For me, I was struck by the teacher responding "interesting" to the student's incorrect answer and then following up with "I think I see what the student saw."
I see this as respecting the fact that there was intention behind the student's answer, a thinking process which we can see as interesting in and of itself, and then showing that while it might not have been the correct answer, the thinking itself wasn't all that far off target. It's a relatively small adjustment.
I teach writing, but it reminds me of dealing with an issue around what I call "pseudo academic B.S." where students will put on a kind of performance of "intelligence" by using elaborate syntax and elevated vocabulary in their expression, often in ways that muddle the message.
Since writing to audiences is the core of my class experiences, I'll tell students that I think I know why they're doing this - because they believe the audience of a teacher will be impressed - but that we're writing to different audiences with different needs. They're demonstrating one of the core skills (thinking about audience) but are aiming at the wrong target. The shift for students is pretty much instantaneous, and what seemed like a bad habit I'd have to continually correct is simply redirected to the goals of building their writing practice.
Love these videos that make the teaching so visible.
> I see this as respecting the fact that there was intention behind the student's answer, a thinking process which we can see as interesting in and of itself, and then showing that while it might not have been the correct answer, the thinking itself wasn't all that far off target. It's a relatively small adjustment.
Same. And there is something that is central to the whole project of teaching to me in trying to adopt two lenses at the same time—yours and another's. Maybe central to the project of LIFE!
Super impressed with how easily and (apparently) without fear a student both 1) offered up an answer that was wrong, and 2), when asked, "did that capture a sand dollar?" the student - again, apparently without fear or embarrassment - just calmly says, "No." This teacher must've created an incredibly safe and respectful learning environment!
I think you could view her response as the academic version of VABB. She validates and affirms that there was mathematical thinking that led to the student’s answer but then builds the bridge to how to correct the common mistake of switching the coordinates. I wonder if she could have emphasized a bit more that the error happens frequently with points that lie on one of the axes?
Agree with John Warner. So many great teacher moves that uphold student dignity here. I also love the co-construction of knowledge. "High-information" is being provided by a peer. "Tony what would you do?" was a thoughtful way to call in a student to share. Facilitating a class discussion for learning is like guiding an orchestra toward harmony. When do we revise a chord progression, or call in a new instrument? This took me back to Sean Numbers from my teacher prep program. I am moved every time I hear Sean say, "I disagree with myself." I found the video here: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/65013
Although my comment slightly deviates from the main topic of feedback, I couldn’t resist bringing up a related issue that connects directly to my research with middle school students. It concerns a common way of thinking about points on a coordinate plane—often labeled as a "misconception" or "confusion" about switching the coordinates.
When a student "confuses" the x- and y-coordinates—for example, thinking that (0,4) is (4,0)—my research suggests that their reasoning is more structured than it seems. Instead of randomly swapping the coordinates, they often interpret the x-value as the distance from the x-axis and the y-value as the distance from the y-axis.
For instance, if asked to plot (3,5), a student might go 3 units up from the x-axis and 5 units to the right from the y-axis, ultimately placing the point at (5,3). This is not simply a mistake but a logical and justifiable interpretation based on their understanding of distances in the plane.
Since this reasoning is mathematically valid, just unconventional, we need better ways to respond to it. Labeling it as mere "confusion" may not help students adjust their thinking. Instead, we should find ways to build on their reasoning and guide them toward conventional coordinate plotting in a meaningful way.
What an easy and powerful thing for a teacher to exclaim. I have a new goal as a math coach: encourage and then catch a teacher using these two simple words.
Yeah, it seems like the key here is not just the *information* that the teacher is providing in their response, but the *interest* that they're expressing, both in the problem and in the way that the students are thinking about it.
Probably also important to remember that the expression of interest involves more than just saying the words, though that definitely seems like a good coaching point. (In this case, for example, we might notice the way that the teacher turns back to the students when she says "Oh, interesting," and the "let's think about this" gesture she makes with her hand near her face.)
