Marzano Strategies: Similarities & Differences, Homework & Practice, Generating & Testing Hypotheses, and Cues, Questions & Advance Organizers

Lesson: Moodle and Causes of Civil War

I created this lesson on using the online discussion board Moodle and the causes of the Civil War partly from a SPU class and partly on my own. The Issues and Advances in Education Technology class at SPU brought Moodle to my attention, but the school also began using Moodle before I came up with the idea to use it in my class. The manner in which I utilized the technology (and thus reaching the criterion for that aspect of Standard T) came from my original creation. As students analyzed the causes of the Civil War and responded to each other, this allowed them to demonstrate their competency toward the various written and historical standards (as well as understanding of content). Obviously a great part of this lesson dealt with creating technologically fluent students while creating historical arguments. The attached artifacts showed their understanding of the material clearly in their Moodle responses.

Instructional Strategy-Referenced Reflection 

Similarities and Differences

As Robert Marzano states in his Instructional Strategies that Work, “asking students to independently identify similarities and differences enhances students’ understanding of and ability to use knowledge” (Marzano, 2001). In this lesson, I asked students to consider their previously learned knowledge during our unit on Antebellum America and access it to form an opinion. Students needed to compare the causes of the Civil War and determine independently which one (between social, economic and political) proved to have the most impact on the beginning of the war.

While I believe most students gained a good understanding of the similarities and differences in the various causes, I would be more explicit in my explanation of these thematic causes prior to asking students to write about them in the future. This is partly what didn’t go well and partly what I would do differently in the future. Some students appeared to struggle particularly with understanding the social cause of the Civil War. As I reflect upon the lesson, it does seem pretty vague. I think some students confused social with political causes.

My mentor teacher encourages the instructional strategy of similarities and differences as part of our Jesuit teaching model. We continually strive for students to create their own learning opportunities and similarities and differences fit perfectly in this model. My university coordinator did not comment specifically on this instructional strategy, but did give me great feedback on the lesson overall. Specifically, she encouraged me to have assessments that matched up with my learning strategies.

Homework and Practice

One of the primary focuses of the first semester at Seattle Prep for juniors involves the National History Day paper. This research paper challenges and pushes students to work toward a historical analysis of an innovation in American history. Teaching students to create a paper around a centralized argument (thesis) rather than a collection of facts can be difficult for students. This skill requires a great deal of practice for even the most sophisticated students. Thus I create many assignments that require students to generate topic sentences or thesis statements so they can practice this kind of analysis. This particular lesson requires students to do the same kind of analysis that they must do for their research paper.

I believe that this lesson does a great job in terms of homework and practice. While I wanted my students to succeed on this particular assignment and lesson, I really wanted them to practice for their research paper. This lesson accomplishes this practice very well. I wouldn’t change much, if anything, concerning this instructional strategy.

The only advice I received regarding this strategy involved ensuring that my assessment matched my strategy. My university coordinator wants to make sure that assessments are not just informal, but formalized with rubrics. Thus I created a rubric for the lesson.

Generating and Testing Hypotheses

A large part of our curriculum at Seattle Prep, especially in the junior year, involves creating hypotheses and proving them with evidence. As I mentioned before, the National History Day paper allows students to use this skill, but there are a number of other smaller assignments that push students to do this as well. As Robert Marzano states, creating hypotheses in writing and proving them can be instrumental in student development. “A fair amount of research has demonstrated the power of asking students to carefully explain – preferably in writing – the principles they are working from, the hypotheses they generate from these principles, and why their hypotheses make sense” (Marzano, 2001). In this lesson, students not only had to generate a hypothesis, but they needed to prove it with specific evidence from earlier lessons or the text. Additionally, students needed to respond to two classmates, thus their hypotheses were tested by being examined and commented on by their peers.

I feel pretty good about this instructional strategy as I use it a lot in all of my classes. Students must learn how to form an argument and prove it; I feel that there is no more important skill in history. While I am confident in my ability to teach this skill and in particular with this lesson, I would be more clear in my instructions with this lesson. I allowed students to choose the cause of the Civil War and I left it too open ended. Some students created a hypotheses that involved all three causes rather than taking a strong stance in choosing one particular cause (social, political, or economic). In the future, I will not allow this ambiguity so that students must take a strong stand and form their argument.

