Teaching with a Maker’s Mind:

Tinkering, Collaborating, & Learning through Application of Making in the Classroom

http://bit.ly/1UuhuND

@brandycjudkins

@zlfalls

#midtesol16

Warm-Up

  • Open your envelope and take out your tool.
  • Using your 5 senses, record your observations about your tool on the envelope.
  • Switch envelopes and tools with another person.
  • Create a pro/con list about your tool on the envelope.
  • Switch envelopes and tools again.
  • As a table, brainstorm ways to improve your tool.

Transforming Your Classroom into a Maker Space

  • Rethinking content---What? Why? How?
  • Rethinking the physical space---What do you have access to? What fosters creativity and collaboration? What can you add or take away?
  • Rethinking how your students show what they know
  • Reenvisioning your students as experts/potential experts
  • Connecting to your community and world, bringing it into your classroom

http://edut.to/1CAbriF

Three Core Principles

  • CAST & NCUDfL’s Universal Design for Learning
  • Stanford’s d.School Design Thinking
  • Our Take on Applied Science* Literacy

This approach is also connected to and shares elements with Connected Learning and Project Based Learning.

CAST & NCUDfL’s Universal Design for Learning

Learning experiences should consider the following core elements:

  • Why?---learning should have a purpose
  • What?---vary the ways content is presented or levels of content
  • How?---vary how students demonstrate their learning; all students should have opportunities to be experts

http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

Universal Design for Learning

  • Universal design for learning is a framework to improve and optimize teaching and learning for all students.
  • Universal design involves development and implementation of instruction that anticipates learning needs, builds in accommodation, remediation, and acceleration, and integrates brain-based learning and instruction.
  • Universally-designed instruction is strategic, engaging, resourceful, active, and expressive (CAST, 2014a).

http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

Universal Design for Learning in the Classroom

  • multiple encounters with content
  • multiple encounters with target language
  • diverse opportunities to “show what you know”
  • diverse outlets for connecting prior knowledge to new content
  • strategic and purposeful integration of multimodal and accommodated instruction throughout lessons (CAST, 2014b)

http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

Stanford’s d.School Design Thinking

This project (which is amazing, check it out here: http://dschool.stanford.edu/dgift/)

Challenges students and teachers to learn through real-world, hands-on problem solving.

They break this down into three steps:

  • Understand
  • Experiment
  • ideate

http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Participant-Worksheet.pdf

Understand

Get out into the real world, meet people, ask them questions (What? Why? How?)

If that’s not possible, learn as much as you can from a beginner’s perspective about your target audience/setting (ex. Learning about what it is like to be on the International Space Station via videos, readings, blogs, etc)

Divide and conquer, have different students become “experts” on different things

Coming back together, share what you learned

http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/understand-mixtape-v8.pdf

Ideate

Good ideas come from good questions:

  • What is the problem?
  • What’s your unique perspective?
  • How might we? Questions

Get creative juices flowing (think improv activities!)

Brainstorming without limits

Paring down and distilling ideas with intention (the rational choice, the long shot, most delightful)

http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ideate-mixtape-v8.pdf

d.School’s Brainstorming Rules

  • One conversation at a time
  • Quantity over quality
  • Build on the ideas of others
  • Encourage wild ideas
  • Be visual
  • Stay on topic
  • Defer judgment

Experiment

Get creative juices flowing (think improv activities!), warm up and energize

Break into teams and begin to build prototypes

  • Wizard-of-Oz (aka fake it til you make it)
  • User-driven (how do users think?)

When done with drafts, demo them for others

Gather feedback

Have groups either improve their own prototypes OR improve another group’s

http://dschool.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/experiment-mixtape-v8.pdf

Building Academic Language Through Innovation:

Moving into Teaching with a Maker’s Mind

http://bit.ly/1UuhuND

@brandycjudkins

@zlfalls

#midtesol16

Warm-Up

  • Open your envelope and take out your tool.
  • Using your 5 senses, record your observations about your tool on the envelope.

Warm-Up

3. Switch envelopes and tools with another person.

4. Create a pro/con list about your tool on the envelope.

Warm-Up

5. With those near you, brainstorm ways you could improve 1 of the tools.

Transforming Your Classroom into a Maker Space

  • Rethinking content---What? Why? How?
  • Rethinking the physical space---What do you have access to? What fosters creativity and collaboration? What can you add or take away?
  • Rethinking how your students show what they know
  • Reenvisioning your students as experts/potential experts
  • Connecting to your community and world, bringing it into your classroom

http://edut.to/1CAbriF

Applied Science* Literacy: HS Rocket Prototyping

Where the two approaches intersect with the real-world demands of diverse classrooms.

