Understandings

It is not the interaction with information and facts that makes for effective education, but our interaction with information in the context of our interactions with each other (Dyson, as cited in DiPardo & Freedman, 1988).

Rich conversation and a culture of active listeners is something that I strive for within my classroom. I will never forget a project one of my kindergarten classes did about building a community, when Ian expressed the need for a power plant. I froze for a moment shocked with the higher level thinking presented to our discussion and was excited to see what conversations and inquiry would come from this suggestion. I gave my class some wait time to take in the new concept was disappointed when this did not evoke any responses from the rest of the class. Looking into the wide-eyes of my kindergarteners, I knew that the majority of my kids did not know what a power plant was and yet they did not ask. When I finally asked, Who knows what a power plant is and why we would need one in our community? only one hand raised. I then had a conversation with my class about how important it is to ask questions when we dont understand something, and immediately hands flew up. As I called on one student they asked me, What is a power plant? My response was to not ask me, but to ask our friend Ian. I knew from this point on that I wanted to support my students in becoming self-advocates for their own knowledge. Equally important, I want them to be active participants amongst their peers in creating meaning. I dont want to act as the keeper of all knowledge within our classroom; I want each individual to feel like a valued contributor. Social Constructivism Effective communication is a necessity for the construction of knowledge. Social constructivism emphasizes the social collaboration of knowledge construction, in which most learning is socially negotiated, with individuals actively composing their knowledge through dialogue with others (Nicol and Boyle 2003). Katherine Au (1998) also supports this constructivist view with an emphasis on social collaboration and social exchange as a necessity for people to create meaning. Working with primary age students I feel there needs to be a combination between a constructivist approach as well as staying true to Vygotskys cognitive theory. Cognitive theory believes that culture gives the child the cognitive tools needed for development. Adults such as parents and teachers are conduits for the tools of the culture, including language. However, constructivist theory highlights the importance of peers in the learning process as well. In a primary classroom I feel there is such great opportunity provided with peer-to-peer learning and discussion, but this needs to be taught, supported and monitored by a teacher. Many of the children in their beginning years of school are being put in a new social situation of large classrooms filled with peers and will need explicit instruction and modeling of what constitutes good discussions.

I see my role as a constructivist teacher to create an environment for learning in which students can become engaged in interesting activities that encourage and facilitate learning. To support students growth, my responsibility is to guide students as they approach problems, encourage them to work in groups, to think about issues and questions, and support them with encouragement and advice as they tackle problems. Teachers thus facilitate cognitive growth and learning, as do peers and other members of the child's community (Chen, 2012). Vygotskys theory of the Zone of Proximal Development lends itself nicely to aiding students in their beginning stages of discussion and group collaboration. ZPD can be seen as a way of stretching learners. In constructing skills there is room for "cannot yet do", "can do with help", and "can do alone". The ZPD is about "can do with help", not as a permanent state but as a stage towards being able to do something on your own (Atherton, 2010). As a primary grade teacher I lay a foundation and provide opportunity and practice for these important conversational skills, but I also recognize that for many this may not be developmentally appropriate. When I reflect on how developmentally appropriate is defined it is obvious when you walk into any classroom that even though kids are the same age, they can be very developmentally different. Jean Piaget found that before certain ages children are unable to understand certain things. It is important to understand the ages that Piaget mentions are norms, not universals. Piaget leads us to believe that if you try to teach children something before they are able to understand they probably wont be very successful at it. Yet, as one of his protgs notes, On the other hand, if there is one thing we have learned from Piaget it is that children can probably be left to their own devices in coming to understand these notions (Duckworth, 2006, p. 3). Eleanor Duckworth worked as a research assistant to Piaget and later found many important insights on his work through her job developing elementary science curriculum. The focus amongst her and her colleagues was not about what children ought to know or what they ought to be able to do at a certain age. Instead, they worked on developing lessons that would engage children and that allowed for various access points of departure. Of particular interest, Duckworth found that children could make significant advances, and find excitement in their thinking, as a result of asking the right question at the right time. Duckworth writes: It is almost impossible for an adult to know exactly the right time to ask a specific question for a specific child-especially for a teacher who is concerned with 30 or more children. Children can raise the right question for themselves if the setting is right. Once the right question is raised, they are moved to tax themselves to the fullest to find an answer (2006, p. 5). This reinforces the importance of children being active in their interactions and discussions amongst peers to aide in their learning. Referring back to the idea of the ZPD, and what children can do with help, modeling and posing strong questions is

