Children must be taught how to think, not what to think
Margaret Mead
It has become increasingly trendy to tell teachers to talk less and make space in their classrooms for their students to talk more. ‘Talk-less’ teaching has even become a practice coined amongst educators. However, this practice coexists in a world where the theory of cognitive-overload buzzes about Twitter feeds and where Rosenshine’s principles of instruction have become hot topics for staff CPD.
Rosenshine’s study on methods of instruction suggests that the most effective teachers talk for a greater proportion of the lesson than less effective ones. Through our voices, we can name the connections, pre-empt the patterns and reveal the language of learning to our pupils. It is here we teach the ‘thinking’ which underpins the reasoning and problem solving demanded when learning new materials.
So why has it become ok to suggest a teacher, the educator in the room, should silence themselves?
Rosenshine’s 2nd principle of instruction, presenting new material in small steps, in my opinion, relies upon our (the educators) guidance, and therefore our voices. It is this procedure of primarily teaching in small steps, through guiding student practice, which deals with and overcomes, the limitation of our working memory. The practice of ‘thinking aloud’ is brought to life. The teacher’s thought processes are unleashed, rightly reverberating around the classroom.
It all sounds too good to be true. Unfortunately, the ‘Achilles heel’, so to speak, of this strategy of instruction lies within its audible nature. Our words are only momentary, they only last as long as our pupils’ working memories can hold onto them. This has left room for this approach to be challenged and replaced with alternatives. This is where the use of scaffolds has begun, in my opinion, to displace ‘teacher-talk’. Pupils’ learning has somewhat started to be viewed by some, as a ‘thing’ which can be propped up and held together by carefully constructed and tailor-made learning-materials, or ‘scaffolds’. These scaffolds don’t disappear into the stratosphere of our classrooms like our words risk doing, but can sit beside the pupil as a point of reference throughout the learning experience.
Rosenshine does refer to the use of scaffolds within his principles of instruction; it is definitely not something he disregards. His 8th principle specifically refers to the use of scaffolds; however, it states that these supports should be temporary to assist children when learning becomes difficult. It is his 5th principle that leads us back to this belief that at the heart of successful learning, our children’s practice should be guided. Arguably, it is our most successful teachers who invest the time in becoming the vehicle that drives pupils in the right direction through the messy process that occurs when learning something new!
It would be easy to disregard one or the other. To decide that ‘I do, we do, you do’ guided approaches can replace scaffolds or vice versa. There are areas of doubt within both models. How much time we give to guided practice remains ambiguous, as does the ‘figure’ underpinning the high success rate named in Rosenshine’s stages of guided practice.
So is there a solution?
The principle of dual coding, first introduced by Allan Paivio in 1971, I believe, may be at the core of our solution. This theory states that our brains can process information from two channels at the same time, audible and visual. It is a theory rooted in the knowledge of the practical use of imagery as memory aid from as far back as 2500 years ago; the belief that imagery can accelerate the acquisition of knowledge. In dual coding, the use of visual aids is teamed with the belief that our words and explanations provide the logic behind the ‘image’. In terms of research, Mayer and Anderson (1991) found that when verbal information was presented alongside relevant images, learning became memorable, with these images able to be kept in place to aid pupils in subsequent tasks.
I believe that this is the perfect partnership required to create a climate for learning to flourish. Through dual-coding our talked-through-thoughts and our scaffolds or models begin to become intertwined, formulating into the weapon our pupils need to combat the beast that is cognitive overload
Knowing how children learn best, is certainly a blend of experience and expertise. In my opinion, it pays to bring it to the forefront of our minds, questioning and reflecting upon our current practice and seeing it as a challenge we all face. This is rather than assuming we’ve got it sussed, creating a laissez fair attitude, viewing it as ‘just learning’.
I think it is time to challenge teachers: to reflect on what the messy process of learning truly looks like, trust their train of thought and share every inch of the learning process with their pupils. Thus lies the beginning of a pursuit that is truly worthwhile.
Post originally published by the Nottingham Institute of Education
Inspired by Rosenshine’s Principles in Action by Tom Sherrington
