Both of us love the global positioning systems (GPS) we have in our cars, but for somewhat different reasons. Doug, who's a native Californian, takes the GPS directions under advisement, comparing the recommended route with his favorite familiar route to see which one is better. Nancy, who's not from California and is directionally challenged anyway, follows her GPS directions faithfully to improve her chances of arriving at her intended destination.
We both agree, though, that the GPS provides the timely midcourse corrections we sometimes need. And so it goes in classrooms. Teachers routinely collect a variety of information and use it to make the midcourse corrections that keep their students on track.
GPS for the Classroom
The practice of checking for understanding is an essential tool for teachers to determine whether the instruction they're providing is sticking. Research has found that, to be useful for students, our feedback must be goal-referenced, timely, ongoing, specific, understandable, and actionable. And these same qualities are what make the feedback we collect about student performance most valuable to teachers. Information about a learner's progress is not useful for adjusting instruction if it is purposeless, delayed, vague, or undefined.
So how can we make checks for understanding more useful and dynamic? An encouraging development is the availability of a variety of apps for tablets and other mobile devices, which can help teachers gather data to assess students' knowledge and needs. One method of immediate formative assessment is an audience response system, which enables the teacher to witness learning in real time, discover partial understandings or misconceptions, and respond with further instruction and explication.
See It in Action
In the that accompanies this column, mathematics teacher Aimee Suffridge uses an audience response system to gauge how her students solve a problem. It is early in the school year, and she presents her students with a mathematics problem similar to those that will appear on the state test. One purpose of the activity, which she implements several times a week, is to prepare students for this test. But the activity also serves at least two other purposes: to guide a classroom discussion that helps students explore their mathematical thinking and to gauge students' mathematical reasoning so that Aimee can make decisions about further instruction. She uses the following format:
- Present a problem or question and have students respond individually using the audience response system device.
- Without showing them the results, ask students to talk with others about why they chose a particular answer, and listen to the reasons students offer for their choices.
- Reopen the poll and invite students to answer the same problem again, either changing their response or sticking with their original answer.
- Display the results, including the number who selected each answer choice. Discuss the reasoning used for each answer with the class.
- Provide follow-up instruction as needed for individuals, groups, or the whole class.
Low-Tech Works, Too
Teachers in responsive classrooms also routinely use a variety of low-tech approaches to gather the data they need to make instructional decisions. In fact, gathering data isn't really the challenge for most teachers; practices like using pre-assessments before instruction and short quizzes immediately after are common. But data quickly become unmanageable if there isn't a plan for organizing the information in a meaningful way.
One method is to use three sort-it-out boxes. At the end of the lesson, pose a question to the class that captures the learning target. Students insert an index card with their name into one of three labeled boxes:
- I know it, and I can explain my thinking.
- I know parts of this, but some of it is still confusing.
- I don't know it yet, and I need help.
It's best not to have students write what, exactly, they're having difficulty with; those who are confused about the content often don't yet have enough knowledge to determine what they're missing. But the sorting boxes enable the teacher to group for the following day. He or she can now identify who can serve as a peer tutor (I know it) to the students who need just a bit more information (I know part of this). In the meantime, the teacher can spend time with the students who need more instruction (I don't know it yet).
With experience, students become more adept at assessing their own learning and identifying what level of support, if any, they need. In terms of organization, this method is especially useful for secondary teachers who teach multiple sections; grouping for the next day's instruction involves simply dividing the name cards into three categories.
Organization is essential for closing the feedback loop and making midcourse corrections. Like GPS directions, frequent checks for understanding can increase the likelihood that we'll end up at our intended destination. In addition, the practice of collecting timely feedback on student performance helps us continually refine our lessons to optimize their efficiency and effectiveness. And isn't that what we all hope for?
