201: Teaching Multiple Perspectives (Bonus March of 1932)

1-sources

 

Official BEF Photo. Digital image. Radio Diaries. Radio Diaries, n.d. Web. 14 May 2016.

 

2-what

 

bonuswar

 

Revising History:
  • Examples:
    • Pluto lost its planet status in 2004
    • Deepening understanding of role of women in American Revolution due to work of Carol Berkin, Mary Beth Norton, Kathryn Sklar, Linda Kerber, Nancy Cott, Carol Dubois
  • Why this occurs:
    • New evidence uncovered
    • Old evidence investigated by new questions
  • Math / Science connections
    • Understanding of concepts and techniques change as
      • new evidence is uncovered
      • new techniques are tools are invented
Multiple Perspectives:
  • Multiple perspectives versus Historical interpretations
    • former deals with evidence created by people in close proximity to the focus events
    • latter deals with sources created by people who are not participants in the focus events – wrote about the event later in time
  • Tips about teaching multiple perspectives to teenagers
    • do not use too many perspectives at once
    • use a variety of one-dimensional sources that as a collection represent multiple perspectives
    • subtext and context of sources is important to understanding perspectives of pieces
Why the Bonus Army?  
  • Stories of participants humanize the Great Depression
  • July 1932 – 20,000 Americans stages a peaceful protest in Washington, D. C.
  • Context: Adjusted Compensation Act of 1924:
    • 1.00 / day for domestic service; 1.25 / day for overseas service
    • Compensation made available through:
      • Bonus certificates redeemable in 1945 for pay over $50
      • Less than $50 – immediate cash
  • Bonus Army and related events:
    • led by WW1 veteran Walter Waters
    • army of unemployed veterans conducted an 18-day march from Portland, Oregon to Washington, D. C.
    • due to news coverage, gained followers from Texas, Louisiana, New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, etc
    • protesting late payments of bonuses
    • lobby in favor of bill sponsored by Congressman Wright Patman of Texas for immediate pay of bonus in 1924
      • considered fiscally responsible because it exceeded federal budget
    • a D. C. police chi and WW1 veteran Pelham Glassford aided protestors by organizing sites and buildings for them to lay camp and working to provide them with food and water
      • partly provided aid to make protesters more malleable to local laws
    • Walter Waters responded to police aid with military style discipline
      • forbade freeloading, drinking and radical talk
      • military police patrolled the campgrounds
      • opposed Communist and radical elements within their camps
        • at one point D. C. police had to prevent them from beating Communists caught within their camps
    • June 7 – 8,000 marched down Pennsylvania Avenue
    • Government concerns
      • afraid protests were a threat to reelection of Herbert Hoover
      • afraid lobbying exceed scope of passing the Patman bill
      • afraid of possible connection between B.E.F. and the Community Party who was constantly trying to take credit for the march despite Waters’ protests
    • June 17 – Patman bill rejected by U. S. Senate vote
    • Many protesters left – trains home paid for by $100,000 train assistance provided by Hoover administration
    • 10,000-15,000 protesters remained in D. C.
      • frustration increased due to time, poor food, summer heat, waterborne diseases
    • July 28 – police tried to move protestors from Federal Triangle buildings to Anacostia Flats – protestors responded by throwing bricks at the police
    • Hoover ordered the U. S. Army to move the protestors under command of MacArthur, Eisenhower, and Patton
      • army moved protestors to Anacostia Flats using tear gas, bayonets and physical force
      • MacArthur disobeyed President’s orders to not enter Bonus Army’s camps – entered the camp and routed the veterans.
    • Diverse reactions to veteran treatment
      • some perceived it as evidence of President Hoover’s callousness
      • some perceived it as necessary action to protect country from a Communist plot
    • Hoover made a public announcement that the “Communist threat” was defeated
      • investigations failed to reveal a connection between the Communist party and the Bonus Army
  • Varying historians’ interpretations of the events:
    • evidence of President Hoover’s lack of caring for veterans and the unemployed (Walter Water’s and Police Chief Glassford’s perspective)
    • President Hoover acted to protect country from Communist Party (Cold War perspective)
    • evidence from release of Hoover’s personal papers in 1966, squared blame on MacArthur (Hoover perspective)
  • Students who investigate the Bonus Army investigate multiple perspectives to develop and defend an answer to the question: Why was the Bonus Army forced out of D. C. and who should bear responsibility for this decision?
From Idea to Historical Investigation:
  • Refining driving question
    • Focusing on the why instead of the what of the events helps students to dig deeper into the evidence
  • Limiting number of sources
    • Limited number of sources to 8 to avoid overwhelming students
Teaching the Lesson:
  • Students listen to song: “Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?”
    • provide info on the Depression and plight of WW1 veterans
    • relates to homework reading on these topics
  • Students read about Bonus Army for homework
  • Debrief homework using series of images of Bonus War events.
  • Introduce driving question: Why were the marchers forcibly removed and who should take responsibility for the decision?
  • Students provided 1 of 8 sources.
    • Provide students with Who’s Who list of people involved in the Bonus Army events
  • Students grouped into teams that have experts on each of the 8 sources.
    • students share their findings from their sources – present content, context and subtext in their sources (teacher monitoring supports this critical sharing of
    • after sharing, students complete the following sentence stems:
      • We believe that the Bonus Army was forcibly removed from Washington D. C. because …
      • We believe that ________ was / were responsible for the decision to remove the Bonus Marchers because …
    • students debate within their teams while trying to come to an agreement on how to complete the above sentence stems.  Remind student to preface their arguments with According to Source #, ____________
  • After students have interpretations, one final piece of evidence is released, a memoir from Hoover written 30 years later that contradicts many of their interpretations
  • Students’ reactions
    • Students seemed to be more suspicious of sources written long after the events EXCEPT for Hoover’s memoirs.  They seem to give him credit for revealing the truth at a time when the truth is less likely to damage his or other’s reputations.
  • Students learn how to
    • use multiple perspectives to realize a more nuanced view of history
    • question historical sources
    • formulate, define and defend historical arguments
    • how science is created
 
