Question: As I’m reading this book I imagine Lemov as a cross-between a camp counselor and military general because he emphasizes keeping students’ interest in a very structured way. In technique 15, Lemov discusses the need for teachers to circulate around in the classroom. His reasons for moving around during class time hinged on the need for a teacher to have ownership of the room and maintain his or her power. Is this the only reason and motivation to move around in a classroom? I’m thinking of Atwell and her side-by-side conferences. Sure, she does “own” the classroom, but she’s also showing that she is walking in the muck of their writing process with them. Are there other reasons to break the line?
Agreed, Leslie! I think that in breaking the line, we as teachers should be concerned with not only behavior management, but also giving our students one-on-one time.
It's funny, cause when I first saw that technique, I thought Lemov was about to talk about how teachers can be at the same level as students for certain lessons. Turns out, the message was different. I personally think it could work both ways: the students feel happy that the teacher is working with them as opposed to over them and is less likely to cause trouble for the teacher.
I agree with the notion that the teacher shouldn't show fear in crossing the plane, but I think it should just become natural for the teacher to want to be aware of their surroundings constantly and simply be interested in the students and their progress. In my opinion, those should be the main reasons for circulating about the room... 'control' should just be a happy benefit.
Comment: I love a good sports analogy, which is why I’m drawn to the Ratio idea in technique 17 called the Batch process. Unlike Lemov, I prefer to call discussion volleyball instead of ping-pong or batch processing. I like the volleyball term because it shows that students can effectively take the discussion if they simply learn the steps: bump, set, spike. This why I particularly like having those phrase starters. They show a student how to keep the ball of conversation in the air to reach the goal of understanding. I found the whole technique of Ratio intriguing, especially the quote which states, “A successful lesson is rarely marked by a teacher’s getting a good intellectual workout in front of the classroom. Push more and more of the cognitive work out to students as soon as they are ready” (Lemov, p. 93). Teaching isn’t about us. We have nothing to prove. It’s about the students and having them put in the thought and work.
Question: As I read these techniques, I realize little I know about being a teacher. After the reading, I became a little overwhelmed with the sheer amount of things we as teachers have to be focused on during the day: the lesson itself, breaking the "plane," breaking it down, etc.
How are you guys going to work all these techniques into your teaching strategy? (I think I am going to choose the top 3 that are most important for day one, and work the rest of the techniques in little by little, otherwise I'll get too overwhelmed.)
Of techniques 12-17, which do you think seems to be the most beneficial?
Comment: I can't wait to get into a classroom and try these things. There seems to be so much to keep in mind all the time, and I think that with practice they will get easier.
I'd like to think some of these techniques and processes will come somewhat naturally, but would need refinement. For instance, the whole 'circulate' thing just seems like something I'd do anyways. Same goes for the hook, but I think I'd have to work on the other ones. I think they're all beneficial. It'd be too difficult to rank them. I guess it would depend on the situation. I dunno how I'm gonna do these, necessarily, but we'll see, I guess. :P It is rather overwhelming.
I like your idea of trying to incrementally add techniques to your teaching repertoire. Additionally, I think you should start with techniques that lend themselves to your strengths so that you can increase your confidence earl on.
It does seem overwhelming, but I think that eventually doing these things will become second nature. We are creatures of habit, so I think establishing those techniques early on will help us get into the groove. I remember when I first started driving, I wondered how in the world people could look at the spedometer, check all three mirrors, and keep their eyes on the road at the same time. Now, I do it without thinking. Obviously, teaching is not driving a car, but I think we will get used to doing many of these techniques the more we practice.
I agree that it is overwhelming but I also think that as a teacher in front of a classroom some of these would come to you naturally even if you had not read the techniques in this book. For me that makes it seem less overwhelming. Additionally I think that the techniques that wouldn't come naturally are a helpful resource in the book and if you really learn them a trigger will go off in your head when you are planning a lesson and you can anticipate when you may need to use them.
Question: I'm with Chelsea. Upon reading Lemov's techniques, I became slightly nervous. It seems as though these techniques may be something you slowly add over time. How long do you think it will take us to incorporate these techniques?
