Consensogram: Visualize Student Beliefs, Build Community & Launch New Learning

Looking for ways to launch a new unit or text, leverage prior knowledge, create community, and showcase thinking? Here it is: The Consensogram–a visual learning strategy where students create a bar graph of their thinking.

Looking for ways to launch a new unit or text, leverage prior knowledge, create community, and showcase thinking? Here it is: The Consensogram–a visual learning strategy where students create a bar graph of their thinking. I use it as a unit opener, offering students the unit’s essential questions and themes as debatable statements. Together, as a class community, their individual perspectives on these debatable claims form a “Consensus” in the form a visual bar graph. The Consensogram is a powerful tool that can be used as a unit opener or launch of a new text. It can also be used as a formative check for understanding mid-unit. I’m always searching for a novel way to facilitate immersive learning with the goal of taking the work “off the page,” and the Consensogram does just that. It adds a new layer of depth and engagement to the traditional “anticipation guide,” and it can be used effectively to facilitate discussions and debates.

Understanding The Consensogram

It’s a different way to stimulate thinking, create discussions, and engage students effectively. One of the unique aspects of the Consensogram is the way it can be used to visualize and analyze thinking as data. It encourages peer questioning, whole class discussions, and even Socratic Seminars. The final product can be displayed throughout the text or unit of study, and can be referred back as the class works through essential questions and develops themes. As an added bonus, it catches the eye and interest of the room. At the end of the unit, students can return to the Consensogram to compare their agreements and disagreements as a reflection of how their thinking and understanding of unit themes and concepts have evolved.

The Consensogram can also be used anytime you want students to think about their stance on a topic. All you have to do is choose at least 2 debatable claims, evidence, or ideas for students to think about and apply to their own beliefs.

Implementing the Consensogram: What You Need

The set up is worth it! Here’s a guideline to help you get started:

  • Choose 5-8 debatable statements, ideas, or claims related to the text or unit’s universal ideas, themes, and essential questions.
  • Print each statement in large text on a piece of chart paper and tape it to the top. Draw a line down the center of the chart paper in marker and draw a horizontal line at the bottom. Write the numbers 1, 2, 3, and 4 under the bottom horizontal line with numbers 4 and 3 to the left of the vertical line and 1-2 to the right.
  • Prepare small sticky notes, ideally 1×1. Use a different color for each class to help students analyze data across classes the next day.
  • Each student receives the number of sticky notes matching the number of claims or posters. If there are 8 claims, each student will receive 8 sticky notes.
  • Ensure the numbers (1-4) you are using on the agreement spectrum (1=strongly disagree, 2=disagree, 3=agree, 4=strongly agree) match the numbers on your chart paper.

Immersive learning takes set up, but the pay-off is student engagement.

Step 1: Reflect and Rank Debatable Claims

One of the reasons I am a Consensogram fan is that it leverages students’ prior knowledge, allowing the space to jump in with their own belief system. There are several ways you can facilitate this first step:

One option is to use a traditional “Anticipation Guide,” where the debatable claims are printed on the guide and students indicate their level of agreement using a scale from 1 to 4, ranging from strongly disagree to strongly agree. Students can complete the Anticipation Guide with or without providing reasoning for their beliefs.

Alternatively, you can provide the claims separately on paper or project them. I am a manipulatives person, so I cut the eight claims into laminated slips for each student and re-use for all of my classes. That way, I can even save them for next year when I introduce the unit again. Students think about each claim and record their level of agreement and reasoning in picture frames. This simple change from the traditional Anticipation Guide adds a bit of novelty, and for my students, novelty equals higher engagement.

Step 2: Add Sticky Notes to Chart Papers

Once students have ranked the claims, they add their sticky notes to chart papers according to their level of agreement. For example, if a student selected 2 (disagree) for statement #3, they would go to the chart paper labeled with the claim and number “3” and add a sticky note above the horizontal line belonging to “2 – Disagree.”

