Why Asking "What Is the Central Idea or Theme?" Is a Bad Question

What is the worst question we can ask our students but the one we reading and English language arts teachers often use and even rely upon as evidence that we are challenging and engaging our students to think critically and deeply about the texts and topics we are reading and reviewing?

What is the central idea or theme of a story or text?

What's ironic is that this very question is considered to be a good question  -- or even the best -- that we can ask our students to stimulate their deeper thinking and deepen their knowledge, understanding, and awareness about the meaning and message presented in the texts and topics being read and reviewing in class.  When ask students what is the central idea or theme, our intent and purpose is for students to think critically about the meaning or message presented in the text either concretely or abstractly.   We also believe we are challenging students to demonstrate higher order thinking -- specifically, the ability to analyze and evaluate.  

The question what is the central idea or theme should be an open-ended inquiry that should challenge and engage students to think critically and creatively about the meaning and messages presented in texts.  It is an interpretive inquiry that should prompt and encourage students to express and share their own impressions and perceptions of the central idea and theme of a text.  However, students' responses to this question should not be based on emotion or opinion alone.  They should justify their interpretation or perception of the central idea or theme by citing specific evidence from the text or explain the logical inferences made by the author.

Unfortunately, the real problem with asking what is the central idea and theme is it's posed as a closed-ended question that students can only answer correctly or incorrectly.   What's also interesting is how we pose or present the question does not resemble or reflect how the question is asked on formative and summative assessments.  Usually, we want students to provide a short answer or write an essay that describes and explains what is the central idea and theme.  Questions about the central idea or theme of a text or passage generally looks like this:

Consider what students are expected to demonstrate and communicate here.  Its intent and purpose is to assess whether the student understands what is the central idea or theme.   While the question asks students to think deeper, in regards to depth of knowledge, asking what is the central idea or theme could be categorized as a D.O.K-1  because it is asking them to recall and reproduce what the central idea or theme is as accurately and explicitly as it was taught or told to them by the text or the teacher. Also, if you think about it, multiple choice questions such as these provide the students the correct answer.  They just have to read the text and figure out which is the correct answer from the other three distractors.  Questions such as these also give students the impression that there can only be one central idea or theme expressed in a text.

Questions such as these also control or directs their thinking.  It also forces students to accept or agree with what one source states is the theme.  It could also damper or even dissuade students from thinking critically and creatively when they are reading and reviewing text - especially if they can't or don't recognize and agree with what is presented or portrayed to be the central idea or theme.

That's why this is a bad question - or even the worst question we could ask students. 

Literary texts are highly complex and dynamic - especially literary fiction that can address and allude to numerous ideas and themes.  Just look up any text explained by supplemental references such as CliffsNotes, Spark Notes, or Shmoop that are meant to help students understand the complex ideas, motifs, symbols, and themes addressed and expressed in texts.    Literary analysts and critics also have their own unique impressions and interpretations of different texts and the meaning and messages they express.  However, who is to say they are accurate or even right?

So how can we ask good questions -- or at least better ones -- that not only reflect the type of questions about central idea and theme on standardized assessments but also challenge and engage students to demonstrate and communicate the following:

• Determine the central idea or theme of a text.
• Analyze how the central idea or theme of a text develops.
• Summarize how key details and ideas strengthen and support the central idea or theme of a text.

These are the performance objectives that mark and measure cognitive rigor as well as college and career readiness.  However, when we ask , we're only addressing that first performance objective.  Just look when we state these performance objectives as cognitive rigor learning goals that challenge and engage students to show and tell higher order thinking and depth of knowledge:

• Show and tell what is the central idea or theme of a text.
• Show and tell how does the central idea or theme of a text develop.
• Show and tell how do the key  details and ideas strengthen and support the central idea or theme of a text.

Take away and you have these questions:

• What is the central idea or theme of a text?
• How does the central idea or theme of a text develop?
• How do the key details and ideas strengthen and support the central idea or theme of a text?

When asked together, these good questions scaffold the level of thinking and extend the depth of knowledge students should demonstrate and communicate - or show and tell.  That's how we can make what is the central idea or theme of a text a good -- or better -- question.

However, these are overarching essential questions that challenge and engage students to show and tell their conceptual and procedural knowledge of the central idea and theme of texts and how can both be determined.  In English language arts, good questions must focus on the specific text being read and reviewed and the central ideas and themes they express and infer.

So what if instead of asking students what is the central idea or theme we ask students the following good question?

How does the text address the following central idea or themes?

