Introduction

Children observe the world around them and often develop their own understanding of

science. This understanding is integrated into their established framework of knowledge.

Unfortunately, what is perceived is not always what is factual, which may lead to

misconceptions. One way to address students’ misconceptions is through the development and

use of models, a “big idea” in science. Models, an important part of scientific learning in the K-8

classroom, allow students to connect new ideas with their previous knowledge. By creating

models students “assemble their seemingly fragmented knowledge about concepts and

relationships into larger, more clearly understood constructs” (Gilbert & Ireton, 2003, p. vii.)

Through our action research, we addressed misconceptions about magnetism. The

question that drove our study was: How does our teaching, with the use of models, influence

students’ learning and change any misconceptions they may have about magnetism?

“Surprisingly, we know less about peoples’ conception of magnetism than we do about other

physical phenomena” (Hickey & Schibeci, 1999, p. 383). Very little research on the topic of

magnetism has been conducted (Hickey & Schibeci, 1999). The research that has been

completed has focused on participants from high school and college. Two such research studies

include Almudí, Guisasola, and Zubimendi (2003) and Hickey and Schibeci (1999).

Both studies use written response questions as the main method of research. The study

completed by Almudí, Guisasola, and Zubimendi (2003) demonstrates models of magnetism

held by students can be placed into four different categories, which include “the inherent nature

of matter, ingenuous realistic, electrical, and Amperian” (p. 456). The inherent nature of matter

was used by fifteen percent of the participants wherein they attributed magnetism to the

properties of the matter involved (Almudí, Guisasola, & Zubimendi, 2003). Additionally, fifteen

percent of participants used an ingenuous realistic model that explains magnetism resulting from

field lines interacting as real entities (Almudí, Guisasola, & Zubimendi, 2003). They found fifty

percent of participants held an electrical model of magnetism that describes magnets as charged

bodies with movement of ions (Almudí, Guisasola, & Zubimendi, 2003). Only twenty percent of

participants understood magnets using an Amperian model that attributes the source of magnetic

field to movement of electrons generating magnetic dipoles at the microscopic level and dipoles

at the macroscopic level (Almudí, Guisasola, & Zubimendi, 2003). In comparison, Hickey and

Schibeci (1999) also found approximately fifty percent of participants conceptualized magnetism

as an electrical model.

Through our action study, we hoped to further the current research of Almudí, Guisasola,

and Zubimendi (2003) and Hickey and Schibeci (1999) first by using participants from a fourth

grade gifted class and secondly, by adding assessment methods that will utilize the science “big

idea” of models. We looked to see if younger students held the same misconceptions as older

students found by current studies. Additionally, we hoped to expand current research through

participants drawing models of magnetism to explain their understanding. Encouraging students

to draw models assisted them in demonstrating their understanding of magnetism.

Methods

Our action research took place in a fourth grade classroom at an elementary school in

Michigan. Of the twenty-two students, six are Asian, two Indian, one African American, and

fourteen Caucasian all of which are from middle to upper income families. These twenty-two

students are part of the Alternative Learning Program for Students (A.L.P.S.). This program is

designed to meet the educational needs of extremely bright students who test and qualify. The

students in A.L.P.S. focus on critical, creative, and divergent thinking through a differentiated

curriculum (Northville public school, n.d.). The science curriculum, Battle Creek Area:

Mathematics & Science Center covers four main topics for grade four, which include animal

behavior, force and energy, earth materials, and magnetism and electricity.

To conduct our research and investigate our question, students were pre-assessed with

paper and pencil using a six-item questionnaire that included four written responses with

explanations, one checklist response, and one student generated drawing. The pre-assessment

responses to each question were categorized into like responses to look for patterns in the

students’ concepts. We expected these categories to be similar to that of the current studies,

which would include magnetism as electricity, magnetism as a cloud, magnetism as inherent

properties, and magnetism as Amperian model (Almudí, Guisasola, & Zubimendi, 2003). Once

the students’ misconceptions were identified, we developed two lessons that utilized inquiry

methods and models. The students worked in small groups exploring by using the target,

magnets and magnetism. Models, such as pictorial, graphical, and concrete, were used to support

the lessons, reinforce students’ correct understanding, and address their misconceptions. After

the two lessons were taught, we administered a post-assessment. By comparing the pre-

assessment and the post-assessment, we were able to determine how our teaching through

inquiry lessons and models influenced students’ understanding and misconceptions about

magnetism.

Our method of research was similar to that of Almudí, Guisasola, and Zubimendi (2003)

and Hickey and Schibeci (1999) as we included written response questions that aimed to identify

students’ conceptions of magnetism. Additionally, three of our questions were based on research

questions from Hickey and Schibeci (1999). The pre-assessment questionnaire consists of the

following six items.

1) What materials are attracted to a magnet? Check all that apply. (question develop by ourselves)

paper clip in a glass of water aluminum foil stainless steel spoon

Foam penny glass rod

a nickel wood copper wire

Key common nail plastic straw

2) Explain why magnets are attracted to your choices above. (Question developed by ourselves)

3) Can you judge how strong a magnet is by its size? Explain your thinking. (Based on research ofBrown-Struthers, 2002)

4) Does a magnet have to touch an object to affect the object? Explain why or why not. (Hickey &Schibeci, 1999)

5) Draw a picture of what you think is going on inside a magnet to make it work. Use labels asneeded to help explain your drawing. (Based on Hickey & Schibeci, 1999)

6) Is there a link between magnetism and electricity? Explain your thinking. (Hickey & Schibeci,1999)

To reflect the concepts taught in our two lessons, four of the six pre-assessment questions

were used in the post-assessment with only the first question altered. The alterations reflected

the particular items used in our first inquiry lesson. The post-assessment questions are as follows.

