Stephanie Wofford-Dec. Blog-Inquiry

Before the long break, I had the pleasure of working with Ashley Blackwelder on a science inquiry lesson related to our unit on fast changes.  My students worked in small groups and had the task of designing a house (using just miniature marshmallows and toothpicks) which would withstand an earthquake.  Before beginning, they brainstormed ideas they might need to consider when designing such a house.  They worked with a partner to do a close read of an article that related their project to real world problems engineers and architects face when designing buildings and houses.  It was great to see the kids apply some of the strategies we had previously worked on regarding close reading.  A few did an excellent job underlining just key details they could then use to help them come up with ideas for their house.  They then created a rough sketch of what they thought would work.  The students then got into small groups to share their ideas.  Together, they agreed on one design (some chose one out of the group they thought was best, some collaborated and picked the best ideas from a few designs) and sketched it out.  They were told to label the parts so that they could give us an exact number of toothpicks and marshmallows needed.  Many justified their designs using ideas from the article regarding buildings needing to be lighter.  This step was the most frustrating.  Many had an extremely difficult time labeling (the 3D part really threw them off) and giving an accurate number of supplies needed.  Some got frustrated working within a group, and there was some redirection needed from us.  Once they finally gave us an exact number of supplies, they received them and got to work.  They worked together to build their structures and test them.  It was interesting to see how some groups revised their designs once they got started.  There were many situations where they realized the original plan didn't work, and they had to go back to the drawing board, so to speak.  Once they had a model, they were able to test.  For the most part, they were successful.  After completing their tests, they were able to complete a quick write where they explained their designs, why they thought they worked or didn't work, and their experiences working within a group.  Overall, this experience was really beneficial for the students.  Instead of working out of a textbook, they were able to discover and learn both on their own and within groups.  We related their task to the real world with articles.  They were able to engage in discourse with their groups, sharing ideas and coming to a consensus.  Finally, they were able to express their learning and experiences through writing.  The best part is, I bet even now, weeks later, they remember quite a bit about what they learned.  Can we say the same about a textbook lesson?