Remind students to place the sticky notes vertically and not to cover anyone else’s note. By using a different color sticky note for each of your classes you can track class trends and dig deeper into the data your students create. Tip: ask each student to write their initials on the note to track engagement.

Step 3: Partner Discussions

Next, students find a partner and work through discussion cards. These cards are adaptable for any activity and can be laminated for reuse throughout the year. The partner work provides a helpful scaffold to the Socratic Seminar or whole-class discussion in Step 4, allowing quieter students to problem solve and process 1:1.

In my Consensogram resource, I provide two different discussion card sets. One version of the cards has students work through questions with the same partner. Another version of the cards has only one question on the card: students ask and answer each other’s question, then trade cards before finding a new partner and a new question to discuss.

Step 4: Circle Discussion or Socratic Seminar

Finally, students gather together for a circle discussion or Socratic Seminar, working through the five questions on the activity handout. The whole-class discussion questions are designed to move students through higher DoK questioning from “What do you notice?” to “What might trends in our thinking or points of disagreement/agreement mean?” to “What are the implications of this data?”

Encourage students to notice and talk about their Consensogram as collected data representative of their shared belief system and different perspectives within your class community. Students walk away with making connections between the evidence/data and synthesizing the class’ collective responses and with even more questions and excitement as we start new learning.

So, next time you’re looking for a novel way to get your students thinking, consider trying out the Consensogram. Happy teaching!

Adding Student Voice to Dr. King’s “What Is Your Life Blueprint” Speech

Dr. King’s “What Is Your Life Blueprint” speech gives a different perspective to King’s rhetoric. My students are immediately pulled in to his message when they watch him deliver the speech to middle school students. His words, supported with vivid images and strong metaphors, speak directly to students.

With the mission of getting Dr. King’s words off the page, I transformed the way I taught the rhetorical situation through this speech. Each activity centers student voice and agency in Dr. King’s message of finding and sticking to your life’s path no matter what obstacles stood in your way.

Tableau or Spoken Word Performance

Tableau and spoken word performance is the ultimate engager as students to physicalize with feeling Dr. King’s rhetoric. This trio created the image of the “crystal stair” in the speech and gave a passionate, from-the-heart mini performance. With just a small bit of text, and in under 1 minute, students can focus in on one or two images to create either a still picture in a tableau or a performed mini scene, putting voice to text. Students feel the alliteration, repetition, and rhythm in a way that cannot be replicated by silent reading.

Discourse Builder Roundtable Discussion

What it is: Join 4-5 students together to practice accountable talk and close reading. This is called a “discourse builder” because students are tasked with using probing questions to add on to what each person offers in discussion. This discussion focuses on close reading. Each student receives a text selection from the speech as a “mystery text.” I call it a mystery text to build anticipation before we read.

Why it works: Student voices are central to this activity just as student agency. They are not only engaged in discussion with each other, but each person gets to lead the discussion for their specific text selection. This builds excitement and serves as a scaffold to reading the full speech as students have already chunked and analyzed language in their “mystery text” slices. At the end of this activity, they have made and shared personal text connections, built community through shared ideas, questioned the text, and are familiar with unknown words, writing style, and message. And all before we even read!

The strategy:

Step 1: I select 4-5 chunks of text, focusing on excerpts with a significant amount of unknown vocabulary, complex sentence structure, imagery and metaphor that connect back to Dr. King’s message. I also make sure to differentiate text so that some selections are more easily accessible. I like taking selections from beginning, middle, and end of the text so that students get a sense of the arc of the speech before they read and can say “I know this!” when we get to the full text.

Tip: Point students in the direction of probing questions to focus and redirect accountable talk moves. I have on hand laminated probing questions cards. For my tenth graders, I love the “basketball question cards” that divide probing questions for accountable talk into three roles: Point Guard, Power Forward, and The Center. Students can’t miss these bright green cards in the center of the discussion.