Then, instead of having students identify the central ideas or themes, we list what the themes are and encourage students to think strategically (D.O.K.-3) how the text addresses these ideas and themes by citing specific details or making logical inferences.  Asking questions about central idea and theme would look like these:

• How does Green Eggs and Ham by Dr. Seuss address the following ideas? Change can be scary but good.  Try new things.  Keep an open mind. Don’t judge appearances.  Don't take life too seriously.
• How does Charlotte's Web by E.B. White address the following themes? admiration, friendship, home, perseverance, time, life and death
• How does Charlie and the Chocolate Factory address the following themes?  family, wealth vs. poverty, greed, reward and punishment, appearances, parenting, vice, good things come in small packages, what comes around goes around
• How does Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank address the following ideas? isolation, youth and coming-of-age, identity, religion, virtue, friendship and loyalty, adolescence, the horrors of war, generosity and greed during wartime
• How does The Odyssey by Homer address the following themes?  heroism, hospitality, family, loyalty, perseverance, justice, vengeance, piety, pride, temptation, fate vs. free will, appearances vs. reality, spiritual growth, cunning vs. strength, suffering, rules, tradition, customs
• How does Romeo and Juliet address the following themes? love, fate vs. free will, hate, youth and maturity, foolishness and folly, gender and masculinity, marriage, mortality, transience, exile, feuds and grudges, sex 
• How does the Declaration of Independence address the following ideas? all men are created equal, all men have basic human rights given to them by God, autocracy, government must be by the consent of the governed,  unalienable rights, governments are built for the sole purpose of protecting these basic rights, the abuse of leadership and power and its consequences, sovereignty and justice, people have the right to rebel against and overthrow their government
Notice the difference between how these questions are posed.  Yes, the answer of what is the central idea or theme is provided in the question.  However, these good questions can be used to set the instructional focus and serve as summative assessments for the texts being read and reviewed.  They can also inform students what is the intent or purpose for reading and responding to the particular text being reviewed in class.
Also, consider how broad and global these ideas and themes are.  These are dynamic issues and topics that not only address the meaning of life but are interpreted and perceived by different perspectives, philosophies, and points view.  Just look at the ideas and themes of love, life and death, greed vs. generosity, wealth vs, poverty, or family.  What is the formal definition of each as defined in a dictionary?  What is the scientific explanation, the religious perspective, the social connotation, or even the students' own personal philosophy?  All of these are good universal essential questions we can ask students to deepen and extend students knowledge, understanding, and awareness.  They can also prompt deeper conversations and discussions amongst their classmates and with you.  However, be sure to facilitate the discussion rather than direct or lead it.  Remember - we want our students to think and come up with their own impressions and interpretations based upon the definitions they acquire and discussions they have.  
Also, consider how broad and global these ideas and themes are.  These are dynamic issues and topics that not only address the meaning of life but are interpreted and perceived by different perspectives, philosophies, and points view.  Just look at the ideas and themes of love, life and death, greed vs. generosity, wealth vs, poverty, or family.  What is the formal definition of each as defined in a dictionary?  What is the scientific explanation, the religious perspective, the social connotation, or even the students' own personal philosophy?  All of these are good universal essential questions we can ask students to deepen and extend students knowledge, understanding, and awareness.  They can also prompt deeper conversations and discussions amongst their classmates and with you.  However, be sure to facilitate the discussion rather than direct or lead it.  Remember - we want our students to think and come up with their own impressions and interpretations based upon the definitions they acquire and discussions they have.  
Once a clear definition or explanation of these broad and grand ideas and themes are established within the classroom, we can then ask students how does the text as a whole or a part of the text address this idea or theme.  For example, we could ask students to explain how does Chapter Two of Charlotte's Web address the theme of friendship - specifically, the friendship of Wilbur and Fern or how does Act 3, Scene 1 of Romeo and Juliet  address the theme of gender and masculinity.  Good questions such as these could serve as the instructional focus as well as formative assessments for individual lessons taught as part of a literary analysis or genre study.
Asking good questions about central ideas and themes in this format also emulates how these questions are phrased on standardized assessments.  They also educate students how to recognize the specific details and realize the logical inferences made within a text that strengthen and support the central idea and theme - which is the essential skill students must develop and demonstrate.
To develop and deliver instruction using these good questions, take the following steps:
1. Identify what is the central idea or theme of the text being read and reviewed in class.  Look at what supplemental study guides such as CliffsNotes, Spark Notes, or Shmoop identify as the central ideas and themes.  (Trust me - if you don't look at and use these resources, your students will.)  Challenge yourself to come up with your own impression or interpretation of what you think the central idea or theme is.
2. Phrase your good question to ask How does [the text being read and reviewed in class] address the following themes? and list the themes.  You can have this question serve as the instructional focus and serve as the summative assessment for a literary analysis or genre study or a text.
3. For each part of the text such as a passage or a chapter, choose one of the themes that part addresses one of the ideas or themes listed.  Engage the students in a whole class or small group conversation about the broad or global idea or theme.  Have them research the formal definition, investigate how the idea or theme is interpreted  in different aspects of life, and to consider their own perception or philosophy on the issue or topic.  Then, once the class has a clear and comprehensive understanding of the broad and global issue, ask the students to examine and explain how does [the part of the text] address [the idea or theme being defined and discussed]?
4. Provide students the opportunity to develop, demonstrate, and differentiate their talent and thinking by asking them a good affective question that asks what do you think is the central idea or primary theme of [the text being read and reviewed]?  You could have them choose from one or more of the ideas and themes provided or come up with their own impression and interpretation they must defend, explain, justify, and support by citing specific evidence and making logical inferences from the text.  You could also further challenge students by prompting them to argue which central idea or theme do you believe is not addressed clearly in [the text being read and reviewed].

