by Helen A Scharff, Deirdre A. DeAngelis and Joan E. Talbert

This stand-alone introduction to inquiry  for the very beginner was distributed to all participants in Boston’s new fifteen-school inquiry initiative (the design and curriculum of which is adapted in SAM-Boston).  It combines both pep and process by including a message from the superintendent and evidence of success from SAM-Boston schools while distilling the unique characteristics and main stages of inquiry into four short pages.  There is also an appendix of inquiry cycle maps.  Those are described in more details here.

After the messages of urgency and hope, the guide introduces a simple graphical representation of inquiry cycles that can be used to explain inquiry at any level on any topic.  Next, team members are shown how inquiry is meant to penetrate every level of the school within existing structure, adding purpose and power to familiar practices.  (It references certain practices and structures that may be Boston-specific, but the idea of using inquiry to guide the work of existing teams is applicable across districts.)  Finally, the document lays out four essences of inquiry that make it different and powerful: use of data to justify every step, an aggregation of small changes for big results, utilization of knowledge that already exists within schools, and collective, collaborative action.

Those who are new to inquiry can get a concise introduction to inquiry, while those who wish to introduce inquiry to their schools or districts can easily adapt this guide to their context.

It is intended to support inquiry teams as they build the skills and habits that give data-driven inquiry its power: designing short-term instruction to achieve mastery of high-leverage skills; continually assessing both their own actions and the student learning that results; responding to new data with strategic next steps.

How This Version Differs from Prior Versions

­This revised inquiry explicitly emphasizes the Cyclical Nature of data-based inquiry.  The circular nature of “Asses Effects, Hypothesize, Define Success, Plan and Act, Assess Effects” is shown through the graphics near each section and through stressing that assessing current effects is not just the end of one cycle but the start of the next one.

­The sequence of this cycle asks teams to define success and plan to assess it before planning an intervention.  Teams that have clarified exactly what they want to see students doing can often design more direct, precise, and efficient actions to move students on learning targets.

­This version does not include the checkboxes of prior versions where teams could indicate which condition of learning they were action on and at what level of school organization.

Tips for Effective Use

­When introducing cycles of inquiry and this map, use the Toddler Example to provide a concrete out-of-school example of inquiry in action.  It’s a filled-out inquiry process map describing how one facilitator tried to reduce her toddler’s tantrums by engaging in inquiry.  Teachers and administrators new to inquiry found this example to be straight-forward, revealing, and very analogous.  When team members are ready to consider school-based examples, use the Sample Middle School Writing and High School Attendance inquiry maps.

­The version with the questions, many of which have been newly added to elicit more evidence and forethought, may prove helpful to anyone facilitating inquiry.  Although the questions will not be answer fully on the map itself, the questions should b the basis of teams’ conversation and decision-making at each step.

­Teams that have conceived of a “constellation” of related learning targets will be able to move most swiftly from one cycle to the next, analyzing data.  This is why they’re asked to consider “what else could it be” when choosing a learning target so they can design future assessments to reveal possible new learning targets when they assess mastery of current learning targets

­Monitor lag time, particularly around how long it takes to collect, analyze, and act on the assessment data. Facilitator support may be needed to maintain momentum until teams develop efficient systems and—even more important—the hunger for fresh data that comes from confidence that data does contain the clues that can guide teams to success.

­This tool also allows teams to assess the quality of their decision-making: Over time, are decisions increasingly (a) based on evidence of what students know and need to learn next (b) responsive to new data as it becomes available, and (c) aligned with other instructional decisions?

Tips for Effective Use:

Choose a lens (e.g., pedagogical practices, curricular decisions, assessment practices) and keep constant focus on it as you work your way down the layers (see example). Users need to be able to draw a clear cause-and-effect relationship between every layer.

­The Patterns layer should comprise low-inference statements based on data whenever possible (e.g., Only 2 out of 12 classroom transcripts contained a systematic means for teachers to check for every student’s understanding. Three of the four sixth grade teachers report that they do not assess students’ prerequisite math skills at the start of the school year.)

