Shortening food chains: Circle of Life or Human Interference?
The
article discussed this week can be found below:
Researchers show that smaller area means not only fewer
species, but also, shorter food chains.
(2013, November 25). News Medical Life Science. Retrieved from:
https://www.news-medical.net/news/20131125/Researchers-show-that-smaller-area-means-not-only-fewer-species-but-also-shorter-food-chains.aspx
To continue our knowledge on determining which text is
appropriate to introduce our students to, Pearl and I have chosen to continue
with the topic of food chains due to its versatility. For the past two weeks,
the overall message of the articles we have used have had a heavy focus on how
our actions have influenced the world around us. Specifically, these articles
presented the problem that animal habitats are not how we have once known them
to be. Where our actions such as littering, and emission of greenhouse gases
have nearly devastated the primary producers that are included within the aquatic
food chain. However, Pearl and I were hoping to find an article that would bring
up more concepts for our students to keep in mind when one is thinking about the
different components that give rise to changes in the food chain. Given that Pearl
is more experienced in teaching life science and presenting literature, we have
decided to go with an article she selected entitled “Researchers show that smaller
area means not only fewer species but also shorter food chains” (cited above) that
was published thorough the news medical life sciences website. The one thing I
like about this article is that there is an emphasis placed on animal behavior.
This new focus will allow for students to learn a new component of life science
while expanding their knowledge on how organism diversity can be linked to how these
organisms behave in their environment.
When I first read the article, I felt that the author
grabbed my attention and brought a different perspective on how we as humans
are heavily influencing the ecosystems that many living organisms call home.
This article is structured in a way that is not chronological but utilizes the . In addition, the text is structured and well organized with the use of
headings to express the overall main idea of the paragraph prior to navigating
to the next section of the text. For instance, the article opens with a brief
overview that the “smaller area will mean not only fewer species, but also
shorter food chains” (2013). Right away this grabbed my attention because when
we talk about changes in the environment, typically the ideal of species becoming
endangered or facing extinction was the topic at hand. However, this article
also creates this positive correlation of the reduction of habitat area also
leads to a reduction in the length of food chains. When the article referenced
that the top predator will be the first to go, I found this to be interesting
because I remember learning early on about how the primary producer becomes
affected with changes to their habitat and that those changes then trickle down
to the primary consumer (herbivores), secondary consumer (carnivore), and finally
the top predator. This focus on a disappearance of top predators brings about an
idea that the descending links in the food chain may behave differently with
there not being as many top predators to look towards them as a food source.
At the conclusion of my discussion
with Pearl, we both came to the realization that this article is appropriate
for both middle and high school students. The good thing about this article is
that the overall diction of the text is very straight forward and would allow
for our students to be given more challenging tasks when it comes to either
guided reading questions or a type of formative assessment. Due to the simplicity
of the text, I think that if I was to give this article to high school students,
I should probably When looking through
the learning standards, I found that this article relates the most to the life
science learning standards that reads as, “Design, evaluate, and refine a solution
for reducing the impacts of human activities on the environment and
biodiversity.” (Guilford, 2017). One
thing I liked about the text was that its simplicity allows for our students to
be challenged more in their extension piece to assure they truly connect with
and comprehend the text they have just read. Once our students are able to determine
the big picture of a text, they will be able to become more critical and concise
thinkers.
