How Does Sara Think?
By Tina Kern
Sara was guided to the correct answer by highlighting phrases and sentences in the selection and yet still she struggled to find the answer to one of the higher-level questions that accompanied her reading. She didn’t have any difficulty with the “right there” questions – the ones whose answers could be found easily in the selection. On the other hand, she couldn’t manipulate the information to extract information that wasn’t explicitly in the text. She finally elicited the answer.
“Great! Now let’s discuss how you found the answer,” I said in my best excited teacher voice.
“No, thank you,” she replied quickly. “I have the answer, right?” When I continued, hoping she would be curious to know why it was correct, she reiterated, “It’s the right answer, and that’s what counts.”
Why didn’t Sara care about knowing why the answer was correct? Though I had encountered this attitude before, returning to class after COVID, raised more concerns about the lack of progress in this new post-virtual era and the reasons for the inevitable gaps in education.
I noticed a growing apathy and lack of curiosity in the students. Did my colleagues find an attitude that centered on the results and correct answers, rather than the process that went into finding that answer? One of the math teachers echoed my concern when she expressed her consternation upon realizing that her students could pass a test, yet a mere two weeks later could not repeat the process that they should have learned from those lessons. They didn’t “learn” how to do the work; instead, they memorized how to achieve a passing grade. As a result, they couldn’t duplicate their passing scores again. Were they learning for the test, and not to integrate the information into their toolbox for future use?
Some teachers alluded to the “learning gap” and COVID. This, though, is not a new phenomenon. To be fair, when I stopped to evaluate my students and their progress, at times I had already noticed that some were apathetic beyond gaining points for their grades – before virtual learning. Yet this incredibly disturbing situation was becoming more prevalent.
A goal is to ignite a natural – or unnatural curiosity – in our students. The period of virtual learning during COVID made the task of self-discovery difficult, but when we returned to the classroom, I became more apprehensive about the learning processes of my students. With our data driven educational society, I wanted to observe, not the data culled from the summative assessment after a group of lessons, but the journey needed to successfully integrate the skills into the students’ toolboxes. If students learned the “how”, they could tackle more tasks successfully. As the Chinese philosopher Lao Tzu, founder of Taoism said: “Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day. Teach him how to fish and you feed him for a lifetime.”
Teachers do strive to give the students the tools to solve problems and search for answers. Unfortunately, though, after the virtual teaching that was experienced at the height of COVID, some of the focus has been on the loss of learning that standardized testing data has “uncovered”. That, in turn, has produced a frenetic race to increase the achievement scores. Does that necessarily mean that this will raise the learning curve and fill the gap? Will our students learn more, or produce better scores? They are not the same. They can be mutually exclusive.
In the race to raise scores, what message are we giving the students? Are they being taught (subconsciously) to focus on the final grade, or to savor the learning that goes into the lessons that help the students build upon the knowledge so they become independent learners? In the perfect storm of today’s educational community, the desire to have students reach a higher level is measured by the tests available to measure growth, mostly standardized tests, which our multilingual learners find difficult to negotiate. As a result, on these tests, our students tend to show limited growth, or at the least, not a true reflection of what they have learned. Instead, the focus seems to be on what they didn’t learn. This is a disheartening appraisal which administration might interpret as an indication of their classroom teaching
Looking at the educational atmosphere of today’s students means looking at many factors. Teachers are integrating social-emotional learning skills, conflict resolution, restorative strategies among other skills, into the everyday curriculum. On December 7, 2022, Education Week recently published an article, “Here’s How the Pandemic Changed School Discipline.” It highlights the “higher levels of trauma and anxiety, which leads to more conflicts and less impulse control.” In this environment of uncertainty, teachers are also tasked with pacing their lessons based upon a pre-pandemic curriculum, with the underlying tension created by the emphasis on final scores. Of course, teachers don’t just teach. We have to meet deadlines for various tasks, unrelated to classroom planning.
In the midst of everything and in the amount of time a teacher has to plan for the multitude of mandatory activities, how does an educator steal the time to add crucial lessons in learning that are beyond the curriculum? How do teachers channel the frenetic energy necessary to “catch up”, and at the same time ask students to stop and reflect upon their classwork and assessments? Foregoing this integral step in learning steals the opportunity to teach the students how to find the answers themselves, and to question the information and research they discover.
What can teachers do?