Paper Clip Cardboard Spoon

Canadian Dime U.S. Penny Glass

U.S. Quarter Wood Copper Wire

Screw Aluminum Foil Plastic Straw

Foam Key Canadian Nickel

1) What materials are attracted to a magnet? Check all that apply. (question develop by ourselves).

2) Explain why magnets are attracted to your choices above. (Question developed by ourselves)

3) Can you judge how strong a magnet will be by its size? Explain your thinking. (Based onresearch of Brown-Struthers, 2002)

4) Draw a picture of what you think is going on inside a magnet to make it work. Use labels tohelp explain your drawing. (Based on Hickey & Schibeci, 1999)

The pre- and post-assessments were analyzed to determine whether students had

misconceptions. For each item, the answers were categorized based on like answers and patterns

in the data collected. The categories were compared to current scientific explanations and the

answers that did not align were considered misconceptions. Specifically, answers for item one of

the pre- and post-assessment should have reflected an understanding of ferromagnetic material.

Selection of items that did not contain iron, nickel, or cobalt showed a possible misconception

that all metals are attracted to a magnet. Selection of items that are non-metallic would indicate a

misconception that all materials are influenced by a magnet. Item two answers of the pre- and

post-assessment helped to clarify students’ conceptions in item one. For item three of the pre-

and post-assessment, we looked for trends in reasoning as to the influence of size on a magnet’s

strength. The answers that indicated misconceptions did not reflect an understanding that size is

not a determinant of strength. Item four answers of the pre-assessment demonstrated basic

awareness of magnetic field by students acknowledging that objects do not have to be touching a

magnet to be affected by the object. Further understanding of students’ concept of magnetic field

came from their explanations. These explanations were categorized and evaluated based on

current scientific explanations. For item five of the pre-assessment and item four of the post-

assessment, we evaluated the students’ concepts of the source of magnetism. The drawings were

categorized to find trends in concepts. The drawings that represent misconceptions did not

indicate understanding of magnetic poles or domains within the magnet. Item six answers of the

pre-assessment reflected students’ understanding that electrical current in motion creates a

magnetic field. The categories created from student responses helped determine the extent of

student understanding.

Results

After performing our pre-assessment, we analyzed the collected data and found some

common misconceptions among the fourth graders. These misconceptions included thinking that

all metal is attracted to magnets, that the strength of a magnet can be determined by its size, and

varying misconceptions about the source of magnetism. When answering pre-assessment

question number one regarding metal items, students identified only fifty-five percent of the

items correctly (see Figure 3). These percentages were calculated by comparing expected

responses to actual responses for each item and by separating the items by metal and non-metal.

Our analysis of question two revealed the possible explanation of question one results. In

question two, fifty-nine percent of students explained that magnets are attracted to all metals (see

Figure 4). This conclusion was made by categorizing the written responses. Thirteen of the

twenty-two students responded that all metals are attracted. Secondly, in question number three,

nearly seventy-three percent of the students said that the strength of a magnet could be

determined by its size (see Figure 5). We concluded this by categorizing the students’ written

responses. Fourteen of the twenty-two students believed that bigger magnets equaled stronger

attraction. For pre-assessment question four, students responded as to whether an object needs to

touch a magnet to be affected by the magnet. One hundred percent of students responded with a

correct no answer. However, only one student gave a reasonable explanation. The remainder of

students had a variety of explanations with no prevailing explanation (see figure 1)

Figure 1

Does an object have to touch a magnet to be affected by the magnet?

100% answered with a correct NO - of those:

Percentage Count Explanation

>5% 1 Good reasoning of magnetic field

>5% 1 Depends of object

9% 2 Depends on strength

9% 2 Depends on Electricity or electrons

14% 3 Has Force or power

14% 3 Has magnetism

14% 3 It just can

18% 4 Depends on of magnet size

14% 3 no explanation

In answering question five, no student was able to draw an acceptable model of magnetism that

included north and south poles and magnetic domains. The results were split almost into thirds

with thirty-five percent showing models of electricity, thirty percent models of particle attraction,

and thirty percent magnetism located on the ends of a magnet (see Figure 6). From these results,

we concluded that students had varying misconceptions about the source of magnetism. In our

final pre-assessment question, students had a variety of responses with only two of the twenty-

two students showing a reasonable connection between magnetism and electricity. Twenty-three

percent of students responded that there was no link and twenty-seven stated that electricity is

needed for magnetism (see Figure 2)

From our pre-assessment analysis, we decided to teach two different lessons to address

the students’ conceptions (see Appendix C). In our first lesson, we addressed the students’

misconception that all metals are attracted to magnets. The topic of our first inquiry lesson was

determining the particular metals that are attracted to magnets. While analyzing materials and

making predictions, students learned materials that are ferromagnetic, such as iron, nickels, and

cobalt, are attracted to a magnet. In our second lesson, we addressed the students’ misconception

that size can determine magnetic strength and students’ misconceptions about the source of

magnetism. The topic of our second inquiry lesson was determining if size of a magnet indicates

strength. Students did investigations with different size magnets in which the strongest was the

smallest. The students found that magnetic fields are different among magnets and that strength

does not always coincide with the size of the magnet. Additionally, in the lesson’s “Explain”

section, the concept of the source of magnetism was addressed as students learned that strength

depended on the alignment of domains. Two different models, one concrete and one pictorial,

were used to help explain the concept of domains. These lessons addressed the Michigan

Curriculum Framework Science Benchmarks (2000) Motion of Objects (PMO) IV.3.3 which

Figure 2

Is there a link between magnetism and electricity?