Step 2: Cut up the text selections, making a set for each student group. Each group receives a “Discourse Builder” handout (linked here for free) with boxes for each text selection. I love manipulatives and any opportunity for hands-on engagement. Students glue in each text selection as they work through the activity. Each student is responsible for one of the text slices. They read their slice independently, making personal connections and questioning the text. In a round table discussion, when it is time to lead, each student shares their connection and questions to the table and leads a discussion about their text slice using probing questions.

Save the Last Word for Me

What it is: Similar to the Discourse Builder Roundtable, Save the Last Me provides opportunity for accountable talk with a focus on listening to learn. This is a great replacement option to the Discourse Roundtable if you are using it as a pre-reading activator with “Mystery Text” quotes. It also allows students to zone in on specific parts of the text during reading and as a reflective exercise looking back on the entire text post-read.

Why It Works: This is great for students who don’t like going first as it allows time for processing — the initial first step as the discourse leader is to read the quote and then step back and take notes to capture what the groups says in response. I love this strategy for building strong listening. It’s also a helpful exercise for students who struggle to monitor air time in discussion as it provides a structure for holding back to let other speak.

3 Levels of Text Discussion

This is another great discussion framework that facilitates text-to-self and text analysis through close reading. Read more about how to do this in your classroom here. The resource can be found here.

Reflective Writing Responses

What it is: Sometimes I call this “meditation” writing. Getting students to think about their thinking, building metacognition in reflective writing, also builds writing stamina as students learn to flex their reflective muscles. While my students read Blueprint, I integrate quotes relating to Dr. King’s message in the speech focusing on success, failure, adversity, tenacity, etc. from Audre Lorde, Angela Davis, Malcolm X, to name a few.

Why it works: These prompts are great discussion points on their own and create a nice compare/contrast analysis with Blueprint. The prompts work well because of universal themes, but also because they push students to compare and contrast–and synthesize–ideas from different voices. Here’s a few from my slide deck below. The full slide deck with 11 prompts can be found here.

Close Read with Purpose

What It Is: Before they read, I tell them that their reading mission is to determine which part of the speech (chunk 1, 2, or 3) is the most effective given Dr. King’s message and audience. This becomes the question for a debate or socratic seminar post-reading.

It’s important for students to learn to read for message (what the writer wants) and understand the relationship between message and audience/reader impact. After the pre-reading activator Mystery Quote activity, I introduce the concept of message and audience through the lens of universal ideas. It’s important for students to base their reading or analysis in universal ideas rather than facts or evidence. It helps students move from “What happened” to “So What” about what happened. Check out my free Universal Ideas lesson here. As a tenth grade, Pre-AP and AP Language teacher, universal ideas are the groundwork for analysis and prevent reliance on plot summary.

Why It Works: My reading go to is Reciprocal Teaching Groups, or variations of RTGs, where students read collaboratively to build meaning. In collaborative reading groups, students either work with Task Cards or with specific reading look for’s. This mission-focused reading sets up close reading with purpose and helps students to self-manage the text. Collaborative reading helps students process multiple look for’s simultaneously and pushes students to build stamina with a multi-step reading process. I have found that students are less likely to give up if they have a role to fulfill and are accountable to a reading group.

How: I have a digital version of Blueprint that is color-coded by three sections (beginning, middle, and end). It includes guided reading questions in a format that visually separates text for readers who learn better with sight markers to break apart the text. Color coding, or breaking the text into distinct parts, chunks the text with purpose. For paper people (I’m still in that bunch), a non-color copy is numbered into three sections, and students can box-out each section in different colors to visually code the text before they read.

Blueprint is rich in metaphor and imagery. A good starting point would be to talk about the title, connecting “blueprint” with the reflective writing prompt themes or messages, metaphors, and imagery that stood out to them from their Mystery Quote pre-reading activator.