or theme of a text is half the battle.  Students must also be able to analyze and explain how the central idea and theme develops by citing specific details and making logical inferences.  Students must also develop deeper understanding and awareness of the broad and global issues and topics central ideas and themes of texts address.  By posing good questions about central idea and theme in this format, students will not only engaged to demonstrate and communicate deeper knowledge and thinking about the text and topics they are reading and reviewing but also develop extensive understanding and awareness about how these ideas and themes extend beyond the the text.

Erik M. Francis, M.Ed., M.S., is the lead professional education specialist and owner of Maverik Education LLC, providing professional development and consultation on teaching and learning for cognitive rigor. His book Now THAT'S a Good Question! How to Promote Cognitive Rigor Through Classroom Questioning will be published by ASCD in July 2016.  For more information, please visitwww.maverikeducation.com.

The Power of You: How to Personalize Standards-Based Learning

Why is it that we remember the foundational literacy and mathematics concepts and procedures we learned in grades K-3 so well?

Is it because these concepts and procedures are so easy and simple?  Perhaps they are now considering all the skills and stuff we have learned since our time in the primary grades.  However, when we were kindergarteners, first graders, second graders, and third graders, reading and writing text and performing the four operations of arithmetic were all difficult and complex.  

So why is it those lessons and teachings have resounded with us throughout our lives?  Could it possibly be that it's because our K-3 teachers did not focus on demonstrating and communicating the concept, the operation, or procedure they were teaching but instead prompted and encouraged us to show and tell you with what we were learning?

Do we expect them to demonstrate and communicate deeper knowledge, understanding, and awareness of specific details, elements, and terminology and how concepts and procedures can be used to answer questions, address problems, accomplish tasks, and analyze texts and topics in-depth and in detail?

Do we expect them to show and tell how they have processed the ideas and information they have acquired and gathered into extensive knowledge and thinking they can transfer and use in different academic and real world contexts insightfully and in their own unique way?

When we ask them questions that refer to students in the second person - what do you believe, feel, or think; how could or would you; or what can you design, develop, or do, we are asking students to think critically and creatively how they personally can express and share the metacognitive knowledge they have acquired and developed in-depth, in detail, insightfully, and in their own unique way.

That's the power of you in teaching and learning.  It personalizes educational experiences by focusing on how each individual student perceives, processes, and presents the ideas information they have acquired and developed into deeper self-knowledge, understanding, and awareness.   It fosters and promotes differentiation by permitting students to demonstrate and communicate the depth and extent of their learning in their own unique way.   It also supports talent development by having students show and tell what can they -- or you -- create, design, develop, do, invent, plan, produce, or write using their innate strengths and skills.

Interestingly, however, as children progress through their K-12 education, teaching and learning becomes more conceptual and procedural than personal.  It becomes more important and vital -- or essential -- for students to demonstrate and communicate their deeper knowledge and thinking about how and why concepts and procedures can be used to attain and explain answers, outcomes, results, and solutions.  At the same time, we want to challenge and engage our students to demonstrate and communicate their learning authentically through by differentiating instruction and through project-based learning.

So how can we accomplish this?  We can emulate what K-3 teachers do so well --ask our students what can you design, develop, and do with what they (or you) are learning.

We can create these good questions that personalize learning using the cognitive rigor question stems associated with the cognitive category to create that lies at the top of the cognitive process dimension of Bloom's Revised Taxonomy.   To do this, replace the cognitive action of the performance objective of academic standards or tasks with one of stems.  Consider how the instructional focus of these academic standards shift from demonstrating and communicating conceptual and procedural knowledge to self-knowledge and metacognition.

You are teaching a unit on performing operations with multi-digit whole numbers and with decimals to hundredths.  Your students are expected to do the following:

• Fluently multiply multi-digit whole numbers using the standard algorithm. (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.NBT.B.5)
• Find whole-number quotients of whole numbers with up to four-digit dividends and two-digit divisors, using strategies based on place value, the properties of operations, and/or the relationship between multiplication and division. Illustrate and explain the calculation by using equations, rectangular arrays, and/or area models. (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.NBT.B.6)
• Add, subtract, multiply, and divide decimals to hundredths, using concrete models or drawings and strategies based on place value, properties of operations, and/or the relationship between addition and subtraction; relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used. (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.5.NBT.B.7)

To challenge and engage students to demonstrate and communicate conceptual knowledge, students should be asked the following questions:

How can multiplication be used to find the product of multi-digit numbers?

