Jigsaw discussion method

Jigsaw is a tried and true method for cooperative learning in my classroom.  I feel this method works especially well with older students who appreciate having more autonomy and ownership over their own learning.  Additionally, study and reading groups in college often operate under this same premise:  become an expert on one section, then depend on info. supplied by other student "experts" to complete the full "puzzle" of the reading.  The peer dependency is a strong motivator and a responsibility my students tend to take quite seriously.
Most recently, I used this method in my British literature and composition class to study Romantic era poetry.  Students were divided into groups, designated with color coding on a spreadsheet shown at the front of the classroom.  Initially, students individually studied and analyzed their assigned poet's writing style.  Then, they met together with others who had studied the same poet.  This allowed time to share their own ideas and add to their original list new insights gained from shared info. of group members.  Next, together as a group, they read poetry by two assigned American poets that correlated in some way (either stylistically or by subject matter) with the original British poet.  They were charged with discussing and coming to conclusions about comparative values between the authors.  Finally, the group was divided out, and one representative from each group was mixed with representatives from other groups to form a new mixed expert group.  While this sounds a bit complicated, the color coding of groups actually made it quite manageable.  I feel this approach gave them a variety of learning experiences, not only to be the recognized expert, but also to see the value of listening to others and synthesizing information to create a fully developed picture of their own understanding.
This jigsaw method was also used in my AP Lang class (in an adapted format) for the editing process on a recent essay.  Students completed an essay and then studied closely one of six elements of strong writing (taken from the 6+1 traits model).  They evaluated a sample essay and a peer's essay for this element, and then discussed as a group the relationship between all six elements working together to
make a successful final written product.  The jigsaw was less discussion-based, but the interactions were planned and structured, which is more successful with this class of students.
Overall, I find this method to be one that lends itself well to my strengths as a teacher.  Facilitating and guiding learning is my favorite approach as I feel it gives student-driven education an environment in which to to thrive.  Structured with probing questions and careful setup, this method is most successful when students are fully invested in the process and know they will be held accountable for the knowledge gained.  I usually end an activity like this with an individual assessment which taps into knowledge gained through the jigsaw activity as well as teacher-driven instructional reinforcement.

Socratic Seminar discussion method

This teaching method is modeled after the one proposed and utilized by Socrates himself.  The methodology in practice involves questioning with depth and purpose, but not necessarily debate, concepts and logic or philosophical perspectives in subject study.  This is a methodology that thrives in many classrooms and invokes interest in learning because it is largely student-driven and student-centered.  This methodology is all inclusive in that it brings into action students' problem-solving skills and inquiry-based learning repertoire developed in their math and science learning, and the use of rhetoric and support for ideas, as well as knowledge of historical and social relevance, areas developed in their humanities learning experiences.  Of course, their participation and creative development of ideas as well as ability to interact and appreciate alternate viewpoints to their own are developed in all areas, including their fine arts and physical education courses.

Socratic seminars require some front loading on the part of the teacher.  Students should be given a text to read (article, poem, book, textbook selection) or view (film, short video clip, picture, painting, speech, etc.)   It is important that all students have been given the same text, for discussion purposes.  In the case of a reading text, it is helpful to number the paragraphs so students can easily refer to specific quotes or examples to support their ideas.   Also, consider the reading level of all students and choose one of a middle level text complexity to ensure that all students will be able to participate
Teachers should explain this method briefly, that is will require students to answer and pose questions to the class, that participation is vital to get the most from the learning experience, and that they should arrive with prepared ideas or notes for recollection purposes during the discussion.

I used this discussion method in my AP Lang course as a way to encourage participation.  To begin the unit, all students read Plato's "Allegory of the Cave" and answered five questions that probed their depth of understanding.  Then, students were assigned one of the five questions to focus on with another 3-4 students from class.  Together, they developed extension questions to propose to the rest of the class, and assigned logistics such as who would vocalize which question and what they might predict response times to be like.  Then, we set those questions aside for about a week, and continued to read and grow our knowledge about the many facets of the unit topic: education.  We ended the unit by having a Socratic seminar.  Students reviewed, added to, and finalized plans for questions and participation developed earlier in the unit.  Then, I proposed a change of venue from the classroom that seem to put them a bit more at ease.  We went to the media center and sat in a group facing each other on the couches and tables in the corner.  I began with a brief history of Socrates' method of questioning for learning purposes, and then outlined the parameters that all students were expected to speak at least once during each group's discussion.  Students in this class are not very talkative or voluntarily participatory, so I knew this would be a challenge for them.
The discussion lasted three days, and students were participatory for much of the time, although meaningful contributions were exhausted by day three.  We ended with a debriefing about how ideas related to other pieces from the education unit.