Also, in technique 13, Lemov talks about making steps "sticky." Do you think this will be hard? (I tend to be a perfectionist so I think it may be hard for me to create "the perfect catchphrase.")
Comment: I especially found "Break it Down," technique 16, to be interesting. I had no idea that breaking something down was so involved, or even had a process.
I loved the idea of making steps "sticky," but I think we are going to have to think long and hard about it before we come to something that actually works.
I feel there are some techniques that will come to us more quickly than others. Maybe we will take advantage of the ones we've mastered and slowly work our way into the others. Either way, I feel like rushing into something unfamiliar could back fire.
I agree with rob. I also think that some techniques may work with one group of students, but may not work with other groups. I think we have to be mindful of that. So, a lot of our decisions to determine which to use will come as we get to know our students. Some may not work at first, but over time I think we'll all get the hang of it.
I think that making the steps GENUINELY sticky will be difficult. I think that if you force it too much and they don't make sense or they are too disconnected they won't be effective. With that being said I think that when used genuinely it is super effective.
Statement: I'm a big fan of Lemov's Hook technique. My sophomore World History teacher used to use it all the time to get us invested. We were studying Renaissance painters and some of the names included Leonardo, Michelangelo, Donatello, and Raphael. So our teacher began the lesson with: "before these fellows were famous painters, they went into the sewers and became teenage mutant ninja turtles." Our class immediately stopped talking to one another and turned their attention to the teacher. After a few seconds of laughing, our teacher went on, filling in some humor with history here and there and capturing his students' interest. I'm gonna try and use "the Hook" whenever I feel students are zoning out or can't find the fun in English.
The hook is also my favorite of the techniques. People generally have no interest in learning something that they perceive as boring and/or unimportant and a great hook can get that initial blockade out of the way lickety split!
Yes! The hook was one of my favorites as well. It's kind of like a trailer for a movie. As teachers, we not only want an audience but also an invested audience.
Question: Lemov's technique of "Breaking it down" came off as very interesting to me. He claims it is a deep process because one can never entirely be sure of how much a student needs until the student reveals it. Lemov lists out several specific ways of breaking down a lesson but are there any favorite methods of ya'lls? Would you like to try something that he hasn't listed?
Question: I dunno about the whole board = paper thing... I mean, it's important to know how to take good notes and all, but I think it promotes short term learning. Wouldn't it be better to demonstrate to students how they should take notes and make them their own from the beginning rather than starting by having them copy what you write word-for-word? I imagine such a technique would be especially frustrating for slow writers.
I found that technique very interesting as well. I think it would work best in a think-aloud situation where you are trying to model something for the students, so that they can internalize and become better at it.
I see what you're saying, Noel. Mirroring everything for a year would be tiring. However, like Ben said, it's good to model, especially at first. I think students may need it in the beginning. I think we'd be surprised how many students do not know how to take good notes. They just don't know what to write down, but if we model how notes should look, I think that they will learn the things to include & they will become better at it over time. Then, the teacher won't have to require them to write word for word. They will be able to pick out the important pieces on their own. I can definitely see both sides on this though.
Well Noel, don't forget that according to Lemov, our only goal is to get these kids to college. So as long as these notes somehow translate to at least a few SAT ACT points then it doesn't matter! Seriously though, I agree with your questioning of the technique.
Comment: Ratio is interesting and I think it's very important for teachers to utilize as so many times, teachers are so tempted to just tell the answer to save time, but the suggested processes seem great to get students to think for themselves and gain more out of the classes. A shame so many teachers opt for the easier choice.
I like Technique 15, Circulate. Lemov says it is, "a technique for moving strategically around your room during all parts of your lesson." I think this is something that is useful in the classroom. It's a way for you to move about & take note of those who are actively participating versus those who are off task. Not only does it give you a sense of control over the classroom, but also allows for you to move around unpredictably. Once kids notice you're not just sitting behind your desk, hopefully they will stay focused on the task at hand because they never know when you may walk by.