Explanation Count PercentageElectricity can be used to make magnets 2 9%Magnetism is needed for electricity 2 9%Electricity and magnetism are attracted 2 9%Similar in operation 2 9%No link 5 23%Electricity is needed for magnetism 6 27%No Response 3 14%

What materials are attracted to a magnet?Correct Responses of Metals / Non-Metals

0102030405060708090

100

Non-Metal MetalResponses

Per

cen

tag

eo

fCo

rrec

tR

esp

on

ses

Pre-assessment Post-assessment

states, “All students will describe how things around us move, explain why things move as they

do, and demonstrate and explain how we control the motions of objects: Elementary: 3. Describe

patterns of interaction of magnetic materials with other magnetic and non-magnetic materials”

(p. 27).

After teaching two inquiry model based lessons, we conducted a post-assessment in

which we analyzed and organized the data into categories as in our pre-assessment. Our analysis

of post-assessment item one showed that eighty-six percent of the students were able to identify

metals, ferromagnetic materials that would attract to a magnet (see Figure 3). Additionally,

students’ explanations expressed in item two showed that eighty percent of the students

understand that only some metals are attracted to magnets (see Figure 4). Of this eighty percent,

six-five percent were able to name one or more of the ferromagnetic materials. From our analysis

of item three, we concluded that sixty percent of students correctly answered with reasonable

explanation that size is not an indicator of magnetic strength (see Figure 5). Lastly, from our

analysis of item four, we concluded that sixty percent of the students gained understanding of the

source of magnetism by using domains and poles as part of their drawing (see Figure 6).

Figure 3

Reasons Objects are Attracted to Magnets

0102030405060708090

All Metals CertainMetals

Electrons,Atoms

Electricity Other

Reponses

Per

cen

tag

eo

fR

esp

on

ses

Pre-assessment Post-assessment

Figure 4

Is size a determinant of magnetic strength?

PRE-ASSESSMENT

POST-ASSESSMENTRESPONSES

Percentage Count Percentage Count

Incorrect YES (Total) 72.7% 16 25% 5Bigger is stronger 63.7% 14 10% 2

Smaller is stronger 0% 0 15% 3

Other 9% 2 0% 0Correct NO (Total) 27.3% 6 75% 15

Depends on domains 0% 0 40% 8

Other reasonable explanations 9% 2 20% 2

Faulty explanations 18.3% 4 15% 5

Figure 5

Drawing Explanations of Magnetism

010203040506070

Electricity Particle,Atom

Magnetismat ends

Magneticfield force

Magneticpoles

Domains

Responses

Per

cen

tag

eo

fR

esp

on

ses

Pre-assessment Post-assessment

Conclusion:

The results and conclusions answer our research question, “How does our teaching, with

the use of models, influence students’ learning and change any misconceptions they may have

about magnetism?” After teaching two inquiry lessons utilizing models, results indicate that our

teaching influenced students’ learning by showing changes in students’ misconceptions toward

more scientific reasoning. These gains were apparent when comparing our pre- and post-

assessments. For question items one and two in the pre-assessment, we found fifty-five percent

of the students could identify materials that are attracted to magnets and fifty-nine percent of

students believed that all metals would be attracted to a magnet. This is comparable to the results

from Hickey and Schibeci (1999) where forty-four percent of participants stated that magnets are

attracted to all metals. In our lesson one, students through inquiry found what metals are

attracted to magnets. Additionally, we used a pictorial model that helped explain the

Figure 6

ferromagnetic materials that will attract to a magnet. These methods significantly affected

students’ learning as indicated by the post-assessment results showing that eighty-six percent of

students correctly identified materials that are attracted to magnets (see figure 3 in Results), an

improvement of thirty-one percent. Additionally, only five percent of students indicated that all

metals are attracted to a magnet (see figure 4 in Results), a fifty-five percent improvement.

Another gain was shown in the results of post-assessment item three where we asked

students if it is possible to judge the strength of a magnet by its size (see Figure 5 in Results).

Before our second lesson, 64% believed that a bigger magnet would be stronger. Our pre-

assessment results were similar to that of Hickey and Schibeci (1999) with 42% of participants

indicating that larger magnets have greater attraction. In comparing the participants’ responses of

this study with our study, we found similar ideas that strength depended on the size of the

magnet, on electron alignment, and on the material of the magnet. To attack this misconception,

our second lesson used inquiry methods providing students with different strength magnets to

explore and test. Additionally, we used pictorial and concrete models showing magnetic

domains to build an understanding of the source of magnetism and of magnetic domains to

explain magnetic strength. The post-assessment indicated an improvement of fifty-one percent,

as sixty percent of the students correctly identify and adequately explain that size is not an

indicator of strength. The sixty percent is a combined percentage comprised of forty percent of

students indicating that strength depends on the alignment of domains and twenty percent with

other reasonable explanations.

While teaching about magnetic strength, our second lesson also addressed students’

conception of how magnetism works. In post-assessment item four, students drew models

explaining magnetism. We found sixty percent of the students used magnetic domains as an

explanation and thirty-five percent included poles in their explanations. Two respondents used

poles only as an explanation of magnetism, which is reflected in Figure 6. This is a change from

zero percent using poles and zero percent using domains in the pre-assessment (see Figure 6 in

Results). Although students used the ideas of domains and poles, they did not always use them

accurately. However, the drawings did show an improvement in understanding of the concepts.

