[This sample proposal is an adaptation of one written by an experienced physics Modeling Workshop leader in
2010. The school superintendent submitted it to a local corporate foundation. It was not funded, unfortunately. The
proposal describes the project well and describes successful recruitment activities that attracted 15 teachers who paid
$300 each, out of their own pocket. The daily calendar is excellent.
This proposal is well worth your adapting. In the previous fall, ask your principal to have your superintendent
submit it to a local foundation or two. Follow each foundation’s guidelines. For backup, ask your principal or district
curriculum coordinator that fall to allocate Title II-A funds to pay you $3500 to lead the workshop, or ask them to
seek a gift of $3500 minimum from local companies. Suggest utilities and high-tech companies, for they care! Try to
make a short presentation to the school board and/or a local service organization such as Soroptimists, – J Jackson]
Project: Workshop on the Modeling Method of Teaching Physics
Goals: Improve physics teaching, improve STEM education
Table of Contents
School District Officers
Page
2
Proposal Section
A. Needs
3
B. Goals and Anticipated Outcomes
5
C. Activities
5
D. Achievement and Impact of Previous Projects
6
E. Timetable
6
F. Evaluation Plan
7
G. Proposal Budget Summary
8
H. Budget Explanation
10
I. Vitae
11
J. References Cited
13
Appendices
Appendix A: Outline of Modeling Workshops
14
Appendix B: Modeling Cycle Example—Constant Velocity
15
Appendix C: Sample Course Descriptions and Syllabi
16
Need for this project
K-12 education in [your state] and the nation is at a critical juncture. All citizens must be
scientifically literate to thrive in an information- and technology-based economy. A solid
foundation in physics is crucial, as physics is basic to all sciences, technology, and engineering.
High school physics classes are important stepping stones for entry in hundreds of careers.
Occupations that require high school physics include automotive technicians, heating/air
conditioning mechanics, machinists, electricians, physical therapists, chiropractors,
sound/broadcast engineers, and of course all types of engineers.
Because of the importance of physics in the 21st century, a few years ago [your] High
School decided that the honors 9th grade science would be physics. They are using Modeling
Instruction with their classes. Modeling Instruction is an innovative, effective pedagogy that
structures inquiry around scientific models. It develops in students the ability to analyze data,
reach a conclusion and defend it; and it emphasizes experimental design. Other 21st century
workplace skills developed include scientific use of computers and probeware, teamwork, and
verbal and written communication skills. Students become self-directed, independent learners.
Student achievement in concept understanding is typically double that under traditional
instruction. A much larger proportion of students become motivated to pursue science,
technology, engineering and math (STEM) careers.
Teacher training is an important component in ensuring that Modeling Instruction is
implemented successfully; but our four 9th grade physics teachers have not been trained in
Modeling Instruction. They wish to learn it so they are better able to implement it. However,
they are unable to attend a Modeling Workshop in another state, due to family commitments
and/or lack of affordability.
Modeling Workshops work best if there is a group of at least fifteen participants for three
weeks. Word of the success of Modeling Instruction in physics has been spreading around the
nation. In the [your city] metropolitan area, many teachers have heard of Modeling Instruction
and desire to take a Modeling Workshop. We have a current list of [# -- 20 is a good number]
teachers who have said they will attend if they can afford it. We would like to invite them to a
three-week training session at [your] High School next summer in Modeling Instruction in
mechanics.
The Modeling Workshop meets four core needs of an effective system of science
education.
1) Enhancing teacher understanding of content material: A new movement in the nation is
for the science sequence to begin with physics instead of ending with it. That has led to some
teachers leading a class with insufficient preparation in physics. The success of previous
Modeling Workshops demonstrates that this intensive training greatly improves teachers’ depth
of understanding in physics. 1-5
2) Effective methods of teaching science to all students: While understanding the content is a
necessary condition, it is not sufficient. Teachers also need a high level of skill and expertise in
teaching students the content. Modeling Workshops intensively train teachers in extremely
powerful and adaptable pedagogical techniques that use the scientific process as a vehicle for
learning and engagement. This method works for a diverse group of students. Modeling
Instruction naturally lends itself to differentiated instruction and has been successful nationwide
at schools in all socioeconomic strata, ranging from economically challenged inner-city to
private boarding schools.5
1
3) Research-based pedagogy that is effective and long-lasting: Through efforts of highquality education research, particularly in physics, much is now known about how students learn
science: typical preconceptions they bring into the classroom; and successful pedagogy for
correcting misunderstandings, building upon correct notions, and instilling an appreciation for
the process of science. Valid methods have been developed to assess student outcomes.