On this particular strategy, I did not receive any feedback or advice from either my mentor teacher or university coordinator.

Cues, Questions, and Advance Organizers

This particular lesson centers on the important and “higher level” question of the cause of the Civil War. This isn’t a factual recall question and it requires students to analyze information to create an argument. As Marzano states, “a fair amount of research indicates that questions that require students to analyze information – frequently called higher level questions – produce more learning than questions that simply require students to recall or recognize information – frequently referred to as lower-order questions” (Marzano, 2001). By constructing an argument with support and analyzing the different perspectives of other students in the class, each student must access analytical and higher level skills.

I would add an element to this lesson in preparing students to create their arguments to better utilize this instructional strategy. The advanced organizers presented by Marzano could greatly benefit many of my students in creating their argument concerning the cause of the Civil War. Most likely, I will use the graphic organizer such as a mind map to accomplish this.

Both my mentor teacher and university coordinator (as well as other faculty members and the Dean of Academics) to continually push myself to ask “higher level” thinking questions in class. This is emphasized continually at Seattle Prep.

Standard S Criterion-Referenced Reflection

Content Driven

By asking students to create a historical argument concerning the cause of the Civil War and write it on the discussion board “Moodle”, there is no doubt that the lesson is content driven. Additionally students debated their point of view in class thus accessing their oral communication skills. Lastly, by reading other students’ arguments on the Moodle page and having to respond to two classmates, each student understood the content even better. Not only do they read about the information, students create their own argument and analyze others.

Aligned with Curriculum Standards and Outcomes

Students in my class understand that they are creating historical arguments in regards to the causes of the Civil War. The Antebellum sub-unit involves analyzing the causes of the Civil War through three different lenses: economic, political, and social. As the class learns about specific people and events, the particular lessons are connected to causes of the war.

Integrated Across Content Areas

This lesson didn’t access much in aesthetic reasoning but did allow students to contrast and prove their argument in different manners. First, they wrote their hypothesis on Moodle with evidence backing it up. Second, they needed to respond to classmates. Third, they argued their point in class in a debate format. The creation of a hypothesis with evidence utilizes scientific reasoning.

Standard T Criterion-Referenced Reflection

Informed by Standards-Based Assessment

I charged students with creating a historical argument, thus my assessment must match this objective. I created a rubric assessing students’ ability to create and back up their argument with evidence.

Intentionally Planned

Students are allowed to choose their own perspective on the cause of the Civil War. This creates an opportunity for each student to create their own argument without being forced to take a specific perspective. Additionally, by responding to other students’ commentary, each student gets to explore the history for themselves.

Influenced by Multiple Instructional Strategies

As referenced in the four instructional strategies included in this lesson, this lesson definitely varies its approach to reach learning targets. I allowed students to not only write about their historical argument on Moodle, but respond to each other online and in the classroom through debates. These varied instructional strategies allowed for different types of learners to achieve success.

Informed by Technology

By using Moodle, students in my class utilized a web 2.0 tool that they will encounter numerous times in the college environment. They became more proficient in using technology while still working toward analyzing the causes of the Civil War.

Artifacts

Student Moodle Work

Seattle Prep Moodle

Marzano Strategies: Summarizing & Note Taking, Setting Objectives & Providing Feeback

Lesson: Minoans/Myceneans & Myth

This lesson plan regarding the Minoans/Myceneans and the myth allows students to meet the standards S and T in many ways. While a colleague of mine created the original paragraph assignment, I adapted it to be a peer edit and topic sentence work. It originated mostly because freshmen need as much work as possible on writing, and in particular on historical arguments. With this in mind, the positive impact on student learning can be viewed through the attached artifacts. In the first version of the paragraphs, students created rough versions of topic sentence, but through the peer edit process the end result improved greatly. By connecting directly to written, historical, and reading standards, while remaining in the Greek unit in the curriculum, the work shows clear competency of the standard. The students work improved through the process and they achieved good results with their topic sentences in the end. 