How can division be used to find whole-number quotients of whole numbers with up to four-digit dividends and two-digit divisors? 

 How can whole-number quotients of whole numbers with up to four-digit dividends and two-digit divisors be found using the following?

• strategies based on place value
• the properties of operations
• the relationship between multiplication and division

To challenge and engage students to demonstrate and communicate procedural knowledge, students should be asked the following questions:

How can the standard algorithm be used to multiply multi-digit numbers?

How can decimals to hundredths to be added / subtracted / multiplied / divided using the following:

• concrete models or drawings
• strategies based on place value
• properties of operations
• the relationship between addition and subtraction

To challenge and engage students to demonstrate and communicate metacognitive or self-knowledge and awareness, they should be asked the following questions:

How can you fluently multiply multi-digit numbers using the standard algorithm?

How can you find whole-number quotients of whole numbers with up to four-digit dividends and two-digit divisors using the following?

• strategies based on place value
• the properties of operations
• the relationship between multiplication and division

How can you add / subtract / multiply / divide  decimals using the following:

• concrete models or drawings
• strategies based on place value
• properties of operations
• the relationship between addition and subtraction

Notice how simply including the pronoun you completely shifts the instructional focus of the lesson or unit.  The emphasis is not demonstrating and communicating how and why mathematical concepts and procedures can be used to attain and explain answers, outcomes, results, and solutions.  It prompts and encourages students to show and tell their self-knowledge, understanding, and awareness how can you use mathematical concepts and procedures in a different academic and real world contexts.  The problems presented by the text or the teacher will serve as the evidence and examples students will need to strengthen and support their responses.

Also notice there are other performance objectives included in these standards that prompt and encourage students to illustrate, explain, and relate -- all cognitive actions that expect students to express and share the depth of their learning in their own unique way.  We can rephrase these performance objectives that will promote differentiation and individualization by asking the following good questions:

How can you illustrate explain calculations by using the following?

• equations
• rectangular arrays
• area models

How can you relate the strategy to a written method and explain the reasoning used?

Again, these good questions prompt and encourage students to think critically and creatively about youthe math being taught and learned.  They can also serve as driving questions that challenge and engage students to demonstrate and communicate the deeper and extensive knowledge they have acquired and developed through a project-based learning experience.  The graphic below includes good question stems that can be used to foster and promote project-based learning.

In English language arts, the writing standards personalizes learning by prompting and encouraging students  to demonstrate and communicate what their have learned through oral, written, creative, or technical expression.  They also challenge and engage students to express and share the depth and extent of their knowledge and thinking through specific types of text.  To challenge and engage students to express and share their knowledge and thinking in a particular form of text, we can use the following question stems:

• What kind of original argument or claim can you write and defend or refute...?
• What kind of original informative / explanatory text can you write and present...?
• What kind of original narrative can you write and share...?
• What kind of research can you conduct and present...?

These are the question stems that will allow us to transform college and career ready writing standards into driving questions that encourage students to demonstrate and communicate their knowledge and thinking about texts and topics using oral, written, creative, or technical expression.  What follows these stems are the key details and ideas they are examining and exploring in the texts they are reading.  For example, in a novel study about a dystopian science fiction novel such as The Giver by Lois Lowry or Fahrenheit 451 by Ray Bradbury, we could pose the following good questions:

• What kind of argument could you write and present that defends or refutes whether the world is heading toward the future as described by Lois Lowry / Ray Bradbury?
• What kind of informational / explanatory text can you write and present that explains how dystopian science fiction serves as a lesson and warning about the past, present, and future?
• What kind of original narrative can you write and share that incorporates the motifs, styles, and themes of dystopian science fiction and also reflects your thoughts about the future of mankind?
• What kind of research can you conduct and present that explains the influence science fiction and science have on each other and the impact scientists and science fiction authors have on each other's works?

Notice how these good questions address a variety of academic skills and stuff (I define "stuff" as the content - which is exactly how A Nation at Risk defines the curriculum we are teaching students).  The students are expected to demonstrate and communicate conceptual knowledge what is the purpose of specific texts and how they are written.   They are also expected to think deeply and express and share deeper understanding of the meaning and reasoning of texts and topics.  Most importantly, they show and tell what they have personally learned by producing a work that reflects and represents the depth and extent of their knowledge and thinking - which is truly what we want students to demonstrate and communicate.