However, many teachers remain disconnected from this body of knowledge. Modeling
Instruction provides a framework for incorporating these results into high school science
instruction. Modeling Workshops have been offered for 20 years for 3500 science teachers
nationwide, and they have demonstrably improved the learning of hundreds of thousands of
students.1-5 (See http://modeling.asu.edu.)
4) Enhancing teacher skills in using technology: This is the era of STEM (science, technology,
engineering and mathematics) education in our state and nation. There is no better course than
physics, in which to incorporate all STEM elements. It is important that students become
proficient in technological tools that scientists use to gather and manipulate data. In this
workshop teachers will get extensive practice in technology and will learn to guide their students
in using the computer as a scientific tool.
Modeling Instruction uses technology innovatively. In the physics classroom, each team of
three or four students designs their own experiment and gathers data using probes such as
photogates, motion detectors, and force probes that interface with the computer. Students analyze
data with the help of spreadsheets and graph it on the computer. They linearize the graphs and
state the type of relationship of the variables, based on the steps needed to linearize. Their final
product is a conceptual and mathematical model to describe and explain the physical
phenomenon under investigation. Using 24” x 32” whiteboards, they present their model verbally
to the class and in writing in a lab report. Then they deploy the model to other situations, and end
the modeling cycle with a class project, called a lab practicum, that prepares them for the unit
test.
B. Goals and Anticipated Outcomes
This project provides physics teachers with education in content and pedagogy, bridging
the gap between educational research and application of its findings to improvement of
classroom instruction. Also, it promotes systemic reform by providing schools with a corps of
expert science teachers in effective use of technology. The project has the following goals:
1) Participants will demonstrate enhanced pedagogical knowledge and skills and teach their
science courses using Modeling Instruction, a flexible, robust, research-based pedagogical
framework that is effective for all levels of students.
2) Students of participants will demonstrate an improved knowledge of physics concepts,
especially in motion and Newton’s Laws.
C.
Activities
All activities are based upon the highly successful Modeling Instruction, documented in
section D.
Summer Workshop: The workshop will be a three-week, 15-day summer workshop at [your]
High School in [month, year]. Participants will have 90 hours of instruction, plus homework. If
they wish, participants can earn [#] semester hours of graduate credit at [university] at their own
expense. Since many teachers cannot afford to take three summer weeks off, we propose to offer
the teachers a $1200 stipend for attending the workshop. This will partially defray their tuition
2
cost if they need graduate credit, and it will help them buy the textbook and classroom supplies if
their school cannot budget for them in this economic downturn.
Participants will learn Modeling Instruction as a systematic approach to the design of
curriculum and instruction. The workshop incorporates up-to-date results of science education
research, best practices in high school science teaching, use of technology, and experience in
collaborative learning. The Modeling cycle, Modeling method, and workshop format are outlined
in Appendices A and B. A daily workshop schedule is in Appendix C.
All summer activities are in the context of mechanics. Participants begin the workshop in
“student mode,” performing class activities as if they were their students. Instructors lead
reflective discussions in “teacher mode,” addressing details of the Modeling cycle and any
concerns that arise along the way. As the workshop progresses, participants have increased
opportunities to “play teacher” and lead the class. After leading activities, participants debrief on
the experience and share strategies for dealing with potential difficult situations. By the
workshop’s end, participants have a thorough understanding of the mechanics curriculum, as
well as experience in leading Modeling laboratory sequences and classroom scientific discourse
sessions. In addition, each teacher receives a 425-page manual of all paper materials necessary
for teaching mechanics. All units are designed to promote understanding and improve student
retention as demonstrated by research on the Modeling methodology.
As a result of these activities, students of participants will exhibit substantial gains in their
understanding of physical science concepts.
The proposed timetable is in section E. Evaluation details are in section F. Key personnel and
their roles are described in detail in sections G and H.
