Introduction

Chantelle White s3382680

Science Principles and Practices
TCHE2435
Assessment Two: Science Teaching
Reflection

The following reflections detail my experiences as a Pre-Service Teacher on a five-day

placement (every Thursday for five weeks), at a public Primary School in Melbournes
northern suburbs. I was in a double classroom with two grade-3 classes, who joined as
one group for most subjects, including Science. A fellow PST was in the other grade, but
generally, the four of us (two mentors and two PSTs) were going to team-teach the two
classes. The placement had a Science focus, and fortunately for us, our classes had a
Science block every Thursday afternoon. My reflections use Gibbs Reflective Cycle
(1998) whereby I follow the framework stages of:
1. Description
2. Feelings,
3. Evaluation
4. Analysis
5. Conclusion
6. Action Plan
The purpose for using this model in this assignment is to participate in critical reflection
and provide scope to challenge my original assumptions and recognize my existing
strengths and weaknesses, in the effort to inform and influence self-improvement and
better practice. In my reflections I will refer to Research and Literature when it has
informed my practice or thinking.
This paper concludes with a brief self-assessment based on my performance during this

Reflection One: Learning

Science content
Describe
On my placement, all the grade-three classes were beginning a Science unit on Earth
and Space. The unit had already been constructed by the grade-three teaching team,
and included nine lesson plans, of which I was expected to conduct the first five. The
unit sequence, and all the lessons closely resembled Primary Connections: Night and
Day (Australian Academy of Science 2013). Learning and understanding Science
content was not too difficult for me, however deconstructing my understanding, and
how it has evolved over the years presented a challenge. I spent a lot of time revising
my content knowledge and re-conceptualizing the ideas in an attempt to understand
the level of prior-knowledge grade-threes may bring. My approach to relearning the
content was varied; I discussed the concepts with my siblings and practiced the
experiments with them. I consulted the Teacher background information sections of
the Primary Connections (PC) Unit and studied kid-friendly YouTube videos and visuals
to consolidate my understanding, and importantly to understand the detail of
complexity of the understanding that was required for year-three.
Feelings
I found it challenging to deconstruct understandings I took for granted about
phenomena such as why night and day happen. I felt a lot of responsibility when
teaching students about concepts such as the Earths rotation causing day/ night
because I was potentially challenging their ideas that the moon follows their car home,
or that the sun and moon essentially rise and set from a flat horizon as if they are
moving, rather than us.
Evaluation
I think I was successful in learning (and relearning) the Science content, and delivering
it in a way that was effective for kids and my mentors comments support this. The

students work samples prove to me that content was understood from my lessons as I
compared their thinking before and after learning. Although I was confident in the
social-constructivist pedagogy, and could see the opportunities for students to realize
knowledge for themselves, I was less confident that my explanations were coming from
a sophisticated conceptual territory (Leach & Scott 2002) even though I put a lot of
effort into learning it.
Analysis
I think my strategies and effort to familiarize with the content was effective, but my
teaching of it could have been better given more time to become confident in it. To
learn effectively takes effort and the learner is responsible for it- this is true, especially
when the teacher is a learner too (Skamp & Preston 2015).
Conclusion
Given the circumstances and taking into respect the limited amount of time I had at my
disposal, and the level of Science understanding I had going into the placement, I feel
my effort to learn the content was satisfactory. The experience taught me the
importance of building my own repertoire of Science understanding, and distinguishing
the difference between learning and knowing (Skamp & Preston 2015).
Action plan
To benefit my future practice and prepare for more fluent, authentic teaching, I need to
spend time learning the Science content in the Victorian Curriculum. My first point of
reference will be PC (AAS 2013) and Teaching Science Constructively (Skamp & Preston
2015), two resources trusted by many Australian Educators, and I will continue to build
my collection of resources including visuals and videos that articulate the content in
kid-friendly dialogue. I intend to work on my confidence delivering Science
explanations, which I believe will develop alongside my own conceptual development.

