Predict-Observe-Explain
Class Size
Whole Class
Time
15-25 min
Technology
None
Domain
Cognitive
Difficulty
Beginner
Delivery
Face-to-Face, Hybrid
Overview
Predict-Observe-Explain (POE) is a science strategy where students predict what will happen in a demonstration, observe what actually happens, and explain any discrepancy. The prediction commits students to their current understanding, making them receptive to new evidence.
Educational Purpose
Students often hold misconceptions that persist because they don't actively test them. POE forces students to commit to a prediction, observe reality, and reconcile differences. The prediction makes the observation meaningful.
Educational Psychology Behind It
Research on conceptual change (Posner et al., 1982) shows that dissatisfaction with existing conceptions is necessary for conceptual change. POE creates this dissatisfaction when predictions are wrong.
Why It Works
Research on conceptual change (Posner et al., 1982) shows that dissatisfaction with existing conceptions is necessary for conceptual change. POE creates this dissatisfaction when predictions are wrong.
When to Use It
Use for demonstrations in Science where outcomes may surprise students. Grade 3 and up. Particularly effective for counterintuitive concepts (density, air pressure, inertia).
When NOT to Use It
Avoid demonstrations where the outcome is obvious. Avoid demonstrations without a clear conceptual link. Do not skip the prediction step -- it is the key to engagement.
Best Grade Levels
Grades Grade 3 to Grade 10
Best Subjects
Science, Math
Step-by-Step Classroom Guide
- 1Select a demonstration with a potentially surprising outcome.
- 2Predict: Students write what they think will happen and why.
- 3Observe: Conduct the demonstration. Students observe carefully.
- 4Explain: Students explain what happened. If it matches their prediction, why? If not, what was wrong with their reasoning?
- 5Discuss: Address misconceptions revealed by the predictions. Connect to the scientific concept.
Classroom Scenario
Ms. Santos does a POE in Grade 6 Science. She holds a sheet of paper in one hand and a crumpled ball of the same paper in the other. She asks: If I drop both at the same time, which hits the ground first? Most students predict the crumpled ball hits first because it's heavier. Some predict they hit at the same time. She drops both. They hit the ground at the same time. Students are surprised. She asks: Why? The discussion leads to air resistance and gravity. The misconception that heavier objects fall faster is confronted directly.
Sample Dialogue
Advantages
- Confronts misconceptions directly through prediction
- Creates engagement through commitment to a prediction
- Observation becomes meaningful because of the prediction
- Explaining discrepancies drives conceptual change
- Quick and powerful for surprising demonstrations
Limitations
- Finding demonstrations with surprising outcomes requires planning
- Some demonstrations need specialized equipment
- Students may predict what they think the teacher wants, not what they actually believe
- Can be difficult to manage safety for some demonstrations
Common Mistakes
- Skipping the prediction step, which removes the engagement
- Using demonstrations with obvious outcomes
- Not addressing the misconceptions revealed
- Not requiring written predictions, which reduces commitment
Variations & Adaptations
Adapt the investigation complexity, equipment needs, and group structures based on students' lab experience and safety considerations.
Technology Integration
This strategy requires no technology. If desired, enhance with digital tools such as Google Docs for collaborative writing or Padlet for sharing responses.
Assessment Ideas
Assess through observation of participation, quality of science, and formative checks such as exit tickets or quick writes.
Reflection Questions
🤔 What did you learn from this activity?
🤔 What was the most challenging part?
🤔 How could you use this strategy in a different subject?
🤔 What would you do differently next time?
References & Further Reading
- White, R. & Gunstone, R. (1992). Probing Understanding. Falmer Press.
- Posner, G. et al. (1982). Accommodation of a Scientific Conception. Science Education, 66(2).