Cokie Gaich

ED327/McAllister
Lesson Reflection
Alka-Seltzer Lesson Reflection

This lesson was a lab that aimed to explore how changing the surface area
affects reaction time. The main goals of this lesson were for students to be able to
identify key parts of the scientific method and to analyze and draw conclusions from the
data collected. The lab materials used were Alka-Seltzer tablets and water along with
lab specific materials that were familiar to the students. Alka-Seltzers were chosen
because they can be familiar to the students and are more relevant to their lives than
any powdered chemical that may kept in the prep room. The students did not have any
given knowledge about the effect of surface area on reaction time. This was a deliberate
decision because it allowed them to be more involved with finding the results of the lab
and use critical thinking skills to form their hypothesis based on their background
knowledge. Without knowing the expected outcome of the lab I believe that they were
able to go through the scientific method more independently and more like a
professional scientist rather than a typical school lab lesson.
Before the lesson began, I believe that it’s important to set a positive learning
environment for the students and myself. To do this I have to know my students
personally and academically. I’ve been able to learn about a handful of students in both
period classes through observations and having individual conversations. Both classes
are very respectful and rarely have any major discipline problems because the
expectations for their behavior has been made very clear and are posted in the
classroom. The students do enjoy to talk during the class period when given the class
and this informed my teaching decisions to use class discussions to meet their social
needs while having them focus on a specific task or goal. Before I start teaching any
lesson I always ask the students how they are feeling that day. For me this is vital
information that will guide me to cater to any emotional needs or if I need to alter my
expectations for responsiveness slightly. If students are tired or stressed, it can be
expected that their engagement level may be decreased and there could be
modifications made to ensure that they still learn without having an outside distraction.
The first period class told me that they were all very tired. Normally I would have had
them do an activity to wake up, but I made the decision to wait since they would be
moving around for the lab section of the lesson. Since they were all tired, they were not
all very responsive but most actively listening to what was being said.
After the emotion check up, I used a question/answer format to provoke students
to figure out what they already know about Alka-Seltzers and surface area. The
answers between the two classes varied. The first period class was gave more
generalized answers, while second period went into more detail about what they know
or what they believe they know. I did not expect much knowledge on what an Alka-
Seltzer is and what it does, but I was told that both classes have learned about surface
area in their math classes. The question/answer format helps me to determine what
background information I need to cover so that their understanding of the materials and
question is where I need it to be to answer the pre-lab activities. Though they were
taught surface area, the majority of both classes seemed to struggle to give me a
concrete definition of what it was and why it was important to their lives outside of a
math class. I gave them the example of having to paint a 3D object. The amount of paint
I have to use to paint the outside is related to the surface area, or the area of the object
that I have to paint. This seemed to clarify confusion for the first class, but in the second
class one student became focused on the time for the paint to dry rather than the idea
of surface area causing some confusion. Since their hypothesis would include choosing
between increasing surface area and decreasing surface area, I took a moment to
explain what increasing surface area actually looks like because this concept isn’t
always intuitive.
After the background discussion, I had the students read through the lab method
so that they would be able to later give me the variables and list of materials needed.
For both classes I simply asked them to read through the sheet and gave them a couple
minutes to do so. If I were to teach this lesson again, I would have given them a focus
for their reading to prepare them for the next task. By asking them to look for the
variables or the materials needed would have increased their engagement with the
reading and prepare them for the next activity. Since a demonstration of the lab was
going to be done the focus did not have to be on what they physically had to do in the
lab.
For the pre-lab section I asked for them to orally give me the answers for the
variables and materials as I wrote their responses on the board. When asking for the
independent, dependent, and controlled variables I also stated a small definition of each
when asking what they were in the lab. These are key terms that they are expected to
know for their unit and standardized tests. However, my focus on their ability to identify
these from a given method and research question I did not want them to focus
remembering the definition of each. The materials section was completed in a similar
manner, but I allowed students to just shout out the answer, though the vast majority
just raised their hands to give their responses. I found that this worked well and got
most of the class engaged.
Once the students finished completing the pre-lab on their individual worksheets,
I gave a quick demonstration of what they would be doing in the lab. I chose to
demonstrate the lab method so that students could get a visual and auditory
representation of what was expected during the lab. This also allowed me to clear up
any confusion they may have had from just reading the lab method. If a student had
decided not to read the lab during the allotted time, this gives them another opportunity
to learn what is expected of them during the lab procedure. I made the decision to not
actually use the materials for the demonstration and asked them use some imagination.
