Productive Group WorkProductive Group Work

Nancy Frey and Doug Fisher San Diego State University www.fisherandfrey.com

Inside View

Know How To

Gradual Release of Responsibility

Quality Indicators

Engaging & Interactive

Front View

Back View

Guided Focus Lessons Independent

Collaborative

Purposeful Teaching

How have you helped today?Did you ask for help?

The helping curriculum

Did you offer help?

Did you nicely decline help so you could try it yourself?

Did you accept help?

Early Predictors for Passing (or Failing) the CAHSEE Grade Point Average Absences Classroom Behavior

These are present as early as fourth gradeZau, A. C., & Betts, J. R. (2008). Predicting success, preventing failure: An investigation of the California High School Exit Exam. Sacramento, CA: Public Policy Institute of California.

There are some myths in education

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Retention: d = - 0.16Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Ability Grouping: d = .12Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Homework: d = .29Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

and some truths as well.

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Small group learning: d = 0.49

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Meta-cognitive Strategies: d = 0.69

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

0.5

Reverse effects

Zone of desired effects

Reciprocal Teaching: d = 0.74Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses related to achievement. New York: Routledge.

Gradual Release of Responsibility: A Framework for Instruction

Lets Make a Foldable

Envelope fold Focus Lesson Guided Instruction Collaborative Learning Independent Learning

TEACHER RESPONSIBILITYFocus Lesson I do it We do it

Guided Instruction

CollaborativeIndependent

You do it together You do it alone

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY

A Model for Success for All StudentsFisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

The sudden release of responsibilityTEACHER RESPONSIBILITY Focus Lesson

I do it

Independent

You do it alone

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY

DIY SchoolTEACHER RESPONSIBILITY (none)

Independent

You do it alone

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITYFisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

The Good Enough ClassroomTEACHER RESPONSIBILITY

Focus LessonGuided Instruction

I do it We do it

Independent

You do it alone

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITYFisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Time for a Story

TEACHER RESPONSIBILITYFocus Lesson I do it We do it

Guided Instruction

CollaborativeIndependent

You do it together You do it alone

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY

A Model for Success for All StudentsFisher, D., & Frey, N. (2008). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

How does Maria:Establish purpose? Model her thinking? Demonstrate? Provide language supports? Utilize productive group work? Provide guided instruction? Check for understanding? Foster metacognition?

Second Grade Mathematics

QuickTime an d a H.264/AVC decompre ssor are need ed to see this p icture .

How does Maria:Establish purpose? Model her thinking? Demonstrate? Provide language supports? Utilize productive group work? Provide guided instruction? Check for understanding? Foster metacognition?

How Do You Know Its Productive?

What does it look like? What does it sound like?

Collaborative

STUDENT RESPONSIBILITY

Productive group work Group and individual accountability Productive failure

Students are consolidating their understanding Negotiating understanding with peers Engaging in inquiry Apply knowledge to novel situations

Conversational RoundtableYour Notes: Group Member #2:

Group Member #3:

Group Member #4:

Collaborative Posters in Geometry

QuickTime and a H.264 decompressor are neede d to see this picture.

INDICATORS Complexity of task: The task is a novel application of a grade-level appropriate concept and is designed so that the outcome is not guaranteed (a chance for productive failure exists).

Joint attention to tasks or materials: Students are interacting with one another to build each other s knowledge. Outward indicators include body language and movement associated with meaningful conversations, and shared visual gaze on materials.

Indicators of Success - Productive Group Work DRAF T 4-Exemplary 3-Applying 2-Approaching Task reflects purpose and what was Tasks provide multiple, clear The task is somewhat reflective of modeled. The task allows students an opportunities for students to apply the purpose of the lesson, but there opportunity to use a variety of and extend what was modeled. is little opportunity for student resources to creatively apply their Students have an opportunity to experimentation or innovation. knowledge of what was modeled. use a variety of resources to Students have an opportunity to creatively apply their knowledge experiment with concepts. of what was modeled. Students ask critical questions of each Body language, visual gaze, and Body language, visual gaze, and other, developing and forming language interactions provide language interactions provide some personal opinions and conclusions. evidence of joint attention to the evidence of mutual attention to the They are able to evaluate and task or materials by all members task or materials by most members. synthesize information, as well as of the group. Students can explain Students are not holding each other independently use a variety of their contributions and the accountable for purposefu l resources to acquire new or unknown contributions of o ther group contributions. information. members.

1-Limited Task is an exact replication of what was modeled, with little or no opportunity for student experimentation with concepts. Students divide up the task so that they can work, then meet near end to assemble components. Body language, visual gaze, and lack of language interactions provide evidence of independent work occurring within the group. No clear process is in place to facilitate accountable talk. Lack of structure is evidence as students are off-task, in conflict, and/or are unable to complete product.

Argumentation not arguing: Student use accountab le talk to persuade, provide evidence, ask questions of one another, and disagree without being disagreeable.