The question stems what can you design, develop, and do can also be utilized to engage students in S.T.E.M. learning experiences that promote scientific inquiry and engineering design.  Consider how the following good questions can serve as driving questions for S.T.E.M. educational experiences:

How can you develop models to describe that organisms have unique and diverse life cycles but all have in common birth, growth, reproduction, and death? (NGSS-3-LS1-1)

How could you construct and present an argument that some animals form groups that help members survive? (NGSS-3-LS2-1)

How could you apply scientific ideas to design, test, and refine a device that converts energy from one form to another? (NGSS-4-PS3-4)

How could you develop a model to describe that light reflecting from objects and entering the eye allows objects to be seen? (NGSS-4-PS4-2)

How could you develop a model to describe that matter is made of particles too small to be seen? (NGSS-5-PS1-1)

How could you use models to describe that energy in animals’ food (used for body repair, growth, motion, and to maintain body warmth) was once energy from the sun? (NGSS-5-PS3-1)

How could you develop a model using an example to describe ways the geosphere, biosphere, hydrosphere, and/or atmosphere interact? (NGSS-5-ESS2-1)

Notice how these good questions are derived directly from the Next Generation Science Standards, which are written to foster and promote personalized learning through scientific inquiry and engineering design.  They turn students into innovators and inventors who demonstrate and communicate and how can you use the scientific concepts and principles being taught and learned to address or explain a phenomena.

Referring to you in good questions also challenges and engages us educators and our students to delve into the Affective Domain of Bloom's Taxonomy.  The Affective Domain deals with how people handle and perceive what they are learning emotionally rather than cognitively.  The categories within this taxonomy address individuals'  feelings, values appreciation, enthusiasms, motivations, and attitudes about learning.  While cognitive rigor and college and career ready standards generally do not delve into these areas, we educators can expand upon and extend students experiences by asking good questions that begin with the question stems listed below..  

Teaching and learning for cognitive rigor - especially at the higher levels - should not only be about demonstrating higher order thinking and communicating depth of knowledge about concepts, procedures, texts, and topics.  It should also extend learning by making it personal, prompting and encouraging students to think deeply and express and share the depth of their knowledge and thinking insightfully and in their own unique way.  To accomplish this, instead of asking just who, what, where, when, how or why, do what the K-3 teachers do so well - ask what can you design, develop, or do; what do you believe, feel, or think; or how could or would you.  Then watch and marvel not only how deeply students learn but how critically and creatively they show and tell what they have learned.

 Erik M. Francis, M.Ed., M.S., is the lead professional education specialist and owner of Maverik Education LLC, providing professional development and consultation on teaching and learning for cognitive rigor. His book Now THAT'S a Good Question! How to Promote Cognitive Rigor with Good Questions will be published by ASCD in 2016.  For more information, please visit www.maverikeducation.com.

High-Stakes Testing: A Bad Way to Play Ball - and Evaluate Students and Teachers

Someone once said, "Baseball is an island of activity among a sea of statistics."

The same could also be said about education.

Think about it.  The classroom is the "field" where the "game" - or instruction and assessment - takes place.   The classroom is the "team" that's funded and supported by the school or district - or "organization.  The students are the "players" and the teacher is the "manager" who leads the team to have a successful "season" or year.  

However, unlike baseball - or any sport - the value or worth of a player or team is not defined or judged by their performance in one game during a long season.

There are 162 games in a baseball season.  For 161 games, that baseball player has hit the ball every time they have stepped up to the plate.  They either get on base, hit someone else home, belt the ball out of the park, or at least get a piece of the ball when it's thrown at them.

However, there's one game where the player encounters a pitcher whom he struggles to hit off, and when he does, he grounds out, pops out, or cannot hit his teammates home.  Should that player be labeled as "falling far below" based upon that one game?  Should the manager be labeled "unqualified" because that player could not get on base, knock it out of the park, or send one of his teammates home?  Should the team be labeled "underperforming" based upon the results of that one, single game?

He would be if the player was a student, the game was the standardized assessment he was taking, and the pitches were the questions asked on that one test given one out of the 180 days of the school year.  Everything rides on that one game!  That one game will truly mark and measure whether the coach and the players are skilled players.  It doesn't matter how you the teacher / coach or your class / team performed all season long.  This one day means EVERYTHING!!!

Isn't that ridiculous?

However, this is the reality of education.  It does not matter how our students have been performing or the growth they made over the course of the school year / season - at least, not to the organizations that rate our performance and give us that letter grade or performance designation.

So how can we counter these single-day high stake tests our students take quarterly or annually?

What if we turned the performance objectives of academic standards into good questions they can address and base the depth of their knowledge and understanding on how correctly, clearly, comprehensively, and even creatively they respond? 

What if instead of having the question, problem, or task present to the student drive and determine whether students know, understand, can use the concepts and procedures they are learning we use them as textual evidence and examples to support their responses?

Let me explain.

Typically, we instruct and assess student learning by presenting students with assignments and tests that look like this:

These questions, problems, and tasks and how well the students answer them serve as the criteria for whether students can know and understand place value.  If they can answer these questions correctly, then they must know their stuff, right?

If that's the case, then why isn't that knowledge and understanding transferring to the problems they are presented on their formative benchmark or summative assessments?  If they answered the question incorrectly, is that they do not truly know or understand the concept and procedures for determining place value or were they given a "bad question" that was possibly unclear or worded poorly?

