The Master Teacher Blog

We know that giving students even a few seconds of “think time” after asking a question can make a big difference in the quantity and quality of the responses we receive. Using “wait time” (waiting at least three to five seconds) gives students time to recall, connect, and analyze information that can lead to better responses. However, like with most instructional strategies, there is more we need to consider if we hope to maximize the impact and increase the learning that results from wait time.  

Of course, there are times when wait time is less crucial to achieving our purpose—for example, when we are working with students to increase automaticity with core facts and processes. Similarly, students typically require less time to formulate yes-or-no or true-or-false responses.  

When we want students to consider, reflect, and genuinely think, wait time can be a powerful tool. It can help us to level the playing field for students who may understand key content but need more time to process information and formulate a response. Even students who typically volunteer an answer can benefit from a few seconds of additional thinking time to fully consider what has been asked. Here are seven tips for making the most of the additional thinking time. 

Ask questions that are worthy of thought. The best questions for wait time are complex, thought-provoking, and personally relevant to students. They are questions that invite students’ thinking, reflecting, and responding. 

Be comfortable with silence. Time to process information and formulate responses can feel uncomfortable at first. Resist the temptation to rephrase, paraphrase, or restate the question too quickly. Allow at least three to five seconds of silence before interrupting it or calling on a student for a response. Consider counting the seconds to yourself until you become comfortable with the time lapse and can sense when five seconds have passed. 

Signal students that you will be “cold calling” rather than selecting a volunteered response. Here, wait time is positioned so that everyone has an opportunity and reason to consider the question and formulate a response. Consider avoiding eye contact with students during wait time to avoid students concluding that you have decided on whom you intend to call. Additionally, consider spending a few seconds jotting a note or reading a few words to signal that you have yet to decide on whom to call. We can assume that some students will initially try to read our behavior to determine whether they will be called upon or whether they can stop thinking and relax. Some students and circumstances might even warrant you providing a heads-up the day before; consider pulling certain students aside and telling them the question you will be asking so that they know you intend to call on them the next day. Not only will this allow the students time to think of how they will respond, but committing to this will result in more students’ voices being heard.  

Resist collecting a single response and moving on after giving students time to think. Rather, collect multiple responses before providing your own comments, reinforcement, or follow-up question(s). This approach signals to students that just because someone has answered, that does not mean that the discussion will move forward. Everyone needs to remain engaged and ready for additional responses.  

Be patient and persistent. Students are likely to come with limited experience with wait time. They may be accustomed to routines where the students who raise their hands are promptly called on and correct answers are signals that the discussion will move forward. Some students may assume that by not raising their hands, they will not be called upon. You may need to extend your patience and resist giving in and moving on when too few volunteer responses. Inform students that you are comfortable with silence and are willing to wait. However, be careful not to get into a power struggle. Usually, a little nudging is enough to communicate that you are serious in your expectations. 

After students have a few seconds to contemplate a response, ask students to turn to a partner to discuss their thinking; you may have heard of this being called “think-pair-share.” You might even pose questions with more than one obviously correct answer to add energy and variety and intensify the discussion. Challenge students to develop a response with which they both can agree. Once students have decided on their response, you might collect several responses before adding your perspective. You might also note consistencies among responses. You may even inquire whether any of the pairs were unable to agree on a response and collect both perspectives before commenting. The discussion might conclude by inviting students to comment on what they have heard and where they note common themes.  

Create time for everyone to think about what has been said once responses have been offered. This step is often called “Wait Time 2.” Rather than immediately providing reinforcement, commentary, or interpretation, wait a few seconds to allow students to think. Again, eye contact and other nonverbal behaviors matter. Just staring at the student who responded or immediately moving on to look at another student can be uncomfortable and be read as indicative that the answer was not satisfactory. However, nodding slowly and allowing your eyes to drift or focus elsewhere as though you are thinking, too, can signal to students that the question and response are still active. After a few seconds, and before you weigh in, you might even turn to another learner and ask their thoughts on the question, what they might add, or to comment on the response. Here, too, wait time can encourage additional thought and more extensive analysis. 