Students reach a better understanding or consensus based on evidence and opinions provided by others. Students hold each member of the group accountable by using questioning strategies and evidence to persuade or disagree. The conversation is respectfu l and courteous. Sentence frames are diffe rentiated based on studentsproficiency and need. A wide range of f rames are available for students and students use the frames independently in academic language and writing. Teacher modeling includes the use of f rames as well as academic vocabulary and high expectations for language production. Teacher is purposefu l in scaffolding using prompts, cues and questions and checks for understanding regularly. Evidence collected during this time is used to plan further instruction. Groups are fl exible and change based on studentsprofici ency, academic need, and/or content area. Productive group work occurs throughout the day.

Language support: Written, verbal, teacher, and peer supports are available to boost academ ic language usage.

Teacher role: What is the teacher doing while productive group work is occurring?

Grouping: Small groups of 2-5 students are purposefully constructed to maximize individual strengths without magnifying areas of needs (heterogeneou s grouping).

Students ask for and offer evidence to support claims. However, members continue to maintain initial beliefs or positions about a topic without considering the arguments of others. The conversation is generally respectfu l but some members may not participate. Students use one or two sentence frames from the variety that are available in a structured setting. A set of target vocabulary is available and used. Teachers model the use of f rames. Students are encouraged to use the language support in guided instruction and productive group work. Some scaffolding and checking for understanding occurs but there are delays in corrections or changes to the instruction. There is a link to fu rther instruction. Purposefu l heterogeneous grouping occurs which are fluid in response to students proficiency.

There is a process in place for accountable talk. However, student dialogue is limited and there are minimal efforts to support the product. The conversation is generally respectfu l, but is often dominated by one member of the group or veers of-topic. Academic language related to the concept/standard is present. A frame may be provided. The teacher models at least once using target vocabulary or language frame. Students are encouraged to attempt using target vocabulary without opportunities for guided practice. Scaff olding or checking for understand occurs but is not used to plan fu rther instruction.

Vocabulary is posted but its use is not modeled. Students are simply told to use words. Language frames are not provided.

Teacher manages, but does not interact with groups to scaffold conceptual knowledge. Grouping practices are solely homogeneous and are done primarily for scheduling convenience.

Some heterogeneous grouping occurs, but homogeneous grouping practices dominate. Decisions based on assessment are not apparent.

Lets make aFoldableQuickTime and a decompressor are neede d to se e this picture.

Quality Indicators

Quality Indicator #1Complexity of Task: The task is a novel application of a grade-level appropriate concept and isdesigned so that the outcome is not guaranteed (a chance for productive failure exists).

Productive failure

Quality Indicator #2Joint attention to tasks or materials Students are interacting with one anotherto build each others knowledge. Outward indicators include body language and movement associated with meaningful conversations, and shared visual gaze on materials.

Look down, not up.

Quality Indicator #3Argumentation not arguing: Student use accountable talk topersuade, provide evidence, ask questions of one another, and disagree without being disagreeable.

How have you helped today?Did you ask for help?

Did you offer help?

The Helping CurriculumDid you nicely decline help so you could try it yourself?

Did you accept help?

Quality Indicator #4Language support: Written, verbal, teacher, and peer supports are available to boost academic language usage.

Can you buy your way to happiness?

HSHMC Essential Question #2 2009-10

The evidence shows that ____. The evidence shows that poor people are not unhappy. The evidence shows that just because you win the lottery you are not guaranteed happiness.

My own view, however, is that ___. My own view, however, is that happiness is not based solely on money. My own view, however, is that happiness is a combination of things that happen and dont happen to a person over his or her lifetime.

Quality Indicator #5Grouping: Small groups of 2-5 students are purposefully constructed to maximize individual strengths without magnifying areas of needs (heterogeneous grouping).

Quality Indicator #6Teacher role: What is the teacher doing while productive group work is occurring?

Grade 6 Science

QuickTime an d a H.264/AVC decompre ssor are need ed to see this p icture .

What are your favorite ways to encourage collaboration between students? What are the benefits and challenges?

What does it take to make a task engaging and interactive?

Use the secondQuickTime and a decompressor are needed to see this picture.

Foldable

What Does It Take to Make a Task Engaging and Interactive?

Enough background knowledge to have something to say.

Language support to know how to say it.

A topic of interest.

An authentic reason to interact.

Expectations of and accountability for the interaction.

An established community of learners that encourage and support each other.

Knowledge of the norms of interaction.

How do you construct a task that is engaging and interactive?

Gradual Release of Responsibility

Inside View

Quality Indicators

Engaging & Interactive

Front View

Back View

The TakeawayCollaboration is an essential part of learning. Know what youre looking and listening for. Make tasks engaging and interactive.

For TomorrowQuality Indicators Engaging & Interactive

Please bring your Foldable and handouts