Questions, Claims and Evidence: The Important Place of Argument in Children's Science Writing.

Norton-Meier, L., Hand, B., Hockenberry, L., & Wise, K. (2008). Questions, claims and evidence: The important place of argument in children's science writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.


Summary:
This book goes into more detail on using the Science Writing Heuristic developed by the authors (specifically Brian Hand) and described in previous articles. It includes student and teacher voices, as well as examples of student work. Each chapter ends with a Key Understandings paragraph that nicely sum up what is contained in the book. 


Chapter summaries:


1. "There are two important major cognitive ideas that we need to focus on within science classrooms. First, every individual's learning is an activity that is undertaken by the individual for which we as teachers have no control. Learning is an activity that is controlled by an individual. Second, knowledge is stored in long-term memory as conceptual frameworks, not as separate content knowledge points. The function of learning leading to understanding is to develop and enrich one's conceptual frameworks. The key point is that  that individual learner controls learning."


2. "Matching teaching to our views of learning means that we have to change some of the strategies that  we use in our classrooms. ... We need to change how we question students, how we use group work, and how much control we think we have of student learning. Our encouragement is to keep trying: Work on one particular aspect and the other parts of the teaching and learning dynamic will change also. ...  It is up to teachers to orchestrate opportunities where students can share an expand their developing understandings."


3. ".... The purposes involved in the various writing skills change as a consequence of focusing on the learning and with consideration to topic, type, purpose, audience, and the method of text production. Assessing this writing is also an important consideration, but with a reminder of who controls learning, it is essential to include the student in this assessment process by allowing the audience for the writing to provide key feedback and assessment in addition to the teacher."


4. "Developing good questions takes time and practice. Understanding Bloom's Taxonomy and using tools such as the Bloom's Question Starters can help us develop questions and move students to higher levels of thinking as they negotiate meaning about the big idea. Activating prior knowledge is essential to developing good questions. When student are curious about a concept, questions flow naturally. A good question is one that requires students to think critically and investigate thoroughly, and leads to negotiation of meaning and a deeper understanding of the big idea."


5. "Good questions, questions that require higher-level thinking, lead to evidence. the process of students negotiating understanding of the big idea, the process that takes studetns from questions to evidence, is often "messy" and takes time. Students need to:"

• Investigate

• Observe

• Think about what they're observing

• Discuss their observations with peers

• Ask questions about what they are seeing

• Reflect upon their observations and have opportunities to record their observations in a variety of ways

"When students are actively engaged in negotiation their understanding through observation and investigation of their questions, teachers support students by: "

• Observing students to identify misconceptions in their understanding

• Prompting students to "look again" while providing additional opportunities to investigate

• Asking additional higher-level questions to help students negotiate understanding of the big idea

• Providing a safe environment that encourages students to take risks and think critically

6. The last three chapters are focused on tools to help teachers implement the SWH approach, including identifying pitfalls and guidance for helping students through the process. 

A final note - this book primarily focuses on elementary school age children. 

Key 

Effects of Peer Tutoring on Student Achievement

Horvath, K. (n.d.). Effects of peer tutoring on student achievement (Unpublished master's thesis). Retrieved from http://www.cehs.ohio.edu/gfx/media/pdf/Horvath.pdf


Summary
The author was a graduate student from Ohio and her research question was: “Does one-on-one peer tutoring have an effect on student academic achievement; specifically, retelling accuracy as a measure of reading comprehension?” (p. 5)  She conducted her study over a four week period in a sixth grade classroom.  The study was limited to two students who participated in peer assisted learning and two students who did not.  The limited nature of her data make the results of her study difficult to qualify as representative of a larger group.


Reflection
I am glad I came across this thesis for a number of reasons.  Since her research question is very similar to mine, I was interested to see what data she collected and what area of learning she focused on.  The main reason this was a helpful read was her extensive literature review.  I found the list very helpful and plan to use many of the resources listed.


Resources:  

American Psychological Association (2010). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association (6th edition). American Psychological Association: Washington, D.C. 


Brewer, R. D., Reid, M. S. , & Rhine, B. G. (2003). Peer coaching: Students teaching to learn. Intervention in School and Clinic, 39(2), 113-120. 
Dineen, J. P., Clark, H. B., & Risley, T. R. (1977). Peer tutoring among elementary students: Educational benefits to the tutor. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 231-238. 