Instructional Strategy-Referenced Reflection

 

Summarizing and Note Taking

 

As Robert Marzano states in Instructional Strategies that Work, part of the note taking process involves comprehending what parts are most important. Students in my class are continually pushed to not only take notes, but answer the question: why does that matter? History cannot be viewed as a list of events and people if students are to become critical thinkers. Marzano highlights the strategy developed by Brown, Campione, and Day in 1981 that includes the following when it comes to note taking:

 

• Delete trivial material that is unnecessary to understanding
• Delete redundant material
• Substitute superordinate terms for lists
• Select a topic sentence, or invent one if it is missing (Marzano, 2001).

 

By taking notes on my PowerPoint presentation, the students are forced to discern the most important aspects of the material. We practiced this skill earlier in the year through note checks on their text reading and in class work. After gathering info and reading the myth, the students then create their own topic sentence in a comparison of the two. This allows students to put the notes into practice.

 

If I had to change something about this lesson it would be to be more specific with my direction in regards to summarizing and note taking. I think it could be helpful during the PowerPoint to call on random students to read their notes on the last slide out loud. If not that, have students share with each other what they took down for notes on the last slide. I would simply create “check points” for the notes to ensure students are really taking down the right, crucial information.

 

My mentor teacher is a big proponent of note taking and checks on notes in the classroom. We spoke numerous times about the importance of this skill at the freshman level specifically. Students from various backgrounds (in terms of schools) come to Seattle Prep with different skill sets. It is essential for the teacher to let students know early and often the expectations of my own classroom. I did not meet with my university coordinator about this specific lesson.

 

Setting Objectives and Providing Feedback

 

By allowing students to peer edit and focusing on a specific skill in this lesson, I provided varied forms of feedback for students. When reading Marzano’s chapter on feedback, this lesson fits the criteria very well. For example, Marzano states that feedback “provides students with an explanation of what they are doing that is correct and what they are doing that is not correct” (Marzano, 2001). By focusing this lesson exclusively on the topic sentence aspect of the paragraph, students and myself were allowed to narrow in on the following:

 

• Is the topic sentence an argument?
• Does the topic sentence avoid 1^st or 2^nd person?
• Does the topic sentence address the “why” question? (Meaning is there a because following the argument).

 

By focusing on these elements, students receive corrective feedback that allows them to change for the final product (after peer edit) or for the next time (after my grade). Additionally, the feedback is timely especially with the peer edit. Marzano states that “the timing of feedback appears to be critical to its effectiveness” (Marzano, 2001). By having students peer edit each other the day the paragraph was originally due, the feedback is immediate. Lastly, the feedback is specific to criterion. Since the lesson focuses on a specific skill that they need to be developed, there isn’t a comparison to other students. The central point of the lesson involves creating effective topic sentences solely.

 

While I think this lesson really does a great job in terms of feedback, I can alter the lesson to be more effective. I think in the future I will do a few things differently. First, I would have students bring in a copy without their name on it so the focus remains specific on the work rather than the person they edit. Second, I will be more explicit in my explanation that the focus is on topic sentences rather than the whole paragraph in the first draft. This allows students to work on stronger topic sentences and worry less on grammar, spelling, and sentence structure. Third, I will give my feedback the next day rather than a few days later to ensure effectiveness.

 

My mentor teacher also works a lot on topic sentences and crafting historical arguments. He didn’t specifically help with this lesson or provide specific support, but we held many conversations about creative ways to ensure we achieve this in the classroom. I did not have a specific conversation about this lesson with my university coordinator.

 

Standard S Criterion-Referenced Reflection

 

Content Driven

 

Students must read their text for the original material, write their own paragraph, read another classmate’s paragraph and re-write a topic sentence. This allows students to focus on the content of the Minoans and Myceneans while practicing various skills needed in this standard. They also practiced problem-solving by examining their topic sentence and recreating a new one based upon feedback.

 

Aligned with Curriculum Standards and Outcomes

 

I let students know that they were going to create topic sentences as they began their first draft of the Minoan/Mycenean and myth paragraphs. I could have done a better job of being specific in asking for specificity toward topic sentences rather than a whole paragraph at the beginning of the assignment. When they exchanged papers to peer edit, I provided students with a progress check toward this target. Lastly, they turned in revised topic sentences. We reached the learning target, but not all students did it as well as others obviously. I provided this feedback in the evaluation of the topic sentences.

