Findings
Section 5: The Effect of Peer Relationships on Project Outcomes and Deeper Thinking
On the final reading survey, 82% of students agreed that making or doing their project helped them think deeper about the book Unwind. By asking what helped students come to a deeper understanding of the messages and themes of Unwind, I hoped to pinpoint those elements. The majority, 56% of students said that discussions with peers helped them think deeper about Unwind. 33% stated that completing the project helped and 22% named reading in a small group. The other choices had less than 15% each, including “nothing helped me” with 9% of the class or 5 students. Seven students wrote in answers. Three students felt like they understood it on their own, two students mentioned debating, and two believed that the act of reading the book led to deeper thinking.
|
On the final reading survey, 82% of students agreed that making or doing their project helped them think deeper about the book Unwind. By asking what helped students come to a deeper understanding of the messages and themes of Unwind, I hoped to pinpoint those elements. The majority, 56% of students said that discussions with peers helped them think deeper about Unwind. 33% stated that completing the project helped and 22% named reading in a small group. The other choices had less than 15% each, including “nothing helped me” with 9% of the class or 5 students. Seven students wrote in answers. Three students felt like they understood it on their own, two students mentioned debating, and two believed that the act of reading the book led to deeper thinking.
|
At the beginning of my action research, I was shocked by the amount of students who did not think “discussing a book with peers” would help them enjoy reading more. Only 34% of the class in the first research cycle and 31% of the second class thought discussing would make reading more fun. I did not ask this same question at the end of the research cycle. Due to my shift from thinking about reading for enjoyment to reading for deep thinking, I asked the following questions:
As you can see from the graphs, most students (80%) felt that their peers had a major role in making their projects better. Only half thought their peers helped them think deeper. High Tech High puts a huge emphasis on peer critique and helping each other make beautiful work. I also emphasized this by having students participate in the project tuning protocol using their prototypes. I did not put as much effort into scaffolding the process of helping each other to think deeper. I facilitated small group conversations and tried to model good questioning techniques to allow students to go deeper into the themes and messages. I explicitly taught how to deepen thinking with the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy chart. I did not, however, explicitly teach students how to help each other in this way.
In final reflections, students offered various ways that peers made their project better. Lauren explained how working together and dividing up roles help them play to their strengths and make a beautiful final project. She explained at length how she and her partner discussed the book’s themes together but doesn’t connect that to the idea that peers can help you think deeper.
In final reflections, students offered various ways that peers made their project better. Lauren explained how working together and dividing up roles help them play to their strengths and make a beautiful final project. She explained at length how she and her partner discussed the book’s themes together but doesn’t connect that to the idea that peers can help you think deeper.
“We realized the book had some key themes of not being loved, abortion, and how to find yourself or who you are. We started to think of how to incorporate those themes. We started to think about the heart and how “unwinds” aren’t loved by their families. We came up with a poster with a brain, eyes, and a heart we chose those parts, because those are important parts we need in everyday life. We chose to connect them with strings symbolizing that they are being held together and also being pulled apart. It symbolizes being unwound, your parts are elsewhere but you are still connected in some ways. When Kathryn told me that she isn’t the best artist, we thought that she is better at writing so she made an artist statement describing what we created and what the meaning is. I don’t think I could have done this without my partner Kathryn, because she has great ideas and contributed a lot to this project. -Lauren
|
As I watched these two girls talk and work together, I could see that they were helping each other come to a deeper understanding of the book. She also clearly writes about this in her reflection. I wonder if she didn’t see the connection because the conversation was unstructured and loose, not teacher directed and structured. I wonder if it could be as simple as calling out what I was observing to bring student’s attention to it. I wonder how many other students were also having conversations about the book’s themes and messages but didn’t realize those were causing deeper thinking.
Collaboration during project work time
I was fascinated by students’ answers on one particular final reading survey question. I asked who they worked with on their project. This question was initially a way for me to simply categorize the data. I wanted to see if those that worked in partners or groups answered questions differently than those working alone. What I found however, was that students didn’t answer in ways I was expecting. The zine group, for example, all had separate projects. I expected them to mark “I worked alone.” All three students marked that they worked in a group! No students who wrote fan fiction were officially in a group. They either had a partner or wrote their own story. Three out of the eight people marked “I worked with a group.” All three of these students wrote individual stories. |
On the other hand, over 50% of the debate group, who I watched actually debate for two weeks straight before the official debate, marked that they worked alone. They did write up their arguments separately but definitely used each other to practice and try out arguments during the process. They also spent many days deciding how to structure the debate and formalizing the questions to be posed. I fully expected this group to mark “I worked in a group.”
Collaboration as Help
Whether they saw themselves as part of a group or not, students definitely saw the power of peers when it came to their final products. The nature of help that students cited was specific to the project type. I now see why so many people marked yes on this question. The students saw so many different ways to “help.” Some saw help as a physical act such as participating in the film. Others saw editing and critique as help. Cat explained, “When we were critiquing each others projects I got some really good advice. I also shared my document with some of my friends who would help edit things that I missed and suggesting ideas on what to do next.” Suggestions either formally through the project tuning protocol or informally were also cited as helpful as Gina explains. “They told me to feature reviews in my zine.”
