The first in a series of posts looking at how responsive teaching can be understood, implemented, and embedded within system-wide efforts to improve teaching and learning.
Super helpful! Excellent examples and non-examples. Are "contingent scaffolding" and "responsive teaching" the same or just similar? I'm wondering if I got it right in this explanation: Pathways to Information: Accessing Knowledge by Leveraging Language (https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/pathways-to-information-accessing?r=5spuf)
There’s a term for this strategic knowledge—contingent scaffolding—which simply means that your next teacher move is contingent upon a student move. It’s not four-dimensional chess; it’s just everyday teaching to three-dimensional children. Depending on questions students are asking, or how they answer one of your questions, you may need to alter the trajectory of the lesson and take it in a new direction—or simply revisit prior instruction to reteach what hasn’t been completely understood.
In a recent discussion on the Better Teaching: Only Stuff That Works podcast, Carl Hendrick (How Learning Happens) refers to the observation of a pro-level soccer player, who explains that all the players at that level have comparable skill; the difference is that the most effective ones make better decisions.
Hendrick applies this analogy to teaching. While struggling to make better day-to-day decisions, teachers often fall victim to insufficient information from feedback loops. In sports—and certainty in chess—he asserts, if you make a mistake, you get instant feedback. The loops are really short, and bad decisions are punished quickly, and you see what you did wrong. But with teaching the feedback loops are long—so long, in fact, that "you might not find out that you did something wrong for six months, or even longer—or ever!"
And that feedback loop is lengthened -- or at least complicated -- by increased class sizes. One teacher staying on top of 30 third graders is definitely rocket surgery performed as the rocket is flying.
"It demands that teachers become skilled diagnosticians, capable of recognising not just what students know, but how they know it and where their understanding might be brittle or incomplete." That is a great line! Thank you for the thoughtful post.
Really appreciated this nuanced discussion! I think back to how everything I learned about teaching in graduate school (which is to say, mostly nothing) was some variation on telling students what I knew and then getting them to discuss it. Thankful that we’ve come this far in the intervening decades!
Re: "But learning is messy. It meanders, loops back, and crucially, it sometimes stalls before it accelerates."
This should be shouted from rooftops. Plus, anyone who has raised a toddler and was paying attention knows that they usually regress right before they approach a major milestone: Tantrums, meltdowns, lots of sleeping -- and then, they're doing the thing! I can't prove it, but I swear that teenagers are similar.
Re: "basic sequences like learning letter sounds"
There is nothing basic about letter sounds in the English language.
This has been really insightful, thanks. I think a diagram would help here.
My interpretation: responsive teaching is thinking in a non-linear way (like in a zettelkasten, where you revisit this same idea in terms of how it connects to other ideas from a variety of different perspectives)
but also focusing on ‘where might I be misunderstanding’ which is possibly something AI can help with. By using it to assess that note and respond with the opposite argument, or perspective from a range of thinkers or different professions
Super helpful! Excellent examples and non-examples. Are "contingent scaffolding" and "responsive teaching" the same or just similar? I'm wondering if I got it right in this explanation: Pathways to Information: Accessing Knowledge by Leveraging Language (https://harriettjanetos.substack.com/p/pathways-to-information-accessing?r=5spuf)
There’s a term for this strategic knowledge—contingent scaffolding—which simply means that your next teacher move is contingent upon a student move. It’s not four-dimensional chess; it’s just everyday teaching to three-dimensional children. Depending on questions students are asking, or how they answer one of your questions, you may need to alter the trajectory of the lesson and take it in a new direction—or simply revisit prior instruction to reteach what hasn’t been completely understood.
In a recent discussion on the Better Teaching: Only Stuff That Works podcast, Carl Hendrick (How Learning Happens) refers to the observation of a pro-level soccer player, who explains that all the players at that level have comparable skill; the difference is that the most effective ones make better decisions.
Hendrick applies this analogy to teaching. While struggling to make better day-to-day decisions, teachers often fall victim to insufficient information from feedback loops. In sports—and certainty in chess—he asserts, if you make a mistake, you get instant feedback. The loops are really short, and bad decisions are punished quickly, and you see what you did wrong. But with teaching the feedback loops are long—so long, in fact, that "you might not find out that you did something wrong for six months, or even longer—or ever!"
Re: "It’s not four-dimensional chess; it’s just everyday teaching to three-dimensional children."
Then again, this could be just another example of how teachers sell themselves short.
That feedback loop is shortened through effectively implemented, and frequent, checking for understanding. Looking forward to the next post!
And that feedback loop is lengthened -- or at least complicated -- by increased class sizes. One teacher staying on top of 30 third graders is definitely rocket surgery performed as the rocket is flying.
"It demands that teachers become skilled diagnosticians, capable of recognising not just what students know, but how they know it and where their understanding might be brittle or incomplete." That is a great line! Thank you for the thoughtful post.
Really appreciated this nuanced discussion! I think back to how everything I learned about teaching in graduate school (which is to say, mostly nothing) was some variation on telling students what I knew and then getting them to discuss it. Thankful that we’ve come this far in the intervening decades!
Re: "But learning is messy. It meanders, loops back, and crucially, it sometimes stalls before it accelerates."
This should be shouted from rooftops. Plus, anyone who has raised a toddler and was paying attention knows that they usually regress right before they approach a major milestone: Tantrums, meltdowns, lots of sleeping -- and then, they're doing the thing! I can't prove it, but I swear that teenagers are similar.
Re: "basic sequences like learning letter sounds"
There is nothing basic about letter sounds in the English language.
Every letter is silent sometimes:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/grammar/mums-the-letter-when-letters-dont-say-a-thing
And the Chaos, a poem by Gerard Nolst Trenité:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chaos
Thanks Carl - I love how this hints at the threshold concepts idea - how the learning leads to a transformed understanding.
Thank you for sharing these insightful thoughts and creative ideas.
This has been really insightful, thanks. I think a diagram would help here.
My interpretation: responsive teaching is thinking in a non-linear way (like in a zettelkasten, where you revisit this same idea in terms of how it connects to other ideas from a variety of different perspectives)
but also focusing on ‘where might I be misunderstanding’ which is possibly something AI can help with. By using it to assess that note and respond with the opposite argument, or perspective from a range of thinkers or different professions
Key learnings here. Thank you.
Thank you so much for this great article. Vital concept of responsive teaching.....
I would like to cite you on recursive learning, but I need a peer-reviewed publication in PDF format. Is there any? Thank you in advance.