Overall, I feel this method was a success.  Without me to facilitate discussion, the conversations were dependent upon them listening to one another and responding accordingly to each others' ideas.  There is always value to building one's repertoire in leadership practice.  If I do this method with this class again, I will try to put a cap on the number of times students can respond, so no one student dominates discussion.  I will also look to tie the points for into quality of responses, rather than just the expectation to voice opinion or "participate," as some received credit for only subtle agreements, while others presented more complex thoughts that led to further discussion.

Guided Inquiry Learning

This strategy is one used to spice up the traditional avenues of "research and report" used when gathering and sharing historical background information by which to interpret literature of the time period and how it informed and was received by the people.
Guided Inquiry Learning is learning-centered, rather than product-centered (there is not an end "report" or "paper").  It is designed with intention, driven by students' authentic questions to get at deeper understanding.  GIL recognizes the emotional side of learning and promotes self-driven research practices.  
I used this strategy in my British Literature and Composition class when studying The Middle Ages, medieval history, which informs our understanding of medieval ballads, Chaucer's Canterbury Tales, the stories of King Arthur and the Knights of the Round Table, and, to a lesser degree, the setting and nobility practices in Shakespeare's Macbeth.  Many of these works are about and written for the common, everyday people of the time period, and, therefore, our research tended more to lives of the people.  Thus, guided inquiry learning led us to orchestrating our own class-wide "game of life" with a middle ages twist!
I began by checking out as many different books as possible from local libraries about the medieval time period.  Students generated questions they had about the time period, and then were divided into groups to research their own aspect of the time period. 
The groups included:
1.  Careers-- charged with researching a variety of jobs held by each sex in both peasantry class 
2.  Marriage and Weddings-- charged with researching the wedding and marriage customs of the medieval time period and performing an artistic aspect of the ceremony or festival (ex. students showed the class how to do a dance, and one group even prepared a traditional dessert!)
3.  Housing-- charged with researching the living quarters and housing options of peasantry and nobility in medieval times
4.  Lives of the children-- charged with researching the lives of children at this time period and teaching classmates a game they might play, how they heard stories
5.  Valuables-- charged with researching items of currency and trade commonly valued in the medieval time period by peasantry or nobility
6. "Chance"-- charged with researching mishaps, misfortunes, and fortunate circumstances one might encounter as a member of the nobility or peasantry related to other categories

Then, we pieced this info. together into an interactive game (modeled loosely after the board game of Life) and students were able to "play" the game in teams, and learn about the opposite class they had researched.  It was a fun learning experience that the entire class had a stake in and the students felt they learned a lot about the time period we were studying.  This learning was evident in their writings and verbal interpretations of medieval literature that followed.

Guided Inquiry Design is not a new idea, but it was given further merit and explanation by “Making the Shift from Traditional Research Assignments to Guiding Inquiry Learning” by Leslie Maniotes and Carol Kuhlthau in Knowledge Quest, November/December 2014 (Vol. 43, #2, p. 8-17),
http://www.ala.org/aasl/kq/novdec14.  Colleen shared this via email on 12/2/14.

Praise, Question, Polish: Students as Peer Editors

This strategy is one used during peer editing in order to facilitate meaningful feedback between peers and to encourage students in sharing their reading aloud with others.
I chose to use this strategy in my AP class this year when editing a creative paper about experiences with learning to read and the importance of words.  Students were charged with gathering in small groups (3-4) and individually reading drafts aloud.  While the author read his/her draft, others in the group (the peer editors) listened and took notes on elements of praise, question and polish.

• Praise:  What is good about the writing and why is it good?
• Question: As a reader/listener, what do you not understand?  What would you like clarified or extended upon?
• Polish:  What specific suggestions for improvement can you make?

At the end of the reading, peer editors finalized notes and then shared those ideas aloud in a discussion/dialogue with the writer and the other editors.  The written comments were then also given to the author, so that he/she would have comments to look at while revising for the final draft.

• Students responded that they felt this worked well.  They liked the leading questions and having a format for their comments to be shared. They also were happy to take home a variety of responses to their writing, rather than just one editor's comments.
• As a teacher, I liked that all students had an expected voice in the editing process, all were cognizant of the fact that their comments would be shared aloud and should hold merit and relevance to the author.  I also liked that students were able to hear a variety of comments in response to their own draft and others' drafts, allowing their own perspectives to be validated and built upon as well.
• For assessment purposes, the forms that students filled out held them accountable, but having time to add to their responses during sharing of the comments did allow for some of the comments to not be authentically one's own.   This would only be used in a formative nature.