Wait time is a powerful tool to support reflection, discussion, and deeper learning. However, it requires intentional discipline, patience, and strategic thinking in order to be effective. Still, the benefits of wait time, once it becomes routine and well thought out, can empower all learners and build better thinkers.  

In part 1 of this two-part series, we discussed ways in which we can reduce the time and energy we invest in instructing and supporting students without undermining or sacrificing their learning. However, the sources of pressure and stress we feel are not always confined to our instructional practices. We can create stress through the expectations we hold for ourselves. We can form habits and engage in behaviors that sap our energy without our realizing the price we are paying. We can even become stressed by how we view situations and circumstances over which we do not have control.  

Often, just becoming aware of the source of our stress and frustration can help. At times, though, we need to step it up and give ourselves permission to let go of or at least adjust the expectations that are getting in the way of our success and satisfaction. Here are five opportunities for examination, reflection, and modification.  

Opportunity #1: Stop stressing over minor interruptions and unexpected changes.  

We frequently spend our energy fretting over deviations and distractions that get in the way of our plans and expectations. In response to something we could neither foresee nor control changing our day, we can either let ourselves be shadowed by a negative mood, or we can choose to adjust, refocus, and make the best of the situation. The energy we save can be reallocated to areas of greater benefit and satisfaction. 

Opportunity #2: Stop overthinking.  

It is inevitable that we will occasionally do or say something we regret. We will make mistakes and experience setbacks. When we do, we have a choice. We can keep replaying the situation in our minds, figuratively beating ourselves up, and wishing we could have a “do over.” Or, instead, we can make the choice to accept what happened, apologize if needed, and ask ourselves what we can learn from the situation. The time we spend regretting and replaying the situation yields little benefit; on the other hand, deciding what to learn and letting go frees us to shift our attention and energy in the direction of things we can do something about.  

Opportunity #3. Stop associating with negative people.  

It is true that not everyone with whom we work may be positive, optimistic, and pleasant to be around. However, we can choose to limit the time we spend with them and avoid spending any time with negative people when we have a choice. Negative people drain our energy, poison our outlook, and create frustration. The less time we spend with them, the more time and energy we have available to associate with others who feed our energy and leave us feeling better.  

Opportunity #4: Stop being constantly available during evenings, weekends, and holiday breaks.  

In the aftermath of the pandemic, expectations for teacher availability have become blurred and, in many cases, out of control. Students and parents may feel free to reach out during evenings or weekends with questions and requests and expect to have a response before school starts the next day. While in emergencies we want to be reachable, we can choose to provide structures and establish expectations for our work hours and times when we are available. We want to be responsive, of course, but we also can and need to set limits.  

Opportunity #5: Stop maintaining the perfectly decorated classroom.  

There is no question that classrooms with attractive and relevant decorations are pleasant places to be. There is even some evidence that they can help students to feel welcomed and give them a sense of belonging. However, wall-to-wall decorations and too much splash and color can become distracting. Additionally, classroom decorations do not have to be changed weekly or monthly. Giving some thought to decorations that will support learning and make students feel comfortable can be a good investment. However, classroom decorations are not the most important element in support of learning. We can afford to spend less time (and money) decorating and reallocate our energy to tasks with more learning impact.  

Like the opportunities we discussed in part 1 of this series, some of these opportunities may not be sources of pressure and stress for you, or you may have already made adjustments that serve you well. It might be that your reflection on these opportunities has surfaced other sources of pressure and stress that you may want to address. If so, now is a good time to make changes and find what works for you.  

It seems in education that we are constantly adding. Rarely do we identify and abandon significant tasks and activities. Yet, if we were able to do so, we could create time for other important activities. We could preserve energy to make life more satisfying and successful. However, we want to be certain that anything we might abandon does not disadvantage or undermine the learning of our students.  

The good news is that there are several common tasks, habits, and preoccupations which we can choose to abandon that can make our lives better while not sacrificing learning. Here are five things to consider.  

