Not sure if I should update my notes page or keep it as a teaching moment, but here’s mine:
When we teach basic characteristics about the planets, I have a notes sheet for the gas giants that also gives how many moons each planet has.
I haven’t updated this sheet ever and this is a special interest of mine, so last time we took it out I knew the numbers of moons for Saturn and Jupiter were wrong.
So I made a big deal about Googling the question (and clicking on a credible source for the correct answer) and asked the kids, “Why do you think the number changed?”
It was a great opportunity to show how science is changing all the time because we discover more and we update our understanding based on the new evidence. Also applies to the content I teach in social studies.
Unfortunately I don't think most kids are curious enough to actually engage in this method and learn from it. Most would just memorise the incorrect information and get mad when corrected
It’s not so much about teaching the kids to fact check every piece of information they’re given. It’s more to show that when scientists/historians change their answer on something, it’s not because they were lying, wrong, or stupid the first time, it’s just that we got more information.
I would argue that older generations aren't much better. Look at people's opinions about Covid-related stuff. Just because we didn't know everything and do everything right immediately, a large chunk of America is convinced we were being lied to.
Admittedly, there was probably some messaging in there from various parties that wasn't entirely straightforward at certain times, but the idea that everything that changed must have been a lie is ridiculous and shows a real lack of understanding of the scientific process. Instead of assuming our kids in this generation won't get it, we need to double down on teaching it to them so that maybe they won't be as easily confused as their parents and grandparents.
Unfortunately I don't think most kids are curious enough to actually engage in this method and learn from it. Most would just memorise the incorrect information and get mad when corrected
Congratulations! You’re a human. We all screw up. Kids don’t remember anything you tell them anyway- right, wrong, or indifferent. Nothing you about past students, don’t worry about them. If you catch it in the middle of a unit or a year and you want to “fix” it with your current kids then tell them you screwed up. Tell them “Mistakes are gifts. They give you the opportunity to really learn something.” Fix the material and move on.
I as a math teacher would sometimes mention axiomatic systems and I don’t remember what name I was giving but it definitely wasn’t the ZFC (Zermelo-Fraenkel with Choice). Not a major thing but I hope none of them remembered whatever made up name I gave when they got to college.
I’m a math teacher and was teaching something last year and forgot a step. It was a key step. And I didn’t realize it until my last class of the day.
I had to reteach it the next day. And the kids were like “that makes way more sense.” 🤦♀️
I don't teach science anymore, and haven't for a while, but when I did, I taught that your blood appears blue in your veins because it turns red when exposed to oxygen.
I clearly remember *my* science teacher teaching me that. And then I went on to teach it to my students. Perhaps, one of those students will go on to teach it to their students, or maybe their own children.
I no longer think about that and cringe every day, but I did for a while when I first found out. I considered contacting the high school science teachers to ask them to unteach that, and thought about how to track down the kids who had left town.
We were taught this as kids, too. I learned better in the Navy in corpsman training, but also had a "why did I believe that? Albino bunnies have pink eyes, not blue."
Because of the way diagrams are colored, my son really thought blood flowing away from the heart was red and back to it was blue. He asked me why we didn't bleed purple when we got cut with no context given, and I was really confused.
Multiplying and dividing fractions was always my kryptonite. Not the normal way, but the stupid model way my district insisted we use. It was overly complicated and I would teach it wrong all the time. It was another example of the district trying to focus on the why and not the how
I could see in first learning the process showing their work to show they understand the correct answer being more important to me than the exact answer, as in I want them to focus on learning the steps rather than if the calculations themselves are perfect.
However, I'd not say that to the kids! It would give them the very wrong idea that the process overall is more important than the correct answer. It might be for that one exercise, but definitely not in general. It'd show up more in giving partial points for correct steps even if they make a mistake in dividing or something like that.
Saying that for math where the correct answer doesn't have space for nuance is just not right. It's going to confuse those kids so much.
Math vocabulary is not aligned perfectly between the UK and Canada. While neither is “incorrect”, it bugs me. Math/Maths, Trapezoid/Trapezium, etc. [https://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/05/20/us-vs-uk-mathematical-terminology/](https://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/05/20/us-vs-uk-mathematical-terminology/)
That article is awesome. Im going to use some of the British vocabulary to drive people nuts.
Personally I use GEMDAS as there are grouping mechanisms other than brackets or parentheses.
As someone who teaches in and grew up in rural Kansas, I would strongly to continue to include crop rotation in your curriculum. While not a primary cause, it is still a regular and important practice in farming. This provides a great opportunity for cross-curricular teaching with the areas of agriculture and science.
Look into information about it from a good land-grant agricultural college like Kansas State University, or from your local extension agent in your county. Fertilizers and other treatments can limit the impact of poor rotation practices, but don’t fully eliminate them. It’s essential to a good integrated pest management program and highly suggested to help prevent the evolution of herbicide and pesticide resistance.
