Principles of Learning and How Accountable Talk Fits In

The Principles of Learning are condensed theoretical, yet practical, statements summarizing decades of learning research. The Principles of Learning are a tool designed by the Institute for Learning to help educators analyze the quality of their own instruction, as well as the opportunities for learning that they offer to students. While each is expressed as an independent idea, the Principles of Learning are connected to each other and interdependent. Thus, Accountable Talk practices do not stand alone but are related to the other eight principles. We will introduce some of those relationships here. There are two types of Principles of Learning. Some are more directly connected to classroom practice, others to systemic organization. We will begin with the Principles of Learning directly connected to classroom practice and first address the subject of our course - Accountable Talk.

Accountable Talk Practices

Talking with others about ideas and work is fundamental to learning. But not all talk sustains learning; Accountable Talk discourse is talk that sustains learning. For classroom talk to promote learning, it must be accountable to appropriate knowledge and to rigorous thinking (see section below on Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum). Participants in Accountable Talk discussions seriously respond to and further develop what others in the group have said. They put forth and demand knowledge that is accurate and relevant to the issue under discussion. Accountable Talk participants use evidence appropriate to the classroom discipline (e.g., proofs in mathematics, data from investigations in science, textual details in literature, documentary sources in history) and follow established norms of good reasoning. Teachers in Accountable Talk classrooms intentionally establish and promote the norms and skills of Accountable Talk practices. Accountability to knowledge, reasoning, and community (by way of conversational norms) are the foundations of Accountable Talk discussions. Aspects of each of the three foundations are universal and apply for all academic disciplines and every Accountable Talk conversation. But, each foundation may also play out in unique ways by academic content area and by grade level. Thus, thinking about unique needs and considerations for each of these foundational ideas in nonacademic settings does not take us too far afield from what educators must consider grade level by grade level and content area by content area. As we observe others delve into their particular Accountable Talk settings, in school and out, we can each learn lessons that help us in
The Accountable Talk Program is owned by the University of Pittsburgh, 2013. The Accountable Talk Program materials reproduced in this course are being made available to the public and registered students under the Creative Commons License: Attribution-NoDerivs 3.0 United States, which terms and conditions can be found at: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nd/3.0/us/.

ours. By observing others participating in their own Accountable Talk settings, we can glean important lessons that connect to our own context or situation and think about what is (and is not) universal in productive learning conversations. Even if the particularities of one setting do not apply to your own, the way another person thinks through, adapts, and adopts for that setting can provide insight into process for everyone.

Socializing Intelligence
Intelligence is much more than an innate ability to think quickly and stockpile bits of knowledge. Intelligence is a set of problem-solving and reasoning capabilities, along with the habits of mind that lead one to use those capabilities regularly. Intelligence is equally a set of beliefs about one's right and obligation to understand and make sense of the world, and one's capacity to figure things out over time. Intelligent habits of mind are learned through the daily expectations placed on the learner. By calling on students to use the skills of intelligent thinkingand by holding them responsible for doing so educators can "teach" intelligence. This is what teachers normally do with students they expect much from (e.g., students labeled as gifted); it should be standard practice with all students. Accountable Talk discourse is one of the primary ways in which people socialize and learn intelligence. Consider the role people who believe they have a right and obligation to understand and make sense of the world might take in a conversation compared to people who do not. For example, people who ask questions to clarify their own understanding or to ask others to explain or extend their reasoning build deeper understanding, and knowledge, than those who stand back, say, for fear of looking foolish because they do not knowing something. This is as true in a business meeting as it is in a classroom. Some people are taught this assertive learning role at home and it comes easily to them in public settings. Many others do not and, for them, explicit instruction and modeling is crucial. OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL SETTING: How do problem-solving and reasoning capabilities-linked with beliefs about ones right and obligation to understand and figure things out -get the work done in your setting?

Organizing for Effort

An effort-based school replaces the assumption that aptitude determines what and how much students learn with the assumption that sustained and directed effort can yield high achievement for all students. Everything is organized to evoke and support this

effort, to send the message that effort is expected and that tough problems yield to sustained work. High minimum standards are set and assessments are geared to the standards. All students are taught a rigorous curriculum, matched to the standards, along with as much time and expert instruction as they need to meet or exceed expectations. This Principle of Learning is consonant with a growing body of evidence that demonstrates effort trumps innate ability across all fields of human endeavor. (We will explore this research more in Week 2.) OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL SETTING: What high standards do you strive for in your setting? How do you or could you organize to evoke and support the effort needed to attain these standards?

Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum

Thinking and problem solving are the "new basics" of the 21st century. But the commonly held idea that we can teach thinking without a solid foundation of knowledge must be abandoned. So must the idea that we can teach knowledge without engaging students in thinking. Knowledge and thinking are intimately joined. This implies a curriculum organized around major concepts that students are expected to know deeply. Teaching must engage students in active reasoning about these concepts. In every subject, at every grade level, instruction and learning must include commitment to a knowledge core, high thinking demand, and active use of knowledge. Accountable Talk discussions are only Accountable Talk discussions if they are organized around something worth talking about: topics that meet the criteria of Academic Rigor in a Thinking Curriculum. Thus, most classroom conversations of any duration should be about major concepts students are expected to know deeply and designed around well-planned open-ended questions that invite students to explore those concepts and actively reason about them. OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL SETTING: What are people expected to know and learn in your setting? How do people think and reason about this knowledge base and learn more?

Clear Expectations
If we expect all students to achieve at high levels, then we need to define explicitly what we expect students to learn. These expectations need to be communicated clearly in ways that get them "into the heads" of school professionals, parents, the community and, above all, students themselves. Descriptive criteria and models of work that meet

standards should be publicly displayed, and students should refer to these displays to help them analyze and discuss their work. With visible accomplishment targets to aim toward at each stage of learning, students can participate in evaluating their own work and setting goals for their own effort. Clear expectations require something beyond posting homework and a set of bullet points for the days work, as often seen in classrooms. Clear expectations refer to public and explicit definitions of excellence that are displayed, discussed, and refined. Over time, students internalize and refine the expectations and strive for excellence without outside help. Public and explicit definitions include written communications such as rubrics, criteria charts, or graded work with written explanation of why the work did (or did not) meet standards. In addition, talk about expectations is an essential ingredient for building and checking on everyones understanding. OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL SETTING: Clear Expectations should be directly applicable to most settings; the expectations change but not the need to make them explicit and to model them. How do you or could you do this?

Self-Management of Learning
If students are going to be responsible for the quality of their thinking and learning, they need to develop - and regularly use - an array of self-monitoring and self-management strategies. These metacognitive skills include noticing when one doesn't understand something and taking steps to remedy the situation, as well as formulating questions and inquiries that let one explore deep levels of meaning. Students also manage their own learning by evaluating the feedback they get from others, bringing their background knowledge to bear on new learning, anticipating learning difficulties and apportioning their time accordingly, and judging their progress toward a learning goal. These are strategies that good learners use spontaneously and all students can learn through appropriate instruction and socialization. Learning environments should be designed to model and encourage the regular use of self-management strategies. Notice the similarity between some of the internal moves of self-management of learning and the external moves in an Accountable Talk conversation. A primary way that modeling and encouraging regular use of self-management strategies occurs in classroom setting is through Accountable Talk discourse. During conversations, teachers may model self-monitoring, explicitly telling students, for example, I didnt understand this word problem, so I... or I already knew X, so when I was confronted with Y I... Questions formulated during class discussions are similar to questions students should ask themselves when they monitor their learning. Again, the process

can be made explicit during classroom discussions so students can add self-monitoring tools to their learning toolboxes. OUTSIDE THE SCHOOL SETTING: One might hope that Self-Management of Learning is something all adults have automatically or naturally mastered. Simple mastery is easy for some people; for others, even adults, it must be made explicit. Is there a need to help yourself or others self-monitor your learning, your process, and/or your work? How might you begin to do this?

Learning as Apprenticeship
For many centuries, most people learned by working alongside an expert who modeled skilled practice and guided novices as they created authentic products or performances for interested and critical audiences. This kind of apprenticeship allowed learners to acquire complex interdisciplinary knowledge, practical abilities, and appropriate forms of social behavior. Much of the power of apprenticeship learning can be brought into schooling by organizing learning environments so that complex thinking is modeled and analyzed, and by providing mentoring and coaching as students undertake extended projects and develop presentations of finished work, both in and beyond the classroom. Learning as apprenticeship may resonate, particularly, with those of you working outside the classroom setting. Now we consider Principles of Learning that connect more to systemic organization.

Fair and Credible Evaluations

If we expect students to put forth sustained effort over time, we need to use evaluations that students find fair; and that parents, community, and employers find credible. Fair evaluations are ones that students can prepare for: therefore, tests, exams, and classroom assessments, as well as the curriculum, must be aligned to the standards. Fair evaluation also means grading against absolute standards rather than on a curve, so students can clearly see the results of their learning efforts. Evaluations that meet these criteria provide parents, colleges, and employers with credible evaluations of what individual students know and can do.

Recognition of Accomplishment
If we expect students to put forth and sustain high levels of effort, we need to motivate them by regularly recognizing their accomplishments. Clear recognition of authentic

accomplishment is a hallmark of an effort-based school. This recognition can take the form of celebrations of work that meets standards or intermediate progress benchmarks en route to the standards. Progress points should be articulated so that, regardless of entering performance level, every student can meet real accomplishment criteria often enough to be recognized frequently. Recognition of Accomplishment can be tied to opportunity to participate in events that matter to students and their families. Student accomplishment is also recognized when student performance on standards-based assessments is related to opportunities at work and in higher education.