 

 

Integrated Across Content Areas

 

Students worked toward creating an effective argument that could be proven in comparing a myth to a declining civilization in Ancient Greece (the Minoans). This creation of an argument provides students with an opportunity to practice scientific reasoning. They must create a hypothesis (or argument) and back it up or prove it. I did not integrate mathematical or aesthetic reasoning into the lesson. By allowing students to re-invent their topic sentences, they really had an opportunity to create a good argument. Thus the efforts were good in this respect. I believe there are great opportunities in this lesson for aesthetic reasoning in the future through nonlinguistic representations of the decline of the Minoans.

 

Standard T Criterion-Referenced Reflection

 

Informed by Standards-Based Assessment

 

By editing each other’s original paragraphs, students received valuable feedback in order to self-assess. This lesson provided opportunities for students to evaluate their own work and revise before being assessed. Through this revision process, it became clear to students what they would be assessed on in their final product.

 

Intentionally Planned

 

Through a revision process and peer editing, this process became personalized for each student. Instead of the assignment being generalized about topic sentences, each student received specific feedback. This allowed for individual work on their own topic sentence. Also, when faced with a student who (due to a diagnosed learning difference) should not edit other’s work, I personalized the lesson to allow her to edit her own work.

 

Influenced by Multiple Instructional Strategies

 

By allowing for peer edit time, writing time, and group instruction, this lesson encompassed a variety of instructional strategies. Students who benefit from a lecture format and are auditory learners could benefit from my lesson on topic sentences. At the same time, those are more visual benefited from the peer edit work.

 

Informed by Technology

 

This lesson utilized PowerPoint in the instruction section as students took notes. While PowerPoint isn’t the most exciting or hands-on technology we use at Prep, it does create help visual learners and it informs students on how to use it for presentations later in the year. By watching me model the use of the technology, students gain their first step in using it for their own work.

 

Artifacts

 

 

Student Work: Minoans/Myceneans

Marzano Strategies: Reinforcing effort and providing recognition, nonlinguistic representations and cooperative learning

Lesson: Allegory of the Cave

The Allegory of the Cave assignment originated a few years ago by another history teacher at Seattle Prep. Through meeting with him and discussing the assignment a couple years ago, I decided it would be a perfect fit in the Greek unit. The Allegory story is a required part of our curriculum, but I added the effort rubric as part of this year’s assignment. The work from this assignment that I attached is evidence of student work and achieving the objectives, as well as the standards. The visual representations of the Allegory story show a variety of instructional strategies, as well as varied reasoning. The effort rubric allowed for student input in the assessment part of the standard. The paragraph work on the interpretation of the allegory shows my competency and reaching the standards of being content driven and aligned with historical and written standards.

Instructional Strategy-Referenced Reflection

Reinforcing Effort and Providing Recognition

Robert Marzano notes in Instructional Strategies that Work that “not all students realize the importance of believing in effort” (Marzano, 2001). At Seattle Prep, effort stands as the norm most of the time. Almost all students work extremely hard which provides for great opportunities as a teacher to lead class discussions and other activities. At the same time, this can be discouraging for some students as they feel like their effort doesn’t really get them anywhere. With this in mind, I targeted the Allegory of the Cave assignment in my freshmen class as an effort assignment and lesson.

The Allegory of the Cave can be daunting for many high school students, especially freshmen. Many of them can do part of the assignment in depicting the literal version of the story into a visual. Yet not many can interpret the allegory for its underlying meaning regarding Socrates and his view of the enlightened versus the unenlightened. While we set up the reading in class, I challenged the students to take time and really work toward understanding the story. I encouraged them to keep working even when things got difficult as they took on this assignment.

Before they turned in their work, I reminded them that I asked them to work on this assignment despite adversity they may have encountered. I then provided them with a rubric that featured two columns: one for effort and one for achievement. I asked the students to rate themselves on this assignment; to see if their effort correlated with the achievement on the objectives that I provided for them. They had a good understanding of the allegory after we worked on it in class more. Most students enjoyed rating themselves and some were even a little hard on themselves I would say.