Provides opportunities for students to engage with the language of conducting science (or other content areas :-)) by asking students to collaborate, problem solve, and justify and explain how and why they are solving problems.

Language learning and acquisition is hidden, but intentional.

http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines

What is science literacy? Relationship to Academic Language?

“Scientific literacy is the knowledge and understanding of scientific concepts and processes required for personal decision making, participation in civic and cultural affairs, and economic productivity. It also includes specific types of abilities. In the National Science Education Standards, the content standards define scientific literacy” (National Science Education Standards, page 22).

Being science literate means that one can:

-ask, find, or answer questions about everyday experiences and natural phenomena

-describe, predict, and investigate everyday experiences and natural phenomena

-critically understand science media, debate, and policy

-articulate critical opinions with support (Anelli, 2011)

Academic language is not just lexicon. It includes discourse and registers, reading, writing, and speaking. It is context-specific and content-driven.

Photo retrieved from NASA Deep Space Observatory Flickr: https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasakennedy/16517924761/in/album-72157650531580732/.

Embedding Academic Language---It’s Already There!

Academic language is there, in the making, in 3 ways:

  • the collaboration---can’t get done without communication---any communication
  • the process---having to explain what they did and why (“Shark Tank”)
  • the engagement---it’s hard not to get into it when you get to “play”

Purposeful strategies to target academic language:

  • Provide low-stakes, use-it-if-you-need-it discussion starters (ex. http://bit.ly/2dhU16l)
  • heterogeneous grouping
  • Questions you ask as you facilitate---ex. Tell me about your prototype. How does it work? Can turn into defining “axle”
  • Final task---explain how it works or describe your process, evaluate others, write directions for someone else to do the same

Resources

Anelli, C. (2011). Scientific literacy: What is it, are we teaching it, and does it matter?. American entomologist, p. 235-243. Retrieved from http://entomology.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Anelli2011scientific-lit.pdf.

Cooper, J. (2013). Maker education: Designing a school makerspace (blog). Edutopia. Accessed at http://www.edutopia.org/blog/designing-a-school-makerspace-jennifer-cooper.

Dougherty, D. (2012). The maker movement. Innovations, 7(3), 11–14.

Fleming, L. (2015). Worlds of Making: Best Practices for Establishing a Makerspace for Your School. Corwin Press.

Honey, M., & Kanter, D. E. (2013). Design, Make, Play: Growing the Next Generation of STEM Innovators. Routledge.

Maker-Movement-Reinvents-Education.pdf. (n.d.). Retrieved fromhttp://www.khabele.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/Maker-Movement-Reinvents-Education.pdf.

Makerspace.com. (2012). High school makerspace tools and materials. Makerspace, 1-34. Retrieved from http://spaces.makerspace.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/hsmakerspacetoolsmaterials-201204.pdf.

Schrock, A. R. (2014). “Education in Disguise”: Culture of a Hacker and Maker Space.InterActions: UCLA Journal of Education and Information Studies, 10(1). Retrieved fromhttps://escholarship.org/uc/item/0js1n1qg

Check out and join MakerSpace.com to see what others are doing and share your successes.

Zoe Falls

Othmer Fellow

GTA/Instructor

TLTE@UNL

zoe.falls@huskers.unl.edu

Brandy C. Judkins

Othmer Fellow

GTA/Instructor

TLTE@UNL

bjudkins2@unl.edu

Logo retrieved from UNL Toolbox & Brand Mark: http://ucomm.unl.edu/images/brand-book/Our-marks/campMarkLock05.jpg.

Pushbutton image retrieved from https://middleeastmattersdotdeloittedotcom.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/bzi_ris_glb_ho_1049_lo.jpg.

Personal Photos retrieved from presenters’ personal LinkedIn profile pages.

References

Anelli, C. (2011). Scientific literacy: What is it, are we teaching it, and does it matter?. American entomologist, p. 235-243. Retrieved from http://entomology.wsu.edu/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/Anelli2011scientific-lit.pdf.

CAST. (2014). What is universal design for learning? National center on universal design for learning. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl.

