Below is the pdf of my research project that I completed as part of my PGCE top-up course. It followed from a fuller literature review that can be read here.
Completed in 2015, I only just realised that I didn’t have a link to it.
Category: Teaching & Learning
In 2016 I wrote this blog post. My answer to that question is now decidedly, yes. Content is King.
In this post, I want to explore why this is the case and outline what my ideas are now in relation to teaching biology.
The importance of content?
First, I should point out that a re-reading of my 2016 article makes me realise that I never concluded by suggesting content wasn’t king. Like all good questions, the article title helps to stimulate thought and a discussion about where we are at in our beliefs and in defending those beliefs. Really, the argument I was making was that teaching is not all about teaching content, but about teaching content AND encouraging critical thought with that content matter.
Content underpins everything. It underpins thinking. You can’t think without something to think about. It underpins understanding. You can’t understand something that is not represented as a propositional claim at a basic level. You can’t develop “skills” that aren’t grounded in some form of understanding.
When I am talking about content, I am referring to facts or propositional knowledge, statements that are thought to be true and are about the way the biological world is.
Propositional knowledge then must have primacy in teaching biology. To my mind, currently, propositional knowledge can be broken up into facts and concepts. Facts cannot be understood, they can only be known. Whereas concepts can be known and understood.
I think that to achieve deep, flexible, biological knowledge (flexible in the sense that it can be thought about in the abstract and applied in new situations) students need to achieve a conceptual understanding of the major themes in biology.
To do this they must first meet domain-specific examples. From those examples, they can then begin to pull out the commonalities to allow the mind to achieve an understanding of an abstract concept. My post here outlines how I went about this when teaching natural selection this year.
Learning domain-specific facts cumulatively builds to domain-specific conceptual understanding which accumulates in the learner being able to think in terms of these concepts and apply them elsewhere.
The importance of presenting content in the “right” sequence
Related to the idea of sequencing teaching so that we build up to conceptual understanding from specific examples, is the idea that we need to sequence teaching to avoid cognitive overload. To do this we need to think about which areas of the curriculum provide just enough challenge to engage students but not so much so they are overwhelmed.
In teaching biology, I think this is best achieved by teaching those areas with the least new propositional knowledge for the learner. Once the learner achieves mastery of this new knowledge then we can begin to add more.
In this sense, when trying to teach the understanding of the relationship of structure and function we may wish to look at studying the function first of any new example, before looking at the structures that support that function. Developing knowledge of the function of something might contain less instances of “facts” than the discrete structures that build up that function.
Once we have looked at lots of examples of, say, the relationship between surface area and diffusion, students will build up to the understanding of the relationship generally, and hopefully be able to apply this in new and novel ways.
Retrieval practice embedding content for the long-term
Drill and kill, right? Apparently not. My reading this year has convinced me that giving students the chance to practice retrieving information, not only builds their confidence that they can perform, and therefore reduces stress but also improves their ability to retrieve that information and therefore improves its storage in long term memory.
The same goes for learning the language of the subject and so now I try to begin my lessons with a fun low stakes retrieval practice activity. Low stakes in the sense that I do not record results and store them; students are not graded. For this I have prepared a deck of quizlet terms for the DP biology course and I alternate between using these or simply giving students a series of MCQ’s from last lesson, last week, last month and last term.
Interleaving & spaced practice – what might this look like in biology?
A year ago, on the Facebook AP/IB Biology teachers group, I first asked the question of what interleaving might look like in a biology course. I had been hearing a lot about interleaving during meetings and inset training from our DP Coordinator who is a Maths teacher. It seems that interleaving has been studied quite a bit in mathematics education.
When I asked the question, hardly anyone was aware of this concept amongst the biology teachers and I was stumped. I now have some ideas.
Interleaving or spaced practice is the idea that instead of learning all the content for a particular topic at once or in a set of continuous lessons, you space out the learning over time, revisiting topics over time.