Also a great example of a situation where the tech really does seem to be facilitating the student-teacher interaction. It would be a very different dynamic if the teacher were the one making the (0,4) on the grid, rather than having the little crab pop up as something that both the teacher and the students can respond to.
Students aren't wrong in random ways, they're wrong in predictable ways, and even when they're wrong their wrongness always has an internal logic of its own, they're not giving you nonsense. Responding to (0,4) the same as you would to "IDK" or "Artichoke!" is something only a robot would do.
I also wonder if it might help to point out that "putting the x first" is just a convention, just something we all agreed to, so my coordinates will match your coordinates.
I love that. Something very honest and open about saying, "yes, this part right here truly could have gone in different directions, but someone had to decide."
Loved this clip, especially her seeing the live feedback and replying "interesting!". It's so tough for me to get students to offer wrong answers after they've already received the feedback from the screen. I like the idea of having students work on answers while paused, volunteer answers, and then verify with this screen as a class.
Would love a feature that pauses the screen, but doesn't grey it out. Allowing students to have access to the problem, but not receive that feedback just yet.
A different teacher might have said "fix" or "correct," which, you know, I don't want to get too precious here but they have a different effect on a kid, especially cumulatively.
Dan's first sentence contains a link to this recent research report "The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research".
Here are a few snippets from that report:
p12 Feedback is more effective the more information it contains.
p12 high-information is most effective.
p12 student-student feedback is the most effective form
p 13 Estimates of the effects of feedback range between 0.48 (this meta-analysis),
0.70 (Hattie, 2009), and 0.79 (Hattie and Timperley, 2007)
p13 Feedback on average is powerful, but some feedback is more powerful.
For me, I was struck by the teacher responding "interesting" to the student's incorrect answer and then following up with "I think I see what the student saw."
I see this as respecting the fact that there was intention behind the student's answer, a thinking process which we can see as interesting in and of itself, and then showing that while it might not have been the correct answer, the thinking itself wasn't all that far off target. It's a relatively small adjustment.
I teach writing, but it reminds me of dealing with an issue around what I call "pseudo academic B.S." where students will put on a kind of performance of "intelligence" by using elaborate syntax and elevated vocabulary in their expression, often in ways that muddle the message.
Since writing to audiences is the core of my class experiences, I'll tell students that I think I know why they're doing this - because they believe the audience of a teacher will be impressed - but that we're writing to different audiences with different needs. They're demonstrating one of the core skills (thinking about audience) but are aiming at the wrong target. The shift for students is pretty much instantaneous, and what seemed like a bad habit I'd have to continually correct is simply redirected to the goals of building their writing practice.
Love these videos that make the teaching so visible.
> I see this as respecting the fact that there was intention behind the student's answer, a thinking process which we can see as interesting in and of itself, and then showing that while it might not have been the correct answer, the thinking itself wasn't all that far off target. It's a relatively small adjustment.
Same. And there is something that is central to the whole project of teaching to me in trying to adopt two lenses at the same time—yours and another's. Maybe central to the project of LIFE!
Super impressed with how easily and (apparently) without fear a student both 1) offered up an answer that was wrong, and 2), when asked, "did that capture a sand dollar?" the student - again, apparently without fear or embarrassment - just calmly says, "No." This teacher must've created an incredibly safe and respectful learning environment!
Word. Extremely good call-out there. This moment brought to you by zillions of moments like it previously in the school year.
I think you could view her response as the academic version of VABB. She validates and affirms that there was mathematical thinking that led to the student’s answer but then builds the bridge to how to correct the common mistake of switching the coordinates. I wonder if she could have emphasized a bit more that the error happens frequently with points that lie on one of the axes?
