Ana Parra Martin

ED127
3/18/15
In the Classroom Reflection #1
1. Background
The video clip I presented was part of a 5th grade science lesson in the classroom
where I am student teaching at Linden STEAM Academy in Malden, MA. For the past
few months we have been studying electricity and electrical circuits. The students each
have circuit boxes with their own D-cell battery, small light bulb, wires, and battery and
light bulb holders. We started out having them experiment in pairs, and as we moved
further into the unit we let them join up in groups so they could build larger and more
complex circuits using joint materials. This lesson actually took place during one of our
ELA periods and, prior to experimenting, my mentor teacher had them read short, leveled
books on electricity as a way to include some literacy into the science lesson. She asked
them to focus on the differences between series and parallel circuits, which we had just
started learning about. They had begun trying to make their own series and parallel
circuits in a previous lesson, and in this lesson they continue their exploration. As they
worked in groups, my mentor teacher and I walked around checking in with them. This
clip shows the very end of the lesson, when my mentor teacher had called everyone over
to observe what one group had found, and I am trying to get the students to attempt
making sense of the phenomenon. It was an unplanned teaching moment, and I wanted
to engage the class in a short discussion in the time before we had to switch for math.
This was also our last science lesson before our week-long February vacation.

2. Subject Matter
At this point in the unit, the students know how to create a closed circuit.
They know that both sides of the battery must be connected, as well as both the metal tip
and threaded base of the light bulb, and that electricity will not flow through an open
circuit that has any gaps or breaks. Having explored different materials for their
conducting/insulating properties in a lesson I conducted several weeks before, they also
know that metals are good conductors because they allow electricity to travel through a
closed circuit and they are able to identify which parts of the circuit act as insulators.
I have been trying really hard in science to get my students to really think, to
reason through what they are observing, and to come up with ways to test their theories.
This has proven challenging so far, as they are mostly used to copying down notes from
the board and learning facts that they then recall without necessarily understanding
their meaning. I have also felt that doing the required readings from their textbook or
leveled readers takes away part of the exploration aspect that I am trying to encourage.
In the clip, a group of students had made a large series circuit made up of 5
batteries and 5 light bulbs. They noticed different levels of brightness in the light bulbs
depending on the orientation of the batteries in the circuit. Below is a simplified diagram
of the phenomenon the students are observing:

A) Bulbs brightest

B) Bulbs dimmer

C) Bulbs dimmest

3. Student Thinking
From the very beginning, the students seem to have strong feelings about what is
right or wrong with these circuits, as they use these terms frequently in their
descriptions. This is probably influenced by what they have learnt so far from the
readings, from notes they copied down, and from previous experiments and discussions.
Jordan, the student who has noticed the phenomenon is clearly very excited to show the
class what he has found: What I noticed was wrong with this group was that they had
the two same charges facing each other, and they were more dim. Then I said they had
this wrong, and when I switched it, it made it brighter.
I connected this to what two other students, Samantha and Ashley, had been
telling me only a few minutes before, as I was hoping to include them in the
conversation. They had previously observed an experiment with similar results, a 2battery, 2-bulb setup, with the batteries facing in different directions, in which the bulbs
had been very dim instead of completely off (as I would have expected). This result was
informing their predictions for the experiments they had been setting up during this class.
When I asked the students for ideas as to how to explain Jordans observation,
Angelo provides: Maybe because when you have two batteries and you connect them
together Its supposed to be negative and positive, not positive and positive. During a
previous lesson, he and his group members had come to realize, through trial and error,
that they had to arrange their batteries all in the same orientation (the positive end of one,
touching the negative end of the next). I had stressed to them that it was a very important
observation and that they should write it down and share it with the class. However, it is
clear from his its supposed to be that he does not fully understand why this is.

Pedro, who has a great scientific mind and can be very insightful, suggests: It
was working because there were other charges still pushing in, like other negatives and
positives. Pointing to the other four batteries that have the same orientation, he says, So
all those charges were still going through, so it was lighting. Later, he says power
sources instead of charges when referring to the batteries. It seems like he is
envisioning batteries generating electricity because they have these two different types of
charges, positive and negative, on either end. This could come from prior knowledge that
electricity is made up of charges, combined with the obvious labeling of the ends of the
battery with a + or symbol. When he continues, [the switched battery] might not have
been working because two positive energies wouldnt work together, it sounds like he
believes both types of charges are necessary to power the circuit. His statement, Because
positive and positive repel, but positive and negative make energy, confirms this. He
then adds, Attract, after someone else whispers it to him and, from observing other
students describe electricity in similar ways, I wonder if he believes it is this attraction
that creates the pushing of electricity through the circuit.
At this point, it seems Pedro has a theory that when all batteries are in same
orientation, they are all providing the circuit with energy. When one is switched around,
there is less energy for the circuit, since that battery is no longer working. Jordan explains
that the bulbs are still lit because the battery holder is still metal [] and the battery is
also metal so [the electricity] can go through. He is clearly recalling my lesson on
conductors and insulators here, remembering that metals are good conductors and you
need metal-metal contact to achieve a closed circuit for the electricity to travel. Samantha
chimes in here with some prior knowledge: Positive and positive, like magnets, they