Although gains in understanding were observed, not all misconceptions were changed.

Thirty-five percent of the students held on to their misconceptions about what materials are

attracted to magnets, forty percent still could not explain why a larger magnet does not

necessarily mean a stronger magnet, and forty percent still could not explain magnetism with

domains and poles. To address these continued misconceptions additional lessons would need to

be taught.

Our results added to existing research of Almudí, Guisasola, and Zubimendi (2003) and

Hickey and Schibeci (1999) as both focused on misconceptions of high school and college

students. Our action research expanded the research into elementary students uncovering that

younger students hold similar misconceptions as older students suggesting that these

misconceptions begin early in education. Additionally, our research shows that by using models

in inquiry based lessons students’ misconceptions can be influenced towards conceptions that are

more scientific. Therefore, if these misconceptions are to be changed, starting earlier in students’

education may be beneficial.

Cynthia Currado

Reflection

It was a great learning experience being able to plan, write, and carry out our lesson plans

on magnetism. It was also interesting to find out that not a lot of research had been done on the

topic of misconceptions and magnetism with young students. Magnets seem to be a part of

science that really intrigues young students. From working in elementary classrooms, I have seen

how excited students get when exploring with magnets. What I have not seen was the way we

did our lessons with our target group. Using an inquiry method of teaching and using models as

our “Big Idea” really had an affect on how the students learned. When students were testing the

strength of magnets, they were able to try things on their own. With the use of our pictorial

models, they were able to connect their results with new knowledge to correct their

misconception that a large magnet would always be stronger than a smaller one. It was great to

see how clever some of the students were when coming up with ways to test their magnets.

Without a lesson such as this, they would not have had the opportunity to try some of the things

they did. One group was able to keep stacking paper together to see how strong the magnet was

by reacting to metal through a thick object. I have learned that even younger students benefit

from doing what we did in many of our inquiry classes, using white boards to make graphical

models of their data. The students seemed so confident in their learning when they reported their

findings in that manner. From our post-assessment, we were able to see results that showed a lot

of growth in the students’ understanding of the concept of magnetism.

Doing this type of research, while working with students, has helped me grow as a pre-

service teacher. Working with students while at the same time gathering evidence to use in

research gave me a chance to see that teaching is not just for the benefit of the students in the

classroom but for all students. Our research can help develop plans to make changes in the way

all subjects are taught. I have learned that using a “Big Idea” in science gives much more

dimension to teaching along with using inquiry learning. Using models enabled us to show the

students more about the concept of magnetism, something that is difficult to comprehend at a

young or even older age, as we found in our research. I believe students’ misconceptions,

especially on size versus strength, may not have changed if we had not used models as part of

our lesson. We did conclude that the students would still need more instruction on the concept of

magnetism; hopefully, they will not have the same misconceptions as they get older.

I would like to visit the idea of an action research project in the field of special education

once I start teaching. I would like to continue research on different methods of educating

students with autism. From the positive experience that I have had working on this action

research project, I most likely will get involved in other action research projects when I start

teaching. While teaching, I will use inquiry lessons as much as I possible; I also like the idea of

having a “Big Idea” in my lessons. It supports the opportunity for students to make connections

in the real world around them.

Katherine Crunk

Reflection

Conducting this action research has been a positive experience for both the classroom

involved and myself. For the cooperating teacher, we were the first pre-service teachers that he

has had in his classroom. Therefore, the action research was an experience for him. Our five E’s

inquiry lessons showed him a different way of teaching science. He stated that he uses a style

similar to inquiry but the concepts are introduced first and then the students explore. With

inquiry, he noticed that the students were engaged, excited, and focused on the task. I hope that

our teaching influenced this teacher to use the five E’s inquiry learning with future lessons.

The students enjoyed our time with them. After our second lesson, several students asked

what fun things we were doing the next week. Unfortunately, we were teaching only two lessons.

Besides having fun, the students were influenced by our teaching with inquiry and models. The

inquiry exploration was important in changing their misconceptions, as they become part of the

learning process. Instead of being told what to think, they were allowed to discover on their own.

During the explain portion of the lesson, we utilized models and explained the “Big Idea” of

models to students. We explained how models can help us learn about concepts that are difficult

to see with our eyes. For example, when we discussed magnetic domains, our concrete model, a

tube with metal shavings and a magnet, helped students visualize the microscopic domains in

ferromagnetic material turning and lining up to be attracted to a magnet. As we showed this

model, we explained what each part of the model represented and made sure that they understood

that the model was not the actual thing. The metal shavings just represented magnetic domains.

The models that we used were affective in helping the students understand magnetism.

Overall, we saw positive gains in addressing students’ misconceptions. However, these

changes were not complete. Some students still held onto their misconceptions and some were

just beginning to form new understanding. A few things could have been changed in our lessons

to help this. First, on our data sheet used to compare metals in the first lesson, we included all

elements of the materials, for example, carbon was in some items. This confused students

causing them to think that carbon is also ferromagnetic, which was reflected in the post-

assessment. In the future, I would just include metal elements. Also, while exploring size and

strength, one group chose to use the distance of attraction to measure strength. The results of

their experiments did not support our lesson that sometimes smaller can be stronger. The

members of this group now believe that smaller magnets are stronger based on their findings.

We tried to address this issue by demonstrating with the whole class additional magnets where

the large magnet was the strongest. However, on the post-assessment, these students stated that

because of their groups experiment results, smaller is stronger. If I were to teach this lesson

again, I would discourage students from using the distance method and I would give a little more

time to the explain or have students find that the larger magnet can be stronger.