Opportunity #1: Stop doing things students can do for themselves.

Like mother birds, we sometimes “pre-chew” what we give to students. We may even “digest” the information for them and then tell students exactly what they need to do with it. Yet, confusion and challenge can be useful to learning experiences. We may also find ourselves constantly reminding and nudging students to plan, prepare, and perform when they can do so themselves, if given the responsibility and allowed to experience the natural consequences that come when they are not constantly being reminded. We may think that we need to set goals for our students; however, students are more likely to own and seriously pursue goals they set for themselves. Rather than defaulting to our judgment, we might provide students with rubrics to evaluate the quality of their work. The list could go on. Beyond the time we spend doing things our students could do, we risk fostering dependence and learned helplessness.  

Opportunity #2: Stop being the sole driver of learning.

It has been said that the person who gives the most effort in a classroom is the person who learns the most. When we spend all or most of a class period talking, we risk cutting off opportunities for students to engage, discuss, examine, debate, and learn. Further, learning that comes from reflection, effort, and challenging thought tends to be valued more highly and retained longer. When students play a more active role, we move from driving every activity to facilitating, monitoring, and redirecting.  

Opportunity #3: Stop stepping in too quickly when students struggle.  

Of course, while we do not want students to engage in excessive struggle that leaves them feeling defeated and unwilling to try in the future, we must note that some of the most important learning students encounter comes with struggle. Struggle forces students to focus, think, and explore new strategies. If we step in too early when our students are grappling with a challenge, they are more likely to see us as a quick solution rather than discover or develop the solution on their own. 

Opportunity #4: Stop piling up our feedback.  

When grading student work, providing analysis and guidance, or coaching students, we need to be careful to limit and focus the feedback we give. The truth is that more feedback is not necessarily better. We may feel that we need to point out every area that could be improved, but when we do this, we risk overwhelming students, and the result can be the rejecting or disregarding of everything we have offered. On the other hand, feedback that is specific, targeted, timely, and actionable is more likely to lead to the improvements we seek. Meanwhile, we will have avoided spending our evenings and weekends preparing feedback that will not be applied.  

Opportunity #5: Stop assigning excessive homework.  

Homework provides no benefits if students choose not to do it. Further, practicing problem solutions is only effective in small amounts. We do better when we assign moderate levels of work that is worthy from the perspective of students. The greatest benefits accrue when we assign purposeful tasks that encourage independent thinking and application of knowledge. If we don’t have a meaningful task for students to do outside of class, we need to consider not assigning homework. Of course, brief, meaningful, targeted homework—or no homework at all—requires less of our time, too.  

Not every opportunity for the abandonment of the tasks discussed may feel right for you. Feel free to adopt those that will serve you best. Also, please note that this list is not exhaustive. As you read and reflect, you may discover additional opportunities that will serve you and your students well. If so, now is a good time to put them into practice.  

Note: Tune in next week to learn five more things we can stop doing! 

Seeing students become ensnared by misconceptions and slowed by learning barriers can be among the most disappointing and disheartening experiences we confront in our role as educators. Our disappointment is only further compounded when our students are otherwise interested, engaged, and committed to their learning.  

Fortunately, there are several steps we can take to help students avoid predictable misconceptions and sidestep common learning barriers. However, we need to anticipate potential problem areas and learning traps, and then we need to develop plans to help our students avoid them before they are encountered in order for our efforts to be effective.  

A good place to start is sorting through our experiences with student struggles in the past and refreshing our knowledge of how our students learn. We might think about what has worked and where students have been challenged with past learning, especially with the learning that parallels what they are about to learn.  

We can pre-assess our students to measure their current understanding and recall of the key content and skills necessary to be successful with the planned new learning. However, we must remove any hint or intention of consequences for their not knowing or recalling. In short, we need an accurate assessment of what students know—and what they are ready to learn.  

