Scopes Link: https://www.scopesdf.org/lesson-plan-builder/?post=15674

Context for Collaboration

1) Collaboration: In what started as a Faculty Learning Community, I was introduced to a new colleague from the Biology department, Jamila. She was having trouble thinking of ways to integrate fabrication into her coursework. To start I asked her about what courses she taught and what she was interested in for the biology course and what got students interested. This lead to discussing how the biological word 'learns' through interactions with the material word - like how plants grow towards the sun or how fungus and bacterial 'learn' to move and shape themselves towards something they need - like a food source. This got me thinking to create mazes for pea plants as a way to integrate fabrication and growing plants. Jamila helped me to consider 3 different 'challenges' for designing the mazes and what's reasonable for pea plants to consider. This collaboration was really helpful to get me to think of plants as much more complex agents for experimenting and how using fabrication (such as designing mazes)

2: Instructional Challenges: One instructional challenge I encountered while implementing this lesson with preservice teachers was supporting adult learners in making deep, evidence-based connections between plant observations and the function of their maze box designs. Some initially focused on descriptive summaries rather than engaging in scientific reasoning about how the design elements influenced plant behavior. To address this, I modeled how to interpret plant growth patterns through the lens of environmental design and facilitated small-group discussions using targeted prompts (e.g., “What features of this box might have redirected the plant’s growth?”). I also plan to incorporate collaborative analysis protocols and reflective writing to help preservice teachers articulate the reasoning behind their conclusions. Although these are adult learners, I am intentional about modeling instructional strategies that support diverse learners in K–5 classrooms—such as using visual supports, scaffolding explanatory writing, and offering multiple modes of expression—so that preservice teachers can both experience and deconstruct inclusive science teaching practices that they will one day use with their own students.

3: Integrating Disciplines: The “Plant Growth Through Light Mazes” lesson currently falls under the interdisciplinary category, as it integrates science, engineering, and literacy in a cohesive way around a central investigation—how plants grow in varied 3D-printed environments to reach light. Students apply scientific reasoning, design skills using Tinkercad, and communicate their findings through a digital poster, showing meaningful connections between disciplines. To move the lesson toward a transdisciplinary approach, it could be reframed around a real-world challenge, such as designing plant habitats for space or food-scarce regions, and invite students to pursue their own inquiry questions. Adding real-world context, community connections, and broader ethical or environmental considerations would deepen engagement and allow students to use knowledge across disciplines to solve authentic problems. I chose to model this lesson in a science methods course for future teachers because it demonstrates how to design three-dimensional, standards-aligned instruction that supports authentic inquiry, cross-curricular integration, and student-centered learning—key elements of effective elementary science teaching practice. To move further toward a transdisciplinary model, I plan to collaborate with the literacy methods professor so that future teachers can more explicitly connect scientific reasoning with purposeful reading, writing, and communication strategies across content areas.

Title: Guiding Growth: Training Plants Through Light Mazes

Lesson Plan

Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS)

2-LS4-1

Make observations of plants and animals to compare the diversity of life in different habitats.

Clarification: Emphasis is on the variety of living things in each habitat.

Assessment Boundary: Specific animal and plant names are not required.

3-5-ETS1-2

Generate and compare multiple possible solutions to a problem based on how well each is likely to meet the criteria and constraints of the problem.

Common Core State Standards – ELA Anchor Standards

Writing Standard 6

With some guidance and support from adults, use technology—including the Internet—to produce and publish writing as well as to interact and collaborate with others.

Students should demonstrate sufficient keyboarding skills to type a minimum of one page in a single sitting.