Reflection Two: Organizing for learning: the selection of

Science content and learning activities
Describe
Primary Connections: Night and Day was the unit to be taught across all grade-three
classes at my placement school. Therefore content/ activities were pre-set and I had
limited scope to make input. Nevertheless, I was pleased to see a PC unit in practice.
The unit, and the lessons embodied constructivist sequences/ narrative with clear
conceptual focuses (Skamp & Preston 2015). This pedagogy recognizes that knowledge
is accumulated, gradually refined and combined to form ever-richer cognitive structures
(Skamp & Preston 2015). The unit (see appendix 1) was developed according to the 5Es
model: Engage, Explore, Explain, Elaborate, Evaluate (AAS 2013). To complement this
schemata, each lesson was designed to support constructivist, and social-constructivist
learning with sequence and activities that provide students the opportunity to realize
knowledge through experiences and discursive practices (Skamp & Preston 2015). I
created extended versions of the lesson outlines provided in order to make this
sequence clearer to me, an example can be seen in Appendix 2.
Feelings
The narrative-structure of the lessons made me feel confident that I was providing
effective, constructivist learning experiences for the students. I was thankful that the
students were familiar with the PC Science lessons and that their teachers had
established clear expectations for collaborative Science work, abiding by the PC Team
Roles. I felt disadvantaged not knowing the students level of understanding beginning
the unit, and was disappointed that there was not much room for me to do diagnostic
assessment.

Evaluation
The changes in the students initial explanations of Science concepts, to accurate and
expressive justifications using sophisticated scientific language, proves that personal
meaning making was being generated through the experiences in the lessons (Skamp &
Preston 2015). By only teaching the first five lessons of the unit, I did not get to observe
students participating in the Elaborate and Evaluate phases of the 5Es model and
therefore did not get to experience entirety of the 5E model in practice.
Analysis
The research argues that schemata such as the 5E model are necessary in supporting
conceptual change (Vosniadou 2012). The existing classroom expectations of PC lesson
structure and practices including collaborative work using team roles assisted in
smooth implementation of lessons. Complementary to this, students were well aware of
the 5E model, which supported their engagement and gave them a clear expectation of
where the learning was heading.
Conclusion
This experience has allowed me to observe the effectiveness of the PC unit and lesson
structure. I gained a better understanding of how the 5Es, Team Skills and Team Roles
work, and how they support effective learning experiences. In future I will aim to
conduct Science units/ lessons in the same, or at least similar format to Primary
Connections.
Action plan
I will spend more time becoming familiar with PC and the theories supporting the
strategies it uses. I will endeavor to explore more literature about the benefits of the
constructivist learning approach and the reasons that lessons with clear narrative are
so successful.

Reflection Three: Assessment

Describe
After my first lesson and realizing that the lessons provided did not have much
emphasis on collecting assessment data, I decided to create worksheets (Appendix 4)
that would allow me to monitor the meaning-making over the remaining lessons. The
sheets were designed as spaces for the students to write down/ draw their initial
thinking on the lesson focus, for example Why the sun and moon appear the same size
when we know they are much different, after activating prior knowledge, but before
any learning/ exploring/ investigating. There was space on the sheets for students to
return at the end of the lesson and manipulate, add to or change their initial
explanations/ diagrams/ annotated drawings if and when concept development
happened for them (Thomas 2012). Another intention for these sheets was to develop
the students metacognitive skills, by asking them to take responsibility for their
learning, by identifying and correcting inconsistences (Wandersee, Mintzes & Novak
1995). This was influenced by my awareness of the limited time I had to teach the
concepts and the large size of the group (approx. 60 students), meaning there was no
room to re-teach previous concepts.
Feelings
I felt overwhelmed by the depth of understanding students were expected to gain in
five lessons. I felt like expecting these students to change their thinking from the moon
follows my car home, to understanding concepts such as Earths rotation, the size of
the sun and moon, and how shadows are made, was over-complex for that time-scale. I
felt challenged to create something that could be used by the diverse ability levels in
the two classes, and limited to making one, universal tool since I had not witnessed