I think it is also a way to add energy and life to your teaching. Hey, that teacher doesn't just sit around, but is trying to encourage me and get to know me. I feel like it can only benefit your classroom.
I agree! I want to move around when I teach. It just seems like a natural thing to do. However, I know I have to make sure that it doesn't turn into pacing or moving a little too fast so that it's distracting instead of engaging. Otherwise, I want to move around and be energetic like Ben said in the above comment.
I'm kind of with Noel on the idea of "board=paper." I don't remember if it was in class or in the readings, but I compared the idea of "board=paper" to having homework where you simply fill in the blank. I have had classes where the teacher uses this method and have had mixed results. For example: I don't pay attention in class because I'm just looking for words on the powerpoint, BUT when it goes back to studying I have great notes. Are students learning anything with this method? Why would this work with class notes and not with homework? What are some of the downfalls to this method?
Comment: I tried to implement technique 12 ("the hook") as much as I could in my unit plan. I think it's a great way to grab attention. My favorite part was using either a story or media to get the point across.
I have had the same experience with the board=paper technique. I think it depends on what else happens IN ADDITION. But I may also argue that students aren't really learning with this method. Even if it is an effective study tool I think that just boils down to memorization which in most cases doesn't facilitate long term knowledge.
Comment: I liked the idea behind Board= paper. I feel like many times teachers ether assume that students know how to take notes, or don't think to teach them. This technique is a step towards teaching kids how to take notes on their own, and even though coping word for word at first might be weird it eventually transitions to them taking notes on their own.
A few other people commented on how this practice may lend to a student merely relying on a teacher for notes, which I think is a valid point. However, I do think that if you taper it off or gradually stop then students would ideally be learning how to take notes.
I think my thing was instead of doing the board=paper thingy, to instruct students how to take good notes, i.e. pay attention to what's said/written and make it their own early on.
Question: in the circulate section, Lemov discusses the importance of keeping the position of power. How would you best set up a classroom so that you can circulate, break the plane, and successfully move throughout the whole class while still keeping most of the class in your view?
My favorite classroom setup was my junior year of high school. The setup was 3 sections. A middle facing forward and the two sides angled in. The seats were set up in pairs. It was almost like a u shape. It gave the teacher enough room to wander and break the plane and also have the students interact when needed.
When Lemov references the breaking it down method, I became very interested. Sometimes, or usually, our first reaction is to simply correct the student or tell them the right answer; but we should try to give small hints so that they can discover the answer on their own. That being said, why is being familiar and constantly improving your content knowledge beneficial, in regards to that exercise?
I really enjoyed the technique which dealt with walking around the classroom and having students sense the accountability that the teacher could come by at any moment. It did kind of sound like an intimidation method, but if used right, I think it could work well.
I did feel that Lemov used it as an intimidation technique, but I think with the right body language and tone of a classroom that it would not completely come across as an assertion of power and ownership. I like your point about accountability because it's a better word and provides a better connotation than power.
Comment: I know some other people have already mentioned it, but I want to add my own voice to the camp of people who found themselves concerned or slightly troubled by the board=paper technique. Anything were the students are expected to reproduce the teacher's work exactly just sounds like "banking" to me, trying to force pre-formed knowledge into the heads of student receptacles.
Question: That being said, maybe I'm missing the point. Is it not actually as bad as it sounds to me? Or is there some ultimate benefit that makes "banking" alright in this instance?
I think banking can be okay for some things, but as a general rule, I don't think it's a good idea. Therefore, I'd think that board=paper wouldn't be good for most things either... but I may not be getting it either...
Question: I always found some degree of problems as a student following "Board=Paper." In many of the classes I have been in, I found myself frustrated and unable to fully take in the conversation when writing down the notes on the board. Does anyone else have problems with this? Is there anything we could do as teachers that could prevent such problems other than breaking the flow and taking a minute for the students to jot down notes?
I really enjoy the Board=paper technique because it visualizes the steps for the students rather than them just hearing it. As long as we are writing the steps as we go, I really don't think that it would prevent the flow.
