Facilitation
In the previous sections of this portfolio, I have discussed how a teacher can prepare for differentiation in the classroom through Data Collection and Construction of Lessons and Tasks. In this section, I will discuss Facilitation, and how teachers can use facilitation strategies to promote differentiation within lessons and discussions. In facilitation, and particularly the ways in which I try to conduct discussions, I am particularly influenced by the writings of Michaels et al. (2007), who write about the many considerations that must go into effectively facilitating classroom discussions that encourage disagreement and thoughtful dialogue, but argue that it is worthwhile for many reasons, including differentiation:
A number of studies have suggested that productive classroom talk has many benefits in the classroom. It can lead to a deeper engagement with the content under discussion, eliciting surprisingly complex and subject matter–specific reasoning by students who might not ordinarily be considered academically successful.[i]
Figure 3: Using Facilitation for Differentiation
To begin this section, I would like to highlight a specific type of lesson which I use frequently, wherein I employ a variety of relevant facilitation techniques: “Number Talks,” a form of mathematical instruction that seeks to build number sense and mathematical concept understanding through activities that are highly discussion-driven.[ii] During number talks, I typically begin with a relevant mathematical question or challenge. I then ask students to think of the answers for themselves, and give me a subtle, nonverbal signal to let me know they’re prepared to answer – which both serves as a form of assessment and encourages students who need more time to continue working through the problem. As an additional form of differentiation, I sometimes encourage students who finish quickly to think through how they can explain how they got their answers, or to think of additional strategies they could use to check their answers, while I wait for all students to come up with preliminary answers (and deliver the expectation that all students should try to solve the problem). In this way, from the very beginning I am seeking to conduct a discussion that can support students with varying levels of proficiency regarding the relevant mathematics.
From that point on, the emphasis is on sharing strategies that students have used to solve the problem. With minimal direct input from the teacher, the teacher’s responsibility in these discussions is to use facilitation techniques to achieve a number of goals, best outlined by Parrish (2011):
Achieving all of these goals relies heavily on careful facilitation, but the ultimate intent squares very well with the goal of differentiation, as it potentially supports all students in different but important ways. Students who find answers easily are challenged to deepen their understandings by clarifying and explaining their processes, by listening and responding to peer explanations and critiques, and by considering and comparing alternative approaches. Students who struggle get to hear explanations by peers of a variety of strategies, in order to familiarize themselves with effective strategies and to clarify concepts that might have been less clear previously.
Effective facilitation of this discussion relies on a variety of techniques, such as asking clarification questions, restating of student comments, and asking other students to restate student comments, all of which aim to help make student thinking more transparent (and to help students learn the skills to clarify their own explanations); careful selection of students to call upon, with an eye towards balancing the needs of the students being called upon (i.e. determining who could benefit by being challenged to explain their thinking to the class) and the class as a whole (e.g. determining what kinds of explanations would be more valuable to discuss publicly); and a clear understanding of the relevant concepts, in order to determine where areas of confusion or miscommunication are most likely to result and ensure that the most important understandings are touched upon. While number talks are a specific lesson type unique to mathematics, I try to draw upon all of these facilitation strategies in other subjects as well, and have found them useful in a variety of other contexts ranging from science discussions, class read-alouds, and writing minilessons.
I would like to devote some additional attention to the specific strategy mentioned above of selecting which students to call upon, which I have found to be an extremely important and challenging element of facilitation. On one hand, it is important to achieve balance and some degree of unpredictability, so that all students know that they are accountable for thinking through questions posed to the entire class. On the other hand, there are lots more considerations to be weighed. This is one place where I have found prior use of observation and assessment to be extremely important, as it helps me build an idea of what to expect from various students. For instance, I have developed a sense of which students to call on if I am hoping for relatively basic answers to certain types of questions, if my goal is to encourage other students to chime in as well; I also have a sense of which students will contribute more fully-formed and/or original concepts, who might be good to call on later in discussions to add framings or understandings that may not have come up otherwise. Knowing students in this way can also be important when I know what kinds of questions I will be asking later – perhaps if I know that the questions will get more complicated, I will begin by calling students who are more likely to struggle with more advanced concepts in order to help get them thinking and to give them a feeling of success early in the lesson. Applying this strategy allows me to drive a discussion with an eye to differentiation by giving attention to engaging all students; providing individuals with appropriate challenges and opportunities for success; and ensuring that the progression of the conversation is scaffolded in a way that supports students with less proficiency in the relevant concepts while still being engaging to those with more proficiency.
