Summer Reading: Teach Like a Champ - Post 1 of ?

Summer Reading: Teach Like a Champ - Post 1 of ?

In this post: Checking for understanding, The culture of "wrong", and don't take "I don't know" for an answer.

In the dying days of the school year, and in a desperate attempt to maintain my motivation going into the summer, I decided to order a book of chapters.ca (No I won't call it indigo). I was torn between "Teach Like a Champion" and "Teach Like a Pirate". I was leaning heavily towards Pirate (for obvious reasons) but after learning that the latter book did not involve swords, parrots, or booty, I decided on "Teach like a Champion" by Doug Lemov [From here on out abbreviated TLC... don't go chasing water falls]

The book begins with some useful preamble about he purposes of the book, but in an effort to avoid stepping on the authors toes, I am just going to skip to the good stuff. The vast majority of this book involves techniques, so I will provide my take on some of the 62 techniques (Yes, you read that right, 62!)

The first six groups deal with checking for understanding, abbreviated as CFU by the author. This posed a bit of a problem for me, working as a lifeguard and taking quite a few molecular biology courses, CFU typically stands for Colony Forming Units and is indicative of how much feces is in the water.  But I digress.....

When Doug Lemov speaks of CFU, he isn't talking about at the end of a unit for the purposes of a report card, but rather activities at the beginning, middle, and end of a lesson to determine A) When it is time to move on and B) Where you need to focus some more attention. While reading, this is where I started to get really interested. I will be teaching math for the first time in a while starting in September, and all of this clicked well with how I was envisioning my math class. (These techniques will also work well with my Jr. and Sr. Science classes as well, and he provides examples on how to use them with an English class to boot!)

Unfortunately this first unit is also where I start to get a bit worried. Throughout TLC Lemov provides suggests that involve a great deal of preparation. He suggests having everything in a lesson planed out, from the questions you will ask, to the answers you expect to get from the students, and how you will address what you think the students will do incorrectly. At times it reminds me of some mad game of chess. That degree of planning might be obtainable for me after five of six times teaching a course, but I don't know if our curriculum will stay the same for long enough to make that possible (kidding....mostly) Here is my takeaway (I'm ignoring the parts that I don't agree with, or feel like I wouldn't have time for).

1. Ask probing questions in class.
      e.g. "Where is the energy transformation when a car stops? What else has a similar                       transformation? How do you know"
   These questions should be answered in full sentences so that someone walking by the room and only hearing the student answer, would know what was going on (more on that later)1. This ensures that the student DOES understand what is going on, and it isn't a fluke, and it makes sure that the other students understand it now as well (even if they didn't before) 
2.   Ask for volunteers infrequently. If you are asking questions of the class to assess understanding, and the same three students are answering your questions, you are really only assessing the understanding of those three students. Relying on the same few students also allows the remainder of the herd to relax and take a mental break during these question times. Not exactly what a teacher is looking for!
3. Don't take "I don't know" for an answer. Those herd members that want the rest know that if you just feign ignorance enough times, you will get that rest. Don't let them!
   E.g "Markus, Where would you find the largest biomass in an ecosystem""I don't know""Lets figure it out then. Where should we start to find the answer?""I don't know""What are the options""I don't know""Okay, Bobby Brownose, where would we find the LEAST biomass" "The apex predators""Correct Bobby, Frieda Cantfocus, why do you think Bobby said that""Because they rely on the next level down for energy, so if there were more of them, they would starve""I think you have the answer, but I'm not sure. Can you give that answer again, but convince me you understand it, maybe using the correct terms for everything""Apex pedators eat primary and secondary predators, so if there were more biomass with the apex predators, they would starve"
   "Much better Frieda! Now Markus, with that information can you predict where we would find the MOST biomass and why?
   This exchange would probably take 3 min, but would give a pretty clear indication of the general level of class understanding, but only if you used targeted questioning. You have to know who to ask that is least likely to understanding, most likely, and equally as likely. This requires you to know your class, but that is a post for another day (Attachment Theory etc) 
4. Change the emotion behind being incorrect. "Being wrong is embarrassing. It grates. It is to be avoided at all costs!" at least that is how I felt as a student. It wasn't until university that I realized I learned more with I got something wrong then when I got it right (sometimes by accident) The class (and maybe school) mentality has to shift. "Growth mindset" gets thrown around a lot. But that is what is called for by this book. 
5. Standardize your written CFU. Create a template to put your questions in, and have students write the answers in the same location with their work in another, laid out in a particular manner. This allows you to circulate and quickly understand what students understand and what they don't. Furthermore, he suggests you should have these problems all worked out in advance along with likely areas of misunderstanding. When you circulate, he suggests you write down the names of those students that had those misunderstandings. This along with the culture of "wrong is good" can help to shape your class discussions or single out students for more help at lunch/after school.
   
   I feel like # 5 is the tip that would help me the most in my Math classes, but I haven't taught them enough to anticipate the misunderstandings. That is where planning with a more experienced teacher would be great, unfortunately there is vanishingly little time in the school year to do things like that. I find this to be the most heart breaking because it is where "what is good for kids" does not seem  possible to me (sparing giving up my every waking moment) 

1- Using "academic language" is the only way to ensure students speak the language of academia and their points are taken seriously. Saying " the thing does stuff and that shows that process" will convince nobody of anything