My last post focused on explicit strategy instruction, a research-based approach to building the procedural knowledge that is essential for owning and initiating the complex behaviors required for a high level of reading, writing, and problem solving. It outlined the teacher/student transactions that first, illuminate those behaviors for students and then, engage them in scaffolded opportunities to practice and apply the strategies in varied problem-solving situations that arise in the context of their studies and explorations.
As I started today’s post, I was all set to “drill down” and share with you how I actually implement explicit strategy instruction. However, I realized that would be as short-sighted and ill-advised as plunging a souffle into an oven that had not been preheated. The results would likely be just as unimpressive. So let’s back up a bit.
What do we need to do to create a climate in our classrooms that supports and nurtures self-directed, independent learners, learners who signal their comfort and confidence in monitoring, regulating, and evaluating their own learning with statements such as these:
“I always have a hard time understanding my social studies book. I better take notes when I read this. I’ll do a bubble map while I’m reading.”
“Wait a minute, I’m doing it again. I’m starting every sentence with the same word. Maybe I can combine some sentences.”
“Why don’t we make a bar graph, like we did in our science experiment. We can keep track of the websites we use and how many times we use them so for our next project we’ll know the best places to look for information.”
Which paradigm, what teacher-student transactions and instructional settings create the climate that supports self-direction?
1. Teaching the learner as well as the learning is at the heart of improving our students’ performances in a self-sustaining way. We align our teaching with a constructivist paradigm and we take our teaching cues from our students' demonstrations of understanding not just our syllabi. We expect learning to be idiosyncratic so we research our students’ needs and abilities with formative assessments and then differentiate their instruction. Because cognitive psychologists have ascertained that memory is not formed at the moment information is acquired, we ask students to process information (e.g., organize, summarize, compare) to develop and strengthen their cognitive structures.
2. Creating a duel agenda of teaching process and product gives our students access to the procedural knowledge that can put them in the drivers seat as they navigate the challenges of learning and problem solving. By ”talking process” and thinking aloud students expand their repertoire of problem-solving strategies, engage in metacognition, become more reflective and less impulsive, and acquire life-long skills that transcend the answers being sought. We even make high-stakes testing useful to students by extracting the long-term learning embedded in the tasks instead of focusing on scores.
3. Fostering mental self-management enables students to select and initiate the strategies they have been taught in new and authentic contexts. Decontextualized practice exercises are replaced with dynamic practice in identifying obstacles and deciding what strategies would be helpful (e.g., multiple choice exercises in getting the main idea are replaced with organizing ideas while reading to facilitate memory).
4. Coaching students to discovery. The teacher uses open questions (e.g., “What options are you considering?” What do you think is interfering with the clarity of this paragraph?”) to allow kids to identify and remedy glitches in their work. Instead of rushing to get at the answers, fix the writing, identify the words, we give priority to our students’ expanding knowledge of the criteria for excellence and the behaviors that are essential for expertise.
5. Scaffolding strategy instruction creates a safety net for students as they internalize new behaviors and advance from neophytes receiving collaborative support to independent practitioners. Students are given guided practice in problem solving with non-directive coaching, constructive feedback from teacher and peers, and opportunities to exercise control over the processes and products of their learning. The teacher knows when to step out of the spotlight and become an active observer.
6. Allowing for different outcomes for all students so that lower-achieving children are not on “overload” and have the opportunity to extend the dialogue around their work and engage in planning and monitoring activities. These children, who rely on teacher and peer support and are expert at getting assistance, have the opportunity to develop their own self-regulatory behaviors.
While each of these “climate adjustments” may need to be honed with collegial feedback and reflective practices, like any well-functioning heating and cooling system when they are in operation they create a zone of comfort in which the work of posing questions, seeking answers, making connections, perceiving patterns, building knowledge, and visualizing possibilities, can take place.
An expanded discussion of the topics discussed here can be found in Learning for Keeps: Teaching the Strategies Essential for Creating Independent Learners