Friday, September 2, 2011
The Evolution of a 21st Century Educator -- post #37
Saturday, June 18, 2011
Father's Day blog Posting -- #36
![]() |
| Father and Daughter |
| Family Home |
Monday, May 9, 2011
People's Choice voting Now Open in Google Science Fair 2011
- http://www.google.com/events/sciencefair/vote.html
Thursday, April 28, 2011
Saturday, February 26, 2011
Judging the Google Global Science Fair – post 21
I am excited to report that I have been invited to serve as a preliminary judge for the Google Science Fair 2011! This is the first time that Google has sponsored a Science Fair. They have partnered with CERN, the LEGO Group, National Geographic, and Scientific American to attract the brightest, best young scientists from around the world. Youth Science Canada, which includes Smarter Science, is the exclusive Canadian educational partner for this activity and is working to ensure that young Canadian scientists are well represented in the competition. Youth between the ages of 13 – 18 have the opportunity to work digitally, globally and collaboratively to present their projects.
Judges, including me, have been chosen from a panel of teachers and university professors from around the world for the first and second round of judging. As a judge I do not have to leave the comfort of my own home! Simple access to a computer with an internet connection along with some online training provides me with the confidence to access and evaluate the online submissions!
Entries that make it through the first round of judging then go on to be checked for scientific accuracy. Fifteen finalists will be flown to Google headquarters in California where they will present their projects before a panel of acclaimed judges including Nobel Laureates, tech visionaries and household names. (No, not including me!)
So in making a global Science Fair a sensational event for youth Google has also made it a wonderful opportunity for the humble science teacher, like me, to engage in our global village of digital opportunities!
Friday, February 4, 2011
Testing the Absorbency of Paper Towels and the Sham-wowTM! -- Part Three
(Posting 18)
Okay! So my grade nine / ten Essentials Grade Nine Science class has spent two days preparing to conduct an experiment to determine which type of towel is the most absorbent. The three types they have to choose from are brown paper towels like those found in school washrooms, white paper towels common in most North American kitchens and the Sham-wowTM a commercial product advertised for its absorbency. I spent the first day getting them engaged in the concept of the inquiry that we would be performing (see blog posting 16). Then we spent the next day using the Smarter Science elementary framework to plan our controlled test of the three paper towels (see blog posting 17).
You may be thinking that this is way too much time to invest in a science experiment, there is curriculum to cover, facts to memorize, textbooks to read and tests to write! I would like to counter any of these arguments with the reply that I have been using the Smarter Science framework in my classroom for some time now with the result that the students have an enduring understanding of the process of science and they have become able to think critically about a wide variety of concepts, not limited to science. As a veteran teacher I have often struggled with the question “But how do I get them to think?” I have read a plethora of books, taken too many courses, sat through endless hours of professional development and tried countless strategies to develop students’ metacognitive skills but it was not until I started using the Smarter Science framework in my classroom that I felt that the students were actually developing their metacognition.
The posters we used are available in pdf format on the Smarter Science website. Because my students have weak literacy skills I chose to complete one master set for this experiment which I had prominently displayed in my classroom. As the students entered my classroom today I met them at the classroom door and gave them a photocopy of the bottom half of page 4 as they entered with the instructions that the only other item they needed today was a pencil.
Together we reviewed the process we had gone through yesterday wherein we had ended by determining the question we wanted to explore. The question is: “If we change the type of towel what will happen to how long it takes to clean up (time)?”
The students were instructed to complete the handout I had given them of step five individually. This included changing the words “We” to “I”. Every single student completed the first half with: “I predict that the Sham-wowTM will be the best.”
They struggled a lot more with the second sentence starter, “I think this will happen because . . .” They wanted me to tell them what to write. Again I had to convince them that it was what they think, not what I think, as long as that is what they think then their answers will be right. There was a huge tendency to copy from the few risk takers who took the chance to fill in their thoughts so I had to ask them to turn their papers over when they were done. An additional problem I encountered was that due to the weak literacy level in the class some students asked me how to spell particular words, which is a practice I encourage with these learners. However, what happened today was when others heard what words were being requested they used those words in their answers. Thinking is a real challenge but one I now feel competent to deal with!
