never mind the optics

We’ve had a cracking cohort of pupils work their way through Standard Grade and Higher over the past three years.  On Tuesday, we’ll have an unusually large number sitting the Higher Physics paper and fifteen of them have indicated that they would like to continue to study physics in S6.  While it’s brilliant to have so many motivated pupils signing up for the Advanced Higher course, it does present a bit of a problem for a department that typically runs with a class of only 5 pupils.  

I’m in the middle of putting together my requisition for next session and, while I was thinking more about ensuring we had what would be required to tackle the Curriculum for Excellence science outcomes, I’m now having to consider whether we have sufficient apparatus to offer up to 15 different, independent and appropriate AH investigations.

One of the things I spotted in the Rapid online catalogue was a spring made from a smart alloy.  I’d previously seen the alloy demonstrated as a wire in a model robotic arm developed by Gregor Steele of SSERC but had not known about the spring.  I had the idea of using the smart spring for an investigation based around magnetism and self-inductance.  I’m not sure whether this would work but, combined with a hall sensor, I think there might be adequate opportunity to produce graphs and determine uncertainties.  Given the need for a third experiment on the theme, I though about looking at mechanical properties, based around the hysteresis of the smart alloy.  The investigation would therefore explore aspects of units 1 & 2 of the AH course.

I made some notes on my board to bounce off a colleague tomorrow but I’d be interested in hearing what other physics teachers think.  Data sheet for the spring is here.

After I applied to animoto for an  all-areas education pass, I decided to start following them on twitter.  A few days later, they posted the following tweet

Animoto stickers lying dormant in our office. Tweet @ us why you want some, and we’ll DM you to ask where you’d like your stickers sent.

I replied and asked for one for each of the members of my S2 science class who had been working with animoto as part of our curriculum for excellence trial.  The stickers arrived today and generated a lot of interest in the staffroom.  For me, and I know this might sound daft, the coolest thing was the handwritten envelope, sealed with a sticker, and the handwritten note inside.  It was just so different from the mail-merged post I normally receive at school.  The class don’t know about the stickers yet, it’s a surprise I’m keeping for Monday morning.  

Here’s what came in the envelope.

I thought I would include a second Animoto video.  What’s interesting is that pupils did not feel it was necessary to extend their videos beyond a minute, even when they had access to the all-areas education pass that allowed for full-length animations.

Podcast Video [ 0:39 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

So what might we consider to be evidence of achieving a Curriculum for Excellence outcome?  I’ve been working on one of these with a lower ability S2 science class.  The outcome we explored was

I can use my knowledge of the basic needs of humans, and the bodies of our solar system, to put together a reasoned report on whether we can colonise space.

I like the way this ties together aspects of physics and biology.  A lot of people out there have this idea that physics and chemistry go well, as do chemistry and biology.  How many people have experienced the intersection of physics and biology though?  I understand this gap a little as I used to work as principal engineer in a biophotonics instrumentation company developing laser-based laboratory equipment for protein analysis in the drug development sector.  When I attended meetings, I was amazed to see so many presentations from researchers who were using biology and physics to solve their problems.

As I mentioned in another post, my class have researched the bodies of the solar system.  They then reviewed their prior learning on the gases in the air, respiration and photosynthesis to make an informed choice of potential colony – they decided on Mars.  Our timing was spot on, as we were able to follow the European Space Agency’s Mars500 project, looking at the potential effects of long term isolation on astronauts travelling to Mars.

For a lower set, writing a report was a daunting prospect.  So we threw out that idea and I took them to the library and introduced them to Animoto, GoAnimate and Glogster.  Once we got round initial problems of web filtering, pupils experimented with all 3 and unanimously agreed to work with Animoto.  I applied for, and received, a free education all-access pass from the Animoto folks for 6 months.  Without this, their films were limited to 30 seconds.

I’ve attached one of the short films they produced to this post.  Are these clips evidence of achieving an outcome?  I feel that they are at least part of the way.  One of the things I like about them is that there is not a powerpoint presentation in sight.  My concern when I hear people around the school talking about implementing CfE is that too many of the outcomes might be assessed by the quality of a powerpoint presentation to the rest of the class.  If nothing else, I hope I have shown this class a different way of structuring and showing information.

Oh, did I mention that they had fun doing it?

Podcast Video [ 0:52 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

About a year ago, I wrote a post about my thoughts on a survey of pupils’ views now that we had completed their courses.  I was asked to hand out another survey this week, having finished several NQ courses just in time to hand out a second prelim, sit the final NABs and run through any questions before they all go off on study leave.

Our surveys are simultaneously better and worse this year – at least that’s my opinion.  I said before that if we valued what pupils had to tell us we would construct a form that asked specifically about our subject rather than a generic set of questions.  Well this year we have a better form with more detailed questions.  The problem is that the whole school is using them.  So the same form (with different header & footer text) is being used in each department.  Pupils told me they had already completed the same form for maths, PE, chemistry & biology.  It was them who pointed out that the text at top and bottom of the sheet was the only difference.

Unlike <insert subject here>, I teach a practical subject.  There are regular experimental tasks activities involving group or individual work where an idea is investigated, discussed, misconceptions challenged, etc.  Nowhere in this feedback exercise do pupils have an option to comment on practical work; the lack of it (or otherwise), the organisation of it, relevance of it to the course or the extent to which it helps them to learn.

