1 day creating a culture of critical thinking nmec fall 2017 · 01/08/2017 · 9/7/17 1...

Creating a Culture of Critical Thinking

Linda LaughlinExecutive Director: Maine Cohort for Customized LearningAdjunct Professor, University of Maine FarmingtonIndependent Educational [email protected]@lindaflaughlin

9/7/17

1

Creating a Culture of Critical Thinking

Linda LaughlinExecutive Director: Maine Cohort for Customized LearningAdjunct Professor, University of Maine FarmingtonIndependent Educational [email protected]@lindaflaughlin

vWhat can we do to build a focus on learning?

v Understand two concepts necessary to increase the ability of a learner to think more critically. Building a culture of critical thinking and explicitly teaching specific critical thinking skills are two important concepts.

v Determine what the evidence (result) is that learners are performing at a high level of critical thinking.

v Understand how to build a culture of critical thinking by using thinking routines & evidence-‐based reflective practice to make “thinking visible” to your learners.

OUTCOMES

Another Important Outcome!!

I. INTRODUCTION, AGENDA, OUTCOMES-‐ Outcomes, Assumptions, Agenda -‐ Resources/Materials-‐ Setting the Stage: What is Thinking? (Thinking Routines)

AGENDA

II. THE CONTEXT FOR TEACHING COMPLEX REASONING & DEVELOPING CULTURE

-‐ How to make thinking visible, make thinking an important learning expectations.-‐ Thinking Routines-‐ Creating a Thinking Culture in Your Classroom-‐ What Do We Start Doing -‐-‐-‐ What Do We Stop Doing

III. Evidence-‐Based Practice, Artifact Review, & Planning-‐ Evidence-‐Based Practice: Sentence-‐Phrase-‐Word Routine-‐ Classroom Artifact Review-‐ Planning For Tomorrow-‐ Resources

9/7/17

2

Thinking Routines

• What Makes You Say That? Constructing support routine.

1. What is going on?2. What do you see that makes you

say that?

Concept MapsA drawing of a concept, or different, related concepts. Show how YOU understand the concept(s). Fits your own learning style or way of thinking. Also called “mind maps”. Provides a way to put the ideas together yourself. Helps you identify weak areas. They help show relationships.

Flow Chart: shows steps in a process.Circle Diagram: Flow chart drawn as a circle. Tree Diagram: incorporates outline, summarizes different parts of a process. There are vertical and horizontal tree diagrams. Spoke (radial) Diagram: put central idea in the middle: Ideas relating to a central concept. Sketch it out!: Even if you “can’t draw” creating simple stick figures will help you learn.

Thinking Routines

“Creating Cultures of Thinking” by Ron Ritchhart. Copyright 2015

Types of Responses to the question: What is thinking?

Associative Responses: Associated with thinking but not thinking. The when or where of thinking or what they are thinking about. Ex. “in math class”, “when I am traveling”, “what will happen next”.

Emotional Responses: an affective connection with thinking. Ex. “Unsure”, “joy”, “hard when there is time pressure.”

Meta Responses: comments that reveal a greater awareness of the nature of thinking. Ex. “there is always more to learn”, “You can’t ever fully understand something,” “remembering helps to develop creativity”

Strategic Responses: • Memory & Knowledge-‐based strategies (storage & retrieval of information)• General and nonspecific strategies: Ex. “Think logically”, “Problem solve”, “Metacognition”, or

“Understand”.• Self regulation and motivational strategies: showing an understanding that thinking needs to

be motivated and managed. Ex. “Clear your mind of all other worries”, “tell my self I can do it”

• Specific thinking strategies and processes: shows deep or constructive approaches to learning, about making meaning, building understanding, solving problems, and making decisions. Ex. “consider different perspectives”, expand on other questions that may arise from the previous one.”

