a dvancing a mbitious e quitable p ractices s ummer i nstitute 2011 supporting co-learning between...
Post on 19-Dec-2015
215 views
TRANSCRIPT
1
ADVANCING AMBITIOUS EQUITABLE PRACTICESSUMMER INSTITUTE 2011Supporting Co-Learning between Teacher Candidates and Cooperating Teachers
3
PARTNERS FROM LAST YEAR Ramona Grove, Cascade Ann Morris, Arts & Academics
Academy, Evergreen Campus Liz Savage, Health Science & Human
Services High School, Evergreen Campus Kari Hollandsworth, Lindbergh High School Amy Peterson, College Place Middle School Kathy Colombo, Kirkland Junior High Stu Dick, Mountlake Terrace High School Oliver Jones, Lindbergh High School Margaret Jones, Garfield High School Bethany Sjoberg, Technology, Engineering &
Communications School, Evergreen Campus
4
MENTORING STANCES Local Guides
Provided emotional support and short-term technical assistance Explained local policies & procedures, shared materials,
answered questions, gave advice, often pulled back as soon as novice seemed more confident
If perceived limited time, tended to focus on “fixing” novices
Educational Companions Also kept their eye on professional goals such as focusing on student thinking and
developing sound reasons for actions, inquired with novices into the particulars of their teaching asking “What sense did students make of the assignment?” “How can we find out whether this assignment worked?”
Developed skills as mentors & formed a vision of mentoring as a vehicle for educational change
Agents of Change Reduced traditional isolation among teachers by encouraging collaboration and shared
inquiry, built networks among novices and CTs by visiting other classrooms and facilitating serious conversations among teachers about teaching
Feinman-Nemser, 2001
5
THEORY OF ACTION How does your teaching relate to student learning? Intended theory and enacted theory
Theories of Action (City, Elmore, Fiarman & Titel, 2009 )
Begin with a statement of causal relationship between what I do and a positive result in a classroom
Are empirically falsifiable; data can be used to disqualify all or parts of the theory
Are open-ended; must be open for inquiry and revisable.
Theories of how students learn & what they are capable of Young students can: construct why explanations, model unobservable
processes, reflect on their own thinking (Leona Schauble, Richard Lehrer, Ann Rosebery, Beth Warren, Christina Schwarz)
Students need opportunities to: address preconceptions, learn to “do science” and represent their ideas, & reflect on their learning (NRC, Donovan & Bransford, Eds, 2005)
6
DEVELOPING THEORIES OF PRACTICE & INFLUENCE OF CONTEXT
Teaching-Learning Unproblematic
Teaching-Learning Problematic
Appropriation of language without
ambitious practices
Integration of ambitious practices
Compartmentalization of ambitious practices
Conceptual Change Theory of Practice
Student ThinkingTheory of Practice
GestaltTheory of Practice
PLANNING FOR MODEL-BASED INQUIRYGOAL: FOR STUDENTS TO USE MULTIPLE FORMS OF EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUCT, REVISE, AND APPLY A CAUSAL EXPLANATORY MODEL FOR A CLASS OF NATURAL PHENOMENON
Discourse #1: Elicit students’ ideas, language, everyday experiences you can build on
• Introduce an unobservable element of explanatory model needed to assemble causal story
• Students start activity • Pressed to reason about purpose of activity and connection to explanatory model
• Teacher finds out where students’ ideas have changed, what gaps in causal story remain
Explanatory model
Puzzling Phenomena
Discourse #3:Pressing for evidence-based explanation
Start and End here: Big Idea
Discourse #2: Making sense of activity: Repeat this cycle for each
facet of explanatory model
Figure 1. Model-based Inquiry Unit Planning Heuristic used with Core Cohorts
8
Re-setting novices’ ideas about good teaching: Science Learning Framework
Why this structure? Simple Begins with Big Ideas Instruction framed around discourses, not activityClose proximity to practice Each tied to a supporting tool
9
Puzzling phenomena: Gas tanker implosion
Explanatory model: There are air molecules inside and outside of the oil tanker. Steam cleaning adds water molecules that move at a high speed and collide with the interior wall. Prior to being sealed high-energy air molecules are driven out of the tanker. After sealing the tanker, there is no gain or loss of molecules on the inside. The steam and air molecules on the inside lose energy as it cools and there are fewer collisions in the interior. Pressure decreases on the inside but pressure on the outside remains the same (14lbs/in2). With less pressure, the tanker collapses to maintain equilibrium.