Elbaum, B., Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., & Moody, S. W. (1999). Grouping practices and reading outcomes for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 65, 399-415. 


Enright, S. M., & Axelrod, S. (1995). Peer tutoring: Applied analysis working in the classroom. School Psychology Quarterly, 10(1), 29-40. 


Fitz-Gibbon, C. T. (1988). Peer tutoring as a teaching strategy. Educational Management and Administration, 16, 217-229. 


Greenwood, C. R. (1991). Longitudinal analysis of time, engagement, and achievement of at risk versus non risk students. Exceptional Children, 57(6), 521-535. 


Greenwood, C. R. (1997). Classwide peer tutoring. Behavior and Social Issues, 7(1), 53-57. 


Harris, V. W., & Sherman, J. A. (1973). Effects of peer tutoring and consequences on the math EFFECTS OF PEER TUTORING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT 25 performance of elementary classroom students. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 6, 587-597. 


Kamps, D. M., Barbetta, P. M., Leonard, B. R., & Delquadri, J. (1994). Classwide peer tutoring: An integration strategy to improve reading skills and promote peer interactions among students with autism and general education peers. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 27, 49-61. 


Kourea, L., Cartledge, G., & Musti-Rao, S. (2007). Improving the reading skills of urban elementary students through total class peer tutoring. Remedial and Special Education, 28(2),  95-107. 
Leslie, L., & Caldwell, J.S. (2011). Qualitative Reading Inventory – 5 (5th ed.). Boston: Pearson. 


Levine, H. M., Glass, G. V., & Meister, G. R. (1987). A cost-effectiveness analysis of computer assisted instruction. Evaluation Review, 11, 50-72. 


Maheady, L., & Harper, G. F. (1987). A class-wide peer tutoring program to improve the spelling test performance of low-income, third- and fourth-grade students. Education and Treatment of Children, 10(2), 120-133. 


McCarty, T., Griffin, S., Apollini, T., & Shores, R. E. (1977) Increased peer teaching with group-oriented constingencies for arithmetic performance in behavior-disoriented EFFECTS OF PEER TUTORING ON STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT 26 adolescents. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 10, 313. 


McGee, G. G., Almeida, M. C., Sulzer-Azaroff, B., & Feldman, R. S. (1992). Promoting reciprocal interactions via peer incidental teaching. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 25(1), 117-126. 


Miller, D., Topping, K., & Thurston, A. (2010). Peer tutoring in reading: The effects of role and organization on two dimensions of self-esteem. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 80, 417-433. 


Miller, L. J, & Kohler, F. W. (1993). Winning with peer tutoring. Preventing School Failure, 37(3), 14-19. 


Olmscheid, C. (1999). The effectiveness of peer tutoring in the elementary grades. Retrieved from ERIC database. (ED430959) 


Pigott, H. E., Fantuzzo, J. W., & Clement, P. W. (1986). The effects of reciprocal peer tutoring and group contingencies on the academic performance of elementary school children. Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis, 19, 93-98. 


Schisler, R., Joseph, L. M., Konrad, M., & Alber-Morgan, S. (2010). Comparison of the effectiveness and efficiency of oral and written retellings and passage review as strategies for comprehending text. Psychology in the Schools, 47(2), 135-152. 



Simmons, D. C., Fuchs, D., Fuchs, l. S., Hodge, J. P., & Mathes, P. G. (1994). Importance of instructional complexity and role reciprocity to classwide peer tutoring. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 9, 203-212. 


Topping, K. J. (2005). Trends in peer learning. Educational Psychology, 25(6), 631-645. 


Webb, M. (1988). Peer helping relationships in urban schools. Equity and Choice, 4(3), 35-38.

Inquiry Investigation: A New Approach to Laboratory Reports

Hand, B.; Keys, C. W. Inquiry Investigation: A New Approach to Laboratory Reports. Sci. Teach. 1999, 66, 27-29.

Summary:
The authors have developed a science writing heuristic the follows a path of inquiry to be used for student investigations.

The Science Writing Heuristic, part I
A template for teacher-designed activities to promote laboratory understanding.

