Technique 18: Check for Understanding

(Part of Chapter 3 Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

First, the author says this should be called "Check for Understanding and Do Something About it Right Away", but that is too long of a title :-).  

The first part of this technique is Gathering Data.  You need to gather data to see if what you are saying is being understood -- and you do this, obviously, by asking questions.  But, the interesting point here is: if you ask one question and the one student who answers it gets it right, it doesn't mean that all students have understood.  Or, if the one student gets it wrong, it doesn't mean all students have not understood.  So, you have to gather data better.

This can be done by asking more, similar, questions, or by asking certain students you know to be representative of different abilities.

By thinking of answers to questions as data, you will probably ask far fewer "yes-or-no" questions, as these have a higher possibility of false positive answers.

Another great way to gather accurate data is to use some kind of "polling technology" -- like the "clickers" we have available at Calvin (which I haven't used in the past).

The second part of this technique is to fix the problem when you discover that some portion of the class does not understand what has been taught.  This can be done by reteaching what was taught, teaching it in a new way, reteach just the steps in the lesson that were not understood, etc.

My response:

I ask far too many yes-or-no questions, and I don't treat the answer to a question as a single data point -- I've made the mistake of thinking one answer is representative of all the class. I need to spend more time coming up with sets of questions by which I can get better data on understanding from the class.

Technique 17: Ratio

(Part of Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

Your "Ratio" is how much of the "work" your students do in the classroom: how much thinking, how much writing, how much analyzing, how much talking, etc.  If you do all the talking (i.e., you lecture), your ratio is 0.  The author does not consider this a good thing, it seems, as he says the champion teachers have high ratios -- i.e., they don't just lecture.

Methods for increasing your Ratio:

1. Unbundle: break questions into smaller parts, and aim the various parts at multiple students.
2. What's next?: ask students about the process of solving a problem, not just the ultimate answer.
3. Repeated examples: ask students for multiple examples (of situations you are talking about).
4. Rephrase: have one student rephrase another student's answer.
5. Whys and Hows: have a student explain why or how an answer is correct or incorrect.  This takes the discussion to a deeper level and pushes understanding deeper.
6. Batch process: allow students to respond to others' statements, without the teacher's intervention.  But, don't let this go too long, and don't let the focus wander.
7. Discussion objectives: keep the questions/discussion focused on the learning objective of the day.  

The author notes that there is a difference between a ratio and a productive ratio.  "Releasing students to solve a problem that requires a skill they hadn't learned or mastered yet, in the hopes that they might infer that skill by trying, would result in students doing a lot of thinking but not a lot of productive thinking." (97)

My response:

I like this and I try to do this, in general.  I'm trying to get more and more away from the strict "lecture mode."  One of the methods the author suggests excites me especially: the Repeated Examples method.  I can see asking students in CS106 (intro programming) to give repeated examples of certain if-else clauses, or if without and else clause, or if-elif-else clauses.

Technique 16: Break It Down

(Part of Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

"Break It Down" is a strategy you use in response to an incorrect answer to a question.  The idea is to quickly analyze where you think the student went wrong in formulating her/his answer, and then ask questions or give information that fix that error, and then ask subsequent questions (or repeat the original question) to get back to the correct complete answer.

Lemov says,

You never know exactly how big the gap is between the student's level of knowledge and the knowledge necessary for mastery, but in most cases, you want to provide the smallest hint possible and still enable your student to get to the correct answer successfully. (p 89)

One difficulty is taking the time to break down the problem sufficiently, but not taking too much time so that the entire flow of the lesson is broken.

Some examples of "Break It Down" techniques follow.

• Provide examples: provide an example of an answer to the question.  E.g., if the question is "what is a prime number?", say, "7 is one, so is 11, and 13".
• Provide context: e.g., use an unknown word in a few sentences to see if a student can derive the meaning.
• Provide a rule: if you've set up rules for determining the answer to the question, remind the student of the rule.
• Provide the missing step.
• Eliminate false choices.

My response:

This is a useful technique, even in the college classroom.  In FIT, I show students an Excel formula and ask them if it correct or not.  If they say it is correct, then I break it down by asking if it obeys some of the rules we have established ("never" use constants in formulas, will the formula still work if copied/moved, etc.)

It is useful in teaching intro programming, too, I think.  We go through many examples where my students have to write short code snippets.  When they are wrong, I try to break it down.

The real challenge is, I think, to break down problems quickly, but get back on track quickly, too.