This idea came from an article shared via email by Colleen on Dec. 2, "Can Peer Review Help Johnny Write Better?" by Susan Taylor, published in The Journal of Adventist Education, April/May 2014 (Vol. 76, pp. 42-46).

Student Interaction Strategies

The intention of this year's entries on the blog is to research and experiment with all different student interaction strategies.  It is my intent to use these strategies in my classroom to foster more varied, authentic, and academically-productive student interaction, and then write about the successes and shortcomings observed.  I will discover various current sources to inform my postings, including books, web sources, and colleague input; these sources will be linked whenever possible.

Universal Design for Learning

Universal Design for Learning (UDL) is an educational approach that has evolved from recent brain research.  Intended to reach all types of learners at their most comfortable instructional levels, curriculum is designed around three key questions:

1.  HOW does a learner gather and categorize information he/she receives?

2.  HOW does a learner best organize and express his/her ideas?

3.  HOW does a learner get and stay motivated to learn?

The final question is probably the most important one to start with, as motivation is key to learning of any type.  Finding out what stimulates interest, excitement, or motivation in learners is key to engaging them in instruction.  In this category, it is important to consider everything from the environment in which material is presented, to how students are asked to interact with one another and their own thoughts while learning.  All of this has a marked impact on their engagement with what you are trying to teach.  The problem is that every learner is different, and what motivates one may intimidate another.  This where gauging that classroom climate comes into play.  The trick is recognizing what works best for a majority of your class, and then adapting on an individual basis for those who will be truly uncomfortable and need a different type of stimulation for engagement.  

Looking back to Dweck's Theory of Motivation (previous posting) may help in this realm.

The first question involves the obtaining and arranging of knowledge.  This area requires that information be presented in a variety of formats and methods for all students to become adept.  Some of the best ways to do this involves presenting the material in a variety of ways (audio, visual, kinesthetic, etc.) that engage the senses and allow them to process the info.  Second, provide an alternative to just written or spoken explanations.  Remember that students learn well when material is presented in visual formats as well, but not every visual is clear.

The second question addresses the element of response, and, in turn, assessment.  Providing students with various ways to respond to content they have learned allows for a wider range of success.  To this end, students can be given choices as to their responses to learning.  This allows for differentiation and creative expression for those who are inclined to respond best in this manner, and more linear or conceptual thinking options for students who are more likely to respond well to a highly structured task.

In summary, the major intents of UDL in curriculum design and implementation are threefold:
1.  To provide multiple means of representation of content material
2.  To provide multiple means of action and expression for students to articulate and exemplify the extent of their learning
3.  To provide multiple means of engagement so students are interested and motivated to learn from beginning of unit to end
The overall goal of UDL is to give educators a means by which to consider the learning needs of EVERY student, not just provide instruction that works "for the masses" but does not give students a stake in the setting, obtainment or proof of their educational goals.

A helpful reference website is provided at the right.

Student motivation

It may be the weather, or the impending thaw, but whatever it is, this time of year is a tough one when it comes to student motivation.  Student motivation is waning, and the theorists abound with possible reasons and solutions, some easier suggested than implemented.
At the right, I have gathered a few links to interesting theories and suggestions to improve student motivation.  The commonalities I found amongst these theories was that they all indicated it was a problem largely rooted in the student, yet the solutions given are things that a teacher can do to address the problem.  While I think there is certainly room for debate here, the bottom line is that we, as educators, can really only control ourselves and the learning environment we provide in the confines of our classroom.  There are multiple other factors for every student in the motivation category. 
But, the suggestions given for teachers are worth reading and considering.  Even if they do not change every student, it may make you feel better about the vibe of positive energy you are putting out there, and could make a difference for some students who respond largely to the environment they are in at the time.
Please look to the right for some of these links.

Dweck's Theory essentially argues that students qualify themselves into two types:

Fixed IQ theorists:  those who believe that their learning potential is fixed (since birth) and nothing can be done to change it.  These are the kids who say "I'm not good at grammar," and, therefore, do not try to learn it whenever it is presented.  Eventually, it becomes somewhat of a self-fulfilling prophecy: they believe they do not have the potential for success, so they are not able to succeed.

Untapped potential theorists:  those who believe that their intelligence is due to learning directly, and are, therefore, invested in continued learning to further their knowledge base.  These students are willing to continue to try new avenues of learning, even if they have failed, because they recognize the potential to learn is always in existence, just sometimes harder to reach.

And, there are also students who qualify themselves somewhere in the middle, especially depending on the learning subject or task at hand.