INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER

Checking forUnderstanding

Finding out what students

have learned and what

to reteach requires more

than asking students to

nod or recite facts.

By Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey

Douglas Fisher (äfisher%mail.sdsu.edu) is aprofessor of teacher education at San DiegoState University and a teacher leader at HealthSciences High and Middle College in San Diego,CA.

Nancy Frey (nfrey@mail.sdsu.edu) is aprofessor of teacher education at San DiegoState University and a teacher leader at HealthSciences High and Middle College.

They are the authors of Guided Instruction: Howto Develop Confident and Successful Learners(2010, ASCD).

Watch the Video!Watch a teacher demonstrate

strategies to check tor

understanding.

http://youtu.be/8IL18hRrLSo

Did everybody get that?" saysMr. Unger. Rafael, a student inUnger's class, thinks to himself,

"No, I have no idea what you're talk-ing about, but I'm not about to let ev-eryone know that I'm confused. " Andso the game continues—the teacherthinks that he is checking for under-standing and accepts the silence as anindicator that learning has occurred.In reality, despite quality instruction,Mr. Unger has no idea whether it hasor has not.

How, then, could he check forunderstanding? What does qualitychecking for understanding look andsound like? Our analysis of classroominstruction and assessment suggeststhat teachers can check for under-standing in several ways, includingthe use of oral language, questioning,writing, projects and performances,and tests (Fisher & Frey, 2007). Whenteachers use those procedures, theyknow which students understand thecontent and which students need ad-ditional instruction.

Checking for understanding is animportant part of a formative as-sessment system. Looking at studentresponses or student work informs theteacher, and that information can beacted upon to create better under-standing. Importantly, checking forunderstanding must occur throughoutthe lesson, at least every 5-10 min-utes, if teachers want to maintain therigor of the lesson and support studentlearning. As an observer to a class-room, you're on the lookout for theteacher's method and the freqency ofchecking for understanding.

Oral LanguageOne effective way to check for un-derstanding is through oral language:speaking and listening. When students

are doing the talking, the teacherhas a chance to assess understanding.A number of classroom structuresgive students an opportunity to talk,including think-pair-share, reciprocalteaching, literacy circles, discussionprompts, and Socratic seminars. Forexample, as Ms. Ramirez listens toher students discussing a book theyare reading as part of their book club,she notices that they are not justifyingtheir responses with evidence fromthe text. They are skilled at summariz-ing, but the lack of evidence in theirdiscussions indicates that she shoulddevote additional instructional time tothis practice.

In addition to listening as studentsinteract, retellings are a valuable wayto check for understanding. Retell-ings give the teacher a glimpse intostudent thinking. For example, Mr.Bradford asked Jasmine to retell asection of video clip about glacierformation and movement. As partof her retelling. Jasmine said, "Theglaciers take a long time to develop.Well, really they grow Uke somethingalive even though they're not alive.They develop when it snows and thesnow piles together. It changes to thisspecial kind of ice, but before that,there is this in-between ice called fim."This retelling lets Mr. Bradford knowthat much of his teaching has stuckand that Jasmine is well on her way tounderstanding glaciers.

QuestioningQuestioning, which can be done orallyor in writing, is the most common waythat teachers check for understanding.Unfortunately, not all questions areworthy of instructional time. To beuseful, the initial questions teachersask should be planned in advance. Ofcourse, additional questions that probe

60 I Principal Leadership I SEPTEMBER 2011

Student understanding will come tomind during the interactions teach-ers have with students, but the initialquestions form the expectations forstudent understanding. Less helpfulquestions are those we like to call"guess what's in the teacher's head."More formally known as Initiate-Re.spond-Evaluate (IRE) (Cazden,2001), this cycle privileges studentswho are willing to play the game.For example, when the teacher asks,"When do we use the FOIL rule?"three or four students raise hands, andTanya is selected to respond. Tanyasays, "When you multiple binomi-als," to which the teacher replies,"Good." IRE is typically used to checkstudents' recall and gives only a fewstudents an opportunity to respond.

Instead, in high-quality checkingfor understanding, teachers ask ques-tions that require more complex andcritical thinking and require responsesfrom lots of students. A number ofinstructional routines let studentspractice their questioning skills, suchas ReQuest (Manzo, 1969) in whichstudents read with a partner, takingturns asking and answering ques-tions. As they practice, their teacheranalyzes the types of questions beingasked and the appropriateness of theanswers. Over time (and with instruc-tion and practice) students tire ofliteral and recall questions and movetoward more interesting questionsthat require synthesis and evaluation.

Another way to question in aninclusive way is through audience re-sponse systems. These can be as basicas index cards with answers on themthat all students hold up to answer aquestion or as complex as handhelddevices that allow each student to keyin a response. As an example of theformer, students in a biology class used

green and red cards, with Yes writ-ten on the green card and No writtenon the red card. As the teacher readeach statement about the ecosystem,students held up one of their cards toindicate if they agreed or disagreed. Aquestion about the impact of clean-ing agents entering the water systemthrough storm drains split the class,which provided the teacher withinformation about where to focus thelesson.