From the rough places in our lessons, I realized the impact that teachers have on students.

On the positive side, I saw students’ ideas changing and experiencing growth. The action

research was my first experience where I actually observed the affects of my teaching. On the

negative side, I saw how little errors, lack of planning, or lack of foresight could affect students

learning.

As a teacher, I would enjoy being involved in action research studies at my school. I

believe that research is important to understanding how students think and learn. In my own

classroom, I will conduct my own mini action researches to evaluate myself as a teacher and to

know what lessons to teach. First, I would conduct pre-assessments covering the content that I

want to teach. The results would give me an idea of what misconceptions the students have so

that I can plan my lessons. Then I would give a post-assessment to see the affects of my

teaching. My experiences with the action research project showed me that I do not have to be

concerned only with the students learning and growth but also with my own as my teaching

successes and failures as they have direct affect on my students.

References:

Almudí, J. M., Guisasola, J., & Zubimendi, J. L. (2003). Difficulties in learning the introductory

magnetic field theory in the first years of university [electronic version]. Science

Education, 88(3), 443-464.

Brown-Struthers, S. (2002).Using action research to address the scale and

structure of magnets. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from

http://www.umd.umich.edu/sep/students/sbrownst/sbrownst_arrep.htm

Gilbert, S. W. & Ireton, S.W. (2003). Understanding Models in Earth and Space Science.

Arlington Virginia: NSTA Press.

Hickey, R. & Schibeci, R.A. (1999). The attraction of magnetism [electronic version]. Physics

Education, 34(6), 383-388.

Michigan curriculum framework (2000) (Electronic Version) Retrieved on November 11, 2007

from Michigan Department of Education web site:

http://www.michigan.gov/documents/MichiganCurriculumFramework_8172_7.pdfl.

Northville Public Schools. (n.d.). Gifted program. Retrieved October 25, 2007, from

http://www.northville.k12.mi.us/instruction/gifted/pdfs/gifted-programs-2007-2008.pdf

Appendix A

Time Schedule

Appendix A

Tentative Time Schedule

Each step was jointly developed and administered by both Katherine Crunk and Cynthia Currado.

Both parties were equally responsible for each step.

DATE RESEARCH STEP

October 17, 2007 Observation

October 31, 2007 Pre-assessment

November 7, 2007 Taught lesson one

November 14, 2007 Taught lesson two

November 21, 2007 Post-assessment

Appendix B

Pre-assessment

Post- assessment

NAME: _____________________ PRE-ASSESSMENT DATE:_____________

1) What materials are attracted to a magnet? Check all that apply.

Paper clip in a glass of water Card board Stainless steel spoon

foam Penny Glass rod

quarter wood Copper wire

key Aluminum foil Plastic straw

2) Explain why magnets are attracted to your choices above.

3) Can you judge how strong a magnet will be by its size? Explain your thinking.

4) Does a magnet have to touch an object to affect the object? Explain why or why not.

5) Draw a picture of what you think is going on inside a magnet to make it work. Use labelsas needed to help explain your drawing.

6) Is there a link between magnetism and electricity? Explain your thinking.

NAME: ______________ POST-ASSESSMENT DATE: ___________

1) What materials are attracted to a magnet? Check all that apply.

Paper Clip Cardboard Spoon

Canadian Dime U.S. Penny Glass

U.S. Quarter Wood Copper Wire

Screw Aluminum Foil Plastic Straw

Foam Key Canadian Nickel

2) Explain why magnets are attracted to your choices above.

3) Can you judge how strong a magnet will be by its size?Explain your thinking.

4) Draw a picture of what you think is going on inside a magnet to make it work. Use labels tohelp explain your drawing.

Appendix C

Lesson Plans

Cynthia CurradoKathy Crunk

Magnetism Lesson Plan

Grade Level: 4th grade

Concept: Students are familiar with magnets. However, they have some misconceptions aboutwhich metals are attracted to magnets. Students will work in groups to make predictions and testmetallic items that will and will not be attracted to magnets.

Michigan Curriculum Framework Science Content Benchmarks Summer, 2000Constructing New Scientific Knowledge (C) I.1.2 All students will design and conductinvestigations using appropriate methodology and technology: Elementary: 2. Develop solutionsto problems through reasoning, observation, and investigations.

Constructing New Scientific Knowledge (C) I.1.6 All students will communicate findings ofinvestigations, using appropriate technology. Elementary: 6. Construct charts and graphs andprepare summaries of observations.

Motion of Objects (PMO) IV.3.3 All students will describe how things around us move, explainwhy things move as they do, and demonstrate and explain how we control the motions ofobjects: Elementary: 3. Describe patterns of interaction of magnetic materials with othermagnetic and non-magnetic materials.

Objectives:Students will:

• Learn that not all metallic objects are attracted to a magnet.• Learn that objects that are made of ferromagnetic material, such as iron, nickel, and cobalt,will be attracted to a magnet.• Make predictions and test their predictions• Analyze materials of objects tested and compare similarities and differences.• Students will give examples and show understanding of Models, “big science idea,” as waysfor us to learn and think about a science concept like magnetism.

Materials: 6 prepared bags containing one of each: Canadian quarter, dime, nickel, and penny;

American quarter, dime, nickel, and penny; brass nut, steel washer, steel screw, keys,paperclip, coated paper clip, staples, aluminum foil ball, scissors, and spoon

6 magnets 1 copy for each student of “Magnus Gets Stuck” (Piotrowski, ed., 2003) 1 copy for each student of magnetism worksheets 6 copies of Metals Used to Make Items 6 group size whiteboards Dry erase markers

Teacher prepared poster that includes picture of magnet, magnetic field lines, andpictures of iron ore, nickel ore, and cobalt ore. Also smaller pictures of items that attractto magnets not attached to poster for students to put on, including Canadian nickel, dime,and quarter, paper clip, coated paper clip, screw, washer, staples, and spoon.