repel each other, connecting the batterys two types of charges to how magnets work.
Unlike Pedro, she believes, [The battery] was working, but its just going to repel each
other. It is possible she is imagining the actual batteries repelling or pushing away from
each other, just like magnets with like poles do. She doesnt think this stops the batteries
from producing energy; it might just stop that energy from going anywhere.
To test Pedros hypothesis, Jordan suggests a great experiment: Take out a
battery. This way we would be able to observe if indeed we were seeing the brightness
produced by 4 batteries, instead of the 5. Pedro seems to agree with Jordan and reiterates
the experiment design: Maybe if when you turn the battery around, since its going to be
dim, we take it out when its dim, to see if it was powering [the circuit] when it was off.
Its a shame we could not compare all three setups side by side, but all students
seem to agree on the result that it (circuit B) looks different from the previous scenarios
(circuits A and C). Jimmy summarizes the observation very nicely: Its like medium. Its
bright and dim. Pedro immediately launches into trying to make sense of the data: It
must have been giving off not too much power, only little amounts. However, when I
remind him that this 4-bulb circuit is brighter than the previous 5-bulb one with the
switched battery, he revises his hypothesis: Or was it pulling in energy? [] Since it
was in the wrong position, it might have been taking in energy instead of pushing it out.
This is such an interesting idea! Pedro seems to be imagining this battery working in
reverse, taking energy away from the circuit instead of providing it with energy, due to its
reverse orientation. Clearly convinced by his own theory, he elaborates, Since its in the
right position right now, its releasing the energy it might have pulled in. [] [The
battery] must have been pulling in energy, then when you put it in the right position, its

releasing all the energy back. He could be picturing the flipped battery being charged by
soaking in energy from the circuit (provided by the other batteries), and then returning all
that energy back to the circuit when its correct orientation is reestablished. Does he
believe rechargeable batteries work in this way? I now wish I could ask him if he thinks
charging a battery like this, by allowing it to pull in energy from other batteries, would
make a light bulb brighter than normal if then used in a single-battery setup. Pedro (as
well as several other students) definitely seems very invested in trying to figure out this
phenomenon, and is using our data as evidence to reason through different options that
would explain it which is exactly what I would like to see all of my students doing!

4. Teaching Response
Considering the constraints of this moment in the lesson it was a spontaneous
and unplanned discussion, we had limited time before switching classrooms, and it was
the last science lesson before vacation I am pleased that, for the most part, I was able to
draw out student reasoning without leading them too much and influencing their words
with my own ideas. In addition, although I was not very successful at engaging the entire
class, there were several moments when I called on other students to join in the
conversation and share their opinions on the theories the key players were exploring.
I realize that part of the reason more students were not participating may have
been that it was all happening so fast. Those who were deeply invested in the
conversation were on the same page as me in terms of what we were observing, but other
students may have not even had the chance to clearly see what the phenomenon we were
talking about was. I also may have taken some of their prior knowledge for granted based

on what we had explored and discussed in previous lessons. For example, assuming they
were all clear on closed circuits and troubleshooting, at one point I lead them to join the
wires together, bypassing the empty battery holder. I did this in the interest of time, as I
wanted to achieve more depth of discussion on the phenomenon we were invested in
before we were cut short. However, it is possible that some students were not as clear on
certain key concepts as I had thought, and would have benefited from the extra minutes
of grappling with this issue.
I think that having a better understanding of the phenomenon myself I was only
able to completely reason through it after the lesson might have helped me know what
specific questions to ask the students that would guide them towards a collective
understanding. For example, once they had observed that circuits B and C were not equal
(circuit C was even dimmer), I might have suggested taking one more battery out of
circuit B. Time permitting, I would have also liked to have them set up circuits A, B and
C next to each other so that they could compare them side by side.
If a similar moment in class happened again, I would like to do certain things
differently. Clearly, I wish we had had more time to debrief on this interesting
observation, and that I had been able to engage more of the students in the discussion.
Next time, I would pause to diagram the different scenarios on the board or flipchart, as
well as create a record of emerging ideas and theories. This would allow more students to
access the case study and become involved in the sense making. If our science lessons
werent so disjointed, I would like to readdress the phenomenon during the next class
period so that we could build on it together and design new experiments to keep
exploring. I could also use my newly introduced science dialogue in their notebooks as