1. Exploration of pre-instruction understanding through individual or group concept mapping. 
2. Pre-laboratory activiitesm including informal writing, makeing observations, brainstorming, and posing questions.
3. Participation in laboratory activity (can be student generated procedure).
4. Negotiation phase I - writing personal meanings for laboratory activity (lab journals?).
5. Negotiation phase II - sharing and comparing data interpretations in small groups (for example making group charts).
6. Negotiation phase III - comparing science ideas to textbooks or other printed resources (for example writing group notes in response to focus questions).
7. Negotiation phase IV - individual reflection and writing (for example, creating a presentation such as a poster or report or a larger audience).
8. Exploration of post-instruction understanding through concept mapping

The writing heuristic, part II

A template for student thinking.

1. Beginning ideas - what are my questions?
2. Tests - what did I do?
3. Observations - what did I see?
4. Claims - what can I claim?
5. Evidence - How do I know? Why am I making these claims?
6. Reading - How do my ideas compare with other ideas?
7. Reflection - How have my ideas changed?

Quotes:
"The SWH give students multiple opportunities to develop conceptual understanding by integrating practical laboratory work with peer group discussion, writing, and reading." p. 28

"Next students engage in pre-investigation activities, which might include making initial observations or explorations, writing questions and brainstorming ideas."

"Prompts 4 & 5 direct students to construct a deeper understanding of their laboratory findings by stating the knowledge, claims, or understandings gained from the lab and providing a coherent set of reasons for those claims. Prompt 6 guides students to check their explanations with an authority figure such as a text book or teacher."

-Note: while I love the idea of students being the final authority on their findings, I do think the final step of researching the phenomena explored and comparing their results to previously established results is a necessary step at this stage.

Wisdom of the (Multi) Ages: Students Learn by Teaching

Jackel, M. (2008, June 5). Wisdom of the (multi) ages: students learn by teaching. Edutopia. Retrieved from http://www.edutopia.org/multiage-classroom-looping-peer-mentoring
Summary
The article discusses the benefits of multi-age classrooms.  "Older students model good behavior and, through continual peer mentoring, stretch their teaching muscles and solidify their own knowledge. And the younger students learn that teachers aren't the only ones who know a thing or two."  The author references a study that older siblings have higher IQs due to the fact that "Explaining something to a younger sibling solidifies your knowledge and allows you to grow more extensively," he added. "The younger one is asking questions and challenging meanings and explanations, and that will contribute to the intellectual maturity of the older one." stated Robert Zajonc, a psychologist at Stanford University. 


Reflection
I stumbled upon this article on Edutopia, hoping to find a specific study where ELs and EOs were paired as I plan to do in my action research project.  I was pleased to read that the idea of working with a peer mentor to solidify knowledge has been documented in multi-age classrooms.  This gives me another resource as I continue my research. 


Resources
New York Times article, Robert Zajonc, a psychologist at Stanford University

Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades

Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Shanahan, T., Linan-Thompson, S., Collins, P., & Scarcella, R. (2007). Effective Literacy and English Language Instruction for English Learners in the Elementary Grades: A Practice Guide (NCEE 2007-4011). Washington, DC: National Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/publications/practiceguides.

Summary:  

This is a Practice Guide that highlights current effective strategies being used in classrooms with English Learners.  The purpose of the guide is to give specific recommendations to administrators and teachers based on evidence of research.  Five recommendations are listed as showing strong evidence of effectiveness:  1. Screen for reading problems and monitor progress 2. Provide intensive small-group reading interventions 3. Provide extensive and varied vocabulary instruction 4. Develop academic English 5. Schedule regular peer-assisted learning opportunities

Since my action research question focuses on English speaking students collaborating with English learners as peer-to-peer mentors, I reviewed this section in depth.  

Quotes:

"Ensure that teachers of English learners devote approximately 90 minutes a week to instructional activities in which pairs of students at different ability levels or different English language proficiencies work together on academic tasks in a structured fashion. These activities should practice and extend material already taught." (p. 28)  

"Partner work is an opportunity for students to practice and extend what the 

teacher has taught during regular instruction. Partner work is excellent for tasks in 

which correct and incorrect responses can be clearly determined (word and text reading and phonological awareness activities, such as identifying sounds in words)." (p. 28)

"In three of the five studies, students worked in pairs to practice, consolidate, and extend prereading, decoding, comprehension, and spelling skills. In each of the studies student pairs, with different abilities in either reading or English language proficiency, were provided with clear instructional activities and taught procedures for working effectively with peers. Teachers used guides that included prompt cards and activities for students." (p. 28)

"Also consider the use of partnering for English language development instruction.