This week, we were tasked
to provide our students with text that will allow for students to make
extensions beyond the mere facts obtained from the literature. In order to
accomplish this, I continued using the preparatory analysis of text (PAT) to be
able to complete an analysis of the text from both the perspective of an
educator and as a student. In my analysis, I felt that the overall density of
information was concise and allowed for the reader to slowly intake information
without becoming discouraged by information overload. In the second component of
this assignment we are to assign our partners a strategy that can be provided
to students to form extensions of the information they have read to build one’s
essential knowledge. For this week, I assigned Pearl the double diary entries
and Pearl assigned me the fact pyramid (Buehl, 2014). In the double diary entries,
there are two components where one must find a quotation or textual evidence in
one column and in the other discuss the importance of the selected text. I suggested
the use of this strategy to Pearl because when I am analyzing text, the words
that I highlight that had the greatest impact on me while reading tend to be
the pieces of text that I can form and extension off of to discuss how a piece
of literature relates to me and the world I live in. When using the fact pyramid,
there are three components which include (from top to bottom) essential
knowledge, short-term information, and background detail. For the essential knowledge,
this is the main take home message the reader receives after reading a piece of
text. In this part of the pyramid, I wrote island fragmentation leads to loss
of top predators and the interactions they contribute to their environment. When
moving down to the second part of the pyramid, I wrote the terms habitat and ecology
because the second level of the pyramid serves the purpose of providing
information that is used to contribute to one’s essential knowledge but may be forgotten
about over time. In the bottom of the pyramid is the background detail and I wrote
that one must know that the top of the food chain is symbolic of the top
predator and the primary producer is going to be on the bottom of the food
chain. I also wrote the terms ecology and animal behavior because if we want to
conserve the planet and protect wildlife, then it is imperative that we can
understand ecology which is merely how organisms behave with ones of their own
kind and organisms belonging to different species.
Overall, I think that the
use of the fact pyramid would be a better option for extension of reading due
to the idea of incorporating prior knowledge with the new information presented
in the text to form a more concrete idea of a topic taught in class. This
strategy reminds me of inquiry learning because I can see where each of the
four phases of inquiry learning (triggering event, exploration, integration, and
resolution) can be utilized in class to aide students in learning about food
chains (Breivik, 2016). For instance, the triggering events can be a
think-pair-share drill activity to get students thinking about the impact
changes in the environment impact the food chains. The exploration is where I
would supply my students with the article where students can highlight the main
idea the author is trying to get across in the text. In the integration piece,
students will use the fact pyramid to combine their prior knowledge with the
new concepts they have learned to come to a resolution where students can devise
a plan that can be used as a conservation effort to keep islands and other habitats
together.
References
Breivik, J.
(2016). “Critical Thinking in Online Educational Discussions Measured as Progress
through Inquiry Phases: A Discussion of the Cognitive Presence Construct in the
Community of Inquiry.” International Journal
of E-Learning & Distance Education.
Buehl, D.
(2014). Classroom Strategies for
Interactive Learning (4th ed.). Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Guilford, J., Bustamante, A., Mackura, K., Hirsch, S., Lyon, E.,
& Estrada, K. (2017). Text Savvy. The Science Teacher, 84 (1),
49-56
Hi Breanna!
ReplyDeleteI agree with you on how engaging an article is if it begins in a way to grab your attention immediately. The past two articles I have read, began with a brief story and I was immediately engaged an accessing my prior knowledge from the scenario. I believe if you are engaged immediately then this shows that your students will be as well. I think your strategy this week sounds like an interesting ones for older students. How would you fit that strategy within your classroom specifically? Do you feel that the students would be engaged from the strategy and it would allow for better comprehension?
Bri,
ReplyDeleteI liked the article you and your partner chose this week because the text structure makes the article much more accessible for your students. Because the information is formatted into several small paragraphs, each with their own title, it breaks the text up into several major ideas that are easy to follow. I was interested to see that you thought fact pyramids were an effective reading strategy to extend student learning. In Bloom’s Taxonomy, this would meet a high level of thinking. If students can evaluate information and distinguish essential ideas from other ideas this hits a level 5 of understanding (Zhou & Brown, 2015). However, since this text was already broken up into several organized paragraphs, I felt like much of the work was already done for the reader. If I were to do this activity as a student, I feel like I would be rewording the paragraph titles as my essential knowledge. I also wish there would be some peer evaluation or collaboration once each individual student created their pyramids. You could alter this assignment to be more closely related to paired summarizing, where students create their own summary, read a partner’s summary and compare and contrast the findings (McLaughlin, 2015). We add more listening and speaking practice when we get students to work in small groups.
McLaughlin, M. (2015). Content Area Reading: Teaching and Learning for College and Career Readiness. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson
Zhou, M. & Brown, D. (2015). Educational Learning Theories- Education Open Textbook, Georgia, University System of Georgia, Galileo Open Learning Materials
Hi Vince,
DeleteThose are interesting ideas about how to expand on the strategy. Teaching students how to work with text features, such as headings, are important when teaching them how to be metacognitive with the content area texts they encounter.