| ERESE Teacher Lesson Plan Template (CEO1A) |
| Teacher Name | Kathryn
L. Henderson |
| Lesson Title | Advances
in technology and the accuracy of seafloor mapping |
| Grade | 6th
grade Earth Science |
| School | Clements
Middle School |
| City, State | Covington,
Georgia |
| Purpose
of Lesson |
Introductory
lesson: how better data collection can lead to better scientific
interpretations. 1. For students to discover how knowledge about the seafloor increases as new technologies are developed 2. For students to find patterns and interpret these patterns How seafloor maps become more accurate as new technologies are developed |
| Education
Standards |
Georgia Performance Standards: S6CS1 ,
S6CS4 c., |
| INQUIRY STAGE 1 | |
| Orientation |
Introduce available tools and concepts. |
|
Purpose |
Make students feel safe taking intellectual risks. |
| Procedure | Prior to this
lesson, the students will have had an introductory content lesson on
toporaphic maps. They should be familiar with the terms:
topography, contour lines, profile. The students should also be
familiar with the terms: interence, hypothesis. Have students imagine that they are explorers long ago passing over a newly discovered ocean. Ask them to brainstorm how they would tell would how the seafloor was shaped. Write down brainstormed list on the board. Hopefully the students will come up with the idea of dropping a weighted line down and measuring the length of the line. If not, guide them to this. Should include a description of any activities or lessons you include to get the students focused on the skills they will use to experience the provocative phenomenon |
| INQUIRY
STAGE 2 |
|
| Fieldwork |
Provide students with provoking, relevant phenomena. |
| Purpose | To foster their interest and ownership and generate their own questions about the phenomena. |
|
Procedure |
Two provoking phenomena will be
used. The plan will be to present the first provoking phenomenon,
debrief, then present the second provoking phenonmenon and
debrief again. PROVOKING PHENOMENON NUMBER 1: The students will create two profiles of the same model underwater volcano (one with 6 data points, one with 12 data points) and compare the two. Procedure: Two shoeboxes with a concealed model of a volcano inside each. The cover of one box has 6 holes poked along a line at the top and 4 other holes The cover of box has holes poked along the top. **see below Anticipated observations: * the first profile is pointy, the second profile is smoother * both profiles go up, then down * the second profile goes down in the middle Make a map view of each of the models ( one constructed from more data points than the other) Compare map views Anticipated observations: * the points were harder to connect with fewer data points * the map created with more data points more closely shows the actual shape of the volcano PROVOKING PHENOMENON NUMBER 2: The students will observe and compare the following two maps: "Topography of the North Pacific" by Chase, Menard, and Mammerickx of the Geological Data Center , Scripps Institution of Oceanography and Institute of Marine Resources, 1971 Smith, W., and Sandwell, D., 1997, Measured and Estimated Seafloor Topography (version 4.2), World Data Center A for Marine Geology and Geophysics reseach publication RP-1, poster , 34" x 53". The students will make write their observations in their logbooks. Anticipated observations: * One shows depth with topo lines, one shows depth with coded colors * Differences in scale * One shows the whole earth, one just the North Pacific * The maps were constructed in different years - one in 1971, one in 1997 * Direct students to observe the area around the Clipperton Fracture Zone on the "Topography of the North Pacific" map. There are few data points in this area. Students should compare the maps that they have made with fewer data points to this area of the ocean which was mapped with fewer data points. ** Possibly order Science Kit "Mapping the Unknown Seafloor" kit and modify it . Or create my own box with holes. Should include a detailed instructions, identify the provocative phenomena and a list of the anticipated observations |
| INQUIRY
STAGE 3 |
|
| Debriefing |
Teacher honors all student observations. |
| Purpose | Assist students in developing testable questions and hypotheses. |
|
Procedure |
DEBRIEFING FOR
PROVOKING PHENOMENON NUMBER 1 The teacher will ask the students to share their observations about the two profiles with the class. The teacher will write these on the board. The teacher will ask the students to make inferences about the two profiles. Questions should include: Can you identify what's "under the sea" in the boxes? Why or why not? Are the features in each box the same or different? Which profile might be closer to the actual shape of the imaginary seafloor in the box? What would you do to make a more accurate profile of the imaginary seafloor in the box? The teacher will ask the students to share their observations about the two profiles with the class. The teacher will write these on the board. The teacher will ask the students to make inferences about the two maps.. Open the covers and reveal what is in the box. The students will discover that each of the boxes had the same volcano. The students will tell that the profiles and maps with more data points were more accurate. DEBRIEFING FOR PROVOKING PHENOMENON NUMBER 2 The teacher will ask the students to share their observations about the two map with the class. The teacher will write these on the board. The teacher will ask the students to infer why the maps are different. Anticipated inferences * the maps are different because one is made using more data The hypothesis that the teacher would like the students to reach is: As ocean exploration technology improves, the maps of the seafloor will become more accurate. Should include detailed instructions of the process including the anticipated hypothesis and question, along with a description of any content lessons necessary to achieve this stage |