Using the information from our prior knowledge and pre-assessment activities, our next step is to coach and support students to activate their prior knowledge. We might use practice problems, reteaching, or simply a discussion with students to bring what they have learned into an active state that can be employed to support new learning.  

Next, we can design scaffolding to support students to find success as they approach the next learning challenge. The scaffolding design might include key vocabulary words students will need to know, important concepts and skills to employ, strategies to consider, and background information that might be helpful. 

Depending on the nature, scope, and challenge of the new learning, we might develop a more comprehensive preview guide to create interest, stimulate curiosity, and build confidence in our students. The guide might include questions that students will find compelling, provocative statements to consider, and hints regarding the value and purpose of what students will be learning. Any scaffolding and supports we have designed can be included in the guide, as well as reminders of the prior learning and skills that students already possess, that will be useful to their new learning.  

Of course, we want our preparation to help students avoid needless and distracting barriers and missteps as they learn, but our purpose is not to remove all the challenges and struggles students may encounter. Learning that comes through effort, and even mistakes, is also important to our students’ development, competence, and confidence to take on future learning challenges. The bottom line is this: Our goal is not to prevent all mistakes and setbacks that will occur as students learn. We want students to experience enough success to create learning momentum, but we also want to build learning resilience and flexibility that will serve them long after they leave our classroom. 

Multiple research studies have found that student achievement is closely associated with teacher assumptions and expectations. Even though we may not intend for this to happen, we can still fall into the trap of having our perceptions of students’ abilities and potential drive our practices in ways that ultimately undermine their success.  

Research studies spanning the past two decades have shown that the students perceived to have high learning potential are often given more interesting and challenging opportunities in which to engage and may even receive more reinforcement to succeed. Students assumed to be lower-potential learners can find themselves presented with less challenging, less interesting, and less learning-supportive work. Thus, existing achievement gaps between the groups fail to close and may even become wider, despite students attending the same classes. 

How do our expectations play out in practice? Here are five common areas wherein we can find ourselves giving some students more opportunities to engage, more time to reflect and contribute, and more encouragement and support for learning than others.  

How much time do we give students to respond? High-achieving students are often quick thinkers and confident question-answerers. For this reason, they are generally given more time to respond than others, as they are assumed to have responses ready to offer. Yet, if given more time, more students are capable of successfully answering and participating meaningfully in discussions. Research consistently shows that teachers typically do not give most students adequate time to think and formulate a considered response. In fact, the typical time teachers wait for a response is between one and two seconds. Amazingly, extending the time students are given by as little as three to five seconds can significantly increase the frequency of correct responses and deepen the insight and completeness of responses. We may need to provide additional support by previewing or rephrasing the questions we will ask or offering hints or clues—but, ultimately, providing additional time makes a key, foundational difference. When we do, fewer students will respond with “I don’t know.” Meanwhile, more students will volunteer with appropriate answers, including students who otherwise are likely to remain silent.  

Who is given the most frequent opportunities to respond to questions and contribute to discussions? It can be easy to fall into a pattern of calling on students whom we anticipate will be able to answer our questions or contribute meaningfully to a class discussion. We can feel pressure to maintain a fast pace and look for quick answers. We may even become frustrated when we must wait for a student to think. Or we may anticipate that certain students will be unable to respond or contribute on a given topic or concept. Yet, these are opportunities to learn, and we must provide those opportunities to all of our students.  

Are the levels of complexity and challenge in our questions well distributed? Class discussions can fall into a pattern of asking perceived high-potential students questions that require reflection, analysis, and complex thought, while students assumed to be low-potential are presented with questions that rely on recall and fact-based information and which present limited analytical challenge. We may think that we are protecting low-performing students from embarrassment, but we risk not challenging them, not giving them opportunities to engage with challenging content, and lowering their perception of what they can do. Disparities in opportunities to interact, share ideas and perceptions, and engage in debate can perpetuate and exacerbate inequities and expand gaps between high- and low-achieving students. 