In the first lesson I observed in my kindergarten placement (see Appendix for notes), I saw this in use: the teacher was “deconstructing” the calendar from December, asking for volunteers to pull down numbers that met specific descriptions (e.g. “one more than 5,” “10 and 7 more,” “the biggest number left on the calendar,” etc.). While she generally called on students who were able to be successful with the degree of challenge in the questions, she also made use of student uncertainty: with the question “What number is 10 and 7 more,” the first question she had asked of that type, she called on a student who looked unsure. Immediately, the teacher drew ten dots on the board, then 7 more dots, and asked the class to generate strategies the student could use to count them all. In this way, she managed to do present the class with a student-driven, guided modeling of a particular set of strategies that the students could draw upon to help them answer future questions; the specific strategies, however, were generated by the (more proficient) students in the class, and then applied by the (less proficient) student at the board. Following this example, she began calling on students who seemed less proficient earlier to practice applying the various strategies to new problems, giving those students an opportunity to demonstrate and deepen their learning and giving the teacher an opportunity to assess whether further clarifications were necessary, and if so, for whom.
One additional facilitation strategy that I have seen, and used, to positive effect involves the process for transitioning from whole group instruction to independent or small group work. This strategy involves allowing each individual student to choose a unique assignment in conversation with the teacher before they leave the group to do the work. This can happen in a few different ways, and some examples may clarify what I mean by this. When students in our class were writing a book of facts about bats, the teacher gathered all students on the carpet, then gave students individual assignments by calling out topics (sometimes based on questions raised by students at the beginning of the unit, sometimes based on categories discussed by the class), and getting volunteers; for example, the teacher would ask, “Who wants to write something bats have?” then pick a volunteer, prompt her to specify what answer she’s going to write about, then hand her a card with the question written on it as a reminder. The teacher would use facilitation techniques (similar to some of those discussed above) to drive this task – for example, she would deliberately put simpler questions at the beginning, and choose for them the students perceived as being more likely to struggle with the assignment; by the time she got further along, she would have more challenging questions for students she thought could benefit from those questions; and by the time she reached the last students (perceived as those ready for the most advanced tasks), she would have “run out” of fully formed questions or most intuitive facts to write about, and ask the students to generate their own questions or respond to less clearly defined concepts. A similar process was used for our Animals in Winter unit, where each student was responsible for choosing a different animal to write about and illustrate.
From that point on, the emphasis is on sharing strategies that students have used to solve the problem. With minimal direct input from the teacher, the teacher’s responsibility in these discussions is to use facilitation techniques to achieve a number of goals, best outlined by Parrish (2011):
- Clarify thinking.
- Investigate and apply mathematical relationships.
- Build a repertoire of efficient strategies
- Make decisions about choosing efficient strategies for specific problems
- Consider and test other strategies to see if they are mathematically logical[iii]
Achieving all of these goals relies heavily on careful facilitation, but the ultimate intent squares very well with the goal of differentiation, as it potentially supports all students in different but important ways. Students who find answers easily are challenged to deepen their understandings by clarifying and explaining their processes, by listening and responding to peer explanations and critiques, and by considering and comparing alternative approaches. Students who struggle get to hear explanations by peers of a variety of strategies, in order to familiarize themselves with effective strategies and to clarify concepts that might have been less clear previously.
Effective facilitation of this discussion relies on a variety of techniques, such as asking clarification questions, restating of student comments, and asking other students to restate student comments, all of which aim to help make student thinking more transparent (and to help students learn the skills to clarify their own explanations); careful selection of students to call upon, with an eye towards balancing the needs of the students being called upon (i.e. determining who could benefit by being challenged to explain their thinking to the class) and the class as a whole (e.g. determining what kinds of explanations would be more valuable to discuss publicly); and a clear understanding of the relevant concepts, in order to determine where areas of confusion or miscommunication are most likely to result and ensure that the most important understandings are touched upon. While number talks are a specific lesson type unique to mathematics, I try to draw upon all of these facilitation strategies in other subjects as well, and have found them useful in a variety of other contexts ranging from science discussions, class read-alouds, and writing minilessons.
