# data[].attributes.headline
This stage is more of guiding students learn more about the practices of science as well as better design scientific investigations

# data[].attributes.subject
This stage is more of guiding students learn more about the practices of science as well as better design scientific investigations

# data[].attributes.body
The ADI model serves as a developmentally appropriate introduction to scientific research.

# data[].attributes.body
The opportunity to review other's work is important on many levels, especially in writing!

# data[].attributes.body
As an English teacher as well as a Science teacher, this step excites me. This is the perfect way to teach cross curricular. Reports, labs, etc. need to be legibly written to make sense.

# data[].attributes.body
I struggle with my higher kids seeing the importance of writing in a concise manner. They have in their heads that more words equals a better paper/grade.

# data[].attributes.body
I love the anonymity of the double-blind group peer review session so that students can provide constructive, effective feed back without fear of hurting each other's feelings. I also like how the group has to review them together and decide if the report met the criteria or not.

# data[].attributes.body
The argumentation session allows students to share their initial findings with others. They also have the opportunity to learn from what other groups learned at the same time to add to their own ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
I think the idea of the double blind peer review is great. I also like that the group is evaluating individual papers and has to come to a consensus about what they will mark on the rubric.

# data[].attributes.body
Each Student writes a report.  Up until this stage it has been a group activity.  I think this is great as it helps to focus the students during the lab and then holds each student accountable for their own learning.

# data[].attributes.body
Each Student writes a report. Up until this stage it has been a group activity. I think this is great as it helps to focus the students during the lab and then holds each student accountable for their own learning.

# data[].attributes.body
I went to a state training last summer on how to teach the new standards. After reading about ADI, I now realize that the demo lessons we completed were actually ADI lessons.

The argumentation portion was completed with one person staying at the lab table with the white board to discuss with others who came to read the board. The rest of the team walked the room to read others results and discuss with the person at the table. Sometimes you could help another team realize a mistake they had made, or vice-versa, it was really a great process.

# data[].attributes.body
This is an important step that allows students to  process what they are doing and to make real world connections while providing the teacher the opportunity to see and hear what students are thinking.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Takeaway: This part of the process is so important. Students will gain so much insight by hearing the ideas of peers and by arguing their own ideas.

# data[].attributes.body
I can imagine that a peer group may not really review a paper, either because they are rushing or because they still have questions about the concepts themselves. How can a teacher best handle that situation?

# data[].attributes.body
I believe that this stage is where you can really hit paydirt with the students. They are primed to really learn. They've done the initial work, so they're invested; they're probably either more eager to share what THEY'VE done or eager to learn how to improve their work; their previous efforts have helped them develop "hooks" to better understand concepts as they're discussed; and the teacher has an excellent opportunity to identify and discuss misconceptions that appear.

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway - this stage is where my students and I typically end inquiry investigations. Students form a claim, provide their supporting evidence, and justify how the evidence supports their claim (CER model). I appreciate that the ADI model incorporates additional stages to further engage students in critical thinking and reasoning with each other to establish deeper understanding of the guiding question.

# data[].attributes.body
During this stage students design their own method for collecting necessary data in order to answer the guiding question. Appropriately facilitating students during this stage always proves difficult. I hope there will be some strategies or resources provided to help us enhance our student support.

# data[].attributes.body
By using an anonymous peer review, students can work and receive feedback without feeling pressured that their peers will view their work as "wrong". I also like that by evaluating and critiquing other students work, they'll be able to learn from each other and improve their own work.

# data[].attributes.body
I feel like stage 3 is the most important part of this whole process as it ties together the initial question (from stage 1), the data the students have collected (from stage 2), and, hopefully, the explanation of what it all means! To make that connection is vitally important to understanding what is happening.

# data[].attributes.body
I love the idea of students creating a proposal for their investigation. It adds a lot of student choice to the learning environment, as well as mimicking how research occurs in the real world.