Eventually everyone had something written down. Some examples of their answers included, “I think this will happen because . . .
· the Sham-wowTM is made of fabric.”
· it is better.”
· material is good.”
· it is expensive.”
We referred back to poster3, step 3(b) on which we had written our three unchanged variables: blotting or rubbing, amount of water spilled, and amount of time spent cleaning up. Collaboratively we decided on the values to give each of these variables. They were:
· Blotting only, no rubbing
· Amount of water spilled = 25 mL
· Size of towel = 10 cm x 10 cm
I wrote these values right onto the poster for the students to refer to.
Almost ready to perform and record! We decided the instruments we would use would be the 25 mL graduated cylinder for the amount of water spilled. Consequently, we had some “just in time” teaching while I demonstrated how to use the graduated cylinders. We also decided to use pencils and rulers to measure out 10 cm x 10 cm squares of each towel and scissors to cut
Next we designed our observation table onto which we would record our data. We drew them right on the back of the small handout the students had used to make their predictions.
| Type of towel | Volume of spill | Size of towel | Time to clean up |
| Brown paper | 25 mL | 10 cm x 10 cm |
|
| White paper | 25 mL | 10 cm x 10 cm |
|
| Sham-wowTM | 25 mL | 10 cm x 10 cm |
|
I did not worry about the fact that they were only going to do one trial with each type of towel. We can only cover so much ground at once! We can get into multiple trials and reproducibility another time.
Measuring out a 10 cm x 10 cm square onto the towels was very challenging for some of these students, as was cutting the squares out. After helping all of them cut one square out I showed them how to use it as a template for the next towel rather than measuring a new square out. In the future I may prepare some cardboard templates for the students who struggle with their fine motor skills. It would also be an opportunity to have a peer helper or buddy come into the classroom to help measure and cut the squares.
The students were happy to be measuring out their squares and using the graduated cylinders. I was pleased when one asked me if they should put their goggles on. I told them it was okay because we were only using water so they would be safe but they were disappointed so I got the goggles out and made them optional for this lab. About half of the students put them on, I have observed time and again that students like to be “real” scientists and do what a “real’ scientist would do.
The students were even more delighted that they were allowed to “spill” water onto the lab counter. As they performed the lab they required verbal cues to remind them to “blot not rub” and “don’t start blotting until you look at the clock”. In order to facilitate timing I had the students work in pairs, but each person performed the entire lab. This allowed them to focus on either timing or blotting at one time instead of both thereby ensuring that data got collected and recorded.
By the time everyone had performed the inquiry, recorded their data and cleaned up I had them all pass in their little handout for marking. There was much more learning than what was recorded on that paper but it allowed me, as a classroom teacher, to have some evidence of the students’ accomplishments so I could record something in my mark book.
There are so many extensions that could be done with this inquiry we could probably do nothing but this for the entire semester. Here are some questions that the students had while doing the inquiry:
· I wonder if the Sham-wowTM works as well after it has been washed.
· I wonder if the blue Sham-wowTM works as well as the orange sham-wows.
· I wonder how the no-name Sham-wowTM from the Dollar Store compares.
· I wonder why they don’t put Sham-wowTM in all the washrooms.
· I wonder why they don’t make diapers out of the Sham-wowTM?
· I wonder how the Sham-wowTM compares to an ordinary towel.
· I wonder if I could use the Sham-wowTM to dry my dog.
It is these questions that provide evidence to me that the students are engaging their metacognitive skills, and that is the power of Smarter Science!
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Testing the Absorbency of Paper Towels and the Sham-wowTM!
(Posting 17)
If you read my previous blog posting you know that I spent a considerable amount of time laying the ground work for today’s inquiry. The students I teach in this class are teenagers yet they all have high needs and a multitude of exceptionalities which results in them working well below grade level.
Today, when the students came to class I greeted them at the door, as usual. On my desk I had the same three items as yesterday – a roll of brown paper towels, a roll of white paper towels and an orange Sham-wowTM , however, there was no spilled water on the front counter. Taped up on the front board I had the set of four Smarter Science posters that are recommended for use at the elementary level.
We quickly recapped yesterday’s lesson wherein we had observed spilled water and discussed which type of towel would clean it up the best.