differentiation for abilities in the classes so far. I also felt limited by the concrete lesson
I was expected to give and the way I could include an assessment tool without
disrupting the set lesson. I didnt like using a worksheet but I knew that these students
were used to them and I deliberately chose to start the sentences to cater to the
students who would struggle with this. I felt I was not servicing all the students the best
I could given these limitations and didnt like giving the same task to everyone because
I didnt believe it would be challenging enough for some.
Evaluation
The worksheets were received well by my mentors and the students who all
completed them successfully. The students familiarity with worksheets made this
additional activity easy to implement and didnt interfere with the planned lesson. The
worksheets served as effective tools for formative assessment that made it easy for me
to see the improvement in students understanding (Skamp & Preston 2015), and
identify the students who required more explicit teaching. Representational
negotiation was evident when comparing the predictions to the What I learnt spaces
of the worksheets that gained accurate use of scientific language and by the
modifications to the annotated diagrams which expressed comprehensive
understanding. A student work-sample that shows this achievement is in Appendix 3.
Not seeing the second half of the unit was disadvantageous to my experience as I am
missing out on observing the students evolving understanding, at the Elaborate and
Evaluate phases, where they begin applying their learning. An important point about
assessment is that it shouldnt serve superficially as data that shows where students
are at and where they need to go, but rather how to get there (Skamp & Preston 2015).
Unfortunately, due to the fact that as a PST I couldnt change the activities in the
upcoming lessons to scaffold to the challenging areas, and in differentiated ways that
were beneficial to different learning styles.
Analysis
The logical sequence of the unit and lessons and the addition of my worksheets
definitely helped me to assess constructivist learning. Discussion, observation and
written work provide opportunity for assessment, but the talk, writing and actions
pupils display their state of understanding is the space where major advancements in
learning can be observed (Black & William 2001). This notion that the morphing
language proves growth in learning (Black 2012; Cowie 2012), is acclaimed
consistently throughout the research. It inspired a thought of another way I could have
documented the learning to explicitly prove the learning advancements. Creating a
video-diary/ documentary of the students participating in the unit would serve as
diagnostic, formative and summative assessment that follows the students through
their constructive, meaning-making journey in a creative way that could be a sharable
resource. Obviously I didnt have the ability to do this as a PST.
Conclusion
This experience taught me the importance of diagnostic assessment to inform teaching
from a relevant starting point. I learnt the value of formative assessment and the
effortlessness of incorporating it into a lesson by simply asking for predictions and
conclusions. If I had the scope I would use assessment to inform future teaching/
learning activities and include differentiation and explicit scaffolding where needed, and
perhaps test-out a documentary-type assessment like the one I described above as way
of adding a different, exciting and creative form of assessment that can be engaged
with by students, teachers, parents and the community.
Action plan
In my own practice, I will ensure I collect diagnostic assessment before beginning
teaching to properly understand where my students are at and what knowledge needs
to be taught. This can also inform grouping strategies and activities such as creating

mixed-ability groups to promote peer mentoring, or addressing specific groups of

students to explicitly scaffold learning needs. I will incorporate formative and
summative assessment practices into Science units to assess against Curriculum
standards.

Reflection Four: Pedagogical strategies used to promote

students understanding
Describe
Students were expected to reconstruct their existing ideas in a social and participatory
context, inspired by the research of Vygotsky (1978) who tells us that collaborative
learning aids skill and concept development. We put strong emphasis on teamwork in
our lessons and spent a lot of time articulating good team skills and team roles as
outlined by PC. Prior to our first lesson I asked our mentors to create small, mixedability groups so as to promote this peer mentoring and skill-transfer. Constructivist
learning literature says we learn from each other (Vygotsky 1978) and this is why our
lessons were consistent is providing opportunities for rich discussion allowing students
to engage with each other, and their teachers, in Science talk to encourage personal
meaning-making. During collaborative tasks I observed students encouraging each
other and making true efforts to explain concepts to their peers in language that would
communicate the understanding accurately and effectively. There were minimal
negative experiences within groups such as dobbing on students who do not
participate, or become too dominant.
Feelings
I felt confident in social-constructivist approach but slightly nervous as to how smoothly
it would happen when I didnt know the students well. I was grateful that my mentors
shared my opinion in creating mixed-ability groups to promote growth in students Zone
of Proximal Development (Vygotsky 1978). I was excited to see these students work in
groups, as I had not seen it in their other subjects. Coming from a Communications
background, I was enthusiastic to explain the prevalence of collaboration and
communication in Science, and most professions now as a way of sharing and
developing bigger and better ideas.
Evaluation
The structure of constructivist Science learning was already established in the
classroom and students were aware of clear expectations for their Science collaborative
work. These factors were advantageous in the productivity of my lessons, and meant
that time wasnt wasted learning about the team roles, or the 5Es from scratch, and
students were ready to engage in the lessons using these structures. Ideally, I would
have liked to know the students better to understand what personal and social skills
were developing through these activities, and creating groups accordingly.
Analysis
The socio-constructivist is much different, and much less traditional than a transmissive
approach (Hewson, Beeth & Thorley 1998) but yet I saw significant advancement in
concept-development among the students.
The incorporation of teamwork and collaborative learning inspired rich discussion and
expressive and accurate Science talk, which are proof of conceptual understanding
(Black 2012; Cowie 2012). Overall, I noticed the dynamics of collaborative meaningmaking in science investigations and witnessed students using metacognition as they
applied language and understandings they had learnt from each other (Skamp &
Preston) to their discussion-contributions and What I learnt sections on their
worksheets.
Conclusion