Science connections:
  • A multiple perspectives treatment of science can be used to consider multi-faceted evidence around once or still controversial issues in science such as:
    • the theory of evolution
    • global warming
    • development of string theories and related theories
    • the development of electromagnetic theory
    • development of theory of gravity
  • While considering different pieces of evidence focused on one of these topics, students can consider:
    • what model is constructed to describe the phenomena
    • what are the strengths of the model
      • what type of phenomena are described well by the phenomena. Why?
    • what are the limitations of the model
      • what type of phenomena are not well described by the model.  Why?
    • who supports the model? why?
    • who does not support the model? why?
  • Caveat –
    • At some point teachers need to emphasize accepted theories to avoid sowing wrong information and misconceptions into students’ minds
    • Teacher may need to explicitly teach how scientists and scientific communities confer validity to some types of information and not others
3-sowhat
Having students investigate and interpret sources that represent multiple perspectives helps students develop a more nuanced understanding of how knowledge is created.  Students who engage in using evidence to create, defend, and refine interpretations are more likely to remember the information they investigated.  This is because they are building knowledge frameworks to connect and challenge the information.

 

4-nowwhat
Note:  This is written for Science teachers.  For tips for history teachers, read the book or the summary of the book chapter in the WHAT? section of this article above.

 

Preparation Steps
  • Identify what concepts are the enduring understandings of your particular course
  • Research to determine if any of the enduring understandings either have a controversial origin or are applied in a current controversial issue
  • Research to find several sources that:
    • focus on one controversial issue
    • offer a collection of perspectives towards the controversial issue
    • use multiple methodologies to investigate the issue – different experimental studies, different theoretical models, etc.
    • are accessible to students with some vocabulary scaffolding support
  • Develop a driving question that can be investigated by all the sources – It could be something like:
    •  Why is the model of ________________ evolving?  Who posed the most valid description(s) of ________________ and what makes their description(s) most valid?
  • Develop thinking sheets for each of the sources that ask students to consider:
    • what model is constructed to describe the phenomena?
    • what are the strengths of the model?
      • what type of phenomena are described well by the phenomena. Why?
    • what are the limitations of the model
      • what type of phenomena are not well described by the model.  Why?
    • who supports the model? why?
    • who does not support the model? why?
  • Decide which sources will serve as the launch source and the final piece of evidence source:
    • the launch source should hook students into the debate and transition well to the driving question
    • the final released piece of evidence source should
      • contradict some of the previously released emphasis
      • might help to have it connect with the most accepted view of the phenomena since people tend to remember best the sources they are shown last
  • Design a project calendar with following phase:
    • launch – initial investigation and initial impression gathering phase
    • investigate individual sources individually
    • in groups share evidence to form consensus interpretations of evidence considered as a whole that address the driving question
    • release final piece of evidence
    • students refine their conclusions
    • debrief discussion that shares current accepted views of the phenomena and how the science community came to agreement on that model
Early Implementation Steps
  • Implement project calendar described above
  • Monitor students during individual investigation phase to make sure they are questioning and accurately describing he strengths and limitations of the models in their sources
  • Monitor students while they debate and formulate interpretations in their teams – make sure they are using evidence from their sources in their arguments
  • During debrief discussions, probe for questions, understandings and misconceptions
Advanced Implementation Steps
  • Get students to investigate a debate that is still ongoing and to predict how the debate  will end in the future and the types of evidence that will be required to end the debate
5-relatedstuff

200: Teaching Chronological Thinking and Causality (Rail Strike of 1877)

1-sources

 

2-what

 

Screen Shot 2016-05-14 at 12.02.31 AM

 

Chronological Thinking
  • Beyond sequencing events in temporal order
