In reading the Boaler article, there were several points that resonated with me in her discussion of complex instruction and the work at Railside:
1. "Put simply, when there are many ways to be successful, many more students are successful" (page 42)
The use of open-ended problems is at the heart of this statement. I think we all know that we should use more open-ended problems in our classrooms but what are the barriers preventing us from doing so?
2. "The roles contributed to the complex interconnected system that operated in each classroom, a system in which everyone had something important to do and all students learn to rely on each other" (page 42-43)
This felt like a vision statement to me. I've played around with roles but have not had this type of success. I found that some roles, such as resource manager, were not 'meaty' enough. This role in particular is finished fairly quickly and the child is left watching as the others play out their role. I would have liked Boaler to address some of the explicit teaching and modelling that the teachers had to do to get students to be an effective 'facilitator' or 'team captain' etc. These skills do not come naturally to students.
3. "If student feedback is to address status issues, it must be public, intellectual, specific, and relevant to the group task" (page 43)
Assigning competence is a new term to me but the practice is not. In reflecting back, I can think of specific students in my elementary classes who benefitted from this. I wish I did it more often and was more intentional. But I wonder, how would secondary students react to this? Would they welcome it or resent the spotlight?
This statement also connects to her later statement about effort over ability. If we give students feedback based on their work, it gives them the message that their effort will bring about success. Dylan Wiliam calls this descriptive feedback.
4. "...it was critical to the success of the students that teachers kept the demand of lessons intellectually high, by providing complex problems, and by following up with high-level questions" (page 44)
The statement contributes to our discussion about the deficit model of thinking about low-achieving students. It is so easy to dismiss the use of complex problems with a 'my students can't handle those kinds of problems' comment but Boaler clearly articulates that the use these problems contributed to student success.
5. "...students learned something extremely important that would serve them and others well in their future interactions in society, which is not captured in conceptions of equity that deal only with test scores or treatment in schools" (page 45)
This (relational equity) is not easily achievable so this makes Railside's success even more amazing! Teaching is complex and success does not come with quick fixes.
I really appreciated Boaler's summary that, "at the heart of this system is the work of the teachers and the many different equitable practices in which they engage".
With that in mind, I wonder about the types of supports that were provided for these teachers. I'm sure there were obstacles and challenges on the way, so how did the school get the teachers to persevere with this way of teaching?
I think your 3rd quote on student feedback is really important. I think many of us provide lots of positive feedback to students - I think I need to work harder at making the feedback specific enough to help students develop a more nuanced view of what 'competence' or 'smartness' looks like.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that struck me when reading the Boaler article was the concept of relational equity. I found this particularly interesting I think because it has to do with the way students treat each other. We have talked at great lengths in this course about the ways in which we can change our teaching, the structure of schools, the way we perceive differences, but I think this is the first time that we’ve talked about the way that students interact with each other. Boaler mentions that at Railside School, the “students learned to treat each other with respect”. I will be doing a better job of teaching, when I can say this about my students and the article reflects this as well. In the conclusion, it is mentioned that the school has been asked to share their curriculum, but that sort of attitude change in students can’t be written in a formula on paper. I also love that the students forged these relationships by working with each other and recognizing each other’s strengths. This is so important for students to learn and it’s really the way that teachers can help to shape the future. It’s like that fishing proverb, give a student equity and they will grow in it; teach a student how to give equity to others and they can foster growth in others.
ReplyDeleteI also loved the concept of a multidimensional classroom because I very much agree that we as teachers are too quick to reward students for being able to “execute procedures correctly and quickly”. This means that there are a lot of students who will never be rewarded, but have much to add. I keep coming back to that idea from earlier in the course about considering what students have to give to the mathematics community rather than only thinking about how mathematics can benefit the students. If we only hear from the typical students who are able to answer procedural questions quickly, we are excluding others from contributing to the community – both the classroom community and the broader mathematics community.
Boaler’s article about Railside High has me searching for many of the references to learn how it was accomplished. As Devika pointed out, this is not an easy fix and would take time to develop. I found the general principles easier to envision in my classroom than other works on collaborative learning (ie Slavin and Johnson). I really would like to have more information on the implementation process.
ReplyDeleteWhat stands out for me is task selection. Good tasks are essential to increasing the ways of being successful. Until now I have been looking for good tasks- tasks that capture Boaler’s high expectations and yet have multiple access points for different ability levels. After reading the Chizhik article, I started seeing more ways to create these tasks- opening up the task to quote Marion Small.
I liked the term assigning competence I have tried to find ways to give meaningful positive feedback to all students, but really have to watch how I respond to incorrect work. Devika asked if it would work with secondary students- I think it does if its sincere and specific. Last semester I had a jaded grade 12 come into my class 3 weeks into my workplace 11 course. She affected the climate of the class and honestly she intimidated me a bit. I tried to treat her with respect and I ignore some off task behaviour. I complemented her solution strategies in class and her artwork outside of class. By the last month she was making an effort to talk to me, working to get better marks. I can’t claim that I was responsible for the transformation, because I don’t know much about what else was happening in her life, but this is just a more extreme example of what I often see. The only problem is that a semester only lasts 5 months and it often takes 3+ months of hard work on my part to create a better working relationship. However my success with this individual strengthens my resolve that the effort is worth it.
Like Devika I have struggled with roles. One trio that has worked well for me is coach, solver and recorder – the solver works on the board with assistance of the coach. The recorder writes down the answer for assessment. IThe roles switch throughout the assignment. I have only used it with single answer questions- especially where there is a lot of symbol manipulation, but I will
Like Beth, I was struck be the concept of relational equity. I have noticed a lot of differences between teachers and how the students interact. I have always been fairly strict against negative comments, but I have not worked proactively to build more positive relations. I am not sure I know how. My original training I am a psycho-linguist and with some cognitive- pychology.
This paper reminded me of another I had read when starting my MA: Matthews et al 2003 Improving Attitudes to Science and Citizenship through Developing Emotional Literacy. When I first read it, and presented the paper to the class wasn’t convinced by its arguments. The paper now makes more sense to me- from my notes on the article:
– Emotional Literacy can improve student lives (Steiner, 1997 & Bocchino, 1999)
– “Cognitive understanding develops hand in hand with social and emotional understanding” (Goleman, 1996)
I tried to find the paper today as it had questionnaires that the 12 year old students filled out after collaborative science activities which were followed by whole group discussions on those interactions.
The Results:
Experimental groups had more positive attitude towards science at the end of the year (p>.05). Experimental group indicated more likely to continue with science (p>.05 boys, p>.1 girls) Qualitative remarks about science were very positive: “we all sort of knew, but explained them more to each other”
Teachers noted greater cohesion in the class. Students liked working with the opposite sex and said the group work helped them settle into secondary school.
I have to agree that student feedback is important and sometimes missed during group work activity. If teachers do not do this there is the chance that students will not learn the value of process of the group work. I will admit that this is an area that I need to improve upon.
ReplyDeleteI also agree Devika, that teachers working together and ensuring an equitable situation occurs. I wonder if there is a disconnect among the teachers in the value of group work that students will resist the teacher who is trying to bring group work into the classroom? I have encountered at times student resistant to group work and I wonder where this might stem from? I also believe that teachers themselves can be resistant to group work because they may see it as a lack of control - how do we change this around too?