Reflection on Guided Inquiry Lesson

Introduction Engage/Exploratory

• Was
the introduction and assessment of prior knowledge using a “think-pair-share”
effective enough to engage students and motivate them to solve the problem?

Due to time
constraints and because the inquiry lesson began immediately following the
direct instruction lesson, we did not use the “think-pair-share” to assess
prior knowledge.

• Was
using the fictional character Dr. Merriweather an effective and engaging
strategy to introduce students to the problem?

Yes! The students seemed to enjoy being presented
with the problem by Dr. Merriweather and were all listening intently to the
task.

• Was
using a tellagami an engaging approach to involve students in inquiry?

Yes I think it
was. It was more interesting for the
students than one of us teacher candidates just giving them instruction. I think the tellagami got them more engaged
in the task.

Development - Explore and Explain

• Was
using one image and a ThinkLink the best way to model the process students would
need to undergo for this lesson?

Although we had to do
a quick model due to time constraints, the students did seem understand what
they were supposed to do once they were able to start the webquest.

• Were
the images and ThingLink selected to model the process to students engaging and
informative?

Yes. The images and ThinkLink selected showed the
students what was expected of them and how they could use the ThingLink to find
information.

Monitoring Inquiry - Expand

• Did
I provide enough evidence for students to make conclusions?

I do not think that
initial image was enough for students to make a question from. Most, if not all, students did not even write
a question down which eludes me to believe that either my instructions were not
clear enough, or students were unable to make a question based on one abstract
image alone. Students were able to make
conclusions based upon the artifacts given to them and the information they
found on the ThinkLinks.

• Were
the pictures of artifacts I provided enough for students to make a hypothesis?

This question is hard
for me to answer. One group immediately
concluded the craft of a colonist before even researching their artifacts and
made their hypothesis off their conclusion.
However, other groups were able to make adequate hypotheses based on the
artifact images and initial image provided to them.

• Did
I create an activity in which students could engage with technology and one
another?

Yes. I observed students working together in
groups to discuss the artifacts and what they were finding. The ThinkLinks provided an easy and
accessible way for the students to use the internet to find information about
their artifact.

• Were
the artifacts students given clear enough for students to understand what their
objective was?

Yes. The way the artifacts were presented to the
students they were able to find information about each artifact because the
images of the artifacts were the exact images used in the ThingLinks.

• Was
enough information provided to students to allow them to finish the task?

Most, if not all
students, skipped the initial part of the inquiry process which was to ask a
question based upon their initial image.
I am not sure if the reason for this was due to the short amount of time
I had to model the process due to our lack of time, or if the students were
unable to formulate a question based upon one abstract image on the front of
their team folder without seeing the pictures of the artifacts as well.

• Was
twenty minutes enough time to complete the task?

Twenty minutes was
definitely not enough time to complete the task. Initially, I had planned for the students to
rotate among station to see the different ThingLinks. However, there was not enough time to allow
the students transition time. So I
instead accessed the three different ThingLinks of the computer where each
group was sitting. This way they could
see all three ThingLinks and gather all of the information without having to
rotate. In the future, I would allot
more time for this portion of the lesson, make the lesson encompass more than
one class period, or put the information about all three artifacts on one
ThingLink for the students to access only one ThinkLink to obtain their
information.

• Did
I provide enough images and information from the pictures and website links for
students to grasp the “big ideas?

I believe that I
did. Even though we were short on time, all
of the groups were able to make conclusions about their artifacts based on the “big
ideas” we were learning about.

• Did
the rubric help me to evaluate the student’s inquiry process?

If we had enough time
for students to complete the task as intended, I believe that the rubrics would
have helped me to evaluate students on the inquiry process. However, given that we were short on time,
many students were unable to finish the task or were rushing to complete
it.

Closure

• Was
using an oral presentation of students finding the best way to allow students
to present their conclusions?

Yes. This gave students an opportunity to orally
present their findings to the class.
Everyone was supposed to follow a set of presentation guidelines—such as
facing the audience, speaking loudly, having everyone in the group
participate—however, due to the time constraint, we were not able to go over
the presentation guidelines or activate prior knowledge about presenting with
the students.

Independent Practice - Elaborate

• Was
using a letter the best way for students to translate the information they
learned and the conclusions they came to?

I think using the
letter format was the best way for students to translate the information that
they learned. This allowed them to
create a letter based on their artifacts and present their conclusions in a way
that make them think how to write their conclusions in letter form.

• Did
the rubrics criteria help me evaluate the student’s ability to write in a clear
and concise manner to share information and conclusions?

Yes the rubrics
did. This was a task that many students
completed at home or during regular class time because we ran out of time
during fieldwork. The rubrics helped me
to subjectively evaluate each student’s letter.

• Was
the choice of a letter activity engaging to students?

The letter activity
was engaging to students most students.
Even though students were not able to complete this activity during
fieldwork time, many students completed the letter at home or in regular class
time and returned the letter at the next fieldwork session.

• Was
ten minutes enough time for students to complete the task?

Even though the
students did not have enough time to begin the letter task during fieldwork, I
do not think that ten minutes would have been enough time for the students to
complete the letter activity.

Overall, I think the
students were actively engaged in this lesson.
They were excited to work together as a team of detectives and worked
hard at completing the task. I wish that
there was enough time for me to completely model the process for the
students. In the future, I think I would
break this lesson into a two day activity.

## No comments:

## Post a Comment