The same can’t be said for ICT.  There are several prompts for students to indicate their thoughts on ICT:

• How frequently does your teacher use ICT during lessons?
• Do you think the ICT used in lessons is of a high quality?
• Does the ICT used in lessons help your learning?
• Do you prefer the use of ICT to teacher generated materials on a board or overhead projector?

Looking at the responses, I am left wondering what pupils’ concept of ICT might be.  I use ICT frequently and several pupils seem to agree but others claim they never see ICT in my room.  Is this because they think ICT is a PowerPoint presentation?  I rarely use those.  My definition of ICT would include all the web sites I display in class, use of animations and simulations, youtube and other video sites, using a blog and some podcasts on iTunes to distribute extra resources and homework exercises and screencasts of worked solutions to the homework tasks.  According to some in my staffroom, ICT is “anything with a plug on it”  - that’s pretty much every piece of apparatus in my room barring Bunsen burners and general glassware.

If we want pupils to provide feedback we need to write the questions in such a way that they know what we are asking.  If we want pupils to know that their opinion will be valued then we must convey that by building value into the survey itself.

I found this blog post by Joe Dale on a method for creating mobile phone quizzes very interesting.  The maker of the videos, Lilian Soon, has since blogged about it herself here.  I finally got round to giving it a try for myself today.

I had previously asked members of my Higher class to tell me the make and model of their mobile phone.  I checked these on the manufacturer web sites to get information on screen resolution and was surprised to discover that 240 pixels wide by 320 pixels high appears to be something of an industry standard.

I used a simple graphics package to create a series of white rectangles 240 pixels wide by 320 high and pasted in images I had scanned from an old Higher Physics past paper.  I used the graphics threshold levels to remove any residual greyness from the scans before inserting the text of each question around them.  Simple questions required two images each (one for the question and a second for the answer) while longer questions with multiple statements or diagrams required three or even four image files to complete.

I created seven multiple choice questions over a double period, creating text only questions would be much quicker than tweaking graphics.  I uploaded the image files to my phone in jpg format.  The results were encouraging, with both the text and images displayed clearly.  My only concern was that the order of the files had reversed when transferred to the phone by bluetooth.  On trying again, it seems that the problem is that the Apple iSync application transfers multiple files starting with the highest file name, while the phone stores files in the order of receipt.  This is an issue requiring a workaround before distributing quizzes to a class.

Here is a question from the set I made. I’ve left them at full size (240 x 320 pixels)

My school will be implementing something along the road towards the new CfE outcomes for Science for S1 after the summer holidays.  I don’t know how far down the road we will go in our first year of implementation, it’s unclear if anyone has the answer to that yet at this stage.  

Perhaps unsurprisingly, assessment seems to be an issue already.  It’s disappointing as I thought perhaps there would have been sufficient flexibility in our approach to allow the classroom teacher to assess pupils against the 4 capacities when it came to report card time.

There may be some consensus in the need to get away from the treadmill of racing through a course to meet the requirements of an exam, but so far all I can see is the potential for a “core” science curriculum to be taught in same way by all members of the department and “extension” topics where creativity and opinions of pupils may have some input into what and how a specific outcome progresses.  

The “core” science would be assessed as it always has been, with formative assessment of the additional outcomes.  This assessment policy by committee does not live up to my hopes for CfE.  How are other schools planning to implement CfE in Science?

…is perhaps a grand title for an informal after-school get together but I think it conveys the importance we placed on coming together as a group.  Last month, a group of teachers from Highland schools were invited to Dingwall Academy to meet fellow teachers who either run blogs themselves, or have classroom or even whole-school blogs.

The group, initially all primary teachers, were contacted by email to see if there was sufficient interest in the idea of a meeting.  Louise Jones suggested that Stephanie Disbury and I, both secondary teachers, should try to attend as there was currently no framework for us to participate in a similar group with a secondary focus.

We met in one of the computer suites in the recently-opened Academy.  The idea was for us to spend some time looking at each other’s blogs and seeing what other practitioners were using their blogs for, both inside and outside the classroom environment.  I was really surprised by the frequency of media use.  Photographs and embedded video seemed to feature prominently in many of the sites we visited.

Louise brought us all up to date with the e-safety CPD roll-out across Highland and an interesting debate on the use of 3rd party sites followed, particularly around the issue of whether or not pupils should be using a personal account.

A theme that cropped up several times was that of internet filtering and the problem associated with hosting materials to be used in school on sites such as youtube, vimeo and flickr.  I must thank Margaret Vass for coming to our rescue with suggestions for sites that would not be filtered in primary schools, Photobucket seems to have gone down well – it works in school and has shorter upload times.

Jim Henderson, our virtual learning coordinator, also joined us.  He delighted several of us with his announcement of a new server, complete with WordPress MultiUser, to give a safe blogging platform for schools across the Highlands.  This could not have come at a better time.  I am planning a series of blogging sessions with staff at my own school during study leave and now have an appropriate hosting solution that will not require vigilance for inappropriate advertising in the sidebar.

Hopefully this will be the first in a series of meetings.  It was great to see how others not only use their blogs but also to hear how they think their use of blogs will change over time.