Week 6 Thoughts: The Development of the 5E's

The Development of the 5E's

Over the past week, with the exploration of the 5E's, the conversion of lessons from traditional 

introduction / body / conclusion to that of the 5E format, I have come to realize that many of the lessons which I have developed over the past many years actually fit into this format.

While much of what we have done over the past week depicts the 5E system as a series of "stages", and almost always shows things in a linear format, I would argue that this is done more for the purpose of study than actual use. 

The "stage" of Evaluate should not be an actual stage, but one of constant and continuous incorporation. 

In addition, each of the "stages" should not necessarily stand alone, but should collaborate with one another throughout the lesson in order to be most effective.

The incorporation of the 5E system of instruction is a perfect fit into the Inquiry Based Learning (IBL) format, as it allows the students to expand their own knowledge into areas that interest them while observing and evaluating, as opposed to dictating information for the sake of information only.

Just the Facts, Ma'am...

Detective Sergeant Joe Friday, portrayed by Jack Webb

Probably the largest gain that I have had over the last week or so has been the discernment between fact and concept.

All insects have six legs.

The earth revolves around the sun.

The area of a circle is

πr squared.

Wait a minute, is the last one a concept or a fact?  Makes you want to stop and think about everything that we have been teaching, eh?

 One of the most important things that I have learned over the last two weeks is to look at the questions that I am asking, and determine whether or not they are investigable or non-investigable.  In the field of robotics, engineering and architecture, I felt that it was hard to come up with non-investigable questions, but that is not the case.  I came to realize that by the end of the courses, the questions might be investigable, or factual, based upon the information which was discerned throughout the class, but at the beginning, they were non-investigable, concept-based questions.

I guess that my big question now is, do I continue in this format, working from concept to fact, or do I work more along the lines of fact from the beginning?

I think that one of the things that I like best about the courses within this program in the diversity of the software and apps that we are exposed to.  So often  in reading the posts of the various classmates, I am introduced to apps that are not mentioned in the curriculum itself.  I absolutely love this, and wish that I had more time to work and explore many of the apps discussed.  Unfortunately, time doesn't stand still for anyone, and being able to explore is not always an option.  I was actually hoping to "Blabberize" Sergeant Joe on this page, and have him saying "Just the fact, Ma'am", but the site has been listed as "overloaded" for the past few days, so a picture will have to do.

I think that is the other thing that we need to look at.  

Though it is wonderful to have access to all of these apps and be able to use them, complete reliance on them is not wise.  Be prepared to do other activities, because technology doesn't always work the way that you want...

ADDITIONAL INSIGHTS INTO

INQUIRY BASED LEARNING

As noted in my previous posting, when I first began looking at Inquiry Based Learning (IBL), I compared it to Project Based Learning (PBL) and considered it to be a process suited more for advanced level projects.  With the advancement through the learning process of this program, I am coming to realize that IBL can be incorporated into early levels of education, provided that there is enough of a foundation of student knowledge established and that there is a suitable level of control and respect for the instructor and the class.

In comparison to a PBL format, which is highly structured and designed to meet a set goal with provided levels of learning throughout, IBL can be more spontaneous in its formats, with the learner able to branch off with new discoveries and ideas as they develop their knowledge base.  This provides more flexibility for the student, as they are investigating what interests them, while at the same time reaching for goals provided by the instructor.

One of the greatest insights which I have gained this week would have to be from the reflection part of the video The Physics of Optics (http://www.learner.org/vod/vod_window.html?pid=1414).  At marker 47:20, the presenter made the comment that doing inquiry is much like painting a picture - there is no right or wrong way to do it - it is all based on the instructor.  

Also, his quote:
"If you value the learning, you are probably doing inquiry.  If you value the telling, you are probably not. "

The key, therefore, to IBL is not to be rigid, or to foster memorization.  That is nothing more than creating a human database.  They key is to encourage questioning and having the students find their own answers (provided that they are the correct ones) to the problems in a way that will enhance their desire to learn more and to help them retain what they have already learned.