# data[].attributes.body
I noticed that with the "guiding question" ADI seems to be leading to PBL style of investigation

# data[].attributes.body
Allowing students to learn from each other in stage 7 and then revise their own report in stage 8 will provide a way for students to continuously learn throughout this process. So many of my better students want the one right answer and then be done. This process will help high achieving students show growth.

# data[].attributes.body
After students have begun thinking about the guiding question, they then plan how they can best learn the answer. This is more interesting and student driven than the cookie cutter labs we have used over the years.

# data[].attributes.body
Guiding questions are an excellent tool to hook students and allow them to begin thinking about what they will learn from the beginning.  I like not beginning with the I CAN statements.

# data[].attributes.body
I like the idea of anonymously reviewing peer journals.  It gives students an objective and unbiased critique of their work without feeling embarrassed of being "wrong". On the other side of the coin, it also gives students an opportunity to learn from one another and fill gaps in knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
I love the concept of students having the freedom to develop/construct their own procedures/experiment.  This practice will require students to think critically and demonstrate deep understanding.

I also think it important for us as teacher's to screen these ideas just a tad to make sure students are not way off track.

# data[].attributes.body
This step allows students to develop and enhance written and verbal communication using evidence to support reasoning. Middle school students typically lack skills to support arguments/ideas with substantive evidence. This step requires students to determine if their data is "relevant, sufficient and convincing enough to support their claim".

# data[].attributes.body
Teachers provide a list of possible materials and hints to get started. A suggestion made is for students to write out the investigation proposal and have the teacher approve it before beginning.  This is important in a middle school setting and holds the whole team accountable during the investigation. Also allows the teacher to check in with the group.

# data[].attributes.body
I have been incorporating a ton of CER into the end of basically each lab that is done. It is great to see this as a similar part of this stage!

# data[].attributes.body
I have been incorporating a ton of CER into the end of basically each lab that is done. It is great to see this as a similar part of stage 3!- Mary Ghaly

# data[].attributes.body
I love the Round-Robin suggestion format of the Argumentation Session. Maximizing student participation and time while having students argue and support their ideas with their peers.

# data[].attributes.body
Revising their report after participating in peer feedback will make students more receptive to peer feedback.

# data[].attributes.body
By providing feedback to their peers, students will learn how to strengthen their own arguments and writing. I also like that students have to learn to work together to reach a concensus.

# data[].attributes.body
I love that students will learn how to distinguish between ideas to accept or reject. I also like the round robin idea as it takes a long time to hear from groups one at a time.

# data[].attributes.headline
Big Ideas: Students plan their own procedures for finding answers to the essential question.  This may involve some guidance from the teacher including suggested materials and safety concerns, and guidance on how to collect and organize their data.

# data[].attributes.subject
Big Ideas: Students plan their own procedures for finding answers to the essential question.  This may involve some guidance from the teacher including suggested materials and safety concerns, and guidance on how to collect and organize their data.

# data[].attributes.body
One of my concerns is safety---especially in a freshman class where students are often not familiar with the materials

# data[].attributes.body
I love that students will be hearing from their peers after they have formed their arguments. I will definitely have to invest in some whiteboards or big post-it notes!

# data[].attributes.body
I really like that the final submission that the student turns in has already been given feedback from other classmates and the student has had the opportunity to revise it.

# data[].attributes.body
This is anonymous and and integral part to the scientific process!  It also allows them to see how others view their work and allows them a chance to revise after feedback from peers which is at times, better than teacher.

# data[].attributes.body
The importance of correcting misconceptions is important at this time and that this is a time for good discussion and learning by the student.

# data[].attributes.body
Students gain the ability to investigate and utilize date to develop their argument and support their claims. This can outline and explore their understanding of both the experiment and the nature of science.

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway-NOT a lecture and completely teacher led.  It is more of a socratic seminar sort of? I think?  Where we go over the big ideas and concepts from the investigation and help everyone make sense of what they saw and/or didn't see and how to improve.

