Skip to main content

Think, pair, share in the MFL classroom

This blog was prompted by a section in Tom Sherrington’s excellent book The Learning Rainforest. Tom writes about the revelation he experienced when someone explained the “think, pair, share” technique when interacting with a class. In case you are not familiar with it, this is when you ask a question and, instead of asking for hands up or ‘cold calling’ (to use Doug Lemov’s term), you tell the class to discuss the answer with a partner before eliciting a response.

To put the technique in context Tom reminds us of the disadvantages of traditional hands up questioning. They are worth revisiting:

1. Only one pupil can answer at a time.
2. The answer can be given before others have had time to work it out.
3. Pupils can opt out of answering and hide.
4. More timid students are intimidated when there is a ‘forest of hands up’.
5. When no one raises a hand the teacher doesn’t know if the class doesn’t know the answer or is just reluctant to offer a response.
6. H ads up can encourage closed questioning. ( You want people to answer so ask easier questions.)
7. The same students always put up their hands and a pattern is established for other lessons.

Incidentally, the main advantage of no hands-up questioning (cold calling) is that students cannot hide and you get a clearer idea of whether the whole class has understood. (Note, in passing, that this is not the same as random, ‘lollystick’ questioning, which is inferior, in my view, since it takes the way the teacher’s skill in matching questions to specific pupils.)*

Think, pair, share has a lot going for it. Every student is obliged to take part. In language lessons though, I would argue that it has limitations.

Where some conceptual thinking is needed it makes sense. For example, let’s say you wanted to ask a class to explain a grammatical rule after the students have seen some examples of a pattern in the input. Some time to think, discuss and formulate an answer is useful. Similarly, if you were studying a section of text and asked a question about its content, particularly at higher levels, time for thought and brief discussion/comparison of responses would be useful before answers are elicited.

On the other hand, what about questions used in the language teacher’s way, those somewhat artificial ‘display questions’ like “Where is the book?” “ Is Jack a butcher or a baker?” or “What time did Pauline arrive at the beach?”?

In this case I would argue that to encourage quick reactions, multiple repetitions and a fast pace, then hands up or no hands up makes more sense. Indeed, despite the obvious disadvantages of hands up mentioned above, we shouldn’t ignore its advantages. I would mention these:

1. The ablest students are enthused by the opportunity to shine and please the teacher.
2. Less confident students get to hear other good models of listening input.
3. The teacher gets at least some idea of how many students are keeping up.
4. The pace of a lesson is maintained if the questioning technique is good.
5. Even when students show their enthusiasm by raising a hand, you can always choose to ask someone else, killing two birds with one stone, as it were.
6. Some pupils will find no hands up questioning frustratingly slow and may lose interest.

Don’t forget that whole class questioning in MFL lessons is as much, if not more, about modelling listening as developing oral fluency. It’s a particular type of questioning often unlike that used in other subjects, with the aim of developing linguistic skill rather than the understanding of concepts. It is frequently fast, repetitive and choral.

Think, pair, share is, of course, just one way of handling classroom questioning. Good teachers often use a mix of strategies: hands up, hands down, lolly sticks, cold calling, ‘turn and talk’, mini-whiteboards, write the answer then share, and no doubt other variations.

To finish let me summarise Tom Sherrington’s further points about the merits of think, pair, share:

1. It’s easier for pairs to say “ We don’t get it” rather than “ I don’t get it”.
2. Every student gets the chance to answer a question in the safety of their paired bubble.
3. Two heads may be better than one. Pairs may debate the answer and consider it in different ways.
4. When the teacher elicits answers, pairs have had the chance to rehearse them. (I would add that this repetition of a pre-rehearsed answer may help it be remembered later.)

So maybe this is a technique you are already very familiar with or, alternatively, could add to your repertoire. “ Okay, you’ve got two minutes to work out the rule and report back... off you go!” Or “ What do think are the key points to remember when doing GCSE photo cards? One minute... discuss.” Or “ What camera techniques did you notice being used in that film clip? Take a few minutes to discuss before I ask you for your ideas.”

Tom Sherrington’s book The Learning Rainforest (2017) is published by John Catt Educational and costs just over £11, which is excellent value. I think it’s relevant and interesting for all teachers and leaders.

* Some teachers confess that when they select a lollystick with a child’s name on, they actually choose a different child. This makes sense! Students think it’s random but it isn’t. Smart pupils will no doubt figure this out!



- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

What is skill acquisition theory?

For this post, I am drawing on a section from the excellent book by Rod Ellis and Natsuko Shintani called Exploring Language Pedagogy through Second Language Acquisition Research (Routledge, 2014). Skill acquisition is one of several competing theories of how we learn new languages. It’s a theory based on the idea that skilled behaviour in any area can become routinised and even automatic under certain conditions through repeated pairing of stimuli and responses. When put like that, it looks a bit like the behaviourist view of stimulus-response learning which went out of fashion from the late 1950s. Skill acquisition draws on John Anderson’s ACT theory, which he called a cognitivist stimulus-response theory. ACT stands for Adaptive Control of Thought.  ACT theory distinguishes declarative knowledge (knowledge of facts and concepts, such as the fact that adjectives agree) from procedural knowledge (knowing how to do things in certain situations, such as understand and speak a language).

The 2026 GCSE subject content is published!

Two DfE documents were published today. The first was the response to the consultation about the proposed new GCSE (originally due in October 2021) and the second is the subject content document which, ultimately, is of most interest to MFL teachers in England. Here is the link  to the document.  We are talking about an exam to be done from 2026 (current Y7s). There is always a tendency for sceptical teachers to think that consultations are a bit of a sham and that the DfE will just go ahead and do what they want when it comes to exam reform. In this case, the responses to the original proposals were mixed, and most certainly hostile as far as exam boards and professional associations representing the MFL community, universities, head teachers and awarding bodies are concerned. What has emerged does reveal some significant changes which take account of a number of criticisms levelled at the proposals. As I read it, the most important changes relate to vocabulary and the issue of topics

La retraite à 60 ans

Suite à mon post récent sur les acquis sociaux..... L'âge légal de la retraite est une chose. Je voudrais bien savoir à quel âge les gens prennent leur retraite en pratique - l'âge réel de la retraite, si vous voulez. J'ai entendu prétendre qu'il y a peu de différence à cet égard entre la France et le Royaume-Uni. Manifestation à Marseille en 2008 pour le maintien de la retraite à 60 ans © AFP/Michel Gangne Six Français sur dix sont d’accord avec le PS qui défend la retraite à 60 ans (BVA) Cécile Quéguiner Plus de la moitié des Français jugent que le gouvernement a " tort de vouloir aller vite dans la réforme " et estiment que le PS a " raison de défendre l’âge légal de départ en retraite à 60 ans ". Résultat d’un sondage BVA/Absoluce pour Les Échos et France Info , paru ce matin. Une majorité de Français (58%) estiment que la position du Parti socialiste , qui défend le maintien de l’âge légal de départ à la retraite à 60 ans,