Over the last few weeks I have developed, planned, and implemented a structural inquiry lesson plan for my AP Environmental Science class at Riviera Beach Maritime Academy. Inquiry lessons in science are a method recommended by the National Science Education Standards (Buxton, & Provenzo, 2011) and is a common professional development standard. This type of lesson starts with a question that will ignite the curiosity of students, engage them with an open ended idea, and then have the students answer the question (Laureate Education, 2010a). During my lesson I was focusing on the process of photosynthesis and the idea that mass gain in plants come primarily from carbon fixation in the air. This lesson started off with the basic question “Where does mass gain in plants come from?” In this paper I will be reflecting on the results of my lesson, what went right and what could be dome better, and my opinion of the success of my lesson on students learning the concepts I was attempting to teach.
Students are often taught the process of photosynthesis but they seem to have a hard time correlating that with the fact that plants grow because of the energy produced by sugars from photosynthesis. This also leads into discussions of whether plants respire, energy flow, entropy, food chains, and ecosystems. It is an important concept in biology that plants start the food chain and this happens through photosynthesis. I was amazed by the answers I received when I initially asked the leading question. Most of the answers had to do in some way with the soil. When I posed questions about aquatic plants there was a similar answer, water. I really thought that this lesson went well in teaching the students the answer to this question. Based on the presentations, laboratory papers, and the resulting research and discussions I believe that my students now understand this concept.
I did think that the laboratory was a little simple for the students in the class. In the future I will try to use guided inquiry lessons with the students developing the laboratory procedures as a class (so they can use results from different groups to compare). Structured inquiry offers a little more thought by the students and will get them a little more involved earlier on in the process (Banchi, & Bell, 2008).
Another improvement that I need to make is teaching my students to be more descriptive in their writing. This applies in particular to their procedures where detail needs to be such that anyone reading the procedure report can accomplish the procedure themselves (Environmental Protection Agency, 2007). The other issue that dealt with format is that the references used were not in APA format. Although I was specific in requesting this format (both verbally and in the rubric) I did not give the students a reference of where to get this information, thinking that they would research it themselves. All student groups failed to do this right. In the future I need to provide them with proper training and resources to do this correctly.
The KWL chart used in the lesson was helpful in determining holes in the students knowledge and testing for misconceptions. I did think that the results from what the students would like to learn did not teach me anything and tended to have the students guessing what I wanted to read. In the future I will eliminate this section which will provide me with more space for the students to write down what they have learned (in particular).
One of the major improvements that I need to accomplish is the use of a handout that has questions on it relating to the topics that I want the students to cover before they start the laboratory. I believe that although the students can now answer the desired big idea questions I missed an opportunity to teach the students some finer details about energy flow through an ecosystem, in particular about the first and second law of thermodynamics and their tie into photosynthesis. A handout will slow them down just enough to allow them time to absorb all of the new information that has been given to them and allow them to write down the answers. Since note taking and summarizing is one of the best strategies for student improvement (Laureate Education, 2010b) this should be sufficient to allow the students to pick up the ideas. I should see the results of better knowledge in the laboratory paper as well as in the presentation.
It is important for a teacher to evaluate their performance and their lesson to guide improvement in their teaching (Laureate Education, 2010c). I believe that although I was happy with the results of my lesson and the students learned several new things and can now see the connection between mass gain and photosynthesis, there are several areas that I can improve on in teaching this concept in the future. I have attached some work accomplished by my students on this.
References
Buxton, C. A., & Provenzo, E. F., Jr. (2011). Teaching science in elementary & middle school: A cognitive and cultural approach. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Banchi, H., & Bell, R. (2008). The many levels of inquiry. Science and Children, 46(2), 26–29.
Environmental Protection Agency. (2007). Guidance for preparing standard operating procedures. Retrieved from http://www.epa.gov/quality/qs-docs/g6-final.pdf
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010a). Interview with an expert: the nature of science. In The Nature of Science. Retrieved from http://www.courseurl.com
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010b). Education today. In Designing Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment. Retrieved from http://www.courseurl.com
Laureate Education, Inc. (Producer). (2010c). Becoming a critically reflective teacher. In Teacher as Professional. Retrieved from http://www.courseurl.com
