:Spiders
Trend Task
Loading Images

Approach: Team Level: Year 4
Focus:   Planning information gathering and appropriate questions
Resources: A3 recording sheet, 2 instruction cards, 2 A4 answer sheets, highlighter pen
144KB
Questions / instructions:
In this activity you are going to start planning a study on spiders. You are going to do a brainstorm about spiders, which means writing down all of the ideas and information you know about spiders.
Give out A3 sheet and pen.

This piece of paper is for you to write down everything you know about spiders. Remember to write down everyone’s ideas. Here is a card to remind you what you have to do.

Read instruction card to team. Stand back and allow sufficient time.

Now you are going to work in pairs to decide what other information you might need for a study on spiders. After that, I want you to write four questions about spiders that would help you to search for the information you need.

Spiders Brainstorm
1. Choose someone to write.
2. Write down everyone's ideas
3. Make sure everyone says their ideas.
4. Tell the teacher when you have finished.
These are questions that you don’t know the answers to. This card will remind you what you have to do.
Read card to team.

You have about five minutes to make up your questions.

Assign students to pairs – students 1 and 2; and students 3 and 4. Give each pair an answer sheet, pencils and instruction card. Allow about five minutes.

Now you are going to work together as a group again. Show and read your four questions to each other. After that, decide on three of the best questions that will help you to find the information for your study. Use the highlighter pen to mark them.
Allow time for the group to identify three questions.

Now read to me the three questions you highlighted.
   
% responses
2005 ('01)
Y4
Brainstorm process:
Involvement –
all members contributed substantially
61 (60)
  
 
3/4 or 2/3 members contributed substantially
36 (33)
  
1/4, 2/4 or 1/3 members contributed substantially
3 (7)
  
Acceptance –
all ideas received constructively
77 (67)
  
 
majority of ideas received constructively
20 (26)
  
half or less of ideas received constructively
3 (7)
  
Rejection –
no member had all or most of their ideas rejected
92 (87)
  
 
one member had all or most of their ideas rejected
6 (11)
  
two or more members had all or most of their ideas rejected
2 (2)
  
Selection of final three questions:
 
Collaboration –
decisions made by consensus, involving constructive dialogue
23 (16)
  
 
decisions made by consensus, quick agreement without much discussion
54 (48)
  
decisions made without consensus, through initiative of one or two members
20 (25)
  
decisions made after disagreement, with disagreements clearly not resolved
(at least one person unhappy about decision)
3 (11)
  
Questions selected:
First Question –
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
43 (57)
 
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
52 (41)
gave irrelevant information or information already available in brainstorm
5 (2)
Second Question –
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
47 (43)
 
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
51 (54)
gave irrelevant information or information already available in brainstorm
2 (3)
Third Question –
gave relevant “new” information, potentially very rich in detail/depth
47 (50)
 
gave relevant “new” information, but likely to be quite succinct
(eg. single fact)
50 (47)
 
gave irrelevant information or information already available in brainstorm
3 (3)
Total score:
6
15 (24)
 
5
29 (19)
4
28 (38)
3
25 (16)
0–2
3 (3)

Commentary:
A high proprotion of the groups made their decisions in a positive, collaborative way. Almost half developed either two or three strong questions suitable for rich information. Performance was a little weaker in 2005 than in 2001.
 
Loading Images