SMART Equity Sticks

Sticks.

No, not those Styx. These sticks.

Every time I talk with someone about discussion or cold-call strategies, the sticks inevitably make an appearance. Whether you put numbers or student names on the sticks, there is something wonderful about their simplicity. While they are not perfect (is there a tool that is?), there are a number of strengths hidden in their grain. The top two for me are that they add more equity to the questioning process and work to raise student engagement by raising their level of concern, both due to the randomization of the process.

While I am personally a fan of the tangible Popsicle stick version, there are also some digital versions worth exploring, and until this week, I wasn't aware of one that has been right at our fingertips. SMART Notebook has the ability to randomly select a student name from your roster! There are only a few steps to set this up, and my awesome colleague created this tutorial to help us get started. Thanks, Chris!

Turn It In Discussion Board

If you are a high school English teacher in our district, you are most likely already making good use of Turn It In and its many features, but did you hear about the newest feature?

Turn It In now offers an online discussion board!

I had the opportunity to view it in action this week with freshmen; I get to see it with juniors next week...and I am very excited about this new feature!

Why am I excited and using exclamation points? Don't we already have access to online discussions through Google Classroom?

Google Classroom does allow students to have discussions via questions the teacher posts to the stream. Turn It In takes it a few steps beyond the basics, however. Here's what you can do in Turn It In's discussion feature:

• Teachers post questions using a screen similar to posting an assignment. There is a spot for the question, a spot for additional instructions, and a due date.
• Teachers can have multiple questions posted at once, and they are easily viewed on the Discussion page.
• Teachers can chose to moderate posts or not.
• As students post responses and reply to posts, Turn It In visually tracks the thread and labels each response.
• 1 (or another single number) means the post is the beginning of a thread.
• 1.1, 1.2, etc means the posts are responses to the original post labeled 1.
• 1.1.1, 1.1.2, etc means the posts are responses to responses to the original post labeled 1.
• (I'm not sure how far down the path it goes, but I did see a 1.1.1.1 yesterday!)
• Teachers can manipulate how they view the posts. They can view the posts threaded (meaning the posts read like a conversation, in the order they were posted) or they can view the posts by student.
• When a teacher sorts the posts by student, the teacher can see both original posts and replies to classmates posts. The student's every contribution shows up. (In contrast, Google only shows a student's original post.)
• Students can post questions if the teacher allows. This could add an interesting dynamic to the conversation.

Thinking of giving it a go in your room? Please let me know how it goes!

Fate-Led Critical Thinking?

Remember making these? Origami fortune tellers (aka cootie-catchers) were all the rage back in, what...middle school? Maybe further back in elementary school? Bet you didn't anticipate that they would make a comeback as an interesting way to approach critical thinking!

The inspiration for this post came from a Romeo and Juliet lesson I saw by Creative English Classroom on Teachers Pay Teacher. (For $1, you can get her digital template, but you can easily make your own for free.)

The origami fortune teller fits quite nicely with a story like Romeo and Juliet where fate, destiny, the stars, and the like play (possibly) a large role. Students use the fortune teller (fate?) to lead them towards critical thinking questions about the text. It could be used as an actual in-class activity (a humorous way to approach pod discussions?) or the fortune teller could be available for those who finish early and need something productive to occupy their time.

If it has been a while since you last made one (or if you have never made one!), follow these folding instructions. (If you don't have square paper, you can start with a normal 8 1/2 x 11. Once you do the first large triangle fold, cut off the extra paper above the folded section.) Follow the directions through step 11 ("Write the numbers 1-8...") and then adapt according to your needs. Suggestions for adapting follow the illustrated instructions.

Possible Adaptation:

In step 12 ("Add your 8 fortunes..."), replace the fortunes with your set of critical thinking questions.

In step 13, replace the color or object with a symbol or word pertinent to your lesson. (For Romeo and Juliet, it could be character names, the family names, or words such as love, hate, fate, etc.)

Possible critical thinking statements/questions for Romeo and Juliet fortune tellers can be found in this previous post. The critical thinking questions listed below are adapted from questions I've used in the past and the Teachers Pay Teacher lesson. Really, you could use any set of questions.

• Was Juliet's nurse a good friend? What does she (or doesn't she) do to make you feel that way?
• Do Romeo and Juliet truly fall in love? What is your definition of love? How do they fit (or not fit) your definition?
• Do Juliet's parents truly love her? Why or why not?
• Who/what is most at fault for the deaths of Romeo and Juliet? Why?
• How could Romeo's parents have handled the situation better? How could Juliet's parents have handled the situation better?
• What would be the best alternate ending to Romeo and Juliet? Would your ending improve the play? Why or why not?
• What is Friar Lawrence's biggest mistake?
• Which character makes the wisest decisions throughout the play? Explain the wisdom behind the decisions.

Opinionated Romeo and Juliet Discussion Statements

I came across a few opinionated statements regarding Romeo and Juliet this afternoon, and it occurred to me that they could be great fodder for Socratic Circles or pod discussions. They are worded in a way that students would be apt to respond strongly one way or another. Plus, they would have to practice bringing evidence to the table. Without further ado, here are the (mostly) statements from Trent Lorcher at BrightHubEducation:

• Love vs. Lust: Romeo and Juliet are obsessed, infatuated, out of control, and irrational. Sounds like lust to me.

• Prejudice: The feuding families create tension and conflict, not unlike feuding cultures in today's society.

• The Role of Fate: Shakespeare calls the two lovers "star-crossed." Does fate, however, play a greater role than the numerous stupid choices made by Romeo and Juliet?

• Book Smarts vs. Street Smarts: Friar Lawrence knew a lot. Most of it was useless. After all, he had no real world experience. He just walked around all day collecting herbs.

• Suicide: It's the gigantic green elephant in the room. You might as well talk about it.

• The Role of Women: Verona society did not hold much for women, which makes Juliet's strength stand out even more.

• The Role of a Husband: Romeo's weakness dooms the relationship from the start.

• Friendship: Romeo's friend, Mercutio, causes his banishment. His other friend, Friar Lawrence, causes his death. Juliet's friend, the Nurse, abandons her in her time of need.

• Communication: Juliet and her father need to sit down and have a nice long talk.

Happy discussing!

Calling Mulligan

Oops! Calling Mulligan is actually nothing like calling the Culligan man.

As someone who is not a golfer, I did not fully understand the title of this article until I read the piece (and then looked up the origins of the term). In ASCD's "Education Update" newsletter, the last page features a "Road Tested" technique or strategy from an educator. February's road tested idea focuses on two discussion/questioning techniques as explained by Lisa Arter in "Calling Mulligan! Two Rules for Dynamic Discourse."

In this quick read, Arter, a former middle school teacher and current college assistant professor, explains her version of academically "calling Mulligan" and the 5 Rs of Academic Discourse that she utilizes within some of her large group discussions. In short, calling Mulligan allows students to retract statements that come out wrongly or are misinterpreted, while the 5 Rs (respond, repeat, restate, rebut, reinforce) help encourage students to think more critically about their classmates' responses. If you'd like to hear more about these two ideas in action, take a few minutes to read her article.

Accountable Talk Stems

Elizabeth Wiggs (@e_wiggy) shared this conversation bubble document via Twitter recently. It is intended to help students join in the conversation. She also shared her Google Document here so that others wouldn't have to recreate the wheel. (It is view only, so you will need to make a copy of it and save it to your Google Drive if you wish to manipulate it.)