This speech is a great way to introduce or reinforce the idea of tone as the author/speaker’s attitude towards their subject or topic. I find that students can easily spot tone when reading fiction and analyzing a character’s tone, but with speech analysis, students are learning to “read like a writer” rather than their life-long habit of “reading like a reader.” It’s really a flipswitch moment for a lot of students. This free “SPACECAT” resource is a great tool for rhetorical analysis. This “Read Like a Writer” lesson on diction and tone is also a good next step in rhetorical analysis. Check out my bundle of “Read Like a Writer” resources.

Here are some questions about tone and message to guide reading like a writer:

A tone wheel (honestly, I would wear this tone wheel every day–that’s how much I use this in writing and reading) is linked in the reading and helps students attach Dr. King’s language choices to tone. It also sets up a nice follow-up question for students to dig in deeper.

Synthesize Ideas with Socratic Seminar or Debate

Students take their reading purpose question and prepare a position statement or response for seminar or debate.

Level up debate through these moves:

  • Give students a position to defend. Students may at first question how they will debate a part of the speech, but building their argument muscle can begin with framing the parts of King’s speech as being defensible.
  • Adding in the “message and audience” as parameters can raise the cognitive demand as students must apply their knowledge of both to build a case for the part of his speech that is “most effective.”
  • The demand is increased even more when students push their argument to include how their selected text is more important than the other parts of his speech.

Check out more debate resources here.

This debate question can also apply to a Socratic Seminar discussion as students prepare text to support their position on the prompt. I’ve designed Seminar pre-work for students to verbally share their thinking with a partner before writing independently to prepare for the group Seminar.

Blueprint Lifts up Student Voice

This speech empowers students to connect to Dr. King’s message. The structure outlined above engages students even before they read the entire speech as each student leads discussion of a part of the text and makes it their own. It’s powerful to watch students enter the world of this speech and without even knowing it, they have learned the rhetorical situation through student-led discussion, close reading for metaphor and tone, and defending parts of the text against a claim in debate or socratic seminar.

I’ll end with a student’s observation of his “Mystery Text” selection during the Discussion Builder Round Table:

“If you are going to be at the top of the game, or at the bottom. Whatever you’re doing, going up a hill, playing ball, swimming, whatever you got to do…You’re going to mediocre it or be at the bottom? You might as well just do it. When he says “scrub,” if you think about it…what could that relate to? Scrub is like negativity. I relate that to basketball. When you call somebody a scrub in basketball, you’re being disrespectful. But he said, ‘be the best scrub,’ so he’s saying even if you’re down and not doing good, give it your best. That’s what I do. I can relate to that.”

Resources in this article:

Dr. King’s Blueprint Speech full resource, including:

  • The Discussion Builder Roundtable (digital and print versions)
  • Save the Last Word for Me (+ colorful quote cards, writing space, exit ticket, and slides)
  • 11 reflective writing prompt slides
  • Dr. King’s Blueprint speech with 3 sections divided by color, guided reading questions, and links; Blueprint speech without color for printing, also with guided reading questions and separated into 3 sections with numbers.
  • Debate slides pictured above
  • Colorful tone wheel pictured above
  • Socratic Seminar pre-writing space + partner share cards
  • Socratic Seminar accountable talk tracker and individual reflection space

Basketball Accountable Talk Cards / Probing Questions

Debate Resources

free “SPACECAT” resource

“Read Like a Writer” lesson on diction and tone

bundle of “Read Like a Writer” resources

Free Universal Ideas lesson slides

3 Levels of Text Discussion

Free Discourse Group Roundtable handout

Writing and the Re-visioning of Failure

With a growth mindset, failure is a right of passage. But for students who supposedly “don’t do school,” that right of passage feels like a set-up. Productive failure, by design, creates opportunities for failure. The persistent redirection, “You’re not done, let’s figure it out,” is an acknowledgement of a student’s humanity, offering the space to grow.

The promise of productive failure in an English Language Arts classroom.