Safety concerns: Magnets and objects should be kept away from students’ faces particularly themouth and eyes. Magnets should also be kept away from computers, disks, and flash drives.Once the Explore step is finished, materials should be returned to bag and returned to the teacher.Additionally, all students should wash their hands after handling the different metals.

Engage:1. Teacher will hand out and have students take turns reading aloud the story

“Magnus Gets Stuck.” This folk tale is about a young boy who is able to climb the rockymountains of Turkey to take care of a herd of sheep. He finds that his new sandals, withlarge nails in the soles, are attracted to the rock. He also finds that the metaltip of his spear and a tool in his pocket are also attracted to the rock.

2. Teacher will ask if students are familiar with a rock that has the same property of amagnet. Show students a lodestone and its ability to attract a paper clip. Lodestone is anatural magnet. Other than the nails in Magnus’ shoes, what else do you think will beattracted to a magnet? Teacher will make a list on board with students’ ideas.

3. Teacher: Today, we will test several items to check for attraction and to find similaritiesamong these items. As we explore, we are looking to answer the question, “Whatproperties are similar among attracted items?” As we explore what are some possiblesimilarities we could look for? (Make sure the idea of different metals is included.)

Explore:1. Teacher: We learned by our story that magnets are found in their natural state, as in

lodestone, but today we will be using magnets that are man-made. You will be dividedinto six groups to explore our question “What properties are similar among attracteditems?” Each group will have a bag with the same items to check for the ability to beattracted to a magnet. Each group will determine a timekeeper, to stay focused; arecorder, to write group results on whiteboard; a spokesperson to share group results; anda tester to use the magnet.

2. Put students into groups3. Pass out bags of items, worksheets, whiteboards, and markers.4. Students will first make predictions for each item recording prediction on worksheet

including whether the item will be attracted to a magnet and explaining predictions.Remember we are looking for similar properties.

5. Once predictions are made, the teacher will hand the magnet to the tester and studentswill test predictions and record answers on worksheet.

6. Once predictions are tested and recorded, students will be given sheet to identify metalsused to make each item. Instruct the students to look at what metals are in the items thatwere attracted and compare them to each other. Also, compare to the items that did notattract. What similarities do you find?

7. Record findings on large group white boards to share with class.

Explain:

1. Each group will share findings and conclusions with the class on whiteboards. Teacherwill ask: By looking at your results what can we say about the properties of the materialsthat were attracted to the magnet? (The findings should show that materials with a lot ofiron and nickel was attracted) Did anyone find any item that was attracted that was notmade of mostly iron or nickel? Materials that are attracted to magnets are ferromagnetic.The three ferromagnetic materials are iron, nickel, and cobalt.

2. Show students the pictorial model (poster) of magnets and explain the use of models inscience. Teacher: Here is a poster of a magnet and the materials that are attracted tomagnets. This poster is a model of magnets. Models are a “Big Idea” in science becausethey are used in all area of science including biology, chemistry, physics, and earthscience. There are many different kinds of models. This one is a pictorial model. Whatother models can you think of that we might use to understand different scienceconcepts? In science, we use models to help us learn and understand different concepts.However, in our explore work today, we used real magnets because using the real thing isalways better if you are able to use it. This model though gives us pictures to see whatwe do not have available, such as the actual metal ore, and what we cannot see with oureyes, such as the magnetic field lines. What similarities does our model have to a realmagnet and real ore? What differences are there?

3. Pass out pictures of the items tested in the explore stage. Have the students place themon the poster by the ore picture that shows the metal that the item had the most of incomposition.

4. By what we can see, of the metals we tested today that were attracted by your magnets,most were made of from iron. However, the older Canadian quarters, nickels and dimeswere made with 99.9% nickel. New Canadian coins are now made like our money andwill not be attracted by a magnet. U.S. coins are mostly made from mostly copper. Iscopper one of the metals that will attract? Cobalt is harder to get, so none of our exampleswere made from cobalt. Cobalt is used in making the very powerful Alnico magnets(Aluminum, nickel, cobalt) that are used in electric motors, microphones, and speakers.From our results, then what properties are similar among materials that are attracted tomagnets? Is it proper to say “all metals” are attracted?

Extend/Apply:

Vending machine companies have a problem with people being dishonest. Some people will tryto get free pop and snacks by using slugs or washers in the machines. With what you know now,what would suggest the companies do to prevent this problem? Why will your suggestion work?Write your answers in a paragraph. After students turn in their papers, ask the students for ideas.(The ideas should include using a magnet).

Evaluate: Collect prediction papers to assess making predictions and testing predictions. Observe students’ completed group boards and discussion to assess analysis of materials

similarities and differences. Observe students’ answers and discussion to asses whether they understand models and

how they are used. Use the answers from the paragraphs to see if students realize that not all metallic objects

are attracted to a magnet, and able to identify the metals that are attracted to a magnet..

References

Piotrowski, B.A. (Ed.). (2003). Magnus gets stuck. Foss science stories: Magnetism and

electricity. (1-4). Berkeley, CA: Delta Education.

Holgate, S. & Kerrod, R. (2002). Electricity and magnetism. The way science works. (134-137)

New York: DK Publishing.