The Panel members know that there was no experimental research on this topic, 

but we still consider this to be a promising practice." (p. 29)

Reflection:

This report helped confirm that I'm on the right track with my research question!  Peer to peer mentoring works if done correctly.  I was also interested to read that there is not experimental research specifically on paring English Dominant and English Learners.  I believe there must be some information out there from teachers that have tried this.  This can't be a completely original idea!

Resources:

Calhoon, M. B., Al Otaiba, S., Cihak, D., King, A., & Avalos, A. C. (2006). Effects of a peer-mediated program on reading skill acquisition for two-way bilingual first grade classrooms. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Calderón, M., Hertz-Lazarowitz, R., & Slavin, R. (1998). Effects of bilingual cooperative integrated reading and composition on students transitioning from Spanish to English reading. Elementary School Journal, 99, 153–165.

Cirino, P. T., Vaughn, S., Linan-Thompson, 

S., Cardenas-Hagan, E., Fletcher, J. M., & Francis, D. J. (2007). One year follow-up 

outcomes of Spanish and English interventions for English language learners at-risk for reading problems. Manuscript submitted for publication.

Saenz, L. M., Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (2005). Peer-assisted learning strategies for 

English language learners with learning disabilities. Exceptional Children, 71, 231– 247.

Providing a Rationale in an Autonomy-Supportive Way as a Strategy to Motivate Others During an Uninteresting Activity

Annotation created by Melissa Han

Reeve,J.,Jang,H.,&Omura,M.(September 2002). Providing a Rationale in an Autonomy-Supportive Way as a Strategy to Motivate Others During an Uninteresting Activity. Motivation and Emotion, 26(3),183-207.

Quotes:

~” Only when the rationale is accompanied by facilitating autonomy-supportive conditions (i.e., non-controlling language, acknowledging negative feelings) can it be expected to increase self-determination and engagement”(186).

~” Before a rationale such as the one above can be expected to facilitate the identification experience, the socializer first needs to discover and then communicate why putting forth effort on the task would be a valuable investment for the person”(203).

Ideas:

This article states that providing a rationale, even if the activity is uninteresting, can raise motivation. The rationale is providing a reason as to why the activity is valuable to the person doing the activity. But the rationale proved to raise motivation if accompanied with autonomy-supportive environments and acknowledging negative feelings. For example, a teacher would state “The reason why you are being asked to try ___ is for the benefit of ___. The information so far has been difficult and at times frustrating. Still, I ask you to concentrate, persevere, and try hard.”

In this study, the subjects were asked to learn the Chinese language. The following were measured: perceived importance, perceived self-determination, effort, and interest. When the rationale was provided, perceived importance increased but not self-determination. When non-controlling language was provided, self-determination also increased but not perceived importance.

Connections:

I think as educators we strive to design meaningful, relevant curriculum for our students. But the reality is that not all students will receive it as that initially or even during the whole duration of the lesson. I was relieved to find that this study addressed this issue.

Providing a rationale needs to be accompanied with autonomy-supportive conditions and acknowledgment of negative feelings in order for motivation to increase in an uninteresting activity. Stating the reason why isn’t enough. Educators still need to connect the relevance of the activity to the students’ experiences. I am struck by how the autonomy-supportive studies I have read consistently addresses the reciprocal relationship between teachers and students as they collaborate with one another to create a learning environment that stresses on the self-regulating process instead of solely on concept understanding.

Other Sources:

Berlyne, D. E. (1966). Curiosity and exploration. Science, 153, 25–33.

Grolnick, W. S., & Ryan, R. M. (1987). Autonomy in children’s learning: An experimental and individual difference investigation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 890–898.

Kohn, A. (1993). Punished by rewards: The trouble with gold stars, incentive plans, A’s, praise, and other bribes. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.