What do we do when student responses are weak or incorrect? Students may respond to our questions with varying levels of clarity and correctness. Some students will answer with exactly what we are seeking. Other students may misunderstand or misinterpret what we are asking. Some students may present a partial answer but offer less than we are looking for. What we do in response to this variation can reveal differences in our perceptions of students’ learning potential and lead to variances in learning outcomes. Our willingness to probe beyond initial answers, provide prompts when necessary, or offer clues can make a significant difference in the learning revealed and gained through these interactions. On the other hand, quickly moving on to another student to answer the same question, or present a new question, risks squandering what could be a productive learning experience for the student who is responding and for others in the class who are listening and observing. 

To whom do we give the most nonverbal support? Students watch us closely and are quick to interpret and assign meaning to our behaviors. Again, multiple research studies have pointed to the significance of nonverbal behaviors as reflections of our perceptions of others. Students perceived as high-potential, willing learners are likely to be the objects of more direct eye contact, more positive body language, and more supportive facial expressions. When speaking with them, we can be more likely to show an open, inviting posture, supported by encouraging smiles, winks, and nods. Eye contact while listening is a sign of attention and respect. Leaning forward and an open body stance are powerful tools for conveying interest and connection. Students who experience these behaviors less frequently are likely to interpret their experiences as indicative that they are not as capable or that they do not have the same level of potential as the students for whom these experiences are more commonplace. As a result, they can be less likely to take learning risks, persist when they struggle, and bounce back when they experience learning setbacks. 

The truth is that we can easily fall into habits and practices that reveal high expectations for some students and not for others. Being conscious of this possibility can be a good start. However, we may need to be more intentional. We might keep logs of questions we ask, and to whom we ask them, for later analysis. We might capture our teaching on video for later review and reflection. Or we may have a colleague observe our teaching and provide feedback. Regardless, the achievement of many of our students depends on our getting this part of our practice right. It is well worth the effort.  

Convincing students to spend their time studying can be a challenge. However, the task becomes even more daunting when students employ study strategies that are less than effective. Convincing students to invest large amounts of time and still not see significant learning results can be a tough sell.  

The good news is that there are strategies students can employ to help them increase the learning they reap from the efforts they invest in studying. Meanwhile, they will have to spend less time studying in comparison to traditional approaches. Here are five strategies and comparisons we can share. You are encouraged to share these with your students! 

Typical study technique:  

Students read and re-read content, assuming that familiarity with information is learning. Yet, reading alone is not an effective way to develop deep understanding or transfer information into memory for later recall and application.  

Better:  

Have students read targeted content only one time, with as much focus as they can give. When they finish reading, have them spend time recalling and reflecting on what they understood and take notes accordingly. The key is for students to think about the meaning, structure, and significance of what they read. If they find that there are gaps in information or if they experience confusion, they can re-read only that portion of the text and then repeat the process.  

Typical study technique:  

Students often study one subject, skill, or concept at a time. This is called blocked practice, and the assumption is that focusing on one thing at a time will increase learning and recall.  

Better:  

Counsel students to improve and accelerate their learning by including multiple skills or concepts within the same learning or study session. For example, students might study math and chemistry in the same session, mix in new information while reviewing past learning, or address content out of chronological order. Known as interleaving, the process of addressing multiple concepts or skills in succession keeps the brain alert and improves its ability to differentiate elements and aspects of the content students are learning.  

Typical study technique:  

Students often spend hours leading up to an exam cramming information into their brain with the hope that it can be recalled during the test. Unfortunately, attempts to cram information into the brain is not only time-consuming, but it often results in confusion, gaps, and quick forgetting.  

Better:  

Coach students to engage in brief, intense bursts of learning, followed by breaks to absorb, reflect, and make sense of it. While learning may be spread over more days, the actual time spent studying can be less—and more effective—than trying to cram.  

Typical study technique:  

Students allocate time for studying but engage in multitasking with social media, digital distractions, and other unrelated attention-competing activities. The problem is that multitasking, or task switching, degrades focus and extends the time necessary to learn.  

