Chapter One; Observations: My observations include the aspect that many times I knew my lessons required thinking, however, I did not always identify the goals or types of thinking I was wanting from my students. I wanted learners to understand the concepts. Now I know, "Understanding is the goal of thinking rather than a type of thinking." Connections: With much training in Blooms and critical thinking, I always wondered how I was suppose to think sequentially. We all know that I do not have that ability. I like the fact that thinking is messy and complex and not sequential.
Oh my goodness, I typed a response and lost it, I didn't hit "publish!" Oh well. Chapter 1: I really loved how the author cited artistic experiences, of course! I love the idea that created products evidence our learning. I definitely also connect with the "messy" bit - just in that the process of learning (not just the materials) may not always be linear and tied up with a bow so to speak, but that welcoming open-ended curiosities and pursuits may follow rabbit trails sometimes. I have mixed feelings about the part on fun/activity versus a worksheet, and considering the learning first. Social learning and confidence-building is still a type of learning and if an activity is fun, sometimes it might be accomplishing those types of ends, although I see the author's point.
Chapter Two: Observations: I liked the identification of three things to model; model intellectual engagement; student's constructing understanding, and clarifying student thinking. Wonder: I loved the example that was used for current events. What's the story?, What's the other story?, How do you know the story?, Why know/tell the story? Where's the power in the story? I wonder how this might be used with 3rd-5th grades when working with current events? Comment: What makes you say that?, What makes you think that?, Can you give an example? are all good ways to get students to deepen thinking. Connection: We try to show visible thinking charts on our IB boards. I wonder if charts could be discussed in PLC meetings to discuss misconceptions?
Chapter 2: I really love the bit about modeling an interest in ideas - kids pick up on whether or not we are actually curious and if we can genuinely model having a sense of wonder and inquisitiveness, they get that. I also love that he referenced Reggio Emilia - I am a little bit obsessed with RE and the way they function. I wonder if some of what the author is promoting in reference to listening and going further makes sense with VTS or Visual Thinking Strategies, which is a method I was trained in for looking at and discussing art with kids. Here is a link to VTS info: https://vtshome.org/ and https://artmuseumteaching.com/2014/04/29/openthink-visual-thinking-strategies-vts-museums/ I do remember people saying that being too rigid with VTS was sometimes frustrating and restrictive and that kids needed to be able to branch beyond it with questioning. I do think it's a good place to start, however.
Chapter One;
ReplyDeleteObservations: My observations include the aspect that many times I knew my lessons required thinking, however, I did not always identify the goals or types of thinking I was wanting from my students. I wanted learners to understand the concepts. Now I know, "Understanding is the goal of thinking rather than a type of thinking."
Connections: With much training in Blooms and critical thinking, I always wondered how I was suppose to think sequentially. We all know that I do not have that ability. I like the fact that thinking is messy and complex and not sequential.
Oh my goodness, I typed a response and lost it, I didn't hit "publish!" Oh well.
DeleteChapter 1: I really loved how the author cited artistic experiences, of course! I love the idea that created products evidence our learning. I definitely also connect with the "messy" bit - just in that the process of learning (not just the materials) may not always be linear and tied up with a bow so to speak, but that welcoming open-ended curiosities and pursuits may follow rabbit trails sometimes. I have mixed feelings about the part on fun/activity versus a worksheet, and considering the learning first. Social learning and confidence-building is still a type of learning and if an activity is fun, sometimes it might be accomplishing those types of ends, although I see the author's point.
Chapter Two:
ReplyDeleteObservations: I liked the identification of three things to model; model intellectual engagement; student's constructing understanding, and clarifying student thinking. Wonder: I loved the example that was used for current events. What's the story?, What's the other story?, How do you know the story?, Why know/tell the story? Where's the power in the story? I wonder how this might be used with 3rd-5th grades when working with current events?
Comment: What makes you say that?, What makes you think that?, Can you give an example? are all good ways to get students to deepen thinking.
Connection: We try to show visible thinking charts on our IB boards. I wonder if charts could be discussed in PLC meetings to discuss misconceptions?
Chapter 2: I really love the bit about modeling an interest in ideas - kids pick up on whether or not we are actually curious and if we can genuinely model having a sense of wonder and inquisitiveness, they get that. I also love that he referenced Reggio Emilia - I am a little bit obsessed with RE and the way they function. I wonder if some of what the author is promoting in reference to listening and going further makes sense with VTS or Visual Thinking Strategies, which is a method I was trained in for looking at and discussing art with kids. Here is a link to VTS info: https://vtshome.org/ and https://artmuseumteaching.com/2014/04/29/openthink-visual-thinking-strategies-vts-museums/ I do remember people saying that being too rigid with VTS was sometimes frustrating and restrictive and that kids needed to be able to branch beyond it with questioning. I do think it's a good place to start, however.
Delete