This pedagogical approach would be enhanced with the time to learn about the
students skills, interests and capabilities, and to be able to understand better what
achievements are being made in their personal and social development. This
experience allowed me to see successful social-constructivism as I saw low students
graduate to the same level of understanding as the high kids thanks to peer
mentoring, and the high kids engaging in deeper thinking and asking questions
beyond the scope we were exploring (of course I had these students write these
questions in their Science Journals as What I want to learn about, and encouraged
them to seek the information themselves, as unfortunately, I didnt have the time to
teach them). I observed the PC structures such as the 5Es and Team Roles work
effectively and contribute to high productivity and high-level thinking and concept
development.
Action plan
In future I plan to continue teaching Science with a social constructivist pedagogical
approach. I believe the success of the lessons and the outcomes achieved support this
decision. In my own practice I would have better knowledge of my students and create
teams to serve to promote healthy personal and social development skills and to create
and maintain a supportive, friendly and collaborative classroom environment.

Conclusion
Through these reflections I have been able to recognize my strengths and weaknesses in
the areas of Learning Science content, Planning for learning, Assessment, and
Pedagogical approaches to Science. This process has informed what I need to concentrate
on to better my future practice. Through engaging in critical reflection I have been able to
explicitly see where research and theory has informed my practice and where I can apply
it to become a more effective teacher. This experience has been valuable in preparing me
for my own practice.

Self-assessment of Assignment 2
In this assignment I feel I did the following things well
- Acted professionally in tense circumstances; Fellow PST continued to be
unprepared, not reply to emails from our mentors or me and was not enthusiastic
about tasks we were asked to do. Our mentors complimented me on my approach to
include him when I created worksheets, restructured the lesson plans etc. even
though my effort was not reciprocated
- Worked well in a team-teaching environment; was respectful and professional
engaging with fellow PST and mentors in all lessons
- Implementing knowledge learnt in Science Principles and Practices class into
Science classes; Used 5Es, Word Wall, Science Journals, Team Roles, Constructivist
approach, collaborative learning strategies etc.
- Interacted well with students and staff
- Made valuable reflections that were informed by Literature and theory; although I
would have liked to include more detail but was unable to do so due to word limit
From completing this assignment I think I need to work on
- Confidence!!! I think I really needed to approach my fellow PST about his lack of
enthusiasm and preparation. I was conscious his behaviour may be giving PSTs a bad
reputation as a whole group, but I tried to believe it would resurrect itself over time.
It didnt, and I probably should have done something about it.
- Utilizing the Word Wall tool; the way my mentors explained and demonstrated it,
the word wall was just used to put new words that came up during the lesson, and
then they were never readdressed, at least not in the time I was there. I dont think
this is the most effective way to teach new words and understanding and I would
have liked to do more with the word wall, but again, given the short amount of time,
and the strict guidelines as to how to conduct the activities, this was hard to do.
Overall, I would award myself the following mark for the individual
component
NN, PP, CR, DN, HD
Why?
I feel I did a really good job on this placement and that my mentors feedback
(Appendix 4) supports this. I feel I am obviously still learning and have the potential
to teach Science constructively a lot better, given time and experience and hopefully
less boundaries on what I can and cant do. I think I need to improve the way I use
the Word-Wall tool and learn more about the reasons for this, and other tools, such as

