Students will complete the SALG assessment.
The assessment must be completed in order for you to receive your course grade museum exhibit grade.
Instrument ID# xx548
password: phsc4010
We will let you know when the assessment is live.
Sunday, December 2, 2012
Thursday, November 29, 2012
Moon Journal Activity
Images of your moon journal data are in your PHSC_Share file at DropBox.
You will comment on the following:
How do we determine the length of the moon cycle using the data that we have?
Come up with a procedure.
Due: Monday, December 3, 2012 at noon.
Some interesting sites on the moon:
http://www.winkatthemoonnight.com/
http://phet.colorado.edu/en/simulation/lunar-lander
Tuesday, November 27, 2012
Museum Exhibits: Nature of the Atom & Nature of Science
Each team will provide one comment on the following questions:
1. What is your team name?
2. What is the title of your exhibit?
3. What is your central idea?
4. How do you plan to offer/access the following through your exhibit?
1. What is your team name?
2. What is the title of your exhibit?
3. What is your central idea?
4. How do you plan to offer/access the following through your exhibit?
a. Intellectual rigor
b. Multiple learning modalities
c. Integration of constructivist and sociocultural learning theories
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Logistics of Museum Exhibition
Please submit one comment on behalf of the entire cohort with the following information:
1.what you have discussed with Early College teachers concerning the exhibit, student visitation to the NHM, logistics, etc.
-your plan for assessing student gains in knowledge concerning the nature of the atom and the nature of science
Excellent Resource
Here is an excellent resource:
http://www.exploratorium.edu/partner/pdf/Interacty_article3_finweb.pdf
Wednesday, November 14, 2012
Reflection and Investigation from The Great Equations
FINAL WORK: November 29, 2012
Last night, you presented on a chapter of Robert Crease's book, The Great Equations.
All work must be made as comments to this blog post.
---------
A. Each team will provide one response to the appropriate question below (between 300-400 words).
During class, you will present your response to your peers.
Due online Sunday, 11/18/2012 at/before at 9:00 PM
How is the nature of the atom as developed over time related to kinetic molecular theory and the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
What empirical evidence do we have that the Shrodinger Equation is a reasonably accurate model?
What is the connection between the phenomenon of relativity and the interchangeability of matter and energy? What are some practical applications of the equation?
Explain why a Newtonian model of the atom (with circulating electrons around a central nucleus) cannot be explained using Newton's Laws.
B. Each team member will provide a comment and at least two questions to one of the explanations.
-----------
FINAL WORK: Nov 29, 2012
Please provide a scientific explanation to the questions below as a response to the blog post by your peer (200 words or more). Please cite your credible, reliable sources.
Some questions were split into two parts for clarity.
Also, do not assume that the way that a question is worded means that it is correct.
Do electrons change in speed or remain at a constant moving speed? Casey C
Last night, you presented on a chapter of Robert Crease's book, The Great Equations.
All work must be made as comments to this blog post.
---------
A. Each team will provide one response to the appropriate question below (between 300-400 words).
During class, you will present your response to your peers.
Due online Sunday, 11/18/2012 at/before at 9:00 PM
How is the nature of the atom as developed over time related to kinetic molecular theory and the Second Law of Thermodynamics?
What empirical evidence do we have that the Shrodinger Equation is a reasonably accurate model?
What is the connection between the phenomenon of relativity and the interchangeability of matter and energy? What are some practical applications of the equation?
Explain why a Newtonian model of the atom (with circulating electrons around a central nucleus) cannot be explained using Newton's Laws.
B. Each team member will provide a comment and at least two questions to one of the explanations.
Responses are due by noon on/before Monday, 11/26/12.
Comments and questions must be meaningful in scope and must reflect the discussion presented by your peers.-----------
FINAL WORK: Nov 29, 2012
Please provide a scientific explanation to the questions below as a response to the blog post by your peer (200 words or more). Please cite your credible, reliable sources.
Some questions were split into two parts for clarity.
Also, do not assume that the way that a question is worded means that it is correct.
Did the second law of
thermodynamics disprove the first one? (I kind of think it did, but please explain
how) Hailey
"Thermodynamics uses energy
in the form of work to convert colder matter to warmer matter...." so in
its simplest form, would this be like a microwave? Kelly
How are electrons everywhere at
once, yet we can determine where they are using Schrodinger's equation? Are
they only everywhere in certain orbitals? Brianna
How does Newton's law of motion
apply to Rutherford's gold foil experiment? I feel like there is a strong
connection with how the alpha particles reacted when hitting the gold foil and
Newton's law of motion. Maggie O’
What exactly does it mean by the
entropy striving towards a maximum? Is there a maximum entropy? Jill
How are potential energy and
kinetic energy of elements related to the first and second laws of
thermodynamics? Madison
What are some real world
applications of thermodynamics? Missy
Why doesn't it [gravity] account
for the effect of attraction between the protons and the electrons? Sara
Do electrons change in speed or remain at a constant moving speed? Casey C
What exactly is the concept of
invariance? Does that mean that a moving object is never constant like the
speed of light? Siobhan
The equation [E=mc2] is
still a little confusing. Alexis
Why is the c squared?
Casey B
Why can't an object reach the
speed of light? Nicole
What happens when the world
reaches maximum entropy? Can it? Clay
What do you mean by this: “Atoms
use energy to combine with other atoms”? Tynishia
What do you mean when you say
atoms become more “disorganized” when they speed up? Are you referring to their
motion? Maci
What exactly are the
"electrostatic forces" that are providing the attraction between the
nucleus and electrons? Tarver
Thursday, November 8, 2012
Lab: Heating curve of water
Deadline: Dec 4, 2012
We inquired into how water behaves when heated from ice to steam.
Complete this lab write-up that reflects on your learning from this lab activity.
1. What did you expect the heating curve to look like?
2. Create a sketch of their experiment and explain what you did.
3. Consider how you went about coming to this experimental set-up? What did you try? Why did you discard this approach?
4. Use the Science Writing Heuristic to frame your report.
Here are some resources to assist with the heat concepts::
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/thermalP/u18l2c.cfm
http://www.physicsclassroom.com/class/thermalP/u18l2a.cfm
\
Saturday, November 3, 2012
Reflection on the Heat homework discussion
Here is a reflective piece by Dr. Deneroff in her observation of class on Tuesday, October 30. We were looking at the heat homework problems that students had problems completing. The remainder of class was spent on a discussion.
-----------------
Dr. Richards was facilitating a lecture-discussion on heat,
developing students' ideas about energy transfer and how to do problems. I
noticed a couple of times that students would give the "right"
answer, but when Dr. Richards probed further, the students didn't really
understand what they were talking about. It would have been easy to accept the
correct answer as proof of understanding and then move on. The depth of
students' knowledge (ignorance, not meaning it in a judgmental way) was
profound, and it took some time to uncover its true dimensions.
I'm reminded of diSessa's construct of p-prims, which he describes (to the best of my recollection) as conclusions about phenomena which are not linked to other ideas, but remain as islands. When Dr. Richards asked students to make connections or to follow a chain of causal reasoning, they were able to do so only with great difficulty and a great deal of prompting in the form of questions. She engaged individual students in extended questioning in order to scaffold putting together a cohesive whole.
I noticed that not all students were following the conversation and did not seem to understand that their colleagues' were being questioned publicly in this way in order to get ideas onto the table for everyone to consider. Earlier in the evening students repeatedly focused on the right answer, and when someone came up with an answer that was judged to be correct, it was quickly passed around. At the time Dr. Richards announced that we were not really interested in the correct answer, which the students seemed to shrug off. I think that they don't have any other perspective on science calculations, and the idea of viewing problems as a shorthand for science concepts is an entirely new idea they have little experience with.
At the end of Dr. Richards's discussion of heat, I felt that I should call students' attention to what we had been doing. I had two purposes in doing this. One was to let students know that the structure of our lesson was deliberate, and that we had a particular pedagogical goal in mind. I also wanted to clue in those students who had not been paying attention that perhaps this was important. I reiterated that we were not interested in formulas, but that they should focus on understanding the problem; understanding makes the strategies for solving it obvious. Dr. Richards reiterated that she too is not interested in students memorizing formulas. I also explained that there had been several times during the lecture when students had appeared to give the correct answer, but Dr. Richards kept probing, and it was revealed that the students did not really understand. I tied this to the issue of accepting evidence of learning, and asked whether they had run into this phenomenon in their field placements.