extremely important to encourage and inspire children to ask more meaningful questions. My ultimate goal was to see an increase in children digging deeper into their thinking by asking more significant questions. Social Justice and Equity Teaching in a very diverse population I am challenged and confronted with a growing concern of the achievement gap between students of diverse backgrounds and those of mainstream backgrounds. When striving for an increase in participation and strong social conversations and discussions between students was I assisting in closing this academic gap, or was I setting myself up for providing an inequity for my second language learners? There are two strands of this issue I would like to address: equitable participation amongst student and teacher in discussions, and equitable participation amongst students. In the latter case, I want to ensure that it is not just the more confident, or in many cases, more middle-class and English speaking students who are participating the most. One step I feel we need to take as educators is to recognize that students may learn effectively not only in teacher-led lessons but through collaboration with peers. In terms of instructional methods and implementing a constructivist approach in classrooms, Au notes that the emphasis tends to be on process rather than product, educators with a mainstream constructivist orientation may see it as their role to act as facilitators of students' learning, responding to students' work but not transmitting knowledge (1998, p. 18). When I first began implementing project based learning in my classroom, I immediately appreciated how it allowed me to emphasize the importance of the process children go through in their learning, rather than only the outcome. I have seen first hand when peers are working together for a common goal how much they benefit from the language and social interaction they share. That said, I think there is a need for students to learn how to effectively engage in rich discussion in which all students are participating and individuals are taking an active role in their learning. I love this movement from a teacher as the central figure in the classroom to a facilitator aiding in dialogue. This is in contrast to the initiate-respond-evaluate model that unfortunately is present in most learning environments and creates an imbalance of social justice. The initiate-respond-evaluate model is basically one in which the teacher asks a question, students answer the question, and then the teacher evaluates the response (Fisher, Douglas & Frey, 2007, p. 22). This dynamic creates social capital within the classroom, in which only the students that can correctly and quickly answer the question are rewarded and acknowledged for their understanding. Personally, I dont want to be responsible for reinforcing the importance of fast-talking and quick hand-raising. Futhermore, in typical classrooms speaking rights are typically seen as teachers having the right to speak at any time and to any person; they can fill any silence or

interrupt any speak; they can speak to a student anywhere in the room and in any volume or tone of voice. And no one has any right to object (Cazden 1988 p. 54). I dont want to assume these rights or live by such rules. When we offer all students opportunities and expectations to listen, respond intelligently with comments and/ or questions, we are holding them all to the same standards and generating inquisitive, active citizens regardless of language and background. To look at equity amongst students, I feel it is extremely important to look at the home experiences that these children come from. According to Annette Lareau and her studies of childhood (2011), she finds that for middle-class mothers the boundaries between home and institutions are fluid. Middle-class mothers mediate their childrens lives by cultivating their childs talents through organized activities and often intervening within institutional settings. An example of this could be confronting a teacher when their child is unhappy with an aspect of the program. The children observe this and therefore have an advantage in acquiring the language and skills for effective interactions. The skill of how to get organizations to meet their individualized needs is being passed onto the child. Lareau refers to this close monitoring of their childrens institutional experiences as concerted cultivation. In contrast, Lareau found that working-class and poor families tend to have clearer boundaries between home and school, and are less likely to intervene with institutions on their childs behalf. This is not to say that the parents of working- class and poor parents lack interest in their childs education, but that they have less detailed knowledge of educational institutions and are more reluctant to ask questions themselves. The childs educational career is often handled at school, by teachers and counselors, and the students themselves (Lareau, 2011). These families are also more aware of economic constraints and lack of transportation. Working-class and poor children tend to participate less in organized activities, have greater autonomy from adults in their free time, and generally experience a greater separation between adult and child life. All of this can lead to a greater sense of self-direction and even more creative play, but it also means that children have less exposure to the language and skills expected in most school environments. I often see this transfer into a divide within the classroom. Every school year I observe middle-class students eager to please and take control of their learning. In regards to participation this means they love to share about their many experiences and arent afraid to speak up. In contrast, students from working-class and poor families tend to sit back and let the conversation flow without them. Its often a challenge to get my less privileged students to engage with their peers. When put on the spot, they get uncomfortable, and I witness them eagerly staring at the clock awaiting recess. This is not to say that they dont have great input and experiences beyond the classroom to share, they just need to find the confidence to speak up for themselves, and believe that its ok to do so. These children are simply doing what they have been taught to do. Unfortunately, schools tend to value the middle-class way of being more. This puts the more privileged kids at even more of an

