11/6/14

Literacy Lesson
Mr. Kuhns 8th Grade Science Class
G. Paul Hudak
DR. MARK ESCH
RDG 507 CONTENT AREA LITERACY

ASSIGNMENT: LITERACY LESSON IN MY FIELD EXPERIENCE CLASS MENDEL WEBQUEST

Hudak 2

G. Paul Hudak
RDG507 Content Area Literacy
Dr. Mark Esch
November 11, 2014

Literacy Lesson for Mr. Kuhns 8th Grade Science Class Mendel Webquest
For this literacy lesson assignment, I engaged several of my 8th grade honors science
classes in a conversation and lesson as part of a unit about biology and the history of genetics,
with a particular focus on Gregor Mendel, the 19th century monk who is widely regarded as the
father of modern genetics. My honors science classes contain between 24-30 students and are
split into groups of 4 around the room as pods or teams. My goal was for the students to
figure out that there are rules in this type of assignment, specifically which if they were to make
a claim, back it up with a citation or evidence. This is a fundamental on which Id like to build
my students lifelong careers as critical thinkers.
The big idea for that particular lesson was to bring into focus our previous work on
punnet squares, heredity and chance with regards to genetic inheritance. Our objective was to
learn about Mendel, his process, his goals, and what he achieved. After group discussion,
students would practice literacy by referencing their science books. Then we moved on to a
webquest they worked on in groups on their laptops. It was important for me to provide framing
for this scientists work since he used the scientific method, particularly by using test groups and
control groups.
To begin the class, I provided a line of questioning starting off in broad terms asking
where genetics came from. I activated prior knowledge by tying in references to the weeks of

Hudak 3

lessons we had been working on. I asked the class what a genotype was, and was provided two
incorrect answers before receiving the correct one. Then I touched on key points about our
previous genetics lessons regarding inherited traits in an attempt to make the content more
meaningful and relevant. Afterwards, we opened our texts and referenced key concepts within
their genetics chapter. This led to a conversation about the simplicity of these organisms, and
their ease of use from an observers point of view in an experiment.
I encouraged the groups to engage in discussion with one another about some of these
ideas, and wrote on the board about inheritance and genetic variation. After some more literacy
practice, I provided the students with directions for their web module about genetic inheritance
and the students filled out a worksheet (guided by the webquest) until the period was over.
A unique moment occurred after their web module during a closing group discussion.
When I pushed them to expand their understanding into todays genetics, I got a unique
opportunity for contextualization when one group brought up the movie Jurassic Park, and a pair
of students eyes lit up. They were enthusiastic to discuss their experience with this work of
fiction, and it ignited a discussion among the group. This student-student interaction was what I
was looking for, particularly when they hit on the fact that a genetically identical copy was, in
fact, a clone, and thats why the purple flowers gave way to more purple flowers.
By the 2nd hour I was able to bring forward the reference to Jurassic Park, thanks to the
students who made the connection, and make it meaningful to them in that regard, since it was a
story that they enjoyed. I made several attempts to bring meaning to the fact that genetic
inheritance comes from parents who combine genetic information to pass down to children, but I
feel I could have done a better job preparing a line of questioning about that. It didnt appear to

Hudak 4

resonate with any of the groups very much, but I continued practicing bringing relevance to the
topics. Some parts of genetics can be very interesting to this age group, but it appeared that the
history of Mendel was lost on a few students.
I was very satisfied how many of my ELs and other students were able to reference the
big ideas we were discussing in the unit overall, like Mendels use of the scientific method, for
example. It was through engagement in group discussion - and writing down notes about what
they read in the module and chapter - that they were able to participate and bounce ideas off of
each other. I believe that the students probably would have been more active in their
participation in Think Pair Share arrangements, too, because I did notice a few students being
passive while the other students spoke. In a duo, this might be eliminated.

Hudak 5