Running head: L.i.c.p. Page: 5 of 6

Framing our reading (Part IV)

Title	Text link	Rationale	Elected Terms	Strategies & Resource
Physics Talk: Average Speed (Eisenkraft, 2010, pp. 37-46)	(Eisenkraft, 2010, pp. 37-46)	I selected these terms as they are the root or foundation terms to understanding kinematics, the study and analysis of the motions of objects through time. The only more fundamental elements would include distance, displacement, and vector and scalar descriptions of quantities; all of which are covered in a different chapter not included in the readings used for preceding posts.	Speed Slope Velocity	Semantic Question Map see Template (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342)

For this assignment I selected the Semantic Question Map strategy to examine the terms addressed: speed, slope and velocity (McLaughlin, 2015). This examples of the documents can be found attached to this page below; please note that for the “completed” versions to display appropriately they really must be downloaded and opened locally from your computer, Google’s imaging software has issues with the contained diagrams.

I selected this strategy as it would provide me, the teacher, to select and highlight the specific aspects of investigation for my students. This strategy allowed me to determine the things that I particularly wanted my students to examine and stretch to understand. Though all of the information of the text is both accurate and important, my district’s curricular aims and assessment criteria mitigate the mathematic element of the coursework and stress that we stretch the students’ conceptual understanding of the subject. In other words, it is less important that students be able to do the math than express explanation of the occurrence. The math of the text can become preoccupying and this variation of Semantic Mapping allowed me to keep focus.

Though I can appreciate the power of a tool like this for “a certain type of learner”, I for one am one among “those other types”. Even in creating these activities, and then especially when responding afterward I found that my personal learning prerogatives have not changed. Activities such as these are to “my sort” almost counter-productive. I spend so much time and energy concerned with format and the “how to” of what I am doing that I find myself neglecting the attention to what I am doing and its implications. I suppose then that my own experience gives credence to the argument for multiple modalities, but not to instruction this time; instead this argues for multi-modal expression of learning and assessment.

Supporting documentation and resources:
  Download and open locally to preserve formatting and images

Blank Model Semantic Question Map for Speed  (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342) (Eisenkraft, 2010, p. 37-46)

Blank Model Semantic Question Map for Velocity  (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342) (Eisenkraft, 2010, p. 37-46)

Ch. 1, Sect. 3 - Physics Talk: Average Speed  (Eisenkraft, 2010, p. 37-46)

Completed Model Semantic Question Map for Speed  (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342) (Eisenkraft, 2010, p. 37-46)

Completed Model Semantic Question Map for Velocity  (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342) (Eisenkraft, 2010, p. 37-46)

Template Semantic Question Map  (McLaughlin, 2015, p. 110-111 & p. 342)

All references can be found on the linked references page.