Introduction

Class 2a is a mixed year group, with 13, more able, year one pupils and 16, less able, year two pupils.  The differentiation by the classroom teacher tends to centre around ability grouping with a total of four grouped sets, two for each year group within the class.

The lesson to be described took place on Wednesday 22 October by which time the class had been together for just six weeks.   I had received a total of eight hours contact time with the children prior to the implementation of the lesson.  The class dynamics were such that the majority of year two pupils appeared less focused and more disruptive than the children from year one, who generally, exhibited better levels of concentration.

Summary of the Lesson

The lesson was to be on forces and movement, for reasons to be explained following this summary the activity was to involve children experimenting with a variety of artificial surfaces that were to be placed on a board and raised by means of wooden blocks.   A toy car was then to be placed on the ramp and the number of blocks noted down when the toy car rolled down the ramp to the bottom.

The lesson was to begin with a discussion in which children were encouraged to inform me of their previous experience of using ramps as well as their own experience outside of school, riding a bike or other vehicle down a hill.  Questions about riding bikes, skateboards etc on grass or on roads were also raised.

Some different material was then to be introduced and passed around for the children to touch and comment on.  The proposed surfaces included sandpaper, underlay (which was to be used upside down), woollen carpet, corrugated cardboard and bubble-wrap.

A question about how “builders” decide what to make the road with was put to children who were there guided towards the word “testing”.  Children were then told that we were to find out the best surfaces with which to build a new road, but we were only allowed to use the materials they had just been shown.  

The children were then to propose which surface might suit our needs best (predict) before been guided towards proposing an investigation.

At the end of the lesson the children were to feedback their results (one response in particular was very interesting, details to follow) and to say if and why their predictions differed form their findings.

Rationale

Areas to be addressed when planning a Science Lesson.

Having agreed to teach the whole class a science lesson it was then suggested that any activity I do, should link to the current topic of “Forces and movement.”  Planning began by looking at the existing medium term planning.  Appendix ii.

In addition to the existing planning, the structure of the lesson was also guided by theories of child development.

Learning theory

Wittrock’s view of learning as discussed in Learning in Science by Osborn and Freyberg (1985) proposes that to learn with understanding “learners must themselves actively construct, or generate, meaning from sensory input…” 

Join now!

While Piaget, as discussed in Gill Nicholls book, Learning to Teach “observed that children learn faster when they co-operate with others; this co-operation develops and improves their formal thinking” (page 41)

On the basis of Wittrock’s views I wanted the children of class 2A to perform an investigation for themselves, with as little adult intervention as possible.  It was important that I accommodated Piaget’s observation, ensuring that the children work in groups to generate elements of co-operative working.  This in turn raised additional issues of inclusion, which I will address later.

Questioning

The importance of teacher and ...

This is a preview of the whole essay