Comment: I found that with Lemov's "Circulate" technique that the importance of properly positioning desks was made all the more vital. Creating small groups of four or using the u-shaped formation seems like important ways for arranging the room to better facilitate the Teacher's ability to manage the classroom. With the typical columns and rows formation, it would be near difficult for teachers to maneuver without gaining a certain degree of awkwardness. It always is good to see that the techniques that have been utilized over the last two months have distinct pedagogical purposes.
So much goes into arrangement of your class to classroom management on top of teaching what you need to that day! Teachers have much more responsibility than most realize. We have an important job! We will become the best multi-taskers! I'm excited!
My favorite technique from this reading (besides "The Hook") is "Ratio". I like how it divides difficult or long questions into smaller, easier to answer ones. "Ratio" combines "cold call" and "name the steps" for one crazy effective, totally engaging game/lesson hybrid.
The Hook: short, sweet, and captivating. T had a few great biology and anatomy teachers when I was in high school. One would open some of her lessons with pictures of her travels and experiments that showed the practical use of her subject. Another would sing a songs she had written about the circulatory system or whatever it was that we were studying. What are some interesting hooks that you can remember some of your teachers using?
Comment: I really thought Circulate was an interesting technique. Something seems so natural to circulate around the room, but here there is a whole strategy to it. I really like that "making the shole classroom your won" is a subtle way of keeping authority and keeping behavior in check.
I think that we could use Technique 13 in our English classes by identifying the steps of ie: the writing process. We could have the steps up on the walls so that they will be easily accessible for students to refer to & it wouldn't be something just taking up wall space. So my question is -- what other steps (or other devices to remember things for class) could we list on the walls for our students that would act as a functional type thing, not just decoration?
Comment: I really like the idea of the "hook." I think in an art class that it would be awesome to have a painting or a video or a background story of an artist or even dressing up like the artist that we will be talking about. It would really get the kids interested and ready to hear about the lesson. I know this is something everyone has heard of but I didn't really think about it a lot until I read this and it was so exciting to me.
I didn't love the "Board=Paper" technique. I don't feel like it would be a good exercise for the students because they are literally copying and then memorizing. Making their paper look like mine isn't really gonna help them in the long run. What do you guys think about this technique? Would it be something that you would use in your classroom?
I don't love it either. But I don't necessarily think it should be totally negated either. I think that there is a place for it as long as you use it appropriately- in a way that still allows students to include valuable extra information that helps students really grasp the meanings.
Comment: I really like the break it down technique, especially for a visual art classroom. I think that using it to help students see why their compositions may not be successful or convincing will help them also see how it can be fixed or tweaked, which is most important. Without knowing how to fix their issues telling students that they aren't successful is just putting them down and confusing them/complicating their artistic process.
Question: When reading the circulate method I was very intrigued about it's use in a visual art classroom because much of a fine art class is spent with students working on their projects on their own in class. Making sure that they stay on task and know that you are there to answer their questions/help them address struggles is important. My question is: How would you balance this authoritative role with the helpful side of the technique in a way that doesn't make you unapproachable?
With Board = Paper, I think it has different applications in different subjects. Note taking might be quite natural in History, or something similar. But there are certain techniques that students are trying to master to become better writers, better artists, etc. The only technique some students have to master in a history class would be a memorization technique. In a typical history class at most schools, i mean.
Question: As I’m reading this book I imagine Lemov as a cross-between a camp counselor and military general because he emphasizes keeping students’ interest in a very structured way. In technique 15, Lemov discusses the need for teachers to circulate around in the classroom. His reasons for moving around during class time hinged on the need for a teacher to have ownership of the room and maintain his or her power. Is this the only reason and motivation to move around in a classroom? I’m thinking of Atwell and her side-by-side conferences. Sure, she does “own” the classroom, but she’s also showing that she is walking in the muck of their writing process with them. Are there other reasons to break the line?
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Leslie! I think that in breaking the line, we as teachers should be concerned with not only behavior management, but also giving our students one-on-one time.