Learning Objectives

1. Biologists will make observations of how plants grow in different maze boxes to compare which environments are easier or harder for them to reach light.
   (Aligned with 2-LS4-1 – diversity in habitats)
   
   

2. Biologists will  describe how plant growth changed in different 3D-printed environments and explain why one habitat design worked better than another.
   (Aligned with 2-LS4-1 and supports scientific reasoning about plant behavior in varied environments)
   
   

3. Biologists will  design and compare at least two different box models for growing a plant toward light and explain which design worked better and why.
   (Aligned with 3-5-ETS1-2 – engineering solutions and constraints)
   
   

4. Biologists will use a computer to create a science poster that explains my plant growth experiment and share my work with others.
   (Aligned with CCSS Anchor Standard W.6 – using technology to publish and collaborate)

Explore Slicing

What is Slicing?

Imagine you want to 3D print something. You have a finished 3D model of it, but what do you do now? 

We need to prepare it for 3D printing using "Slicing" software. The 3D printer needs instructions, like a recipe for baking a cake. Slicing in 3D printing is like cutting the cake into thin layers, but instead of using a knife, we do it with a computer.

Here's how it works:

• Designing: First, you design the object you want to print on a computer. Let's say you want to print a toy car.

• Slicing: Now comes the slicing part. Imagine your toy car is made of many thin layers, like stacked pancakes. The slicing software takes your 3D model and slices it into thousands of these thin layers, like slicing a loaf of bread. Each layer is very thin, like a single page of a book.

• Instructions: After slicing, the software creates instructions for the 3D printer. It tells the printer exactly how to move and where to deposit material for each layer. It's like giving the printer a step-by-step guide on how to build the object, layer by layer.

• Printing: Finally, the 3D printer follows these instructions and starts printing your toy car. It lays down one layer of material at a time, gradually building up the object from the bottom to the top, just like stacking those sliced layers of cake or bread.

So, slicing in 3D printing is like breaking down your 3D model into tiny, printable layers so that the printer knows exactly how to build your object. It's a crucial step that makes 3D printing possible!

Not every 3D printer uses the same Slicing software. For example, our Bambu Lab printer uses BambuStudio while our Prusa printers use PrusaSlicer. These software's also have their differences in usage and capabilities. Understanding the basics of slicing software equips you with the foundational knowledge to operate various 3D printers, as the core principles remain consistent across different printers.

Directions: Create a 3 d image using TinkerCad, alter size and shape, include 1 new feature, and create 1 point with a 'hole"

Tinkercad Design Challenge: Maze Plant Light Blocker

Directions:

1. Create a 3D Object
   Start a new project in Tinkercad and choose or design a 3D object related to our plant maze (e.g., a wall, light blocker, or directional guide for light).
   
   

2. Alter the Size and Shape
   Use the resizing tools to change the dimensions (height, width, or depth) of your object. You can also stretch, rotate, or reshape it to make it your own.
   
   

3. Add One New Feature
   Add something creative or functional—like a handle, a ramp, a curve, or a light filter.
   
   

4. Create One Hole
   Use the “hole” shape tool to cut out one section of your object. This could be for a window, a path for light, or just a design element.
   
   

5. Check Your Work
   Make sure your object is solid (except for the hole!), looks different from the original shape, and includes your added feature.

Tinkercad Challenge: Design 3 Plant Growth Boxes

Objective:
Design three enclosed boxes that each create a different level of challenge for a pea plant to grow through toward light.

Directions:

1. Create Three 3D Enclosed Boxes
   Use the shape tools in Tinkercad to build three separate box-like structures. Each one should be fully enclosed except for an opening or path where light could enter.
   
   

2. Vary the Difficulty
   Make each box progressively more challenging for a plant to grow toward the light:
   
   

   • Box 1 = Easy path (straight or wide opening)

   • Box 2 = Medium challenge (a bend, tunnel, or obstacle)

   • Box 3 = Hard challenge (multiple turns, small openings, or complex barriers)
     
     

3. Alter Size and Shape
   Change the size and shape of each box. Think about how the dimensions might affect plant growth (e.g., taller vs. wider, narrow paths vs. open spaces).

4. Add One New Feature to Each Box
   Include a feature that changes how light enters or how the plant must grow (e.g., a window, curved wall, internal divider, or reflective surface).