“What happened to the spill, Miss?”
“Which towel did you use to clean it up?”
Imagine the students surprise when I told them that I did not clean it up! Instead I left it there when I went home yesterday and when I came back today it was gone.
“The custodian must have cleaned it up” quickly became the class consensus. I asked if anyone had any other ideas of where it might have gone. Sadly, they didn’t so it was up to me to suggest that it might have evaporated. This led to a lengthy discussion about evaporation. The example that most students seemed to be able to relate to was puddles disappearing when the sun comes out. Although they all came around to accepting that evaporation is real there remained a great deal of uncertainty about how long the process would take.
“Let‘s talk about the observations we made today and yesterday” I said as I drew the students’ attention to the first poster at the front of the room. Step One, collectively we came up with three observations:
- Miss spilled water yesterday.
- Miss has towels that could clean up the spill.
- Where did the spilled water go?
“Looking at these three observations, what does it make you wonder?” (Still step one of the Smarter Science framework.)
- Was it really water?
- Why did she spill it?
- How much water did she spill?
- Who cleaned it up?
- Which towel works better?
Although the students had deviated from the intention of the “WONDER” box I did not correct them since they were completely engaged, on track and offering excellent questions. (The “wonder” box is intended to be used for the students to speculate as to the answers they posed in the “observe” box.)
Moving on to step 2(a) of the Smarter Science framework, on the second poster, we worked together as a class to brainstorm the answer to “What could we measure or observe about the spilled water?” We recorded our ideas on pink sticky notes.
- How much water was spilled? (initial volume)
- How long does it take to clean up? (time)
- How much water gets soaked up by the towels? (final volume)
- How big is each type of towel? (size)
These questions lead us directly to step 2(b): “What could we change or vary about the object or the event that may affect what we could measure or observe?” These items were listed on yellow sticky notes.
· Amount of time spent cleaning up
· Blotting or rubbing with the towel
· Size of the towel
· Type of towel
· Amount of water spilled
All of the ideas listed above came directly from the students. A different group of students may come up with a completely different list. That does not mean one list is better than the other. As long as they stay on task any list is correct. The students need to receive continuous positive verbal feedback and reassurance that there is no such thing as a stupid idea in science class. In fact, some of the best discoveries in science have come from what others considered “stupid ideas”. One of my own personal favourites that I use to describe this phenomenon is that of Galileo Galilei, but I digress. 

Moving onto poster three, step 3(a) we had to decide what we would change. This choice was limited by the yellow sticky notes we had placed in the box for step 2(b). It was decided that our changed variable would be the type of towel used. This decision was prompted by reminding the students that what we wanted to test, today, was which type of towel was the most absorbent. Consequently, the yellow sticky note reading “type of towel” was placed on the “changed variable box” of step 3 (a).
Our next decision was how we would measure of observe the result. This process was starting to go over the heads of some of the students plus their attention was starting to lag but when I told them that this was really a multiple choice question and all they had to do was choose one of the pink sticky notes from step 2(a) for us to put there they perked back up. The choices we had previously recorded on pick sticky notes in step 2(a) were:
- How much water was spilled? (initial volume)
- How long does it take to clean up? (time)
- How much water gets soaked up by the towels? (final volume)
- How big is each type of towel? (size)
We voted to determine that the quantity we would measure would be time and we would use the second hand on the classroom clock to measure it. So the pink sticky note that read “How long does it take to clean up? (Time)” was moved to the appropriate box on poster three.
Step 3(b) on poster three asks “What will we not change?” so the remaining yellow sticky notes were moved here.
Moving on to poster four all we had to do was move the pink and yellow sticky note from poster three, step 3 (a) onto step 4. Therefore it read, “If we change the type of towel what will happen to how long it takes to clean up (time)?”
Eureka! We have successfully initiated and planned a controlled experiment! But . . .we are out of time.
The students are told that tomorrow they will start by making their predictions and then we will be able to get on to the actual experiment!
“Yay! Another day with no work! We love science!”
See the next blog posting : Testing the Absorbency of Paper Towels and the Sham-wowTM!
Part Three – Using the Smarter Science Framework to Perform, Record, Analyze and Interpret the Inquiry (Posting 18)