a space for students to individually attempt generating some ideas on the subject. This
would help those students with some theories already in mind to begin articulating them
more clearly, and it would allow the students who did not participate in the discussion
some time to reason through it and become involved.

5. Planning & Structured Response

For the most part, I am happy with the general structure of the lesson as an openended, exploration of electricity and circuits, as it allows the students to go in many
different directions based on their own interests. However, I would like to find a better
way to tie in all their discoveries as a class, to generate a group understanding of the
material. Recording our progress on chart paper would be one good option to keep track
of all their ideas. It would help remind them of what we had previously talked about, and
it would help me orchestrate discussions that made more sense as a sequence, building
student knowledge about different aspects of the subject matter. I would also like to
design the entire unit along these lines, rather than being constrained by having to
cover certain material for their end-of-the-year MCAS test, or doing the required
textbook readings before they have had a chance to think on their own first.
Electricity and circuits is such a generative topic that can lend itself to so many
levels of complexity. I feel that maybe for 5th grade, we have too many variables at play
different brands of batteries, different types of wire (Cu or Al), and different types of
small light bulbs (round or elongated). These can all affect the outcomes of experiments
and require reasoning that maybe the students arent yet ready for. I wonder if trying to
control for these variables until a basic level of understanding was reached would help

the students in their discovery process. Spending some lessons talking about experimental
design and variable control would also be beneficial for the students in trying to unpack
some of these ideas and intriguing results, not only with their circuits, but also for any
future science unit. Additionally, I want to give the students as much freedom to play as
possible, but initially restricting the complexity of their circuits to a maximum of 4battery, 4-bulb setups may be helpful. If the students are having difficulty reasoning
through simple circuits, adding more materials makes it even harder to figure out what is
really going on.
Finally, although I have already tried to stress this during my lessons, I want to
get my students in the habit of recording their observations and ideas in their notebooks. I
want them to learn to be more systematic in planning and reasoning through their
experiments, so as to engage them in the scientific method. I want to encourage them to
ask more questions, to construct hypotheses and analyze their data to draw conclusions.

6. Peer Discussion
Having the opportunity to discuss this case with my MAT peers in class helped
me deconstruct the clip to take a closer look at my students thinking. It also gave me the
chance to reflect on my own practice and notice my deliberate or spontaneous teacher
moves. My peers gave me great suggestions on how to address some of the questions
and concerns I had about this moment, such as good places to pause and record emerging
ideas so as to engage more of the students in making sense of the phenomena. The
hardest question to tackle was how to get my students to think more creatively about
science and not simply regurgitate facts they do not fully comprehend. I think my peers

agreed with me that much has to do with the classroom culture and the structure of
science units as a whole more focus on sense making and less on textbook content!
After reflecting further on this science lesson, there are a few more questions that
come to mind that I would like to ask my peers. For example, I have noticed that, unless
specifically called on, many of the girls in my classroom are less willing to share their
thoughts during whole-class science discussions than the boys are. However, when I
work with them in small groups they have great and insightful ideas, and clearly enjoy
the hands-on exploration activities as much as the boys do. It is true that my classroom
has particularly strong male personalities, and also that we continuously have difficulty
increasing voluntary participation in whole-class activities, however I am concerned
about the potential for stereotype threat for the girls in science. I want to make sure they
feel like they are incredibly capable and that they have the potential to be great scientists.
In addition to struggling to get my students to think outside the box and make
sense of science without leading them to the right answers, I sometimes have difficulty
balancing student thinking with my teaching objectives. I want to create the time and
space for my students to share their thoughts and connections, but it is hard to know
when to redirect a class discussion if a particular line of reasoning is not very relevant, is
too confusing for the majority of the class to follow, or is taking up too much time.
Clearly all these issues are complex and take plenty of experience, of trial and
error, and being reflective with ones practice to achieve. As a new teacher, it is definitely
not only helpful, but really important, to have a group of peers or colleagues to debrief
with and bounce ideas off of!