I believe in censorship

I have discovered that there are certain banned words in my classroom. I have started referring to some things as “banned.” In the future I hope to make a poster.

“I hate________ (logarithms, chemistry, dissolution, math, etc)”

“I don’t get it.”

“I can’t do ____________ (stoichiometry, logarithms, diagramming, etc)”

This is not because I dislike questions. I love questions. I want to hear their struggles.

I would like them to say (and think) along these lines:

“I have struggled with this in the past.”

“This topic didn’t click the first time around.”

“I need more practice on ____________ (logarithms, diagramming, etc) until I understand it better.”

“I would like you to explain this another way.”

And so on. I think the difference is pretty clear. Defeatism really frustrates me. So I’ve banned it. =)

The new quarter

Overall, the new quarter is going well. It is going very quickly.

I feel like I have got my stride. I spend less time figuring out what I need to do.

My motto has been, babysteps, practice, babysteps, practice. I don’t let myself show them an equation, or teach them anything, unless they get to use it that class period, in some way. And I try to make sure that they need to use it later on in the quarter, in a lab or something.

I have been lecturing more. I am learning that it is possible to be student centered while I lecture. My students are finding things much easier. The past week or two have been lower order basics however, facts, and a lot of procedures. I have a two part lab planned for this week and I want to make them use these skills. They have found the skills so easy, that I will be quite sure that the problem is a lack of skill at higher order application, evaluation, and metacognition if they are struggling. It will be hard for them to know what to do where.

They also really struggle with the fact that they have to remember, and use, everything we have already done. They may not forget about molarity. They may not forget about dissolution. If they do, they will not be able to solve the problems. Their instinct is to only use what they have learned in the last week. I try really hard to fight that by having problems that specifically force them to use formulas and solve problems from a month ago. I also hope that those people who didn’t get it the first time around will have more success the second time around. This will help them on the final.

The big project thing isn’t panning out quite yet. I know what I want them to do for the final, but I really, really, need to put it all together NOW so I can give it to them and they know where we are going.

Self-Centeredness

Early in my Master’s program, I remember one of the experienced teachers (a wise, wise man) say that one of the big difference between novice and experienced teachers is that novices think a lot about themselves in the classroom: how they are doing, what techniques they are using, etc, and experienced teachers think about the students and what they need.

I am getting pretty good about thinking about my students (being a parent has really helped me there) but I tend to transfer my feelings about life, learning, and success to my students. I think my previous post is an example of that. Who says my students want to do learn and do a good job just for the sake of understanding the joy and beauty of chemistry? Second chances, and all revisions, are a lot of work, and that is one thing they really don’t want more of.

I do think I am still too self-centered in the classroom. This is one thing that my students don’t see directly, but affects how I plan and my expectations for their reactions.

I should think of someone I know who thought that high school was okay, and that chemistry is okay, and try to plan for them.

More thoughts on revision

After writing the last post, I think that more of my sympathies for revision are explained. I get to teach all this stuff again next year. I will do it so much better. I’m trying hard, and doing a pretty good job (at least all the people who observe me seem to think it’s about as good as can be expected), but it will be so much better.

My best friend (an experienced teacher now) told me to give myself the gift of time. I reassure myself with that. This unit was only so-so this year, but next year it will be better.

I guess I want to share that reassurance and opportunity with my students.

A square peg in a round hole

Being a first year teacher, and like all teachers, not having nearly enough time, I often scope out other teacher’s materials on-line to modify or use in my classroom. This sometimes leads to interesting results. Today, for instance, I have a great practice set for Lewis Dot structures, but it doesn’t match well with the method I taught them from a different teacher.

I was trying to remember how I learned Lewis structures. I know I did; I know there must be a time when I did not understand why carbon wants to make four bonds, or didn’t have the octet rule buried somewhere in my brain. I just can’t really remember.

This is another reason I like to look at other teacher’s materials. They have years of experience and have tested their methods and systems. I find  a lot of good stuff. It just doesn’t always fit together well.

The moral of this story is that I need to do all the practice I assign using the method I am going to teach.

And I will do that. When I have all my materials together in advance, and my daughter starts napping again, and when my homeroom students work so that I can get some work done.

