Here we go again....
The new semester has begun and this time instead of three academic classes I have 2 academic and 1 applied. The academic classes are in the morning and the applied is in the afternoon. I am looking forward to this semester as it will bring an opportunity to refine what we have done, add new activities, and also have the applied class do similar activities. My applied class is small, 8, with 6 regular attenders. They are lovely and interested in learning, just very nervous about math.
Debbie also has 2 sections of academic math, but joining us this semester is Natalie Dash and Katie Vlug. We have a total of 7 sections of academic math and 1 applied between the 4 of us.
After a bit of introductory material to start the semester, we thought we would try out our new Scratch activity: Graphing with Scratch. I was feeling really confident with this activity since the other activities we had done unfolded essentially as planned. Well.... this one, for me anyway, not so much....
I felt badly for my period 1 class as they were the guinea pigs and I was able to make changes for the subsequent class and share my observations with the other Grade 9 teachers.
The first change, was planned ahead of time, we added the matching warm up activity since these students have not had math in 8 months and should probably do the matching activity with something they are familiar with.
The warm up starts with students matching tables of values with graphs. In the academic class they were posted around the room and students had to find the matches and we consolidated approaches to finding matches. In the applied class I gave a set to each pair of students and they matched them. In both classes we discussed linear and non-linear patterns for tables of values and graphs. In the applied class, I had students glue the matches on chart paper and identify linear/non-linear relations.
When the students confirming their matches for Table 2 were correct, one student wanted to know how could they make it so the dots were connected with a line. I asked them to look at the different commands to see if they could figure it out. They recognized they only needed to add a pen down and a pen up at the end, shown below.
I have a bit of a concern moving forward in trying to use Scratch. We need to identify why loading the Scratch interface took so long when we had approximately 20 groups working at the same time. To me, this shouldn't have been an issue, this is less than the number of students in a Grade 10 Computer Studies course, which also uses Scratch.
Debbie also has 2 sections of academic math, but joining us this semester is Natalie Dash and Katie Vlug. We have a total of 7 sections of academic math and 1 applied between the 4 of us.
After a bit of introductory material to start the semester, we thought we would try out our new Scratch activity: Graphing with Scratch. I was feeling really confident with this activity since the other activities we had done unfolded essentially as planned. Well.... this one, for me anyway, not so much....
I felt badly for my period 1 class as they were the guinea pigs and I was able to make changes for the subsequent class and share my observations with the other Grade 9 teachers.
The first change, was planned ahead of time, we added the matching warm up activity since these students have not had math in 8 months and should probably do the matching activity with something they are familiar with.
The warm up starts with students matching tables of values with graphs. In the academic class they were posted around the room and students had to find the matches and we consolidated approaches to finding matches. In the applied class I gave a set to each pair of students and they matched them. In both classes we discussed linear and non-linear patterns for tables of values and graphs. In the applied class, I had students glue the matches on chart paper and identify linear/non-linear relations.
Then, it was time for matching the Scratch code to the graphs and tables of values. We purposefully did not include the axes and scale on the graphs as we wanted students to think about the starting position. Originally, I thought that I could use the same set of graphs for both the applied and academic, but during my morning academic classes, I quickly realized this wouldn't work. Thank goodness the timetable worked out this way!
Observations on Matching Strategies (I regret not taking photos of all of this, but I was honestly surprised at the different strategies):
- Started by putting axes and scales on their graphs without looking at the tables of values and then tried to match the code and tables of values.
- Started by completing the blank tables of values as they realized the code was essentially the tables of values and then match the graphs.
- Started by matching the code with the graphs, then complete the tables of values.
- Identified linear and non-linear relations first in the graphs and Scratch code and then matched from there.
Observations on Axes and Scale:
- Most common: assumed the first point on the graph was considered the origin and the scale was going up by ones regardless of the information in the tables of values or the Scratch code.
- Axes at the same location, but scale different on each graph.
- Axes at the same location and scale the same once it was identified on one graph.
It was the observation on the placement of the axes and the scale that had me thinking that this was not working out the way I had thought it would.... I was wondering why was it that a number of groups were positioning the axes is different locations and using different scales on the graphs? I thought that once they discovered the location of the axes and scale on one graph that they would automatically check to see if it worked on the other graphs.
When I asked, there were a few different of explanations:
I knew right away, I would have to change the activity for the applied students, I knew I needed to put a set of axes on one of the graphs to help guide them.
Next problem... originally we hadn't planned on having students check their Table 2 matches using Scratch. This would have made consolidating much easier. Other problem... We didn't have a Scratch template for them to use to test their matches... I have no idea why we didn't consider this when we were developing the lesson, but it was an oversight that although seemed small, had a negative impact on how the lesson unfolded. It appeared disorganized, something I didn't want to have happen. I quickly created one and shared on our Google classroom that the other classes could use.
When I asked, there were a few different of explanations:
- Based on previous experience, the first dot is where the origin is.
- They didn't understand the graph was created using the Scratch code
- They didn't understand that Scratch would not change the location of the axes or change the scale.
I knew right away, I would have to change the activity for the applied students, I knew I needed to put a set of axes on one of the graphs to help guide them.
Next problem... originally we hadn't planned on having students check their Table 2 matches using Scratch. This would have made consolidating much easier. Other problem... We didn't have a Scratch template for them to use to test their matches... I have no idea why we didn't consider this when we were developing the lesson, but it was an oversight that although seemed small, had a negative impact on how the lesson unfolded. It appeared disorganized, something I didn't want to have happen. I quickly created one and shared on our Google classroom that the other classes could use.
Table 3... more interesting observations. Even though they had gone through Table 2, match graphs and Scratch code and testing it out, when it came to writing the code for the graph, many groups started with the first point as (0,0). Fascinating.... Again... why? Why was it that they weren't connecting the graphs to the Scratch code. When I asked, there wasn't really a clear answer.
Also, we had a lot of difficulty with connectivity to Scratch. When we had 2 sections of students trying to connect using wifi and Chromebooks, it was incredibly slow. Some groups were not able to load Scratch at all and so students found it frustrating. The connections we were trying to make with coding didn't really come to fruition.
Now... my applied class. Since I had worked out all of the kinks in the morning classes, this went a lot more smoothly. I also had them glue their matches on chart paper.
Also, we had a lot of difficulty with connectivity to Scratch. When we had 2 sections of students trying to connect using wifi and Chromebooks, it was incredibly slow. Some groups were not able to load Scratch at all and so students found it frustrating. The connections we were trying to make with coding didn't really come to fruition.
Now... my applied class. Since I had worked out all of the kinks in the morning classes, this went a lot more smoothly. I also had them glue their matches on chart paper.
When the students confirming their matches for Table 2 were correct, one student wanted to know how could they make it so the dots were connected with a line. I asked them to look at the different commands to see if they could figure it out. They recognized they only needed to add a pen down and a pen up at the end, shown below.
Another extension I had students try was to draw the axes on the graph. One student chose to change the backdrop of the stage and another tried to code in the axes by using the pen and changing the thickness of the line.
Overall, I was very pleased with how it unfolded in the applied class, but not so much in the academic classes.
I have a bit of a concern moving forward in trying to use Scratch. We need to identify why loading the Scratch interface took so long when we had approximately 20 groups working at the same time. To me, this shouldn't have been an issue, this is less than the number of students in a Grade 10 Computer Studies course, which also uses Scratch.
Comments
Post a Comment