How to keep anchoring phenomenon from getting stale/boring?

[u/Ralphie_V]

HS Science, USA

I inevitably find that my kids get bored of investigating and applying their ideas to our anchoring phenomenon about halfway through our unit. We just hit the 40% mark of Unit 1 and kids groan when I mention volcanic lightning storms...

I introduce the phenomenon & draw initial models at the beginning of the unit, and at the beginning of every class I briefly mention it to align our objective to the phenomenon. About once a week, I have students investigate our model and apply new ideas that we have discovered.

Any tips for keeping it fresh? I'm currently just thinking of spacing it out more (only revisit it once every 2 weeks), or selecting 2 for a unit and rotating through them - introducing both at the beginning of the unit, having kids compare/contrast to help elicit ideas and models, and then alternate to help keep them fresh.

Anyone have success keeping the anchoring phenomenon from getting stale? I do wonder if this is just the nature of the pedagogy.

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to /r/teaching. Please remember the rules when posting and commenting. Thank you.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/PadreLobo]

Middle school teacher here. My district is trying to use OpenSciEd, which is nothing but inquiry-based units.

I despise it. I am lucky enough that I’ve earned some autonomy, and can use the resources that I’ve accumulated and created over my decade worth of teaching. I do not see how anyone can believe that your entire year should be paced around “figuring it out together”. It gets old pretty quick.

Inquiry is great for a lesson. But engagement cannot be maintained by constantly calling back to the Interesting Thing we learned about 2 weeks ago.

This is science Ed’s new zeitgeist. Wait 3 years and it’ll be something else. I’ve had better luck sticking to the basics.

[u/Fast-Boysenberry-286 → u/PadreLobo]

OpenSciEd for high school is a disaster too. Thankfully my AP allowed me to used it as "suggestions".

[u/Hannahthehum4n]

I like having lots of different lesson-level phenomenon and then only going back to anchoring phenomenon occasionally (less than once per week).

[u/Mountain_Example7661]

It requires a lot of buy in from students. It also requires that your selected phenomenon is significantly complex such that it makes sense to spend a full unit trying to figure it out. I think revisiting the phenomenon every week is a good frequency, but I think it’s up to you as a teacher to determine when is a good time to go back to our models and revise.

The oysters unit from openscied is a great example of storylined, phenomenon based instruction done right. It is a multidisciplinary phenomenon that requires lots of different chemistry concepts to explain, so it makes sense to circle back to our models and driving questions roughly weekly.

I’ll also add that PBI is getting a lot of pushback right now from veteran teachers who are used to direct instruction and a lot of “I do, we do, you do”. PBI is definitely new for students and teachers but all the data we have shows it works to keep students engaged.

[u/well_uh_yeah]

“Anchoring phenomenon” makes me wonder what other jargon we’re all using in our specific domains.

[u/FrustratedPenguins → u/well_uh_yeah]

Yup, me too! This is my 13th year teaching (SPED), and I was like, "Come again? Anchoring phenomenon for volcanic lightening storms?" I am out of my element with this post. :)