On the first day of summer school last July, I handed each student an orange with the instructions to peel it…very slowly. Some students asked why. Others started immediately. I heard talking as they peeled and laughing when someone asked, “Can I eat the orange?” After everyone was finished peeling, I said, “Okay, now, put it back together.” Inevitably, there were a lot more “Why’s,” and they were a lot louder. I heard a version of “Are you kidding me?” I held firm. “You can do it. This is your only job at this moment. Figure it out.” I walked to each table with a 4-foot long strip of tape for each student.

When I heard students say, “This won’t work!” I questioned, “How do you know?” 

I teach the orange lesson as a metaphor for pushing boundaries, taking risks in learning, and building resilience with the idea of understanding something that pushes against our comfort levels of what [we think we know] we can do. We know what peeling an orange feels like, and we know the outcome of that action. We don’t know—or yet understand—the process of putting an orange back together again. That unknown act requires trust that the process will yield a certain outcome. It also requires vulnerability for playing our part in that process. 

Last July, for the thirty students in front of me who had failed English multiple times over multiple years, I framed it as “unlearning” in the sense that sometimes we must “undo” what we know to move forward and take on new challenges. I asked my students, “Why might unlearning be something we want to try when working with something challenging?” One student raised his hand, “You can’t ‘unlearn.’ You can re-learn, but once you know something, you can never not know it.” I wanted to jump up and down. If there had been any hesitation at spending July and August in a classroom without windows, I could not remember it at that moment. 

I learned valuable information about my students as I observed how they put their orange back together.

In the growth mindset Ted Talks I play for students, there is an explicit message: Fail first; fail often.

With a growth mindset, failure is a right of passage. However, the longer I teach writing to students who supposedly “don’t do school,” the more I recognize that writing is about students giving themselves permission to fail. Each day with my students I see how even the thought of failure stops writing before it starts. In order to assume that “failure” is a conduit of creating and composing, we need to believe that we will recover from failure, and further, that we will be protected from the aftermath of having failed. For some students, failure is a right of passage that feels like a set-up. From a restorative teaching lens, failure is an option that students are less likely to choose if compassion is less visible in their learning environments both in and out of school.

When we teach writing with a restorative lens, as a way to change student mindset, we affirm for students that they are worthy of failure as a means of growth.

I’ve struggled with ways to integrate trauma-informed teaching and restorative practice into my daily lessons until I experimented with ways to integrate that mindset into the teaching of writing. Teaching writing is reliant on a learning environment, rich in affirmation, that prioritizes relationships as a driver of teaching and learning. As Zaretta Hammond points out in Culturally Relevant Teaching and the Brain, this relational piece is what gets students to jump into the work of learning, right into the learning pit. Teaching writing has the effect of revising how our brains are wired, shaping a different way of thinking through learning challenges and productive struggle. Teaching writing is restorative practice.

In that same summer school classroom, I was reminded of how writing is a change-agent, re-visioning how students think about themselves as contributors to the world. One student in particular defied the stereotype of being labeled a failure, learning that he is, in fact, a writer. He wrote a 30-page memoir over four weeks as credit recovery for failing sophomore English.

But first he needed to realize the relevance of writing his story, and I needed to convince him to show up to summer school every single day.

“You should write a book.” 

“Why would I do that?”

“So people can see what you see.”

We closed the deal with my offer: “If you write your book, you’ll earn passing credit for ELA. All you have to do is show up and write.”

His response: “F- it. Let’s do it.”

Every day I am driven by the question of how to engage students who are stuck in a cycle of failure.

Most of my students have failed, multiple times over multiple years, and are labeled by nearly everyone around them as failures. They carry around with them the long list of people who have told them something like, “I’m done with you. I can’t do anything to help you anymore.” The collegial advice I dread is the notion that “sometimes the kid just has to hit rock bottom, and that’s the best thing for them.” At what point does this also mean giving up on a student? Failure is a missed opportunity when we ignore it, or worse, ignore the students who have failed. When we don’t talk about failure, students get stuck and teachers get frustrated, observing engagement move from ritual compliance to, well, nothing. 