CAST. (2014). The three principles of universal design for learning. National center on universal design for learning. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/aboutudl/whatisudl/3principles.

Executive summary. (n.d.). Next generation science standards. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/Final%20Release%20NGSS%20Fr

nt%20Matter%20-%206.17.13%20Update_0.pdf.

Georgia Department of Education. (2009). Astronomy curriculum. Georgia performance standards. Retrieved from https://www.georgiastandards.org/standards/Georgia%20Performance%20Standa

ds/Astronomy.pdf.

Georgia Department of Education. (2009). Physical science curriculum. Georgia performance standards. Retrieved from https://www.georgiastandards.org/standards/Georgia%20Performance%20Standa

ds/Physical_Science_Revised_06.pdf.

Georgia Department of Education. (2009). Physics. Georgia performance standards. Retrieved from https://www.georgiastandards.org/standards/Georgia%20Performance%20Standa

ds/PhysicsRevised2006.pdf.

Georgia Department of Education. (2009). Sixth grade science standards. Georgia performance standards. Retrieved from

https://www.georgiastandards.org/Standards/Georgia%20Performance%20Standards/SixhGradeRevisedStandards.pdf.

Herrera, S. G., Peréz, D. R., Kavimandan, S. K. & Wessels, S. (2013). Accelerating literacy for diverse learners: Strategies for the common core classrooms, K-8. New York: Teachers College Press.

High school engineering design storylines. (n.d.). Next generation science standards. Retrieved from http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/HS%20ETS%20Storyline%20-%20

CI%20and%20Topic.pdf.

Krajcik, J.S., and Sutherland, L.M. (2010). Supporting students in developing literacy in science. Science, 358, 456-459.

Laugksch, R.C. (2000). Scientific literacy: A conceptual overview. Science education, 84, 71-94.

McLaughlin, M.J. (2012). Access to the Common Core for all: Six principles to consider in implementing CCSS for students with disabilities. Principal. Retrieved from http://www.naesp.org/sites/default/files/McLaughlin_2012.pdf.

References

National Science Education Standards. (1996). National academy of sciences. Washington, DC: National academy press.

Next generation science standards. (2013). Earth and space sciences. Next generation science standards. Retrieved from

http://www.nextgenscience.org/search-performance-expectations?term_node_tid_depth5B%5D=101&term_node_tid_depth%5B%5D=102.

Next generation science standards. (2013). Appendix I---Engineering design in the NGSS. Next generation science standards. Retrieved from

http://www.nextgenscience.org/sites/ngss/files/Appendix%20I%20-%20Engineering%2Design%20in%20NGSS%20-%20FINAL_V2.pdf.

Proctor, C. P., Dalton, B., & Grisham, D. L. (2007). Scaffolding english language learners and struggling readers in a universal literacy environment with embedded strategy instruction and vocabulary support. Journal of Literacy Research, 39(1), 71-93.

doi:10.1080/10862960709336758. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/resource_library/articles/scaffolding_ell_and_struggling_readers.

Reeves, J. (2007). Learning English in adolescence. Adolescent Worlds Newsletter. IANR, University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Reeves, J. (2006). Starting conversations with content area peers. Essential Teacher, 3, 24-26.

Rose, D.H. & Gravel, J.W. (2010). Universal design for learning. In E. Baker, P. Peterson, & B. McGaw (Eds.).International Encyclopedia of Education, 3rdEd. Oxford: Elsevier. Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org/resource_library/articles/udl.

Wessels, S. (2013a). Science as a Second Language. Science & Children. 51(1), 50-53.

Wessels, S. (2011). Promoting vocabulary learning for English learners. The Reading Teacher, 65(1), 46-50.

Wessels, S. & Trainin, G. (2014). Developing School-Based Literacy Practices for English Language Learners. LDYC Newsletter, 18 (2), 6-8.

Wessels, S. (in preparation). The impact of a vocabulary instructional framework on the vocabulary development of English language learners

Wessels, S. (in preparation). Designing vocabulary instruction in science for English language learners.

References

Achieve Inc. (2013). Next generation science standards. www.nextgenscience.org/next-generation-science-standards.

Allen, J. (1999). Words, words, words: Teaching vocabulary in grades 4-12. York, ME: Stenhouse.

Beck, I.L., McKeown, M.G., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guilford.

