ED 617

Case Study: Student Interview

February 7, 2020

Case Study: Student Interviews Rubric

Item Point(s)
Describe students’ ideas 1 (1)
Analyze students’ ideas 1 (1)
Compare students’ ideas 1 (1)
Discuss misconceptions 2 (2)
Develop lesson plan idea 2 (1.5)
Present student interviews to class 2 (2)
Post visuals to course website 1 (1)
Total 10
1. I think that I was able to summarize the ideas that the students presented in their
interviews (1).
2. The synthesis was a bit more challenging, but I was able to identify each
student’s strengths and weaknesses (1).
3. During the analysis and reflection, I compared each student’s attitude,
knowledge, engagement, and ability to expand on the topic (1).
4. As I analyzed the students’ data, I was able to identify several common
misconceptions (2).
5. My lesson plan includes ideas for differentiation, engagement, and schema
activation. I feel that if I had more time with the students, I could have created
questions that were more authentic to where they are in the curriculum (1.5).
6. I will present this information in class to the best of my ability (2)
7. I will post the visuals to the course website (1)

Super Salmon

The topic that I chose for this interview was salmon, specifically the types of salmon in
Alaska, fin anatomy, and the stages of its lifecycle. I was inspired to create this
interview as the class is currently participating in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife’s Salmon in
the Classroom program. A large portion of the class’s counter space is currently
occupied by a large salmon tank!
After observing how students were interacting with their project, I created five questions
that would both review key information on salmon as well as expand their current
thinking on the subject. I asked our local Forest Service if I could borrow any
manipulatives that they might have on salmon and their life cycle. They happily
provided me with the hands-on tools that I used for this interview.
My questions to the students were as follows:
1. Can you name the different types of salmon that we see here in Alaska?
2. Can you label the fin anatomy of a salmon?
 3. What is a lifecycle? Can you think of different examples that have a lifecycle?
4. Can you name the different stages of the salmon lifecycle?
5. Can you tell me something interesting about each stage?

I asked my host teacher if I could interview three students, a ‘high-flyer’, an average

student, and a below-average student. Mr. Ellsworth did not inform me as to which
student was which so as to prevent any bias on my part during the interview process.
As I interviewed each student, I took note of their confidence level, engagement in the
topic, knowledge level, and the ability to expand on the questions given.

Student 1-Sixth - grade girl

This student walked confidently to the interview table. She appeared relaxed for the
duration of the interview and would readily ask questions for clarification (whether
spelling would count or not, is this going to be graded). She was able to name the
different types of salmon: silver, red, king, pink, and dog. She was also able to
accurately name all of the labeled fins on the salmon manipulative: dorsal, caudal,
pelvic, pectoral, adipose, and anal fins. When asked what a life cycle was, she
responded that they were the stages that organisms go through during their life, from
when they’re born to their death. She identified each life stage and able to expand on
the question, without being asked. She noted that the eggs grow eyes; the alevin eat
their yolk sac to grow; she named the fry but did not expound on this stage; a smolt
goes out to the ocean; adults come back from the ocean to their home stream where
they become spawners. She was able to provide several examples of different life
cycles in nature.