Sansone, C., & Smith, J. L. (2000). Self-regulating interest: When, why, and how. In C. Sansone & J. M. Harackiewicz (Eds.), Intrinsic motivation: Controversies and new directions (pp. 343–373).

Skinner, E. A., & Belmont, M. J. (1993). Motivation in the classroom: Reciprocal effects of teacher behavior and student engagement across the school year. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 571–581.

Wade, S. E., Buxton, W., & Kelly, M. (1999). Using think alouds to examine reader-text interest. Reading Research Quarterly, 34, 194–216.

Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork

Annotation created by Melissa Han

Assor,A., Kaplan,H., & Roth,G.(2002). Choice is good, but relevance is excellent: Autonomy-enhancing and suppressing teacher behaviours predicting students’ engagement in schoolwork. British Journal of Educational Psychology. 72, 261–278.

Quotes:

~” Number of educator-behaviours that affect students’ feelings toward and

engagement in learning. The theory groups those behaviours into three general

clusters: autonomy-support, competence-support (structure) and relational-support

(interpersonal involvement), according to the basic need they are assumed to support”(262).

~” According to Self Determination Theory (SDT, Ryan & Deci 2000; Ryan, 1993),

people experience a sense of autonomy when they can realise their personal goals,

values and interests”(262).

~” To foster the relevance of schoolwork for children, teachers need to take an

empathic-active role in relation to their students. This role requires the teacher first to

understand students’ goals, interests and needs, and then to link school tasks to those

goals, interests and needs”(265).

~” The primary task of the teacher is to try to understand their

students’ authentic interests and goals, and then help students to understand the

connection between their personal goals and interests and schoolwork”(273).

Ideas:

This article addresses components of autonomy enhancing teacher behavior. The components listed were fostering relevance, allowing criticism, providing choice, encourage self-initiation, minimize use of controls, and acknowledge others’ perspective and feelings. Autonomy suppressing teacher behavior was also listed as suppressing criticism, intruding, and forcing unmeaningful acts.

Fostering relevance was highlighted as the best predictive of positive affect and engagement. Fostering relevance is when the teacher explains the contribution of learning a task to a student’s personal goal and attempts to understand a student’s feelings and thoughts around the learning task. If the student isn’t aware of their goals, then teachers should provide choice so that students can work on tasks that allow students to realize their goals or interests contributing to student experience of autonomy in learning.

Connections:

I had initially thought that autonomy was something that could be achieved if I just provided choice to my students, but according to this article the key is in connecting learning experiences to student personal goals and interests. I also struggled with how much of my presence would seem controlling or prevent the autonomy that my students needed. What is optimal autonomy in learning? According to this article, it seems that my absence doesn’t enhance autonomy, but that my presence needs to be useful in enabling my students to realize and formulate their goals and interests.

Other Sources:

Iyengar, S. S., & Lepper. M. R. (1999). Rethinking the value of choice: Acultural perspective on intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 349–366.

Maehr, M. L., & Midgley, C. (1991). Enhancing student motivation: A school-wide approach. Educational Psychologist, 26, 399–427.

How Far Have We Moved Toward the Integration of Theory and Practice in Self-Regulation?

Annotation created by Melissa Han

Boekaerts,M., & Cascallar,E.(2006). How Far Have We Moved Toward the Integration of Theory and Practice in Self-Regulation?Education Psychology Review, 18,199–210.

Quotes:

~” Feature attributed to SRL is that the learner actually has control over his own learning, steering and directing cognitive and motivation processes to achieve the learning goal”(200).

~” Students who want to reach a goal (e.g., increasing their competence in a domain, making new friends, or helping others) initiate activity in the growth pathway because they value that goal and are prepared to put energy in its pursuit (i.e., self-regulation is energized from the top down)”(202).

~” The following aspects of instruction and teacher behaviour have an effect on the way students’ self-regulate their learning: clarity and pace of instruction, the amount of structure provided, autonomy granted, teacher enthusiasm, humor, fairness, and teacher expectations about students’ capacity”(204).

~” Therefore, researchers should design their assessment instruments in such a way that they provide insight into how students’ attempts at self-regulation change over time in function of their own perception of goal salience, goal conflict, and progress in skill development”(208).

