PROCESS CIRCUS DISCUSSION
PAGE
Below is an ongoing discussion
of the Procss Circus Activity with the most recent comments on top. Scroll down
to read older comments.
Please add your thoughts
about this activity by clicking below. If you have taught this activity, please
describe how it went, and any innovations you made. (Please note: your comments
will not appear for about an hour, due to the security setup of our website.)
On Monday, May
18 I prepared ten process circus stations for class of first year teacher interns.
It went well. They all sailed through the stations for about an hour with a partner.
Partners seem to convince each other of the "best" response. But when they met
in pairs then in fours there was more discussion and disagreement regarding which
process they used at each station. I had the groups tally their responses and
this brought more differences of opinion because the fours could not agree and
wanted to tally two responses when identifying the "key" (their term) processes
used. I have 15 teachers and I had a ball observing them as they interacted. We
had a discussion regarding hypothesis, prediction, guessing, questions and the
"scientific method" in general. The point was made that maybe this concept of
"H" had developmentally inappropriate terms for primary students. Their exit cards
indicated they enjoyed the activity and welcomed the chance to continue to think,
read, and observe their students to further explore this inquiry-based process.
The following Thursday I was asked to present an activity to a group of 35 scientists
representing various departments at Caltech. This was their first introduction
to the collaborative science program between Pasadena Unified and Caltech. As
part of my presentation I involved everyone in two activities from the Balls and
Ramps Kinder Kit. As I visited groups all around the house and out in the driveway
exploring balls and ramps, I never once heard the word hypothesis. I asked the
group if anyone had first formulated a hypothesis before starting. The discussion
that followed was informative. At the end Jim Bower concluded that the "scientific
method" was a myth and that what really drives scientists is curiosity stated
in form of questions they develop after making observations and collecting data
about an observable phenomenon. The group did not reach a consensus on this issue.
Irma Gonzalez Science Resource Teacher PUSD/ Caltech Science Center
Irma Gonzolez
USA - Friday, January 08, 1999 at 12:10:26 (PST)
of minds out there that
are looking for an understanding of the "whys and hows" about our world. For
a long time I've thought that given the correct answer to each mater at hand
would cause a great improvement in the efficieny of the world. We're all in
this game of life together. Peace
Terry J Harlon <tjharlon@shreve.net>
Shreveport, La USA - Monday, March 09, 1998 at 00:01:02 (PST)