One idea is to modify our lessons to integrate different techniques that encourage our students to think critically. In this way, teachers can enrich the lessons without sacrificing the curriculum timeline. For example, QFT (Question Formulation Technique) questioning is the skill of having students generate their own questions, as the teacher’s role becomes the facilitator instead of the creator of the questions. According to the Right Question Institute, “the QFT builds the skill of asking questions, an essential — yet often overlooked — lifelong learning skill that allows people to think critically, feel greater power and self-efficacy, and become more confident…” (https://rightquestion.org/what-is-the-qft/ ) Students are taught to differentiate between closed and open-ended questions. As they delve further into question-making, they start to write closed questions for selections – in any content area. Then the skill is elevated to another level as students change these questions to open-ended ones. They discover the difference between the information gathered from a closed question, and contrast it with the depth of material they garner from an open-ended question. This self-discovery technique transfers to all areas and leads the student into critical thinking and other higher-level skills. It leads to more thinking, learning, and ultimately fuels student engagement.
The level of questions that are presented during a lesson naturally lead the students to HOT (Higher Order Thinking). Utilizing QAR (Question Answer Relationship) questions can help with differentiation as educators teach these various forms of questions to students. The “right there” questions are simply finding information in the text. When the student has to find information in two different places in the selection to completely answer a question, they are practicing “Think and Search” questions. “The Author and you” questions require the students to synthesize the information that the author supplies in the selection with their own knowledge. Opinion questions are called “On Your Own” questions in QAR. This technique leads the student from identifying facts to eventually formulating opinions based upon readings.
In some districts, platforms for reading and math are purchased to provide computer assisted learning in an effort to lead the student to more rigorous material. Most of the questions are closed, meaning there is only one answer. In this way the computer corrects the answers and the students are encouraged to complete each unit, receiving immediate positive feedback. Students see their progress as the correct answers accumulate. If the computer doesn’t explain the errors, though, in a way that the student can understand, will the student learn from the mistakes and be able to self-correct? How do we provide scaffolds to their thinking while they are utilizing these programs? How do we encourage students to ask “why” the answer is wrong?
Is there an underlying message that correct answers are valued, not the method that leads to the correct answers? The effectiveness of these computer programs is acknowledged, but teachers can elevate the substance of these platforms by having students evaluate their errors. If students can recreate the process they used to ascertain the answer, and be guided to correctly assess their errors, teachers then are leading them to be independent learners. The program then transcends the original purpose as teachers add another layer. Students are led to another level. Hopefully, with time, they shouldn’t be content with just supplying the correct answer. Educators want the students to ask “why” and “how”, not just plug in the “what”.
To combat the proliferation of students clicking through answers, and careless mistakes, teachers can institute some tactics to have students become more thoughtful learners, and slow down those that strive to finish the task almost before it begins! Begin to insist upon students justifying their answers with evidence. Have students correct their mistakes. If students don’t stop and reflect upon their incorrect answers, the teaching moment passes. Sometimes the process of finding the right answer becomes a more valuable lesson than having the correct answer, especially when elicited by chance.
Giving your students the gift of achieving higher level thinking skills is priceless, and will lead our multilingual learners on the pathway to success. Such additions to lessons, such as scaffolding strategies like “compare and contrast” with graphic organizers, enriching the engagement before lessons with short videos and online pictures so students can visualize and build background, can boost participation by allowing access to more content. Students also need to be led beyond the concrete to the abstract. Teaching abstract concepts are difficult. Students need to learn to look for patterns and search deeper. For example, in science students can think about results of experiments. In other classes, students can write and share stories. They can learn to elaborate upon simple answers, and supply evidence for their conclusions.
Many of our students need support and encouragement to think beyond the basics and ignite their curiosity. Teachers can provide a toolbox of realistic and practical strategies so, hopefully, many students are no longer content to answer indiscriminately, without thinking, just to complete an assignment. By leading students to higher order thinking through questioning and scaffolding instruction, teachers can instill skills to guide students and gift them the tools for lifelong learning and educational success.
References
Pendharkar, E. (2022, Dec 7). How the Pandemic Changed School Discipline. Education Week.
Right Question Institute. (2022, May 6). What is the QFT? https://rightquestion.org/what-is-the-qft/
The Author – Tina Kern is a Professor-in-Residence at William Paterson University, and provides professional development, coaching and mentoring at the New Roberto Clemente School in the Paterson School District. She is also an adjunct professor at WPU and Kean University in the Education and the English as a Second Language Departments. She has an MA in education, and NJ certifications in ESL, Bilingual Education, English, Spanish, and Elementary Education. Her experience includes mentoring teachers, being a Program Assistant and teaching ESL, and Bilingual Language Arts in the Morris School District for 30 years.
Recent Comments