TACTics Journal

A Publication for and by TOC for Education Practitioners

August 1, 2003

In this week’s issue:

Networking

(1) PAR2: A Student-Owned Reading Method, Belinda Small

Editor’s Notes

(2) Kay Buckner-Seal

NETWORKING

(1) PAR2: A Student-Owned Reading Method

By Belinda Small, B.S., M.Ed., Classroom Teacher, USA

Introduction

Perform, Perform, Perform! Higher scores, better gains, more improvement!

My seventh grade language arts students in the Panhandle of Florida feel

tremendous pressure to perform on standardized test day. This is likely the

case for most every Florida student. I am sure I am not the only teacher

with sweaty palms on that anxiety stricken day in March. The test score

results are very important. Please, don’t get me wrong; I want more than

higher test scores for my students. My highest calling is to foster the lifelong

love of reading and learning. But the reality in my state, and many

others, is that numbers measure success.

Background

In January, I was approached by Kathy Suerken to do some action research

with Dr. Danilo Sirias from Saginaw Valley State University. Additionally,

she asked me share some classroom experiences using the TOCFE critical

thinking tools at the 7th Annual International Theory of Constraints for

Education Conference 2003 held in Fort Walton Beach, Florida. I was

thrilled to be invited.

I had been lucky enough to be involved with the group in 1993 when the

Theory of Constraints win-win techniques were first introduced to a group

of educators. TOC provided exciting cutting edge information back in 1993;

thus I anticipated this project to be just as inspiring. I eagerly accepted

the invitation to present. Then I decided my focus with students would be

on reading. The high-stake reading assessment was looming in the next

couple weeks; thus, it was foremost on my mind.

Overview

The following narrative includes a step-by-step account of my classroom

experience using one of the TOCFE tools, the Ambitious Target. I will

explain the student/teacher-created reading method that resulted from

using the Ambitious Target tool, and I will share how students benefited

from this experience. For teachers, I have included a couple other points of

interest regarding delivery method, future suggestions, and statistical

findings. The purpose of this article is to share this classroom application of

the tool with those that could not attend the conference and those

interested in effective reading strategies.

Step 1: Defining the Ambitious Target

I defined my ambitious target as follows: “To dramatically increase reading

test scores.”

Step 2: Raising the Obstacles

I solicited student participation, “What blocks you from increasing your

FCAT* test scores?”

*For non-Floridian readers, FCAT is our state’s standardized test, which is administered in

February. Students and teachers are accountable for showing gains from year to year.

Currently, the Florida seventh grade test for reading is multi-genre and multiple-choice

questions only.

Students admitted to having many anxiety-related obstacles that kept them

from performing their best. In fact, there were so many obstacles, that I

wanted to “hang it up” because it was obvious that the students’ test-taking

confidence was down the toilet. They feared it. And frankly, so did I.

Obstacle after obstacle sounded like whining and complaining. (Sounded

like? Heck! It WAS whining and complaining!) Some examples from the

high pitched pre-teen voices were like, “The test is too long,” I get stuck

and can’t remember,and “All the answers look the same!” One enthusiastic

participant was brave enough to tell me the passages on last year’s test were

all stupid.” He said that he “could not relate to the one article about

building a bird feeder after school because he would NEVER in his life build

a bird feeder in his spare time!” Another braver student blurted, “(The

test) is all just a bunch of unadulterated crap!” I had to think about that

one. I might learn something if I allowed him to explain. However, I decided

that moving on would be in all of our best interest. Thank you very much.

Life After Being Webbed With Tons of Obstacles

Beneath the thick hazy list of obstacles, I began to see some similar

patterns. My next step was to manage the list of obstacles. I found the list

of obstacles more manageable when I put them into two groups. Though this

is not typical step in the Ambitious Target process, it worked for my

purpose. When I broke the obstacles down, I saw groups. In this case, a

group dealing with insecurities about content and a group just down right

insecure. It was clear that students doubted their ability to perform on

test day.

Secondly, in creating the tree, I also found it helpful to break down the

action sequence into groups and give each group of actions a name. Later in

the process, this became very important.

Using the ABC Method on One Grouping: Content Mastery

The students and I surfaced many obstacles dealing with their lack of

content mastery. They became very open with me about where they felt

their skills were inferior. In order to tackle these content obstacles, Dr.

Sirias and I began working the ABC method with the students. I noted

practice test scores were on the rise. Dr. Sirias and his international team

of teachers shared this ABC method and research later during the

conference.

Step 3: Creating the Intermediate Objectives

After we started making the intermediate objectives, attitudes began to

shift. All of a sudden, there seemed to some simple things we could do. For

example, “The test is too long” was overcome by the intermediate objective

“Make it shorter.” However, this alone did not create a specific enough

answer. Therefore, the class discussion brightened even more when I asked,

“How can we make the passage seem shorter?” The class decided a good

specific action would be to “Use a pencil to divide the passage into smaller

chunks.” One by one we tacked the obstacles.

Naming Specific and “Visible” Action Verbs

It was very important for students to take most of the intermediate

objectives and make the phrase cause an action that could be seen on paper.

It was not sufficient to simply say that during the “preview stage” of

reading, a reader should “read the title” and “look at the visuals.” The action

box seemed more effective if it read, “Put a check after the title (once you

have read it)” and “Put a check next to all visuals (once you have studied the

picture).” These specific verb beginnings also helped me to see and monitor

progress during practice. This way I could visibly see more of what students

were thinking and doing as they read and answered questions.

Step 4: Sequencing the Actions

I handed out a sample reading passage. I helped students sequence the

steps by asking, “What is the first thing that we should do?” Then I led

withIf we do _______, then what should we do?” My vocal emphasis was

placed on the words, “if” and “then.” I plotted the map on the overhead as

we worked the logic, repeating the “if-then” statements. All students were

engaged and took notes. All of the original specific actions were

incorporated into our sequence steps. Plus, students added more specific

actions that occurred in the logic as we built the model. This was a great

asset because I could also formulate leading questions if students were

missing important elements. Once we began breaking the reading process

down, the class was surprised by how much they really knew about critical

reading.

Please Note: Due to the length of this fine article, we will be publishing it

in several parts. Be sure to read about the “Results of Using the Ambitious

Target” in next week’s TACTics.

EDITOR’S NOTES

(2) Kay Buckner-Seal

Wow, Belinda, your account of this process is most engaging! In the course

of overcoming their weaknesses…their fears, the students discovered their

strengths! There is much that teachers and students can learn from your

experience. Thanks for sharing and we are eager to publish the next part of

your piece in next week’s TACTics.

Several persons, who have shared their 7th International TOCFE

Conference experience in TACTics during the past few months, have

mentioned the “ABC Method” presented by Danilo Sirias. His presentation

must have been powerful and we hope to publish more about it in a future

edition of our newsletter.

To the rest of our TOCFE family, give us some feedback! Send your

responses to TACTics articles, applications of the thinking processes,

lessons, announcements, and etc. by mail to: Cheryl A. Edwards, 2253 S. Hill

Island Rd., Cedarville, Michigan 49719, USA. Or send hyperlink to

cedwards@cedarville.net or bucknek@earthlink.net.

You may also view TACTics in its intended formatting, by visiting our web

site at www.tocforeducation.com. Click on "What's New."