After a four year hiatus and having retired on July 1, I’m reopening this window to share ideas and resources with my fellow educators.
Many teachers struggle with closure. It’s always a challenge to stop the lesson in time at the end of the period to sum up the day’s learning and reflect on whether or not we have achieved our desired outcomes. One powerful strategy for gathering data about student learning at the end of a learning episode is the exit ticket. An exit ticket gives the teacher formative data about where students are in their learning and should inform choices I make as a teacher about subsequent lesson plans.
Here are some great Exit Ticket templates you can use:
And here is a Pinterest board devoted to the topic:
But, remember, an exit ticket does not have to be fancy and photocopied. It can be a slip of paper or index card. What matters most is: will the questions you are asking provide you with the data you need to drive your instructional decision making?
We often ask questions on exit tickets that are too open ended or general. Craft your questions to get at the most important learning: What will students know, understand, and be able to do?
Here is a list of Exit Ticket prompts I’ve begun to accumulate that are grouped by levels of Bloom’s taxonomy and more:
So, now I have the Exit Ticket data… what do I do with it?
Some examples of ways a teacher might respond to Exit Ticket data might be:
what the data says > how I might respond to it
- all students met the objective > move on with the curriculum
- most students have not met the objective > plan a follow up activity using a different modality
- some students met the objective, some partially met it, some are still struggling with it > sort the exit tickets to create flexible groups with tiered activities
Exit tickets are just one way to collect formative data from our students and can provide direction for teachers on their lesson planning and their choices for instructional strategies.
Over the last several years, I’ve been doing a lot of work in the areas of student engagement and differentiated instruction. Once aspect that stands out in both areas is the power of student choice. According to Kanevsky and Keighley, in their article entitled “To Produce or Not to Produce: Understanding Boredom and the Honor of Underachievement” (2003), choice ranks among the 5 characteristics of an optimal learning environment that students seek along with the aspects of control, challenge, complexity and caring. Choices are motivating to most people and we often make choices based on our personal preferences.
In the world of differentiation, choice also plays center stage and no other strategy illustrates this more than Choice Boards (also called Learning Menus, Think-Tac-Toes). Choice boards offer a menu of options for students that can vary in content, process, or product. They are most often constructed with varied learning styles and interests in mind. Choice boards can even be tiered so that advanced learners are steered toward more challenging choices and struggling learners toward more scaffolded choices.
Here is a link to my wiki called Dare to Differentiate where you will find a plethora of examples of choice boards in various formats (one of my favorites is the dinner menu) for various subject areas and levels. Also check out a new type of choice board I’ve recently found called the 2-5-8. On the wikipage, I have also linked to or uploaded examples of rubrics for choice boards along with multimedia examples of ways to deepen your knowledge on the topic.
Teachers like to be in control. And because of that character trait, we like to talk a lot. We have so much to share. But, are we making sure that students are having multiple opportunities to talk about the content they are learning? There is a quote that I’ve heard many times in the world of education, “The person doing the most talking is doing the most learning.”
So, how do we step back and allow students to take control? One way is through flexible groupings. Pairs, triads, random and assigned. Based on readiness, mixed readiness, interest, or learning preference.
21st century skills highlight collaboration, critical thinking, communication, and problem solving. What better way to practice those skills than in groups?
In the 1990’s, Spencer Kagan came up with a vast array of structures for cooperative learning in small groups. These structures are just as powerful today as they were almost 20 years ago.
Some of my favorites are:
- inside-outside circles
- four corners
- talking chips
As far as grouping strategies, some of my favorites are clock buddies and grouping cards. Here’s a set of 36 cards that have a multitude of uses:
For more resources on the topic of flexible grouping and grouping strategies, go to:
Teachers are constantly collecting data.
1. I teach a concept. I see puzzled faces. I respond by switching the mode of presentation (ex. from oral to visual).
2. I collect student work. I notice considerable gaps in my students’ learning. I respond by creating an activity for the next class day with flexible groups tiered by readiness.
