&priority=Asia+and+Australia%E2%80%99s +Engagement+with+Asia&priority=Sustainability&elaborations=true&elaborations=f alse&scotterms=false&isFirstPageLoad=false Sellars, M. (2018). Mathematics and Numeracy in a Global Society. Numeracy In Authentic Contexts, 5-21. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-10-5736-6_1 Shatri, Z., & Zabeli, N. (2018). Perceptions of students and teachers about the forms and student self-assessment activities in the classroom during the formative assessment. Journal Of Social Studies Education Research, 9(2), 28-46. Shutterstock. States of water illustrations [Image]. Retrieved from https://www.shutterstock.com/search/state+of+water image_type=illustration Sullivan, P. (2011). Teaching Mathematics: Using research-informed strategies. Australian Council For Educational Research, 1-72. Unsworth, L. (1999). Developing critical understanding of the specialised language of school science and history texts: A functional grammatical perspective. Journal Of Adolescent & Adult Learning, 42(7), 508-521. Unsworth, L. (2002). Changing dimensions of school literacies. Australian Journal Of Language And Literacy, 25(1), 62-77.