DeleteIt's funny, cause when I first saw that technique, I thought Lemov was about to talk about how teachers can be at the same level as students for certain lessons. Turns out, the message was different. I personally think it could work both ways: the students feel happy that the teacher is working with them as opposed to over them and is less likely to cause trouble for the teacher.
DeleteI agree with the notion that the teacher shouldn't show fear in crossing the plane, but I think it should just become natural for the teacher to want to be aware of their surroundings constantly and simply be interested in the students and their progress. In my opinion, those should be the main reasons for circulating about the room... 'control' should just be a happy benefit.
DeleteIf you carry yourself with good intentions, and you try to make them visible, students will attach themselves to that, and you should be fine.
DeleteComment: I love a good sports analogy, which is why I’m drawn to the Ratio idea in technique 17 called the Batch process. Unlike Lemov, I prefer to call discussion volleyball instead of ping-pong or batch processing. I like the volleyball term because it shows that students can effectively take the discussion if they simply learn the steps: bump, set, spike. This why I particularly like having those phrase starters. They show a student how to keep the ball of conversation in the air to reach the goal of understanding. I found the whole technique of Ratio intriguing, especially the quote which states, “A successful lesson is rarely marked by a teacher’s getting a good intellectual workout in front of the classroom. Push more and more of the cognitive work out to students as soon as they are ready” (Lemov, p. 93). Teaching isn’t about us. We have nothing to prove. It’s about the students and having them put in the thought and work.
ReplyDeleteI like the volleyball analogy better! You're right, each comment should serve to set up students with a deeper understanding.
DeleteQuestion: As I read these techniques, I realize little I know about being a teacher. After the reading, I became a little overwhelmed with the sheer amount of things we as teachers have to be focused on during the day: the lesson itself, breaking the "plane," breaking it down, etc.
ReplyDeleteHow are you guys going to work all these techniques into your teaching strategy? (I think I am going to choose the top 3 that are most important for day one, and work the rest of the techniques in little by little, otherwise I'll get too overwhelmed.)
Of techniques 12-17, which do you think seems to be the most beneficial?
Comment: I can't wait to get into a classroom and try these things. There seems to be so much to keep in mind all the time, and I think that with practice they will get easier.
I'm really liking the hook technique. It's a terrific method for getting students invested.
DeleteI'd like to think some of these techniques and processes will come somewhat naturally, but would need refinement. For instance, the whole 'circulate' thing just seems like something I'd do anyways. Same goes for the hook, but I think I'd have to work on the other ones. I think they're all beneficial. It'd be too difficult to rank them. I guess it would depend on the situation. I dunno how I'm gonna do these, necessarily, but we'll see, I guess. :P It is rather overwhelming.
DeleteI like your idea of trying to incrementally add techniques to your teaching repertoire. Additionally, I think you should start with techniques that lend themselves to your strengths so that you can increase your confidence earl on.
DeleteIt does seem overwhelming, but I think that eventually doing these things will become second nature. We are creatures of habit, so I think establishing those techniques early on will help us get into the groove. I remember when I first started driving, I wondered how in the world people could look at the spedometer, check all three mirrors, and keep their eyes on the road at the same time. Now, I do it without thinking. Obviously, teaching is not driving a car, but I think we will get used to doing many of these techniques the more we practice.
Deletegood point, leslie! :)
DeleteI agree that it is overwhelming but I also think that as a teacher in front of a classroom some of these would come to you naturally even if you had not read the techniques in this book. For me that makes it seem less overwhelming. Additionally I think that the techniques that wouldn't come naturally are a helpful resource in the book and if you really learn them a trigger will go off in your head when you are planning a lesson and you can anticipate when you may need to use them.
DeleteQuestion: I'm with Chelsea. Upon reading Lemov's techniques, I became slightly nervous. It seems as though these techniques may be something you slowly add over time. How long do you think it will take us to incorporate these techniques?
ReplyDeleteAlso, in technique 13, Lemov talks about making steps "sticky." Do you think this will be hard? (I tend to be a perfectionist so I think it may be hard for me to create "the perfect catchphrase.")