We cannot rely on the questions, problems, and tasks provided by a textbook or a test to serve as the determinant for learning.  They are examples and evidence - or support - that proves students know, understand, can use, and think deeply about the content, concepts, and procedures they are learning.  However, the true measure of depth of knowledge and understanding is whether students can demonstrate AND communicate what they have learned.  Questions, problems, and tasks in a textbook or on a text serve as the context in which students can transfer and use what they have learned, and that varies as indicated by Webb's Depth-of-Knowledge Model.

So how can we truly prove our students know and understand what they are learning deeply?  We need to shift the focus from the questions, problems, and tasks they are assigned to the addressing and responding to a good question that has been rephrased from the performance objective.

Look at the sample worksheet in this blog.  The performance objectives want the students to solve, find the products, and explain how you decided the number of zeros for the products of (a), (b), and (c).  They want students to follow the Nike slogan and Just do it!  In fact, the true graphic representation of Bloom's Revised Taxonomy should look like this.

Out of all those performance objectives, only the cognitive action explain directs students to communicate their learning.  However, what about the other problems?  Why are they not being challenged not only demonstrate but also communicate how and why that they attained their answers?

What if we rephrased those performance objectives into good questions that ask students to demonstrate and communicate this:

 Look at how the instructional focus shifts from solving, finding the product, and explaining to demonstrating and communicating -- or showing and telling -- how the concepts of place value understanding explains the outcome of these problems.  The problems -- or context in which students will demonstrate their learning -- remain the same.  However, the complexity of the assignment deepens when the performance objectives become good questions that ask students to think deeply and express and share how, what impact, and even what would happen. 

That's the true mark and measure of deep learning - not just demonstrate whether they can answer questions correctly but also communicate how and why and consider what else can be done or how else can concepts and procedures be used.  That's also the transferrable knowledge we want students to develop so they can answer any question, address any problem, accomplish any task, or analyze any text or topic presented to them.

We can also use the responses to these questions to counter the results of assessments.  We can challenge the question and contest that question was a "bad question" and truly does not reflect or represent the student's learning.  We should look at the data reports that document how many students answered that question correctly.  We can also prove that student truly knows, understands, and can transfer and use the content, concept, or procedure by having them respond to the good question we rephrase from the performance objective and use different problems they solve correctly as textual evidence to support their responses.  That is authentic assessment - the ability to demonstrate and communicate knowledge, thinking, and how it can be transferred and used in different contexts!

So how can we create these good questions from performance objectives that will serve as authentic assessments?  We need to change the introductory statement from The student will ... to Show and tell ...  We then need to replace the cognitive action of the performance objective with a question them that prompts students to understand, analyze, and evaluate how; why; what is the cause and effect; what is the impact or influence; or  what is the reason, relationship, or result.  Then we paraphrase or transcribe the context in which the student must demonstrate and communicate their learning.  For example instead of saying, The student will recognize that in a multi-digit whole number, a digit in one place represents ten times what it represents in the place to its right.(CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.4.NBT.A.1), rephrase the objective to state, Show and tell how and why does a digit in one place in a multi-digit number represents ten times what it represents in the place to its right and 1/10 what it represents to its place to the left.  Take away the show and tell and you have this good question students will be challenged to address and respond:

How and why does a digit in one place in a multi-digit number represents ten times what it represents in the place to its right and 1/10 what it represents to its place to the left

That's the question students must address, and the problems presented to them will serve as the textual evidence to support their response.  We can even give them the answers to the problems and ask them to think strategically about why is that the answer.

When it comes to cognitive rigor, we want students to demonstrate higher order thinking and communicate depth of knowledge of what they are learning.  One question, problem, or task is not a true measure of higher and deeper thinking.  We need students to explain in detail, in-depth, insightfully, and in their own unique way how and why concepts and procedures can be applied to answer questions, address problems, accomplish tasks, and analyze tasks.  We also want them to think critically and creatively about what else or how else they can transfer  and use what they are learning in different contexts.  

To go back to the baseball analogy, we want them to demonstrate and communicate how, why, and what else can they do to hit any pitch thrown to them.  That's the mark and measure or authentic learning and performance - be it on the field or in the classroom.

 Erik M. Francis, M.Ed., M.S., is the lead professional education specialist and owner of Maverik Education LLC, providing professional development and consultation on teaching and learning for cognitive rigor. His book Now THAT'S a Good Question! Questions for Cognitive Rigor will be published by ASCD in 2016.  For more information, please visit www.maverikeducation.com.

The A's of Addressing and Responding to Good Questions

When I conduct my professional development on developing good questions that address the cognitive rigor of college and career readiness, I am always asked, "How should students answer these questions?"

My answer to this question is, "It depends on the question and the student."

