1

ADVANCING AMBITIOUS EQUITABLE PRACTICESSUMMER INSTITUTE 2011Supporting Co-Learning between Teacher Candidates and Cooperating Teachers

2

OUR PURPOSE

Mentoring

EnvisioningAligning

Ambitious Equitable Practices

3

PARTNERS FROM LAST YEAR Ramona Grove, Cascade Ann Morris, Arts & Academics

Academy, Evergreen Campus Liz Savage, Health Science & Human

Services High School, Evergreen Campus Kari Hollandsworth, Lindbergh High School Amy Peterson, College Place Middle School Kathy Colombo, Kirkland Junior High Stu Dick, Mountlake Terrace High School Oliver Jones, Lindbergh High School Margaret Jones, Garfield High School Bethany Sjoberg, Technology, Engineering &

Communications School, Evergreen Campus

4

MENTORING STANCES Local Guides

Provided emotional support and short-term technical assistance Explained local policies & procedures, shared materials,

answered questions, gave advice, often pulled back as soon as novice seemed more confident

If perceived limited time, tended to focus on “fixing” novices

Educational Companions Also kept their eye on professional goals such as focusing on student thinking and

developing sound reasons for actions, inquired with novices into the particulars of their teaching asking “What sense did students make of the assignment?” “How can we find out whether this assignment worked?”

Developed skills as mentors & formed a vision of mentoring as a vehicle for educational change

Agents of Change Reduced traditional isolation among teachers by encouraging collaboration and shared

inquiry, built networks among novices and CTs by visiting other classrooms and facilitating serious conversations among teachers about teaching

Feinman-Nemser, 2001

5

THEORY OF ACTION How does your teaching relate to student learning? Intended theory and enacted theory

Theories of Action (City, Elmore, Fiarman & Titel, 2009 )

Begin with a statement of causal relationship between what I do and a positive result in a classroom

Are empirically falsifiable; data can be used to disqualify all or parts of the theory

Are open-ended; must be open for inquiry and revisable.

Theories of how students learn & what they are capable of Young students can: construct why explanations, model unobservable

processes, reflect on their own thinking (Leona Schauble, Richard Lehrer, Ann Rosebery, Beth Warren, Christina Schwarz)

Students need opportunities to: address preconceptions, learn to “do science” and represent their ideas, & reflect on their learning (NRC, Donovan & Bransford, Eds, 2005)

6

DEVELOPING THEORIES OF PRACTICE & INFLUENCE OF CONTEXT

Teaching-Learning Unproblematic

Teaching-Learning Problematic

Appropriation of language without

ambitious practices

Integration of ambitious practices

Compartmentalization of ambitious practices

Conceptual Change Theory of Practice

Student ThinkingTheory of Practice

GestaltTheory of Practice

PLANNING FOR MODEL-BASED INQUIRYGOAL: FOR STUDENTS TO USE MULTIPLE FORMS OF EVIDENCE TO CONSTRUCT, REVISE, AND APPLY A CAUSAL EXPLANATORY MODEL FOR A CLASS OF NATURAL PHENOMENON

Discourse #1: Elicit students’ ideas, language, everyday experiences you can build on

• Introduce an unobservable element of explanatory model needed to assemble causal story

• Students start activity • Pressed to reason about purpose of activity and connection to explanatory model

• Teacher finds out where students’ ideas have changed, what gaps in causal story remain

Explanatory model

Puzzling Phenomena

Discourse #3:Pressing for evidence-based explanation

Start and End here: Big Idea

Discourse #2: Making sense of activity: Repeat this cycle for each

facet of explanatory model

Figure 1. Model-based Inquiry Unit Planning Heuristic used with Core Cohorts

8

Re-setting novices’ ideas about good teaching: Science Learning Framework

Why this structure? Simple Begins with Big Ideas Instruction framed around discourses, not activityClose proximity to practice Each tied to a supporting tool

9

Puzzling phenomena: Gas tanker implosion

Explanatory model: There are air molecules inside and outside of the oil tanker. Steam cleaning adds water molecules that move at a high speed and collide with the interior wall. Prior to being sealed high-energy air molecules are driven out of the tanker. After sealing the tanker, there is no gain or loss of molecules on the inside. The steam and air molecules on the inside lose energy as it cools and there are fewer collisions in the interior. Pressure decreases on the inside but pressure on the outside remains the same (14lbs/in2). With less pressure, the tanker collapses to maintain equilibrium.