Better:  

Encourage students to increase their study intensity for shorter periods of time. An hour spent in focused, uninterrupted study can be as effective as three hours of study, during which students spend time checking texts, scrolling through Instagram, and engaging in other distractions. As a result of intensely and intentionally studying for one hour, they will have two hours left to socialize and enjoy other activities.  

Typical study technique:  

Students spend their study sessions reading text, underlining key information, and reviewing highlighted content.  

Better:  

Advise students to pre-test themselves on what they already know about the topic or content before they begin to study. Even incorrect answers help to focus attention and look for key information as their study period unfolds. When finished studying, students can self-test using questions from the pre-test and any others that seem relevant from the study session. The time spent pre- and post-testing generates more learning than additional time they might have spent reading or reviewing highlighted content.  

We want our students to be successful and to see us as their advocate. Sharing strategies such as these can offer key support and reinforce our commitment to their success. Of course, these same strategies can be useful when we find ourselves having to learn new concepts and develop new skills. 

Even though students come to us having learned constantly since birth, they often hold significant misconceptions about formal learning. These misconceptions can be the result of myths shared with them by family and fed by advice from friends. Some are myths that result from misreading advice or from confusion stemming from feedback they have received. In some cases, the misconceptions are even embedded in school experiences and subtle messaging from adults.

Regardless of the source, misconceptions about how learning happens can create learning barriers. They can lead students to embrace thinking patterns and strategies that hinder their learning while avoiding experiences and circumstances that could lead to their success.

Our challenge is to uncover and help students to dispel assumptions and perceptions that can get in the way of and undermine learning. Here are seven of the most common misconceptions students have about learning—and why they need to be corrected.

Misconception #1: Struggle is a sign of inability.

This misconception does a serious disservice to learners and learning. Too often, learners who take more time to learn are labeled as “slow” and are assumed not to be skilled learners. In fact, however, taking more time to “wrestle” with a concept or skill can result in deeper understanding and longer retention of what is learned. Slowing down can be an advantage when learning really counts. Consider the quote from Albert Einstein: “It’s not that I am so smart, I just stay with problems longer.”

Misconception #2: Confusion is bad.

Students often panic when they find new content to be confusing. They worry that they are not capable of learning what they confront. They even may blame the teacher. Yet, if students never become confused, either they already knew what they were expected to learn, or what they were given was not very challenging. Confusion is one of the starting places for significant, challenging learning. Confusion should not be avoided. Rather, it should be embraced as an indication that an opportunity to learn lies ahead.

Misconception #3: Fast learning is good learning.

Many educators and parents inadvertently reinforce this misconception by labeling seemingly fast learners as being smart and skilled. Yet, fast learning often is surface learning. It may be that good short-term memory is on display, only to be followed by near-term forgetting. Also, what appears to be fast learning is often simply a review of what is already known or what is closely related to existing background knowledge and past learning. In fact, when it comes to new, challenging learning, students often overestimate the speed with which they learn. Many students have discovered too late that waiting until just before an exam to learn the content on which they will be tested takes longer than they estimated.

Misconception #4: Each student has one learning mode that works best for them.

This misconception assumes that each individual student has a singular, specific learning style that, if utilized, improves their learning. Yet, multiple studies have debunked this misconception. In fact, students are more likely to learn and retain content that is accessed through multiple, varied modes. The more ways in which students are able engage with new information or practice a new skill, the more likely they are to understand and be able to apply what they have learned.

Misconception #5: Listening to a lecture is more effective than active learning.

Students often think that when they are told something in an organized manner and in a formal setting, they learn more than when they openly discuss, reflect upon, and organize new content. Interestingly, a new study from Harvard University found that, despite student perceptions, the opposite is true; students who were actively involved in the learning process scored better on follow-up exams than their more passive learning counterparts. Active learning asks more from students, but they also learn more as a result.

Misconception #6: Knowledge is the accumulation of an array of isolated facts.