Appendix
Appendix 1: Earth and Space Science Unit provided by school- to show the
enforcement of the 5E model
Appendix 2: Personal use/ extended version of Lesson 3 with an emphasis on the
constructivist narrative structure
Appendix 3: Student sample of completed worksheet from Lesson 3 showing
conceptual development and constructive thinking
Appendix 4: Both worksheets I made for Lessons 3-5
Appendix 5: Mentor feedback sheets

Appendix 1: Earth and Space Science Unit provided by school- to show the
enforcement of the 5E model

Appendix 2: Personal use/ extended version of Lesson 3 with an emphasis on the constructivist narrative structure

Title

Night and Day, Lesson 3: Shapes and

Sizes pt 2

Topic and Focus Why do we have night and day?

Duration of
lesson
Year Level

55min

Class
Size

55

Aus VELS
Science Understanding
Earths rotation on its axis causes regular changes, including Day and Night
Science as a Human Endeavour
Science involves making predictions and describing patterns and relationships
Science Inquiry Skills
- With guidance, identify questions in familiar contexts that can be investigated scientifically and predict what
might happen based on prior knowledge
- Suggest ways to plan and conduct investigations to find answers to questions
- Safely use appropriate materials, tools or equipment to make and record observations, using formal
measurements and digital technologies as appropriate
- Use a range of methods including tables and simple column graphs to represent data and to identify
patterns and trends
- Compare results with predictions, suggesting possible reasons for findings
- Reflect on the investigation, including whether a test was fair or not
- Represent and communicate ideas and findings in a variety of ways such as diagrams, physical
representations and simple reports
Learning Intention: We are working in collaborative groups to explore and investigate why the sun and the
moon appear the same size when we know they are much different
Key Vocabulary List: Explore, Investigate, Predict, Sun, Moon, Earth, Night, Day, Shadow, Rotation,
Distance, Closer, Further
Assessment Strategies:
- Formative assessment during introduction and conclusion of lesson to evaluate constructivist learning and
continual meaning making (in this lesson independently, and as a stage in learning in the overall unit)
- Checking that students understand:
* The moon is smaller than the sun

* The moon is much closer to the Earth and thats why it looks the same size as the sun
- Informal assessment/ observation of team-work and collaborative skills
Resources and Materials
-

Basketball, tennis ball and marble for each team

Camera
Large area to conduct investigation
Science journals (with lesson 1s diagrams of how night and day happens)
Work sheets (one per student)
5 Es Model laminated cards for whiteboard
Team Roles laminated posters for whiteboard
Effective teamwork laminated poster for whiteboard
Whiteboard markers

Set up before class

- Write learning intention on whiteboard

- Have 5 Es cards, Team Roles posters and Effective Teamwork posters near whiteboard

Digital Technology Integration

- Use of cameras to record observations and findings (stress the point that scientists keep proof of their observations and
findings and that photos are a good way to do this)
Stage of
lesson

Student
Action /Tasks

Time

Introductio
n

- Sitting in shared 15
area for intro and mins
discussion of
lesson focus
- Making
predictions for the
investigation

Differentiated Learning
Considerations

Teacher Action

- Worksheet prepared to
accommodate all writing
abilities (i.e. wont take the
slower students
significantly longer to
complete because sentence
starters are provided
- Teachers to walk around
during task and assist
where needed

- Ask students to sit in the shared area

- Explain that this afternoon we are going to continue our
science investigation about night and day
- Ask a student to read the learning intention from the
board
- Ask What are the key words in our learning intention?
Discuss their meanings, taking contributions from
students where possible
- Ask for what stage of the 5Es model they think we are
in and why
- Suggest that students may have begun thinking about
this since the last lesson. Think, Pair, Share.
- Ask for opinions on the answer to the learning
intention. Dont say correct/ incorrect. Reiterate how its
important to make predictions of our own.