Student 2 – Sixth-grade girl

This student approached the interview table a bit more wary. Once I explained what we
were doing, she relaxed and settled into her chair. She made good eye contact and
seemed engaged in the topic. This student was able to name all five types of salmon
accurately. She was able to label 4 of the 6 fins of a salmon, missing the caudal and
pelvic fins. She was able to describe a life cycle using an example. “It’s like when you
start as an egg, then a baby, then a kid, a teenager, an adult, old, then you die.” She
readily gave several examples of different lifecycles in nature. As for the stages of the
life cycle, she did not differentiate between an adult and a spawner. When asked if she
could describe or add something interesting about each stage, she was able to describe
the eyes of the eggs; Alevins move their fins a lot; fry and smolt are just cute; a spawner
lays eggs.
Student 3 – Sixth-grade boy
This student approached the interview table like it was a device for torture. He was
hesitant and antsy as he answered the questions. He rarely made eye contact and his
answers were rushed as he scanned to clock for lunch dismissal. This student was able
to name two types of salmon, a humpy and a red. He was unable to name any of the
fins on the model – “I can’t remember.” When I asked him what a life cycle was, he was
able to describe it as, “A way you get born and do the stages of your life”. Simple, but
sufficient. When asked about the stages of the salmon life cycle, he noted that the
salmon looked like a silver salmon (which was interesting because he didn’t identify that
type of salmon in the previous question). He was able to identify two stages in the
salmon life cycle: the egg, and the adult. He could not expand on the stages though
and again said, “I don’t remember”. He was able to give several examples of different
lifecycles in nature.
Analysis and Reflection:
It was not difficult to deduce which of the students was the high-flier (student 1), the
average student (student 2), or the below-average student (student 3). I later confirmed
my thoughts with my host teacher. It was interesting to note the huge disparity in
attitude and body carriage between the high-flier and the below-average student. One
carried herself with confidence and ease, the other was uncomfortable throughout the
interview and rushed his answers in the need to be done.
It seems like such a cliché, but student 1 engaged the material with gusto, expanded on
questions without being asked, and seemed genuinely interested in the material.
Student 2 engaged the material while it was interesting, but once she realized that she
did not know some of the answers, she resorted to humor and distraction for the rest of
the interview. Student 3 seemed agitated and just wanted the whole process to be
over.
None of the students voluntarily used any of the manipulatives. Student 3 used the life
stages pictures only after I suggested that they might help jog his memory.
Manipulatives are not readily used in the curriculum in our school. In fact, one of the
biggest gripes that most teachers have during standardized testing is that students do
not take advantage of the tools made available to them. Whether this is a product of
their age or whether they are not taught how to use these tools to their benefit, is open
to debate. In the future, I will make sure to model just how important it is to effectively
use the tools around you-it is not a sign of weakness, nor is it an indication that you
don’t know what you’re doing. Rather it is the behavior of a successful scientist, using
those things that enhance learning and understanding.
Student 3 did not have sufficient background knowledge to be successful in this
interview. It was almost a self-fulfilling prophesy-he came in thinking he was not going
to do well in this interview, and he acted accordingly. This emphasizes just how
important mindset is when we are teaching students. As teachers, we must break those
preconceived notions that they might have of themselves as students, and show them
that through diligence and hard work, they too are capable of success, at any level!
Student 2 became confused about the order of the life cycle stages and was unable to
provide information for most of those stages. When this happened, she began to get
distracted and made jokes about how the fry and the smolt were ‘too cute’.
To differentiate this lesson and unit design (lesson idea) I would be sure to engage
student schema. When we anchor new learning to prior knowledge, students are more
likely to remember what we teach. The topic of salmon is certainly a subject that most
Sewardites can relate to. If students don’t fish or eat salmon themselves, then they
know someone who does. Most students have either seen or even dissected, a salmon
during their time at Seward Middle School. Student 3 demonstrated just how important
it is to provide and reinforce the background knowledge of a subject. Once he felt lost
in the subject matter, there was no way to bring him back. The key here is to provide
that background knowledge, then you are able to review and reteach any
misconceptions. With student 1, I would encourage higher-order thinking by challenging
her to compare and contrast 2-3 different animal lifecycles that we see here in Seward.
I would also encourage her to use the tools around her, like interview marine biologists
at the Sealife Center, right here in Seward. For the student 2 and 3, I would teach a
salmon’s life stages using a variety of modalities – oral (lecture, guest speakers), visual
(videos, pictures), and tactile (manipulatives) and ask them to synthesize the material in
a way that engages them and helps them as individuals to remember the information
(such as an infographic or even a song). As a way to engage students, I would provide
interesting facts about each stage in the life cycle, like how smolts are able to transform
themselves from freshwater to saltwater fish.
This interview reinforced the concept that each child learns differently, and it is our job
as teachers to find the path that enables our students to learn, and most importantly
synthesize the information. Learning is not a one-size-fits-all application. Rather it is as
varied as the students that sit before us each day. The challenge is modifying our
teaching to meet the needs of our students rather than expecting our students to
change the way they learn to match the way that we teach.