Blachowicz, C, & Fisher, P. (2000). Vocabulary instruction. In M. Kamil, P. Mosenthal, PD. Pearson & R. Barr (eds.), Handbook of reading research (Vol. 3, pp. 503–523). Mahwah,

NJ: Erlbaum.

Bromley, K. (2002). Stretching students’ vocabulary. New York: Scholastic.

Carlo, M., August, D., & Snow, C.E. (2005). Sustained vocabulary-learning strategy instruction for English-language learners. In E.H. Hiebert & M.L. Kamil (eds.), Teaching and

learning vocabulary: Bringing research to practice (pp. 137–154). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Carr, E., & Wixson, K.K. 1996. Guidelines for evaluating vocabulary instruction. Journal of reading, 29(7), 588–595.

Cary, S. 2000. Working with second language learners: Answers to teachers’ top ten questions. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

DeKeyser, R.M., & Juffs, A. (2005). Cognitive considerations in L2 learning. In E. Hinkel (ed.), Handbook of research in second language teaching and learning (pp. 437–454). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Donnelly, W.B., and Roe, C.J. (2010). “Using Sentence Frames to Develop Academic Vocabulary for English Learners. The reading teacher.

Echevarria, J., D. Short, and K. Powers. 2006. School reform and standards-based education: An instructional model for English language learners. Journal of educational research, 99

(4): 195–210.

Gersten, R.M. 1996. The double demands of teaching English language learners. Educational leadership, 53(5), 18–22.

Gibbons, P. (2002). Scaffolding language, scaffolding learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Goldenberg, C. 2008. Teaching English language learners: What the research does— and does not—say. American educator, 32(2), 8–44.

Herrera, S. (2007). By teachers, with teachers, for teachers: ESL methods course module. Manhattan, KS: K-CAT/TLC.

Herrera, S. (2010). Biography-driven culturally responsive teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.

Herrera, S., Kavimandan, S., and Holmes, M. (2011). Crossing the vocabulary bridge: Differentiated strategies for diverse secondary classrooms. New York: Teachers College Press.

Kubota, R., K. Gardner, M. Patten, C.Thatcher-Fettig, and M.Yoshida. (2000). Mainstream peers try on English language learners’ shoes: A shock language experience. TESOL Journal 9 (4): 12–16.

Lachat, MA. (2004). Standards-based instruction and assessment for English language learners.

Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.

Marzano, R.J. (2004). Building background knowledge for academic achievement: Research on what works in schools. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

McKeown, M.G. (1993). Creating effective definitions for young word learners. Reading research quarterly, 28(1), 16–31. doi:10.2307/747814

References

Nagy, W., and J. Scott. 2000. Vocabulary processes. In Handbook of reading research. Vol. 3, eds. M. L. Kamil, P. B. Mosenthal, P. D. Pearson, and R. Barr, 269–284. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

National Research Council. (2012). A framework for K–12 science education: Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core ideas. Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Powers, A., and Stanfield, C. (2009). Developing science literacy for English language learners. AccELLerate 2 (1): 11–12.

Reeves, J. (2006). Out of the box: Starting conversations with content-area peers. Essential teacher, 24-26.

Rupley, W., Logan, J., & Nichols, W. (1999). Vocabulary instruction in a balanced reading rogram. The reading teacher, 52(4), 336–346.

Schechter, S. R., and Cummins, J. (2003). Multilingual education in practice: Using diversity as a resource. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Schunk, HA. 1999. The effect of singing paired with signing on receptive vocabulary skills of elementary ESL students. Journal of music therapy, 36(2), 110–124.

Watts, S. 1995. Vocabulary instruction during reading lessons in six classrooms. Journal of reading behavior, 27(3), 399–424.

Wessels, S. (2008). A mixed study of the impacts of an IBA intervention on the vocabulary development of culturally and linguistically diverse students. Unpublished doctoral dis-

sertation, Kansas State University, Manhattan.

Wessels, S. (2011). Promoting vocabulary learning for English language learners. Faculty Publications: Department of Teaching, Learning and Teacher Education. Paper 146.

http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/teachlearnfacpub/146.

Wessels, S. (2013). Science as a second language: Integrating science and vocabulary instruction for English language learners. The science teacher.

White, T.G., Graves, M.F., & Slater, W.H. (1990). Growth of reading vocabulary in diverse elementary schools: Decoding and word meaning. Journal of educational psychology, 82(2), 281–290.

doi:10.1037/0022-0663.82.2.281

Teaching with a Maker’s Mind: - Google Slides