Puzzling phenomena

Explanatory model

The big ideaDEVELOPING BIG IDEAS: GAS LAWS EXAMPLE

Initial explanations

Final explanations

10

ELICITING STUDENTS’ IDEAS

1. Eliciting observations2. Eliciting hypotheses without

explanation3. Pressing for explanation4. Summarizing

There are four dimensions of students’ experiences that should shape the direction of instruction: students’ partial understandings of the target ideas students’ alternative conceptions about the target ideas students’ everyday language that can be leveraged to help them

understand scientific language related to the target idea students’ everyday experiences related to the target idea that can

be leveraged in later instruction.

11

MAKING SENSE OF MATERIAL ACTIVITY

1. Orienting students to the concepts

2. Back pocket questions: ‐Observation and patterns

3. Back-pocket questions: Connection to the big idea4. Whole class: coordinate student’s ideas & their

questions5. Creating or adding to a public record of student

thinking

12

PRESSING FOR EVIDENCE-BASEDEXPLANATIONS

1. Reorienting students to thefocal models and hypotheses

2. Small groups work at updatingtheir explanation

3. Whole group updates their explanation4. Writing a final explanation5. Applying the new explanatory model

13

Curricular Vision

Critical Pedagogical Discourses

Ambitious Practice

Curricular Vision

Ambitious Practice

Co-learning

Teacher Candidate

Cooperating Teacher

Tools and routines

Tools and routines

Critical Pedagogical Discourses

1) building a shared language and purpose for ambitious practices,

2) sharing a repertoire of ways of reasoning with tools and routines specific to the TC-CT pair,

3) taking principled risks together when experimenting with ambitious practices,

4) co-developing and adopting innovative instantiations of the ambitious practices.

BUFFERING AGAINST REGRESSION: SUPPORTING CO-LEARNING BETWEEN TEACHER CANDIDATES AND COOPERATING TEACHERS

Knowles Science Teaching Foundation

14

FINDINGS FROM YEAR 1: ALIGNMENT OF PRACTICE & TC PRACTICE

Teacher

Selecting Big Ideas/Models

Working with Science Ideas

Pressing for Explanation

Working with Students’ Ideas

Topic focusProcess focus

Theory focus

Method focus

Discover/ Confirm science ideas

Forward science ideas to work on together

MBI focus

No press What happened explanation

How/ partial why some-thing happened explanation

Causal explanation

Monitors, checks, re-teaches ideas

Elicits Ss’ initial understandings

References Ss’ ideas & adapts instruction

Lisa

4,5

2,5

2,4,5 1,3 1,2 3 1,2 3,4,5 1,4 3

Alisa

1,3,4,5

2

1,3,4,5

2

3 1,4,5 2

1

2,3,4,5

Kirsten

2

1,3

1,3 4,5 1 3,4 2,5 3 1 2,4,5 2,4 5

Mike

4 1,2,3

1,3

5 4,5 2 5 4 4,5 1,2,3

Robert

1,2,3,5

12,3,4,

5

4

1,2,4,5 4 1,5 2,3

Sasha

2,3

1

1,4,5 2,3,4,5 1,2,3,4,5 1,4 2,3,5

Jack 1,2,5 3, 4 �� 2 1,3,4,5 2 1,3,5 4

3 1,2,4,5

Keith

4,5

5

1,2,3,4,5

4,5 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3,4 1,2,3,4,5 =Classroom observation of TC practice from September (1) to March (5)