5. Include One Hole in Each Box
   Use the "hole" tool to create at least one intentional opening in each box—this could be for light entry or plant exit.

6. Label or Color-Code
   Clearly label or color each box as Easy, Medium, or Hard for plant growth.

Science Poster Directions: Plant Growth Through Light Mazes

Title:
Create a catchy and clear title for your poster (e.g., "Chasing the Light: How Pea Plants Navigate 3D Growth Mazes").

Sections to Include on Your Poster:

1. Question / Purpose

   • What were you trying to find out?

   • Example: How does the shape and structure of a box affect a plant’s ability to grow toward light?

2. Hypothesis

   • What did you predict would happen in each box (easy, medium, hard)?

   • Write a simple “If...then…” statement for each.

3. Materials & Methods

   • List your materials (e.g., pea plants, soil, 3D printed boxes, light source).

   • Briefly describe how you designed your boxes in Tinkercad and how you set up your plant growth experiment.

4. Design Sketches or Screenshots

   • Include labeled drawings or screenshots of each of your three Tinkercad boxes.

   • Clearly label Easy, Medium, and Hard

5. Results (with visuals)

   • Show what happened with the plants in each box

     • Photos or drawings of plant growt

     • A simple data table (e.g., number of days to reach light, length of plant, or growth direction)

     • Use arrows or markers to show how plants grew through the boxes.
       
       

6. Conclusion

   • What did you learn from this experiment?

   • Were your predictions correct? Why or why not?
     
     

7. Reflection / Next Steps

   • What would you change or try next time?

   • How might this be used in real-world agriculture or space missions?

Design Tips:

• Use big, clear text and color to organize your poster.

• Make sure your images and data are easy to read and visually appealing.

• Practice explaining your project out loud—imagine you’re presenting at a science fair!

Science Poster Rubric:Light Maze Plant Growth Project

4 – Exceeds Expectations

3 – Meets Expectations

2 – Approaching Expectations

1 – Needs Support

1. Observations of Plant Growth in Maze Boxes

(2-LS4-1 – Diversity in Habitats)

 4: Student provides detailed, accurate observations for all maze environments (easy, medium, hard), clearly comparing ease/difficulty of plant growth

 3: Student provides clear observations comparing at least two environments

 2: Observations are incomplete or vague; limited comparison of environments

 1: Observations are missing, incorrect, or unrelated to plant growth in environments

2. Description and Reasoning About Plant Behavior

(2-LS4-1 – Scientific Reasoning in Varied Environments)

 4: Student clearly explains how plant growth changed in each box and why one design supported growth better; reasoning uses evidence

 3: Student describes how growth changed and gives a basic reason why one design worked better

  2: Student gives limited or unclear explanation of growth changes or reasoning

 1: No explanation of growth differences or reasoning

3. Design and Comparison of Box Models

(3-5-ETS1-2 – Engineering Design Solutions)

4: Student designs and compares three box models (or at least two with depth), explaining which worked best and why, using design criteria

3: Student compares at least two models and identifies which worked better with basic explanation

2: Designs are shown but comparison or reasoning is unclear or incomplete

1:  Little or no evidence of model comparison or reasoning about design

4. Digital Poster Creation and Sharing

(CCSS W.6 – Technology Use)

4: Poster is well-organized, digitally designed, and clearly communicates the experiment; student shares and presents confidently

3: Poster is clear and digitally produced with essential content and visuals; student shares work

2: Poster is partially digital or lacks clarity in structure; limited sharing or presentation

1: Poster is not digital, poorly formatted, or not shared/presented

🌟 Stage 1: Self-Assessment – Reflect and Revise Your Work

Purpose: To help you review your own poster and scientific work before sharing it with others. You will identify strengths and areas for improvement based on the learning goals.

Directions:

1. Read the rubric carefully. Focus on each of the four learning objectives. Ask yourself:
   Did I clearly describe how my plant grew in different maze boxes?
   Did I explain which environment worked best and why?
   Did I compare my designs and include a reason for success?
   Did I use a computer to make a clear, organized science poster?
   