| INQUIRY
STAGE 4 |
|
| Experimental
design |
Design
an appropriate investigation. |
|
Data
collection |
Define
approach for collecting data. |
| Purpose | Gather data that address the identified question and hypothesis. |
|
Procedure |
Take the students
into the computer lab. Divide the class into pairs. Assign
each pair of students to view maps of the same area that
illustrate how maps are more accurate as more data is collected with
improved technology. Use maps in the Sea Mount Catalog Sea Mount Catalog Select several seamounts (depending on the number of student groups you have) and assign group a seamount to study. Have students compare the predicted bathymetry map with the multibeam bathymetry map for their assigned sea mount. For example, look at the following links to the the maps of the Vailulu'u Seamount. . Vailulu'u Seamount -- Multibeam bathymetry Vailulu'u Seamount Multibeam bathymetry Vailulu'u Seamount -- Predicted bathymetry Vailulu'u Seamount - Predicted Bathymetry Ask students to collect qualitative data about the maps (detail, resolution) . Also direct them to record latitude, longitude, contour interval, and the type of technology used to collect data for each. Should include detailed instructions of the process and a description of any content lessons necessary to achieve this stage |
|
Data
analysis |
Define approach for analyzing data. |
| Purpose | Analyze data that address the identified question and hypothesis. |
|
Procedure |
Students compare
data collected from their predicted bathymetry map and the multibeam
bathymetry. They should discover the multibeam data map are more
detailed, accurate representations of the seamount. Should include detailed instructions of the process and a description of any content lessons necessary to achieve this stage |
| INQUIRY
STAGE 5 |
|
| Presentation |
Communicate what they have learned. |
| Purpose | Provide
students an opportunity to communicate their results in a forum that
reflects the scientific community. |
|
Procedure |
Each group will
present their findings in an informal class discussion. Our
class hypothesis, "As ocean exploration technology improves, the maps of the seafloor will become more accurate", will clearly be proven correct. The teacher will give a content lesson on the difference between satellite mapping of the seafloor (how the predicted bathymetry maps were made) and multibeam mapping. *** here it would be helpful to have diagrams for how each work in the ERESE matrix. Figures from David Sandwell's powerpoint would be helpful. Should include detailed instructions of the process and a description of any content lessons necessary to achieve this stage |
| ERESE
Teacher Reflective Plan Template |
|
| INQUIRY STAGE 1 |
|
| Orientation |
Introduce available tools and concepts so that students feel safe taking intellectual risks |
|
Type of Evidence |
The teacher leads a brainstorming session after a content lesson about
topographic maps |
|
Teacher profile |
3 |
|
Student profile |
1 |
| Reflective
practice |
|
| INQUIRY STAGE 2 |
|
| Fieldwork |
Give students experience to foster their interest and ownership; provoke students to explore, observe and generate their own questions about the phenomenon |
|
Type of Evidence |
students are making their own observations of the provoking phenomena |
|
Teacher profile |
2 |
|
Student profile |
4 |
| Reflective practice | |
| INQUIRY STAGE 3 |
|
| Debriefing |
Teacher
honors all student
observations, questions and hypotheses in order to identify and discuss
their viability as a research topic. |
|
Type of Evidence |
|
|
Teacher profile |
2 |
|
Student profile |
3 |
| Reflective practice | |
| INQUIRY STAGE 4 |
|
| Experimental
design |
Design an investigation wherein students gather and analyze data that address the identified question |
| A.
Data
collection |
Define
approach for collecting data |
|
Type of Evidence |
teacher
directs students to specific links that are constructed to prove
the hypothesis |
|
Teacher profile |
3 |
|
Student profile |
3 |
| Reflective practice | |
| B.
Data
analysis |
Define approach for analyzing data |
|
Type of Evidence |
the
students can easily tell that multibeam data provides |
|
Teacher profile |
1 |
|
Student profile |
4 |
| Reflective practice | |
| INQUIRY STAGE 5 |
|
| Presentation |
Teacher provides students an opportunity to prepare and communicate what they have learned. |
|
Type of Evidence |
|
|
Teacher profile |
|
|
Student profile |
|
| Reflective practice |