In my experience, I have always taught a topic like cell structure and then moved onto the next topic, maybe membrane structure followed by membrane function – and I think that this is true of most biology courses.
In an interleaved curriculum these topics would be spaced out in time. Let’s imagine you have a 60min lesson every day with the same class, so five lessons a week. In an interleaved curriculum you may devote Mondays to cell structure, Tuesday to metabolism, Wednesday to plant physiology, Thursday to animal physiology and Friday to retrieval practice.
You would then teach the content of these units side by side over a number of weeks. It sounds a bit crazy but it has been demonstrated to improve long-term retention of learning and I am also excited by the possibility for the conceptual links you can make by teaching in this way.
I recently read part one and part three of Ritchhart et al’s 2011 book “Making thinking visible”. The book espouses a methodology for promoting thinking in students and for making that student thinking visible in the work that we do as educators and is broken into three parts.
Part one deals with the philosophy, terminology and theory of putting thinking at the centre of the classroom experience for students; part two details specific strategies that can be used to promote thinking; while part three deals with advice on how to get the most out of these strategies in the classroom.
I have struggled with this question in my own professional practice for a couple of years now. How do you balance, with the limited time you have in class, the need to develop the thinking skills used in the process of doing science with the need to develop knowledge of the content?
I can think of many conversations with colleagues where we have debated this. Often the running theme amongst science teachers in my experience has been that the content is king; that student needs the building blocks that the content gives them in order develop that deeper understanding of more complex science. You can’t just jump into redox reactions and the electron transport chain if students don’t have some understanding already to work with.
Often this has been levelled as a critique against the whole idea of inquiry teaching, the philosophical backbone of the IB. In science class how can you reasonably expect a G8 student to uncovering understanding that has literally taken scientists 400 years to develop?
Often-times science is taught in spiral way; students meet similar topics through middle and high school and each time they go into more depth. This allows students to construct understanding piece by piece year by year.
This book lays a clear challenge to that type of thinking but goes further by actually providing practical steps and examples of the types of questions teachers should be asking to develop students thinking. Undoubtably developing thinking skills in our students is one of the most important things we can be doing as teachers as these skills are inter-disciplinary and underpin lifelong learning. If you know how you can learn anything.
Thus as science teachers we need to examine why we do what we do and think more cleverly about how we use our time. After all, as this book highlights, quality in education is about developing dispositions and habits of mind, not simply high grades on exams with content that is then forgotten.
Students need to see us as learners and thinker, modelling those attitudes and valuing them. learning often occurs through reflecting on mistakes. This can be a challenge in schools where the culture sets the teacher in centre stage. I remember an ex-colleague once saying to me that if he ever admitted to not knowing something then his students would lose all their confidence and trust in him.
Part one of this book details the steps to making thinking visible through modelling an interest in ideas, constructing understanding, facilitating and clarifying thinking all through questioning, listening and documenting.
Ritchhart focusses on asking questions that model an interest in ideas, construct understanding and facilitate and clarify thinking. The key is to ask authentic questions; questions to which the answer is not predetermined, and to elicit these questions from the students as well.
Questions that model an interest an ideas set the classroom culture and allow students to see teachers as learners. Essential questions fall into this category. Questions that construct understanding are ones that guide, direct and push student’s understanding forward of the big ideas and concepts. “constructive questions frame the intellectual endeavors in which students are to be engaged and point them toward uncovering fundamental ideas and principles that aid understanding. Questions that clarify and facilitate thinking enable learners to get what is in their heads out and into the teachers. For example asking students “what makes you say that?” instead of simply responding to a comment will give you insight into how the student is thinking.
We need to learn to identify the key ideas and concepts with which we want our students to struggle and engage instead of just covering the curriculum and judging our success by how much we get through. This will enable us to put students in charge of their own learning and progress not merely providing them with material for the test.
We need to draw our attention to what types of thinking we want to foster in the classroom and what we think thinking actually is. We need to highlight thinking when it occurs in class. Until students can name a process they cannot control it.
As well as questioning, listening and documenting are highlighted as essential parts of the process. Modelling listening, a vigorous and interested attention in what the other is saying, is essential for modelling group interactions for students, showing them how to work collaboratively. Documenting as well as providing evidence of the thinking that is taking place should also act as a stimulus to drive the thinking forward.
Part two introduces the reader to a set of thinking routines that are grouped as to their purpose in the type of thinking they are trying to develop. Each routine contains detailed instructions for its use and clear examples on how to deploy it. Routines are not intended to be used as stand alone activities but as repeated structures in the classroom that students can eventually gain mastery of themselves.
I haven’t yet read part two yet as I didn’t feel the time for me would right until I had spent sometime addressing challenges that part one put before me. Once I have reflected on the types of thinking that I wish to elicit in my classroom then I will plough on into part two.
Part three provides useful case studies of from teachers using these routines over time, providing an excellent guide on how to bring these routines to life.
I was once again reminded of the usefulness of mindfulness in teaching practice. Mindfulness reminds us to remain in the present with attention and this is essential for all of these skills of questioning, listening and documenting and being able to respond to our students.
This book is certainly one every teacher should read, as it provides some excellently researched food for thought about what we are doing in our day to day as educators. Are we placing thinking, and the development of thinking skills at the centre of the learning experience of our students? or are we more focussed on content and assessment?
Got me asking:
- Is memorisation and rote practice ever useful?
- Don’t people need to train and doesn’t training involve practice and isn’t practice often rote learning?
- What types of thinking do we want to encourage today?
- What types of thinking do we want to encourage in science? What types are valuable to scientists?
- How to balance the need for content knowledge vs thinking skills especially when curriculums are so broad and time is so short and universities expect a certain level of knowledge in undergrads?
- What is a quality education?
- What types of adults are we trying to develop?
- What are the essential concepts in Biology identified in the literature of teaching biology?
- What essential questions are we trying to ask in science/Biology class?
- What routines do I want to use in my classroom?
- What does our schools mission and vision say about thinking?
- How can I incorporate more non-written, non-verbal reflection into my students learning?
- What expectations do I set in my learning environments?
- Is shorter lessons a good thing to promote deeper thinking?
- How useful is individualization in developing understanding and advancing deep learning?
- What are the essential questions to propel learning in Biology?
- How do these change and morph through a teaching unit?
Earlier this year a colleague sent me a link to the getting in podcast hosted by Julie Lythcott-Haims. I was so impressed by her refreshing attitude towards the college admissions process that came across heavily in the podcast that I was moved to purchase her book: “How to raise an adult – break free of the overparenting trap and prepare your kid for success”.
Now, it isn’t without irony that I read this book as a parent of a 15 month old girl, but I didn’t initially purchase this book to read as a parent. I bought it as a teacher and college counselor who works with 14-18 year olds and their parents, and one who wanted help to get inside the heads of some parents who at best can be described as helicopter parents and worst who can be described as tiger parents. That being said, reading the book was also helpful as a parent as I became aware of many unhealthy attitudes and thought patterns that have already taken hold in my mind as a parent – I kept thinking: “I do that already!”.
The central premise of the book is that many modern parents are over involved in their children’s lives and do far too much for them. This results in a learned helplessness in young people and a disempowerment of them resulting in an inability to solve life’s problems. Parents have to step back and allow their children to practice a task, fail safely and try again.
Many of the chapters contained examples that resonated with me in terms of the conversations that I have had with parents this year and some of what I read made me question some of the practices that take place in my own school, where we actively encourage parents to become heavily involved with their children’s education. Obviously parents need to be involved and some of this is very very healthy but there is a balance to be struck here and when a parents involvement begins to have detrimental effects on the self-efficacy of the child in question then a boundary has been crossed.
The book is divided into four parts: what we are doing now as parents; why we must stop overparenting; another way of parenting; and daring to parent differently.