   

2. Score yourself in each category from 1 to 4 using the rubric.
   
   

3. Highlight or write comments:
   What is one thing you did really well?
   What is one thing that is missing or could be clearer?
   
   

4. Revise your poster before showing it to a classmate. Add missing data, fix unclear explanations, or improve your design layout based on your self-reflection.
   
   

5. Optional tool: Use a color-coded sticky note system (green = great job, yellow = needs work) to mark areas on your poster as you review.

🤝 Stage 2: Peer Assessment – Get Feedback from a Classmate

Purpose: To get helpful advice from a partner that will improve your final presentation.

Directions:

1. Exchange posters with a partner. Use the same rubric your teacher gave you to score their work in each category.
   
   

2. Be specific and kind when giving feedback. Use this format:
   ⭐ "I noticed..." (something that was done well)
   🔍 "I wonder..." (a suggestion or question for improvement)
   
   

3. Example:
   ⭐ "I noticed your Tinkercad designs were clearly labeled and matched your experiment results!"
   🔍 "I wonder if you could explain why the hard maze slowed the plant more?"
   
   

4. Give back the poster with feedback. Your partner will use your suggestions to revise their final version.
   
   

5. After peer review, revise again if needed. You can update your conclusion, visuals, or design based on your partner’s ideas.

4: Use of AI: I did not use AI during any part of the Field Activity. All components of the lesson planning, implementation, and reflection were developed through my own instructional design process and professional judgment. However, I see meaningful opportunities to integrate AI in future iterations of the lesson. For example, AI tools could support preservice teachers in generating scientific explanations or hypotheses by modeling language structures and offering feedback on clarity and accuracy. AI could also be used to help them analyze plant growth data or simulate alternate maze designs before 3D printing. Additionally, AI could assist in the reflection phase by helping preservice teachers synthesize observations, generate revision ideas, or practice communicating their findings in professional formats. Integrating AI in these ways would not replace pedagogical reasoning but could enhance the learning experience by modeling how emerging technologies can be thoughtfully and ethically applied in K–5 science classrooms.

1. How do you think digital fabrication improves the activity vs utilizing traditional methods? What is the extra value?

   1. The design of the boxes added an extra important part of the science lesson because teacher candidates / future students could really consider baseline and for what plants can and cannot reach when growing. I think it ensures that learners have a curiosity and intellectual investment to investigate.

2. What are some  challenges you expect when you do the activity with your class?

2. Whew—there’s definitely a steep learning curve (for me included) when it comes to creating those boxes. I made several mistakes along the way. I didn’t just download a template—I built the box from scratch, including the shelves, the hole at the top, and the cover. Each step came with opportunities for misalignment or imprecision. Time was definitely a major factor. But in working through those challenges, I realized how valuable it was to model persistence and a growth mindset for my students. By navigating the trial and error myself, I could better support others through the process and show that learning—even for the teacher—is iterative and hands-on.

3. Describe the process that you went through to create the teaching aid. What did you learn during the fabrication process?

To create the teaching aid, I started by brainstorming the purpose: I wanted a structure that would challenge plant growth in a way that made phototropism visible and meaningful for learners. Rather than downloading a pre-made file, I decided to build the plant maze box from scratch in Tinkercad. I designed the outer walls, added internal shelves to create obstacles, included a top hole for the light source, and developed a removable cover to allow observation.

Throughout the fabrication process, I encountered several challenges—imprecise measurements, alignment issues, and print failures. I had to iterate multiple times, adjusting dimensions and shelf placements to ensure a balance between structural integrity and plant accessibility.

What I learned most during this process was the importance of patience, precision, and iterative design. I gained a deeper appreciation for how small changes in design can impact function. I also realized how valuable it is to experience the making process firsthand—not just to improve the final product, but to better anticipate the learning curve students might face. This process helped me see that the act of designing and fabricating is as much a part of the science learning as the plant growth itself.