Outcomes

• Monitoring and taking ownership of their thinking• Taking ideas and tasks in unique direction• Expressing confidence in their own abilities-‐-‐ to think and to improve their thinking• Seeking clarity when they are unsure of what they are trying to understand• Making new connections, gaining insights, seeing relevance• Using the “language of thinking”• Engaged in cognitively complex tasks• Using specific thinking processes strategically

• Interacting with each other (challenging, elaborating, digging)• Talking more than the teacher• Demonstrating “cognitive emotions” (joy of discover; angst from confusion;

satisfaction from insight)• Working their brains to fatigue (“My brain hurts”)• Generating, not just responding • Posing problems and questions• Taking ideas and tasks in unique direction

© Dr. Debra Pickering

After observing classrooms, examining classroom artifacts, and eliciting student input, determine to what extent students are:

9/7/17

3

THINKINGROUTINES

Claim, Support, QuestionThis routine helps students develop thoughtful interpretations by encouraging them to reason with evidence. Students learn to make claims and explore strategies for uncovering truths to support these claims. They are also encouraged to share the questions they may still have about their claim.

Color, Symbol, ImageCSI is a routine for distilling the essence of ideas non-‐verbally. Choose a color to represent a big idea that stood out for you. Draw a symbol to represent one of those big ideas.Sketch an image to represent a big idea.

See, Think, WonderA thinking routine that encourages observations and thoughtful interpretations.

Thinking Routines


Think, Question, ExploreA cultures of thinking routine for introducing and exploring ideas. Activates prior knowledge, promotes wondering and facilitates planning. Directs group inquiry, uncovers current understandings and misconceptions.

Things I think I know about …Questions I have about ….Topics I want to explore …

I used to think…, Now I thinkA thinking routine that helps students reflect on how their ideas change.

Chalk TalkA routine for uncovering prior knowledge and ideas; questioning. It is a conversation in writing and allows all students to participate.

Thinking Routines


9/7/17

4

Through regular use of routines to explore meaningful content with students, teachers convey messages about the nature of thinking and learning. Chief among these are the notion that:

• Learning is a consequence of thinking.• Learning is as much a collective endeavor as it is an individual process.

• Learning is provisional, incremental, and evolving in nature.

• Learning involves continual questioning aimed at uncovering the complexity of ideas.

• Learning is an active process that entails getting personally involved.

Thinking Routines


Our Beliefs Impact Our Ability to Build a Culture of Thinking

• If you believe that school is about work and that students must be coerced or bribed into learning through the use of grades, that belief will make it hard for you to facilitate thinking in your classroom.

• If you believe that one learns through memorization and practice, that belief will make it hard for you to facilitate thinking in your classroom.

• Too much order and control in the classroom can create a culture of learners becoming passive learners who are dependent on the teacher.

In Creating Cultures of Thinking, Ron Ritchhart identifies five belief sets that have the potential to facilitate a culture of thinking.

• Focusing students on the learning vs the work• Teaching for understanding vs knowledge• Encouraging deep vs surface learning strategies• Promoting independence vs dependence• Developing a growth vs a fixed mindset


Focusing Students on The Learning vs The Work

When the focus is on “work” teachers and learners are focused on work completion. The questions learners ask are about the criteria for the work/assignment. “Will this count on the test?” “How long does this need to be?”

When a learning community is focused on the learning:• The assignments & activities are introduced as a way to meet learning

expectations.• Teachers are more likely to provide choice when the focus is on the learning.• Teachers listen for the learning. “What questions are surfacing for you?” rather

than just monitoring for on-‐task behavior.• Mistakes are seen as opportunities to learn .• Teachers provide descriptive feedback that informs learning.


Teaching For Understanding vs Knowledge“Knowledge is a commodity” (Tony Wagner) . It is usually seen as a set of skills or a collection of facts.

Understanding is seen as a performance, something you do with knowledge. Understanding requires that we connect multiple ideas together.

Encouraging Deep vs Surface Learning Strategies

It is the level of processing that is key to developing understanding.

Surface strategies focus on; memory and knowledge gathering.Deep strategies are those that help learners develop understanding.

Deep learning strategies must become the norm rather then the exception in the classroom.