If I had to change something with this instructional strategy, I would spend a little more time discussing effort and why it is important. I might have students brainstorm some ideas and talk about it as a class. It may have felt a little random to receive an effort rubric on this particular assignment.

I did not receive any input on this part of the lesson from my mentor teacher or university coordinator. I don’t know of many teachers at Prep who gave effort rubrics to students. I may be alone on this one!

Nonlinguistic Representations

The rigorous curriculum at Seattle Prep does not always allow for nonlinguistic representations in the classroom. In fact, there are teachers who flat out look down upon this type of learning unfortunately. I attempt to incorporate nonlinguistic representations at least once a unit, but should probably be doing it more often. In this case, students drew a visual representation of the Allegory of the Cave story as part of the assignment. As Marzano points out, “drawing pictures or pictographs to represent knowledge is a powerful way to generate nonlinguistic representations in the mind” (Marzano, 2001). While it allows students to demonstrate their understanding of the story in visual form, it also allows students to prepare themselves to interpret the story. In other words, it elaborates on the knowledge they already have concerning the story.

When reflecting on this assignment, I do think there is a way to have students elaborate even more. In addition to having them visually represent the story, I could have them draw a similar example from their own life. This would allow them to think more critically about the allegory rather than only literally in their nonlinguistic representation.

I did not have specific feedback from my university coordinator, but my mentor teacher encouraged this activity. Most of our freshmen teachers at Prep use this lesson to help explain the Allegory of the Cave so I had a good idea how to use it effectively.

Cooperative Learning

Many of my lessons involve cooperative learning. I will often give some information, provide a reading, worksheet or primary source document and have students work in pairs or groups. The Allegory of the Cave assignment wasn’t much different.

I anticipated students struggling with the meaning of the allegory so I created some questions that went along with the reading. Knowing that I intended to provide them with an effort rubric, I left them to struggle with the assignment a bit. The next day I gave them the questions and grouped them according to the seating chart in groups of four. This avoids homogeneous grouping which Marzano points out can be detrimental to the process (Marzano, 2001). I used a number of Marzano ideas in grouping students throughout the semester including birthdays, height, color of clothes, and alphabetically. This not only gets students out of their seats, but also provides some needed variety.  

I don’t think there is anything I would change about the cooperative learning aspect to this lesson. I liked how they worked in groups and I believe it helped them understand the allegory.

My university coordinator really likes group work or pairs work and so she encourages me often to include it in my lessons. My mentor teacher also utilizes group work and it is pretty typical at Seattle Prep as a model.

Standard S Criterion-Referenced Reflection

Content Driven

The unit centers on the Greeks and their culture, thus this assignment concerning Socrates, Plato and the Allegory of the Cave definitely fits as content driven. The lesson specifically focused on reading, interpreting the allegory, and then writing in a student’s own words how to apply it. This lesson also allowed students to problem-solve as I encouraged them to focus on their effort and fighting through adversity on this particular assignment (so it would work with the effort rubric) in interpreting the allegory.

Aligned with Curriculum Standards and Outcomes

The students began the lesson with a vague understanding of the learning targets, but as we progressed they understood the objectives very well. I even had them write them on their effort and achievement rubric so they could assess themselves on reaching these targets.

Integrated Across Content Areas

Students used aesthetic reasoning in this assignment as they created a visual representation of the Allegory of the Cave. At the same time, students used scientific reasoning to interpret the information in the allegory and create an understanding of how it relates to the enlightened and the unenlightened. They needed to take the story apart and create their own hypothesis. I really think this assignment does a good job of integrating multiple modes of reasoning. Some students were more successful than others in both types. While my efforts were pretty good in this manner, I could be more specific in my expectations for the visual representation so that all students push themselves in the aesthetic realm.

Standard T Criterion-Referenced Reflection

Informed by Standards-Based Assessment

There were a number of assessments that matched up with the lesson in this case. Students had an opportunity to self-assess using the effort and achievement rubric. They evaluated not only their visual representation, but also their achievement of the objectives for the lesson. At the same time, I had the chance to ensure they understood the material by collecting their group work on questions regarding the allegory. This ensured that they understood the contribution to history that Plato and Socrates made and thus matched the Washington State standard.