As I read through each group’s answers to how their peers helped make their projects better, I was the most intrigued by the debate group’s answers.
Collaboration as Help
Whether they saw themselves as part of a group or not, students definitely saw the power of peers when it came to their final products. The nature of help that students cited was specific to the project type. I now see why so many people marked yes on this question. The students saw so many different ways to “help.” Some saw help as a physical act such as participating in the film. Others saw editing and critique as help. Cat explained, “When we were critiquing each others projects I got some really good advice. I also shared my document with some of my friends who would help edit things that I missed and suggesting ideas on what to do next.” Suggestions either formally through the project tuning protocol or informally were also cited as helpful as Gina explains. “They told me to feature reviews in my zine.”
As I read through each group’s answers to how their peers helped make their projects better, I was the most intrigued by the debate group’s answers.
· I got to see certain parts of the book from their point of view and prepare for it.-Ivan · I would talk with them in order to refine my arguments and prepare responses to arguments they might have.-Jerry · As we debated I had to think more on how is my argument not going to fall. In order to do this I had to think harder on how to structure my debate.-Fred |
Each group showed that they needed help in a different way. Most groups needed help in their design or grammar. These final projects displayed thinking but the appearance seemed to be the main focus for critique or “help.” The debate group’s final product was their thinking. There was no physical representation to worry about. In an environment where beautiful work was valued, it was their thinking that needed to be “beautiful.” In order to reach this goal, students used each other to deepen their thinking. As you will see below, this was the only group who had similar responses to how peers helped make their projects better and how peers made them think deeper.
Collaboration to Think Deeper
When asked how other students helped you think deeper about the book, the debate group had almost identical answers as the previous question. Ryan answered, “When we came up with topics you had to pick your sides and come up with very clear and deep points.” As I mentioned before, deep thinking was the final product for the this group so helping to make their project better was the same as pushing their thinking. Jim explains how the art group was pushed to think deeper as they were asked questions about their art and given suggestions. “We were peer critiquing and their ideas made me think deeper and want to understand it better.” |
By debating which scenes should stay or be cut out of the trailer, the video group pushed each other’s thinking. “Because we wanted to make it dramatic and have people want to see it if it really were a movie so we would discuss the book to really understand it and to see if we should add it or not.” –Samantha
I wanted to look at the collaboration data together to see what patterns emerged. I wondered which projects created a natural need for collaboration. I also wondered which projects used collaboration to think deeper, my ultimate goal for students.
I wanted to look at the collaboration data together to see what patterns emerged. I wondered which projects created a natural need for collaboration. I also wondered which projects used collaboration to think deeper, my ultimate goal for students.
More than 50% of the debate, art, and video groups thought their peers helped them think deeper. I also noticed that those groups had very similar answers to both questions. The fan fiction and zine groups, however, had almost exact opposite answers on the first and second question. All but one student said they did get help making their project better, yet all but one also said that their peers did not help them think deeper.
Reflecting back, I wonder if it was the nature of their project choice that affected their ability to have peers help them think deeper. All of the students in both groups worked very hard to finish their projects on time. The fan fiction stories were not short! Students wrote every day for the whole class period, barely coming up for air. The students making zines acted similarly, focused, rarely asking for advice. The other groups seemed much more social, having more natural conversations about Unwind as they worked. They seemed to need less concentration while working, and potentially had more opportunities to deepen their understanding through unstructured discussions.
Looking at the data sorted by project, I see that the fan fiction and zine groups did point to factors that led to deeper thinking, they just weren’t their peers. The highest percentage for each group, two students out of three in the zine group and four students out of eight in the fan fiction group felt that doing the project itself led to deeper thinking.
Projects Provide Opportunities for Unstructured Book Discussions
The discussions happening while working on projects were essential to deeper thinking because they had purpose. Students knew their projects needed to show high levels of critical thinking, I had set that bar. They saw a purpose for talking about the book. The conversations were much deeper than they had been as we read together, when the purpose was to understand. While reading, questions were asked and a discussion ensued because someone was confused or wondering what might happen next. This type of discussion was at a basic level on the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy chart because it needed to be. Students need to remember and understand before they can get to the higher levels of critical thinking. We could have stopped throughout the book to analyze and evaluate but students didn’t seem to have an authentic purpose for this while reading. They just wanted to understand and enjoy. After finishing the book, by having students design their own projects, they now have an authentic reason to think deeper about the book.
One might argue that writing a response paper or reading journals might accomplish the same high levels of critical thinking. Here is where I feel projects have an advantage. Essays and journals are individual activities. They are simply the reader’s point of view. They are lacking the collaborative nature of thinking with others. By having unstructured conversations while completing projects, students are naturally thinking deeper and deeper. They are analyzing in order to prepare a response to what a peer said or to create an interpretation of the book. They are evaluating when peers have different opinions or when they have to defend their work. Finally, by hearing what their peers think, thinking about their own opinion and the author’s messages, they are creating new knowledge. Each book they read and interact with in this way has the potential to slightly change a student’s world view.