Ideas:

A self-regulated learner has control over his own learning, steering, and directing their cognitive and motivational processes to achieve learning goals. This article addresses important questions regarding self-regulation learning.

The first question addressed is “What key strategies do students need to guide and direct their own learning process?” Some strategies stated are how students orient themselves before beginning a new assignment. They collect relevant resource materials, integrate different viewpoints, monitor for comprehension, and assess self progress. They are also able to create coping strategies to reduce the level of arousal.

The second question was “What cues in the learning environment trigger self-regulatory strategies?” The article states that a student’s learning experiences from the past trigger expectations and beliefs.

The final question states “What can teachers do to help students self-regulate their learning, motivation, and effort in the classroom?” Teachers should invite students to collaborate on authentic problems in small groups, expect group members to share information and engage in knowledge building. But teachers should also assess self-regulatory learning by using a combination of the following instruments multiple times in a lesson:

-self-report questionnaires

-observations of overt behavior

-interview evidence

-traces of mental events and processes

-situational manipulations

-recording student motivation strategies as they work

-keeping diaries

Connections:

I realized that the work lies in the goal setting and reflection in the process of striving towards the goal. For students who have an initial goal, they are constantly referring back to it as they manipulate their strategies to help them reach it. Once we have the goal, I want us to self-reflect along the way.

I appreciated the article’s assessment model for self-regulatory learning. I will implement this model as part of our self-reflection piece to guide our learning. This will give me insight in how my students are moving through the self-regulatory process and then give input on how we are learning.

Other Sources:

Boekaerts, M., & Niemivirta, M. (2000). Self-regulated learning: Finding a balance between learning goals and ego-protective goals. In M. Boekaerts, P. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation.417–451.

Hijzen, D., Boekaerts, M., & Vedder, P. (2006). The relationship between the quality of cooperative learning, students’ goal preferences, and perceptions of contextual factors in the classroom. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 47, 9–21.

Pintrich, P. R. (2000). The role of goal orientation in self-regulated learning. In M. Boekaerts, P. R. Pintrich, & M. Zeidner (Eds.), Handbook of self-regulation.451–502.

Sheldon, K. M., & Elliot, A. J. (1998). Not all personal goals are personal: Comparing autonomous and controlled reasons for goals and predictors of effort and attainment. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 24(5), 546–557.

Autonomy-Supportive Teachers: How They Teach and Motivate Students

Annotation created by Melissa Han

Reeve,J., Bolt,E.,&Cai,Y.(1999). Autonomy-Supportive Teachers: How They Teach and Motivate Students.Journal of Educational Psychology,91(3),537-548.

Quotes:

~”Teacher’s motivating style: relatedness provided by teacher provided involvement (care, acceptance), competence nurtured by teacher provided structure(optimal challenge, performance feedback), and self-determination was nurtured by teacher provided autonomy support (choices; shared decision making)” (538).

~”Autonomy-supportive teachers listened more, encouraged student initiative with the instructional materials, asked questions about the students’ wants, replied to questions, and offered empathic-taking statements” (546).

Ideas:

This article makes the distinction between autonomy-supportive teachers and controlling teacher behaviors. Teachers with more controlling behaviors target desirable behaviors, thinking, and feelings through offering extrinsic incentives and consequences. Autonomy-supportive teachers motivate students through identifying and supporting student interests. Dwelling on a teacher’s motivation style is important because of its connection to the quality of student motivation and achievement.

Connections:

I was struck by how autonomy-supportive teachers listened more and asked questions about how students thought through learning a concept whereas teachers who exhibited more controlling behaviors offered more directives and handled the materials more often. Students may learn how to be more self-regulated learners if teachers modeled those skills through how they listen and ask the kinds of questions that’ll empower students to self-reflect more in-depth ways. I wonder how I can ask questions that guide towards autonomy instead of control and listen/pay attention to their self-regulating processes.

Other Sources:

Lortie, D.C.(1977). The balance of control and autonomy in elementary school teaching. In D. Erikson (Ed.) Educational organization and administration,335-371.

Patrick, B.C.,Skinner,E.A.,&Cornell, J.P. (1993)What motivates childrens’ behavior and emotion?Joint effects of perceived control and autonomy in the academic domain.Journal of Personlity and Social Psychology ,65,781-791.