  • Examining sources to determine how events relate to each other
  • Looking for causes of events and consequences of events
  • Understanding the difference between causal and correlational relationships
  • National Standards for History (related to chronology):
    • Identify in historical narratives the temporal structure of a historical narrative or story
    • Measure and calculate calendar time
    • Interpret data presented in time lines
    • Reconstruct patterns of historical succession and duration
    • Establish temporal order in constructing historical narratives of their own
  • Chronological thinking needs to be taught alongside causality
  • Math / Science Connections:
    • Scientists / mathematicians are more likely to say that two variable are correlated than causally related because the latter is harder to prove
    • The relationships among things is emphasized throughout the disciplines, it is the basis of functions and functions are a main ingredient in mathematical / scientific models and the predictions that emerge from the models
Causality
  • Standards related to causality:
    • explain causes in analyzing historical actions
    • grasp the complexity of historical causation, respect particularity, and avoid excessively abstract generalizations
  • Debates surrounding causes of events / eras can make history more real and engaging to students
  • While introducing this concept, select sources that require students to form a chronological narrative – NOT multiple causes, perspectives, or other types of historical thinking – isolate chronological / causal thinking
Why the Railway Strike of 1877?
  • images involve buildings that are local and recognizable to Baltimore students
  • Background info:
    • economic recession and racial tensions during the Reconstruction
    • 1873 Wall Street panic negatively affected nationwide economy
    • 1874 6,000 businesses close
    • railroads hit really hard
    • railroads engaged in a rate war to minimize effects of the depression
    • lower rates led to lower labor costs
      • paid workers less
      • workers hired for less hours
      • workers had to pay for travel home when work took them to distant cities
    • railroads ended rate wars in favor of an agreement to lower workers’ hourly wave
      • workers striked
        • sometimes destroyed railroad property
        • involved 100,000 workers nationwide
      • strike ended due to
        • federal trop deployment
        • lack of central workers’ org
    • Impacts:
      • stirred fear in the public
      • some reforms:
        • created Employees Relief Association – provide some medical services and death benefits to employees (1880
        • 1884 companies setup pensions for workers
      • momentum for Workingmen’s political party and labor movement
      • highlighted problems of industrialization
Implementing the Lesson
  • Display image from strike that shoes building on fire and ask students to identify elements in the image that aid in understanding artist’s viewpoint
  • Introduce Driving question: What event does the image depict and what is the artist’s message about the event?
  • Four sources:
    1. letter advertising Gatling gun to owner of B&O Railroad
    2. broadside announcing lowering of worker wages
    3. letter from president of B&O to President Hayes asking for federal troops
    4. insurance document listing damages caused by worker
  • These four sources can help students’ determine causal relationship among events of the strike
  • Cursive note: can provide typed copies of cursive sources just in case students struggle to read the handwriting
  • Jigsaw analysis
    • Students analyze different sources within a team of 4 with the help of thinking sheets that use question prompts to guide students to notice and interpret key features of the sources and formulate hypotheses
    • As a group, students use collection of sources to create a chronological account that generate original artist’s image at project launch
  • Alternative to group analysis
    • Each group analyzes the same source and presents their finding to the whole class
    • The whole class tries to process and arrange the sources in chronological order
  • Note about the sources and lessons learned:
    • the dates on sources do not necessarily correspond to the actual dates of the events they describe
    • this fact requires students to use causality to correctly order the sources
    • students learn that dates alone do not order sources / events; determinations about the relationships about the information within the sources influence the chronology
    • history is more than a random aggregation of information – there is an organization to the information due to causal relationships
  • Concluding the lesson:
    • Is the launch image pro- or anti- labor?
      • after discussing this question, teacher reveals caption of image: The Frenzy and What Came of It”
 