Intentionally Planned

By using an effort and achievement rubric, this lesson absolutely became personalized. Each student evaluated their own work as well as had the opportunity to visually create their own interpretation of the story. For those who don’t draw especially well, the assignment rubric focused on effort. At the same time, those who do like aesthetic learning more could evaluate themselves for the achievement of the lesson.

Influenced by Multiple Instructional Strategies

By using nonlinguistic representations, group work, paragraph writing, and class discussion, this lesson reflected multiple instructional strategies. Students from different ability levels could work together on questions as well as rate themselves on effort thus everyone could feel successful in some manner. By allowing for a portion of the assignment to be nonlinguistic, the lesson allows for all students to interpret the allegory in the way that fits their understanding best.

Informed by Technology

This lesson didn’t utilize technology, but in the past it has to a degree. By using an overhead or powerpoint screen and various objects, a teacher can visually represent the story for the students to enhance their understanding. I chose not to do this as I focused on their effort in attempting to interpret the allegory on their own or in groups.

Artifacts

Allegory of the Cave Student Work

Allegory of the Cave visual

Effort Rubric

Effort Rubric Student Examples

Allegory Group Questions

Balancing It All (Week 3)

The third full week of school is now complete and I am tired. The students, for the most part, are engaged and fantastic to teach. I love working with my colleagues, the school environment is fantastic, and I look forward to each day. Yet I am still a little tired. It seems to be the prevailing feeling among our staff as we reach the end of third week. What is the reason for this feeling?

Mostly it is trying to balance it all. Trying to teach, grade, spend time with my wife, put our new home together, and staying healthy seems like a lot right now. It is and it isn’t. Part of this scheduling is getting used to the school year again. With three weeks of school and a fair amount of content covered, there is a lot to grade right now. This is fantastic in some ways, as it allows me to evaluate the level of my students and give them some great feedback. On the other hand, it means less time with friends and family this weekend!

I felt very prepared for my classes this week which also contributed to my tiredness as I spent a good amount of time getting ready. It paid off for the most part as the classes went really well. We held a graded discussion in my junior Collegio on Thursday which provides students with a great opportunity to be evaluated in a non-traditional format. With two student leaders preparing questions, the teachers step back and simply observe as the students discuss a chosen topic as part of the unit.

Meanwhile I remembered why we have a rotating bell schedule this week as well. Currently on our ‘B’ day schedule, freshmen come in after lunch. Wow.

The attention span and overall energy level of freshmen after lunch is a spectacular sight to behold. Luckily this also provides me with a great learning moment and great learning. I can do some great lessons in which students get up and move around. I can provide great opportunities for writing or reflection at the beginning of class if I need them to sit more in class. It allows me a great opportunity to be even more intentional with my planning.

So the school year is here and not going anywhere. I look forward to getting some rest this weekend and being invigorated for the next week.

First Couple Days

My first day back at school arrived with a flurry of in-service activity last Tuesday, August 25th. That, and the following day, provided an abundance of administrative details that are necessary for teachers to do their jobs successfully all year long. I spent my afternoons working with my teaching partners in creating a syllabus for each class (with details of classroom expectations) and first unit assignment schedules. It turned out to be quite productive as in both my freshmen and junior classes, the assignment calendars are complete! That is a great feeling as it helps guide me through the unit and aid in the direction that I am heading.

The first day of classes occurred last Friday the 28th as we commenced with an all periods meet day. This allows students to meet all their teachers and get some of the classroom management aspects out of the way before a full week starts. I like this format as I get to meet the students, lay out expectations, go over the year a little, and then start fresh with a full week getting into the curriculum.

As a third year teacher I initially resisted the formatting of lesson plans to include EALRs, GLEs, objectives, and more with the traditional layout. I used my own format and felt successful the past couple years. Yet so far (in only a couple days) I really enjoyed using a traditional format for my lesson plans. It allows me to ensure that I am providing analysis and synthesis level questions for my students, as well as checking for understanding. It keeps me feeling very prepared and ensures that I initiate each lesson with a creative anticipatory set and a clear objective. It is really helpful and I look forward to continuing it as the year goes on!