Questions for assessing learning are meant to be answered, and they are generally evaluated as correct or incorrect based upon the accuracy of the response.  Questions that set the instructional focus of a lesson or unit are meant to be addressed, and how deeply and extensively the student responds depends upon not only the intent and purpose of the question but also the interest of the student.

Good questions that promote cognitive rigor are assessed and evaluated based upon the following criteria:

• Accuracy: Is the response correct or incorrect (i.e. Does the student provide a response that is proven to be absolute, defensible, or irrefutable?).
• Acceptability: Does the response meet certain or specific criteria for addressing the question (i. e. Does the student meet or exceed the expectations for addressing to the question or do they respond to the question incompletely or unacceptably)?  
• Appropriateness: Does the response address the subject or topic in-depth and in detail (i.e.. Does the student support the response with examples, explanations, and evidence or does it just make a blanket statement or provide the result without explaining how or why)?
• Authenticity: Does the response reflect and represent the depth and extent of the student's learning  (i.e. Does the student express and share the depth and extent of their knowledge and thinking insightfully and in their own unique way or do they simply repeat or restate the information they have acquired and gathered as it's presented or provided?)

 These are the criteria for how responses to good questions should be assessed and evaluated -- qualitatively rather than quantitatively.  How good a response is depends upon how deeply or how extensively a student addresses the subject or topic of a question.   Consider the following scenario in which students are expected to determine how the novel The Outsiders and its characters address the theme of stereotyping.

You are teaching a book study on The Outsiders by S.E. Hinton.  Your students will demonstrate and communicate the following:

• Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and ideas. (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.2)
• Analyze how and why individuals, events, or ideas develop and interact over the course of a text. (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.3)
• Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole. (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.5)
• Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence. (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.R.8)
• Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and information clearly and accurately through the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content. (CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.CCRA.W.2)

Your students will address and respond to the following good question:

How do each of the characters in The Outsiders reflect, reject, and respond to the social stereotypes of their community and culture?

This is the topical essential question of this book study that sets the instructional focus and serves as the formative and summative assessment.  That one question is so rigorous -- or good -- that it addresses all the performance objectives of these college and career ready standards.  It also not only engages but also encourages students to delve deeper into the central ideas and themes of this novel.  How good a student's response to this question depends on the following: 

• Did the students respond to the question accurately by defining what is a social stereotype, distinguishing between the different social stereotypes in The Outsiders, and describing how the different characters reflected, rejected, and responded to these social stereotypes?
• Did the students respond to the question acceptably by providing specific examples from the text and explaining how and why these examples serve as evidentiary support for their response?
• Did the students respond appropriately by demonstrating and communicating how The Outsiders and its characters address the social stereotypes of their community and culture clearly and comprehensively as well as correctly?
• Did the students respond authentically by expressing and sharing their own ideas, opinions, and perspectives on how the novel The Outsiders and the characters reflect, reject, and respond to the social stereotypes of their community and culture insightfully and in their own unique way?

These guiding questions assess and evaluate students' responses based upon its quality. It’s also not a simple question students can answer with a yes or no or even one or two sentences. Good students expect students to express themselves in-depth, in detail, and insightfully. They also require students to address and respond using some form of oral, written, creative, or technical expression.

With mathematics, the quality of the response is based not only on whether they can solve the problem correctly but explain how and why they used the concepts and procedures they are learning clearly, comprehensively, and even creatively.  Consider the following scenario in which students are learning about equivalent fractions.

You are teaching a unit on fraction equivalence and ordering.  Your students are expected to demonstrate and communicate the following:

• Explain why a fraction a/b is equivalent to a fraction (n × a)/(n × b) by using visual fraction models, with attention to how the number and size of the parts differ even though the two fractions themselves are the same size. Use this principle to recognize and generate equivalent fractions. (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.4.NF.A.1)
• Compare two fractions with different numerators and different denominators, e.g., by creating common denominators or numerators, or by comparing to a benchmark fraction such as 1/2. Recognize that comparisons are valid only when the two fractions refer to the same whole. Record the results of comparisons with symbols >, =, or <, and justify the conclusions, e.g., by using a visual fraction model. (CCSS.MATH.CONTENT.4.NF.A.2)

Your students will address and respond to the following good question:

How can you recognize, generate, and explain why fractions are equivalent?

The quality of the student's response to this question depends on the following: 

• Does the student respond to the question accurately by defining what is an equivalent fraction and applying the concept and procedures to make and match the fractions presented to them be equivalent?
• Does the student respond to the question acceptably by completing all the problems and showing their work?
• Does the student respond appropriately by providing the answer and explaining why each of the fractions they make and match are equivalent and how they determined they were equivalent?
• Does the student respond authentically by showing and telling how they personally recognized and generated the equivalent fractions verbally in their own words or visually using fraction models?

