Teachable Moments

For this blog post, I have reviewed the article Teachable Moments: Linking Assessment and Teaching in Talk about Writing, by Kathryn Glasswell and Katy M. Parr. In this article, the authors observed the writing instruction of a Year 1 and 2 teacher in New Zealand. They observed instructional routines, talked to students, and interviewed teachers about what they did and why. In the course of the article, Glasswell and Parr describe different types of assessment, define that watchword of education, “teachable moments”, and outline three hallmarks of teachable moments. Then they give the example of a teacher-student interaction in a writing conference to exemplify one teachable moment using their hallmarks.

There are basically two types of assessment according to Glasswell and Parr: summative assessment, which shows evidence of learning, and formative assessment, which requires gathering information about  what teachers do and why. In formative assessment, they further break it down into planned and interactive assessment. Planned assessment is, obviously, planned. It is, by nature, much more structured than interactive assessment. Interactive assessment is more dynamic; it is based on teacher-student conversations and on teacher observations of student behavior and progress within the course of a lesson or unit. In this case, it is important to keep quality notes of observations because there is no other proof of assessment. (I, personally, do not see why interactive assessment could not be used summatively as well, but it is not mentioned by the authors of this article.

Teachable moments are “times when we have found a valuable and authentic way to teach something useful.” It is not a split-second opportunity that occurs and passes but is, rather, based on interactive formative assessment, on the teacher knowing through experience exactly where a student is and where they need to go next in any particular moment. The three hallmarks of a teachable moment are the following: a meeting of minds, a knowledge of possible futures, and an application of proper scaffolding.

The “meeting of minds” describes the student-teacher relationship. A teacher cannot force students to learn; no matter how much we may want to, we cannot simply cram information into children’s brains. Students need to be active participants in their own education. They need to question the method of their own learning and be self-motivated and proactive in pursuing it.

The “knowledge of possible futures” refers to the shared goal of the teacher and student. An example was given of Driver’s Ed. Both the young driver and the driving instructor are aware of the planned outcome: that the student will be able to drive independently and safely. Student awareness of goals is incredible important for progression because the student is as important as the teacher in the learning process. If they do not know the end goal, how can they strive for it? This section also discusses the ZPD (Zone of Proximal Development) of the student. This simply means, in fancy, scientific terms, that if the lesson being taught is to easy or too difficult, the student will not progress efficiently. Like with Goldilocks, the lesson must be “just right”

The final hallmark of a teachable moment is the application of proper scaffolding. Glasswell and Parr state that students need “the right amount of the right kind of support at the right time, for the right period of time.” They say that “parents, teachers, and more skilled peers create a support system for learner that enable her to perform tasks and be more skillful than if she were attempting to perform independently.” (I was a bit iffy on the “more skilled peers” part – why can all peers not support each other in learning?) Scaffolding should be as-needed, flexible, temporary, and diminishing over time. There should be a transfer of responsibility from the teacher (or parent or peer) to the student.

The example given by Glasswell and Parr of these three hallmarks of a teachable moment was of a student named Charlie and his teacher, Eleanor. It only lasted 1 minute and 47 seconds, but is crammed with useful information. During this short time, the teacher devotes her full attention to the student, compliments his brave use of invented spelling, and gives him one thing to work on: making clear to the audience the sequence of events in the story. The following day, Charlie independently worked on his writing piece and, instead of reciting Eleanor’s suggestion for clarity verbatim, experimented with the idea she was promoting. Thus his story “I hurt my leg because (Eleanor’s suggestion) I fell down in the driveway” became, “This week I was walking on the driveway. Then I fell over.” In a different way, it still communicates causality and a sequence of events to the audience. This independent work shows the results of a well-taught moment, in which the teacher saw where her student was, what he needed to do next, offered guidance, then stepped back to let him take command of his own learning when he was ready.

I would like to conclude, not with my own words, but with the authors’ own concluding remarks.

Teachable moments are more than spontaneous occurrences that happen when gifted teachers are listening carefully to their students and responding intuitively. Rather, we suggest that teachable moments are grounded in a deeper understanding of formative assessment (assessment for learning) and its place in the instructional fabric of classroom interactions. We have proposed that to be effective in teachable moments, teachers need to know where their students are in their learning, where each student needs to go to become more skilled, and how classroom talk can create a meaningful scaffold. Without such foundations, the conversations that take place - no matter if they emerge from the student's own initiative or interests - will be "fleeting" and will not necessarily accumulate to support sustained learning in writing.

