Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
>> From my point of view, from a cognitive point of view; one of the things you see is
this idea where, Iím going to show the kids something and Iím going to get them to do
it and then Iím going to give them a test and weíll keep going round and round.
>> Whatís interesting about that is if you look at it from a brain point of view, hereís
a picture of the brain from the front and the back and a slice through it. By going
through this cycle we can get their thinking to be more complex. We can get them to think
in more complex ways, which we see as being reflected analogously in this reflection of
more activity in their brain. But that gets them up to the barrier; these are the kids
who are pressed up against that barrier.
>> What we see is that to go beyond the barrier, and this is different imaging technique, you
can see these parts of the brain have got some similar activity here and here, but what
we see is, that thereís all this region of the brain at the front thatís now becoming
active. When we shift from scaffolding knowledge and procedures, those first two columns, to
scaffolding thinking; inferring, problem solving - these frontal regions of the brain become
active.
>> What these regions of the brain do is; they are the regions of the brain that are
responsible for the stop and think stuff. So I know this, and I know this, and Iíve
got this problem; hang on, how am I going to put it together? Iím going to try this,
Iím going to sequence this and Iím going to value that. Thatís important and thatís
less important. Itís those sorts of practices; those sorts of activities in the brain going
on when weíre scaffolding towards this inferring problem solving.
>> So if that barrier is real we can see it in some of the NAPLAN questions and the student
responses. We can see it in the kids heads depending on what we do; depending upon our
practice, depending upon the activity that weíre generating in their brains, depending
upon the activities that we give them. That barrier is reflected somewhat by the difference
between these pillars: the knowledge and procedural understanding and the putting it into action
and the studentís disposition.
>> What I want to leave you with is this idea that we should just break through that barrier.
We shouldnít consider it as either or; we shouldnít consider it as, ok Iím going to
tell them this and Iím going to do the instructable and then weíre going to put the learnable
on the top of that. Itís a continuum between the two things. The way that we can move between
these continua is to think about the questions that weíre asking the kids. When we ask the
kids whatís the answer; Iím going to tell you something, Iím going to give you a skill
and Iím going to get you to apply it and tell me what the answer is. Weíre limiting
them into this space; into that instructable space.
>> But when weíre asking them: what do you think? What is your judgement? How would you
go about doing this? How else would you go about doing it? Then what weíre doing is
asking all the regions of the brain to become enactive when we think about what an answer
might be, but weíre also getting them to stretch; weíre also challenging them, weíre
also linking it to their prior learning and their lives and what theyíre thinking about.
Iím not just talking about open questions. Iím not just talking about this shifting
from closed questions to open questions. Iím talking about really strategically, purposefully,
intentionally driving actual thinking.
>> What Iím going to suggest is from today, the sorts of things you might think about
is; ask yourself who is doing the thinking? When I let go of these kids hands are they
going to be able to walk themselves or are they going to fall over straight away? Am
I doing the thinking for them and imposing it upon them, only to then let go and take
away their position so they fall over? I would suggest that you might not say something to
the kids if they can think it. Instead of me saying it and them thinking it, you might
ask a question to just get them to think it, for them to generate it, so that theyíre
doing the thinking rather than just sitting back on my thinking.
>> For me, one of the things that came out really clearly from all that research about
studentís cognition, how do they put the knowledge into action? The stuff that weíve
told them, how do they make the most of it? That only comes when we value that problem
solving: that putting of their knowledge into action when weíre modeling it. When weíre
saying to them; I donít know, I donít know the answer to that - well letís find out,
how would we go about it? What would we do? Letís drive the thinking together so they
see us as learners rather than the people who are delivering knowledge to them.
>> Finally there is this idea of practice; not drilling, where we are just going through
developing a skill, but authentically practicing; being able to put the knowledge into action.
That might come about through the sorts of questions that we ask our students just as
one example. To drive some reasoning, to say ok well that might be the answer, but what
made you think it? What were you drawing on? What were you putting together in order to
get the answer, to get that thinking?
>> Then perhaps to ask some things about; so whatís it like? Where have you seem something
like that before. What weíre doing is (this is in danger of looking a bit bluesy and Iím
not going to bluesy daycare or anything like that, Iím being much more purposeful and
strategic. Iím thinking about the kids analogizing; Iím thinking about the kids drawing parallels
between their learning at different times. Iím thinking about kids speaking in a relational
way, not just hereís a bit of information, hereís another bit of information, and another,
but linking it together but then forming the links. Not me telling them the links because
thatís just another bit of information.
>> Itís those questions about you know, what if? Iím going to leave you with a question
that is perhaps the most audacious and outrageous idea. Ask them a question in which they donít
know the answer to. Ask them a question that they canít know the answer to. The hand holding
stuff that weíve been good at is because the kids are good at answering the questions
that we ask them, that they know, that when we ask them a question, that thereís probably
an answer out there somewhere. The ones who know the answer put their hands up and the
ones who donít know the answer shrink back.
>> If we ask them all a question and they expect from us questions that they know we
donít know the answer to, then weíll get answerable in the end when weíve had the
conversation. When our Science or our Maths or our English or History or whatever it is
weíre teaching, when that serves this conversation, that thereís a compelling answer out there
somehow but weíve got to construct the pathway to get to that compelling answer. We canít
just go, yep thereís the answer! For me, thatís taking us into this ground that is
covered by whatís instructable and whatís learnable.
>> South Australia has been fantastic at getting kids to do that instructable stuff; we can
see across the State really great examples and the next challenge for us is as I say,
is blurring that boundary between whatís instructable and whatís learnable.