Leveraging these Lesson in the Future
  • Lessons learned by students:
    • Challenges misconception – sources created close in time to the event are more valid
      • sometimes sources created farther in time from the event have useful things to say because they are written from a broader perspective with access to more corroborating evidence
    • Moving beyond timelines – students learn to interpret sources and their relationships to each other to develop chronological frameworks that connect the sources
    • Students learn to view history narratives as jigsaw puzzles that can be solved
      • students were more engaged by “creating” time line than simply memorizing it – led to better retention
      • caveats – students may read too much or too little into sources and develop chronologies with logic flaws; promoting discussing among discussion may helps students to catch logic flaws
  • Teaching tip:
    • Many historical tools can be used to analyze and interpret sources
    • While scaffolding these tools, it’s helpful to emphasize one over the others
Math / Science Connections:
  • This style of lesson can be used to design lessons that show:
    • chronology of events that led to expanding understanding of a concept or the development of a currently well established math / science model (often called a theory)
      • examples:
        • development of quantum mechanics – happened very quickly and may have a lot of sources with dates that don’t necessarily match the exact discovery dates – (can also remove dates from source until after students have a hypothesis about the chronology). Within quantum mechanics – there are several concepts that can be focused on such as:
          • development of model for an atom
          • development for model of behavior of light
          • development for model for atomic nuclei
        • development of understanding of models to describe electricity and magnetis
        • development of model to understand gravity
        • with biology – the development of the theory of evolution
    •  can open with quote or a cartoon inspired by model being studied and ask students to describe what they notice and answer the driving question – What does this image depict and what is the artist’s message about the contents?
    • teaching students to logically link the development of models can help them to learn how mathematicians / scientists incrementally create new knowledge using more and more sophisticated models (or sometimes simpler models) to understand phenomena

 

3-sowhat
Teaching students how to create their own chronological frameworks by interpreting and connecting primary sources teaches students that history is not just an random aggregate of facts and events.  Creating their own timelines as opposed to simply memorizing ones can involve students in an engaging jigsaw puzzle that makes the resulting sequence more memorable.  This type of lesson can be applied in science / math lessons that investigate the development of now accepted models for describing phenomena.

 

4-nowwhat
Note:  This sequence will be written for science teachers.  If you’re looking for advice on how to prepare and implement lessons related to historical lessons on chronology, read the WHAT? summary above.