Puzzling phenomena
Explanatory model
The big ideaDEVELOPING BIG IDEAS: GAS LAWS EXAMPLE
Initial explanations
Final explanations
10
ELICITING STUDENTS’ IDEAS
1. Eliciting observations2. Eliciting hypotheses without
explanation3. Pressing for explanation4. Summarizing
There are four dimensions of students’ experiences that should shape the direction of instruction: students’ partial understandings of the target ideas students’ alternative conceptions about the target ideas students’ everyday language that can be leveraged to help them
understand scientific language related to the target idea students’ everyday experiences related to the target idea that can
be leveraged in later instruction.
11
MAKING SENSE OF MATERIAL ACTIVITY
1. Orienting students to the concepts
2. Back pocket questions: ‐Observation and patterns
3. Back-pocket questions: Connection to the big idea4. Whole class: coordinate student’s ideas & their
questions5. Creating or adding to a public record of student
thinking
12
PRESSING FOR EVIDENCE-BASEDEXPLANATIONS
1. Reorienting students to thefocal models and hypotheses
2. Small groups work at updatingtheir explanation
3. Whole group updates their explanation4. Writing a final explanation5. Applying the new explanatory model
13
Curricular Vision
Critical Pedagogical Discourses
Ambitious Practice
Curricular Vision
Ambitious Practice
Co-learning
Teacher Candidate
Cooperating Teacher
Tools and routines
Tools and routines
Critical Pedagogical Discourses
1) building a shared language and purpose for ambitious practices,
2) sharing a repertoire of ways of reasoning with tools and routines specific to the TC-CT pair,
3) taking principled risks together when experimenting with ambitious practices,
4) co-developing and adopting innovative instantiations of the ambitious practices.
BUFFERING AGAINST REGRESSION: SUPPORTING CO-LEARNING BETWEEN TEACHER CANDIDATES AND COOPERATING TEACHERS
Knowles Science Teaching Foundation
14
FINDINGS FROM YEAR 1: ALIGNMENT OF PRACTICE & TC PRACTICE
Teacher
Selecting Big Ideas/Models
Working with Science Ideas
Pressing for Explanation
Working with Students’ Ideas
Topic focusProcess focus
Theory focus
Method focus
Discover/ Confirm science ideas
Forward science ideas to work on together
MBI focus
No press What happened explanation
How/ partial why some-thing happened explanation
Causal explanation
Monitors, checks, re-teaches ideas
Elicits Ss’ initial understandings
References Ss’ ideas & adapts instruction
Lisa
4,5
2,5
2,4,5 1,3 1,2 3 1,2 3,4,5 1,4 3
Alisa
1,3,4,5
2
1,3,4,5
2
3 1,4,5 2
1
2,3,4,5
Kirsten
2
1,3
1,3 4,5 1 3,4 2,5 3 1 2,4,5 2,4 5
Mike
4 1,2,3
1,3
5 4,5 2 5 4 4,5 1,2,3
Robert
1,2,3,5
12,3,4,
5
4
1,2,4,5 4 1,5 2,3
Sasha
2,3
1
1,4,5 2,3,4,5 1,2,3,4,5 1,4 2,3,5
Jack 1,2,5 3, 4 �� 2 1,3,4,5 2 1,3,5 4
3 1,2,4,5
Keith
4,5
5
1,2,3,4,5
4,5 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4,5 =Classroom observation of TC practice from September (1) to March (5)
CT
UW
TC
CTUWTC
15
ALIGNING PRACTICES
1) Not at all aligned
2) Aiming for different targets
3) Aligning: Building on kids’ ideas
4) Aligning: Working through explanations & scaffolding students’ thinking
CT
UW
TC
CTUWTC
CTUWTC
CTUWTC
16
UNDERSTANDING ALIGNMENT
1. Co-teaching = co-planning, co-instruction, co-debriefing
2. CT theory behind “turning over responsibility” during student teaching
3. Midcourse refocusinga) CT refocusing b) Calibrating through targeted coachingc) Calibrating through social media
CT
UW
TC
17
CO-PLANNING AT ITS BEST
Co-planning a full explanation & connecting activities Set time With colleagues Used a tool- as a starting place for conversations & a standing public