As a teacher, I needed to learn to work with failure, not against it.

I began the work of facilitating memoir writing with my student and dug into Manu Kapur’s idea of productive failure, productive struggle 2.0: Set up the problem and step back. Thinking about Kapur’s notion of productive failure, I reframed instructional strategies to create opportunities for failure in my lessons. Here’s how I see this play out in my classroom:  If I’ve set up learning with productive struggle in mind, I’ve already hit the trifecta of rigor, cognitive demand, and student-centered learning. Productive failure is that intentional instructional shift that starts before the student begins. In lesson design, productive failure requires letting go of the “plan” to get the student from A to B by C and allows the student space to problem solve with re-directions rather than directions. 

There’s a voice in my head that still questions the risk of failure by design. Edutopia’s September 2022 interview with Kapur, If You’re Not Failing, You’re Not Learning, affirmed the practice of designing for failure, indicating quantifiable gains in learning outcomes. Similarly, in the Jenny Anderson’s New York Times article Learning the Right Way to Struggle, productive struggle is paired with Kapur’s research on productive failure, where problem solving before learning how to do something produced learning outcomes that changed the brain.

Although mostly associated with STEM, productive failure is exactly the work of writing as there is no way to fully understand how to write until you go through the motions of writing.

There is no ready-made, visible path. Yes, there are graphic organizers and stems and brainstorming and think-alouds, but there’s no guarantee of the end product exactly as it will be written. For my student writing his memoir, the  productive failure was inherent in the act of composing and figuring out: How do I get what is already living inside my head, from my head to my hands, to the page, and to keep that momentum going to compose a story? The path of productive failure is circuitous; it leaves ambiguity within a void of either nothing (denial and quitting) or something new (embracing opportunity). 

I pushed my student to provide more detail, which became one point of productive struggle within a process of productive failure.

Over July and August my student began the work of writing as problem solving, moving forward without knowing what is ahead. But, first he needed to show up. He asked for a morning text to help get him to school, and I followed up every day with a positive note.

During revision I asked questions:

“Why do you think that happened? What were you expecting instead? How do you think things would be different if…” My questions, “What does it sound like? What do you see around you?”

“How do you know it’s X and not Y?” marked a frustration point to which he responded, “This is making me tight. I’m not doing that. It’s just clear in my head.” And I countered, “But it’s in your head, not mine, so you have to make me believe it.” At each point my student stopped with, “This isn’t going to work. I can’t do this.” I responded, “You’re already doing this. Keep going.”

It took a month of writing every day for him to realize that writing the vignettes of his life—and making them stick with the reader through vivid imagery, dialogue, and detail—was a wall that he broke through to get to the other side of what he thought he was capable of before he started. But each break-through moment was matched by a moment of giving up as he said things like, “Why are you helping me? I don’t deserve this. Everyone says I’m a piece of shit.” I sat with that without saying anything so he could be heard. I saw people, educators, treat him just the way he saw himself in that moment of meeting his frustration level. At that moment he knew exactly how to quit. Most of my students choose quitting over failing; quitting prevents them from even starting, making quitting their safety net.

My student met his frustration level because he didn’t have the road map in front of him to tell him how to get the thoughts in his head to the page.

Meeting and naming his frustration was the part of the writing process that proved to him that he could persist. So his response, “This is making me tight,” is met with: “Describe what you are feeling” or “What do you need right now to push through?” or “Tell me why,before I asked “What is your next step?” or “Okay, so that didn’t work. What can you try instead?” My strategy was for my student to be able to name the frustration, acknowledge how it impacts his writing, and move beyond it. When I teach writing, I am upfront with students that the urge to quit is real; it is normal, and it is always present as an option, but our job is to choose another way. 