 

Preparation Steps
  • Research the unfolding of discoveries that advanced the development of models that describe a specific phenomena.
  • Find student friendly, engaging sources that represent different models that describe the same phenomena.
  • Select sources whose dates don’t necessarily relate to the dates of the origin of the models OR expunge the dates from the sources.
  • Developing thinking sheets with several question prompts that guide students to analyze each source and its relationship to the anchor image.
  • Find an anchor image to launch the project that shows the model in an interesting way that hints at its origins and implications.
  • Create a driving question that requires students to investigate the sources to chronologically relate the models depicted in them to the model depicted in the anchor image?
Early Implementation Steps
  • Introduce anchor image and driving question.  Hold preliminary discussions to share and record what is initially notices and initial hypotheses
  • Have different teams investigate different sources with the help of thinking sheets.
  • Have each team present their findings to the class.
  • Use teams’ presentations to have a discussion aimed at sequencing the models
  • After models are sequenced, reconsider the anchor image and re-address the driving question
Advanced Implementation Steps
  • Lesson could have models that relate to concepts that are still in flux and have students predict future expressions of the model

 

5-relatedstuff

199: Text, Subtext and Context (Theodore Roosevelt & the Panama Canal)

1-sources

 

2-what

 

Screen Shot 2016-05-13 at 2.56.54 PM

 