D. Achievement and Impact of Previous Modeling Workshops
Modeling Instruction has had a remarkable positive impact nationally in previous years’
workshops. Modeling Instruction was developed at Arizona State University, and it was funded
by the National Science Foundation from 1990 to 2005. It is one of five K-12 educational
technology programs designated “Promising” in 2000 and one of only two K-12 science
education programs designated “Exemplary” in 2001 by the U.S. Department of Education.6 It
has grown rapidly in recent years; as of 2010, approximately 3000 high school and 600 middle
school teachers have taken at least one summer Modeling Workshop of median duration 15 days.
Twenty-nine states have hosted Modeling Workshops.
It is rare that any reform project in education has a lifetime of more than a few years; 7 this
fact alone speaks to Modeling Instruction’s potency and portability. Half of Arizona’s physics
teachers have participated in one or more intensive Modeling workshops, significantly
influencing science education in that state; we would like to have a similar impact on [your
state], and this is a beginning. [Your state] has not yet hosted a Modeling Workshop and is
behind in the spread of Modeling, with only [#] teachers trained in Modeling Instruction. All of
these teachers have had to attend workshops outside our state.
Perhaps the most compelling aspect of Modeling Instruction nationally is huge gains from
pre-test to post-test of students of participating teachers. Using well-researched assessment tools
such as the Force Concept Inventory (FCI)8 and the Mechanics Baseline Test (MBT),9 studies
show that students who are taught consistently with Modeling Instruction have typically double
the gains in content understanding of those who are taught conventionally. These results have
been replicated many times, with tens of thousands of students in many different kinds of school
environments.
3
E. Timetable
[Year]
Autumn and winter were used to recruit teachers to the workshop as explained below:
October: With the assistance of the publicity director of [your school], a flyer was put together
publicizing the workshop. The flyer is being handed out by district personnel such as the
superintendent, at appropriate meetings.
October: The two leaders of the planned workshop gave a one-hour presentation on the
Modeling Method of physics instruction at the regional convention of the National Science
Teachers Association (NSTA) in [city]. Flyers were handed out inviting teachers to apply for the
workshop. [#] teachers attended and [#] indicated interest in attending a summer workshop.
October-December: further publicity via [describe].
[year]
January: A three-hour workshop was held on January [date] at [your] High School for physics
teachers interested in learning more about the Modeling Method. [#] teachers participated and [#]
of them expressed a strong interest in attending the summer workshop.
April: applications are due; program staff selects participants and creates waiting list, notifies
applicants.
May: participant letters of intent due for workshop, leaders plan details of workshop.
July: three-week summer workshop is held as described in section C; participants’ administrators
are invited to attend during the last week.
August: participants are added to national Modeling listserv.
September: participants begin implementing Modeling Instruction in their own classrooms,
administer pretests to their students and return scoring sheets for analysis.
May: participants post-test their students and return test sheets for analysis.
F.
Evaluation Plan
Teachers who participate in the workshop will have greater confidence and competence
with forces and motion: Participants will be pre- and post-tested using the FCI and MBT.
Teachers will take the pre-test on the first day of the workshop and take the post-test on the last
day. The normalized gains for each teacher will give an indication of the content knowledge
gained during the workshop.
Students of participants will demonstrate an increased knowledge of forces and motion:
The FCI will be administered by participants to their students in the school year as both a preand post-test. Results will be sent to the Arizona State University Modeling Instruction program
to be added to their extensive study.
4
G. Proposal Budget Summary
INSTITUTION: [your] School District with [your] High School
PROJECT DIRECTOR: [your name]
Requested
Program
Funds
1. PERSONNEL COSTS
(List separately with names & titles)
A. Key Personnel (Faculty, Administrators) Salaries
[your name] (Workshop co-leader)
[name] (Workshop co-leader)
Dr. [name] (University Liaison)
B. Key Personnel Fringe Benefits
C. Support Personnel (Clerical, Assistants, etc.) Salaries
D. Support Personnel Fringe Benefits (at 5%)
TOTAL PERSONNEL COSTS (Salaries & Fringe Benefits)
2. TUITION & FEES
A. Tuition
B. Fees (Registration, Instructional fees, etc.)
$3,000
$3,000
0
$6,000
0
3. PARTICIPANT COSTS
(Provide details in budget explanation)
A. 20 Teacher Stipends (Rate of $80 per day for 15 days)
B. Teacher Substitutes
C. Room & Board
D. Travel
E. Books & Materials
F. Other
$24,000
0
0
0
0
0
$24,000
TOTAL PARTICIPANT COSTS
5
Other
Funds
In-kind
In-kind
BUDGET SUMMARY (CONTINUED)
