So, this video definitely seems different than the rest in regards to it’s intended purpose. So far the others seem to be geared toward convincing the viewer of the importance of inquiry, while this one appeared to be more instructional based. While they did show a great deal of student interaction with the classifying process, I felt it’s purpose was geared more toward conveying the way students grapple with the concept rather than student and teacher ignorance in regard to teaching and learning (which I feel is the main purpose of the videos pertaining to the Private Universe Project which involve student/teacher participation). While the video definitely touched upon the fact that our understandings of the classification process have evolved over the years, the intent behind the information being conveyed is more of a gentle prod to sincerely understand life sciences to a greater degree, rather than a backhanded educational case study.
    The first thing that struck me about this video was that the female narrator kept referring to the groups of living things as “Animal, vegetable, or other.” Why wasn’t she saying “animal, plant, or other”? Am I wrong in my own understanding that vegetables are plants, but not all plants are vegetables? I mean, I get the fact that the video was starting with an “old-school” approach to biological classification in the classroom and eventually made it’s way to how our understand has evolved... but I’m still puzzled as to why she kept saying that.
    Anyway. I thought it was interesting that children tend to leave vegetables, weeds, and seeds out of their own definition of plant. Thinking about why this is- however- makes a lot of sense; most kids distinguish plants as things that grow in the ground and have leaves. I’m sure the Private Universe videos would go into greater depth about this, probing students unaware of the implications of their answers and them as weapons against their very own teachers. But, cattiness aside, the reality is that we need to work with kid’s innate fascination with the living world to help mold their understanding of how the living things around us are grouped in relation to their overarching characteristics. Only then will they truly understand the difference between species existing simultaneously within the world around us.
    On a last QUICK note- I loved how in depth-this video went with the necessity to regard the microscopic world as an imperative driving life force on the same level we consider plants and animals within all of Earth’s ecosystems. I also enjoyed the explanation of the distinction between plant and fungi.
 
“You can’t assume that what’s blatantly obvious to you- and has always been blatantly obvious to you- is gonna be that way to to somebody else, especially a kid. That's where you have to stop, regroup, and think ‘wait a second, is this really as self-evident as you’d like to think it is.”

    The narrator states that, “sometimes, the simplest problems in science defy intuition.” This video implores us to consider a few things: a) students are not empty vessels, they are very capable of considering and making sense of the world around them and therefore don’t approach the classroom as empty vessels needing to be “filled” with information. On the contrary, their innate curiosity has led them to very concrete understandings of the world (in their terms, of course), and because these thought processes have become so ingrained in their psyches, they are not o easily convinced when presented with other theories or fact. I agree that students should be expected to participate in guided hands-on activities to think things through and reconstruct their own interpretations. I’m starting to get the sense that this is indeed the main point behind all of these Annenberg videos associated with the A Private Universe Project.
    On another note- I thought it was brilliant that they used the mirror analogy as a way to debunk the idea that an absentminded hands-on-approach is magically going to help students sincerely understand the material. The fact that while we interact with out environment on a day to day basis, it does not necessarily mean that we aren’t ignorant to the intricacies behind what what we consider to be commonplace. In other words, “we hear what we expect to hear and see what we expect to see.”
    I also thought the progression of this video was well thought out. I still am not too crazy about how the student are approached and portrayed in these videos- it almost seems cruel to me and is honestly uncomfortable to watch. I find myself cringing and wanting to fast forward through the portions that include student questioning and teacher monitoring. I understand their necessary implications, but find them to be seriously deterring.
 
“They have minds, and if those minds are supported and challenged, they will have so much potential.”
 
    I don’t necessarily agree with the film when it argues that students are “unaware” of their own theories concerning phenomenon that they haven’t yet learned how to correctly explain (i.e. like seasons and phases of the moon). I think it is in our nature as human beings to formulate theories and ideas about how our world works. Therefore, before they ever step foot in a classroom, students have come to comprehend certain things about their world in ways they can understand. I feel that this is why it can be so difficult as an educator to reconstruct their understanding of certain concepts, especially when it comes to natural phenomenon that they have spent their entire lives approaching with a very specific mindset. I don’t believe it is anyone’s fault (teacher or student) that these misconceptions linger past the date of the initial class “lesson”, or numerous lessons for that matter. This is why I believe it is important to contextualize certain scientific material within multiple lessons as often as you can, because then it allows the student to stretch their minds far enough to encompass the new material in relation to other concepts they approach and on a variety of different levels in general.
    Specifically, here’s what I’m taking away from the video (though it is technically nuanced from the above paragraph): students have spent their whole lives explaining and trying to understand the world in their own terms, so don’t assume that they are a blank slate. Why not ask kids “how do you think this works? how do you think that works?” Questioning of this manner is a way to exercise inquiry, to talk about how people have thought about the world in similar ways in the past, and also that those ideas were well-thought out even though they aren’t necessarily fact. We can constantly be thinking about the world around us, and this curiosity will lead us to discovering truth- which is essentially the inspiration of science in general.