Learning Knowledge Developing Understanding

9/7/17

5

Encouraging Independence vs Dependence“Independent learners are internally motivated to be reflective, resourceful, and effective as they strive to accomplish worthwhile endeavors when working in isolation or with others -‐-‐-‐ even when challenges arise, they persevere” (Rose-‐Duckworth & Ramer (2008) P. 2)

Benefits of independence in learning:

• Resilience in the face of difficulty• Openness and willingness to accept challenges• Greater motivation, engagement, ownership, and drive (Pink, 2009)• Intrinsic motivation• Interdependence and independence• Development of a learning or mastery orientation in oneself• Enhanced self-‐esteem and sense of efficacy (Kostelnick, Whiren,

Soderman, Stein, & Gregory, 2002)• Development of lifelong learners


Developing a Growth vs A Fixed Mindset

Carol Dweck’s research reveals that “in a growth mindset students understand that their talents and abilities can be developed through effort, good teaching and persistence.

Classroom practices that help determine a learner’s mindset:• Grouping/tracking practices• The nature of our praise and feedback. Comments that focus on a person’s efforts, tend to aid in fostering a growth mindset. “You really worked hard at this, and it shows!”


In Summary:

In Creating Cultures of Thinking, Ron Ritchhart identifies five belief sets that have the potential to facilitate a culture of thinking. They are:

• Focusing students on the learning vs the work• Teaching for understanding vs knowledge• Encouraging deep vs surface learning strategies• Promoting independence vs dependence• Developing a growth vs a fixed mindset


Getting Started with Thinking Routines• The Initial Stage

• At first it will feel like a stand-‐alone activity. • Students will probably question and feel uncomfortable, especially if they are

used to giving right/wrong answers to tasks in the classroom.

• The Development Stage• Teachers’ thinking moves from a focus on the routine as an activity to a tool that

they will use to explore content and enhance understanding. • Teachers make a transition from planning the routine first to identifying the

understanding and picking the routine that gets to the desired thinking. • Students will become more comfortable and confident. • Students begin to feel that the teacher really cares about what they think.

• The Advanced Stage• Teachers learn to fit thinking routines seamlessly into their orchestration of the

learning process. • With practice and reflection comes confidence. • Shift from “how do I use these thinking routines? To “how do I create a culture of

thinking in my classroom?”• Students use routines independently to guide their learning in and outside the

classroom.


9/7/17

6

© Dr. Debra Pickering© Dr. Debra Pickering

Four areas of focus for creating a “thinking culture” in your classroom

Environment (Physical and Psychological)

TO WHAT EXTENT…-‐-‐does the arrangement of the classroom encourage learners to listen to the teacher OR to talk to each other?-‐-‐do the behavioral norms create a place that is uncomfortable for learners to think aloud OR a place where it is safe for learners to think aloud-‐-‐-‐without fear of being put down, dismissed, or embarrassed?


Ego (Dominance and Control)

TO WHAT EXTENT…-‐-‐does the teacher OR do the learners do most of the talking?-‐-‐do the rules and norms reinforce routine and order OR encourage a free flow of thinking?-‐-‐when learners do talk, are they responding to questions and following directions (generated by the teacher or materials) OR generating ideas?-‐-‐are lessons designed with a prescribed sequence of activities and assignments OR for learners to take the topic in unique directions?


Expectations (Conveying and Supporting)TO WHAT EXTENT…-‐-‐do learners believe that in order to be successful in this classroom, they need to complete their work as well as they can OR to think?-‐-‐does feedback (verbal, written, grades) focus on learners’ improving their work or on learners’ improving their ability to think?-‐-‐do learners believe that certain learners are potentially just good thinkers OR that all learners are potentially good thinkers?-‐-‐are assignments and activities designed to challenge the thinking of some but allow for some to do more lower level thinking OR designed to provide all learners with significant challenges to their thinking?


9/7/17

7

Expertise-‐-‐This area will be our ongoing pursuitJust as

• doctors need to be experts about the human body, and• lawyers need to be experts about the law, and• car mechanics need to be experts about how engines

work, and• pilots need to be experts about aerodynamics

As EDUCATORS, we need to be EXPERTS

ABOUT THINKING & LEARNING!


Claim, Support, Question

Color, Symbol, Image

See, Think, Wonder

Think, Question, Explore

I Used to Think…., Now I Think

Chalk Talk

Concept Maps

Thinking Routines


Thinking Routines

• Think/Puzzle/Explore (A K-‐W-‐L Makeover) Sets the stage for deeper inquiry.

1. What do you think you know about this topic?

2. What questions or puzzles do you have?3. What does the topic make you want to

explore?

Thinking Routines

• I Used To Think…, But Now I Think…. A routine for reflecting on how and why our thinking has changed.

9/7/17

8

Thinking Routines

• See-‐Think-‐Wonder (STW) A routine for exploring works of art and other interesting things.

1. What do you see?2. What do you think is going on?3. What does it make you wonder?

HOW???

WHAT DO WE START DOING? WHAT DO WE STOP DOING?

Evidence-‐Based Reflective Practice

Peers

9/7/17

9

Debrief: Sentence-‐Phrase-‐Word

In what ways did this thinking routine engage you in thinking?

What was the value and why?

How might you use this strategy with students? What would you hope to accomplish? How would you modify it?

• Journals, notebooks• Classroom notes• Completed assignments that have been graded

• Tests• Tests that have been graded• Grade books• Writing folders• Long-‐term project products• Power point slide shows used by teacher or students

•Classroom Artifacts?


9/7/17

10

Planning for Tomorrow

Use this self assessment to help identify three “next steps” you will take to make thinking more visible to your learners. One of those ”next steps” should be something you are able to do within the next week.

http://www.visiblethinkingpz.org/VisibleThinking_html_files/01_VisibleThinkingInAction/01a_VTInAction.html

Thinking Routines Resource

CLOCKBUDDIES

Noon & 6: by grade span3 & 9: by favorite content

Supervising Learning:

Beyond Classroom Observations

Debra Pickering

Educators throughout the country are recommitting to insuring that all students have opportunities to

learn from highly effective teachers. To this end, new teacher evaluation standards and processes for

measuring those standards are being generated in state departments of education.

As a result of all of this work, educators, and legislators, are asking the question that has long challenged

us: Now that we have instructional standards, how should we determine whether teachers are meeting

those standards?

Some would suggest we use student achievement data, which are often in the form of test scores.

Although this data has a place in measuring teacher effectiveness, much has been written about the

limitations and flaws inherent in relying too heavily on test scores. Acknowledging these flaws, states

are also recommending a renewed focus on classroom observations as a major means of assessing

teacher performance. Again, this is a good idea but one that also has significant limitations.

Classroom observations, whether done live or through video, and whether done during formal

observations, walk‐throughs, or instructional rounds, will, and should, continue to be a rich source of

evidence for assessing teacher performance. Ideally, this evidence is then used not just to generate a

score or rating, but also to provide feedback that encourages teacher growth.

The good news for those observing in classrooms is that there are powerful tools available that provide

specific criteria with accompanying scales for assessing teaching performance. States and districts have

used such tools for decades, and powerful instruments from national leaders, like Charlotte Danielson

and Robert Marzano, are being used across the country.

But, here is the problem. Many of the research‐based characteristics of effective teaching detailed in

these powerful instruments cannot be measured well through the lens of classroom observations. And

here is the danger. An obsession with using mainly classroom observations could distract us from using

the very accessible and compelling evidence that will tell us much more about the classroom: classroom

artifacts and students’ voices.

Of course, these sources of evidence are not new to educators. However, because achievement data

and classroom observations have been dominating the national dialogue, they simply have not been

given the kind of attention that would make them integral to teacher supervision. Analysis of this kind of

evidence should perhaps be framed as “virtual observations,” because they can provide a clear,

comprehensive view of the classroom that is real, because it is a view through the lens of the learner.

Classroom Artifacts

The term classroom artifacts refers to anything produced for and by students. This includes things like

student‐generated journals and notes, writing folders, projects, tests, daily assignments, and returned

papers. In many teacher evaluation instruments there are certainly multiple references to evidence or

indicators that include these types of artifacts. However, classroom observations consume so much

time and energy, we haven’t tapped the potential of this type of evidence, Some specific examples

illustrate.

Instructional Standard: Create assessments aligned with essential knowledge in the curriculum

Even multiple, perfectly‐timed observations might not be able provide evidence of meeting this

standard; but a collection of actual tests administered in the classroom over a specific period of

time would speak volumes. These artifacts could show whether, for example, assessments often

focus on recalling details from every chapter of a specific class novel or if, instead, the tests require

application of important learning targets like an understanding of how literature helps us

understand societal trends.

Instructional standard: Engage students in long‐term, cognitively challenging and meaningful

tasks.

Systematic examination of student‐generated projects, through actual student work samples or

photographs/copies could allow for determination of how often the students are actually

cognitively challenged or just displaying information. It might also reveal the extent to which

student’ parents were the ones challenged‐‐to visit the craft store or collect leaves.

.

Students’ Voices

Given the right prompt in a safe environment, students can provide incredible insight into what actually

happens in the classroom, especially when only the teacher and students are present. Many teachers

know this and, thus, regularly elicit student feedback to improve their own instruction. Schools can

make the same commitment to systematically and responsibly using processes of surveys and interviews

to gather evidence of teacher effectiveness.

Caution must be used, of course, when analyzing evidence of students interviews and surveys. Students

might be on the warpath with a teacher and work to distort reality as a way of getting revenge. Or,

students can so adore a teacher that their perceptions might not be an accurate indication of areas of

expertise. However, even given these cautions, systematic and focused processes for eliciting student

input, along with collaborative analyses of results, can provide strong indications of areas of strength

and weakness Again, examples illustrate the power.

Instructional standard: Create a classroom environment with high expectations and respect.

It is hard to imagine monitoring this standard without hearing from students, whether through

interviews or surveys. Although many schools often do some sort of student survey, taking this

instructional standard seriously requires that the schools systematically elicit student input in a

safe environment and regularly use that input to sustain what is working and to change what is

not.

Instructional standard: Provide feedback that both motivates and guides learning.

For this standard, classroom artifacts can reveal the type of feedback students are receiving, from

simple scores and comments on their work to detailed rubrics. It is not until we talk to students,

however, that we can determine how that feedback is being used. Even general prompts, such as,

“Tell me what you are good at and what you still need to work on,” will provide an indication of

the extent to which students are pursuing the achievement of learning goals or just simply “doing

school.”

Using the Evidence from Classroom Artifacts and Students’ Voices

There are multiple scenarios in which these types of evidence could be a major, if not the most

important, source of evidence of effectiveness.

1. Individual teacher and collaborative team evidence‐based reflection.

As a part of their reflective practice, individual teachers or teams (grade level, department, PLC)

collect artifacts and/or elicit students’ feedback with a focus on selected instructional goals in

order to self‐assess, celebrate strengths, and set new goals. This cycle repeats in order to

sustain focus and see results of this commitment to agreed‐upon instructional goals.

2. Supervising learning school‐wide

The supervisor selects an instructional focus then collects artifacts and elicits student input as a

way of examining the experiences of the students in the school. After spending time examining

this evidence, he/she shares perceptions with the faculty. No single teacher is targeted for

praise or criticism; the supervisor is sharing what patterns surfaced as a result of his thoughtful

analysis. The supervisor then leads the faculty celebrating successes and in setting school‐wide

goals for instructional improvement. The supervisor promises to repeat this analysis in order to

monitor growth in the targeted areas.