Requested
Program
Funds
Other
Funds
4. CONTRACTUAL (Consultants, Evaluators, etc.)
(Provide details in budget explanation)
5. OTHER TRAVEL (Field trips, Meetings)
(Provide details in budget explanation)
6. SUPPLIES/MATERIALS
(Provide details in budget explanation)
A. Instructional Materials
B. Other (office and mailing supplies)
C. Whiteboards
D. Markers
$200
0
0
0
$300
In-kind
8. SERVICES (Duplication, Publication, etc.)
(Provide details in budget explanation)
Photocopies
0
In-kind
9. OTHER COSTS
(Specify – Provide details in budget explanation)
Facility fees for [your] High School
0
in-kind
7. EQUIPMENT (Rental, Purchase)
10. SUBTOTAL COSTS (Sum of items 1-9)
$6,200
11. INDIRECT COSTS
0
12. TOTAL COSTS (Sum of items 10 & 11)
$6,200
13. TOTAL REQUESTED PROGRAM FUNDS
6
$30,200
Budget Explanation
Personnel
[your] School District: [you], physics teacher at [your] High School will plan, direct and lead the
workshop, be instructor of record for the course, and maintain communication with participants. He will
not be paid for planning and directing the workshop. He will be paid $3000 for leading the workshop.
School District [co-leader’s]: [co-leader], physics teacher at [co-leader’s] High School will assist in
workshop planning and will co-lead the workshop. He will be paid $3000.
University of [name]: [name Ph.D.] Professor of [Physics, Chemistry, Science Education, etc], will
serve as project liaison at no charge. He will arrange for graduate credit.
Participant Costs:
Stipends: Teachers will be given a stipend of $80 a day for the 15-day workshop. Each teacher has the
option of obtaining [#] graduate credits from the University at their own expense, for approximately [$].
Books and materials: Each participant will be given a lab book ($10), a 425-page Modeling mechanics
manual ($15) in a 3-ring binder, and a CD-ROM of the materials. This is a total of $500 of which $300
will be cost-shared by [your] High School. (Note: each teacher will buy their own copy of the textbook,
Teaching Introductory Physics, by Arnold Arons, for approximately $90, and they will be responsible
for their own whiteboards, dry erase markers, and constant motion vehicles for their classroom, for an
estimated $200.)
I. References Cited
[1] M. Wells, D. Hestenes, and G. Swackhamer, “A Modeling Method for High School Physics
Instruction,” Am. J. Phys. 63: 606-619 (1995). Available: http://modeling.asu.edu/modeling-HS.html
[2] D. Hestenes, “Modeling Methodology for Physics Teachers,” in E. Redish & J. Rigden (Eds.) The
Changing Role of the Physics Department in Modern Universities (American Institute of Physics, 1997).
[3] R. Hake, “Interactive-engagement vs. Traditional Methods: A Six Thousand-student Survey of
Mechanics Test Data for Introductory Physics Courses,” Am. J. Phys. 66: 64-74 (1998)
[4] D. Hestenes, “Toward a Modeling Theory of Physics Instruction,” Am. J. Phys. 55: 440-454 (1987).
[5] Unpublished data in the Modeling Workshop Project at ASU for over 10,000 students. Reported in
the “Findings” section of the final report to the NSF; download at http://modeling.asu.edu.
[6] Expert Panel Reviews (2001, 2000): Modeling Instruction in High School Physics. (Office of
Educational Research and Improvement. U.S. Department of Education, Washington, DC)
Science: http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OERI/ORAD/KAD/expert_panel/newscience_progs.html
Educational Technology: http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/edtechprograms
[7] M. Fullan, The New Meaning of Educational Change (Teachers College Press, 2001).
[8] D. Hestenes, M. Wells, and G. Swackhamer, “Force Concept Inventory,” The Physics Teacher 30:
141-158 (1992). Available: http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html
[9] D. Hestenes and M. Wells, “A Mechanics Baseline Test,” The Physics Teacher 30: 159-166 (1992).
Available: http://modeling.asu.edu/R&E/Research.html
7
Appendix A: Outline of the Modeling Workshops
Workshop: (three weeks immersion)
 We begin with the study of motion, then the study of forces, and finish with the study of
energy.
