Day 7: May 24
- Classroom Lesson and Observation: Scuola Media Statale A Manzoni (Day 2)
- The Language Lesson
- References
Robin and I were with a 8th grade class today. We got to the room to be told the students were in gym for the next two hours. We went there and the gym teacher let us do our lesson there. We introduced ourselves and the airplane lesson. Overall, I thought it was a great lesson that incorporated physical science (regarding real technology even though it wasn’t’t present in class), creative arts, an explicit use of the design process, communication and collaboration, and sharing the results (Gess, 2017; Wells, 2016).
- We asked students if they know how planes fly. One said with an engine, another aerodynamics, and another the shape.
- We told students they would make paper planes and test them. I handed out the paper as Robin talked.
- Some students helped each other while others needed some adult guidance.
- Some pairs had fancier planes than others, but all had a level of creativity. There was definitely social constructivism at work.
- All students immediately tested their completed planes which added to the excitement among the groups.
We had each group go once, with 11 pairs. I marked the landing points as Robin directed them to fly. After, we asked what could make the planes better.
- Force, so a stronger throw
- Aerodynamics, so focusing on the shape
Robin told the pairs to make at least one change. As students conversed, I handed out new paper; some pairs took more than one.
- As students worked, we talked with the groups about changes. Responses included:
- Bigger or smaller
- Larger or shorter
- Making more mass (more compressed or fewer rips)
- Changing the wing type
- Some pairs didn't want to use their second plane, but we had them do so anyway.
Stesso ordine didn't happen, likely because students were excited about the comparisons. But Robin still counted off as I did my best to keep up with the flying airplanes. Afterwards we asked why many of the second attempts were better:
- Bigger/more mass
- More folds
- Sharper ponts
- Using new paper
- More aerodynamic, which students defined as:
- Cut air
- Less resistant to friction
While some students did not know all the terminology, they understood the concept overall. I’m grateful we were with 8th graders who had a stronger scientific foundation and who were open to a new experience. It especially helped that we were in the gym (which is a unique walk from the school in a completely separate building). The gym was a very open area and set students in an activity mindset.
Robin and I also made planes, threw them with the students, then joined them for badminton. We went through different exercises that built up to pair vs. pair. I found it interesting that the teacher swapped out some students, including the two Robin and I were with; yet, I immediately realized the embodied a social constructivist mindset regarding the Zone of Proximal Development (Vygotsky, 1978), as the new students were weaker, but learned from our stronger coordination to improve. Like last time, and like at the Otello Sarsi, I was surprised no student argued.
We walked the streets of Reggio back to the classroom, which was set up in groups of four or five. Some students told me that their main Italian teacher (homeroom) set the desks like this as an experiment three months ago. However, the separate if they talk too much, need to better see the board (like in technology), have a test, or if another teacher prefers rows.
Then they had English with Dr. Bellacosa, the same teacher as last time. However, she was calmer and more efficient with this group, indicating her heart is in the right place and she wants to help students to learn, offering them a more authentic experience of a language lesson than I had in the United States, and that students continue to experience, based on what my students have discussed. I like that Dr. Bellacosa almost exclusively spoke English, but would clarify in Italian as needed. I also liked how, as opposed to the 6th grade class, she had students read out loud one or two paragraphs about Agatha Christie before discussing the information as a class, and answering questions on the back of the worksheet. I did have some issues though:
- She said students who struggled with listening to English could read the captions of a YouTube video about Agatha Christie, but the captions were set to the smallest size.
- While working through the handout, she sat the entire time and shushed talkative students rather than walk around and monitor the classroom.
The last class we were in was Design/Technology, where students were learning the taxonomy of a group of solids. Students were required to draw a rectangle, a triangle, anexagon, and an octagon for homework, though the teacher explained to me and Robin that too many students don’t do homework. He used the four shapes as the foundation of a 20- minute lesson/explanation of the assignment.
- By the end, students were to draw a parallelepiped, triangular prism, hexagonal pyramid, and an octagonal pyramid.
- Each step was explained, including how students would use a compass and ruler to draw the perspective lines and develop three-dimensional objects on a two-dimensional space.
- The slideshow the teacher created zoomed in on different aspects of the drawing so students could have a snapshot of each step, required labels, and the anticipated result.
- Not only were student questions answered but he also clarified the information, referring to the slides as needed.
- He gave positive and constructive feedback to the students as they worked.
- One student hadn’t brought their Technology portfolio with them. Rather than provide that student with supplies, they had to sit the entire time and do nothing. We mentioned this to another group, who said they also saw that students who left books at home weren’t even given paper to write information down. We speculated that this is one way in which the public schools ensure each student is fully responsible for bringing their materials. It’s a stark contrast for me, where I will be the one printing notes for students whose personal computers don’t connect to school printers or handing out pencils.
Robin and I talked with the teacher during the lesson. He explained that, in math, they were learning about aspects of two- and three-dimensional shapes, though weren’t yet calculating the area and volume. The Technology lesson thus aligned well with the math, which I noted from Wednesday’s observation as well.
I asked if the bases of the solids needed to be regular polygons. The teacher said that they didn’t have to be, as long as they demonstrate proficiency in correctly using the tools to draw the solids. He likes to show how big problems can be broken down into smaller and simpler problems. Another unit he teaches is technological plans, but at the end of the year he recognizes students aren’t focused and gives them opportunities to draw.
Comments
Post a Comment