This choice was made to save materials but to also let the students discover what
happens for themselves rather than have already seen how the reaction looks.
During the lab practical students worked in groups of four, which meets their
social needs but in an organized manner focusing their discussions on the topic of the
lab. While the lab was proceeding I walked around the room to observe the students
and their engagement with the lab and to listen to their conversations. I took this time to
talk to groups independently about what they are observing and how it relates to the
research question; this also allowed me to formatively assess the student understanding
of the the lab and the academic language. Walking around helped with keeping
students on track with the activity and minimize distracting conversations. Period two
had a beaker break that caused some distraction within the group. I was able to stop the
distraction by telling the group that I didn’t care who broke it, but I did want them to step
away for a second while I cleaned up the broken glass. I gave the first period a reminder
about how easy the beakers were to break, but forgot with the second period. However,
when looking back at the footage, the student who broke the beaker wasn’t doing any
dangerous or irresponsible. He was rinsing the beaker in the sink and it fell a short
distance and broke in the sink. I should have remembered to give both classes a
warning about the beakers, but this specific incident could have happened even if they
were reminded.
Once all the groups were finished gathering data and cleaning up their lab
stations, I asked the students to take time individually or with their group to fill out their
observations section as we would be discussing it as a class. While looking at their data
values I noticed that many results were not what was expected. This was due to some
difficulty seeing the dissolving of the smaller pieces and crushed Alka-Seltzer tablets.
The students noted that with increasing surface area the tablets created a foam like
layer at the top of the water which made it hard for the tablet to react with the water and
to see if it had completely dissolved. I used a class discussion format to have the class
share their observations and to build off each other responses. Whenever a student
responded I repeated what they said to the class in case they did not hear it and at
times rephrased what they said using the academic language or to elaborate. I
rephrased to provide more explanation or to clarify what was said, this would help
eliminate confusion and help students hear the response in a different way that might
make more sense to them without having to explicitly ask for clarification. The class
discussion let me hear their thoughts and help guide them to their conclusions, while
also addressing any points of confusion.
The post-lab section of this lab was challenging to complete since the results
were not as expected and first period students seemed to have lost a lot of energy. I
asked the students if they wanted to continue working through the post lab or if they
wanted to take a movement break. They voted to keep working, but I think it would have
been more beneficial for them if we had taken a quick break to wake them back up. I
took the time to address that sometimes our methods do not give us the best results
and that it’s ok if the method isn’t perfect the first time around. I asked them to reflect
and see if they could think of anything that we could change within the lab that may
yield better results. This particular question was found very challenging because they
have not been asked to reflect on a lab in this specific manner. I related this to what
professional scientists do, we are always trying to find ways to make our methods better
to give us accurate and precise results. This reflection question was also one I didn’t
have an answer for so I couldn’t guide them to any answers. Even when talking with the
classroom teacher after the first period we found it difficult to find ways to improve the
method without having to add another variable. It may have been helpful to give
students a completed table with the correct trend to analyze after they have completed
the lab so that they could reach the conclusion independently rather than having to rely
on me to explain the relationship.
Since the lab didn’t go as planned, I explicitly told the students what results they
were supposed to see and reassured them that it was ok if these were not the results
they got and it does not reflect their knowledge of science. After telling the students the
relationship between surface area and reaction time we went to fill out the conclusion
section of the post-lab. I had the students fill in the blanks orally and I repeated the
responses to ensure that the other students heard the answers and were able to follow
along. The first period was able to follow along well, but the second period seemed to
struggle with this section. For the second period I think it would have been helpful to use
the DocCam or to write the responses on the board. This was a debate I had with
myself when going into period two because the DocCam is located behind the teacher
desk in the corner of the room and makes me feel more isolated from the students.
However, in this case I think the visual presentation of the answers would have reduced
the confusion for second period.
Overall I believe that the lesson was successful, but of course could have used
some improvements to further increase student engagement during the pre- and post-
lab. The lab method and materials themselves could use some changes to help yield
better results for topic of the lab. However, despite some of the setbacks from the lab
practical the students still remained engaged with the learning and were able to reach
the correct conclusion after explaining the expected results.