SLED TEACHER REFLECTION HUB SUBMISSION
There are three parts to this reflection submission. The first part requires a brief description of
your instructional activities over the course of a SLED design task. The second part includes
your reflection on a student (or team of students) who performed well and your reflection on a
student (or team of students) who performed unsatisfactorily. The last section includes your
response to a series of questions.
Save your file as: Reflection_YourName_YourSchool_YourGrade_Date
Example:
Reflection_Capobianco_Purdue_Grade4_11-15-2015
When uploading to the hub, use the title: Teacher Reflection: Your Name, Activity, Term
Example:
Teacher Reflection: Capobianco, Save the Wolf, Fall 2014
Teacher Name: Laura O’Shaughnessey
School: Lafayette Christian School
Grade: 6
Design Task: Roller Coaster
Date: February 17-19
PART I:
Day
Overview of your SLED lesson(s):
Brief description of lesson activities you enacted
each day over the course of the SLED design task
1
-Rolling Marble Writing Prompt and discussion
-Introduced the Roller Coaster Activity Prompt (discussed
client, use, criteria, constraints)
-Discussion/review of kinetic and potential energy
-Intro Design Task
-Began individual design
2
-Finished Individual sketches
-Team design
-About 30 minutes of construction time
What do you think your
students learned each day
-Rolling Marble discussions
helped with misconceptions about
kinetic energy and the transfer of
energy! A few expected the marble
to curve, others seemed to
understand that without an
obstacle to push/resist the marble,
it would have to go straight
-Students began to think about
where their energy needed to be
the most in order for their coaster
to work.
-Teams continually redesigned
through trial and error. They began
to demonstrate the need for a lot of
PE at the start, but enough turns or
loops to keep the marble from
flying off (not too much KE)
3
-About 15 minutes of construction time (finishing and final
adjustments)
-Finalizing costs and loop diameter
-Testing of designs while labeling the maximum PE and
KE on other coasters
4
-Brief Discussion and wrap up (why some worked, how
they would improve their coasters, etc.)
-(Later in the week) Formal Assessment – test questions
included roller coasters concepts and where maximum PE
and KE were located
5
6
7
-Students easily could identify the
max PE, but some had difficultly
understanding where the max KE
was, especially since some
coasters had large drops at the end,
and others had longer flatter
endings.
-Students shared team scores and
discussion about whether or not
the coasters would work in a park
helped students understand client’s
needs
-Coasters that worked the best (or
received the highest scores) had
very high starting points (max PE)
and had a large loop, followed by
1 or even 2 loops, each smaller
than the next.
-Also, coasters that maximized
vertical space not only reduced
cost of space, but provided enough
PE to have the KE to keep the
marble traveling
PART II:
Reflection#1 on student performance:
Include an image of work from one student (or one team of students) who you thought
performed well on the task. Insert the image here within the Word document. This image may
be a copy of the student’s notebook entry(s) or an image of the team’s artifact or an actual
picture of the student at work.
In the space below describe what the image(s) is about and why you would explain or
characterize the student’s performance as mastery or excellent.
This particular group of students had a higher score as a team and worked well together. The
students seemed to struggle at the beginning, but pulled together and made the adjustments that
were needed throughout the task. They were able to adjust the height of the coaster to make it
higher, and understood that having a much higher potential energy at the beginning would help
their marble make it all the way through the track. These students were also having difficulty
keeping the marble on the track with such a high start, so they thought creatively and added a
second tube to make a “tunnel” affect. Although this did increase their overall cost, the team was
then able to have enough potential energy to make the marble go through several loops without
many issues, and therefore making a higher team score.
Reflection#2 on student performance:
Include an image of work from one student (or one team of students) who you thought did not
perform as well (unsatisfactory) on the task. Insert the image here within the Word document.
This image may be a copy of the student’s notebook entry(s) or an image of the team’s artifact or
an actual picture of the student at work.
In the space below describe what the image is about and why you would explain or
characterize the student’s performance as unsatisfactory.
This group worked well together, and their coaster also kept the marble on the track the whole
time. They also understood the concept of having a higher potential energy at the start in order to
ensure the marble had enough kinetic energy to make it through the entire track. However, I do
not think these students kept the client’s needs at the forefront of their design. Although the
students had many loops, they used a lot of materials to do other things, like change directions
and have a more “fun” coaster. I still believe the group did well, but I had hoped the students
would focus on the goals of having the most loops for the least amount of cost. This group had
neither.
PART III: Reflection Questions: Please answer each of the questions below.
1. Based on your students’ presentation of their work, what features made a good design?
Students that had a good design seemed to start their coasters very high up. Also, including as
many loops as possible with the material given met the client’s needs in the best way.
2. What features made a poor design?
A poor design was when students did not have enough potential energy at the start of the coaster.
These designs were not working well (until the students adjusted this in the process) because the
coaster had no way of getting enough KE to get around the loops. Also, designs that did not have
many loops did not seem to score well.
3. Which phases of the engineering design process do you feel most comfortable and confident in
teaching?
I enjoy the actual construction of prototypes and encouraging students to be creative within the
limits of the constraints and criteria. Students are allowed a lot of freedom in this area, and I feel
confident, after teaching and leading them in similar activities, in allowing them this freedom to
try new things and learn through their own failures. Even though it can be frustrating for the
students, I feel comfortable allowing students to work through this frustration (to an extent) and
come out feeling more proud and accomplished for the work that they did.
4. Which phases of the engineering design process do you feel least comfortable and confident in
teaching?
I feel the least comfortable teaching the redesign process. Often, I neglect to focus on this part
because of time limitations in the classroom. Also, in certain designs students are constantly
redesigning throughout the entire process. Because of this, I often do not spend much time
working on a complete redesign plan and process. Although we discuss improvements, I do not
feel confident this area.
5. What is one area in your implementation of the design tasks you want to improve upon in your
next implementation?
I would still like to improve in the area of redesign. Because of time restrictions, I would like to
figure out a way to incorporate the concepts of redesign more formally into the lesson. Right
now, I typically have students change their sketches to reflect any changes made to their
prototypes, but I would like to have a more concrete way of showing students how their plans
have changed over time. This would possibly have students draw an original sketch, stop half
way through construction time to reassess and draw a new sketch, then once construction time is
over, have students sketch their design once more. Doing this may show students how design
plans need to be adjusted to get better results.
6. Do you feel you teach science differently now than you did years ago? If so, how are you
teaching science differently? What do you think caused you to change your practice? If not, why
do you think you have not changed?
I do think I am constantly teaching science differently every year. Over the past few years, I have
made more of an effort to make lessons hands-on and interactive. Students learn better when they
experience the concepts for themselves. Creating opportunities for them to do this can be
difficult, but it truly helps all types of learners. Not all lessons can be entirely hands-on, but I
have been trying to implement more problem solving activities, hands-on demonstrations, and
even more design tasks every year.
7. Is there anything that causes you concern, that you are afraid of when you think about
changing your science teaching and implementing SLED design tasks? Are there things that keep
you from changing your teaching?
Although I wish I could teach all the design tasks, I am not able to because of time. Students do
need to take standardized tests, and need to learn how to take notes, listen to details, and write
written responses. Making sure we cover everything we need to in a school year limits the
amount of SLED design tasks that we can do in the classroom, or the amount of time that we can
spend doing each specific task.