When I was in graduate school, one of my education professors asked his students to tape-record their classes and then re-listen to the class and provide a numerical rating every 7 seconds on the type of talk that was occurring in the class. How often was the teacher talking, how often were kids talking, and were they talking to the teacher or to other students?
My classmates and I were surprised that the vast majority of our classes were dominated by teacher-to-whole-class talk. Back then (and to a certain extent now) the Holy Grail of a great classroom was student-to-student talk. In other words, teachers should minimize their lecture time and allow for much more student-to-student interaction.
As you’ll see from the article below, there are some benefits to student-to-student talk, yet educational research shows that more often than not student-to-student talk doesn’t lead to better student learning.
What I especially like about education today compared to when I started in the 1980s is how the focus today is on the evidence of student learning, when years ago the focus was more on the components of exemplary teaching. I know this sounds weird—as the purpose of education should always be on what the student learns--yet my graduate studies focused more on improving teaching methods under the assumption that better teaching would lead to better student learning. Many teachers in the 80s thought they taught wonderfully. Back then I heard a lot of bragging about how stimulating teacher presentations had been and it was the kids’ fault that their test results were so poor.
Today teachers truly empower kids and not just through student-to-student talk. We help students be more aware of not just what they’re learning but literally how they are learning, including the different pedagogies we employ to help them learn, remember, and then transfer and apply. Having kids be more cognizant of thinking about their thinking (metacognition) and having teachers guide them to various types of thinking with appropriate cues and scaffolding aids in remembering, recalling, and applying.
While art remains an important part of being a great teacher, the science of learning is certainly more prominent in schools today as our focus is on learning, not only teaching.
Lecture isn’t all that effective because it doesn’t necessarily actively engage students. But as the article below attests, student-to-student interaction isn’t always that effective either.
Joe
---
Teachers have been led to believe it’s good practice to have students work in groups or pairs, to boost learning and critical thinking. But too often, students get little or no benefit. Walk into almost any elementary classroom and you’ll see the teacher introduce a question and then immediately direct kids to “turn and talk” with a partner. I’ve seen this happen as often as every five or ten minutes. And I’ve seen kids have some lively discussions. But here’s what else I’ve seen:
- Kids having a lively discussion about a topic that has nothing to do with what they’re supposed to be talking about
- Kids having a discussion about the intended topic but saying things that don’t make a lot of sense
- One kid holding forth while a partner just listens—or stares into space
- Both kids staring into space, waiting for the teacher to say that time is up
Teachers may suspect that “turn and talk” isn’t always working the way it’s supposed to, but it’s been drummed into them that it’s an essential part of their pedagogical repertoire and should be used often. Relying on theories formulated many decades ago, schools of education train prospective teachers to believe that standing before a class and explaining things doesn’t work. What does work, they’re told, is having students interact with peers.
To be sure, there’s truth to the idea that interaction has educational benefits. Learning doesn’t happen unless students are engaged, and group and pair work can be very engaging for students. But it’s possible to have engagement without learning.
Research studies show that students can learn more from interacting with peers than from working independently, but just telling them to “turn and talk” isn’t enough. Teachers need to give kids guidelines that require them to debate and negotiate—for example, “Make sure you understand your partner’s perspective.”
That could work—but only if students start out with some understanding of what they’re discussing. Often, they’re directed to “turn and talk” about a topic the teacher hasn’t explained, on the theory that it’s better for them to figure out the facts for themselves. If learners don’t know much about a topic, they may not yet have a “perspective.” They may not have much to say at all—or they may come to erroneous conclusions. Peer interaction may be great for getting students to share opinions or for reinforcing learning through discussion, but when it comes to factual conveyance, that’s what a subject expert is for.
In many ways group work is one of the most enduring myths in education.
That’s not to say students should never be asked to work in pairs or groups.
The alternative to group and pair work isn’t necessarily having a teacher just lecture to passive students. A teacher can impart information and guide thinking in engaging ways. In fact, the recent meta-analysis of studies on group and pair work found that having students interact with an adult one-on-one was more effective than having students interact with each other. But given that most classrooms have one teacher and 20 or more students, that’s not a realistic approach.
Still, teachers can read aloud or explain a concept to the entire class, and pause periodically to ask questions designed to check comprehension, focus attention on what’s important, and prompt analysis. A whole-class discussion can’t involve every student, but the teacher can expand the possibilities—and keep students on their toes—by calling on kids who haven’t necessarily raised their hands. Further questioning can encourage students to respond to others’ ideas and get a true conversation going. Once students seem to have a basic grasp of the subject matter and possible interpretations, a turn-and-talk activity might be appropriate.
One other potentially powerful and underused interactive technique that reaches all students is writing. That may not look like it involves interaction, but writers are inevitably trying to communicate with a reader. Writing requires much of the same cognitive work that underlies what scientists call the protégé effect--the boost to comprehension and retention of information that occurs when one person explains something to another. The caveat is that writing is far more difficult than speaking or even reading. Inexperienced writers need to be guided through carefully crafted activities that free up enough cognitive capacity to allow them to grapple with the material they’re writing about.
That’s challenging but far from impossible. Instead of repeatedly having students turn and talk—and running the risk that the talk will lead nowhere or not even happen—teachers could sometimes ask them to take a few minutes to reflect and write.
No comments:
Post a Comment