 Participants are supplied with a set of course materials and work through all the activities
alternately in the roles of student or teacher.
 Student activities are organized into modeling cycles, which engage students systematically
in all aspects of modeling. Each cycle has two phases:
Modeling Cycles:
(1) Model development (typically 3-5 days in a high school classroom)
Typically, a cycle begins with a demonstration and discussion to establish a
common contextual understanding of terminology and goals. The
teacher is sensitive to students’ initial knowledge state and builds on
it, instead of treating their minds as empty vessels.
In groups of 3 or 4, students design and perform their own experiments
and prepare whiteboards for presentation of results and conclusions.
Student oral reports must articulate and evaluate a model
for making sense of the experimental results, and
respond to questions and critique from students and teacher.
(2) Model deployment (3-5 days)
Students are given a variety of problems and situations to analyze using the model
developed in the first phase.
Again they must prepare to present and defend their arguments and conclusions.
 The teacher guides students unobtrusively through each modeling cycle, with an eye to
improving the quality of student discourse by insisting on accurate use of scientific terms and
on clarity and cogency of expressed ideas and arguments.
 Instruction with the modeling cycle repairs a common deficiency in methods of
collaborative inquiry by showing precisely how to conduct scientific inquiry systematically.
After a few cycles, students know how to proceed with an investigation without prompting from
the teacher. The main job of the teacher is then to supply them with more powerful modeling
tools.
 Lecturing is restricted to scaffolding new concepts and principles on a need basis.
8
Appendix B: Modeling Cycle Example—Constant Velocity
I. Constant Velocity Paradigm Lab
A. Pre-lab discussion
Students observe battery-powered vehicle moving across floor and make observations. The
teacher guides them toward a laboratory investigation to determine whether the vehicle moves
at constant speed, as it appears, and to determine a mathematical model of the vehicle’s position
B. Lab investigation
Students collect position and time data for the vehicles and analyze the data to develop a
mathematical model. (In this case, the graph of position vs. time is linear, so they do a linear
regression to determine the model.) Students then display their results on small whiteboards and
prepare presentations.
C. Post-lab discussion
Students present the results of their lab investigations to the rest of the class and interpret what
their model means in terms of the motion of the vehicle. After all lab groups have presented, the
teacher leads a discussion of the models to develop a general mathematical model that describes
constant-velocity motion.
II. Constant Velocity Model Deployment
A. Worksheets
Working in small groups, students complete worksheets that ask them to apply the constantvelocity model to various problem-solving situations. They are also asked to prepare whiteboard
presentations of their problem solutions and present them to the class. The teacher’s role at this
stage is continual questioning of the students to encourage them to articulate what they know
and how they know it.
B. Quizzes
In order to do mid-course progress checks for student understanding, the modeling materials
include several short quizzes. Students are asked to complete these quizzes individually to
demonstrate their understanding of the model and its application. Students are asked not only to
solve problems, but also to provide brief explanations of their problem-solving strategy.
C. Lab Practicum
To further check for understanding, students are asked to complete a lab practicum in which
they need to use the constant-velocity model to solve a real-world problem. Working in groups,
they come to agreement on a solution and then test their solution with the battery-powered
vehicles.
D. Unit Test
As a final check for understanding, students take a unit test. (The constant-velocity unit is the
first unit of the curriculum. In later unit tests, students are asked to solve problems using models
developed earlier in the course, emphasizing the spiral nature of the curriculum)
9
Appendix C: Sample Course Description and Syllabus
The mechanics Modeling Workshop is an intensive 3-week course with these goals:
1. To educate teachers in use of a model-centered, constructivist method of teaching
and at the same time to improve their content knowledge in physics.
2. To integrate computer courseware effectively into the physics curriculum.
3. To establish electronic network support and a learning community among participants.
Syllabus/Agenda
Week 1
(am) Welcome. Introduce participants, schedules, workshop description, goals,
expectations, grading if taking for graduate credit, FCI pre-test
Mon
(pm) Unit I: Scientific Thinking in Experimental Settings
Day 1 Graphical analysis, oscillation lab, take data and process, whiteboarding rules of
engagement, whiteboard lab, lab report format
Readings: 1) Hestenes, Jackson, Dukerich, “Modeling Instruction”
2) Hestenes, "Wherefore a science of teaching.”
(am) Discuss readings, wrap up unit 1
Tue
Unit II: Particle with Constant Velocity.
