麻豆传媒入口

Students have read a short passage in class, annotating or taking notes on its content. What鈥檚 next?

In my classroom, I鈥檝e faced a tension in this moment: After a stretch of independent work, I want to inject life back into instruction through collaborative discussion, but I don鈥檛 want to lose the deep thinking that took place during independent reading. Neither do I want to ask for volunteers to share what they found, again and again.

Instead, I鈥檝e tried to lean into new post-read activities that keep students engaged with their deeper thinking but also allow them to collaborate purposefully, whether they just read a short story or an informational background article. Here are the three things I鈥檝e been doing more often:

Most Important Word Whiparound After 鈥楥onsensus Chats鈥�

This activity seems deceptively simple: Every student chooses the most important word from the text they just read and crafts a one-sentence reason why it鈥檚 most important.

With a partner or small group, students then must come to a consensus. This means deliberation and negotiation. I love this activity, because we鈥攁s adults鈥攗se these skills often in professional and personal settings, and therefore students will transfer their practice beyond classroom walls.

Next comes the 鈥渨hiparound鈥�: Every partnership or group shares their word and reason while I record the answers at the front of the room. (To keep students engaged, you could ask them to circle other groups鈥� words in the reading as they鈥檙e shared.)

You might have the class vote on their top word (with the requirement that they cannot vote for their own word), providing reasoning for their rankings. If you teach multiple sections, students can compare results across classes for further discussion. 

Silent Peer Annotations Via Desk Gallery Walk

I started using this activity during my 11th year of teaching and immediately regretted not using it during the first 10鈥攅specially as someone who has probably spent hundreds of hours posting things on walls for traditional gallery walks.

The better way that happens to also be much easier is to invite students to put their papers on their desks, then silently go around the room and annotate each other鈥檚 work. I ask them to not only mark the text but explain their thinking, in their own words, on the text itself. (We call this 鈥淕etting as messy as possible with your thinking.鈥�)

From there, I鈥檝e used two extensions:

1. Tell students they鈥檙e going to silently read as many annotations as possible, strolling the room and looking for noticings and explanations they hadn鈥檛 considered鈥攚ith the task of looking for at least two to three additional annotations they can steal and apply to their own text. (I recommend doing this the first time you try the activity.)
2. Have students add their thinking to classmates鈥� annotations. When we do this, I project sentence frames on the board and remind students that they can converse with the annotations: If there鈥檚 a question, answer it! If there鈥檚 a thought, add a clarifying question!

The key here is that students refrain from discourse. I usually play soft instrumental music and watch students鈥� eyes widen when they see what classmates noticed鈥攖hen scribble furiously once they鈥檙e back at their own papers.

鈥楾itle Crown鈥� Competition

In our classroom, I make a new crown each year to give to winners of individual and group competitions鈥攊ncluding my favorite, 鈥淭itle Crown.鈥�

In Title Crown, I ask students to create a title for something they鈥檝e just read鈥攁 new title for a specific section or full text. They also have to come up with a convincing reason for their title.

In my experience, creating an original title is a simple, engaging way for students to draw upon their observations and interpretations while considering creative expression. When explaining their reasoning, students are highly engaged and practicing deep thinking about reading. 

You can go immediately to the competition or, in larger classes, narrow it down to a smaller selection of titles by having students come to 鈥渃onsensus titles鈥� in partners or small groups.

Then, the competition begins.

The first student to share a title and their reasoning starts with the crown (and, in our classroom, receives a quiet golf clap). From that point forward, I take on the role of 鈥渟olitary judge and jury鈥� considering whether each subsequent title and explanation is worthy of stealing the crown.

Group two has a better title? I explain my reasoning for that determination, and they get the crown. Group three not as good? I explain again, and the crown stays.

The winning group is the last one with the crown, and they sign it and have bragging rights until the next competition. (They also sometimes sneak back into class to take some selfies wearing the crown.)

I believe that deep, critical thinking matters as much as purposeful peer conversation. The above strategies have allowed me to center both of those objectives and beliefs equally, enlivening reading comprehension and instruction while fostering collaboration.