Metacognitive structures Generic enquiry Science Specific Structures  Scientific Thinking skills Assessment  Correlated to...
Self directed questions?
Self directed use of  Learning tools Filter map
Self directed use of  Learning tools Frame of reference map
Self directed use of  Learning Tool 20 word wonder
Self-directed research  original survey
Self directed use of  Learning tool Bubble map
Script – an example  of drafting work
Reflection on the process
Reflection continued
Self Assessment of the STS. <ul><li>Despite students only awarding themselves the correct SAT level ( level 5, 6 etc) 26% ...
Self Assessment of the STS. <ul><li>level 5 students correctly identify their SAT level 40% of the time and the levels 3 a...
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Model Science Enquiry

1,101 views

Published on

A current curriculum development. Enquiry Based Learning. Based around developing Scientific Thinking Skills, we are using two frame works. A generic enquiry cycle and a hierarchy of science specific strcutures. Supporting students through develpoing their reasoning skills with a toolbox of thinking tools. The scaffold is also planningto gradually be removed.
The photographs are just a slection of studnt work, where they have chosen tools to help prcess their learning during an enquiry.

Published in: Education, Technology
0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
1,101
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
39
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
8
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Model Science Enquiry

  1. 1. Metacognitive structures Generic enquiry Science Specific Structures Scientific Thinking skills Assessment Correlated to KS3 levels Planned progress. Lessons supporting skills
  2. 2. Self directed questions?
  3. 3. Self directed use of Learning tools Filter map
  4. 4. Self directed use of Learning tools Frame of reference map
  5. 5. Self directed use of Learning Tool 20 word wonder
  6. 6. Self-directed research original survey
  7. 7. Self directed use of Learning tool Bubble map
  8. 8. Script – an example of drafting work
  9. 9. Reflection on the process
  10. 10. Reflection continued
  11. 11. Self Assessment of the STS. <ul><li>Despite students only awarding themselves the correct SAT level ( level 5, 6 etc) 26% of the time the students were overall fairly close to their reported SAT levels. From the 200 levels derived by this method 37% were the same as the teacher levels. They underestimated them by a factor of 2.02, meaning that they were around 2 division of a SAT level, for example they said a 5c and the reported level was 5a.(this would be a score of 2, as would a 5a and a 6b).The spread of the student self assessed levels is 2.5 so that all students are on average within one level of their reported level, backing up the previous measure. So, it is okay to trust the data produced by students </li></ul>
  12. 12. Self Assessment of the STS. <ul><li>level 5 students correctly identify their SAT level 40% of the time and the levels 3 and 4 students 33%. Compared to only 21% of the level 6 students. ( No difference was seen with the top end level 6 compared to the low end). Why is this? Could it be due to the more able students being more reflective about their learning? Could it be down to these students understanding the criteria better? The data suggest yes, the students who most undere stimate their grade are the level 6 students, by a factor of 2.65, gladly still within one level. The level 5 students underestimate by a around half a level (1.8) while the level 3 and 4 overestimate their ability by a small amount (0.33) or for example from 3a to 4c. Another possible explanation is that this form of assessment may actually be testing genuine student ability. Its test what a student can do not what they can remember or have the ability to write down </li></ul>

×