An Inquiry of Birds

In addition to reading assigned articles and chapters, my classmates and I are required to read 5 research articles independently and summarize and analyze them on our blogs. For this, the first of my independent research articles, I read The Ties that Bind: Emergent Literacy and Scientific Education, by Phyllis Whitin, published in Language Arts (journal) in 2007. It details the experience of a teacher who switched from teaching fourth grade to teaching kindergarten specifically because the switch from half-day to full-time kindergarten gave her the time necessary to conduct scientific lessons as well as standard reading/writing/math.

For the most part, I think this article was interesting, accessible, and full of valuable ideas. For instance, the incorporation of non-fiction, and of various genres under the umbrella of non-fiction, is important from a young age. Research by Duke in 2000 showed that, “an average of only 3.6 minutes a day were devoted to non-fiction reading” in elementary classrooms (20). I think that this situation has improved and that non-fiction texts are being used increasingly even in the early primary grades. Children are curious about the world they live in and therefore they should have access to material that can teach them about such interests. From what I’ve read and observed, young children love simple non-fiction.

The teacher in this article specifically focused on learning about birds using scientific techniques, specifically “close, sustained observation, collaborative conversations with peers, and purposeful use of a wide range of resources” (20). Through inquiry into a specific topic, students learned about genre types and the value of using multiple resources, how to use different types of resources (i.e. how to read a storybook (continuous text) vs. how to look up a fact in a reference book (non-continuous text)), narrative writing, how to “read” maps, the difference between skimming and reading and the utility of each, the incorporation of numerical data in observational texts, and, what really “blew my mind” as far as what kindergartners are capable of, the ability to infer information based on what is not present in a text!

This is an example of a page from Stoke’s Beginner’s Guide to Birds: Eastern Region, the guide the students were using from the start of the school year. They began by looking at pictures, learned what each of the symbols present on the page meant, and eventually read the accompanying text (often with some help.)

In addition to gaining valid literacy skills, the focus on a “real-world” subject empowered students. They weren't just Kindergartners, they were scientists (participating in Cornell’s Project FeederWatch); they weren't the youngest member of their family, but a valued resource for bird identification at home and on family outings. Bird knowledge also gained a level of social currency; a girl who joined the classroom midway through the year picked up on this and became more accepted after she presented her first bird observations. Because of all these factors, students were motivated to finish literacy projects connected to birds. One boy, with the lowest reading level in the class, persevered the most when journaling about observing a wren nest at his cousin’s house. With teacher help, this journal entry eventually morphed into his “published” book at the end of the year.

Conclusion:

This article shows that there are many benefits to incorporating non-fiction and meaningful inquiry into the classroom. And I am a strong advocate for cross-curricular instruction. Why not use science to teach reading, thus "killing two birds with one stone"? I am not sure that I, personally, would want to study just birds for an entire year, but there is certainly something to be said for it. Any interesting subject, so long as it contains a certain breadth and depth, will become more interesting as it is studied deeply. Additionally, students become experts on a subject and gain confidence in their ability as scientists or scholars. But there is something to be said for the other end of the spectrum too, for a broader approach that introduces a few more topics on a slightly more superficial level. What if a student is completely uninterested in birds? What if one group wants to study space and another is interested in the history of potatoes? I think, perhaps, finding a middle ground might be the answer – maybe three or four inquiry topics per year rather than one. This variety would provide opportunities for different students with different interests to shine and still allow the necessary time for an in-depth inquiry project. I suppose that, as with everything to do with teaching, finding that perfect balance is contingent upon knowing your students and what will work best for them.

The "McDonaldization" of Teaching: efficiency, predictability, control

In their podcast (adapted to written form), Richard Allington and P. David Pearson make some excellent points about the problems that result from what they call “fidelity to a core program” (70). The main program they focus on is DIBEL, but it is obvious from their conversation that the points they make could be applies, in varying degrees, to many mandated programs and basal readers. I identified six main problems they bring up within this article.

1)      These programs have diverted teachers away from using actual research-based programs that are known to be effective. For example, it is mentioned that in Kentucky, teachers were forced to use DIBEL rather than Reading Recovery. DIBEL has no research showing that it is an effective diagnostic tool or that it can be used for shaping instruction, and yet it is required by all. Allington states that, “DIBELS doesn’t accurately predict reading achievement, yet it sits at the cornerstone  of a bottom-up model of reading” (71).

2)      There is a reduction of the amount of time kids read for meaning. DIBEL “focus(es) on nonsense word production and some kind of weekly monitoring,” but the problem with this is that many children are fully capable of reading quickly and accurately without comprehending a thing they read (Allington, 71). Reading is about making meaning, not about decoding syllables!

3)      It fosters a reluctance in teachers to “spend time on rich conversation around textx that engage meaty ideas for young kids to tackle” (Pearson, 72). Children’s books, as Pearson goes on to point out, address many significant issues that children often face; the pressure to “keep up” with a mandated reading program decreases opportunity to discuss such topics as friendship, betrayal, trust, fairness, honesty, etc.