Paradigm lab: Battery-powered vehicle lab, post-lab discussion
Day 2 Sonar ranger activity
(pm) Worksheets 1, 2, 3
Motion maps
Readings: McDermott, "Guest Comment: How we teach…"
Arons textbook, chapter 1 (special attn: sections 8, 9, 11, 12)
(am) Worksheets 4, 5, practicum, Unit II test
Wed
(pm) Unit III: Uniformly Accelerating Particle Model
Paradigm Lab: Disk rolling down a ramp
Day 3 Take data and whiteboard
Work on lab extension
Readings: Hake, "Socratic Pedagogy in the...", Arons 2.1-2.6
(am) Whiteboard extension, Sonar ranger activity “Up and down the ramp”
Motion maps with acceleration vectors
Thu
Worksheet 1, whiteboard
Day 4 Stacks of graphs
Using graphs to solve motion problems
(pm) Accelerated motion problem solving worksheets
Reading: Mestre, "Learning and Instruction in Pre-College..."
(am) Discuss readings, Intro to Graphs and Tracks, instructional comments,
descriptive particle models, more deployment exercises. wrap up unit III
Fri
materials, test,
Day 5 Reading: Beichner: Tug-K article and TUG-K2 test
Turn in notebooks for grading
10
Week 2
Mon
Day 6
Tues
Day 7
Wed
Day 8
(am) Discuss reading and test
Unit IV: Free Particle Model-inertia & interactions
Discussion of types of interactions, the force concept, force diagrams, normal
force demo questioning strategies
Statics lab
Inertia demo with air hockey puck (Newton 1)
Worksheet 1, whiteboard
Worksheet 3, whiteboard
(pm) Interaction lab with paired force probes
Worksheet 4, whiteboard
Reading: Minstrell, "Explaining the 'at rest' condition…"
(am) Discuss reading
Wrap up unit IV materials, practicum, test
(pm) Unit V: CDP Model-force and acceleration
Weight vs. mass lab
Paradigm lab: modified Atwood's machine
Take data, process and prepare whiteboards
Reading: Arons 3.1-4. Wells et al., “A Modeling Method for HS Physics”
(am) Discuss readings
Whiteboard results of previous day’s labs
Worksheet 1, whiteboard
Worksheet 2, whiteboard
(pm) Worksheet 3, whiteboard
friction lab: pre-lab and data collection, whiteboard.
Reading: Arons 3.5-9
(am) Discuss reading
Worksheet 4, whiteboard
Thu
Practicum, Unit V test
Day 9 (pm) Unit VI: Particle Models in Two Dimensions,
Free fall with picket fence
Worksheet 1, whiteboard
Roll ball down ramp lab or video analysis, whiteboard
Reading: Rex Rice: Role of lab practicums.
(am) Discuss reading
Worksheets 2 and 3, whiteboard
Fri
Practicum, test
Day 10 Reading: "Making Work Work,” by Gregg Swackhamer
Turn in notebooks for grading
11
Week 3
Mon
Day 11
Tue
Day 12
Wed
Day 13
Thu
Day 14
Fri
Day 15
(am) Discuss reading.
Unit VII: Work, Energy, & Power, Stretched spring lab (Hooke’s Law)
Paradigm suite of energy labs
Take data, process it and whiteboards labs
(pm) discussion of working, discussion of heating as a method of changing
internal energy of system
Energy pie charts, Worksheet 1
Energy bar graphs, Worksheet 3a
Reading: Arons 4.1-5, 8, 9. Hestenes: Modeling Methodology for Physics"
(am) Discuss readings
Worksheet 3b, whiteboard
Worksheet 4, whiteboard
(pm) Worksheet 5, whiteboard
Energy practicum and test
Reading: Hestenes, Wells, Swackhamer “Force Concept Inventory,”
(am) Discuss readings
Unit VIII: Central Force Model
Paradigm lab: uniform circular motion
Collect data for 3 purposes, analyze data; whiteboard
(pm) Worksheet 1, whiteboard
Worksheet 2a and 2b, whiteboard
(am) Worksheet 3, whiteboard
Worksheet 4, whiteboard
(pm) UCM practicum, test
Turn in notebooks for grading
(am) Pass back notebooks, take FCI and MBT posttest.
Show how to get materials from Modeling website
Discuss second semester curriculum
12