- Ask students to stick their investigation worksheet in

their science journal and to fill in the first box/ their
prediction.
Body of
Lesson

- Sitting in the
shared area to
hear instructions
for investigation
- Carry out
investigation
following team
roles tasks (i.e.
manager collects
equipment)

20
mins

Activity
- Students pack
Completion up the
investigation and
sit in shared area
with their team
- Students write
and draw a
diagram of their
results/ findings

12
mins

- Different modes of
instruction delivery to cater
to different learning styles
(written on worksheet,
verbal instruction and
visual demonstration)
- Mixed ability groups for
peer learning and
mentoring
- Teachers to walk around
throughout investigation to
help where required

- Ask students to return to the shared area, but this time

sitting with their science team
- Demonstrate the investigation. 3 teachers. Sun
(basketball) Earth (tennis ball) Moon (marble). Show that
when you move the Sun further away from the Earth, it
starts to look smaller, and when you move the moon
closer, it looks bigger
- Tell students they will be testing this out for themselves
and that they will need to take numerous pictures of
their findings (how close the Sun and Moon have to be
for them to look the same size to the Earth). Reiterate
that scientists keep proof of their findings and that
having a photo counts as solid proof
- Teachers to take photos for teams
- Remind students of team roles; ask for students to
explain each one. Ask the manager to come and collect
the equipment for the group. Remind students to be safe
and responsible while completing the investigation
- Allow students to conduct the investigation

- Ask students come back inside, return materials to

teacher, and sit in the shared area in their teams
- Remind students about their diagrams from lesson one.
Explain that they are going to do this again, but this time
more accurately because they know more about why the
sun and moon look the same size, even though they are
not/ one is further away
- Remind about title, labels and to think about the size
that they draw each one
- Ask students to fill in their findings on their worksheets,
with their science teams (written explanation and new
diagram on a new page)

Closure

- Share their
8 mins
findings and team
work skills

- Ask students to return to the shared area and sit in

their groups
- Ask for groups to volunteer to explain how they worked
as a group to complete the investigation. What
strategies did the use? What teamwork skills they used?
Were they surprised by the results? Etc. Congratulate
class on effort.

Appendix 3: Student sample of completed worksheet from Lesson 3 showing conceptual development and constructive thinking

Appendix 4: Both worksheets I made for Lessons 3-5

This sheet was used in lessons 4 and 5. I was unable to collect completed samples of this sheet. The lessons that this worksheet
accompanied are on the next page.

Appendix 5: Mentor feedback sheets

References
Australian Academy of Science (2013). Night and Day: Year 3: Earth and space sciences, in
Primary Connections, Australian Academy of Science
Black, P. (2012) Formative assessment and learning. In J. Oversby (ed), ASE Guide to
Research in Science. Hatfield, UK: Association for Science Education, pp. 126-132
Black, P. & William, D. (2001). Inside the Black Box: Raising standards through classroom
assessment. Kings College London School of Education, Department of Education
and Professional Studies, Grenada Learning
Cowie, B. (2012). Focusing on the classroom: assessment for learning. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin
& C. McRobbie (eds), Second International Handbook of Science Education.
Springer: Dordrecht, pp. 679-90
Darby, L. (2005). Science students perceptions of engaging pedagogy. Research in
Science Education, 35 (4), pp. 425-45
Gibbs, G. (1988). Learning by doing: A guide to teaching and learning methods. Oxford:
Oxford Polytechnic Further Education Unit
Hewson, P., Beeth, M. & Thorely, N. (1998). Teaching for conceptual change. In B. Fraser
and K. Tobin (eds), International Handbook of Science Education. Great Britain:
Kluwer Academic, pp. 199-218
Leach, J. & Scott, P. (2002). Designing and evaluating science-teaching sequences: An
approach to drawing upon the concept of learning demand and a social
constructivist perspective on learning. Studies in Science Education, 38, pp. 11542
Skamp, K. & Preston, C. (2015). Teaching Science Constructively. (5thEd). South Melbourne,
Victoria, Cengage Learning
Thomas, G. (2012). Metacognition in science education: past, present and future
considerations. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin & C. McRobbie (eds), Second International
Handbook of Science Education. Springer: Dordrecht, pp. 131-44
Wandersee, J., Mintzes, J., & Novak, J. (1995). Research on alternative conceptions in
science. In D. Gabel (ed.), Handbook of Research on Science Teaching and
Learning, New York: MacMillan, pp. 177-210
Vosniadou, S, (2012). Reframing the classical approach to conceptual change:
preconceptions, misconceptions and synthetic models. In B. Fraser, K. Tobin & C.
McRobbie (eds), Second International Handbook of Science Education. Springer:
Dordrecht, pp. 119-30
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press