The debate group is a perfect example of having an authentic purpose to discuss. They were at the higher levels of critical thinking during the entire project, not only during their formal debate. Other groups needed to think deeply as they made their plans and as they changed them. Although the zine and fan fiction groups didn’t see peer discussions as important to their thinking, I did observe this happening. The zine group often talked to each other and showed their work to friends. The more successful fan fiction stories were planned out and written collaboratively. I did notice that the less collaborative stories had storyline problems and seemed to go off track. After seeing successful examples of peers pushing each other to think deeper, the next step is to make students aware of those moments and to build on them.
Reflecting back, I wonder if it was the nature of their project choice that affected their ability to have peers help them think deeper. All of the students in both groups worked very hard to finish their projects on time. The fan fiction stories were not short! Students wrote every day for the whole class period, barely coming up for air. The students making zines acted similarly, focused, rarely asking for advice. The other groups seemed much more social, having more natural conversations about Unwind as they worked. They seemed to need less concentration while working, and potentially had more opportunities to deepen their understanding through unstructured discussions.
Looking at the data sorted by project, I see that the fan fiction and zine groups did point to factors that led to deeper thinking, they just weren’t their peers. The highest percentage for each group, two students out of three in the zine group and four students out of eight in the fan fiction group felt that doing the project itself led to deeper thinking.
Projects Provide Opportunities for Unstructured Book Discussions
The discussions happening while working on projects were essential to deeper thinking because they had purpose. Students knew their projects needed to show high levels of critical thinking, I had set that bar. They saw a purpose for talking about the book. The conversations were much deeper than they had been as we read together, when the purpose was to understand. While reading, questions were asked and a discussion ensued because someone was confused or wondering what might happen next. This type of discussion was at a basic level on the revised Bloom’s Taxonomy chart because it needed to be. Students need to remember and understand before they can get to the higher levels of critical thinking. We could have stopped throughout the book to analyze and evaluate but students didn’t seem to have an authentic purpose for this while reading. They just wanted to understand and enjoy. After finishing the book, by having students design their own projects, they now have an authentic reason to think deeper about the book.
One might argue that writing a response paper or reading journals might accomplish the same high levels of critical thinking. Here is where I feel projects have an advantage. Essays and journals are individual activities. They are simply the reader’s point of view. They are lacking the collaborative nature of thinking with others. By having unstructured conversations while completing projects, students are naturally thinking deeper and deeper. They are analyzing in order to prepare a response to what a peer said or to create an interpretation of the book. They are evaluating when peers have different opinions or when they have to defend their work. Finally, by hearing what their peers think, thinking about their own opinion and the author’s messages, they are creating new knowledge. Each book they read and interact with in this way has the potential to slightly change a student’s world view.
The debate group is a perfect example of having an authentic purpose to discuss. They were at the higher levels of critical thinking during the entire project, not only during their formal debate. Other groups needed to think deeply as they made their plans and as they changed them. Although the zine and fan fiction groups didn’t see peer discussions as important to their thinking, I did observe this happening. The zine group often talked to each other and showed their work to friends. The more successful fan fiction stories were planned out and written collaboratively. I did notice that the less collaborative stories had storyline problems and seemed to go off track. After seeing successful examples of peers pushing each other to think deeper, the next step is to make students aware of those moments and to build on them.
Deeper thinking by exhibiting work
I hadn’t thought about our exhibition as a way to continue the deep thinking until I ran across Richard's quote from the final reading survey, “The student’s art helped me think deeper because they had different respects (perspectives) on the book.” This student was not in the art group but instead made a movie trailer. I was fascinated when he wrote this answer to the question, “How did your peers help you think deeper about the book?” It is common for schools in the High Tech High organization to have an exhibition as a way to have a real audience for student work. Normally the audience would be students from other grades or schools, parents, or possible professional in the field. For us, the audience was people who had read Unwind. That pretty much meant, us. It didn’t make sense to invite anyone else because they wouldn’t understand our products without having read the book. |
The debate group held a Socratic seminar instead of an official debate. All who wanted to listen could. The fan fiction group uploaded their stories to a High Tech Middle Fan Fiction web site. They quickly summarized their stories to the class and then showed the web site for further reading. The short film and movie trailer groups showed their videos and then uploaded them to youtube. Finally, the art and zine groups showed their work in a gallery style. They stood behind their art or zine to answer questions and accept positive compliments. Each small exhibition served the purpose it needed to serve. They allowed students the opportunity to show the book’s messages and how those messages affected the student’s view of the world and themselves.
|
What I didn’t see at the time was how the exhibition itself would allow even deeper thinking to happen. This was just one more way for students to see each other’s viewpoints, just like a discussion would. During the exhibitions, especially for the art pieces and zines, students weren’t just looking and moving on. They were asking questions, discussing and debating with the artists and authors, and adding these new ideas into their own. Students were still critically thinking at higher levels even during the exhibition.
|