Comment: I especially found "Break it Down," technique 16, to be interesting. I had no idea that breaking something down was so involved, or even had a process.
I loved the idea of making steps "sticky," but I think we are going to have to think long and hard about it before we come to something that actually works.
DeleteI feel there are some techniques that will come to us more quickly than others. Maybe we will take advantage of the ones we've mastered and slowly work our way into the others. Either way, I feel like rushing into something unfamiliar could back fire.
DeleteI agree with rob. I also think that some techniques may work with one group of students, but may not work with other groups. I think we have to be mindful of that. So, a lot of our decisions to determine which to use will come as we get to know our students. Some may not work at first, but over time I think we'll all get the hang of it.
DeleteI think that making the steps GENUINELY sticky will be difficult. I think that if you force it too much and they don't make sense or they are too disconnected they won't be effective. With that being said I think that when used genuinely it is super effective.
DeleteStatement: I'm a big fan of Lemov's Hook technique. My sophomore World History teacher used to use it all the time to get us invested. We were studying Renaissance painters and some of the names included Leonardo, Michelangelo, Donatello, and Raphael. So our teacher began the lesson with: "before these fellows were famous painters, they went into the sewers and became teenage mutant ninja turtles." Our class immediately stopped talking to one another and turned their attention to the teacher. After a few seconds of laughing, our teacher went on, filling in some humor with history here and there and capturing his students' interest. I'm gonna try and use "the Hook" whenever I feel students are zoning out or can't find the fun in English.
ReplyDeleteAgreed, Hooks are key to gaining student interest, and in turn, their motivation.
DeleteThe hook is also my favorite of the techniques. People generally have no interest in learning something that they perceive as boring and/or unimportant and a great hook can get that initial blockade out of the way lickety split!
DeleteYes! The hook was one of my favorites as well. It's kind of like a trailer for a movie. As teachers, we not only want an audience but also an invested audience.
DeleteQuestion: Lemov's technique of "Breaking it down" came off as very interesting to me. He claims it is a deep process because one can never entirely be sure of how much a student needs until the student reveals it. Lemov lists out several specific ways of breaking down a lesson but are there any favorite methods of ya'lls? Would you like to try something that he hasn't listed?
ReplyDeleteQuestion: I dunno about the whole board = paper thing... I mean, it's important to know how to take good notes and all, but I think it promotes short term learning. Wouldn't it be better to demonstrate to students how they should take notes and make them their own from the beginning rather than starting by having them copy what you write word-for-word? I imagine such a technique would be especially frustrating for slow writers.
ReplyDeleteI found that technique very interesting as well. I think it would work best in a think-aloud situation where you are trying to model something for the students, so that they can internalize and become better at it.
DeleteI see what you're saying, Noel. Mirroring everything for a year would be tiring. However, like Ben said, it's good to model, especially at first. I think students may need it in the beginning. I think we'd be surprised how many students do not know how to take good notes. They just don't know what to write down, but if we model how notes should look, I think that they will learn the things to include & they will become better at it over time. Then, the teacher won't have to require them to write word for word. They will be able to pick out the important pieces on their own. I can definitely see both sides on this though.
DeleteWell Noel, don't forget that according to Lemov, our only goal is to get these kids to college. So as long as these notes somehow translate to at least a few SAT ACT points then it doesn't matter! Seriously though, I agree with your questioning of the technique.
DeleteComment: Ratio is interesting and I think it's very important for teachers to utilize as so many times, teachers are so tempted to just tell the answer to save time, but the suggested processes seem great to get students to think for themselves and gain more out of the classes. A shame so many teachers opt for the easier choice.
ReplyDeleteI like Technique 15, Circulate. Lemov says it is, "a technique for moving strategically around your room during all parts of your lesson." I think this is something that is useful in the classroom. It's a way for you to move about & take note of those who are actively participating versus those who are off task. Not only does it give you a sense of control over the classroom, but also allows for you to move around unpredictably. Once kids notice you're not just sitting behind your desk, hopefully they will stay focused on the task at hand because they never know when you may walk by.