I would like to devote some additional attention to the specific strategy mentioned above of selecting which students to call upon, which I have found to be an extremely important and challenging element of facilitation. On one hand, it is important to achieve balance and some degree of unpredictability, so that all students know that they are accountable for thinking through questions posed to the entire class. On the other hand, there are lots more considerations to be weighed. This is one place where I have found prior use of observation and assessment to be extremely important, as it helps me build an idea of what to expect from various students. For instance, I have developed a sense of which students to call on if I am hoping for relatively basic answers to certain types of questions, if my goal is to encourage other students to chime in as well; I also have a sense of which students will contribute more fully-formed and/or original concepts, who might be good to call on later in discussions to add framings or understandings that may not have come up otherwise. Knowing students in this way can also be important when I know what kinds of questions I will be asking later – perhaps if I know that the questions will get more complicated, I will begin by calling students who are more likely to struggle with more advanced concepts in order to help get them thinking and to give them a feeling of success early in the lesson. Applying this strategy allows me to drive a discussion with an eye to differentiation by giving attention to engaging all students; providing individuals with appropriate challenges and opportunities for success; and ensuring that the progression of the conversation is scaffolded in a way that supports students with less proficiency in the relevant concepts while still being engaging to those with more proficiency.
In the first lesson I observed in my kindergarten placement (see Appendix for notes), I saw this in use: the teacher was “deconstructing” the calendar from December, asking for volunteers to pull down numbers that met specific descriptions (e.g. “one more than 5,” “10 and 7 more,” “the biggest number left on the calendar,” etc.). While she generally called on students who were able to be successful with the degree of challenge in the questions, she also made use of student uncertainty: with the question “What number is 10 and 7 more,” the first question she had asked of that type, she called on a student who looked unsure. Immediately, the teacher drew ten dots on the board, then 7 more dots, and asked the class to generate strategies the student could use to count them all. In this way, she managed to do present the class with a student-driven, guided modeling of a particular set of strategies that the students could draw upon to help them answer future questions; the specific strategies, however, were generated by the (more proficient) students in the class, and then applied by the (less proficient) student at the board. Following this example, she began calling on students who seemed less proficient earlier to practice applying the various strategies to new problems, giving those students an opportunity to demonstrate and deepen their learning and giving the teacher an opportunity to assess whether further clarifications were necessary, and if so, for whom.
One additional facilitation strategy that I have seen, and used, to positive effect involves the process for transitioning from whole group instruction to independent or small group work. This strategy involves allowing each individual student to choose a unique assignment in conversation with the teacher before they leave the group to do the work. This can happen in a few different ways, and some examples may clarify what I mean by this. When students in our class were writing a book of facts about bats, the teacher gathered all students on the carpet, then gave students individual assignments by calling out topics (sometimes based on questions raised by students at the beginning of the unit, sometimes based on categories discussed by the class), and getting volunteers; for example, the teacher would ask, “Who wants to write something bats have?” then pick a volunteer, prompt her to specify what answer she’s going to write about, then hand her a card with the question written on it as a reminder. The teacher would use facilitation techniques (similar to some of those discussed above) to drive this task – for example, she would deliberately put simpler questions at the beginning, and choose for them the students perceived as being more likely to struggle with the assignment; by the time she got further along, she would have more challenging questions for students she thought could benefit from those questions; and by the time she reached the last students (perceived as those ready for the most advanced tasks), she would have “run out” of fully formed questions or most intuitive facts to write about, and ask the students to generate their own questions or respond to less clearly defined concepts. A similar process was used for our Animals in Winter unit, where each student was responsible for choosing a different animal to write about and illustrate.
