Better Together

Day 5: This was a day to consolidate, network, and plan.

What stood out was the amount of time devoted to reflection and how reflection lends to transfer.

We focused on reflecting on the power of the juxtaposition of ideas. Position good instruction with poor instruction and have the audience notice how each makes them feel, and you have gently prepared them for the call to action.

It takes careful planning to know what you want the audience to feel, and to design that experience into the session, and then get the audience to notice it, so you can name it.

One way he gets people to notice is what he calls opening a loop. He injects information or a question that doesn't have an immediate resolution. The mind wants the loop closed, so it dwells, connects, predicts, reinterprets, or revises.

He uses storytelling to start stories he wants the audience to finish about their practice, but he supplies enough so the ending is primed. He creates tension between what he wants you to let go of and what he wants you to embrace in a way that makes you want to adjust your practice.

It takes practice and reflection to fine-tune the moves. The skillful use of ambiguity took him years to refine. Feedback from the audience helps you know whether your intention matches what they left with.

Yes. Both.

The idea is to not interrupt flow, so minimal intervention to keep people in flow. He will only interrupt to have people assess where they are on the single point rubric.

The first thought I had after reading your post was that assessment comes from the Latin word assidere, which means to sit beside. (I know - kind of random - LOL).

The other thought I had when you mentioned students need to know where they are and what types of problems they need to work on to act is a direct connection to UDL and how we think about removing barriers - ALL barriers.

This is a shift for certain - focusing on the interaction not the math task per se. Is this something we do when we are coaching teachers to use BTC AND/OR is it also something we do with students at the boards?

Day 4: Today was about assessment.

Peter has two axioms about assessment.

1. Assessment is the gathering of information for the purpose of taking action.

2. The person who can take action needs to hold the information

a. The person holding the information has a responsibility to take action.

Students need to know where they are and what types of problems they need to work on to act. The navigation grids allow students to know where they are in relation to the target, and what their next steps are in their learning. This helps the student to know what action to take.

When facilitating a session and you hoping the audience will make a change in practice, surface the positive change first and then get the audience to contrast it with the practice that is less effective. Asking what could I have done to make this worse, is one way. Another is to ask, how is this different from..x? The key is to not create a vacuum, something will fill the void. The give the audience something to replace what they let go.

Day 3:

"As a facilitator do not be a solution looking for the problem, be the answer to their problem." The goal is to get the audience to notice and surface the problem you want to talk about. Asking a question like what did you love about... x. Is a good way to get people to ask about where there is tension in their understanding or willingness to change their teaching practice. Unsolicited advice does not always land well. I think of the video, it is not about the nail.

It is all about creating the conditions for learning to happening while minimizing the footprint of teaching. Sometimes you need to seed the idea you want someone to surface. You can interact with a subset of groups and then ask, "who experienced... (name intervention)." It gets the idea out in the open. Other times it is just about waiting for the audience to surface the idea, when they ask and you answer the audience has a better experience. This means you have to be planned, so you can pivot. It is about responding to the audience and what they are ready to learn. Being intentional is key.

Prioritize the use of the single point rubric and getting the audience to commit to the interaction you want. I was able to shadow Peter for one task today, and he was focused on the interaction more often than not when he checked in with a group. A well design task will keep the math moving, so you can focus on the interaction. Many of the constraints and or directions also doubled as the support. In one task we wrote a math sentence on the board, and the sentence was also a support he used when groups got stuck. (This challenged me, and I wanted to dismiss it as it being easy when you do the same tasks all the time).

Using strategic questions to steer the conversation keeps the cognitive load squarely on the participants where it belongs. It stops the session from getting derailed while still making sure the audience feels completely heard and valued.

This is so deeply connected to the power of mediative questioning in cognitive coaching. When we shift from giving answers to asking mediative questions, we aren't just managing room energy or avoiding derailment. We are actively engaging the participant's internal thought processes.

By pausing to ponder what they noticed in the experience or how x compares and contrasts to y, we invite them to self-assess and construct their own meaning rather than passively receiving our takeaways. It honors their intellect and creates the exact mental space required for true conceptual shift.

So many good points to reflect upon and figure out how to apply!

Day 2: Being prepared as a facilitator.

The noticing, naming, and nuancing all start with the learning targets/goals. What idea(s) are you hoping the audience will gain from the session, and how will you create an experience for the audience to notice. Because then you can name it and elaborated on. You will also want to make sure you provide repeated exposure to some the more nuanced ideas you want the audience to pick up on.

4 powerful questions to ask to get things to surface.

What did you notice in your experience?

What did you notice in the facilitation?

What could I have done to make the experience worse?

How does x compare and contrast to y?

The goal is to ask questions rather than answer questions, because by asking questions you steer the conversation, and when the audience starts asking the energy is easily lost and there is a chance the session gets derailed. Acknowledge the question and so they do not feel dismissed. If you have set time aside for a QandA then say there will be time later. The idea is to stay focused on the learning goals and getting the audience to notice the ideas, so you can name them and examine them together.

If you are ever in a room with Peter and he doesn't answer your question, this is why.

Turn and talks are powerful ways to get ideas to surface.

This framework is so powerful! The shift from just experiencing a session to actively unpacking why a facilitator makes specific moves is a game-changer for professional learning.

"Noticing, naming, and nuancing" provides such a clear anchor for intentional teaching. I especially love the emphasis on nuancing. That is something I have not previously considered. Thinking about the subtle, behind-the-scenes facilitation choices that usually go unnoticed by participants will be a new point of reflection for me. Thank you for sharing! I can't wait to read your takeaways on the next four days!

Day 1: Today we focused on three facilitator moves: noticing, naming, and nuancing.

Change happens through noticing. Asking after a PD session what did you notice about the experience, and then what did you notice about the facilitation draws the attention to experience and pedagogy. Comparing what is noticed with what would have made the experience worse and or why the moves where made helps highlight the power and purpose of choices the facilitator has made.

Teaching happens in time, space, and relationships, so it is hard to adjust without reifying it. To do this you need to name what is noticed. By revoicing and elaborating on what is noticed you make it easier to remember the pedagogical moves and their effects.

Nuancing is about highlighting the subtleties. If you are modeling something that is subtle it should be repeated. This is also about making sure to subtle things get surfaced as you debrief the experience.

These are the things Peter Liljedahl does when he is facilitating a workshop. The next four days I will come to understand how he uses these.