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