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


Popular posts from this blog

The latest research on teaching vocabulary

I've been dipping into The Routledge Handbook of Instructed Second Language Acquisition (2017) edited by Loewen and Sato. This blog is a succinct summary of Chapter 16 by Beatriz González-Fernández and Norbert Schmitt on the topic of teaching vocabulary. I hope you find it useful.

1.  Background

The authors begin by outlining the clear importance of vocabulary knowledge in language acquisition, stating that it's a key predictor of overall language proficiency (e.g. Alderson, 2007). Students often say that their lack of vocabulary is the main reason for their difficulty understanding and using the language (e.g. Nation, 2012). Historically vocabulary has been neglected when compared to grammar, notably in the grammar-translation and audio-lingual traditions as well as  communicative language teaching.

(My note: this is also true, to an extent, of the oral-situational approach which I was trained in where most vocabulary is learned incidentally as part of question-answer sequence…

Delayed dictation

What is “delayed dictation”?

Instead of getting students to transcribe immediately what you say, or what a partner says, you can enforce a 10 second delay so that students have to keep running over in their heads what they have heard. Some teachers have even used the delay time to try to distract students with music.

It’s an added challenge for students but has significant value, I think. It reminds me of a phenomenon in music called audiation. I use it frequently as a singer and I bet you do too.

Audiation is thought to be the foundation of musicianship. It takes place when we hear and comprehend music for which the sound is no longer or may never have been present. You can audiate when listening to music, performing from notation, playing “by ear,” improvising, composing, or notating music. When we have a song going round in our mind we are audiating. When we are deliberately learning a song we are audiating.

In our language teaching case, though, the earworm is a word, chunk of l…

Designing a plan to improve listening skills

Read many books and articles about listening and you’ll see it described as the forgotten skill. It certainly seems to be the one which causes anxiety for both teachers and students. The reasons are clear: you only get a very few chances to hear the material, exercises feel like tests and listening is, well, hard. Just think of the complex processes involved: segmenting the sound stream, knowing lots of words and phrases, using grammatical knowledge to make meaning, coping with a new sound system and more. Add to this the fact that in England they have recently decided to make listening tests harder (too hard) and many teachers are wondering what else they can do to help their classes.

For students to become good listeners takes lots of time and practice, so there are no quick fixes. However, I’m going to suggest, very concisely, what principles could be the basis of an overall plan of action. These could be the basis of a useful departmental discussion or day-to-day chats about meth…

Five great advanced level French listening sites

If your A-level students would like opportunities to practise listening there are plenty of sources you can recommend for accessible, largely comprehensible and interesting material. Here are some I have come across while searching for resources over recent years.

Daily Geek Show

I love this site. It's fresh, youthful and full of really interesting material. They have an archive of videos, both short and long, from various sources, grouped under a range of themes: insolite (weird news items), science, discovery, technology, ecology and lifestyle. There should be something there to interest all your students while adding to their broader education. Here is one I enjoyed (I shall seriously think about buying tomatoes in winter now):

France Bienvenue

This site has been around for years and is the work of a university team in Marseilles. You get a mixture of audio and video material complete with transcripts and explanations.This is much more about the personal lives of the students …

Responsive teaching

Dylan Wiliam, the academic most associated with Assessment for Learning (AfL), aka formative assessment, has stated that these labels have not been the most helpful to teachers. He believes that they have been partly responsible for poor implementation of AfL and the fact that AfL has not led to the improved outcomes originally intended.

Wiliam wrote on Twitter in 2013:

“Example of really big mistake: calling formative assessment formative assessment rather than something like "responsive teaching".”

For the record he subsequently added:

“The point I was making—years ago now—is that it would have been much easier if we had called formative assessment "responsive teaching". However, I now realize that this wouldn't have helped since it would have given many people the idea that it was all about the teacher's role.”

I suspect he’s right about the appellation and its consequences. As a teacher I found it hard to get my head around the terms AfL and formative assess…