Throughout the past several months, students have had many opportunities to explore the parts-purposes-complexities of our human bodies and many familiar objects in our classroom, community and homes. Students learned about the function of several tools and enjoyed using them to disassemble and assemble objects. Students were amazed at how many hidden parts are contained within common objects ... parts that are essential to the object's function. The Finished Products - Our Robot Creations Concluding Thoughts Implementing the Agency by Design “Thinking Routines” is simply good teaching practice,... good teaching for all students regardless of intellectual capability! Parts-Purposes-Complexities: Consistent use of the “Parts-Purposes-Complexities” thinking routine across the curriculum helped my special education students observe details in nature, in science, in art, in books, and in communication. For some of my students, depth of knowledge increased from simple object exploration to identifying and labeling the various parts of an the object. For others, depth of knowledge increased to understanding the function and interactions of parts of an object. All students enjoyed the process of tool use and disassembly-assembly; and were amazed at the number of unseen internal parts/pieces of common classroom objects … and of our human bodies. As a result of our consistent work with Parts-Purposes-Complexities thinking routine, students are now:
Imagine If…: Use of the “Imagine If” thinking routine required various degrees of adult prompting and facilitation depending upon the cognitive level and motoric ability of the student. In reading, such comprehension skills as visualization and prediction are often difficult for students whose thinking is at a concrete level of development. Similarly, the ability to imagine or visualize something that is not present, or abstract, is often very difficult for the “concrete thinker”. Providing multiple examples and experiences that explore possibilities, exploring and discussing reality vs. fantasy in literature, and discussing action-outcome are all essential to the development of imagination. Using a “Least-to-Most Prompting Hierarchy”, some of my students were able to imagine a robot that they would want to create, determine its intended purpose, and determine the essential parts needed. Others simply enjoyed the process of creating, with little concern about the end product. Each student was extremely proud of the great work they had done! The Agency By Design Fellowship Expo May 5, 2018
41 Comments
Students worked on their disassembly projects for a couple of weeks. They were amazed at the number of parts contained within common classroom objects. They disassembled computer keyboards, computer mice, ballpoint pens, flashlights, communication switches, and more. "Things aren't what they appear!" Students counted the total number of parts and learned the names of some of the major parts. Some of the students were able to provide a prediction about the function of some of those parts. Part 2 - "Imagine If ...." After reviewing the concept of parts-purposes-complexities as it relates to our human bodies and to the parts of common classroom objects, students were then challenged to imagine and create. In collaboration with the art instructor, students first studied and then created a "hybrid animal" in the style of author/illustrator Eric Carle. They described each animal part and its purpose/function. Students also had the opportunity to visit The Crucible (a non-profit industrial arts school and workspace) where they learned about the tools and skills of many art forms - leathersmithing, blacksmithing, woodworking, metal working, ceramics, carpentry, jewelry making, etc. The following photographs illustrate our process: "Since 2014 we’ve gathered cohorts of Oakland and Bay Area educators to participate in professional learning communities that focus on maker-centered learning and teacher-led classroom inquiry. Over the course of the school year fellows dive deeply into the pedagogical framework and instructional strategies of maker-centered learning, experimenting in their classroom practice and reflecting within the learning cohort. Teachers then choose a focus area to deepen their practice and participate in teacher-led action research in which they design interventions, collect data and documentation, reflect, and iterate." Redwood Heights School, 2017-18 Cohort members Teaching and Learning in a Maker-Centered Special Education Classroom My Question: How can the Thinking Routines and instructional strategies suggested in the Maker-Centered classroom paradigm increase the imagination and creativity in students with significant learning, language and physical challenges? How does Maker-Centered learning help the special education student? - Ann Marie Thomas (engineering prof at St. Thomas Univ.) suggests several important attributes that maker-center learning cultivates: curiosity and the desire to explore, playfulness and risk-taking, sense of responsibility, persistence, resourcefulness, the ability to share, optimism and self-satisfaction. What are “Thinking Routines”? - Thinking Routines are short, engaging patterns of intellectual behavior that are transferable across contexts:
Exploring Parts, Purposes, Complexities and Imagine If... Students with moderate-severe intellectual impairment often function at or near the Pre-Operational stage of cognitive development as defined by Piaget. During this stage, young children are developing the ability to think about things symbolically. The typically-developing child experiences significant growth in language comprehension and use during this period of development. They also develop memory and imagination, which allows them to understand the difference between past and future, and engage in make-believe. Their thinking, however, is based on intuition, and still not completely logical. They cannot yet grasp more complex concepts such as causation, time, and comparison. Our special education students frequently lack the comprehension, communication skills, imagination and creativity of their typical peers. Therefore, I am interested in integrating “maker” Thinking Routines across the curriculum to encourage:
The Thinking Routines that are our primary focus include:
Our 2017-18 Project: Using the Unique Learning Systems special education curriculum of the human body, its various systems, and how these systems work, the “Parts-Purposes-Complexities” Thinking Routine was used as we delved into a basic understanding of our 5 senses and of the parts/function of the skeletal system, muscular system, circulatory, respiratory and digestive systems. Then, using the "Imagine If ..." Thinking Routine, students created a robot for a specific purpose and compared/contrasted their unique creation with the human body. Project Sequence: 1. Students were introduced to the concept of "Parts-Purposes-Complexities" using familiar toys and playground equipment.
2. Integrating the current science unit "My Body", students traced an outline of their body onto butcher paper. Layer by layer, item by item, students learned about the name/parts, purpose and function/complexity of each body part; and added:
3. Students used the “Imagine If” Thinking Routine to:
|
Archives |