1 of 1 people found this helpful
Yes, it is like adding grape nuts to cheerios. A few discrepant events I use include:
1 (gravity/mass/inertia/air resistance) dropping a book and a flat sheet of paper from the same height, then repeating by placing the sheet of paper on top of the book and also by crumpling the piece of paper and dropping it side by side with the book; what will land first - book or paper.
2 (gravity/path of a falling object) place two small containers a few cm apart at end of a meter stick; place one marble in container closest to end; lift ruler at angle of about 30 degrees and drop ruler; what path will the marble follow?
3 (air pressure/Bernoulli's principle) transfer cotton ball from one paper cup to adjacent cup by blowing a puff of air across top of cup with cotton ball
4 (probability) The Monty Hall or Three Door Problem: Game Show Problem | Marilyn vos Savant
Of course, other unexpected results come from the experiments students conduct when they find their hypotheses are wrong. When my students conduct experiments, I require at least two groups to test the same question. Sometimes the results do not match and these unexpected results lead to productive discussions.
The best questions tend to be the ones the students come up with themselves. Many times the questions are beyond what we have the tools to test, so we have to make the questions manageable. Often, I will give the context and the students will come up with the specific question. For example, I have a spinning top game called Battling Tops; student groups come up with questions they can test, such as which top will spin the longest, is a top more likely to get knocked out of the arena if battling one other top launched directly at it or at a 90 degree angle, etc. (those are examples of student generated questions that they actually tested).
Inquiry questions can lead to better writing because there is a higher interest level. I still struggle getting a significant number of students to go beyond the hands on and actually write with detail, clarity, and accuracy, but it is clear to me that if student interest is high, if discrepant/unexpected events/results are involved, students are apt to write more and better. What also helps with the writing portion is student feedback. The teacher I work with is very good about requiring students to make written comments about student work (we have a wiki with student work). A student might comment about data that are questionable, sentences that are awkwardly written, poor grammar, a procedure that is confusing or quite clear, and so on. The authors are responsible for responding in the comment section of the wiki and making any necessary revisions.
Here is a really cool unexpected result from Numberphile: