(Throughout this post, I reference the book Get It Done! Writing and Analyzing Informational Texts to Make Things
Happen by Jeffrey D. Wilhelm,
Michael W. Smith, and James E. Fredericksen. The book is well worth the read)
I learned a new word this summer: heuristic. I first encountered it while listening to Dr. Zalman
Usiskin, professor of math education at the University of Chicago, as he spoke at
MTSU on Critical Thinking With the Common Core.
Zal spoke about the different types of understanding present
in math, using the acronym SPUR—Skill/algorithm,
Property/proof, Use/application, and Metaphor/analogy.
He commented that working on skill/algorithm in isolation from the other types
of understanding is harmful to students’ mathematical development. For a
practical example, if students know the steps for borrowing when doing
multi-digit subtraction, that is an algorithm, a formula, a skill they can
practice. However, just because they can follow the steps does not mean they
have full understanding of base ten operations. Do they understand that the
tens digit is ten ones? Can they create a model using manipulatives? Do they
connect that these activities required the same math concept? If you have only
taught them the skill, you have not given them true understanding, nor have you
equipped to tackle the future problems they will encounter.
Now I’m not a math teacher, which is why I chose a second
grade math skill in my practical example. I am a language teacher. But this concept
of different types of understanding struck a chord with me. In the past,
writing instruction has been algorithm based, particularly for students who are
labeled “at risk”. Writing lessons go something like this: “This is the structure of the 5th
(or 8th or 11th) grade writing prompt, and here is the
algorithm you will follow to get a good score.” Critics call it “formulaic”
writing. It is how I was taught to write in my English classes, with the 5-paragraph
essay: introduction, 3 supporting paragraphs, and conclusion. But this kind of
writing is largely artificial and doesn’t have many real world applications. It
prepares students for “the test” but not the day after graduation.
The point in Zal’s presentation that ignited my thinking was
when he began discussing the difference between problem and exercise. “A
problem,” he said, “is an exercise for which you have no algorithm.” He went on
to say that rather than giving students repeated algorithms to practice, we
want to give them problems and support them with heuristics that empower them
to discover the algorithms themselves.
I fell head over heels in love with the new word heuristic.
I didn’t know what it was, but I sure wanted to find out. Even though I don’t teach
math, I wanted to make certain that my students knew how to solve real world
problems, not just prepare for a test.
The next week I came to MTWP Advanced Institute on Common
Core, and lo and behold, again I encounter my new crush, heuristic, in Wilhem,
Smith, and Fredericksen’s Get It Done!
Writing and Analyzing Informational Texts to Make Things Happen. Here’s an
excerpt from Chapter 3:
The word heuristic comes from the Greek word eureka, which means I
discover (remember Archimedes in his bathtub?). It is defined as
“experienced-based techniques for problem solving, learning, and discovery”
(Wikipedia, retrieved 8/18/2011) or “a generative process that enables a person
to discover or learn something for herself” (Merriam-Webster online dictionary,
retrieved 8/18/2011). Heuristics, in short, are flexible problem-solving tools
based on generative underlying principles. Because they are based on generative
principles, they can be developed, tweaked, and transformed, and then transferred
to new situations. (In a sense, (CCSS) reading anchor standards 1-9 and writing
anchor standards 1-9 are a heuristic for accomplishing anchor standard 10 in
each area.)
At this point my crush on heuristics became complete and total infatuation. You see, I am a
constructivist at heart. My philosophy has always been that the responsibility
of a teacher is to set up an environment that enables discovery. But the
reality of making this work has been less than ideal, particularly because my
responsibility is to students who are “at-risk.” My job is to get them on grade
level as quickly as possible, which means I felt pressure to give it to them as
directly as possible. In math terms, teaching them the algorithm of writing was
a lot easier than fleshing out all possible understandings of the concepts.
Attempts at workshop style teaching felt too chaotic. I needed more structure.
Now, this new love in my life, heuristics,
is providing a structure. But that structure is flexible and generative and
adaptable, (in contrast to algorithm’s rigid and narrow focus) which means it
is meaningful to real life,
This love has walked into my life at just the right season
of change. I am moving to a new classroom, have a new schedule with 60 minutes
(!) of instructional time for each group, and am working under the Common Core
State Standards, which by definition are designed to prepare students for
college and career, not just the standardized test. The CCSS give equal
attention to reading and writing, emphasize critical thinking skills and
problem solving, and are broad enough to ensure deep understanding. Teachers
will no longer be able to simply “cover” standards with a simple pacing guide.
They will have to address multiple standards in each unit, cycling back through
them to deepen student understanding. The PARCC assessment my students will be
taking in the future is a complex assessment that (hopefully) eludes formulaic
response. I now have an excuse to teach the way I have wanted to since the
beginning of my career!
I am going to begin with a focus on one group, as to not
overwhelm myself. My 6th grade students are the group for which I
have no curriculum to follow, so I am creating a curriculum based on the heuristic
model presented by Wilhelm et al. Using the topic of poverty as an
umbrella, we will go through 8 units, each one focused on an essential question
surrounding poverty, a type of thinking, and an end product that has real world
applications. For each unit, we will work through the declarative and procedural
knowledge of the substance (poverty and product) and the form (type of
thinking), as well as the transferal of knowledge to other real world scenarios.
I am going to structure my class around inquiry, as defined
by Wilhelm “the rigorous apprenticeship of learners into the processes of
expert reading, composing, and working in specific disciplines.” (pg. 119 of Get It Done)
On a daily basis, we will begin with 10-15 minutes word
study and language practice, follow with a 20-25 minute reading workshop, and
then connect that reading with 20-30 minutes of “composing” workshop in
response to reading. (I say composing rather than writing because our work will
be multi-modal—it may require visual, dramatic, oral, written, or media
oriented response. For more information on writing vs. composing check out pg.
37-38 of Get It Done).
Within each 4-week unit, I will scaffold instruction so that
students experience gradual release of responsibility for the knowledge
substance and form I am focusing on. In order to do that, we will move in the
directions recommended by Wilhelm et al (pg. 41).
-From familiar to less familiar
-From short to long
-From oral to written
-From multimodal to print
-From concrete to abstract
-From social to individual
-From scaffolded to independent
For example, in Unit 1 we are focusing on the heuristic of
naming and listing, which is foundational for all the other thinking skills in
future units. We will begin in whole group (social) by looking for familiar,
real world examples of lists: grocery lists, menus, wills, contacts in your
cell phone, etc. Then we will move to the less familiar academic forms of
lists: table of contents, index, items in a series, use of colons, etc. In
writing, they will begin by generating lists about themselves and their
preferences, and then will move to lists that support our end product, which is
a web-based guide for parents of future Hobgood students about what children
need to survive and thrive before age 5. Because this product is the first one
of the year, it will be a group project (with individual responsibilities), and
it will be multimodal rather than print. By the end of the year, students will
be writing individual formal multi-paragraph essays.
I invite you to join me as I continue my courtship with heuristics throughout the year. Here
is the link to the folder on my Google drive so that you can view my work in
progress. Comments, questions, and suggestions are welcome! I’ll also be
posting reflections as I implement this curriculum, so come back to learn more
about the good, the bad, and the ugly as I attempt to make my philosophical
ideal a reality.
No comments:
Post a Comment