I used a different model of this type of facilitation when transitioning between poetry mini-lessons and writer’s workshops. Because I wanted to give students flexibility over their writing topics, but also knew that some students might struggle to come up with topics, I wanted to have each student publicly declare what they would be writing about before letting them sit down and begin. There were several considerations I had to weigh in facilitating this. First (after giving students time to brainstorm independently and/or in partners), I wanted to begin with students whom I predicted would have diverse but relatively fully-formed responses, in order to present a variety of thoughts for students who might struggle to think of their own ideas. Second, I would try to prioritize the students who typically would take the most time to do their work, in order to give them more time to write while I was still talking with the remaining students. Third, I would have to weigh physical distribution – I wouldn’t want to send all of the students who sit together at a single table to go work at their table at once, but rather I would try to send the students in a balanced way around the room, so that by the time someone was sent to a crowded table, the other students there would already be working and thus less likely to be distracted. Fourth, I had to balance asking follow-up questions (e.g. “What are some things you think you’re going to write about that?”) with not wanting to take too much time for this process – so I had to know which students I thought would benefit most from clarifying their thinking before returning to their seats, and which students I anticipated could do that work totally independently. During the workshop, I would make sure to check in with those students who had shared fewer details before sitting down for more concentrated student conferencing.
---
Final thoughts:
I think the above anecdote summarizes well the challenges and rewards of running a classroom with a priority on differentiation. While differentiated instruction should not, as Gardner cautions, involve “multiply[ing] educators’ jobs ninefold,”[iv] it clearly does require a significant level of concentrated effort in every area of teaching – in gathering data and getting to know students, in constructing lessons and classroom conditions, and in facilitation of lessons and activities. However, I have found that, with an early investment of concerted effort, many of these strategies quickly develop into habits; and already I am discovering that, for instance, it feels increasingly unnatural and inappropriate to teach math lessons without using some of the facilitation strategies described above. While this portfolio does not seek to represent a thorough collection of strategies and techniques for differentiation, I hope I have presented an account that emphasizes the complexities involved in differentiation but also the potential of incorporating differentiation into all facets of teaching. This work is essential to promoting the goal of advancing the learning of all students, and for this reason I am eager to continue to explore and refine strategies for differentiation.
---
Final thoughts:
I think the above anecdote summarizes well the challenges and rewards of running a classroom with a priority on differentiation. While differentiated instruction should not, as Gardner cautions, involve “multiply[ing] educators’ jobs ninefold,”[iv] it clearly does require a significant level of concentrated effort in every area of teaching – in gathering data and getting to know students, in constructing lessons and classroom conditions, and in facilitation of lessons and activities. However, I have found that, with an early investment of concerted effort, many of these strategies quickly develop into habits; and already I am discovering that, for instance, it feels increasingly unnatural and inappropriate to teach math lessons without using some of the facilitation strategies described above. While this portfolio does not seek to represent a thorough collection of strategies and techniques for differentiation, I hope I have presented an account that emphasizes the complexities involved in differentiation but also the potential of incorporating differentiation into all facets of teaching. This work is essential to promoting the goal of advancing the learning of all students, and for this reason I am eager to continue to explore and refine strategies for differentiation.
[i] Michaels, S., Shouse, A.W., & Schweingruber, H.A. (2007). Ready, Set, SCIENCE! Putting Research to Work in K-8 Science Classrooms. National Research Council. P. 91. Retrieved from http://www.nap.edu/catalog.php?record_id=11882.
[ii] See, for instance, Parrish, S. (October, 2011). Number Talks Build Numerical Reasoning. Teaching Children Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; and Parrish, S. (2010). Number Talks: Helping Children Build Mental Math and Computation Strategies. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.
[iii] Parrish (2011). P. 203.
[iv] Moran, S., Kornhaber, M., & Gardner, H. (2006). Orchestrating Multiple Intelligences. Educational Leadership, 64(1), 22-27. P. 23.
[ii] See, for instance, Parrish, S. (October, 2011). Number Talks Build Numerical Reasoning. Teaching Children Mathematics. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics; and Parrish, S. (2010). Number Talks: Helping Children Build Mental Math and Computation Strategies. Sausalito, CA: Math Solutions.
[iii] Parrish (2011). P. 203.
[iv] Moran, S., Kornhaber, M., & Gardner, H. (2006). Orchestrating Multiple Intelligences. Educational Leadership, 64(1), 22-27. P. 23.