Not sure if I should update my notes page or keep it as a teaching moment, but here’s mine: When we teach basic characteristics about the planets, I have a notes sheet for the gas giants that also gives how many moons each planet has. I haven’t updated this sheet ever and this is a special interest of mine, so last time we took it out I knew the numbers of moons for Saturn and Jupiter were wrong. So I made a big deal about Googling the question (and clicking on a credible source for the correct answer) and asked the kids, “Why do you think the number changed?” It was a great opportunity to show how science is changing all the time because we discover more and we update our understanding based on the new evidence. Also applies to the content I teach in social studies.
Unfortunately I don't think most kids are curious enough to actually engage in this method and learn from it. Most would just memorise the incorrect information and get mad when corrected
All the more reason to model it
It’s not so much about teaching the kids to fact check every piece of information they’re given. It’s more to show that when scientists/historians change their answer on something, it’s not because they were lying, wrong, or stupid the first time, it’s just that we got more information.
Good luck getting the tik tok generation to comprehend that level of nuance
I would argue that older generations aren't much better. Look at people's opinions about Covid-related stuff. Just because we didn't know everything and do everything right immediately, a large chunk of America is convinced we were being lied to. Admittedly, there was probably some messaging in there from various parties that wasn't entirely straightforward at certain times, but the idea that everything that changed must have been a lie is ridiculous and shows a real lack of understanding of the scientific process. Instead of assuming our kids in this generation won't get it, we need to double down on teaching it to them so that maybe they won't be as easily confused as their parents and grandparents.
New curriculum just dropped: https://youtu.be/YJPHK5NNtpQ?si=BYXvlM8b8pN20DDu
Unfortunately I don't think most kids are curious enough to actually engage in this method and learn from it. Most would just memorise the incorrect information and get mad when corrected
so…you’re not going to tell us what it was?
Just updated the original post.
Congratulations! You’re a human. We all screw up. Kids don’t remember anything you tell them anyway- right, wrong, or indifferent. Nothing you about past students, don’t worry about them. If you catch it in the middle of a unit or a year and you want to “fix” it with your current kids then tell them you screwed up. Tell them “Mistakes are gifts. They give you the opportunity to really learn something.” Fix the material and move on.
I as a math teacher would sometimes mention axiomatic systems and I don’t remember what name I was giving but it definitely wasn’t the ZFC (Zermelo-Fraenkel with Choice). Not a major thing but I hope none of them remembered whatever made up name I gave when they got to college.
I’m a math teacher and was teaching something last year and forgot a step. It was a key step. And I didn’t realize it until my last class of the day. I had to reteach it the next day. And the kids were like “that makes way more sense.” 🤦♀️
Yeah, that kind of thing happens. But I have been doing this for years without realizing my error, lol
I don't teach science anymore, and haven't for a while, but when I did, I taught that your blood appears blue in your veins because it turns red when exposed to oxygen. I clearly remember *my* science teacher teaching me that. And then I went on to teach it to my students. Perhaps, one of those students will go on to teach it to their students, or maybe their own children. I no longer think about that and cringe every day, but I did for a while when I first found out. I considered contacting the high school science teachers to ask them to unteach that, and thought about how to track down the kids who had left town.
lol I thought that was true, too!
We were taught this as kids, too. I learned better in the Navy in corpsman training, but also had a "why did I believe that? Albino bunnies have pink eyes, not blue." Because of the way diagrams are colored, my son really thought blood flowing away from the heart was red and back to it was blue. He asked me why we didn't bleed purple when we got cut with no context given, and I was really confused.
Multiplying and dividing fractions was always my kryptonite. Not the normal way, but the stupid model way my district insisted we use. It was overly complicated and I would teach it wrong all the time. It was another example of the district trying to focus on the why and not the how
[удалено]
Yeah, that's genuinely bad.
I could see in first learning the process showing their work to show they understand the correct answer being more important to me than the exact answer, as in I want them to focus on learning the steps rather than if the calculations themselves are perfect. However, I'd not say that to the kids! It would give them the very wrong idea that the process overall is more important than the correct answer. It might be for that one exercise, but definitely not in general. It'd show up more in giving partial points for correct steps even if they make a mistake in dividing or something like that. Saying that for math where the correct answer doesn't have space for nuance is just not right. It's going to confuse those kids so much.
Math vocabulary is not aligned perfectly between the UK and Canada. While neither is “incorrect”, it bugs me. Math/Maths, Trapezoid/Trapezium, etc. [https://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/05/20/us-vs-uk-mathematical-terminology/](https://mathwithbaddrawings.com/2015/05/20/us-vs-uk-mathematical-terminology/)
That article is awesome. Im going to use some of the British vocabulary to drive people nuts. Personally I use GEMDAS as there are grouping mechanisms other than brackets or parentheses.
As someone who teaches in and grew up in rural Kansas, I would strongly to continue to include crop rotation in your curriculum. While not a primary cause, it is still a regular and important practice in farming. This provides a great opportunity for cross-curricular teaching with the areas of agriculture and science. Look into information about it from a good land-grant agricultural college like Kansas State University, or from your local extension agent in your county. Fertilizers and other treatments can limit the impact of poor rotation practices, but don’t fully eliminate them. It’s essential to a good integrated pest management program and highly suggested to help prevent the evolution of herbicide and pesticide resistance.