Had to Share This - See the Earth's Shadow

You will be aware that the earth casts a shadow. It is conical in shape and stretch way out into space, you will b see it when there is a lunar eclipse and the shadow passes over the surface of the moom. There are times when it is visible at dusk (perhaps also at dawn). Wait till the Sun goes down and look for a dark bandjust above the horizon. SEE it here at
http://www.atoptics.co.uk/atoptics/earshad.htm
click on the right hand arrow, top corner, for a panorama where you can see the the shadow is curved, of course it is! Can't wait for a clear evening when I'm away from the city to observe this.
Happy shadow hunting.

What will ICT Become?

Given that we have ICT as a subject rather than a cross-curricular theme? What should it look like. We have voices in government asking for the teaching of Computer Science yet so far they have not been clear about what that means. The word programming is banded about but it ought perhaps to be more than that?

Our present National Curriculum for ICT may not have done us any favours in that it appeared to move teachers away from teaching pupils to control computers. Have applications and programmes become the mediators of ICT in schools? The numerous cloud based applications becoming popular may be further cementing this problem. The best ones are open ended allowing pupils to have a degree of control and to be creative e.g. quadblogging  http://quadblogging.net/  .  Of course there is a distinction between teaching and learning about  ICT and teaching and learning other subjects using ICT.

Fifteen years ago the use of Seymour Paperts programming language LOGO was enabling primary aged pupils to take control of a computer, versions with screen sprites appeared to offer a bridge to applications such as gaming. Do we need to reexamine the best of those options along with control technology and other options?

The new computer Rasberry Pi  may offer primary schools an opportunity to look at computing differently.
http://www.raspberrypi.org/

ICT is about to dissapplied from the National Curriculum, schools are to be given more choice in their approach. This is a great opportunity to look at ICT afresh. ICT as a subject and ICT as a fantastic tool for learners and teachers. This opportunity will require the whole primary profession to engage with change.

In may ways this is a great time to be in primary education and into ICT, the pupils certainly are.

Are Interactive Whiteboards Holding us Back?

I would not be without an IWB but as I left this years BETT Meeting in January at Olympia chatting to a colleague we were dissappointed that we did not seem to have seen much that was innovative. Much that we had seen seemed to be  reconfiguration of IWBs, for example to operate as a table top or on the classroom floor. yes these are exciting innovations but as to the regular day to day use of IWBs there seemed to be little around to indicate what might be the next steps in Primary ICT.

Interactive whiteboards have had and continue to have a  positive impact on the teaching of all subjects when used well and we have all, I hope, seen numerous good examples. At the other end of the scale can they lead to dreary powerpoint type presentations which offer little in terms of enhancment? Can they limit the pedagogy employed?

Would or should IWBs be a vehicle for moving the emphasis to the learner? What exactly does interactive mean? Do we need a shift in thinking about what this technology is for? Is ICT one of the greatest potential instruments for change in classrooms? It has the potential to free some pupils from the challege they face expressing themsleves and even for some accessing the curriculum. Is the ICT going to improve the situation or should our focus be on ourselves as teachers? How do we see the classroom? How do we view ICT? Are our learners growing in autonmy? Is self esteem strengthening?

Next time I plan a lesson using ICT perhaps I need to shift my thinking?

Is Cross-Curricular an End in Itself?

Being a subject in a National Curriculum offers science a great deal in that teachers, even reluctant ones have to teach science (though this very little about its quality!).  Its inclusion guaranteed science a time allocation and systematic coverage. At the time, pre 2005,  when Year Six pupils were subject to Science SATs testing some found themselves on an increasing diet of cramming, of past papers and virtual practical work. Since the removal of the science SAT science has slipped in terms of the priority given to in schools but the cramming appears to be a thing of the past.

