This post is part of a series on integrating the McREL research on classroom instruction that works with videoconferencing.

Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers: Generalizations

1. Cues, questions, and advance organizers should focus on what is important rather than what is unusual.
2. “Higher-level” questions and advance organizers produce deeper learning than “lower-level” questions and advance organizers.
3. Advance organizers are most useful with information that is not well organized.
4. Different types of advance organizers produce different results.
5. Waiting briefly before accepting responses from students has the effect of increasing the depth of students’ answers.
6. Questions are effective learning tools even when asked before a learning experience.

Recommendations

Use these to improve your practice.

1. Use expository advance organizers.
2. Use narrative advance organizers.
3. Teach students skimming as a form of advance organizer.
4. Teach students how to use graphic advance organizers.
5. Use explicit cues.
6. Ask questions that elicit inferences.
7. Ask analytic questions (Pitler, et al., 2007, p. 74).

Brainstorming for Videoconferencing

Cues, Questions and Advanced Organizers are primarily again about accessing prior knowledge. Cues and questions help students see what’s coming next so they can begin connecting it to their current knowledge. These are asked by the teacher. I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about getting student questions to a higher level quality (in ASK & other programs). But that is not what the research on cues & questions is about.

Cues and questions can be used by content providers during the program, and by teachers before & after a program or project. The questions & cues need to tie into the main point of what’s important in the unit.

Cues & Questions Before a VC

• Giving students an overview of the important content in the upcoming lesson.
• Using wait time (double the wait time in a VC) to give time for quality answers.
• Asking higher level questions. I can think of providers who do this well, and others who ask questions that elicit only one-word answers. The Handbook has a nice list of examples of generic inferential questions that can be adapted to your content (p. 270-271).

Possible New Format

Another section is about Analytic Questions. These are questions that analyze errors, construct support, and analyze perspectives. I’m thinking of Eco-Conversations and similar projects that address current issues. What if both classes attempted to answer questions such as:

• What are the errors in reasoning in this information?
• How is this information misleading?
• What is an argument that would support the following claim?
• Why would someone consider this to be good (or bad or neutral)?
• What is the reasoning behind his or her perspective?
• What is an alternative perspective, and what is the reasoning behind it? (Marzano, 2001, CITW, p. 116)

Share Advance Organizers?

I think it would be so interesting and beneficial for students to share their own advance organizers on a topic, but could they be made clearly enough that the other class could read them?

Or what if two classes worked together to create an advance organizer on a topic. It could be created in GoogleDocs as a spreadsheet or table, or an artistic advance organizer in an online collaborative brainstorming or drawing too. Imagine classes with interactive white boards working on the document as a class, and then sharing to see what the other class adds to it. During the videoconference they could discuss the topic or present new information to each other and then add more new knowledge to their organizer.

What do you think? Too much of a stretch? Doable? Please comment.

References: Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J., Norford, J. S., Paynter, D. E., Pickering, D. J., & Gaddy, B. B. (2001). A handbook for classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Marzano, R. J., Pickering, D., & Pollock, J. E. (2001). Classroom instruction that works : research-based strategies for increasing student achievement. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

This post is part of a series on integrating the McREL research on classroom instruction that works with videoconferencing.

Providing Recognition: Generalizations

1. Rewards do not necessarily have a negative effect on intrinsic motivation.
2. Reward is most effective when it is contingent on the attainment of some standard of performance.
3. Abstract symbolic recognition (e.g., praise) is more effective than tangible rewards (e.g., candy, money).

Recommendations

Use these to improve your practice.

1. Personalize recognition.
2. Use the Pause, Prompt, and Praise strategy.
3. Use concrete symbols of recognition (Pitler, et al., 2007, p. 59-60).

Brainstorming for Videoconferencing

Most of the ideas in this area are on giving students certificates (printed and online), posting exemplary work online, using response systems to give recognition, and giving students recorded audio messages.

Interestingly, videoconferencing is included again as a way to have students communicate with professionals and peers as authentic audiences. The Global WRITeS project was featured as a way for students to perform and judge poetry. I’ve blogged about this project when it was presented at NECC last year. Andrea Israeli blogs about this project too. Students receive both authentic feedback from the poet and peers, as well as getting recognition for work well done.

Other ways that students receive recognition in current programs we do are:

• Students hearing their names in a videoconference. When the author or expert listens to a student question and then uses their name back, students LOVE it!
• Complimenting classes. When the facilitator in a project such as MysteryQuest or Monster Match congratulates the class on their monster match or their good note-taking, classes receive recognition.
• Can you think of any others?

New Ideas

• Performance Judging. This idea of having students perform and then be judged (using agreed upon criterion) can be used beyond poetry. What else? Dance, music, and speech. How about student created videos on multiple topics, as organized so efficiently by @roxanneglaser with Texas Twisted Weather and Imagine It!
• Goal sharing. What if students could share, say towards the end of the year, some of their goals and how they accomplished them? Could sharing with another class (authentic audience) how they achieved the goal provide recognition? They could be motivated and inspired by the other class too. Is that too crazy of an idea? What do you think?

What other ideas pop into your head?

Reference: Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

This post is part of a series on integrating the McREL research on classroom instruction that works with videoconferencing.

