Today in Inquiry was more much better than Monday. Here are some reasons why:
- A very clear goal was given to students for the day
- A product was required to meet that goal and it was tied to public performance
- Expectations for public performance were clearly established
- Expectations that everyone had to contribute and be involved were clearly established
- I reminded them of what tools we’ve developed that they have at their disposal to get started
- I acknowledged and set aside interesting ideas and questions that were tangential to activity
Today wasn’t great, but it was a step in the right direction.
What wasn’t soooo great, was we were a little rushed toward the end, and so being engaged in listening and making sense of what others had done wasn’t fantastic. Or, maybe I didn’t set expectations for what they should be doing while the others were listening…
Teach. Brian. Teach. 
Hi Brian, how did you define expectations for public performance?
It was very specific to the task, not general. We’ve been really struggling to relate 2D, 3D, and word representations of what’s going on with the moon. Each group was given a particularly moon phase, and had to describe what would be seen in the sky across a 24 hour period. Each group’s presentation had to include a verbal description of the sky, a pictorial sketch of the sky, a 2D diagram to help explain, and a 3D physical model using props. It was simply stated to them that they are expected to develop a verbal, pictorial, diagrammatic, and physical model as part of their explanation, with some specific comments about what it would mean to do that well.