Wicker, G. (2007). Magnetism-what magnets. Retrieved on 11-04-2007 from

http://www.lessonplanspage.com/ScienceMagnetismUnit1WhatAttracts2.htm

Magnus Gets Stuck

Magnus could hear the sound of his sheep in the mountains. He knew thatit was not a good sign. It meant that one or two of them had fallen into the cracksbetween the rocks and he would have to go and rescue them.

Magnus loved his sheep and even more, he loved the mountains. He hadnever been to this valley before. He was excited to be able to find new places toexplore.

Baaa. Baaa.The sound was coming from behind a large, dark rock. The rock was much

higher than Magnus could reach, but he was able to climb over it.“This will be a good test for my new sandals,” he said to himself.Magnus had saved all winter for his new sandals. He spent all of his money

from helping his family sell wool at the market. The large nails in the soles ofsandals gave him extra traction when he climbed the mountainous terrain wherehe watched his family’s herd of sheep.

Magnus held one foot up, looked at her large circles of metal on the solesof his sandals, and smiled. Then he leaped onto the rock and started climbing.“Don’t worry, little lamb,” he said aloud. “I’ll be there in a minute.”

As he scrambled over the rocks, his new sandals gripped the surface evenbetter than he had expected. In fact, each time he tried to lift up his feet, theystuck to the surface of the rock. “What is happening?” he asked himself. There isnothing on the bottom of my sandal to make them stick, he thought.

Magnus touched the rock to see if it was sticky. The rock felt fine, yet hewas puzzled. He took a few more steps and could not believe the feeling that hewas having. With every step, he was sticking to the rock. He laid his spear downto get a better look at the rock and when he did the tool in his pocket fell onto therock. He tried to pick it up and it was stuck to the rock! This seemed like sometype of magic to him. “This is incredible!” he shouted. He went to pick up hisspear and found the metal tip of that stuck to the rock too.

“I can’t wait to tell my family. They will be amazed at the way this rockbehaves,” he said as he bent down to chip away a piece of the rock to take withhim.

“It’s a good thing you are not made of metal,” he said to the lamb. Magnuspulled the lamb free and headed down from the mountain.

Many years later, Magnus told the story to his family of how he firstdiscovered the amazing rock. A traveler from the far-off land of Magnesia toldstories of similar rocks. He called them magnets because they came fromMagnesia. However, the people of Magnus’s village knew they were really namedafter the shepherd boy who first discovered them.

This is a folktale retold from the Foss Science Stories, Magnets, and Electricity.Published by Delta Education. 2003.

“What properties are similar among attracted items?”

Prediction Test it. Did itattract?

Item

Yes No

Explain Prediction.

What properties do you think will allow attraction?Why do you think this will attract?

Yes No

U.S. Penny

U.S. Quarter

U.S. Nickel

U.S. Dime

Canadian Penny

Canadian Nickel

Canadian Dime

CanadianQuarterPaperclip

Colored paperclipScrew

Brass Nut

Washer

Staples

Copper Wire

Spoon

Aluminum Foil

Key

“What properties are similar among attracted items?”

Item Metals Used to Make Items

U.S. Penny 98% Zinc and 2% Copper

U.S. Quarter 92% Copper and 8% Nickel

U.S. Nickel 75% Copper and 25% Nickel

U.S. Dime 92% Copper and 8% Nickel

Canadian Penny Years 1942 – 1996 used 98% Copper and 2% Tin

CanadianNickel

Year 1955 – 1981 used 99.9% Nickel;

Years 1982 – 2001 used 25% Nickel and 75% CopperCanadian Dime 99.9% Nickel

CanadianQuarter

99.9% Nickel

Paperclip 99.95% Iron and 0.05% Carbon

Colored paperclip

Thin plastic coating & 99.95% Iron and .05% Carbon

Screw 99.4% Iron 0.6% Carbon

Brass Nut Brass made of 65% Copper and 35% Zinc

Washer 99.4% Iron and 0.6% Carbon

Staples 99.95% Iron and .05% Carbon

Copper Wire Copper

Spoon 79% Iron, 1% Carbon, and 20% Chromium

Aluminum Foil Aluminum

Magnetism Lesson 2 Plan

Title: Magnetism Related to Size of Magnet

Grade Level: 4th grade

Concept: Students are familiar with magnets. However, they have some misconceptions aboutthe size of the magnet and its relationship to strength of magnetism. Students will work ingroups to make predictions and test magnets of different sizes to determine if strength isdetermined by size.

Michigan Curriculum Framework Science Content Benchmarks Summer, 2000

Constructing New Scientific Knowledge (C) I.1.2 All students will design and conductinvestigations using appropriate methodology and technology: Elementary: 2. Develop solutionsto problems through reasoning, observation, and investigations.

Constructing New Scientific Knowledge (C) I.1.6 All students will communicate findings ofinvestigations, using appropriate technology. Elementary: 6. Construct charts and graphs andprepare summaries of observations.

Motion of Objects (PMO) IV.3.3 All students will describe how things around us move, explainwhy things move as they do, and demonstrate and explain how we control the motions ofobjects: Elementary: 3. Describe patterns of interaction of magnetic materials with othermagnetic and non-magnetic materials.

Objectives:

Students will:

Learn that the size of a magnet is not a predictable factor of the strength of a magnet. make predictions and test their predictions Show understanding of Models as a “big science idea” in science allowing us to learn and

think about a science concept

Materials:

6 strong small magnets each in a small Ziploc bag 6 weaker larger magnets each in a small Ziploc bag 1 large strong magnet 1 copy of lab worksheet for each group 6 boxes of 100 small paper clips 6 group size whiteboards dry erase markers

Key Brass made of 65% Copper and 35% Zinc

Paper clips attracted by magnets

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3

Magnets

Nu

mb

ero

fC

lip

s

Magnet 1

Magnet 2

rulers Tube of metal shavings filled only half full 1 teacher generated poster of a magnet with moveable pieces to represent magnetic

domains.