Providing Feedback: Generalizations

1. Feedback should be corrective in nature.
2. Feedback should be timely.
3. Feedback should be specific to a criterion.
4. Students can effectively provide some of their own feedback.

Recommendations

Use these to improve your practice.

1. Use criterion-referenced feedback.
2. Focus feedback on specific types of knowledge.
3. Use student-led feedback (Pitler, et al., 2007, p. 41-42).

Brainstorming for Videoconferencing: Current Practice

Predictably, the technology examples give include comments in Word, classroom response systems, grading software, using web rubrics for criterion referenced feedback, and using games and simulations that provide instant feedback.

What I found surprising was the inclusion of communication software in this section, including “blogs, wikis, email, instant messaging, and videoconferencing” (p. 53). As I read the examples in the book, I thought of these current videoconference programs:

• “ASK Deluxe“, where students blogged two chapters of The Ultimate Gift and gave feedback to each other before the videoconference with the author.
• Monster Match and all it’s variations are in some ways “feedback” to the students on how well they wrote their description.
• The instant message example in the book is of students asking questions of their government representative, which we do on a regular basis with our Senator, Representative, as well as veterans and authors in the ASK program.
• The videoconference example in the book has Spanish students talking to students in Spain, similar to the videoconferences we’ve done with Frank Garcia. In a twist, after the videoconference, students use a blog to give feedback to each other using the other class’ native language.
• MysteryQuest and all its spin-offs is another way that students get feedback from an audience. They get immediate feedback on the quality of their presentation (how well the other classes can take notes). They get immediate feedback on their research skills as they find out the correct answer.

The main point in this section was the feedback from authentic audiences.

Brainstorming for Videoconferencing: New Ideas

So, how can we beef up the feedback in our videoconferences?

• Emphasize talking to experts and authors. First, I think we need to continue to emphasize the value of real-time interaction with student-generated questions to authors and experts. I had a long discussion with one of our veterans who wanted to script the videoconference. The value is in the INTERACTION! There is major value to the students in hearing the answer to a question THEY wrote! We can’t forget this. We must continue to make time for it. To plan deliberately for feedback.
• “Poetry Idol”. I can’t find a blogged entry, but we have had a couple high school poetry performance videoconferences that were stunning. The students performed (not just recited) a favorite poem (theirs or not). The other class rated them, with scores, acting as judges. In another exchange, both classes shared essays with each other, and after each essay, the other class gave specific helpful feedback to the student who just read their essay. Incredibly powerful. If this format could be polished a little more, and both classes used the same criterion-referenced rubric for evaluating work and giving feedback, the students could gain even more from the experience. Students could practice and learn ways to effectively give feedback to their peers.
• Language Exchange. After watching my classes interact with classes in other languages (primarily Spanish), I believe we can beef up the quality of those interactions. With a little more preparation we can get more than just laughing, giggling, and a little bit of language practice. Students should prepare something to present/share in the language (a story, a skit, a song, their own writing, statements about themselves). As students tend to be nervous and self-conscious, visual cards to read and remind them of their lines would reinforce the vocabulary and usage. Students could also prepare their questions on cards as well. Have you experienced cross-language exchanges? What made them go well? What made them effective?

What do you think? Do any new ideas pop into your brain? Share them and I’ll add them, giving you credit, to the next iteration of the Projects Booklet.

Reference: Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

This post is part of a series on integrating the McREL research on classroom instruction that works with videoconferencing.

Setting Objectives: Generalizations

1. Setting instructional goals narrows what students focus on.
2. Teachers should encourage students to personalize the learning goals the teacher has identified for them.
3. Instructional goals should not be too specific.

Recommendations

Use these to improve your practice.

1. Set learning objectives that are specific but flexible.
2. Allow students flexibility in personalizing the learning objectives or goals.
3. Communicate the learning objectives or goals to students and parents.
4. Contract with students to attain specific learning objectives or goals (Pitler, et al., 2007, p. 17-18).

Brainstorming for Videoconferencing

At first glance, it seems this doesn’t really apply to videoconferences. Certainly, I don’t think we can make a project template out of it, do you? Just the same, we can improve our practice. What about these ideas?

• Have students make a KWL or KWHL chart before a videoconference or a unit with a videoconference included. Make sure it includes what you want the student to learn (your objectives) and what they want to learn (personalizing learning). Student motivation is higher when they set at least some of their own goals.
• The KWL could create a foundation from which to prepare questions, for ASK programs, asking questions of the other students, Lest We Forget programs, and any program with a content provider who includes a Q&A time.
• What if, before a videoconference, the two classes created a KWL together using a collaborative drawing/brainstorming tool? Dabbleboard looks cool! Do you think this would work? I’m thinking about Read Around the Planet, learning about each others’ communities, and EcoConversations.
• Take your state standards and use them to create a rubric for the students on what they will learn from this videoconference.

Share Your Ideas!
So, what do you think? Do you have any other ideas? How do you currently set objectives for students as they prepare for a videoconference?

Reference: Pitler, H., Hubbell, E. R., Kuhn, M., & Malenoski, K. (2007). Using technology with classroom instruction that works. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.