Technique 15: Circulate

(Part of Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

"Circulate" means moving around the classroom while you teach.  The author gives a few reasons why this is important in a classroom:

• Break the plane: The "plane" is the imaginary space at the front of the classroom, in front of the chalk/white board.  If you teach only from within this space, then you distance yourself from the students.  Also, if you break the plane only to move toward kid with a behavioral problem, then you are telling the rest of the class that you are out of control.
• Full access required: Make sure you can move anywhere in the classroom.  So, make sure the pathways are clear. 
• Engage when you circulate: as you move about the room (while students are doing some desk work, e.g.), you should be constantly looking at what your students are doing, and helping or encouraging.
• Move systematically: move everywhere, systematically, but unpredictably, so students don't know when you'll be near them and so they don't know when they should be working or when they could be goofing off.
• Position for power: stay facing the majority of the classroom as much as possible.

My response:

This technique mostly seems to be a technique for handling behavioral problems.  I don't have behavioral problems in my classroom -- perhaps because it is college, or perhaps because the students know not to mess with me.

However, I do still think that it is important to move about the classroom while I teach.  In FIT, where students have computers in front of them, I like to move down the center aisle and teach from the back of the classroom.  That way students know that I can see their screens and can see if they are goofing around or paying attention.  Also, I like to move because I think it helps students to pay attention.  (I see other professors sitting up at the front of the classroom lecturing to their instructor's monitor sometimes -- that looks like a recipe for putting students to sleep!)

Technique 14: Board = Paper

(Part of Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

Students have to learn how to take good notes -- i.e., how to retain a record of what is being taught.  Lemov says, "As a matter of habit, expecting students to make an exact replica in their notes of what you write on the board is the right starting point."

Some teachers use pre-printed notes, with missing words that the students need to fill in. 

My response:

In college, students should already know how to take good notes.  But, I know some don't.  I'm not sure it is my place to teach them how, though.

I've used the technique of having "partial notes" -- where the notes are printed out with missing words -- and it does work, a bit.  I'm curious to know what people (especially students) think of this.

Technique 13: Name the Steps

(Part of Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons)

"Name the Steps" means breaking down complex skills into manageable (and learnable) parts.  Naming each part helps students understand and learn the parts, and keep them in order.

Lemov breaks this technique into 4 subtechniques:

1. Identify the steps: when you teach the complex skill, teach the steps to learning the complex skill.  I.e., don't hide the fact that you are using steps.
2. Make them "sticky": you need to find a way for students to memorize the steps.  Thus, naming them helps.  If the names form an acronym, that makes remember the steps and their order even easier.
3. Build the steps: if you can derive the steps with the students' help, in class, that makes the lesson even more interesting and memorable.
4. Use two stairways: I think this means narrating the steps and doing an example problem at the same time.

My response:

I think this is a great idea, but I haven't been able to think of examples where I could/should use this technique.  Maybe when I teach debugging techniques in CS106...  Perhaps when I teach building formulas in Excel...?  Hmmm... I have some thinking to do on this one.

Technique 12: The Hook

Lemov says:

If you can introduce material in a way that inspires and excites and can get your students to take the first step willingly, then there is no content about which you cannot engender excitement, engagement, and deep learning among your students.

So, the Hook is a short introductory moment that captures what's interesting and engaging about the material.

The author gives some examples:

1. Story: tell a quick story to inspire and motivate
2. Analogy: offer an interesting analogy in real life
3. Prop: use a prop to grab students' interest
4. Media: act out a part of the book, or show a short movie clip of a dramatization of a book.
5. Challenge: give students a very difficult task -- this can motivate them wanting to find a better/easier way to do it.

Important points: keep it short, make sure it applies, and make sure it is energetic and optimistic.

Also, you don't need one for every lesson.

My response:

I used to do this for almost every algorithm that was being taught when I taught Data Structures and Algorithms at LaRoche College.  I think it worked wonderfully.  I use Analogy, Prop, and Challenge -- I think these apply the best for teaching technology.

I'll have to think more about how this can be used when teaching introductory programming.  For FIT, I think it is not too hard, in most cases, to motivate the students this way.  After all, FIT is supposed to teach very practical content...

Intro to Chapter 3: Structuring and Delivering Your Lessons

Each technique in this chapter is part of an "I/We/You" pattern: responsibility for knowing is gradually released from teacher to student.  E.g., the author demonstrates that the teacher shows how to add fractions ("I"), then does it again, asking students to answer questions along the way ("We"), then asks a student to do an example, with lots of help from the teacher ("We"), then asks students to do an example on their own ("You").  Finally, the teacher gives the students many more examples to do ("You", repeatedly).