Safety concerns: Magnets and objects should be kept away from students’ faces particularly themouth and eyes. Magnets should also be kept away from computers, disks, and flash drives.Once the Explore step is finished, materials should be returned to bag and returned to the teacher.

Engage:1. Last week we looked at what materials will be attracted by a magnet. Before exploring,

we all knew that metals are attracted but did not know what kinds of metal. Now weknow the types of metal and the name scientists have given these materials. Who can tellus one of those metals? Keep asking until all three are stated, which are iron, nickel, andcobalt. Ask if anyone remembers the name scientists call these metals, which isferromagnetic.

2. Teacher: Magnets are used for many different things. Who can name some things that usemagnets? Write these answers on the board. When manufacturers of products decide onwhat magnet to use, what factors do you think they need to consider? (The answers mightinclude material used, size used, and strength used.) One question that would need to beanswered when considering strength, “How can we test the strength of a magnet?” Takestudent suggestions, steering them towards seeing how much weight a magnet can holdbefore it lets go. Today we are exploring this question, “Does size of the magnetdetermine the strength of the magnet?”

Explore:

1. Show the students the materials that they will use for their exploration. Each group willreceive two magnets each in a small Ziploc bag. Tell the students that the magnets needto stay in the Ziploc bags, as the small one is extremely small and easy to lose. If both arekept in a bag the variable of a bag will be the same for both magnets. Each group willalso receive one box of small paper clips and 1 ruler. As a whole group talk aboutdifferent possible ways to test the strength of the magnets and remind students of thequestion, “Does the size of a magnet determine the strength of a magnet?”

2. Explain the procedure of this lab. First students should make a prediction and record onsheet. Next, they should decide on a procedure that they would use to test strength andrecord on sheet. This may be one of theprocedures thought of listed on the board.Then, they will conduct three trials of thesame procedure with both magnets andrecord the results. Lastly, they shouldmake a bar graph showing results on whiteboard. So students understand how tomake a bar graph, make one on the boardto demonstrate. Explain that the numberwill be different depending on their resultsbut this is the basic format for their graph.

3. Pass out the lab worksheets, materials,

whiteboards, and markers.4. Once they understand these procedures students should begin their testing.

Explain:

1. Each group will report their results. Does any group show the larger magnet as beingstronger? Common sense tells us that is something is bigger it is stronger but from whatwe see this is not always the case with magnets. Sometimes, smaller magnets are strongerthan larger magnets. How do we explain this?

2. All magnetic material is made up of tiny microscopic regions called magnetic domains.(Show poster with domains) Here is a model similar to what we had last week, as it isalso a pictorial model to help us understand magnetism. Magnetic domains are part ofthe structure of ferromagnetic materials, like iron, cobalt, and nickel that we learnedabout last week. Each domain acts as a tiny magnet with a north and south pole.

3. When these domains point in random directions, they cancel each other out and nomagnetic field is produced. (Have poster domains in random order.) When these domainsline up with the north poles pointing in the same direction, a magnetic field is produced.(Line up domains to point in same direction) The more domains that line up the strongerthe magnet is.

4. So, between our tiny magnet and larger magnet, which magnet has more domains linedup?

5. We can model the lining up of domains with a tube of metal shavings and a magnet. Inthis functional model, the metal shavings represent magnetic domains in a ferromagneticitem like a nail made of iron. In reality, the metal shavings are not domains but we canuse them to help us understand the concept of domains as it will behave in a similarmanor. Remember models are not the real things but they help us to understand thetarget, the real thing. When a magnet comes close, the domains line up and are attractedlike little magnets. (Teacher to demonstrate model)

Extend/Apply: As a whole class, the students will make predictions of the strength of a varietyof magnets ranging in size. In this case, the strongest magnet should be the largest magnet. Writethe prediction on the board. Test each magnet by using one of used methods in the Explore.Record the results on the board. Ask the students, “What does this show us about the predictingthe strength of a magnet? Can we tell by just looking at the size?”

Evaluate:

You and your friend are shopping for magnets for a school science project. You need a strongmagnet to hold part of your experiment together. Your friend says he wants to buy the largestmagnet because it will be the strongest. How will you respond to your friend? Explain usingwhat you know about magnetic strength and magnetic domains.

1. We will collect written student responses to the extend/apply question on size of amagnet.

2. Observe students as they make predictions and test them.3. We will check for students’ understanding of models by observing and listening to

discussion.

References

Hopwood, A., Kattell, N. (1999). Magnetic Forces. Retrieved on November 10, 2007 fromhttp://www.eduref.org/Virtual/Lessons/Science/Physical_Sciences/PHY0200.html

Wilson, T. (2007). How Magnets Work. Retrieved on November 12, 2007 fromhttp://science.howstuffworks.com/magnet.htm/printable

Paper clips attracted by magnets

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Trial 1 Trial 2 Trial 3

Magnets

Nu

mb

ero

fC

lip

s

Magnet 1

Magnet 2

LAB WORKSHEET

Make a prediction: Which magnet will be the strongest?

Describe your testing procedure.

When you are finished with your testing, you are to make a graphthat is large enough for the whole class to see.

Your graph should be a bar graph similar to this one but using anumber scale that fits your data.

Make sure your graph has a titleand labels.