{"id":5308,"date":"2018-02-28T16:56:21","date_gmt":"2018-02-28T23:56:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/?p=5308"},"modified":"2018-02-28T16:56:21","modified_gmt":"2018-02-28T23:56:21","slug":"scaffolding-a-t-gem-magnetic-fields-and-current","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/blogs.ubc.ca\/stem2018\/2018\/02\/28\/scaffolding-a-t-gem-magnetic-fields-and-current\/","title":{"rendered":"Scaffolding a (T)-GEM: Magnetic Fields and Current"},"content":{"rendered":"

\u201c The inquiry processes evident in GEM included students\u2019 finding patterns in information, generating hypothetical relationships involving three or more variables, evaluating the empirical consistency of information, coordinating theoretical models with information, and making predictions.\u201d (Khan, 2007, p.898)<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Khan (2007) purposes a learning model for students to gain first hand experience defining and refining relationships between variables. Although T-GEM provides a explicit framework, however, something seems to be lacking. When Khan (2007) inspected the teacher\u2019s verbal response, it became clear that specific teaching strategies are required. Instead of identifying skills as teaching methods, scaffolds are a more fitting variable. Upon closer inspection, the T-GEM pedagogical model works harmoniously with problem solving scaffold foci outlined by Kim & Hannafin (2011). In combination, the teacher\u2019s scaffolding role is made more specific and applicable.<\/p>\n

Here is a design that provides suggestions about scaffolding prompts according to each step of the GEM cycle. Students will investigate the relationship between the strength of the induced field, current voltage, relative distance to the current, the direction of field and Earth\u2019s magnetic field.<\/p>\n

Students inquire about:<\/p>\n