ReplyDeleteI think it is also a way to add energy and life to your teaching. Hey, that teacher doesn't just sit around, but is trying to encourage me and get to know me. I feel like it can only benefit your classroom.
DeleteI agree! I want to move around when I teach. It just seems like a natural thing to do. However, I know I have to make sure that it doesn't turn into pacing or moving a little too fast so that it's distracting instead of engaging. Otherwise, I want to move around and be energetic like Ben said in the above comment.
DeleteI'm kind of with Noel on the idea of "board=paper." I don't remember if it was in class or in the readings, but I compared the idea of "board=paper" to having homework where you simply fill in the blank. I have had classes where the teacher uses this method and have had mixed results. For example: I don't pay attention in class because I'm just looking for words on the powerpoint, BUT when it goes back to studying I have great notes. Are students learning anything with this method? Why would this work with class notes and not with homework? What are some of the downfalls to this method?
ReplyDeleteComment: I tried to implement technique 12 ("the hook") as much as I could in my unit plan. I think it's a great way to grab attention. My favorite part was using either a story or media to get the point across.
I have had the same experience with the board=paper technique. I think it depends on what else happens IN ADDITION. But I may also argue that students aren't really learning with this method. Even if it is an effective study tool I think that just boils down to memorization which in most cases doesn't facilitate long term knowledge.
DeleteComment: I liked the idea behind Board= paper. I feel like many times teachers ether assume that students know how to take notes, or don't think to teach them. This technique is a step towards teaching kids how to take notes on their own, and even though coping word for word at first might be weird it eventually transitions to them taking notes on their own.
ReplyDeleteA few other people commented on how this practice may lend to a student merely relying on a teacher for notes, which I think is a valid point. However, I do think that if you taper it off or gradually stop then students would ideally be learning how to take notes.
DeleteI think my thing was instead of doing the board=paper thingy, to instruct students how to take good notes, i.e. pay attention to what's said/written and make it their own early on.
DeleteQuestion: in the circulate section, Lemov discusses the importance of keeping the position of power. How would you best set up a classroom so that you can circulate, break the plane, and successfully move throughout the whole class while still keeping most of the class in your view?
ReplyDeleteHAHA. Good question! I'm excited that one day we will have this mastered. Emphasis on ONE DAY.
DeleteMy favorite classroom setup was my junior year of high school. The setup was 3 sections. A middle facing forward and the two sides angled in. The seats were set up in pairs. It was almost like a u shape. It gave the teacher enough room to wander and break the plane and also have the students interact when needed.
DeleteWhen Lemov references the breaking it down method, I became very interested. Sometimes, or usually, our first reaction is to simply correct the student or tell them the right answer; but we should try to give small hints so that they can discover the answer on their own. That being said, why is being familiar and constantly improving your content knowledge beneficial, in regards to that exercise?
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the technique which dealt with walking around the classroom and having students sense the accountability that the teacher could come by at any moment. It did kind of sound like an intimidation method, but if used right, I think it could work well.
ReplyDeleteI did feel that Lemov used it as an intimidation technique, but I think with the right body language and tone of a classroom that it would not completely come across as an assertion of power and ownership. I like your point about accountability because it's a better word and provides a better connotation than power.
DeleteNow I can't help thinking that every time I walk around the classroom, I will go mad with power...
DeleteComment: I know some other people have already mentioned it, but I want to add my own voice to the camp of people who found themselves concerned or slightly troubled by the board=paper technique. Anything were the students are expected to reproduce the teacher's work exactly just sounds like "banking" to me, trying to force pre-formed knowledge into the heads of student receptacles.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: That being said, maybe I'm missing the point. Is it not actually as bad as it sounds to me? Or is there some ultimate benefit that makes "banking" alright in this instance?
ReplyDeleteI think banking can be okay for some things, but as a general rule, I don't think it's a good idea. Therefore, I'd think that board=paper wouldn't be good for most things either... but I may not be getting it either...