In other words, when pigs fly. At any rate, not until after my students have tested it all for.

My first quarter is over

The biggest lesson I have learned is that my students need to practice. 3 or 4 problems is not enough. They might whine somewhat about the worksheet, but they are hopeless without a lot of practice. The thing to do is not to have other activities replace practice, but to have a lot of practice incorporated into more authentic activities (e.g. labs).

Practice, practice, practice.

And slow down.

and don’t assume anything, especially if you didn’t teach them last term.

A good start

Today was a bad day in everything but my teaching. We are starting “shape.” This is how I think of Lewis structure/VSEPR stuff. We are taking steps towards thinking in three dimensions, which is one of the wonderful things about chemistry.

I managed to start at the beginning. I reviewed their prior knowledge of valence electrons. I then defined Lewis structures. Then I did the LS for the elements whose valence electrons they had just found for their POD. Then I started with two simple molecules (methane and ammonia) and demonstrated “easy” ones. Then I outlined a method for figuring out the number of bonds and the number of non-bonding electrons. Throughout this I would show them 2, and then they would do one. Tomorrow we will start of with practice (I modified a worksheet from another teacher’s website). Then I will show them some examples with multiple bonds and define resonance. Then we will practice more.

Baby steps. Lots of practice. Despite it being a fairly teacher led day, the students seemed quite positive. I think I actually taught something properly, instead of jumping in all willy-nilly with only enthusiasm and assumptions.

They get to do it in English class….

Revision, that is. My MIL sent me some tests from some high school student she knows, and this girl had failed her chemistry tests the first time around. She went back, fixed all the problems, and wrote one to two paragraphs explaining her mistake and the correct answer. If they were good enough, she got half the credit she would have received if she had done it perfectly on the test.

I like this because the burden of work is on the students, it gives students who had a bad day, week, unit, whatever, a chance to re-try the material and improve their grade, and it seems like they would have to address their misconceptions and re-build their knowledge, at least a little bit.

I don’t like re-takes, and this is not a re-take. Much easier to grade, and I wouldn’t need to make up a new test.

I am still wary, though, about it. In general, it is often the students who don’t really need to do this who will, because they want the last few points. The students who really don’t care don’t do it, because they really don’t care. I wonder what would happen.  I could “require” it of some students. I say “require” because all I can do is give them a bad grade, and they already have that, but for some reason being told that it is “required” sometimes works.

In general, I am a fan of revision. I would never have learned to write if I hadn’t spent all my time editing. I like that it puts the emphasis on mastering the material, instead of performing on the test.

The test, and grades

Two of my classes have C + averages, both overall and on the most recent test. The other class has an A- average. Is it me or them? How can I teach both these classes the same stuff at approximately the same pace.

I discovered something interesting while looking at my class summaries on Easy Grade Pro (I love EGP). The test scores are usually just below the classwork scores. The homework scores aren’t that reliable for me because I have so many students who don’t do their homework, they pull down the HW average. So, if they have done B work in class, I can’t expect B+ test scores. They will do slightly less well.

I wonder if this is universal. I guess I expected improvement, because they have received feedback, and can study, so they should know it better. Is that too naive? Or just not how learning and assessment work? I worked very hard this time to make sure they were well prepared.

Touchy Feely Flower Child

One of my students referred to a task we were doing in class today as “touchy feel-y flower child” methods. Not something that one expects to hear in chemistry class, when classifying compounds as either ionic, polar covalent, or non-polar covalent.

This was because I was discouraging the method in the book, which no one except high school textbook authors uses. High school books always want you to subtract the electronegativities, and compare the difference to some arbitrary standard that changes from book to book, to classify a compound as ionic or covalent, polar or non-polar. So annoying. What I always did, and say real scientists doing, was using a general sense of periodic trends to compare polarities, electronegativities, and electron rich and electron poor areas. The textbook method is too formal and impractical, it is not useful. I guess my use of the word “intuition” or “feel” for the periodic table was frustrating for her; she describes herself as having a very “math” brain. I think it is fair to say that most scientists think mathematically =). But sometimes being overly quantitative is arbitrary, time consuming, and provides no useful information.

They were not convinced. A very interesting and unexpected dilemma.