Today went better, but I'm not sure I like why it went better. It went better because I did more. I structured it more, I scaffolded it more, I led them through it more. It seemed to go better, but at what cost? It's going against what I'm trying to get them to do, going against be less helpful.
So I'm torn. It's not that I mind structuring and scaffolding if I think it helps them become curious learners, helps them get to the place where they can inquire and explore more on their own. But I don't think that's what I accomplished today. I think I structured and scaffolded and therefore they didn't have to think much.
We explored inverse variation today by looking at distance, rate and time. The opener (pdf) was review, and I thought pretty basic, but they are still struggling mightily with dimensional analysis. Then we moved on to the lesson (pdf). We first looked at a digital picture of a falling tennis ball and then tried to figure out how fast it was going, how long it had been falling, and what height it had been dropped from. This was a hopefully fun way to look at inverse variation and solving one-step equations.We then used this video (downloaded and edited so they couldn't see the calculated mph) to look at d = rt again (thanks again Dan), and talk about inverse variation and solving one-step equations some more.
Overall, they seemed engaged, it seemed to go well, except I don't think it really did. Frustrated I am (in my best Yoda voice).