The key to promoting cognitive rigor through classroom questioning is communication. Knowing what is the correct answer and showing how can the answer be attained correctly is half the battle. Students should also be expected to tell why this is the answer and think deeply about how could share their knowledge and understanding in detail, in-depth, insightfully, and in their own unique way.

Here are some ways to encourage students to address and respond to good questions:

1. Show and tell. Set the expectations right from the beginning that students will be required to demonstrate and communicate -- or show and tell -- what they are learning. Let them know that knowing what is the answer and showing how can concepts and procedures be used is half the battle. Students must also be able to tell why is this the answer and think deeply about how else can concepts and procedures be used. That’s what will be expected of them and also how their learning will be assessed and evaluated.
2. Discourage one-word or one-sentence responses. Identifying what is the Earth as a planet or who is Edgar Allan Poe as an author who wrote Gothic tales during the 1800s should not be considered acceptable or appropriate responses. Yes, these responses are accurate, but going into details and depth would be more acceptable and appropriate expressions of deep knowledge.  Encourage students to describe and explain further. Have them use examples from the text as explanations and evidentiary support.    
3. Ask, “What do you mean?” Every time a student gives an answer in the form of a simple statement, ask them, “What do you mean?” This prompts them to explain why is this the answer and elaborate upon how was the answer attained. It also challenges them to defend and justify their responses and even question their own thinking and reasoning. For example, if you ask what is the relationship between fractions and division and the student responds, A fraction is a way to divide numbers, asking what do you mean prompts the student not only to explain their response but also think about how they can phrase their response clearly, correctly, and comprehensively.   You can also ask how do you know to prompt students to justify their knowledge.
4. Paraphrase or transcribe information. Students should also not be permitted to recite, repeat, or restate information explicitly as presented by the text or teacher. They should paraphrase or transcribe the information and cite or credit the source from where they obtained the information. For example, students should define what is volume or describe where and when did World War II take place in their own words instead of just simply copying what the text says.   Having students explain in their own words “encourages a deeper processing of ideas, which can lead to a better understanding of the material” -- especially if the students write the information longhand (Mueller & Oppenheimer, 2014).
5. Teach like an expert. Teachers generally teach students what is the answer by presenting the question or problem and showing and telling students how to use concepts and procedures to answer the question correctly. Experts, however, pose the question, present their answer, explain how and why they achieved their outcome or result, and show how it can be applied in different contexts. That’s the deep knowledge students need to learn -- how to transfer and use knowledge and thinking. To do this, present students the question or problem with its answer or solution and ask them to examine how and why. You can even show them visually the procedures and prompt them to explain how is the concept and procedure used. Then, once they provide an explanation that is accurate, acceptable, appropriate, and authentic, challenge them to investigate and inquire how else can the concept and procedure be used in a different context.
6. Have students choose their grade. Unfortunately, some students may not go into the detail and depth they should with the responses. They might also feel as if answering the question correctly or the information they provide is “good enough”.   While we want our students to go deeper with their responses, we also don’t want to discourage them or make them feel defensive about their responses. Here’s a dialogue I use with students to encourage them to provide more depth and detail in their responses:

Mr. Francis: Is this your answer?

Student: Yes.

Mr. Francis: Is this your final answer?

Student: Yes.

Mr. Francis: Is that your A answer?

Student: I think it is.

Mr. Francis: Okay. Do you want an A?

Student: Yes (Hopefully, they’ll say yes.)

Mr. Francis: If you want an A, why don’t you look into this and tell me a little more about how you came to this response. However, that’s up to you. What you have here is accurate. However, your grade is based upon whether the response is acceptable, appropriate, and authentic.   So if you want that A, why don’t you look into this or tell me how you came to this response. However, it’s up to you.

Notice what’s happening in this exchange. Instead of telling the student their response is not “good enough”, they are being ask to consider and reflect upon the quality of their response by asking them what they think and what their perception is. You’re validating their response as accurate but challenging and encouraging them to go further so it meets all the criteria for responding to good questions. You’re also suggesting to them what exactly they should examine and investigate further in order to improve their response. However -- and this is key -- you’re allowing the student to choose whether they want to expand upon their answer and earn that higher grade.   Not only are you teaching them how to delve deeper but you’re also teaching them a life lesson about making good choices and the importance of producing quality work (and if they choose not to go further, then they need to accept the grade they earn).

Keep in mind cognitive rigor is qualitative, not quantitative. Promoting cognitive rigor through classroom questioning involves asking good questions that prompt students to think deeply about how they can transfer and use what they are learning. The quality of their responses should be evaluated not only based upon whether they are accurate but also whether they truly express and share the depth of students’ learning in an acceptable, appropriate, and authentic manner.

Erik M. Francis, M.Ed., M.S., is the lead professional education specialist and owner of Maverik Education LLC, providing professional development and consultation on teaching and learning for cognitive rigor. His book Now THAT'S a Good Question! Questions for Cognitive Rigor will be published by ASCD in 2016.  For more information, please visit www.maverikeducation.com.