With one of the ADI labs I have done (Physical properties) it was interesting to see how my kids all interpreted their data and what they brought to the table in that process-but also how they thought their experiments went wrong.  For the most part they identified where they went wrong and improved their practices.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Takeaway: This portion of the process provides students with "educative feedback and encourages them to develop and use appropriate standards" Writing in science is a vital part of the process. Scientists have to be able to communicate appropriately with others and express their ideas in a way that makes logical sense. The Peer review process allows them to do that, but as the article mentions-feedback from your peers can sometimes be received better than feedback that comes from your teachers.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Takeaway: This portion of the process is very similar to what we have been teaching in a CER (Claim, evidence, reasoning). It gets the students thinking about what explanation their data provides, what evidence (qualitative and quantitative) that they have and how they can put those two pieces together. Gets them thinking like a scientist and using those higher order thinking and processing skills-which they need.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Takeaway: This portion of the process is very similar to what we have been teaching in a CER (Claim, evidence, reasoning). It gets the students thinking about what explanation their data provides, what evidence (qualitative and quantitative) that they have and how they can put those two pieces together. Gets them thinking like a scientist and using those higher order thinking and processing skills-which they need.

# data[].attributes.body
Students having the ability to learn how to investigate and use evidence to support their claim is crucial to success, and developing their literacy skills is an added bonus!

# data[].attributes.body
Big Takeaway:
Real world application of feedback for the final report.

I feel like a lot of times students don't get the opportunity to see how much peer review can help them. Taking the time to allow them to process feedback and see areas in which they can improve is far more valuable than any feedback I can give as a teacher.

# data[].attributes.body
The stage 3 whiteboard session seems like a great way to check in with the students and gain insight into what they are thinking and how they are putting the information together.

# data[].attributes.headline
Data Test: Collecting data first to develop an argument could use much more class time than directing the argument to a specific question.

# data[].attributes.subject
Data Test: Collecting data first to develop an argument could use much more class time than directing the argument to a specific question.

# data[].attributes.body
It seems this style of teaching using 8 steps is much more detailed than the "old" scientific method.

# data[].attributes.body
Students write a report that helps the students to show understanding of the content of the investigation and to utilize their data as evidence to support their argument.

# data[].attributes.body
Big Idea: This stage helps students revise and improve their arguments by sharing their arguments with the class and after sharing they can revise to improve the strength of their argument.

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway: Teacher-lead explicit discussion that encourages personal reflection.

The article lists this step as #8. Additionally, I wonder how relevant this step is given that most educational models are shifting far away from teacher-lead work or explicit teacher-lead whole group discussions. I attended ASCD last year and even in my science sessions, I do not recall this being relevant. I notice the article was written in 2009, is there more updated literature that supports the use of the teacher in this way? Maybe I have misinterpreted this stage.

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway: Students review anonymous reports using a rubric.

Personal connection: I have used a similar practice for an environmental advocacy project, biome project, and an SEL/neuro project. I had students review one another's work but given that they were all PBL assignments, I liked the personal connection and also holding the reviewer accountable. I can envision using the full double blind peer review, however, I would have to adapt to a project model, in addition to writing.

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway: Students create their own procedure (with approval) and collect data.

Personal connection: In my Sphero/digestion lab, students had to create both the organ system correctly laid out (and approved) but also they had to use block coding to plan for Sphero's path through the digestive system. They would have to record their attempts and make progress notes to make improvements and reflect. However, in thinking about ADI and CER vs general inquiry, I wonder if this is fully applicable?

# data[].attributes.body
Big takeaway: Primary purpose is to capture students attention and establish connection between personal experience and learning opportunity. I view this as the attention getting/purpose driven step.

Personal connection: Last year I created a lab called "Sphero's Digestive Adventure" where students had to create the digestive system and code their way through (without instructions). The backstory of the Sphero bot finding its way through the digestive system had many students think about Miss Frizzle and the magic school bus which I think helped them understand the concept.