document representing sharing thinking Challenging one another’s content knowledge beyond the textbook Willingness to revise ideas from the text, curriculum
If not:Loss of rigorCT lost & can not track student ideas
18
CO-TEACHING AT ITS BESTS: Would ash be considered a physical change? Like an egg? S: So we did an example of melted cheese.TC: So what did we just have in the back of the class? S: We thought also that it was physical changes even though it comes after melting and boiling. S: I don’t agree with that because even though there was a color change CO2 was emitted so the identity of the logwould have had to have changedCT: Does anyone have something to add to this? …TC: Raise your hand if you have seen a fire burning…so is it possible that a physical change is happening?
Students’ storiesParticipationWorking on students’ ideas
19
CO-TEACHING AT ITS BEST CON’T
CT: so this is Chemistry. Let’s think about this at an atomic level…What makes up an egg? S: ElementsS: PotassiumTC: Be specific S: Proteins, and when we cook proteins the proteins change TC: What does it look like? What happens when it cooks? [TC draws on board and shows a tightly bound protein and an unwound protein.]S: So it is breaking and forming bonds S: It expanded because of heat. When it heated they [bonds] move apart rather than together.
Students’ storiesParticipationWorking on students’ ideas
20
CO-DEBRIEFING AT ITS BEST
Focused on student thinkingDaily reflection questions about
student thinking, including specific individual students
Planning for the next day informed by key episodes of rich classroom dialogue or what students were NOT talking about
NOTE: only a few CT-TC pairs had routines in place for these conversations
21
TURNING OVER RESPONSIBILITY
Individual artisans Co-PlanningCo-Planners Never fully turning over unit planning, staying involved in lesson planning
until the end Creating richest learning experience for students On board with others from same department OR didn’t have pressure
Individual Artisans Tended to use teacher learning rather than student learning as a meter
stick--meeting CTs limited repertoire or more limited understanding of core practices?
Tension between freedom (TC) and readiness (CT) Tension between “keeping pace” with department members NOT on board
with core practices
CT
UW
TCCTUWTC
22
MIDCOURSE REFOCUSING In January/February many TCs took
a nose dive CT re-focusing
High expectations & accountability New requests were made easier if nightly communication and submitting
lesson plans was already established as a routine (i.e. adding back-pocket question)
Had tough but supportive conversations, challenged instead of “being nice”
Had stayed in touch with planning so easier to get re-involved, for others CTs all they could do is watch TC regression away from student ideas
Calibrating through targeted coaching on core practices Calibrating through social media
23
ADVANCING AMBITIOUS AND EQUITABLE SCIENCE TEACHING…WHAT’S NEXT? Facebook group: we will invite all participants to a closed
facebook group to discuss on-going challenges, tensions and examples of using practices. We would like members to post about 1x/week. This group is not for discussing people, just practices.
Monthly meetings: The second Tuesday of each month CTs and TCs will meet at the UW to discuss planning, teaching and debriefing practices & view video
Supporting you in inquiring into ambitious and equitable teaching practices:
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________