Agree with John Warner. So many great teacher moves that uphold student dignity here. I also love the co-construction of knowledge. "High-information" is being provided by a peer. "Tony what would you do?" was a thoughtful way to call in a student to share. Facilitating a class discussion for learning is like guiding an orchestra toward harmony. When do we revise a chord progression, or call in a new instrument? This took me back to Sean Numbers from my teacher prep program. I am moved every time I hear Sean say, "I disagree with myself." I found the video here: https://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/handle/2027.42/65013
> "High-information" is being provided by a peer.
Great call out. Haven't seen that in this thread yet.
Thanks, Dan, for this short and powerful video!
Although my comment slightly deviates from the main topic of feedback, I couldn’t resist bringing up a related issue that connects directly to my research with middle school students. It concerns a common way of thinking about points on a coordinate plane—often labeled as a "misconception" or "confusion" about switching the coordinates.
When a student "confuses" the x- and y-coordinates—for example, thinking that (0,4) is (4,0)—my research suggests that their reasoning is more structured than it seems. Instead of randomly swapping the coordinates, they often interpret the x-value as the distance from the x-axis and the y-value as the distance from the y-axis.
For instance, if asked to plot (3,5), a student might go 3 units up from the x-axis and 5 units to the right from the y-axis, ultimately placing the point at (5,3). This is not simply a mistake but a logical and justifiable interpretation based on their understanding of distances in the plane.
Since this reasoning is mathematically valid, just unconventional, we need better ways to respond to it. Labeling it as mere "confusion" may not help students adjust their thinking. Instead, we should find ways to build on their reasoning and guide them toward conventional coordinate plotting in a meaningful way.
"Oh interesting..."
What an easy and powerful thing for a teacher to exclaim. I have a new goal as a math coach: encourage and then catch a teacher using these two simple words.
Thanks for sharing.
Yeah, it seems like the key here is not just the *information* that the teacher is providing in their response, but the *interest* that they're expressing, both in the problem and in the way that the students are thinking about it.
Probably also important to remember that the expression of interest involves more than just saying the words, though that definitely seems like a good coaching point. (In this case, for example, we might notice the way that the teacher turns back to the students when she says "Oh, interesting," and the "let's think about this" gesture she makes with her hand near her face.)
Also a great example of a situation where the tech really does seem to be facilitating the student-teacher interaction. It would be a very different dynamic if the teacher were the one making the (0,4) on the grid, rather than having the little crab pop up as something that both the teacher and the students can respond to.
It has a nice effect of taking the teacher out of an evaluative role.
Students aren't wrong in random ways, they're wrong in predictable ways, and even when they're wrong their wrongness always has an internal logic of its own, they're not giving you nonsense. Responding to (0,4) the same as you would to "IDK" or "Artichoke!" is something only a robot would do.
I also wonder if it might help to point out that "putting the x first" is just a convention, just something we all agreed to, so my coordinates will match your coordinates.
I love that. Something very honest and open about saying, "yes, this part right here truly could have gone in different directions, but someone had to decide."
Loved this clip, especially her seeing the live feedback and replying "interesting!". It's so tough for me to get students to offer wrong answers after they've already received the feedback from the screen. I like the idea of having students work on answers while paused, volunteer answers, and then verify with this screen as a class.
Oo yeah - the facilitation there seems really important. Why talk about it if we can just settle it with a button click?
Would love a feature that pauses the screen, but doesn't grey it out. Allowing students to have access to the problem, but not receive that feedback just yet.
I love that she says "how can we revise this?"
➕➕➕➕
A different teacher might have said "fix" or "correct," which, you know, I don't want to get too precious here but they have a different effect on a kid, especially cumulatively.
Dan's first sentence contains a link to this recent research report "The Power of Feedback Revisited: A Meta-Analysis of Educational Feedback Research".
Here are a few snippets from that report:
p12 Feedback is more effective the more information it contains.
p12 high-information is most effective.
p12 student-student feedback is the most effective form
p 13 Estimates of the effects of feedback range between 0.48 (this meta-analysis),
0.70 (Hattie, 2009), and 0.79 (Hattie and Timperley, 2007)
p13 Feedback on average is powerful, but some feedback is more powerful.