The first time they returned to my class, there were funny looks in my direction.  I rearranged the desks to create working groups and pointed towards the equipment they would use; very large measuring cylinders, some tubing and stopwatches.

The scenario I used was

You are an astronaut joining a 10-day mission on the space shuttle.  NASA needs to know how much air you will need during the trip.

There was confusion.  The responses included

• NASA know how much air to pack
• they give astronauts a personal oxygen cylinder
• that’s impossible
• how do you measure gas?

In other words: “Houston, we have a problem.”

If the lesson was going to go anywhere, I would need to give some hints.  I started by asking where we had obtained oxygen for earlier experiments. Some pupils remembered heating potassium permanganate, probably because of the near-explosive results we had achieved that day.  I had to remind them of the time we collected oxygen gas under water from a cylinder.  The measuring cylinders were really just large gas jars and so we could exhale into them through a tube.

We aimed for at least one person per group to measure the volume of air they could exhale in one breath.  Some pupils used stopwatches to count the number of breaths per minute and I could see that they were starting to identify a strategy to answer the challenge.  More importantly, they began to explain their understanding of the problem to the others in their group and, within minutes, I had someone from each group ask for a calculator.

By the end of the lesson, and it did take around 45 minutes, each member of the class has calculated an answer and compared it with someone else. We discussed their answers and I explained that we use problem-soving methods like this in the real world.  Someone said it was like a mobile phone contract, I probably showed my age when I compared it to working out an electricity or gas bill.

I wasn’t going to post about this lesson.  That changed when I watched Dan Meyer’s TEDxNYED session.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BlvKWEvKSi8

Dan’s analysis of our current approach to problem solving is spot on – I often remark to senior pupils that the question setter is leading them by the hand through a problem.  In this lesson, I avoided asking

How much air do you breath in

(i) one minute

(ii) an hour

(iii) a day?

and, in doing so, the class took ownership, rationalised and shared what they were doing.

Let’s make over the problem solving we do in science as well as maths.

I’ve been thinking recently about numeracy, literacy and where they fit within my subject area.  While these thoughts have been bouncing about in my head for a wee while now, it’s only after reading Bill Boyd’s excellent post on literacy for all that I thought I would try to write something down.

Numeracy in physics is unavoidable.  At all levels, pupils are expected to analyse information and solve a problem by performing one or more calculations. This is the familiar face of physics, the side that often results in people telling me that they can’t/couldn’t/didn’t take physics at school because they couldn’t do maths.

After discussions with my maths colleagues, I had to look at my classroom practice and adjust my methods so that pupils see a familiar approach to problem solving.  The examples provided in our new whole school numeracy policy booklet have been very helpful here.

I’m also starting to discover where the literacy demands in physics are greatest. The closer I look, the more obvious it seems that literacy was an issue in Physics long before the Curriculum for Excellence ring binder appeared. Students who are confident in calculation-based tasks often find descriptions or explanations very challenging.

In my opinion there are two topics that stand out.  The electronics unit of Standard Grade and the Gas Laws in the Higher course are both particularly challenging in terms of the literacy demand placed on learners.  In each of these topics, pupils are often asked to explain behaviour of a system.  The skills needed to succeed in these tasks are outlined in the new literacy outcomes.

Learners require a command of the appropriate vocabulary

I can use a range of strategies and resources independently and ensure that my spelling, including specialist vocabulary, is accurate.  LIT 4-21a

and must be able to sequence the information (pupils often call this “cause and effect”)

I can convey information and describe events, explain processes or concepts, providing substantiating evidence, and synthesise ideas or opinions in different ways.  LIT 4-28a

So here are the strategies I have introduced so far with a view to enhancing literacy in physics.

• Create Wordle wall posters showing key vocabulary for the current unit. I’ve made these by copying text from the SQA documents and then blowing them up on the excellent Blockposters site.  I’ve mentioned this step before.

• Think-pair-share activities to encourage pupils to identify for themselves what is required.

• Pupils use the results of think-pair-share to gather together their agreed ideas of what makes a good description and generate a mind map

• Use the mind map as a starting point for additional descriptive work. These tasks can incorporate peer assessment to ensure all learners receive prompt feedback.  Use of peer feedback in pairs or trios ensures that pupils can compare their work and get a feel for quality.

I’ve trialled these approaches in S3-S5 and most pupils report that they find them to be helpful activities. Is it enough though?

Update: the above example relates to the electronics unit of Standard Grade Physics. I have posted a modified version for the Higher Physics gas laws topic on my classroom blog.