4)      The core programs do not offer good advice to teachers. I have witnessed this first-hand. There is a script for the teacher and a script of what the children should say. But my relatively small amount of experience has showed me that children will often do the unexpected.

5)      Rigidified and scripted curricula belittle the professionalism of teachers. Teachers are often not trusted to do their jobs. Pearson told an anecdote about a person who wondered why institutions of higher education did not simply prepare teachers by showing them how to use the basal reader they would need to use in their career. Unfortunately, basal readers change with disquieting frequency. Pearson argues that, “We need to prepare folks in a broader way, with more transferrable skills, strategies, and practices that they can adapt to the materials they encounter” (73). What a novel idea! Imagine preparing teachers to be flexible and creative professionals.

6)      More institutions and agencies are getting involved in “the teacher education game”. This means that teaching is being commodified, that the field is being increasingly dominated by private, for profit organizations that, in some cases, certify people with virtually no pedagogical preparation.

The sad, somewhat ironic thing is that the teacher feared by the “person” in point five, the teacher who is unqualified to teach and should have their professionalism questioned, is created by exactly the programs that try to mitigate them. Allington goes so far as to say that, “If beginning teachers who go into schools where they are expecting to use core programs with fidelity and are told what to do and how many minutes to teach, all of which is monitored, they end up three years later as lazy, stupid teachers. The solution to this is to have supportive school systems that allow teachers to teach and encourage them (as well as their students) to self-monitor their work. 

The Importance of Ongoing Assessment

Assessment is a crucial part of education. It not only shows the teacher whether or not, or to what extent, a student has understood a given lesson, but also directs what will be taught next. This is called diagnostic assessment. While some assessment can be formal, a great deal of assessment should happen in informal or “authentic” learning settings. One example of this informal assessment is conferencing. For the educational layperson, conferencing is a one-on-one meeting the teacher has with every student once a week. Each conference lasts about 10 minutes and the student tells the teacher what they have been reading, what strategies they’ve been using, what they are struggling with, etc. These conferences should be recorded by the teacher in an organized fashion, so they can assess progress over time. The format of this organization can take many forms. For example:

The format I typically use is a simple chart that records the date, the book currently being read and whether it is fiction or non-fiction, a few notes on what the student is doing well, and a few notes on what we worked on together or what I think they should work on next. Sounds simple, no?

The answer to that question is an emphatic “no!” There is so much to keep in mind during a conference! In Catching Readers before They Fall, Johnson and Keier recommend the teacher asking him- or herself these questions:

·         Is the child comprehending and to what extent?

·         What strategic actions are being used?

·         How are the strategic actions helping the reader understand what he or she is reading?

·         How does the reading sound? Is it smooth or choppy? Is it well paced and phrased? Does the child attend to punctuation?

·         What does the child do when stuck on a word? What sources of information is the child using or neglecting?

·         Is the child enjoying the book?

·         What is his or her attitude toward reading?

This is a large number of broad, open-ended (for the most part) questions to bear in mind, and this is the short list! After gathering data, Johnson and Keier recommend a longer series of more specific questions For example, Can the child predict at the word level? At the text level? Can the child infer information from the text? Is the child flexible in problem-solving? Is the child self-monitoring for voice/print patch? For meaning? Of course, these are just examples of the kinds of questions a teacher should be seeking answers to, but it illustrates the vast array of skills neccesary to meaningful reading. Once the answers to these questions are determined and the teacher knows exactly what a student can and cannot do, they must then decide what the most important next step is for each student.

Conferencing – meeting weekly with each student to discuss their reading - is a simple idea in theory and, I believe, a very good one. I am fortunate enough to have had opportunities to conference with many students at different reading levels and in different grades. While I have always loved books and this makes it easy for me to talk with children about books, I lack experience in language arts instruction and am not yet comfortable with simultaneous assessment and instruction. I am not yet sure what conversational direction is best, what strategy would most help a student progress, or which is a small detail to work on and which evidence of a wide or essential gap in their reading process system.  Since the vast majority of my knowledge about teaching language arts is new, it has not been sorted into a hierarchy of importance. If a kid is struggling with reading fluently, and predicting, and Text-to-Life/World/Text connections, etc., I am not comfortable assessing which to approach first. I suppose that, as I gain experience, conferencing will feel less like I am treading water and more like I am actually swimming. I look forward to that time because it will make learning to read easier for my students as well as making teaching to read easier for me. Ongoing assessment, such as weekly conferencing is an essential skill for teachers to learn and utilize. Good assessment demonstrates to the teacher exactly what each student can and cannot do, determines what lessons will be taught next, shows ongoing student progress, and can also be a very useful tool for talking to anxious parents.