DeleteQuestion: I always found some degree of problems as a student following "Board=Paper." In many of the classes I have been in, I found myself frustrated and unable to fully take in the conversation when writing down the notes on the board. Does anyone else have problems with this? Is there anything we could do as teachers that could prevent such problems other than breaking the flow and taking a minute for the students to jot down notes?
ReplyDeleteI really enjoy the Board=paper technique because it visualizes the steps for the students rather than them just hearing it. As long as we are writing the steps as we go, I really don't think that it would prevent the flow.
DeleteComment: I found that with Lemov's "Circulate" technique that the importance of properly positioning desks was made all the more vital. Creating small groups of four or using the u-shaped formation seems like important ways for arranging the room to better facilitate the Teacher's ability to manage the classroom. With the typical columns and rows formation, it would be near difficult for teachers to maneuver without gaining a certain degree of awkwardness. It always is good to see that the techniques that have been utilized over the last two months have distinct pedagogical purposes.
ReplyDeleteSo much goes into arrangement of your class to classroom management on top of teaching what you need to that day! Teachers have much more responsibility than most realize. We have an important job! We will become the best multi-taskers! I'm excited!
DeleteMy favorite technique from this reading (besides "The Hook") is "Ratio". I like how it divides difficult or long questions into smaller, easier to answer ones. "Ratio" combines "cold call" and "name the steps" for one crazy effective, totally engaging game/lesson hybrid.
ReplyDeleteThe Hook: short, sweet, and captivating. T had a few great biology and anatomy teachers when I was in high school. One would open some of her lessons with pictures of her travels and experiments that showed the practical use of her subject. Another would sing a songs she had written about the circulatory system or whatever it was that we were studying. What are some interesting hooks that you can remember some of your teachers using?
ReplyDeleteComment: I really thought Circulate was an interesting technique. Something seems so natural to circulate around the room, but here there is a whole strategy to it. I really like that "making the shole classroom your won" is a subtle way of keeping authority and keeping behavior in check.
ReplyDeleteI think that we could use Technique 13 in our English classes by identifying the steps of ie: the writing process. We could have the steps up on the walls so that they will be easily accessible for students to refer to & it wouldn't be something just taking up wall space. So my question is -- what other steps (or other devices to remember things for class) could we list on the walls for our students that would act as a functional type thing, not just decoration?
ReplyDeleteComment: I really like the idea of the "hook." I think in an art class that it would be awesome to have a painting or a video or a background story of an artist or even dressing up like the artist that we will be talking about. It would really get the kids interested and ready to hear about the lesson. I know this is something everyone has heard of but I didn't really think about it a lot until I read this and it was so exciting to me.
ReplyDeleteI didn't love the "Board=Paper" technique. I don't feel like it would be a good exercise for the students because they are literally copying and then memorizing. Making their paper look like mine isn't really gonna help them in the long run. What do you guys think about this technique? Would it be something that you would use in your classroom?
ReplyDeleteI don't love it either. But I don't necessarily think it should be totally negated either. I think that there is a place for it as long as you use it appropriately- in a way that still allows students to include valuable extra information that helps students really grasp the meanings.
DeleteComment: I really like the break it down technique, especially for a visual art classroom. I think that using it to help students see why their compositions may not be successful or convincing will help them also see how it can be fixed or tweaked, which is most important. Without knowing how to fix their issues telling students that they aren't successful is just putting them down and confusing them/complicating their artistic process.
ReplyDeleteQuestion: When reading the circulate method I was very intrigued about it's use in a visual art classroom because much of a fine art class is spent with students working on their projects on their own in class. Making sure that they stay on task and know that you are there to answer their questions/help them address struggles is important. My question is: How would you balance this authoritative role with the helpful side of the technique in a way that doesn't make you unapproachable?
With Board = Paper, I think it has different applications in different subjects. Note taking might be quite natural in History, or something similar. But there are certain techniques that students are trying to master to become better writers, better artists, etc. The only technique some students have to master in a history class would be a memorization technique. In a typical history class at most schools, i mean.
ReplyDelete