An example of using complexresponse devices to check for under-standing can be found in the video thataccompanies this article. (See www.nassp.org/plO911 fisher.) In the video,algebra teacher Aimee Chen poses aquestion and tells students to submittheir responses using the devices, theninvites them to persuade one anotherabout their choices before revealingthe answer. She then engages them inreteaching. An online version of audi-ence response systems that relies ontext messages from cell phones can befound at www.polleverywhere.com.

WritingWhen students are writing, they arethinking. In fact, it's nearly impos-sible to write and not think. That'swhy short writing-to-learn promptsare so effective when checking forunderstanding. It's important thatthe prompt be developed so that itprovides teachers with informationabout student understanding. Weare particularly taken with a writingprompt that requires that studentsconsider the role, audience, format,and topic (RAFT) in their writing(Santa & Havens, 1995). It's flexibleand teaches perspective. For example,after discussing sportsmanship in theirphysical education class, Mr Daven-port asked his students to respond to

When students are writing,

they are thinking. In fact, it's

nearly impossible to write and

not think. That's why short

writing-to-leam prompts are

so effective when checkirig for

understanding.

SEPTEMBER 2011 I Principal Leadership • 61

INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER INSTRUCTIONAL LEADER

Although tests are typically considered a summath/e

assessment tool used for grading, they can also be used

to check for understanding.

the following RAFT:• Role: Bronze medal winner• Audience: Gold medal winner• Format: Greeting card• Topic: Congratulations on your

victory.Similarly, in a history classroom,

students learned about the GettysburgAddress and discussed the role thatthis speech had in shaping U.S. policy.To check their understanding aboutthe address, Ms. Ly asks her studentsto respond to the following RAFT:• Role: Person attending the dedi-

cation of the Soldiers' NationalCemetery in Gettysburg

• Audience: Family member• Format: Personal letter• Topic: Lincoln's message.

Projects and PerformancesTeachers can also use projects andperformances to check for under-standing. Importantly, this is not donewhen a project has been completed,but rather as students work on theactivities. A wide range of appropriateprojects and performances let studentsengage in meaningful work that isaligned with content standards.

For example, Ms. Anderson's Eng-lish class was focused on the essentialquestion. What's worth fighting, oreven dying, for? The students in thisclass wrote an essay in response to thequestion; read literature, such as Romeoand Juliet; and engaged in class debates.

As one project, each student createda Facebook page devoted to a worthycause he or she would be willing tofight for. As students worked, Ms.Anderson viewed the pages in prog-ress and met with indi-vidual students to checktheir understanding aboutthe essential question. Mi-cah created a page about arare genetic condition thathis sister has. When hemet with Ms. Anderson,Micah said, "I would fightfor money to figure outwhat causes it and how toprevent it. I really would."Their discussion gave Ms.Anderson evidence of Mi-cah's developing understanding ofworthy causes.

TestsAlthough tests are typically considered a

summative assessment tool that is used

for grading, they can also be used to check

for understanding. Incorrect answers on a

test give teachers information about what

students stiU need to leam. Tests can be

developed in a number of different for-

mats, including miJtiple-choice, dichoto-

mous choice (e.g., true/false, yes/no, and

agree/disagree), and essays. For example, if

6O"/o of the students responded incorrectly

to a true/false statement, the teacher will

know that they are confused about some

aspect of the statement.

Checking for

understanding is

the link between

teaching and

learning and

should be part of

every lesson that

teachers plan.

Check AwayChecking for understanding is thelink between teaching and learningand should be part of every lessonthat teachers plan. As such, teachers

should know how andwhen they are going todo so. This ensures thatteachers are basing theirlessons on rigor and highexpectations, rather thanon random events thatare focused on recall.And it allows teachersto plan subsequentinstruction on the basisof student performance,so encourage teachers tocheck away! i'L

REFERENCES• Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom dis-

course: The language of teaching and learn-

ing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

• Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007). Checking

for understanding: Formative assessments for

your classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

• Manzo, A. (1969). The ReQuest pro-cedure: A method for improving read-ing comprehension through reciprocalquestioning. Journal of Reading, 13(2),123-126.

• Santa, C. M., & Havens, L.T (1995).Project CRJSS: Creating independence

through student-owned strategies. Dubuque,IA: Kendall/Hunt.

62 I Principal Leadership I SEPTEMBER 2011

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

Author:

Title:

Source:

ISSN:

Publisher:

Fisher, Douglas; Frey, Nancy

Checking for Understanding

Princ Leadership 12 no1 S 2011 p. 60-62

2156-2113

National Association of Secondary School Principals

1904 Association Drive, Reston, VA 22091-1537

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and it is reproducedwith permission. Further reproduction of this article in violation of the copyright isprohibited. To contact the publisher: http://www.naesp.org

This article may be used for research, teaching and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematic reproduction, re-distribution, re-selling, loan or sub- licensing, systematic supply or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. The publisher does not give any warranty express or implied or make any representation that the contents will be complete or accurate or up to date. The accuracy of any instructions, formulae and drug doses should be independently verified with primary sources. The publisher shall not be liable for any loss, actions, claims, proceedings, demand or costs or damages whatsoever or howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with or arising out of the use of this material.