I'm debating with myself whether to do "A Day in the Life" today. On September 26th I didn't do "A Day in the Life" because all classes only watched a Jane Goodall chimpanzee video. (Oh, chimps reminds me of crocodiles. Today's Google Doodle features Australian zookeeper Steve Irwin. If we count Goodall as being science-related, then I suppose we should count Irwin as well.)
Today the students actually have a written assignment, so I could do "A Day in the Life" since classroom management is more relevant today than on that September day. But since all the classes are the same, I'd have to keep writing the same assignment over and over. Yesterday's "Day in the Life" was much more interesting, since I covered both P.E. and health.
This is one of the middle schools where all periods rotate, and today begins with fourth period. The assignment is to read two packets and answer questions on the respective worksheets. Students may choose which assignment to do first.
The only period when I must write down names for the bad list is second period. This class rotates into the after-lunch position, and so the class begins with silent reading (with the usual whispering and student "sound effects"). It's the only period with a tardy student.
I write down two names on the bad list -- a girl and a boy. The girl repeats a common trick -- she's summoned to go to the guidance office, and when she returns, she claims that the remaining half hour or so isn't enough time to do any work (even though the good list students are able to finish both worksheets in less time than that). The boy doesn't even try to come up with an excuse -- he just doesn't do the work.
I name fifth period as the best class of the day. In this class, so many students complete both worksheets that I must use a random number generator to decide which names I should write down on my good list (since too many names would water down the list). The next best class is third period, since this class cleans up the room well at the end of the day.
One of the two articles is all about "fixed mindset" vs. "growth mindset." On that worksheet, the students must correct fixed mindset statements so that they reflect a growth mindset instead. One of the fixed mindset statements is relevant to math -- "I'm not good at solving math problems." (A possible growth mindset correction would be something like "I'll work harder at solving them.")
For some reason, traditionalists dismiss "growth mindset" as just another fad. But I see no reason why growth mindset would be at odds with traditionalism. Students with the fixed mindset "I'm not good at solving math problems" are likely to avoid solving problems on traditional p-sets, while those with a growth mindset will find value in working on them.
OK, so I'm not doing "A Day in the Life" today. But instead, I'm doing what I normally do when I sub in a science class -- lament on my failure to teach science at the old charter school. Since it's February, there's much more evidence of student work on the board and around the room than there was in September.
First of all, there are assignments on the board listed with a "Table of Contents" and page numbers -- evidence of an interactive notebook. I've noticed that besides math, science seems to be the class where interactive notebooks appear. This once again makes me feel guilty about not using interactive notebooks at the old charter school.
I'm not sure how such notebooks would have worked out had I used them two years ago. I could use two-subject notebooks and have the students label one section "math" and the other "science." But such notebooks might be hard for the students to find, and some might buy a one-subject notebook or use this as an excuse not to bring a notebook the entire year. Another idea is to mix the math and science pages but use the "Table of Contents" to indicate which pages are which subject. I could even have a pattern where the left pages are for math and the right pages are for science.
The most recent lab these seventh graders did was on percentage of oxygen in the air. I already know that air is about 20% O2, but I didn't know that it's possible to devise an experiment to find this percentage (that seventh graders are able to complete). Apparently, it involves taking steel wool and letting it rust (that is, react with oxygen). The air is in a tube where the oxygen, after reacting, is replaced with water. So students can measure the water to find out how much O2 was replaced. (Two years ago, I had another project involving steel wool -- one that didn't go well.)
A past project involves creating a model of a cell. No, these weren't edible models (bringing to mind the special scholar's cousin who bragged about the edible cell model lab from her old school).
I assume that science in this district is based on the NGSS standards -- the integrated model -- since I see both life science (cell models) and physical science (oxygen in air) in seventh grade. If I had done science at the old charter, it would have been NGSS for sixth grade only (as these sixth graders are now eighth graders about to take the first real California Science Test). Seventh grade would have done labs found in the life science Illinois State text.
Lesson 11-6 of the U of Chicago text is called "Three-Dimensional Coordinates." In the modern Third Edition of the text, three-dimensional coordinates appear in Lesson 11-9.
I didn't write much about this lesson last year. This was the other day during Chapter 11 last year when I subbed in a math classroom, so I focused on that math class instead.
Today is an activity day. Since what I posted last year from the classroom is an activity anyway, I've decided to keep that activity and add a new Lesson 11-6 worksheet instead.
With this worksheet, today I can truly say that I've posted every U of Chicago lesson (from the Second Edition, that is) at some point. (Lessons 8-3 to 8-5 were posted in past years). Last year I claimed to have covered every lesson, but in reality I didn't post worksheets for Lessons 11-4 or 11-6 until this year.
This is what I wrote last year about today's activity:
And besides -- at least today's "Luck O' the Irish" actually fits in Chapter 11 on coordinate geometry, albeit in only two rather than three dimensions. If you wish, you can pretend parts of the graphs are in different planes and make it into a 3D lesson.
Ordinarily I don't post copyrighted material. But Cartesian Cartoons are so easy to find online that I see no harm in posting yet another copy of it. (And besides, I've posted some of them before during years past.) Some students today do remark that this is a bit early to be doing a St. Patrick's Day assignment, but oh well!
One girl has trouble understanding how to do the graphs. I try to help her a little, but her points are still a bit off. I tell her that she is "almost smart"and that she should work harder to make the graphs look right. I hope my words can motivate her.
[2019 update: Yes, that was the "growth mindset" I enforced that day last year!]
No comments:
Post a Comment