It is important to make the distinction between science itself and science education which occurs in schools and other places. They are not mutually exclusive but there is a difference, it is often assumed that we want children to do science as part of their science education. Science itself is cross-curricular (Popper). Will a meteorologist draw on different aspects of science as well as usiing a great deal of mathematics when dealing with data and English when communicating findings to his or her peers?  Does this mean that science education has to be cross-curricular? Surely yes? Would be possible to teach about cross-curricular science within discrete science subject lessons? Clearly it would so do we need any other approach?  What some schools and teachers adopt is a overtly inter-disciplinary approach to planning the curriculum with the intention that different subjects make, utilise and benefit from links? It is perhaps worth considering whether the curriculum itself will guarantee links are recognised and used? Or is it still down to how it is presented and utilised in the classroom?

Which is most important? The cross-curricular approach? What does it guarentee? Perhaps more valuable is the committed teacher looking for ways to improve learning who utilises a cross-curricular approach in his her search for more effective approaches?

New Assessment Arrangements or Not?

With a new National Curriculum comes new assessment arrangements. The present arrangement of 8 levels against which pupils achievement is compared forms the basis of the present arrangements. The government claims that these create a glass ceiling, but yet the design of the level system avoids this. When a pupil achieves a level the teacher is already preparing to move them to the next level. Thus we could have a child working twards level 4 in Year 4 because they have achieved level 3. This surely can only be percieved as a glass celieng by those who don't understand it? The TGAT team who devised the levels were very well aware of this possibility. Appointed by the then Conservative government I suspect they were much better qualified than some of those extolling the virtues of  the proposal. So the proposal to avoid a glass ceiling, is to introduce age ralated targets. Did I mis read that? Would these be sets of educational objectives or targets linked to a particular age range? This appears to be the plan. So a Year 4 pupil would work towards the targets, perhaps achieve them in May and then....  ooops  they've hit a ceiling.  Or would the child move to a Year 5 class? this system is used in parts of north America and other contries. Alternatively the teacher could be asked to teach towards the Year 5 targets? very sensible and frankly not so different to the system of levels we have now so ....   ....we spend a lot of money to change a system from one we have to one we have?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/03/england-curriculum-review-debate-controversy

A New National Curriculum

So there is a proposal for a slimmed down National Curriculum here in England? So how slim is slim and what do you remove? We are I suspect all in favour of simplicity and ease of access but less so of dumbing down? What will be the basis of the changes? We could, for example, remove much of the content and focus very much on what we have come to call Science One - Exploration and Investigation of Science. If primary science is about enthusing and engaging young people in the fascinating world around them, what better way? I understand this has been the approach in countries around the world without diasterous results. Perhaps all of this is dependent on what you aims are? Do you want engaged citizens? or studnets who can pass an exam? Do we want informed consumers and other inspired to make a contribution to science and the world? or compliant individuals who don't appreciate the need to question?
We need to look at any curriculum with the same challenging eyes of the pupil who asks why? but why? The last National Curriculum was a product of those who wrote it and their ideas of what was a world view, the next no doubt will be the same. As ever we need those professional challenging eyes to take it and form it into a digestable whole. Lets hope the years of increasing control from the centre are over and that teachers are given some real space to teach.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/education/2011/oct/03/england-curriculum-review-debate-controversy

primary

Playground Science

Science on the playground is not new but not perhaps as common as it might be? Learners often repeat activities from lessons after the lesson. If they participate in science activities such as role play on the playground in lessons we have found that they continue the lesson by repeating the activity with friends on the playground.

Year 2 pupil sketches a life cycle

Jon, a local Manchester teacher and part-time science tutor at the University of Manchester and I have trialled a number of ideas for lesson activities on the playground including science topics such as habitats, Earth in Space, light, forces and more. A typical example would be reflection modelled by the children kicking a ball against a wall. They can see the path of the ball and the angle at which it strikes the wall and the resulting bounce at a similar angle. Pupils are asked to draw, in chalk, arrows to show the path of the ball and to describe what they see. The teacher emphasises words such as path, straight linne, bounce, travel, travel to etc. back in a darkened classroom pupils recount what they have just seen on the playground and watch a demonstration of light bouncing and reflecting of a mirror. They then discuss the similarities to what they observed outside.
If you would like to hear more about playground science do get in touch with alan.cross@manchester.ac.uk