Beyond the notion that is good for students chat, or “make prayers”, is there any real merit to talk to quotes lessons?
Recently on Twitter, Barry Smith got in touch to review all the things he sees that they regularly go wrong with ‘Turn & Talk’:
- Children do not know much and simply cannot articulate anything significant in the given time.
- Slow children to start. I don’t have the words.
- The children gave very little time to express ideas.
- A child will dominate. Others do not participate.
- Embarrassed children
- So it is the number of children who teach incorrect information.
While all the above are real problems that I have also seen in many different classrooms, I would like to suggest that they should not happen if they know it. Because You are using Turn & Talk.
Previously, I have written about the need to solve three different problems in each lesson:
- How do I know if all students are paying attention?
- How do I know if all students make sense what I am teaching?
- How do I know if all students are improving that the things I want to improve?
Thinking about the lessons in this way is, I think, something like a change of play. Instead of choosing to implement a pedagogical technique for your own good, teaching movements must be used to help us answer these three questions.
Something like that
If we had to map ‘turn and talk’ on this grid, we would have to ask ours. So, make students talk to each other helps us to know if everyone is paying attention? No, not really. We can scan a room and have a quick sensation that all students commit themselves to speak, but to find out if they talk about what we want to speak require listening to each individual conversation. Of course, we could wait until after the conversation phase and cold call students to see if they have excellent contributions, but all this really recounts if a student was definitely No Assist. It is or little help to detect if those who are faster on their feet were real in the task. MWB routines and cold calls are better used as an efficient way of creating a culture where students pay attention to you and others.
Neinder will become and talk, but it is very useful to answer the question about students improving in specific skills (unless they want to turn to each other and talk, which I think would be strange).
Where T&T enters itself is to collect data on whether students have the sense of the content they find. In general, when I teach, I will go through a process like this:
Incorporating the turn and talking in this type of process not only provides an essential opportunity for students to try new understandings and articulate how new ideas fit within their existing vision of the world of the world of the world, but also mitigate again T&T & T.
- Altheheme may not know much, the process is so closely focused that they only have to think about how new knowledge is connected to existing knowledge.
- The vocabulary is provident and modeling to ensure that students have a quick and determined beginning
- Because the approach is deliberately narrow (a response of 1 prayer to a notice) there is enough time for both students to express their understanding
- Because students are explicitly asked to share what they have heard, it is difficult for 1 student to dominate
- Shame is a function of the lack of familiarity. If this routine child is based regularly on teaching sequences, it is quickly normalized.
- Part of the T&T point should be to identify and intercept erroneous concepts. (Not doing this does not get rid of the wrong idea, it just makes them more difficult to detect!)
I do not want to say that there is something intelligent, original or special in any of this: quite the opposite. Effective and attractive teaching should be easy. My point is that T&T, as MWBS, is an important tool in the arsenal of a teacher who, if it unfolds to solve particular problems, it is much more likely to be effective.