I’m intrigued by this phenomenon. Although it was a long time ago, I’m pretty sure that “responding to formative data” wasn’t a topic of study in any of my methods classes. So, how do teachers develop this menu of options to meet the needs of their learners?
For me, mostly through intuition and trial and error.
In this age of teacher evaluation tied to student growth, we cannot allow intuition and trial and error to drive our instructional decisions. How can I develop a menu of options to guide my decisions?
James Popham in his book, Transformative Assessment in Action: An Inside Look at Applying the Process (ASCD, 2011), he suggests several categories of responses to formative data:
A. Immediate instructional adjustments based on assessed performance
B. Immediate instructional adjustments based on student-reported understanding
C. Near-future instructional adjustments
D. Last-chance instructional adjustments
E. Students’ learning tactic adjustments
F. Classroom climate shifts
In response to this perceived gap in knowledge, I’ve created a wikipage of types of formative data teachers collect and possible ways a teacher might respond to it:
I’d love to add to this list. Please write your additions as comments to this post.
As Student Growth is becoming a pivotal part of teacher evaluation, teachers need to become data experts. Baseline data, formative assessments, and artifacts and evidence will be central to measuring student learning. Standardized and district-created tests yield data that can be sorted and separated. Teachers collect daily data from students in the form of student work, exit tickets, and observation. For some great ideas for formative assessment strategies, visit this link.
So, the question is… do all of those data points paint a complete picture of who your learners are? I think not. There is so much more to know about our students beyond just test scores. What are some ways you can collect data about student interests and learning preferences?
I’ve assembled a variety of resources on the topic of Knowing Your Learners on my wiki called Dare to Differentiate. There are many tools that have been created, both low and high tech to collect information about our learners in terms of their interests and learning preferences which are customized to the age/grade level of the students. There are even multiple intelligence and learning styles surveys that can be administered to World Language students in the target language.
Two of my favorite tools were developed by a colleague. The first, “Where Does Your Intelligence Lie?,” is an Xcel worksheet on which students indicate True or False to a series of statements. Once you have the student data, you use the second tool, “Class Intelligence Profile,” where you input the two strongest intelligences for each student in a particular class. The results are then created in a chart and also in the form of a pie graph.
Many teachers with whom I have worked love this tool! They print out the pie graph for each class and keep it in their plan books. As they plan lessons for their classes, they refer to the graph to align activities they are planning with the students’ intelligences.
Another great resource I’ve found recently is called a “personality array.” You compare your personality with the characters from Winnie the Pooh.
Happy data collecting!
It seems everywhere you look, student engagement is a hot topic. Engaging students in learning in the 21st century is very different from the way we engaged students in the past. We know that many students are “cooperating” and “complying” in our classrooms, and some are downright angry about how disengaged they are.
If you are interested in exploring the topic of Student Engagement, I would like to direct you to a wiki I created called “Let’s Get Engaged.” On that wiki, I have accumulated a considerable amount of resources on topics relating to student engagement, originally based on a multi-session workshop series.
On the page called “What is student engagement?,” I include a variety of resources in multimedia on the topic. One of my “go-to” resources on the topic is the Schlechty Center. You may know Phil Schlechty from his popular book, Working on the Work. Schlechty describes several levels of engagement:
- strategic compliance
- ritual compliance
For a pdf description of the levels of engagement, click here.
I have created a tool I call the “Engage-O-Meter” for teachers to use when reflecting on activities they plan for their students. No one activity is likely to meet all of the qualities of engagement. When teachers try out a new activity with a class that students do not seem to engage in, the Engage-O-Meter can give some direction to the teacher as to how the activity might be re-engineered to increase student engagement. Here is that tool:
An important point of discussion is the difference between engagement and entertainment. Do I have to wear a clown nose and juggle to get my students to engage? Not at all. Quite simply put, entertainment is what the teacher is doing, engagement is what the students are doing. Engaging with each other, engaging with the content, engaging in discussions with the teacher. How do your lessons measure up on the “Engage-O-Meter?”