A Common Language for Investigating the Part:
  • Using content, context and sub-text to summarize and evaluate historical sources can work for all units
  • Need to repeatedly use content, context and sub-text reflections to build up student skills
  • For guided questions related to content, context and sub-text, go this article: Making historical thinking a reality
Criteria for Selecting Sources
  1. Do not use more than 4 to 6 sources.  Especially in the beginning.
  2. Read the sources ahead of time and check for:
    • can lead to discussion related to driving question
    • accessible to students
  3. Vary types of sources
    • examples: cartoons, artwork, pictures, text, pop culture sources, maps, data tables, graphs, etc
  4. Aid students with:
    • academic vocabulary
    • contextualizing sources
    • providing legible copies of sources (if they are originally in cursive)
  5. Make sources of comparable length if you are using the jigsaw strategy to distribute / share sources.
Initiating the Investigation
  • Investigate sources and look for:
    • lies,
    • half-truths
    • exaggerations
    • rationalizations
    • obfuscations
    • Math / Science adaptations:
      • Look at strategies or concepts and identify
        • Always true
        • Sometimes true
        • Always false
        • Sometimes false
  • Students read excerpt from Theodore Roosevelt’s autobiography about the Panama Canal and ponder the Driving Question
    • What is Roosevelt doing in his autobiography (lying, telling a half-truth, exaggerating, rationalizing or obfuscating)?
    • What role did the US play in the acquisition of the territory used to construct the Panama Canal?
    • Math / Science adaptations:
      • Could present or develop circle axioms (or other conjecture types) and ask:
        • are these always, never or sometimes true?
        • In what situations are they true?
Digging Deeper
  • Students in teams are given one historical source and asked to answer questions related to the content, context and subtext of the source
    • source represent a cross section of view about the Panama Canal
    • 2 short guide questions:
      • What role did US play in the Panamanian Revolution?
      • Is there any info in this source that challenges assertions in Theodore Roosevelt’s autobiographical excerpts?
  • Students in teams discuss their sources.
    • Each team member read and analyzed different source
    • Discuss different sources citing specific examples and quotes from their sources
  • Alternatives to jigsaw approach:
    • One person reads all sources – very time consuming
    • Each group of 3 or 4 analyzes the same source and presents their findings to the class so whole class is exposed to all sources
    • Math /  Science Connection
      • Jigsaw approach – Each person in the team examine a different piece of evidence and share interpretations, observations with whole team (all evidence relates to the same concept)
      • Non-jigsaw approach – All students in same team of 2-3 solve the same problem – challenge students to develop multiple approaches to the same problem and use visuals to represent different approaches
Doing Source Work:
  • Wineburg, Historical Thinking Matters Framework
    • sourcing
    • contextualizing
    • close reading
    • corroborating
  • Hicks, et al. SCIM-C Strategy Framework
    • summarizing
    • contextualizing
    • inferring
    • monitoring
    • corroborating
  • In both approaches:
    • students need to move beyond a single source
    • examine relationships provided by each piece of evidence
    • Corroboration phase -> legitimate interpretations of historical questions
  • Math / Science connections:
    • Math framework
      • Asking questions
      • Making models to answer questions
      • Computations
      • Relating model results back to real life to check if they apply
    • Science framework
      • Making observations
      • Asking questions and hypotheses based on observations
      • Designing data procedures
      • Gathering, organizing, analyzing data
      • Drawing conclusions
    • Corroboration connections:
      • In Math – verifying that multiple approaches led to the same solution
      • In Science – verifying that different tests yield the same results
Complicating the Investigation
  • Students corroborate their evidence by completing the following sentence stem:
    • The various types of sources used to determine the purpose of Roosevelt’s autobiography created problems because …
    • Math connections
      • The various ways of representing the problem reveal different facets of the problem including …
      • The various ways of solving the problem are good for different purposes including …
    • Science connections
      • The various data sources yield different conclusions because …
      • The various data sources create problems because …
  • Types of student responses:
    • unreliable due to biased subtexts
    • sources only try to portray their own biased viewpoints
    • hard to know which source to believe
    • contradicting viewpoints, hard to tell what really happened
  • Student difficulties:
    • Students struggle to make connections among content, context and subtext
  • Another question that guides student corroboration of various sources: The subtext of the various documents was important to consider because …
    • Math / Science connection
      • The contexts / subtexts of the data are important to consider because …
    • Student responses:
      • explains why the source was written
      • explain variety of opinions
      • explains variety of evidence used by sources
      • helped convey reliability of sources
      • insights into intentions of authors
      • helped to tease out truth in sources
      • helped show biased in sources
  • Overall when trying to interpret events from the past, you need to …”
    • Math / Science connection
      • Overall, when trying to interpret data, you need to …
    • Student responses
      • consider sources with different viewpoints
      • research background info that reveals subtexts of sources
      • compare information from different sources
    • Student difficulties
      • believe that bias negates validity of a source (mathematical approach to history)
Student Interpretations – Transition Quick Write
  • Transition quick write at end of day one: Attempt to answer the driving question
    • Look fors in student quick writes:
      • evidence from sources
      • perspectives from multiple sources
    • Math / Science connection
      • Use driving question as quick write prompt
    • Student difficulties
      • Using evidence
      • Bridging content, context, and subtext in interpretations
      • Mathematical approach to history (problematic approach)
        • require consensus among sources
        • require lack of bias in sources
Returning to the Investigation:
  • End analysis by revealing most controversial and faceted source to students
  • Math / Science connection
    • Could reserve most nuanced and controversial piece of data for release near middle or end of project
Conclusions:
  • Analyzing sources’ content, context and subtext can help student investigate the past rather than just memorize and regurgitate text excerpts
  • Teacher resistance
    • kids can’t do this work
      • responses
        • studies have shown that this type of work can be done by elementary school students
        • teacher perseverance helps students acquire student skills
        • historical investigations make history more interesting
        • prepares students with skills they can use in any career
3-sowhat
Finding the right evidence and fashioning the right driving question can make boring topics interesting to students.  Releasing evidence at various points in the project can start and reinvigorate conversations related to the driving question.  Using content, context and subtext to analyze evidence can teach students how to investigate, question and interpret evidence.

 

4-nowwhat
Preparation Steps
  • Collect evidence (data, sources, etc) that students can use to explore content by investigating a driving question
  • Design driving question
  • Design thinking sheets that help students examine content, context and subtext of sources
  • Design prompts to facilitate conversations that corroborate evidence – see above for examples.
Early Implementation Steps
  • Use a controversial or provocative source to introduce a driving question
  • Assign sources (various) to students working in teams
  • Individually assign students to examine the content, context, and subtext to different sources within a team.
  • Get students to answer prompts as a team that get them to corroborate their sources and formulate interpretations that address the driving question
Advanced Implementation Steps
  • Gather evidence and sources that uncovers current problems that relate to central concepts in your course. Design project and driving questions around that set of sources.