advantage as they move through school and ultimately the workplace. This naturally creates a social, as well as academic, divide amongst the class that I want to eliminate by having all students equally participate and contribute to discussions. Supporting Active and Equitable Participation Through this research, I sought to understand how students become adept and independent in their educational pursuits and I pushed them to think, respond, and ask reflective questions. Research suggests that both adults and peers shape these emerging concepts and behaviors through authentic and repeated experiences, scaffolded practice and cognitive engagement. This can be made possible and support active participation if there is a shift away from teacher-centered classrooms. One common aspect found in teacher-centered classrooms is teacher nomination, where teachers control the group discussions by calling on students with raised hands (Cazden, 1998). By eliminating hand raising and implementing stepping up, stepping back, and sharing the air I created more active participation and equity amongst individuals. This is a process in which students recognize when they are a primary voice in the conversation and allow for others to have an opportunity to initiate their opinion. In addition, if they have not spoken, they will try to step up. The goal was to see students active in the self- selection of turns and extending an invitation to those that need to step up. There was also an emphasis on students addressing each other directly, not only verbally, but also with eye gaze. According to Lemke this is called cross-discussion and in a typical lesson, references to other students talk are rare (Cazden, 1998). Students tend to look to the teacher as the official addressee rather than their peers. This is where space and how we use it is important. These changes cannot happen unless students can see one another. Studies show that The circle arrangement produced the least amount of hand raising, the most on-task comments not in response to teacher nominations, and the fewest indications of student withdrawal from the class activity (Cazden, 1988, p. 59). I implemented the circle arrangement during any classroom meetings, group discussions and time on the carpet. This is in contrast to traditional seating arrangements created naturally by the layout of carpets commonly found in primary classrooms with rows of squares. When children are assigned to these individual squares they are not looking to their peers that are sharing in the discussion, but looking to the teacher as the central figure. To shift from lessons to discussions there needs to be a major shift for the teachers typical role and use of language. Dillon suggests that teachers use declarative statements, reflective restatements, invitations to elaborate, and silence (Cazden, 1998). Dillon warns against the tendency for the first speaker (often that of the teacher) to try to solve the problem and of the next speaker to either support or oppose her. The danger is that the discussion then slips into adversarial debate; other interesting points of view find it hard to get a look in. People take sides and

attack and defend, instead of exploring possibilities. This is why Dillion encourages conversations to begin with declarative statements that give testimony to the problem, where participants state what they know about the question and what the question means to them. Then a richer discussion will follow. By restating a student comment, you create an opportunity to connect one speaker to anothers personal experience or perception, by using reflective restatements. This is a great way to teach students how to extend conversations and offers a chance for students to invite others into a conversation by asking about their experience, something in my classroom that will be referred to as sharing the air. Invitations to elaborate provide a similar opportunity and will support students in taking an active role in their learning by asking questions when they dont quite understand what is being said. These methods to increase discussions provide a great opportunity to model for students good conversational habits. One of the more difficult of the above concepts is the expectation of silence, or wait time. According to Henklin: there is a large body of research that supports the idea that if teachers wait three to five seconds after asking a question or before calling on a student, higher-level learning will occur. Even more importantly, if teachers can wait three to five seconds when students have stopped talking, more complex ideas will develop. The minute we start talking, students thinking is interrupted and thoughts are lost (1998 p. 60). I see this going hand in hand with reinforcing the importance of thinking and producing thoughtful responses, rather than just being the first person to speak. This also creates an opportunity for more equity in the conversation as some students need more time to compose their thoughts or may realize that they dont quite understand and ask a question for clarification. I was interested in seeing if these four methods could be transferred into daily discussion amongst third grade children. According to the Zone of Proximal Development, modeling is the first step for these students and hopefully one day these suggestions would transfer to their daily conversational habits. Exploring Ideas Together A benefit of supported peer discussion is the opportunity for students to begin constructing their own meaning of the world around them by being engaged in social situations. In my own practice I saw endless opportunities for children to learn much from one anothers experiences and knowledge, rather than being fed information from their teacher. I didnt want these learning possibilities to be overlooked by passive listeners or students that are afraid to speak up. By encouraging students to step up within peer discussions, I hoped that students would advocate for their own learning and support their own individual needs. I also hoped they would learn to explore topics together, direct questions to one another, and ultimately motivate their peers to think deeper. Specifically, I wanted

to see students asking clarifying questions and producing invitations to elaborate. Before I could expect this from the students in my classroom, there were two aspects that Duckworth suggested to assist in providing opportunities for wonderful ideas to emerge: One is being willing to accept childrens ideas. The other is providing a setting that suggests wonderful ideas to children-different ideas to different children-as they are caught up in intellectual problems that are real to them. (2006, p. 7). Sometimes I feel like children fear that an idea may be dismissed as trivial or a question may be looked at as silly. This naturally would create a feeling of fear or embarrassment for anyone. Our job is to create an environment in which children feel safe to explore their own ideas and to know that there are no wrong questions.