The author says, "Students get very good at watching their teacher demonstrate mastery without ever learning to do it on their own."


My response:

Excellent stuff.  I see myself demonstrating how to do something in Excel or Dreamweaver, or in Python, without using this technique -- and the result is that students can't do it on their own once they have to do it for their lab/assignment...

Technique 11: Draw the Map

The author uses this term (for some reason) to refer to controlling the physical environment to assist in teaching.  The author talks about the arrangement of desks, what posters are on the walls, etc.

My response:

In FIT and in CS106, I could have handled this better.  In FIT, students are very tempted to goof around on the computers while I'm talking.  I try to fix this by "constantly" asking questions and asking for students to respond to what I'm saying with a nod, or something.  But, the author seems to imply that I could/should ask students to turn off their monitors or put away their keyboards if they aren't using the computers to take notes.  I don't know if I want to do this in college.

As for posters, etc., in CS106, I was thinking of making some posters that showed commonly used list methods or function syntax, etc.  It seems kind of like elementary school, but it might be useful...

Technique 10: Double Plan

This means that you plan not only what you will be doing during each phase of the lesson, but also what the students will be doing.  E.g., while you lecture, the students should be taking notes.  Do they know that? (Sometimes I don't want my students to take notes, but just to listen.)

My response:

Sounds good, though not very earth-shattering.

Technique 9: Shortest Path

Use the most efficient teaching technique to achieve the objective.  This doesn't mean that you use only one technique per objective.  Often, the most efficient way to teach is to use multiple techniques (lecture, group discussion, practice, etc.) for an objective.

My response:

Love it!

Technique 8: Post It

Write your objective(s) of the day somewhere consistently (like in the corner of the whiteboard).  Then, students will know what is expected of them that day.

My response:

Sounds great.  I often do that already, just to make sure I don't forget to cover something.

Technique 7: 4 Ms

The 4 Ms (Manageable, Measurable, Made First, and Most Important) are used to evaluate how effective an objective is.

Manageable: the objective should be manageable in the time allotted (which may be more or less than one class period).

Measurable: measure every class period with an "exit ticket" -- a short activity, question, or set of questions that students must complete and leave with you before departing.  "Even if you don't use tickets, setting an explicitly measurable goal beforehand helps you hold yourself accountable."

Made First: this is Begin with the End

Most Important: focus on what is important when designing an objective.

The author gives some examples of bad objectives:

• "Students will be able to add and subtract fractions with like and unlike denominators."   The author says this is too big of a goal: not manageable.
• "Students will be able to appreciate various forms of poetry, including sonnets and lyric poetry."  What does "appreciate" mean?  It isn't measurable.
• "Students will view scenes from the film version of The Crucible." This is an activity, not an objective.
• "Students will construct a poster to celebrate Martin Luther King Jr. Day."  Again, this is an activity, not an objective.  And, the most important objective might be to understand the importance of Dr. King's work, not to make a poster.

My response:

Good stuff.  Very good stuff.  I don't know if the "exit ticket" system would work in college, although it might in computer science labs...

Technique 6: Begin with the End

Chapter 2 begins with this great summary: If you want to be a great teacher, you have to plan, and plan diligently.

When planning a lesson (or, a semester of classes), begin by figuring out the objective of the lesson, not the activities in the lesson.  If you start out with an objective, then you can plan the activities to achieve that objective most efficiently.  And, you can daily measure how well you achieved your objective, and determine then if you are able to move on to the next objective in the course.

E.g., "What will my students understand today?" is an objective, whereas "What will my students do today?" is not.

Great lessons begin with planning, and specifically with effective unit planning: planning a sequence of objectives, one or possibly two for each lesson, over an extended period of time (say, six weeks).

Once you have you objective(s) planned, then you can do your lesson plan:

1. Review how well the previous objectives were mastered.

2. Plan a short daily assessment to determine how well today's objectives are understood.

3. Plan activities that will lead to student mastery of today's objectives (and, perhaps, mastery of previous objectives, if they weren't mastered).

The author points out that sometimes the best way to achieve an objective is to use a technique that isn't very "sexy" -- like presenting a lecture. The criteria to decide how to teach is not how cool the activity is, but how effectively it will work.

(Note: more about the daily assessment, in the next technique.)

My response:

I love it.  I didn't do that in CS106, but I'm going to do it when I plan CS106 for the fall.