­We’ve found that it is sometimes hard for teams to identify the mental models underlying their own school’s current practice; encourage them to approach the iceberg as an anthropologist approaches another culture, asking “What are the participants in this system acting as if they believe to be true about the world?” Remind teams that the system may be operating on implicit beliefs that are in tension with the professed beliefs of individuals in the system.

­The iceberg can serve as an effective “pre-writing” stage before mapping a system. Jot each bullet from the iceberg on its own sticky note and move them around on chart paper to explore the multiple cause-and-effect relationships at play and identify where a small change could make a big difference. It should be clear to a viewer how the data-based problem statement about student performance is a logical or inevitable “output” of the system as mapped. (Additional patterns, structures, or mental models may emerge through the mapping process; be sure to add them to the iceberg for future reference!)

Iceberg Template (Word)

Iceberg Template With More Writing Space (Word)

Resources:

Senge, P., et. al. (2000).  Schools That Learn: A Fifth Discipline Fieldbook for Educators, Parents and Everyone Who Cares About Education.  New York:  DoubleDay.

Hutchens, D. (2001).  The Tip of the Iceberg: Managing the Hidden Forces That Can Make or Break Your Organization.   Waltham, MA:  Pegasus Communications.

It is intended to support inquiry teams as they build the skills and habits that give data-driven inquiry its power: designing short-term instruction to achieve mastery of high-leverage skills; continually assessing both their own actions and the student learning that results; responding to new data with logical next steps.

Tips for Effective Use

For teams used to a circular “cycle of inquiry” graphic, be explicit about how this format is basically an “unwound” cycle – the curvy arrows at left and right connect each assessment (the conclusion of a cycle) to the next hypothesis/learning target (the start of the next cycle).

The effectiveness of an inquiry cycle depends on tight alignment at every decision point: Is it clear how students mastering this learning target will help them gain ground toward the end-of-year skill target? Is the chosen intervention a direct, efficient way to teach kids what they need to learn next? Is the assessment designed to yield about this specific learning target, as well as to illuminate what students need to learn next?

Monitor lag time, particularly around how long it takes to collect, analyze, and act on the assessment data. Facilitator support may be needed to maintain momentum until teams develop efficient systems and—even more important—the hunger for fresh data that comes from a belief that data does contain the clues that can guide us to success.

­ Teams that have conceived of a “constellation” of related learning targets will be able to move most swiftly from one cycle to the next; designing assessments and analyzing the resulting evidence with an eye to “what else it could be” will poise teams to swiftly address whatever misconceptions or skill gaps they identify.

­This tool also allows teams to assess the quality of their decision-making: Over time, are decisions increasingly (a) based on evidence of what students know and need to learn next (b) responsive to new data as it becomes available, and (c) aligned with other instructional decisions?

Inquiry Process Map (PDF)

Inquiry Process Map TABLOID (PDF)

Sam Working Theory of Group Dynamics (Word)

Sam Working Theory of Group Dynamics (Powerpoint)

The major challenge we face working in and with teams, at the present time, is how to assess individual contributions to a group effort.

Our strategy has been to evaluate each team based upon: (a) the quality of what it produces in response to team-based prompts; and (b) feedback from team members on the process by which those outcomes were achieved.

Our strategy to evaluate individual participants has been based upon: (a) the quality of what each participant produces in response to individual prompts; and (b) 360 degree feedback from team members on how a participant performed an assigned role like Team Manager.

Issues that emerge from this process are addressed through regular individual and team coaching session with a trained facilitator.

This approach requires us to design and assign both individual and team tasks and to evaluation their quality separately. And, it relies heavily on self-reporting to identify and address issues. Since most of the team work is done independently it can take a long time before issues that adversely affect the quality of the work of a team are identified and addressed. A lot of what SAM is about is accelerating learning of both the adults we work with and of the students they serve. We would like to figure out a better way to assess individual contributions to a team’s efforts and would welcome your comments and suggestions.