CT

UW

TC

CTUWTC

15

ALIGNING PRACTICES

1) Not at all aligned

2) Aiming for different targets

3) Aligning: Building on kids’ ideas

4) Aligning: Working through explanations & scaffolding students’ thinking

CT

UW

TC

CTUWTC

CTUWTC

CTUWTC

16

UNDERSTANDING ALIGNMENT

1. Co-teaching = co-planning, co-instruction, co-debriefing

2. CT theory behind “turning over responsibility” during student teaching

3. Midcourse refocusinga) CT refocusing b) Calibrating through targeted coachingc) Calibrating through social media

CT

UW

TC

17

CO-PLANNING AT ITS BEST

Co-planning a full explanation & connecting activities Set time With colleagues Used a tool- as a starting place for conversations & a standing public

document representing sharing thinking Challenging one another’s content knowledge beyond the textbook Willingness to revise ideas from the text, curriculum

If not:Loss of rigorCT lost & can not track student ideas

18

CO-TEACHING AT ITS BESTS: Would ash be considered a physical change? Like an egg? S: So we did an example of melted cheese.TC: So what did we just have in the back of the class? S: We thought also that it was physical changes even though it comes after melting and boiling. S: I don’t agree with that because even though there was a color change CO2 was emitted so the identity of the logwould have had to have changedCT: Does anyone have something to add to this? …TC: Raise your hand if you have seen a fire burning…so is it possible that a physical change is happening?

Students’ storiesParticipationWorking on students’ ideas

19

CO-TEACHING AT ITS BEST CON’T

CT: so this is Chemistry. Let’s think about this at an atomic level…What makes up an egg? S: ElementsS: PotassiumTC: Be specific S: Proteins, and when we cook proteins the proteins change TC: What does it look like? What happens when it cooks? [TC draws on board and shows a tightly bound protein and an unwound protein.]S: So it is breaking and forming bonds S: It expanded because of heat. When it heated they [bonds] move apart rather than together.

Students’ storiesParticipationWorking on students’ ideas

20

CO-DEBRIEFING AT ITS BEST

Focused on student thinkingDaily reflection questions about

student thinking, including specific individual students

Planning for the next day informed by key episodes of rich classroom dialogue or what students were NOT talking about

NOTE: only a few CT-TC pairs had routines in place for these conversations

21

TURNING OVER RESPONSIBILITY

Individual artisans Co-PlanningCo-Planners Never fully turning over unit planning, staying involved in lesson planning

until the end Creating richest learning experience for students On board with others from same department OR didn’t have pressure

Individual Artisans Tended to use teacher learning rather than student learning as a meter

stick--meeting CTs limited repertoire or more limited understanding of core practices?

Tension between freedom (TC) and readiness (CT) Tension between “keeping pace” with department members NOT on board

with core practices

CT

UW

TCCTUWTC

22

MIDCOURSE REFOCUSING In January/February many TCs took

a nose dive CT re-focusing

High expectations & accountability New requests were made easier if nightly communication and submitting

lesson plans was already established as a routine (i.e. adding back-pocket question)

Had tough but supportive conversations, challenged instead of “being nice”

Had stayed in touch with planning so easier to get re-involved, for others CTs all they could do is watch TC regression away from student ideas

Calibrating through targeted coaching on core practices Calibrating through social media

23

ADVANCING AMBITIOUS AND EQUITABLE SCIENCE TEACHING…WHAT’S NEXT? Facebook group: we will invite all participants to a closed

facebook group to discuss on-going challenges, tensions and examples of using practices. We would like members to post about 1x/week. This group is not for discussing people, just practices.

Monthly meetings: The second Tuesday of each month CTs and TCs will meet at the UW to discuss planning, teaching and debriefing practices & view video

Supporting you in inquiring into ambitious and equitable teaching practices:

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________