 

5-relatedstuff

106: Setting & Testing Hypotheses

1-sources

 

2-what

 

Screen Shot 2016-05-09 at 2.42.58 PM

 

Research on Generating & Testing Hypotheses:
  1. Hypothesis creating & testing can be approach inductively and deductively.
    • deductive thinking – using a general rule to make predictions
      • to facilitate this type of thinking, first front load general principles and then ask students to make predictions based on these
    • inductive thinking – drawing new conclusions from current evidence
      • to facilitate this type of thinking, first get students to generalize evidence and then use those generalizations to make predictions
      • this is tricker to pull off than leading deductive thinking because it requires selecting the right experiences and using the right prompts to guide students to effective and accurate generalizations
    • real thinking is often a combination of deductive and inductive thinking
  2. Students need to clearly explain hypotheses and conclusions
    • explain inductive line of reasoning (connecting observations to predictions and conclusions) in written form
Classroom Tips for Generating & Testing Hypotheses:
 
6 Types of Making / Testing Hypotheses:
  1. Systems analysis – guide students to think through how a system would change if one aspect of it changed
    • students explain parts and purpose of system
    • students describe how parts affect each other
    • students identify part of systems and describe how changing that part might affect the rest of the system
    • students test the hypothesis through experiments or simulations
  2. Problem solving – selecting solutions that meet specific constraints
    • students define the problem or goal
    • students describe the problem constraints and challenges
    • students identify solutions
    • students test solutions – test prototypes or use simulations
    • students explain whether hypothesis was correct and whether or not to test new solutions
  3. Historical investigation – constructing plausible scenarios of past events
    • students analyze and describe historical event to be investigated
    • students identify what is known about event and what is not known or up to controversy
    • students propose a historical scenario
    • students research information to test accuracy of historical scenario
  4. Invention – using knowledge to create new products and solutions
    • students identify a need to situation to improve
    • students identify standards related to need or improvement
    • student brainstorm possible solutions
    • student models solutions
    • student test models of solutions
    • students modify solutions to better meet standards
  5. Experimental inquiry – using experiments to test hypotheses can be used in science and other subjects
    • students make observations
    • student apply related theories to explain what was observed
    • students used related theories to develop hypotheses that explain observations
    • students engage in activity or experiment to test hypothesis
    • students explain results of activity or experiment – compare to hypothesis and decide whether to conduct more experiments
  6. Decision making – hypothesis testing can help with decisions that select things with the most or lest of somethings
    • students select a choice and identify its alternatives
    • students identify criteria that will be used to make decision
    • students use criteria to rate alternatives
    • students calculate a weighted sum of each score generated from ratings in previous step
    • students use scores to compare alternatives
    • students analyze selected alternative and decide whether or not to adjust criteria or weighting factors
Making sure students can explain hypotheses:
  • provide templates that guide students to provide acceptable evidence for hypotheses
  • use sentence stems
  • audio record student explanations of hypotheses
  • co-develop and implement rubrics that assess quality of hypotheses and related explanations
  • provide public presentation opportunities

 

3-sowhat
Generating and testing hypotheses is a powerful way of developing understanding that is not limited to science classes.  The six hypothesis types above demonstrate how hypotheses can be used in disciplines inside and outside of science.  Using various processes to make and test different types of hypothesis can teach students how to take intellectual risks and learn from them.

 

3-sowhat

Preparation Steps
  • Investigate the types of problem solving involved in applying upcoming content
  • Decide which hypothesis model (see above) fits with the problem solving models in upcoming content
  • Research, gather, and design strategies and tools that can facilitate student thinking through a specific type of hypothesis making & testing
Early Implementation Steps
  • Guide students through making and testing specific types of hypotheses
  • Have students reflect on how making and testing hypotheses is affecting their products and understandings
Advanced Implementation Steps
  • Have students reflect on how hypothesis testing relates to their own personal lives – especially as it related to goal setting and problem solving
  • Guide students through different types of hypothesis testing over various projects – have students compare/contrast their learning experiences while making and testing different types of hypotheses

 

5-relatedstuff