There were many specific elements of the book that I particularly enjoyed. In her chapter on children who leave school without basic life skills, Julie provides a checklist of eights tasks that a eighteen year old must be able to do when they leave school:
- Be able to talk to strangers (e.g. teachers, landlords, HR managers, co workers etc)
- Be able to find their way around a new environment
- Be able to manage assignments, work load and deadlines
- Be able to contribute to the running of a household
- Be able to handle interpersonal problems
- Be able to cope with the ups and downs of competition, tough teachers, bosses
- Be able to earn and manage money
- Be able to take risks
I also liked here strategy for building skills in children:
- We do it for you.
- We do it with you.
- Then we watch you do it.
- Then you do it completely independently.
At school many colleagues use the question, “What is in the best interest of the student?” as a guide to situational problem solving, but I often wonder if often-times we sometimes think that the best interest means not letting the students fail or make mistakes.
In school’s we have the chance to design opportunities for students where they have to do things on their own and make a mess of it. Looking at the list above I can think of plenty of times when parents will step up to defend students or make excuses for them, or as a school we don’t design opportunities appropriately to help students to develop these skills.
I certainly feel that in secondary schooling we should be actively working to develop students self-efficacy and independence, and any action that prevents this is stunting the development of the future adult.
Perhaps our Wellbeing programs should also focus on parenting and the effects of overparenting on the development of our future adults. I worry that to some parents, a wellbeing program means that we smooth every graze and wipe away every tear on the metaphorical school playground and that if we don’t immediately step in to support a student in the way they want then we are seen to not be doing our job. Instead at times students need to have the opportunity to solve issues with teachers and other students on their own.
One of the ways to help older students is to do less for them. This doesn’t mean not supporting them – just not doing it for them.
I am tempted to leave the careers week I run unorganised and ask parents to support their children in their internship search but to not find the placement for them. Is there a case for just providing the opportunity and letting the students get on with it under their own steam? Obviously with support in terms of letter writing and C.V. construction from the school.
The book also provides some useful checklists on how to teach life skills age appropriately, tips for teaching children how to think independently, tips on talking to children of different ages as well as for developing a strong work ethic in children.
A well written and articulate book, with a sound argument that is enough to stimulate thinking in many teachers and parents about how they go about their work.
This book got me asking the following:
- How does the parental involvement in the minutiae of school life impact on the practice of education in our school?
- How do you successfully balance healthy parental interactions via technology when the school working day is still only eight hours long?
- How can our schools wellbeing programme address the caging of students by helicopter parents?
- What exactly is learning if it isn’t memorisation?
- What is the difference between rigor and load when it comes to homework?
- How do we generate useful open questions in classrooms and allow the time for real inquiry?
- How can I help my students learn more with me doing less for them?
- Is the fact that student don’t read widely or at all evidence that they are self-absorbed?
- What is my personal purpose?
- Why do I teach?
Screencasting
Screencasting is a useful and versatile tool for all learners, both teachers and students. Teachers can use it to create task walkthroughs for students like the one I posted here. They can also use it to assess students thinking about concepts and then provide feedback by commenting on the screencast if students share it with them through youtube or some other channel.
Students benefit by creating a visual and auditory performance of a concept (as opposed to a written performance) which they can then critique either on their own when they come to review a topic or study it in more detail. Work can also be saved for future classes to view, critique and improve.
The drawbacks are that it takes a certain level of investment to get comfortable using. I have had students resist doing an activity because they didn’t like the sound of their own voice understandably. This means that gentle encouragement and coaching can draw out the process. In addition students need to be shown how to to this, what software to use and what websites to visit on top of the content that you are trying to help them engage with ultimately.
On this page I introduce readers to an online sketchpad that when combined with screencasting as shown on this page provides an excellent tool for student performances that get away from the pen and pencil and engage other senses in the learning process.
In the performances below, my grade 11 HL Biology students were asked to use sketchpad to describe the process of DNA replication while recording a screencast. I think that the results speak for themselves, and I think any teacher will see the benefit of having students submit work in this format:
Example No 1
Example No 2:
Example No 3: