Lemov offers 49 techniques or strategies. You are to read the ones listed below to prepare for the start of methods. Follow the rubric on blog posts to share a reflection. Specifically,
explain how you think the planning techniques are related to the structure and delivery and the entry routine techniques. Cite specific points to justify your position.
Parameters
- Be very concise. Make simple points. Address a main idea as opposed to trying to cover every point made by Lemov.
- Follow the rubric on blog posts.
- Original post is due Sunday, May 23 at 11PM
- Respond to questions posed to you and respond to at least one classmate by Sunday, May 30 11PM.
Read the following techniques:
- Planning: 6, 7, 9, 10
- Structure and Delivery: 12, 13, 14, 16, 17, 19
- Entry Routine: 29
The planning techniques in Lemov’s “Teach Like a Champion” are related to structure and delivery and entry routines in that they are the primary goals and the other techniques are ways to achieve those goals. It is as if planning techniques are a map defining the locations of home and work, and the structure and delivery and entry methods are all the things you need to get from home to work, like roads, traffic lights and gas stations. There are many components needed to make the drive from home to work, but not all of them will be used every day. In teaching, planning defines the starting point and the ending point. Structure and techniques and entry methods are support tools for reaching that ending point.
ReplyDeleteDuring our orientation, in our methods class, we did the exercise of reading a short story and then writing a brief description of the events. After some discussion, we then wrote a second description of what the message of the story was. The goal was for us to understand what was expected in our reflection writings. This goal was the planning portion. The structure portion was similar to Technique 16, “Breaking It Down.” Although there wasn’t an “error” to correct, the theoretical error was writing a summary rather than a reflection. The class discussion highlighted the difference between a summary and a reflection. It gave us a starting point we understood, writing a summary, and challenged us to think of the level of writing we need to accomplish, which goes beyond a summary.
One of the techniques that I think is very insightful is double planning. I understand the author’s point, that looking at the class from the student’s perspective can help a teacher communicate more effectively. If a teacher is presenting a series of steps, the students should be writing them down to use for homework. If the teacher is presenting a puzzle as part of a hook, the students should be brain-storming ideas. Beyond the teacher asking, “How am I going to teach this material?” the teacher has to ask “How is the student going to retain this material? It seems that this technique helps create a lesson plan that encourages the student to be an active learner.
From Rachelle:
ReplyDeleteThe planning techniques in Lemov’s “Teach Like a Champion” are related to structure and delivery and entry routines in that they are the primary goals and the other techniques are ways to achieve those goals. It is as if planning techniques are a map defining the locations of home and work, and the structure and delivery and entry methods are all the things you need to get from home to work, like roads, traffic lights and gas stations. There are many components needed to make the drive from home to work, but not all of them will be used every day. In teaching, planning defines the starting point and the ending point. Structure and techniques and entry methods are support tools for reaching that ending point.
During our orientation, in our methods class, we did the exercise of reading a short story and then writing a brief description of the events. After some discussion, we then wrote a second description of what the message of the story was. The goal was for us to understand what was expected in our reflection writings. This goal was the planning portion. The structure portion was similar to Technique 16, “Breaking It Down.” Although there wasn’t an “error” to correct, the theoretical error was writing a summary rather than a reflection. The class discussion highlighted the difference between a summary and a reflection. It gave us a starting point we understood, writing a summary, and challenged us to think of the level of writing we need to accomplish, which goes beyond a summary.
One of the techniques that I think is very insightful is double planning. I understand the author’s point, that looking at the class from the student’s perspective can help a teacher communicate more effectively. If a teacher is presenting a series of steps, the students should be writing them down to use for homework. If the teacher is presenting a puzzle as part of a hook, the students should be brain-storming ideas. Beyond the teacher asking, “How am I going to teach this material?” the teacher has to ask “How is the student going to retain this material? It seems that this technique helps create a lesson plan that encourages the student to be an active learner.
Rachelle:
ReplyDeleteYou and I are both ex-engineers. Have you thought about how we are going to incorporate our engineering experience into "hooks" for high school math lessons? I would be interested in any ideas you have on this topic.
Chandan
When I read Lemov's "Teach Like a Champion," the analogy of how a duck swims came to mind. Above the water, all seems quiet and serene as the duck glides gracefully in search of her next meal. Meanwhile, the duck is paddling like crazy under the water. Here is a short youtube video clip of how a duck's feet move under water (which we typically do not see, when observing a duck swimming).
ReplyDeletehttp://youtu.be/qdip7-hOh9M
The duck is working much harder than it appears to the casual observer above the pond. Thus, only by observing the feet do we get a true sense for the work involved. To me, the analogy to Lemov's principles is that teaching involves a lot of hard work - but most of it consists of preparing and planning - which the kids do not see. Thus, the motion of the ducks legs is like Lemov's planning techniques. Whereas the parts of the duck that are above the water are like the structure, delivery, and entry routines. The kids directly see and experience the latter, but much of the work the teacher does takes place "under the water."
The net result is that the kids see a smooth graceful effort from the teacher resulting from an efficient and effective work environment in the classroom. The hard work of planning is kept out of the view of the kids - thus the see the coherent end product instead of all the rough drafts that came before.
It is interesting how Lemov and Johnson have such differing ideas on desk placement as Lemov clearly prefers a more traditional linear (rows) structure whereas Johnson prefers a radical U-shaped structure. I think i would like to try Johnson's approach for smaller classes and Lemov's three-rows-of-two for larger class sizes.
From what I have already observed in my two visits to CT schools, Lemov's "Do Now" approach has already been widely incorporated into the Stamford school systems. Every teacher i have observed is using this strategy to reduce downtime at the beginning of class - it seems to be working.
Although not part of the original assignment, I accidentally read Technique #22 on "cold calling" and thought it extremely useful. In it, Lemov describes the advantages of periodically calling on students who do not have their hands raised in response to a question.
Lemov also gave me some new ideas on how to establish a "hook" to get kids interested in the lesson before it starts. I typically start with an anecdote but he offers several examples that are more focused on student participation like puzzles. I plan to mix it up over the course of several lessons.
Lemov’s “Teach like a Champion”, gave a lot of helpful ideas on how to guide a class and to allow the class to be student centered. Many of the ideas focus on how to direct the work and thinking back to the students to allow them to work through problems rather then the traditional style of the teacher lecturing.
ReplyDeleteI love the idea of the exit ticket – technique 7. It is a way of checking in with the students to ensure that they understand the concept that has been introduced. The student is not graded on the exit ticket, so they don’t have to worry about making an error. I see the benefit of the ‘Do Nows’ (technique 29) happening everyday. It keeps the students busy as soon as they walk into the classroom. My thoughts keep going to how to structure my class to include homework review and great ideas such as the exit tickets. It would be a lot of work to do everything everyday, so I just need to work out in my mind how I would want to try to teach each objective and when to implement the strategies I am learning in these books.. I know my lessons will need to be modified based upon how the class is doing with understanding and mastering the objective. I think my question always come back to consistency of class structure. Do you do the same thing everyday or do you change it up to keep the students engaged?
Lemov also provides the readers with a lot of ideas on how to keep the class flowing. Students can constantly be engaged with use of technique 17 – ratio. Since the teacher is already familiar with the objective, allow the students to work through the problems. The teacher plays the role of a guide in the journey of learning. Similarly, with the technique of ‘break it down’, you are allowing the students to find the error in their work and understand how to correct their work.
I did see a recurring thought about how to incorporate note taking into what is required of students. Although Lemov did not state that students should be graded on note taking, he did stress the importance of it through technique 14 – board = paper. I might even capture that statement somewhere in my classroom as a constant reminder to the students that if it is important enough for me to write down, then it is important for them to write it down too!
I am certain that I will be reading more of Lemov’s techniques because I have found them quite useful.
In planning, Lemov suggests that unit plans should consist of a sequence of lesson plans that consist of one or two objectives. This design ensures that the objectives form an orderly line to the desired outcome - mastery of the subject. I’m envisioning the unit plans as a chain where each link is an objective that depends on the strength of the links before it.
ReplyDeleteIn structure, Lomov recommends that the teacher help the students learn skills by dividing them into a sequence of manageable steps. I see this as another sequence formed by a chain of lighter links. In this context, I envision the connections between planning and structure as a chain of chains where each link of the unit plan (an objective) consists of a sequence of lighter links (manageable steps).
In preparing unit plans and lesson plans, and teaching the skills, we must be watchful as any weak link may contribute to the failure of the chain.
The planning techniques Lemov mentions are the building blocks or foundation on which the whole process of teaching is built. There is a natural progression from the foundation of planning into the structure and delivery. They're related in that essentially one must take place before the other.
ReplyDeleteLemov's planning method of "Begin with the End" creates an orderly and natural chain of events starting with a clear objective, moving into assessment of mastery and finally into an activity that will lead to mastery. In the 4 M's section, I particularly like how he talks about teachers tailoring objectives to fit an activity. Wouldn't that create disorganization? Or a lesson with no direction? Might it also produce a wide array of potential objectives, some or none of which are the intended objective? Lemov specifically states, "Don't underestimate how critical this is" when he preaches 1) objective, 2) assessment, 3) activity.
It seems to me, moving into structure and delivery of a lesson and then ultimately walking into the classroom is virtually impossible unless the above is in place. How would anyone be able to accurately "Identify the Steps" or even "Name the Steps" to any lesson if a clear and concise objective to that lesson hasn't been defined?
Rachelle: "It gave us a starting point we understood, writing a summary, and challenged us to think of the level of writing we need to accomplish" - referring to the Orientation excercise regarding reflections.
ReplyDeleteRachelle, how would you apply this to a math lesson on, say, graphing linear functions?
Chandan, the duck analogy is fantastic. You write: "The hard work of planning is kept out of the view of the kids." What items are you addressing as you plan for your Microteach 1 presentation?
ReplyDeleteBrenda, you refer a couple times to the idea of engaging students. How would this play out in a lesson on solving a system of equations by graphing?
ReplyDeleteMark:
ReplyDelete"unit plans as a chain where each link is an objective that depends on the strength of the links before it" - How so?
"help the students learn skills by dividing them into a sequence of manageable steps" - list the steps involved in solving linear equation with a variable on both sides of the equation.
"In preparing unit plans and lesson plans, and teaching the skills, we must be watchful as any weak link may contribute to the failure of the chain" - How so?
Roger: "teachers tailoring objectives to fit an activity" seems to contradict his point that objectives come first.
ReplyDeleteBut, you go on to expound on the importance of establishing an effective objective, "How would anyone be able to accurately "Identify the Steps" or even 'Name the Steps' to any lesson if a clear and concise objective to that lesson hasn't been defined?"
Can you reconcile or elaborate?
PREDICTION: we will hammer the importance of FIRST establishing an EFFECTIVE objective. Despite this, multiple candidates will make a mistake of not doing this as they microteach.
Rachelle: "It gave us a starting point we understood, writing a summary, and challenged us to think of the level of writing we need to accomplish" - referring to the Orientation exercise regarding reflections.
ReplyDeleteRachelle, how would you apply this to a math lesson on, say, graphing linear functions?
One approach might be to start by having the students take turns plotting coordinates on an enlarged graph taped to the front board, and then playing "connect the dots" as more points were added. From there, you could move on to how to find the "dots" by plugging numbers into an equation.
Funny Randy.....I picked up on the same thing after I read my post. What I originally wrote is ambiguous and could be interpreted as Lemov contradicting himself. I wasn't clear enough.....my bad.
ReplyDeleteIn actuality, he does talk about this, but as the INCORRECT way to do it.....the objective must come first. Otherwise the resulting objective(s) represent something far broader and less-defined such as what he states as a "learning standard". In his words, the learning standard must be broken down into a strategic series of daily objectives.
After reading Lemov's planning techniques, the old saying of "Quality not Quantity" popped into my head. This was told to me countless times growing up, and it is extremely evident in Lemov's approach to teaching. Planning for a lesson with the "Begin with the end" makes the teacher understand that there is an end objective, and ensuring the students comprehension of that objective is the ultimate goal. A teacher could easily plan to cover sections 6.1, 6.2 and 6.3 in one class; Lemov is quick to dismiss this approach because it is impossible to predict if there will be a grasp of section 6.1 or 6.2. Again, this raises an old saying, "you must know A and B before you get to C." Lemov proposed many great ideas (i.e.- the 4M's and Double Planning), and they all run central to a common theme which is ensuring a students comprehension of a lesson is more important than the completion of that lesson. Keeping this in mind while we plan the structure and delivery of our lessons is essential.
ReplyDeleteIn the structure and delivery section of the readings I took the most away from technique 13 and 16. Breaking down a lesson, especially a complex one, into smaller more manageable steps is a technique that I think we will have to master as first year teachers. Obviously, the relation to planning here is that a clear, mapped out approach is required prior to the entry of a classroom. For example, if we were to factor polynomials or use the FOIL technique in a high school math class, approaching the problem in smaller tasks or by identifying steps greatly benefits the student. In my high school math class we introduced the word PEMDAS to the students. This is not a real word, but it was an easy way for them to remember the order of operations (parenthesis, exponents, multiplication/division, addition/subtraction). I think the Break it Down technique is best served and most efficient in math classes. Math usually requires many steps to get to an end result, planning this technique will be a great tool to us.
Planning to have an Entry Routine or a Do now approach to starting a class reminded me a lot of Johnson's "First Five Minutes." In my previous post I stated that I felt the "First FIve Minutes" was one of the most important section of Every Minute Counts. The fact that the students know, without confusion of how to start their class, sets the tone for a productive learning environment. While completing a written Do Now problem it allows the teacher to gage how well they understand the previous material. I will be sure to incorporate this technique into the planning of my lessons.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteBrenda, you refer a couple times to the idea of engaging students. How would this play out in a lesson on solving a system of equations by graphing?
ReplyDeleteNow the real thinking begins… I would try to drum up excitement in my students by saying, “Would you believe me if I told you that we can determine the solution to two equations WITHOUT using elimination or substitution methods?” I know a lot of students look forward to the end of solving equations so some will be happy to know it is over. I would explain that we are going to use graphing to solve the equations. I would put up two equations that could not be too easily solved by looking at them, and ask them to help me graph each line. I would not actually do the work myself, but look to the class to help me solve for Y, graph the y-intercept, and then create 2 more points using the slope. Once I had my point of line intersection, we would prove our work. Next, I would put up two new equations and ask them to work independently while I walked the room and checked in with students. I would then have a student that I saw had the correct answer, present the work on the board to the class so the class can check their work. Knowing that they can be quite lengthy, I am assuming I would have time to present one more and follow the same process with the students working while I walk through and then allow someone to present. I would also try to direct students to each other when I see one person solving the problem quite easily and another student who may need a bit of help. Hopefully this method of directing the class will keep most of the students involved and engaged.
Hope this is the type of answer you were looking for...
In this reading assignment of eleven of Lemov’s techniques and in all the supplementary reading and exchanging of ideas with others that is going simultaneously I keep coming back to one central theme that may only resonate with me and that is that teaching is first and foremost a leadership driven profession.
ReplyDeleteThe techniques of this assignment are all applicable for a quality leader regardless of their chosen profession but here of course they are applied directly and convincingly to teaching. As an example I can draw a direct connection from each of the eleven techniques here to my military background (even though some of those acronyms would not be appropriate to the classroom) including:
- Begin with the End = Backward Planning
- Shortest Path = Keep It Simple Stupid (KISS)
- The Hook = Why this will Keep You Alive (a common first statement in training)
- Board = Paper = If it’s important to your boss it should fascinate the hell out of you
- At Bats = You should be able to do this in your sleep
- Do Now = 10, 5, 3, 1 go
And I am sure I could tie all 49 techniques to proven military training, strategic, or tactical practices. The common denominator is Leadership.
To go into more detail on one technique I found the Begin with the End chapter to be a perfect example in showing the similarities between teaching and other leadership driven activities. In teaching, before any unit or lesson is started you have to define the desired end objective to make sure you stay on target and get there as effectively and efficiently as possible because time is always a limiting factor. I would even take Lemov’s suggestion of starting at the unit level one step further in a perfect world and suggest starting with the term and working backwards through the units to the lessons to the days to the activities while always staying objective focused.
This approach, while requiring a tremendous amount of work up front, will give you an overall roadmap that will allow you to gauge progress along the way to let you know if you are on or off target and need to adjust. The danger with starting with a smaller unit for the initial planning is that it may leave you mid-semester with the sudden realization that you are behind schedule for accomplishing all the objectives. Of course as we start our teaching careers this is very difficult as we don’t necessarily have the experience to accurately gauge the required time at each level of planning for each objective that will required. The fix to this is to rely on trusted and more experienced peers to bounce our planning off of for a reality check.
Change teaching to deployment training, product launch, emergency response, or IPO and though the nomenclature may change the theory and steps stay the same.
A final thought is that establishing a standard entry routine is important for several reasons including establishing expectations, setting the tone, and maximizing the use of the limited time available. However, a standard routine does not mean the same exact thing every day, but rather setting a consistent atmosphere of “let’s get started and not waste a minute because this is important stuff” through a variety of techniques.
As I read through Lemov’s techniques, and coming from the software industry, I couldn’t help think of Apple. They are masters of technique 6 – “Begin with the End”. Even when they announced the first iPod, people at the event were a bit underwhelmed, but Apple already knew where they wanted to be – a giant ecosystem of products that seamlessly worked together. And because everything was under their control, it was Manageable and Measureable. From that point on, Apple has meticulously delivered simple, elegant solutions (a small step at a time) that have “hooked” people, and kept them wanting more. If you look at many of Apple’s competitors, most are playing catch-up and resorting to techniques similar to those found in the Structure and Delivery (rather than Planning). The bottom line, if you are planning your lessons in the manner of “What am I going to do tomorrow?”, you will have non-cohesive units and will always be playing catch-up.
ReplyDeleteIn thinking about how this relates to the micro-lesson on proportions, my unit “end” may be to have students solve a complex proportion involving 3 variables. Thus, the objective for my particular micro-lesson could be “Students will understand how a ratio is related to a simple proportion”. I believe this would meet the “4Ms”. “Double Planning” may include having students call out fractions equal to ½, ¾, etc. (adds the “hook” technique for energy and optimism). I would leave all those fractions on the board and refer back to them when showing proportions that match. To be sure of the mastery of ratios and if I should move on, I might utilize the first few minutes of class and have students write 5 ratios in fractional and colon forms (“Do Now” technique).
Just a final note on technique 9 – Shortest Path; I believe this is one of the most powerful techniques one can use. In my martial arts training, we have a term we use called “high percentage”. The idea is that most of the time, you will revert to the simple, straightforward techniques when grappling or sparring. Knowing these gives you mastery of the objective.
Hi Shaun:
ReplyDeletedidnt know you had an interest in the martial arts. (i do as well). would be curious to share what overlaps you think there are in teaching math and karate. let me know if you have an interest in this. i have already started to gather some material on this rather odd combination.
The assigned sections of Lemov’s Champion provided wonderful insights and techniques for teaching. The planning section was inextricably connected to the “structuring and delivery” and “entry routine” sections. This is true for the obvious reason that the methods for structure and delivery and the entry routine must be planned.
ReplyDeleteMost of the planning section was related to mastering the objective. Lemov talked about the importance of planning an objective, what the objective should look like and where it should come into play in the classroom, and what makes an objective effective. He also talks about planning what the students will be doing as well as the teacher. This was quite insightful for me as I hadn’t realized the importance of having an objective. I always thought the objective was just teacher protocol.
In the “structure and delivery” section, Lemov gives excellent techniques to be used in the classroom, such as hooking the students’ interest, breaking down and naming the steps of complex ideas, increasing not only student participation but also their cognitive input, and increasing repetition to reinforce learning. I found the concept of increasing the student/teacher ratio very interesting, and will most definitely incorporate this into my lessons. In the “entry routine” section, the author talks of the importance of having something for the students to do when they enter the classroom.
All of the structure and delivery and entry routine techniques must be planned for, and all come back to the objective. Lemov even mentions that the techniques are useless if they don’t relate to the objective and lead towards the goal of college preparation. In the “break it down” technique, he mentions that it must be prepared for in the lesson planning process. Some of the techniques such as “the hook” don’t need to be planned for every day, but could be used during unit planning. The “ratio” technique is more of a style of teaching it seems to me, and might be harder to plan. All in all, most of the techniques must be planned for and must tie back into the objective.
I liked the idea of planning for the unit, and also planning for each day. It seems like it would be important for a teacher to have an overview of the big picture when planning daily objectives. I am going to think about this when I begin planning my lessons.
After finishing the readings in Lemov’s Teach Like a Champion, I was most struck by the emphasis on objectives. Everything a teacher does during a lesson should further the students’ understanding of the objective.
ReplyDeleteI found this a helpful point as I could see getting caught up in a new technique or wanting to play a fun game and shoe horning it into the lesson rather than letting things grow organically from the objective.
In one of the classes I observed, the teacher used a concentration-type game for a test review. But the hidden items weren’t identical; the pairs consisted of definitions and examples (the word “tangent” matched with a drawing of a circle with a tangent.) Her objective was to review the definitions with the whole class, and I felt she achieved it. Each student had to pay attention to the cards as they were revealed and think about what they meant in order to spot matches.
Knowing the objective makes it clear what the “steps” to solve the problems should be, and what you should emphasize on the board, and defines what the practice problems should look like. In a math class, I think the Do Know shouldn’t directly reflect the objective, but remind the students of prior knowledge that will be needed in the upcoming lesson (such as having them compute the circumference of some circles as a lead in to learning to compute the area.)
I found the readings useful and easy to digest; I’d like to read more if it as time permits.
Bruce: "Quality vs quantity" - apply that to homework and curriculum as a whole.
ReplyDeleteLen, how do you know if you are "on target"?
ReplyDeleteShaun, how does a student demonstrate that they "understand that a ratio and proportion are related"? Do you ask them if they understand? What test question is asked on a test to measure this? Give an example.
ReplyDelete***Important discussion here everyone***
Ellen, the teacher achieved the objective?! What about the students, what did they achieve and how do you or the teacher know? :)
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteFrom my project management background I have in my tool bag the “plan – do – check – adjust” model. This model came to mind as I reviewed how Lemov’s Planning techniques are related to his Structure & Delivery and Entry Routine techniques. To a great extent the Structure & Delivery and Entry Routine techniques will not be effective unless they are planned into the lesson.
ReplyDeleteIT projects benefit from detailed and comprehensive planning. Often the planning phase of a project (from a time consumed perspective) overwhelms the time necessary to execute a project. It seems this relationship also holds for lesson planning. Of critical importance to the lesson plan is the development of an effective objective. (The analogous task in an IT project is the critical step of developing a project scope and goal). I suspect this task is often time consuming but worth the investment in the subsequent planning and delivery of the lesson.
Once the objective is defined, thought and effort are required in the planning phase to script specific Structure and Delivery techniques into the plan. For example, a “hook” could be prepared as part of the plan. The plan could include the process for breaking complex tasks into manageable steps. Good planning should also identify potential trouble spots and possible cues/hints/questions that could be used to break the troublesome concept into smaller pieces. Lesson plans should also endeavor to push as much cognitive work as possible out to the students (i.e., “Ratio”).
Once an effective objective is developed the plan needs to find the most direct route to achieve the objective. One benefit of this is that more time is available for practicing the new concepts (“At Bats”). Sufficient practice needs to be planned into the lesson such that students are able to solve problems entirely independently.
Similar to the “Check – Adjust” phases of the project management model, the practice activity and the Entry Routine technique of “Do Now” can provide valuable information to the instructor on how well the students have mastered the concepts. This feedback can be used to refine the objective or the activities that were planned to achieve the objective.
Josh:
ReplyDeleteWhy must they be planned? Why is planning important? Is it because Lemov said so and we follow him blindly?
So why is the objective important?
So why is having something for the students to do upon entering the classroom (or at other times) important?
Why is an overview important?
Excellent connection Rick!
ReplyDeleteThe classroom activities must be planned so that the teacher is not flying by the seat of his pants. Without planning the class might go in a direction that is not beneficial to the learning process. This is also why an objective is so important. It is the true north of the teachings; it gives the teacher direction and gives him or her something to check against to see if the class is on track. An overview is important because one must know where the objectives are headed. If the daily objectives are being met but are not leading the students towards a greater understanding of the larger concepts or preparing them for their future, then what’s the point?
ReplyDeleteHaving something for the students to do is important because as I saw in my field observations, when the students are not being engaged they act out and misbehave. Also, class time is limited and the teacher should utilize all the time available. This takes us back to planning, because if the teacher does not adequately plan, it is more likely that the students will have down time with nothing to do.
Adam Scianna
ReplyDeleteNorwalk, CT
While reading through Lemov's "Champion" I came across some points in the different techniques that I could relate to and wanted to comment on.
Starting with Technique 12 "The Hook" Lemov speaks of Bob Zimmerli who weaved a story about a hypothetical friend "Deci." This reminded me of a Math class I took in which we were learning how to compute sine, cosine, and tangent. The teach told us this story about this big Indian chief sucking his toe and saying SohCahToa (although looking back on it this might be a little offensive.) Never the less it has remained with me to this day...sine is opp/hyp, cosine is adj/hyp and tangent is opp/adj...SohCahToa.
This moved nicely into technique 13 "Name the steps" although by the end of this section I wrote down some words of caution. I think having a procedure is helpful to students however I think students sometimes might rely on memorizing steps on how to solve a problem and do not know what to do when there is a change of variables. I think it is important as teachers to make sure students fully understand the broader aspects of mathematics and not just showing them how to solve specific problems.
One other comment I wanted to make not related to these two techniques came up under Technique 7 and Lemov states "the best teachers held themselves accountable for what they could control (the quality of my thinking and sustainability of my arguments), not what they couldn't (whether I liked reading the stuff)." I think this is one of the greatest comments in the book and it reminds me of a Chemistry instructor I had who was receiving a lot of complaints from students who said "When will I ever use this!" The teacher said, "This class doesn't teach you chemistry but it teaches you how to think critically about and solve problems you will be faced with in the future." This is similar to what Randy Pausch once said, "Experience is what you get when you don't get what you asked for."
I appreciated Lemov's insight with respect to the importance of planning with an objective in mind, rather than working backwards from random assignments. This idea of "universal planning," planning that is independent of the materials at hand, allows for assignments to be utilizes as a measuring tool and not the basis of your daily activity. In addition, the three steps that Lemov uses to break down "unit planning" provide the teacher with a repeatable method of self reflection.
ReplyDeletePersonally, of all of the planning techniques discussed, the idea of "double-planning" is the most profound. Lemov states that double planning "…helps you see the lesson through the student’s eyes and keeps them productively engaged." This is great!!! It is so easy for the teacher to be so focused on how they themselves come across, that they forget to consider the student's viewpoint of the assignment. And as part of this technique, Lemov suggests creating a T-chart with "you" on one side and "them" on the other. This is an idea that I can’t wait to try out for myself.
With regard to Structure and Delivery, Technique 17 that discusses Ratio is key. Lemov states: "Your goal is to give students the most practice possible, to apply what they know as much as they can, to do all the work in solving sample problems." I really appreciated his making the point that teachers should actually build in time for this kind of practice, and not leave it (maybe) for the last couple minutes of class. This can actually be harmful and counterproductive, because if you rush a problem and then maybe partially finish one or two more before the bell rings, the students leave in an unsure state of mind. The end of class should be a positive, affirmative experience, not a rushed, stressful couple of minutes. For this Structure and Delivery Technique to work, it's essential that the teacher account for the Ratio Planning Technique. If you don't plan and account for the "student perspective" as an integral part of your lesson, then practice will be an after-thought, something fit in from time to time, rather than a repeated, fundamental element of class done on a daily basis. The concept of a "Do Now" is a continuation of the idea of double-planning.... accounting for the STUDENT's time from the minute they walk through the door.
In Lemov’s “Teach Like a Champion” the planning,entry deadline, structure and delivery are related as a blueprint for marketing the methods for effective teaching. When I worked in the construction field for many years, I realized the importance of blueprints. As subtle as it sounds the blueprint gives you the full picture of the final product. After observing two schools I saw every class using the Do Now method. This method had majority of the students engaged. One math class in particular used the smart board to work out their solution. There was one class that did not start on the Do Now activity right away which resulted in a lot of chatter and disruptions. All the teachers went around and checked on the Do Now activities to assure that previous lessons have been put to good use.I know this will be critical for any teacher to utilize in their classroom.
ReplyDeleteThe 4MS in chap 7 is very useful.This is probably one of the main sources of creating objectives for each day of teaching. In creating our lessons plans we all have to follow these four key ideas. Are my objectives going to be manageable, measurable, made first, and most important? This will help me in writing my lesson plans and teaching so that I will have guided objectives. The activities and the approach on reaching our objectives is based on our individual teaching styles. I can recall in a few subjects when I was a younger student where one of these protocols was not always used.
I believe I "misposted" somehow yesterday so hopefully this is not too redundant...
ReplyDeleteLemov’s planning techniques relate to the structure/delivery/entry techniques by providing the “gate” through which teachers need to pass before designing the desired dynamic and effective lesson. Essentially, if you do not know where you want to go and what you want to accomplish and how to measure it, you will not be able to hook the students, create clear steps to understanding concept and utilize the ability to lead the students on a cognitive journey through the topic that will allow them to develop the ability to reason and that will yield a measurable result.
In the Growing with Math program in my district, the focus in the lessons is often overtaken by the excitement and dynamic of an interesting activity (as cautioned by Lemov in the “Shortest Path”). It becomes easy to overlook identification of the objective and by the end of the lesson, it can be difficult to discern or measure what the students have learned in the process. When the emphasis of the lesson is on the activity (without teacher initiative to pre-teach the concept), the students spend much of their time exploring and hence learning by inference, which Lemov points out (in “Ratio”) is very time-consuming and not necessarily productive. I found Lemov’s techniques very useful in helping me pinpoint some of the discomfort I have had in seeing this program in action in my school.
I see this book "Teach like Champions" as reinforcing some points in the first book, “Johnson’s Every minute counts”. For example, Whys and Hows- asking the students why or how, and making sure students understand a lesson before giving assignments or moving to the next topic.
ReplyDeleteOne technique that I gained a lot from is “Name the Steps” though it seemed very simple, it is a very important technique. I see myself using this technique in teaching. It is interesting that most of these techniques are techniques I have experienced and have used in the past without realizing they had been identified and how important they were. One of techniques are, using “Mnemonic” ; where the teacher simplified each step into one word and then strung the first letters together to make a word e.g. CAR. I used this technique a lot in school while studying and it helped me remember a lot of points and use my own words to explain them instead of cramming entire sentences. So I will definitely use it in Teaching.
Another important and interesting technique is the “hook”- definitely the hook. I am already trying to think of ideas- brief stories, riddles, things I could use when I start teaching.
Beginning with an end, Lemov explained how while planning he was thinking of an activity instead of the objective, what he needed them to know by the end of the class. Starting with an objective helps you measure success. When using the “Hook “you have to use a story, riddle etc which ties into or is related to your objective. You should not use a story which has nothing to do with what you are trying to teach. In classroom observation I did, the teacher used the “ Do now”. It was some practice of the topic they had just covered and also a Challenge- Riddle example of a hook technique. The students were excited about the riddle.
ReplyDeleteTo respond to Chandan’s question about as engineering, how do we develop “hooks” that help students see the connection between math and real life. In the past I have had teachers that did a good job of connecting math, physics and engineering. For example, one teacher used a launcher that created a ballistic trajectory to test parabolic equations. The launcher was low power and we used it in a gym, so you did not have to compensate for wind and other variables. My calculus teacher showed us the relationship between integral calculus and designing the type of glass window to install in the bottom of the shark tank and how the pressure in the tank, and the strength of the window varied with depth. I think we could have great fun integrating trigonometry and 3-D coordinate geometry by using some examples from your freshman in college statics class. I can see sum of forces analysis for various types of bridges, diving boards, etc.
ReplyDeleteRandy asked Len “how do we know if we are on target?” On Friday I monitored the class of a local legendary middle school math teacher, Jack Bowers. It was as if he was purposely putting on a Lemov “how to” clinic – although he had not read Lemov’s book. I saw an example in Jack’s class of a great, simple, inexpensive technique to identify “on target”. As the students entered the class he had them drop their math assignments in a box on a desk in the back of the room. While he was teaching the lesson, an aide came in and graded all of the homework, looking for systemic weaknesses. With about 10 minutes remaining in class Jack asked the aide if she has any information regarding trouble spots, she said, “it looks like we still need some work multiplying fractions” – so Jack spent the final 10 minutes reviewing fraction multiplication.
ReplyDeleteARC Methods for Math said...
ReplyDeleteLen, how do you know if you are "on target"?
In proper planning of an objective the tools to determine whether you are on target are built into the objective.
Consistent with Rick's PDCA comment the "C" is the check part wherein you check or measure the degree to which your lesson is achieving the objective.
And in following up with Lemov's "4M's" technique that second M is for measurable.
So much like the PDCA cycle is often represented qraphically through a circle or loop so do does the ability to tell whether you are on target.
- At the start of the planning process make sure you choose on an objective that among other things is measurable
- During the lesson time include feedback activities that will provide the metrics necessary to determine whether the students are in fact internalizing the objective
- Make a determination based on those metrics whether the objective is being achieved by all, some, or none of the class
- Adjust your pace or approach based on that determination
Jenae:
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that the double planning technique can be powerful. I witnessed the technique in action numerous times during my observations. One teacher, in particular, comes to mind. After brief instruction the teacher would work on a problem on the board and ask for help from the students. As additional problems were attempted the ratio increased as the students participation increased. Eventually the students were at their desks doing problems on their own. I did not see the lesson plan, but even if the teacher did not explicitly create a T-chart she surely had the students’ involvement in consideration. The students left the class with the confidence that they would be able to do the homework.
I am reposting this entry as it has disappeared from the blog. I hope it doesn't show up twice.
ReplyDeleteResponding to Randy’s remarks:
I mentioned that unit plans may be envisioned as a chain where each link is an objective that depends on the strength of the links before it. In this I mean that an objective does not stand on its own. In the design of a unit plan, each objective is part of a sequence of objectives arranged in an order such that each objective leads to the next and is therefore a prerequisite of subsequent objectives. The “strength” of the link symbolizes how well the objective is learned. When I student does not learn an objective well, it puts him or her at risk of not learning the next and those that follow.
The students learn skills by dividing them into a sequence of manageable steps. I will provide a list the steps involved in solving linear equation with a variable on both sides of the equation. (As Lemov suggests I have named the steps.)
1) Simplify: Simplify each side of the equation separately.
2) Choose sides: Decide which side of the equation you would like the variable on. We’ll call this the variable side. The other side will be called the constant side.
3) Eliminate a variable: Add the opposite of the variable term that lies on the constant side to both sides of the equation. This will eliminate the variable term on the constant side.
4) Eliminate a constant: Add the opposite of the constant term that lies on the variable side to each side of the equation. This will eliminate the constant on the variable side.
5) Eliminate the coefficient: Multiply both sides of the equation by the inverse of the coefficient of the variable term. The equation is solved.
As I implied in the first paragraph, learning an objective depends on the learning of the objective before it. The broken link is an objective not leaned. I weak link is one not learned well. We must be watchful as any weak link may contribute to the failure of the chain. Weaknesses may be rooted in any minute detail in learning a skill. I have an example... When I taught solving linear equations I provided a list of steps, similar to those listed above, only after, the level of difficulty of the equations increased to something like:
(3/5)(3x-2) – 5(2x-3) = 3(5-3x) +4
I found some students could reduce the equation to ax + b = c but would ultimately fail to get the right answer. What I had not done was ensure that the students were able to solve simpler equations before I moved on. I should have ensured that the students could handle the forms: x + a = b, ax = c, (a/b)x = c before moving continuing. Without these skills, the chain was broken, and they had no chance of solving the more complex problems.
Another thought on double planning and Lemov's advice that "Your goal is to give students the most practice possible, to apply what they know as much as they can, to do all the work in solving sample problems."......
ReplyDeleteIn my high school observation, I saw a very enthusiastic teacher, and students with far-off, unfocused expressions. I think she would've had much more success in keeping the students engaged if she followed Lemov's advice to break down the method of solving the problem into measurable, repeatable steps. Then, as you introduce each of these steps, put up a problem and have the students themselves take the problem to the next step. By the time you are done, the students will have solved that model problem on their own following the steps you have introduced.
Also, ARC Methods for Math asked Josh:
So why is having something for the students to do upon entering the classroom (or at other times) important?
By having them engaged from the minute they come in, you as the teacher are establishing the start time of class, not the students. The same idea goes for having planned work throughout class... you are setting the pace of events for the beginning of class right up until when the bell rings. If such activities/worksheets/note-taking sheets are not present or used, then in most cases, students will be apt to disengage mentally and not be working to their potential.
ARC Methods for Math said...
ReplyDeleteEllen, the teacher achieved the objective?! What about the students, what did they achieve and how do you or the teacher know? :)
Her objective was to review the material for the test. As clues were exposed, she made a brief remark sometimes reviewing a concept, or giving a little hint – sneaking some teaching in there. That the kids were paying attention, we could see from the groans when one student made a match others had noticed. As matches were made, she’d explain why the two clues matched – or had a student explain. I suppose the ultimate measure of whether they achieved the objective of cementing their knowledge of the topic will come from the results of the test.
The best way for the teacher to know what the Students achieved will be to “measure”. Lemov’s 4 MS- Measurable suggests that we can use an exit ticket (e.g. a short activity or question that they must complete and leave with the teacher) to measure.
ReplyDeleteAn example of a test question (-to show that students understand that a ratio and a proportion are related) could be;
A sum of $420 was shared between 3 friends, Sam, Ada and Ivy in the ratio 5:4:3, respectively;
a) What proportion of the money did her Sam get? (Show your work)
Lemov also suggested that a way to measure if students “know” or “understand” something (thoughts) will be to describe or apply it.
So I agree with Ellen, the test results will show what the students achieve.
It looks like Mr. Lemov uses his strategies for us, teachers, as well:
ReplyDelete#16 + #13= “Break it down” + “Name the steps” (with “sticky” names).
Each his strategy is a step which will be effective when combined with many others during the lesson. For example instead of “effective questioning technique” he uses #18 “Check for understanding”, #21 “Take a stand”, #22 “Cold call”, #23 “Call and Response”, #25 “Wait time”, and #15 “Circulate”.
My favorites are:
1. #9 Shortest path. “The simplest explanation or strategy is the best” (Isn’t just a common sense?). When I wanted all students to pay attention on what I am explaining, I would say that I give them a shortcut, how to do the work easy way, and if somebody enjoys doing hard and useless work, that one does not need to pay attention. This always worked. Showing the shortest path I would ask- why would not we do it another way? Why it would be more complicated? What happened if….? This way students not just learn a strategy, but get deeper understanding of the material.
2. #13 Name the steps. I like this: “make them sticky”. I am planning to find or create mnemonics and jokes for all possible rules. Sometime we first remember mnemonic and it “pulls out” from some “deep storage” a rule connected to it. When I think about rules or information FOIL, SOH-CAH-TOA, PASS, SKREAM are coming first.
3. Those techniques are not in the list, but they are really working.
Lemov split this strategy between two techniques: #22 Cold call and #25 Wait time.
In the #22 he gives a sequence “Question. Pause. Name” and in #25 he emphasized how important to do this pause. This is exactly what my Math teacher at high school was doing. He would ask a question and then open the class journal and few long seconds was pretending that choosing someone, and then would call the name. All this time while he was choosing the student, we all would try to find the answer. And as soon as the name was said all students would relax and stop doing the work just watching “the chosen one”.
4. I think #28 Entry routine has to work with #29 Do now.
If students know that they have only five minutes to get after the gritting the teacher in the class, take sits and do a short quiz, they would not waste their time. “Do now” works as a facilitator of appropriate behavior, gives teacher a feedback on the material, reinforces home work. It saves minutes for teaching and lets to teacher to take attendance without losing time, but the most important it gives the rhythm to the all lesson. Students have to get used to work from the first minute, to be on a task, (because if they relax, it is not easy to change it) and to the last minutes with #20 Exit ticket.
Victoria, the "shortest path" was also one of my favorite techniques. It does seem like common sense but so do most of these techniques. I think they are so simple sometimes that they might be overlooked. I know when I was a student I always liked learning shortcuts and different ways to solve problems. This sounds like an effective teaching strategy.
ReplyDeleteRelated to this discussion: I've just finished reading the CT Competency Instrument. On page 8 (IIB.2 - Closure), it says, "...teacher is responsible for closure at the end of the lesson ... Simply restating the objectives is not sufficient for closure."
ReplyDeleteThis to me seems not to apply to Math, in that the objective is something like "students will be able to factor a polynomial equation by the end of the lesson." Do you agree that an Exit Ticket stands in for closure in the requirement for closure?
In response to Ellen's question about closure...
ReplyDeleteI’m guessing we will be learning many different ways to close the lesson, and in our observations, it will be interesting to see how teachers choose to do this. I have seen the exit ticket used frequently, but one of my favorites, I think, helps wrap up the lesson for the whole class. In this case, the teacher poses the question to the class about what new concept/strategy they learned today. Or the teacher may ask students to name something that seemed difficult at the beginning of class and what helped make it easier. I see one teacher frequently close by asking the students to each say one (brief) thing they thought was challenging in the lesson and one thing they thought was easy. It takes a little while to get to everyone, but the answers are very interesting! (And sometimes students’ will say, “I agree with so and so that….”, which speeds thing along a little.)
Chandan and Shaun...
ReplyDeleteAlthough I'm no martial arts guy, I was intrigued by your thoughts/suggestions on how the two are connected.
My first thought was that both require highly skilled instructors.....naturally. I also thought about various kicks, punches and their impact and what kind of mathematical formulas might apply to that physical movement. Another shared trait, and most sensibly (like most disciplines), each concept we learn is a building block for the next. Fundamental concepts must be mastered before moving on to the next level. I can also imagine for both, there's plenty of frustration along way the way in trying to attain mastery.
I found this interesting article written by a black belt math teacher:
http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ892417.pdf
Randy asked: Shaun, how does a student demonstrate that they "understand that a ratio and proportion are related"? Do you ask them if they understand? What test question is asked on a test to measure this? Give an example.
ReplyDeleteRather than to first simply define that a proportion is two equivalent ratios, I might start by setting up the following problem for the students:
Jimmy’s Prius has a 12-gallon gas tank and it cost him $48 to fill up. Jake’s Hummer has a 20-gallon tank. Assuming the price per gallon of gas was the same for each person, we need to find how much it costs Jake to fill up.
Then I might ask the students to work in pairs and answer the following in their notebooks:
1. What do we know about Jimmy’s Prius? Please write this as a ratio in the form "dollars/gallons". What does this ratio tell you?
2. What is missing in the ratio for Jake’s Hummer?
3. What information in the word problem tells you the ratios should be equal?
Using the TBWA (teach by walking around), I can monitor the students’ answers to each question to make sure each step is understood.
If I feel that students are understanding the concept, I would define a proportion and review again that the two above ratios should be equal (because the price of gas is equal) and use a couple of different methods to solve for the unknown variable.
A test question could simply be a variant of the above word problem. Also, many things will tell me if a student understands – in class work and participation, homework, test scores (as Ellen and Annadoug mentioned), etc. I don't simply want to wait until I see the results of a test to know the progress of a student.
Chandan - yes, I would love to talk about martial arts and how I think some of the concepts can apply to teaching.
Roger – thank you very much for listing the URL on how martial arts and teaching math are related. I have downloaded it and plan on reading it later today. Maybe you (and others) could post some of your interests, so we can all learn a bit more about each other!
Cordell wrote, "...the blueprint gives you the full picture of the final product." That was a significant idea for me. It tied what I know as an engineer to what I will be doing as a teacher. The difference between a good set of plans and poor set of plans has much to do with the preparation. A good set of plan does not lack information or organization.
ReplyDeleteBruce: "Quality vs quantity" - apply that to homework and curriculum as a whole.
ReplyDeleteI think while assigning homework, the quality vs. quantity approach will benefit the students. I agree that working on math problems repeatedly until you understand the method is effective, but only to an extent. If the student feels overwhelmed with work, especially if he/she doesn't have a great grasp on the material, doing a large number of those problems could discourage the students will to keep trying. Instead of assigning a large homework assignment, picking a small to medium amount of problems that properly cover the days lesson is a more effective approach. This way the student does not feel overwhelmed, and will receive an appropriate amount of review of the days lesson. The goal for homework is for the students to attempt new materials on their own time; a concise homework assignment with quality problems betters the chances of them attempting and understanding the new materials.
The same ideas can also be applied to the curriculum. Covering too much in a days lesson can easily disengage students during a class. The teacher I observed at the high school said to always cover what students can understand in one day (within reason). If they are having a hard time understanding one task, spend more time on it before moving on to the next lesson.
I found what Mike R. wrote about regarding the teaching legend at a local middle school interesting. It sounds like a unique twist on Johnson's Last Five Minutes. I think going over the classes trouble spots is a great way to finish class. It gives them more confidence, and keeps them actively thinking about math for a full period. Mike, the teacher you observed had an aid (which is very convenient). I really liked Johnson's ideas of students putting marks on the board identifying which numbers on the homework they had trouble with. Do you think this would be as effective as the aid telling you which numbers to go over, or do you think students wouldn't be as honest?
ReplyDeleteAdam Scianna
ReplyDeleteNorwalk, CT
Chandan spoke about the usefulness of cold-calling. It reminds me of a chemistry discussion section I had in college. I knew every week in discussion our teacher would be cold-calling as opposed to lecture there was not any interaction with students at all. I always felt that I never had to pay attention in lecture or even be prepared because all I had to do there was take notes. But I remember always studying really hard the day before a discussion because I wanted to be prepared to answer questions our discussion leader was going to ask us. It really does make the students more engaged in the topic.
ARC Methods for Math said...
ReplyDeleteChandan, the duck analogy is fantastic. You write: "The hard work of planning is kept out of the view of the kids." What items are you addressing as you plan for your Microteach 1 presentation?
Well, i dont want to steal my own thunder before the lesson, but i want to create some real world examples to share with "the kids" that would make the follow on lesson meaningful to them. i have found that digging up these examples can consume a lot of time. i may also video myself for practice and/or use my two daughters as test subjects.
Roger: Thanks for the article on math and the martial arts.
ReplyDeletechandan