Having a Blast With Volcanoes is a WebQuest intended for students in grades 3-5. The stated purpose of the activity is for students to learn about the physical, environmental, and social aspects of volcanoes. The information given in the task is that a hacker has stolen all worldwide information on volcanoes. The students are a chosen select group of scientists that need to replace this information. I felt the task set up the students to be spitting out information on the various types of volcanoes and left out the critical thinking aspect of a good WebQuest.
The process explained the project in further detail. Four students will be given a topic with a series of questions to be answered. They would each work on a different set of tasks based on their given volcano type.
The cognitive levels needed for each task is quite different. Task #1 (The Formation of a Volcano) requires basic spitting out of information. Task #2 (Location of Volcanoes) also works with fact-finding questions. Task #3 (Emergency Preparedness and Safety Measures) is where the WebQuest begins to improve. The questions in this section involve a higher level of thinking, transformation of information, and synthesis. An example question is: What would happen to your city if you lived near an erupting volcano? Finally, Task #4 (Global Effects of Volcanoes) also uses high level cognitive skills to complete the task. An example is: How can you, your family and your city plan for an emergency should you live near an active volcano?
The designer of this WebQuest may have differentiated the tasks, making some of them factual and others open-ended for the various types of learners in his/her class. I disagree with this position. Lower cognitive learners should still be given the opportunity to answer open-ended questions rather than just cutting and pasting information from the Internet. Designing an investigation with interesting questions and tasks is imperative to a successful WebQuest and all types of learners have the right to experience this.
All students, upon completion of their research, are asked to write a research paper and create a group presentation. This presentation is very open-ended with listed examples like slideshows, posters, drawing, models, etc. I like the opportunity the students will have to make choices, but the rubric written for this project is written in adult language and not student-friendly. I could see students becoming confused on the expectations of the final presentation. Allowing students to make choices is a good idea, but guiding them along the way is critical.
Overall, I saw positive and negative aspects with this WebQuest, therefore it received an average rating. There were high level thinking components, but they were not available in all tasks. The final product and ways to communicate what was learned was open-ended, but possibly confusing due to the rubric and basic expectations posted in the WebQuest. I am learning that writing a good, solid WebQuest is a difficult task but a valuable activity for students.
Here is the link to the WebQuest: Having a Blast With Volcanoes
Ellen~
ReplyDeleteI agree with many of your statements; most importantly the account of how the WebQuest designer differentiated the tasks in such a way that students with lower cognitive abilities do not have the same chance to learn as their classmates. It seems that there is an endless supply of this type of ‘differentiation’ going around in many realms. I work with special education students, and when I chose to learn about the students needs and wants on my own, (without reading endless pages of reports telling me what someone else thought they could and could not do), I was amazed at the types of things they COULD do, simply by having that choice. I will not soap box here about that; simply, I believe that when one designs a WebQuest, one must include ALL levels of students. Working with special ed. students is very similar to working with gifted students; you never know what activity or project is going to make that connection for them!
Is there a way for you to plac a link to this WebQuest on your blog? I clicked on the picture of the volcano, hoping that it would open it, but it did not. I would love to learn more about this WebQuest. Perhaps with a few tweaks, it would work well for my students!
Kathryn
Very true! I like what Kathryn had to say because I agree that it is important to give everyone the chance to DO, rather than give some of the kids that chance. I have also learned that it is difficult to create a rubric that works. I saw many that were better than the one I created. Glad we have the opportunity to re-evaluate our own rubric!
ReplyDeleteEllen, I thought your post was really insightful and thorough. As I get more into these WebQuests, I find it's like getting sucked into a black hole. Well, I guess that's true of anything you do research on, but especially on the web. There are endless links to other places (some of which work, and some of which don't). But your analysis of the volcano WebQuest was particularly helpful because you really broke things down and noted what worked and what did not. I especially appreciated how you talked about the differing levels of cognitive engagement. Even if the author's idea was to provide differentiation, as you mentioned, I agree that this is not helpful or valid. Students from all ends of the cognitive spectrum need to challenged and given choices to make their learning meaningful. Great job on your post!
ReplyDeleteBecky
Ellen,
ReplyDeleteI also really liked your analysis of the web quest. As I do my research there seems to be a wide variety of web quests ranging from bad to good. It was helpful to read your breakdown and compare that with my own ideas. Thanks.