In the relational work of teaching, and teaching writing in particular, the “Why are you helping me?” or “Leave me alone” moments make me realize the gravity of teaching and the importance of students re-visioning themselves through the act of telling their stories. With my student who was writing his book, I worked to redirect the “quitting before failing” learning pattern, so that he could learn to push through the productive failure and change his response to his frustration level. 

Teaching is coaching in a learning environment that lifts up productive failure.

Coaches don’t assume their players will fail. They push them to get better, but they don’t say, “yeah, I’m done with you.” There’s a contract or understanding based on the value of the player. As a teacher, I am constantly reframing from that same coaching perspective—always keeping the asset-based mindset. Failing forward is a choice, both on my part as the teacher and the part of my students. And no one is going to fail without a safety net. Building students’ metacognitive skills within a restorative approach helps students to understand how to use failure and increases learning outcomes. The persistent redirection of “No, You’re not done; there’s more to do; let’s figure it out” is an acknowledgement of a student’s humanity, offering the space to grow. This restorative redirection is also an acknowledgement of the high rigor and standards we believe a student will meet.

On the twentieth day of my student’s writing I printed 30 pages and bound it with a large clip. When I showed him, he stared at the cover page without saying anything, then slowly flipped through each chapter. “I did this?,” he asked. And then he sat down with a pencil in hand and started to read his own story.

Three months after summer school, I presented at our school’s summer training for staff. I asked my student if I could share a paragraph of his memoir with the staff to help people understand firsthand a student’s self-perception as a result of experiencing persistent failure in school. The last slide of the training was just one paragraph of my student’s writing. I presented it as a reflection moment. Soon after, another adult asked to read his memoir. And then another. From time to time my student will text, asking for a book title or sharing and idea for a story. Being a part of this process is transformative.

I am experimenting with how to facilitate failure so that it holds new meaning in the learning process. When the student hits a wall and quits, I now resist the temptation to help or guide as readily as I have in the past. I push with a restorative lens, providing consistency and unconditional promise that students are not yet finished with a learning process that requires them to dig in and find their own way through. That is the meaning I have made with “productive failure.” It’s a mindset shift for me as a teacher, one that I learned from teaching students who “didn’t write” and “didn’t read”…until they did.

Metacognition as a Path to Inquiry Beyond the Classroom

I spent the last two years thinking about how to embed opportunities for students to practice and engage in metacognitive thinking. I think a lot about my students’ levels of awareness of agency and how that relates to their self-efficacy as learners. There is a gap between agency, efficacy, and overall empowerment for many of my students. It’s my job to close that gap by creating more opportunities for engagement with learning. One of the ways I am exploring engagement is by building students’ opportunities for students to practice resilience as learners both in and outside of academic settings. I realized that I need to provide explicit instruction of these social emotional learning skills in order to strengthen my students’ academic wellbeing, so that functioning–and achieving–in an academic setting becomes an internalized part of their self-identity.

One of the ways I connected metacognitive skill building to academic skill building was through an activity I named, “The Journey Wheel.” My students applied their knowledge of Odysseus’ journey as an epic hero in The Odyssey, along with Joseph Campbell’s Hero’s Journey paradigm, to their own journey through tenth grade English as thinkers, researchers, readers, and writers. As a culminating, end-of-year activity, students utilized their writing portfolios, journals filled with Do Now’s, and evidence of their thinking from debates and trials to document their own growth and resilience in tenth-grade English. Similar to the epic hero paradigm, students traced their journey from the “known” (where they were at the beginning) to the “unknown” (where they pushed through beyond their comfort zones), and finally, back into the “known” (where they arrived back where they started, but with a new mindset)–knowing more after experiencing more.

A student shares her moments of “big change” and “new realizations” as part of her Journey Wheel.

Journey wheel jay Continue reading “Metacognition as a Path to Inquiry Beyond the Classroom”