There are different types of knowledge. To know how a square is defined is different than knowing how to identify one. These are different that knowing how to draw one with ruler and paper. Or construct one with compass and straight edge.
A square is a pretty simple example, but when it comes to ramps, bridge, exploring mass and rotation, there’s being able to answer questions about it, and then there being able to build object to create examples, non-examples, and solve challenges. And it can help to have the right tools.
My office recently got a set of Keva Planks. Now, I’ve gotten to see these blocks in action a number of times and they are pretty cool. First, there is almost no learning curve. The blocks are all exactly the same. There’s no connecting pieces or fasteners or adhesive. There’s nothing to them. But with them you can build ramps and towers, polygons and prisms. They set up easily, the clean up easily.
Full-disclosure: They aren’t free. (Cheapest place I’ve found them is Amazon… 400 blocks for $90). Ordinarily, I don’t make a point to advocate for expensive tools, but in this case I think it could be money well spent based on the needs of the location. Also, they are durable and shareable. One department or grade level team could probably make good use with one to share.
Anyway, it’s worth looking in to as they allow us to explore types of knowledge that we otherwise might not be very well equipped to explore. (Particularly with those Next Gen engineering practices that are starting to become a reality in many states.)
For another look, here’s my latest podcast: Instructional Tech in Under 3 Minutes #5 – Keva Planks.
So, today I did a little science in my kitchen. I learned some stuff and I wanted to try it out. And I’ve got a 5-year-old and an 8-year-old who are very willing to be perplexed.
Before I get into the story, I have a question for you.
Imagine you heated a glass bottle (maybe the 12-16 ounce variety) in the oven at 450 for 10 minutes or so. Then you took it out, turned it upside down and placed it quickly about an inch or so deep in a sink of ice water.
What do you think would happen?
Leave your prediction in the comments or e-mail them to email@example.com.
We did this exploration in the kitchen. It led to some good perplexity and some great wonderings.
In my next post, I’ll share what happened.
First watch this (and be amazed… well, if you’re anything like I am.)
So, when the students can get past the idea that there is some foul play involved, then it becomes a wonderful opportunities to discuss the idea of frequency.
Frequency is an odd discussion because it’s got a strange unit. The “per time” can be a little challenging for students to wrap their heads around.
And the opportunity that this video provides is that here, we don’t need to immediately concern ourselves with the quantitative value of the frequency (maybe 300 RPM for the helicopter rotor, for example, or 5 frames per second on the camera), but we can begin with the qualitative value of the frequency (that the frequencies, whatever they are, are the same.)
And then it opens the door for them discussing some quantitative issues. For example, the fact that the standard unit of frequency (the “per unit time”), obviously isn’t constant. So, the helicopter rotor is RPM and the camera shudder is typically in frames per second (at least, I think. Not a photographer…) So, you’ve got some nice dimensional analysis opportunities.
Where could you take this next?
One thing’s for sure, I’d hate to waste a video like this. Fully captivating, and it only costs your 30 seconds of class time.
Source: I owe TwistedSifter credit for blogging about this video first.
A nice engaging intro to your unit on sound waves.
And as an applied project, perhaps students could make a smaller version. Paper towel rolls? Saran wrap? rubber bands?
Anyway, a lot of possibilities when a video is this well done.
All right team, let’s do something with this:
Obvious choices are rotational motion, tangent lines, centripetal force.
I just love the authentic demonstration, particularly when the sliders let go. Tracing their motion (a straight line tangent to the circle at the point they let go…)
This is just too good to ignore. Enjoy it!
Here’s a video (by Derek Alexander Muller) I think you should watch.
The critique of #flipclass aside, I’m intrigued by the way the narrator describes the value of “bringing up the misconception”. It’s almost like a thorn that creates some discomfort that only learning will relieve. This gets close to Dan Meyer’s use of the word “perplexity”.
From Dr. Meyer: “Perplexity comes along once in a while. What is it? It’s when a kid doesn’t know something, wants to know that thing, and believes that knowing that thing is within her power. That right there is some of the most powerful learning moments I’ve ever seen – so powerful that it’s really hard for me as a teacher to mess those up.”
There’s power in perplexity. I’ve seen this in my classroom on multiple occasions. It’s important to remember that there’s three distinct parts to creating what Dr. Meyer is describing. First, there needs to be something worth knowing. Second, you have to create the want. And finally, we need to empower the students so they feel enabled to know that thing. What Dr. Alexander suggests is that becoming aware of your misconception seems unsettling (leading to claims that videos were confusing), but also leads to more learning. The discomfort fed a drive to resolve the discomfort.
The tricky thing is that misconceptions are a tool you can use when they are available. Science provides a particularly fertile ground for misconceptions because so much of it is drawn from experiences many of us have regularly. Alexander uses the model of a ball flying through the air. This video uses the phases of the moon and the seasons.
The potential for misconceptions is necessarily lightened when there’s no misconceptions, so the quest for perplexity in math needs to take on a different look, proper planning and timing, and different strategies for when perplexity isn’t an available option. (Preconceived notions are just as good at times. After all, we ALL think we know something about squares!)
It’s like Dr. Meyer says, those wonderful perplexing moments only come along once in a while. We foster those moments when we have them, try to create as many as we can and we do our best every other time.
One thing you certainly can’t say about #TeamJXN (Made up of Kellie DeLosSantos, Alaina Sharp and Ann Smart) is that they aren’t outside-the-box thinkers.
“Outside-the-box” is certainly well on it’s way to cliche status these days, but despite that, it still has a perfectly functional and relevant meaning. And at an EdTech conference, where so much of what we are learning about is touted as “outside-the-box”, what does it actually take to live up to that?
It takes raptors at lunch.