by: Tyler Wedemeier & Shannon Quandahl, Instructional Coaches "Alright students, now turn and talk with your elbow partner about __________" is a common phrase heard in many classrooms. This "turn and talk" strategy gives students the opportunity to communicate their ideas as well as hear the ideas of their peers. In a recent Forbes article, Senior Contributor Natalie Wexler offers an interesting point of view on this timeless instructional strategy. As the two us reflected on this instructional strategy, having students "turn and talk" gave them the opportunity to discuss what the larger group was talking or reading about. When we read the article, we both laughed at the discussion scenarios Wexler described: - Students having a lively discussion about a topic that has nothing to do with what they are supposed to be talking about - Students having a discussion about the intended topic but saying things that don't make a lot of sense. - On student holding forth while a partner just listens-or stares into space - Both students staring into space, waiting for the teacher to say that time is up - The only group having a meaningful conversation is the one the teacher is kneeling by Having students work together or communicate their ideas can be very powerful and engaging. Wexler cites a meta-analysis of 71 studies in the U.S. and Great Britain where researchers have confirmed this theory; however, turning and talking isn't enough. Researchers concluded teachers need to give students guidelines that require them to debate, negotiate, and understand their partner's perspective. A second twist to the "turn and talk" strategy is making sure students understand what they are discussing. If students are still unaware of the topic, they make not have a perspective to share. They may also share misconceptions their neighbor cannot deny or correct. So what is a solution? Writing requires much of the same cognitive work that boosts comprehension and retention of information as explaining, Wexler points out. Another benefit of writing is the reduction of noise which results in turn and talk. This may help noise sensitive students process and contribute their thoughts. A third benefit is the reduction of what Wexler calls, "social loafing" - students sitting back and letting their peer do the work. The caveat is writing is far more difficult than talking to a neighbor. This post is not saying teachers should abandon this collaborative strategy. Rather than "turn and talk", a nice change of pace might be having students "reflect and write" on their thinking paper, Google Doc, or Collaborative App (see below).
2 Comments
By Denise Lee, DMS Collaborative Teacher & Amy Courtney, DMS Art Teacher
Over six years ago our Standards Based Education journey began. Our DMS faculty members were invited to participate in a book study Charting a Course to Standards-Based Grading: What to Stop, What to Start, and Why it Matters by Tim R. Westerberg. The book was a jumping point for discussions about our grading practices and the SBG practice in general. Some of the questions our study group found ourselves asking were:
The hours of discussions and readings did not give us the perfect path to SBG, but it did have us evaluating our teaching practices. So six years later we continue on an SBG (now Standards Based Education) path of learning ourselves. We will share some of those journeys through a series of video posts. Here is our first:~ by: Tyler Wedemeier - Instructional Coach I have always struggled teaching students to give and receive feedback, especially from their peers. I would use gallery walks for an informal review or peer conferencing for more formal editing. No matter the strategy, I always felt that once the session was over, the revision process was over, too. The creator was never able to process the information they received. I recently received the linked information: How to Use Sticky Note Feedback. In the document, you will find a 45 minute lesson plan introducing the strategy, tips for implementation, sentence frames, and examples. My favorite part is the last page that has a "check list" for the giver of the feedback to make sure they have clearly communicated their ideas. (Thank you, Bev Berns-Keystone AEA) As a great supporting tool, Austin's Butterfly is a video about a 1st grader, who, through peer feedback, was able to draw a pretty complex picture of a butterfly. Watch the video HERE. If you would like to use this strategy in your classroom and need a few extra hands, please let an Instructional Coach know! By Shannon Horton, DMS Collaborative Teacher I considered dramatically ripping up a CRAP test poster the other day while working with a class of 7th-grade researchers. It definitely would have made a point. What point might be up for debate, but the one I wanted to make was that we need to update our media literacy skills.
The world has caught on to our little CRAP test and now many websites easily pass that really shouldn’t. We find an “about us” page that boasts the organization is non-profit and non-partisan, a board of directors with slick sounding titles, and domains that are .org and .edu and think we’re in the clear. For example, The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) was brought to my attention by a high school student last year who was wondering if it was really as good as it looked. Applying the CRAP test yielded positive results - just check out their slick and convincing “about us” page. This student, though, noticed loaded language and biased statements that surfaced after closely reading several articles. We did a quick search in Google to find several warnings about CIS, including this one from Wikipedia: According to Wikipedia, “The Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) is an anti-immigration think tank. It favors far lower immigration numbers, and produces analyses to further those views. The CIS was founded by historian Otis L. Graham and eugenicist and white nationalist John Tanton.” This technique is called “lateral reading” because you’re investigating a source by leaving the page, opening a new tab and searching for outside information about the organization and author. Vertical reading, or the CRAP test, is also important but can no longer be used in isolation. Our Chrome extensions, NewsGuard and Media Bias Fact Check, are tools to use when reading laterally, as is Wikipedia. I’m actually glad the poster is still intact because I think we can alter the CRAP test in a way that allows for this type of investigation. The P currently stands for purpose and can now include the question, “Who is behind this information?” This question will hopefully prompt all of us to leave the page we’re evaluating to see what other credible sources are saying. |
AuthorsDCSD Teachers, Instructional Coaches, Learner Advocate, and Collaborative Teachers Archives
April 2024
Categories |