Students often confuse memorization of definitions, terms, and other bits of information with understanding. To be sure, the ability to recall and recite information can set the stage for developing knowledge and gaining insight, but true knowledge requires going beyond superficial information to connected understanding, application of concepts, and informed reasoning. When students communicate using correct terminology to describe something of significance and apply definitions as they construct arguments, they are demonstrating knowledge.

Misconception #7: Learning is doing only what the teacher says, only in the way the teacher directs.

This misconception assumes that learning is understanding the personality, preferences, and perspectives of the teacher and then giving them what they want. With this mentality, learning is simply “playing the game.” Unfortunately, this misconception risks missing the purpose of what is learned, remaining overly dependent on the direction of others, and failing to build self-management and self-direction skills. While educator instruction, guidance, and coaching are important, so is discovery, discerning, and deciding activities that are not adult driven. Note that this is not intended to conflict with the expectation that students demonstrate respect toward their teacher; instead, this point addresses the tendency for some students to produce work exclusively to “please” their teacher rather than take ownership of their own learning growth.

Few of these misconceptions may be surprising. In fact, many of us may have harbored some of these assumptions and interpretations when we were students. Yet, helping students to dispel their misconceptions can open the door for them to let go of what may be holding them back, and it may very well lead to success that extends far beyond their time with us.

Source:

Reuell, P. (2019, September 4). Study shows students in “active learning” classrooms learn more than they think. The Harvard Gazette.

How we think about the work we do matters. Our beliefs, attitudes, and thinking frames have an impact on the goals we set, the instructional approaches we choose, and the learning our students experience. We can plan based on what we want and intend to do, or we can begin with where our students are and what they need. We can demand compliance or invite commitment. We can manage behavior or nurture responsibility.

This is a good time to reflect on how we engage our students, what outcomes our approaches are most likely to generate, and how we might adjust our strategies and techniques to stimulate imaginations, stir passion, and maximize learning. Here are five questions we can use to guide our reflection and determine if and where we need to adjust.

First, do I seek to delight or inspire? At first, these two goals may seem to be one and the same. However, on closer examination, we see that when we seek to delight students, while they may have a positive experience, little emotion remains beyond the moment. When we seek to inspire, on the other hand, students are more likely to experience a connection with the content, concept, or opportunity to which we introduce them. We open the door for students to own the experience and choose to learn more, experience passion, and act. When we seek to delight, the experience is contained in the moment. When we seek to inspire, we invite connection, reflection, and commitment that may last a week—or a lifetime.

Second, do my expectations irritate or agitate? Again, we may initially see these two terms as very similar. However, irritation typically results from pressing our interests and commitment upon students and their actions. People naturally resist when they feel pressure from someone else about something that holds little interest to them. Agitation, on the other hand, is nudging others to engage and act on something that is of interest to them or in their best interest. When we agitate—the definition in this context meaning to stir and cause to move—we nudge students to be all that they can be. We ask them to be true to themselves. Whereas irritation is a reaction to our agenda, agitation comes from our challenging students to be, do, and accomplish what is of interest and importance to them. 

Third, do I give advice or offer feedback? When we offer feedback, we provide clear, timely, actionable, non-judgmental, specific information to students relative to a learning attempt, creative effort, or work product. Our goal is to help students grasp how their actions relate to goals or outcomes and support them to see the next step to move their learning forward. When we give advice, we are more likely to speak within our frame of reference and draw on our experiences. While what we have to offer may have significant merit, students are more likely to resist and ignore our words, believing that what worked for us may not be as useful to them. Typically, sharing advice rather than offering feedback is only effective for the most highly confident, competent, and committed learners.

Fourth, do I seek compliance or commitment? Most of us experienced school as a highly structured, compliance-based institution. Most important decisions were made by adults and shared with students as expectations for their behavior. Most sanctions and rewards were based on whether students complied with adult rules, expectations, and structures. However, we know that the most powerful learning is driven by commitment and purpose. Learning driven by compliance is typically only as deep as required and retained only until it is assessed. Tapping purpose, nurturing commitment, and supporting students in order to extend their learning beyond the required curriculum can be an experience that is as transformative as it is rewarding.