Technique 5: Without Apology

Do not apologize for the content that you have to teach. You may not think it is interesting or important, but don't tell your students that -- explicitly or implicitly. If you believe material is boring, it will be. If you blame the requirement to teach something on some outside entity, the students will have a bad attitude toward the material and will not want to learn it. Also, if you indicate to students that the material is too difficult or technical for some to learn, they will believe you and give up on trying to understand it.

My response:

I was doing this a bit, but now I have stopped doing it.

Technique 4: Format Matters

The first part of this technique can be summed up in two sentences:

In school, the medium is the message: to succeed, students must take their knowledge and express it in a variety of clear and effective formats, to fit the demands of the situation and of society. The complete sentence is the battering ram that knocks down the door to college.

The second part of this technique is the audible format. The student must speak loud enough and clear enough for the teacher and the students to be able to hear what is being said.

The author suggests that the teacher needs to establish that simply saying "voice" means that the student wasn't speaking loud enough for everyone to hear. This is an efficient method for getting the student to speak up.

My response:

I don't think the first part is that applicable in college. I do notice that many of my FIT students have been trained to use the "complete sentence" format when writing answers on quizzes. I like it, but I don't insist on it.

The audible format point is especially applicable for me, as I am deaf on one side. I have not tried this in class yet, but I need to do it. I need to explain to the students right from the beginning that I'll be using this word as a signal that they need to speak up.

Technique 3: Stretch It

This technique rewards a correct answer with more, perhaps tougher, questions. The technique is important for two reasons. First, it reduces the chances that the student didn't just get lucky with the first answer. Second, it makes learning exciting and challenging. The author says, "This keeps [the students] engaged and sends the message that the reward for achievement is more knowledge."

The author also notes that it helps the teacher do "differentiation" in the classroom. This means that the teacher can keep both stronger and weaker students engaged and learning.

The author highlights a some types of Stretch It questions, a few of which I'll list here:

1. Ask How or Why questions.
2. Ask for another way to answer. (Can the student solve the problem another way, and thus demonstrate mastery of multiple techniques?)
3. Ask for a stronger, more descriptive word in the student's answer.
4. Ask for evidence to back up their answer.

My response:

I've used this technique a bit, usually to move the class further through the notes, but I haven't done this much. The point of differentiation seems important here at Calvin where we are told we have a "bi-modal" student population.

Technique 2: Right is Right

"Right is Right" means that partial answers aren't good enough: only a 100% correct answer is the correct answer. As the author says,

Many teachers respond to almost-correct answers their students give in class by rounding up. That is, they'll affirm the student's answer and repeat it, adding some detail of their own to make it fully correct even though the student didn't provide (and may not recognize) the differentiating factor. ... When answers are almost correct, it's important to tell students that they're almost there, that you like what they've done so far, that they're closing in on the right answer [...]. In holding out for [R]ight, you set the expectation that the questions you ask and their answers truly matter.

The author suggests 4 techniques for holding out for the 100% right answer:

1. Praise what the student said, but ask for more. E.g., "Can you develop that further?", or "I like where you're going. Can you take us the rest of the way?"

2. Make sure the student answers the actual question you asked, not some other question. E.g., sometimes students will give an example when they are asked to define something. That's good, but it isn't an answer to the actual question.

3. Similarly, make sure the student doesn't get ahead of you, and answer a subsequent question. Sometimes you want to lead students down a path, but some students want to jump right to the end of the path. Don't allow that.

4. Use technical vocabulary, and insist students learn to use it, too.


My response:

I like this a lot, but I'm really bad about fixing student's answers myself. I need to work on getting the students to give the correct answers. I find it hard to formulate good questions to prompt a student to get to the point where they give the 100% correct answer.

Regarding the "Use Technical Vocabulary" point: This is so applicable for teaching computer science. I've been using this technique in FIT and it really works. I insist that students answer questions using the technical terms we've defined earlier in the lecture: "algorithm", "volatile memory", etc. I feel that by using the technical terms, they get a better feeling for their meaning.

Technique 1: No Opt Out

"No Opt Out" means that you don't allow a student to just say "I don't know." If you allow this, students learn that they can get away with not thinking or participating by just muttering "I don't know".

Instead, when a sequence begins with an "I don't know" response, you need to make sure you end the sequence with the student answering the question, one way or another. In between you can prompt the student in different ways, put the question out to the general classroom, or even give the answer and have the student repeat after you. But, in all cases, the sequence must end with the student answering the initial question.

My response:

I've started to do this, and I think it really works. I haven't noticed a distinct change in my students' attitudes, and I definitely still get a lot of "I don't know"s (because I'm sure they really don't know) but I still think it is a really good idea.