3. Teacher evaluation

The supervisor and teacher use artifacts and student input from the teacher’s classroom to

identify areas of strength and weakness for the teachers. This type of analysis can help to

teacher evaluation a process of using feedback from evidence‐based reflection to improve

teaching. Therefore, it is the extent to which the teacher engages authentically and

professionally in this type of analysis, not just the ratings for the instructional goals, that is a

major criterion in the determination teacher status

Whether using classroom observations or emphasizing the evidence from classroom artifacts and

students’ voices, supervision can, and should, influence instructional pracrice. Shifting away from too

much reliance on classroom observations, however, can have major advantages.

1. Fairness

Notice that in each of the examples above, there are no hidden agendas or “gotcha” processes.

Although not intentional, classroom observations can feel like that, especially when a teacher

realizes that, wouldn’t you know, his students are acting so weird and right in front of the

observer. Using evidence that represents teachers’ practices over time is a much fairer and

more accurate representation of instructional expertise than is relying on one or two

observations—whether on a good day or bad day.

2. Teacher‐supervisor relationships

Classroom observations sometimes frame the supervisor as an observer who, probably during

the post‐conference, is going use the notes from observation to discuss and coach; the goal is to

have an impact on the teacher, thus the learner. When artifacts and student perspectives are

the major focus, this relationship changes. The frame is that of the supervisor and teacher, side‐

by‐side, analyzing the student evidence; the goal is to have an impact on the learner, thus, the

teacher. Both approaches have a common purpose—to improve instruction—but the two

approaches create very different relationships.

3. Focus on learning

Both artifacts and students’ voices provide a perspective of instruction from the viewpoint of

the learners. Just as with classroom observations, no final conclusions should be drawn from a

small amount of evidence, but when enough evidence is collected to show a pattern,

celebrations and goal‐setting can follow. Further, the indications of pursuing these goals to

improve learning can never be in the form of workshop participation or a book study.

Classroom observations have long provided, and will continue to provide, evidence that can be used in

assessing and improving teaching practices. The reason for emphasizing the evidence from classroom

artifacts and students’ voices is to motivate a renewed commitment to using this type of evidence as a

way to improve teaching expertise because it makes us work to improve the learning experiences of our

students.

© Ritchhart, 2003

Looking at Opportunities

Based on your observations/reflections of a classroom episode, an examination of a unit, or a review of a task; rate each item below on a scale from 1 = not very apparent to 5 = strongly evident. Explain what justification and evidence there is to support your rating. Reflect on how this particular episode, unit, or task might be further enhanced. Criteria Rating Explanation / Reflection

1. In this class, the work students are doing is connected to big or important ideas in the subject area.

2. In this class, the work is focused on developing well articulated understandings. It is relatively evident what understandings are to be developed as a result of doing the work.

Focu

s of

Con

tent

3. In this class, a few topics are explored in depth rather than attempting to cover or touch on many.

4. In this class, the work is purposeful and has meaning for students. It is not just work for work’s sake.

5. In this class, students find the work engaging and worthwhile. Engagement is intellectual as well as social and/or physical.

Enga

gem

ent o

f Stu

dent

s

6. In this class, there is a level of meaningful choice embedded in the work that allows students to have real ownership of the work or helps to personalize it.

7. In this class, the work challenges students in some way, by pushing their thinking in new directions or asking them to re-examine ideas or beliefs.

8. In this class, the work asks students to generate original ideas, explanations, solutions, responses, or findings.

Dep

th o

f Wor

k

9. In this class, the work has depth and regularly goes beyond the level of knowledge/skill building.

10. In this class, students’ thinking is made visible through the work/discussion/ reflections they do so it can be discussed, shared, examined or reflected upon.

11. In this class, patterns of thinking/habits of mind are on display. It is possible to identify the types thinking that students are engaged in and must do to be successful with the work

Pres

ence

of T

hink

ing

12. In this class, there is adequate time for thinking, to prepare responses, and express ideas.

1 day creating a culture of critical thinking nmec fall 2017 · 01/08/2017 · 9/7/17 1...

Documents