Minutes

Teacher Inquiry and  Student Learning in Science

The Summer Science Institute Team Planning Meeting

March 15, 2007

2:30 -4:00 p.m.

Dion Board Room, Rivier College

 

 

Attendees:

 

Heather L. Buckman                 Hudson

Amy Blackwell                         Hudson

Sue Senecal                              Hudson

Doreen Danhof                         Milford

Jennifer Maurais                       Milford

Sue Rowse                               Nashua

Kathleen Karvelas                    Nashua

Amy Seo                                  Nashua

Cecile Carlton                          Nashua

David Burgess                          Rivier College

Fiona McDonnell                      Rivier College

 

(Hollis absent due to teacher workshop)

 

  1. Facilitators restated the goal that the institute is on understanding teaching and learning in science, as well as the new inquiry components of the new physical science frameworks (GSEs).

 

  1. Curriculum Materials currently available in the districts were discussed.

 

·        Lego Dacta Sets (energy grade 4, simple machines, similar to K’nex)

·        Delta STC kits (Newton’s laws, simple machines, properties of matter, sound, elec/mag)

·        AIMS, Gems

·        F.O.S.S. (electricity)

·        Prentice-Hall kits

 

Teachers emphasized the use of AIMS and GEMS throughout their curriculum.

 

  1. Teacher’s ideas of useful activities to incorporate into the institute that could be considered as we begin to develop the institute.

·        Guest speakers/presenters, such as Science on a Shoestring (Doug from Londonderry), Orbit with Corbett

·        Morning activity – either stand alone structured activity or it could set the tone for the theme of the day. The morning activity could be done either as a whole group or at stations. Morning activities could come from AIMS or GEMS or they could be provided with a box of materials along with a question.

·        A choice of sessions to go to which could be repeated.

·        Look at samples of student work.

·        Analysis of data.

·        Connection to writing – how to write up data.

·        Practice developing activities that help students to design an experiment to collect and analyze data.

·        Teachers are concerned about the performance/inquiry strand

·        Could be work around likely questions on the state assessment in spring 2008.

·        Presentation on the NECAP and the frameworks by the state (Jan McLaughlin)

·        Could be browsing bins of nonfiction about topics in science for students.

 

  1. Facilitators agreed to provide a reading packet prior to the institute that contains readings from the literature on the student understanding of physical science concepts.

 

  1. A very brief discussion considered possible institute outcomes.

 

·        Ability to design a lesson around a GSE content.

·        Ability to design an experience for students that involves designing an experiment.

·        Teachers should leave with the idea that science can be fun, doable, and manageable.

·        Helping kids write up an experiment.

·        Teachers should know something about physical science that is central to understanding.

 

  1. There seemed to be a consensus that teachers should be invited to participate in the institute based on their interest in learning and teaching in science and their willingness to actively participate in the institute, incorporate ideas from the institute to be shared at the monthly meeting during the school year.

 

  1. At the Thursday April 19 meeting we will work on the description of the institute to be shared with teachers in participating districts. We will also explore additional data collection tools to be used in project evaluation. We will be joined by Brian Cochrane, who has been contracted by the State to conduct a formal assessment of all State funded projects.

 

Prepared by

David Burgess and Fiona McDonnell, 21 March 2007