I will say that we started the evening with a wide ranging discussion of the role of energy in the body, and the way chemical energy of food is transferred through digestion and metabolism. I was expecting students would not relate the process of combustion from the lab of calories obtained by burning Cheetos with the breaking of chemical bonds within food substances. I discovered this some years ago in teaching high-schoolers, when I would ask them why they need oxygen, and the students were unable to go beyond because you can't breathe. What a shame it is that we don't explore the big picture and assume that students have made connections such as the role of oxygen in both combustion and cellular respiration.
The conversation about heat contained within food revealed that students remember very little of any high school biology.
Last night in one of my graduate classes we started exploring the idea of the lack of connection between learning and completing assignments. Before Dr. Richards came in, I decided to see what the undergrads had to say about this topic. They basically said they had to choose: either do the assignment and get the points, or study and try to understand. I raised the issue that doing assignments is designed to lead to learning. We didn't get farther than that.
We did not get very "far" in our discussion of heat, although we perhaps got deep. I come away from tonight's class with another piece of evidence I interpret as showing the need to explore ideas in depth, and the conviction that most science instruction merely papers over students' confusion.
I'm reminded of diSessa's construct of p-prims, which he describes (to the best of my recollection) as conclusions about phenomena which are not linked to other ideas, but remain as islands. When Dr. Richards asked students to make connections or to follow a chain of causal reasoning, they were able to do so only with great difficulty and a great deal of prompting in the form of questions. She engaged individual students in extended questioning in order to scaffold putting together a cohesive whole.
I noticed that not all students were following the conversation and did not seem to understand that their colleagues' were being questioned publicly in this way in order to get ideas onto the table for everyone to consider. Earlier in the evening students repeatedly focused on the right answer, and when someone came up with an answer that was judged to be correct, it was quickly passed around. At the time Dr. Richards announced that we were not really interested in the correct answer, which the students seemed to shrug off. I think that they don't have any other perspective on science calculations, and the idea of viewing problems as a shorthand for science concepts is an entirely new idea they have little experience with.
At the end of Dr. Richards's discussion of heat, I felt that I should call students' attention to what we had been doing. I had two purposes in doing this. One was to let students know that the structure of our lesson was deliberate, and that we had a particular pedagogical goal in mind. I also wanted to clue in those students who had not been paying attention that perhaps this was important. I reiterated that we were not interested in formulas, but that they should focus on understanding the problem; understanding makes the strategies for solving it obvious. Dr. Richards reiterated that she too is not interested in students memorizing formulas. I also explained that there had been several times during the lecture when students had appeared to give the correct answer, but Dr. Richards kept probing, and it was revealed that the students did not really understand. I tied this to the issue of accepting evidence of learning, and asked whether they had run into this phenomenon in their field placements.
I will say that we started the evening with a wide ranging discussion of the role of energy in the body, and the way chemical energy of food is transferred through digestion and metabolism. I was expecting students would not relate the process of combustion from the lab of calories obtained by burning Cheetos with the breaking of chemical bonds within food substances. I discovered this some years ago in teaching high-schoolers, when I would ask them why they need oxygen, and the students were unable to go beyond because you can't breathe. What a shame it is that we don't explore the big picture and assume that students have made connections such as the role of oxygen in both combustion and cellular respiration.
The conversation about heat contained within food revealed that students remember very little of any high school biology.
Last night in one of my graduate classes we started exploring the idea of the lack of connection between learning and completing assignments. Before Dr. Richards came in, I decided to see what the undergrads had to say about this topic. They basically said they had to choose: either do the assignment and get the points, or study and try to understand. I raised the issue that doing assignments is designed to lead to learning. We didn't get farther than that.
We did not get very "far" in our discussion of heat, although we perhaps got deep. I come away from tonight's class with another piece of evidence I interpret as showing the need to explore ideas in depth, and the conviction that most science instruction merely papers over students' confusion.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)