group lab concept

It's weird and difficult to let students teach my sacred cows. For instance, today groups attempted to teach faults and earthquake location, which I consider my "specialties." I just want to jump in and give my old lessons, but why? Just because I love it and have some knowledge doesn't mean they will love it, nor does it mean any of it will be absorbed or retained, or is even important. I think maybe this level is better because it lets everyone distill just the basic facts from these lessons, with the end goal not being to understand earthquakes, but to know how they might affect us here in Missoula. I guess a minimal understanding is important, but my old lesson plan was probably too deep.

How deep should we go? I just thought of creating some kind of big ven diagram poster at the beginning of each year that shows subsets of knowledge about some topic. For example: humanity, transportation, vehicles, bicycles, parts, wheels, rims, cast aluminum, metallurgy, mining. Then we would number the levels, with humanity being 1 and mining being 10. We could refer to this diagram throughout the year to describe how deeply we are delving into a particular topic, either before of after the fact. I'd say with earthquakes I would take them to level 10 several times during the unit. I think this is good for the brain, especially when math and logic and reasoning skills are involved.

It's becoming clear that a PBL unit is not about going deeply into any particular subject unless it's necessary for the outcome of the project. The outcome is paramount here, and the detailed knowledge is only a means to an end, not the end itself. Traditionally, that's backward. Knowledge is king in most high schools, and grade schools for that matter. What's king in PBL? If the outcome is a product, it can't be that important, can it? Are skills king? Skills gained by the process? What about outlook and attitude toward collaboration and learning? Citizenship.