Establish Routines to Support Students’ Full Participation in Inquiry
Routines to Support Student Talk
Table of Contents
Read.Inquire.Write. is designed for students to learn through talking about the content and processing ideas collaboratively. Alongside the teacher talk moves and routines here, the disciplinary literacy tools embedded within Read.Inquire.Write. investigations offer ways to promote student talk throughout an inquiry. Though keeping up the class’ stamina in these intellectually demanding investigations is challenging, students’ engagement can be sustained, and they get satisfaction out of the work.
Classrooms working with Read.Inquire.Write. tend to make frequent transitions between individual, pair, small-group and whole-group work. This allows a wide range of students to consistently participate and engage with the content, both orally and in written form. Observers often comment on this, and they wonder how teachers set up the environment for this kind of work.
We illustrate how teachers establish an environment for inquiry teaching here through examples from Mr. Kabat’s classroom. A variety of students in Mr. Kabat’s class, including multilingual learners and students who benefit from additional literacy support, have substantial oral participation. For the past few years, Mr. Kabat has been developing an ‘inquiry approach’ in his classroom as he teaches the Read.Inquire.Write. investigations. Here is some of what he’s learned:
- For Mr. Kabat, a good classroom environment and a strong community have been key for the success in adopting an inquiry approach.
- Another important change in his teaching has consisted of reducing his own participation and increasing the students’, thus creating a more interactive environment where students have agency to try out and develop their thinking.
- Frequent small group talk before whole class discussions is one of the most distinctive features of Mr. Kabat’s classroom. It “gives them ownership, gives them interest, gives them more ideas than they would ever get calling one on one.” Students value this too: in a survey, many of them said that it helps to talk with their group, because it allows them to hear what other people have to say, try out their ideas, and refine their understandings in a safe environment. Small groups help bi/multilingual learners as well. Teachers have noticed that if students are not socially or linguistically ready to participate in a whole group discussion, they have the option to “gently join” or “gently not join,” instead of the hard dichotomy of raising or not raising their hand in whole-group. Small group talk gains effectiveness when preceded by individual thinking and followed by whole-group discussions.
- Other participation structures that have been helpful are bell work, individual thinking (usually followed by small group talk), whole-group discussions (usually preceded by small group talk), and individual writing time.
Participation Structures for Inquiry
The following are different participation structures through which Mr. Kabat and his colleagues carry out the Read.Inquire.Write. activities, as well as other lessons. Every day starts with bellwork, and every day includes several cycles of individual, small-group, and whole-group moments. We share short videos of how Mr. Kabat introduces these participation structures during Orientation Week with an incoming cohort of 6th graders.
- letting students’ contributions stand on their own without evaluation;
- asking them to amplify their voices if they’re too quiet;
- strategically reformulating students’ contributions and asking them to confirm that’s what they meant;
- asking students to clarify, elaborate, or back up their thinking;
- connecting one comment to another
Building a Community, Organizing Inquiry
A strong community is the key underlying condition for inquiry work in Mr. Kabat’s classroom. One foundation is that he and the students know each other’s names and personalities. Mr. Kabat greets everyone by name in the hallways, and expresses he’s happy to see them. A strong community also entails a safe environment. As Mr. Kabat explains, this means that students know “that everybody’s working on the same team in this room, that I’m not gonna be teased or disrespected in this class, at least when the teacher’s paying attention … That no matter what I say, there’s value to it in this room.” They know that even if they give the “craziest, most off-topic, most wrong answer possible,” Mr. Kabat’s response is going to be positive. “We’re gonna steer it, we’re gonna thank you for saying that, because it’s gonna make us think of something that’ll maybe get us to the right place.” We see this strong sense of community in the substantive participation from all students in small-group and whole-group moments.
Another key set of conditions for the smooth functioning of inquiry-centered classrooms like Mr. Kabat’s are clear expectations for each participation structure, strategies to transition between them, and systems to organize materials. Mr. Kabat thinks that teaching and establishing these routines during the first week of class is time well spent. However, even with this early groundwork, these routines take maintenance and reminders throughout the year.
Combining Routines to Support Inquiry
See three video examples of how Mr. Kabat and two other expert teachers use a combination of routines and structures to support inquiry in the context of Read.Inquire.Write. investigations.
Here, 7th-grade students are working on the investigation Was democracy in Athens a good form of government? After reading one of the sources –Life of Solon, by Plutarch- the teacher asks students to think individually: what does the source help them understand about democracy in ancient Athens, and is the source reliable for that purpose? He then calls them back together, using the ‘fingers up’ signal, and he launches a whole-group discussion. A variety of students make substantive contributions, which the teacher helps them elaborate and connect. At one point, he uses the ‘fingers up’ signal again to remind them of discussion expectations. Finally, the teacher commends the students on their analysis and asks them to work individually again, for 2.5 minutes, on the headnote and attribution for the next source.