Fifth, do I rely on punishment or discipline? Again, we may confuse these two concepts in pursuit of acceptable behavior. Punishment is assigning consequences intended to be unpleasant enough that students will not repeat the unacceptable behavior. The hope is that students will be reluctant to engage in future behaviors that will lead to the pain, embarrassment, or shame designed by punishment. While this approach works best with students who already want to please adults and typically do not engage in unacceptable behavior, it is largely ineffective with students who do not have strong relationships, who may seek attention, or who otherwise are not afraid of consequences. Conversely, discipline focuses on helping students to see how and why their behavior is unacceptable, develop strategies and options to achieve what they seek through acceptable means, and build self-regulating skills to manage their behavior. Punishment is about consequences while discipline is about learning.  

Convincing students to commit to their learning, become the best they can be, and take responsibility for their behavior is not an easy challenge. Students come to us with a variety of experiences in life and learning. Some students respond enthusiastically to opportunities to co-lead their learning, while others require time and patience. Regardless, when we give students the gifts of owning their learning, committing to their success, and developing their full capacity to engage the world, we give them gifts for life.

Teachers have been urged for years to make student data the focus of most professional learning communities, team activities, and similar efforts. After all, experts have routinely advised that the only way to have an impact on student learning outcomes is to understand current performance. However, researchers now have added an important component to this advice. After conducting and reviewing a variety of studies over several years, they found that the focus on analyzing student data has generally not led to improvements in learning outcomes.   

Knowing where students struggle, need to improve, and are doing well is important, but that is only the first step. Too often, collecting and analyzing student data has been the sole focus; however, unless the information gained leads to insightful, impactful changes in learning support and engagement, changes in learning outcomes rarely happen.  

The researchers noted that educators are investing significant time and effort into data analysis, but the process falters when it comes to whether and how the data is used. The reasons for the lack of effective follow-through appear to be varied.  

According to the researchers, responses to the discovery that a student is struggling have disproportionately focused on non-instruction-related reasons as being the problem, such as struggles at home, failure to study, or poor test-taking skills. As a result, no specific instructional or learning experience changes are suggested or implemented. In short, the problem is defined, but the cause is seen as largely beyond the reach of the teacher, so changes are not made. 

Another frequent response is to place students on “watch lists” or give them similar designations, but no specific actions are taken to change current performance or address existing learning barriers. Of course, merely watching a student offers little promise for change in performance. Meanwhile, time is lost, presentation of the curriculum continues, and interventions often come too late to change learning outcomes. 

Knowing that a student is not performing as expected offers little benefit unless the causes for under-performance are also understood. For example, reteaching a concept or skill without changing our approach offers limited benefits to learners who were unable to learn what was taught the first time. In fact, if the initial introduction resulted in confusion or misconceptions, repeating the process, even at a slower pace, risks reinforcing confusion and confounding misconceptions. The bottom line is that unless our analysis of student data results in thoughtful, informed changes in instructional practice and adjustments in the learning experience of students, we will not see improvements in learning outcomes.  

Further, we need to understand the “real story” behind the data. Often, the only way to discover the cause of student struggles is to include students in the process. We can speculate about the causes behind the struggle, but students can give us firsthand insights and context, if we invite and support them to participate. Of course, some students may be too discouraged to invest at first and may need coaching. Other students may be reluctant to admit and discuss areas in which they struggle, and we may need to lower their perceived risks. Still, others may have the skills and possess a level of insight that enables them to reflect on their learning experiences, and they can become partners in constructing a path to improvement. 

The benefits of including students in the process of analyzing data, understanding root causes of struggles, and designing learning paths often extend beyond just understanding that there is a problem. When students become partners in their learning, they are more likely to commit to that learning and persist when they struggle. Furthermore, they become better prepared to deal with future learning challenges when we are not present to guide and support their efforts.    

Reference: 

Hill, H. C. (February 7, 2020). Does studying student data really raise test scores? Education Week.