I p

Making Thin inVisible

When learners speak, write, or draw their ideas, they deepentheir cognition. Project Zero's Visible Thinking approach shows how.

Ron Ritchhart and David Perkins

W nat are your

thoughts aboutarthropods?

Chances are youdon't have too many

thoughts about this particular phylumof invertebrates. But students in NaomiArrow's 5th grade class at Bialik Collegein Melbourne, Australia, came up withmany initial observations when Naomiintroduced a unit on the creatures,everything from "I think they're creepy"to "They are hairy and have many legs."'Beyond first impressions, the studentsgenerated questions on aspects ofarthropods that they were puzzledabout: "How do they walk upsidedown?" "How does the spider produceits web?" And (in an intriguing somer-sault of perspective taking), "Is therestuff that they stamp on, like we stampon them?"

Naomi's students were applying athinking routine called think-puzzle-explore, which has students share whatthey think about a topic, identify ques-tions they puzzle about, and targetdirections to explore. Thinking routineshelp learners ponder topics that mightnot seem to invite intricate thinking atfirst glance, such as arthropods. Such

I %ot '.

Elementary students at Bialik College record their thinkingthrough drawing "think-puzzle-explore" charts.

routines jump-start thinking and makeit visible.

Thinking routines are one element ofan initiative called Visible Thinking thatwe, our colleagues at Project Zero, andcollaborators in various schools havedeveloped. In our research, we haveexplored the practicality of using

ENT WORK COURTESY OF NAOMI ARROW

thinking routines and documentation asclassroom learning tools, developed aframework for pursuing cultural trans-formation in classrooms and schools,and devised tools for integrating thearts. This work has spanned elementarythrough university settings, includedboth public and independent schools,

ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICUt-uM DEVEL.OPMENT 57

-A,

and involved schools in theUnited States, the Netherlands, rSweden, Belgium, and Australia.'

What Is Visible Thinking?Six key principles anchor VisibleThinking and characterize ourapproach in schools.

a Learning is a consequence ofthinking. Students' understandingof content, and even theirmemory for content, increaseswhen they think through-andwith-the concepts and informa-tion they are studying. Thinkingthrough issues is not a solo Studiendeavor, however. Team measmembers often share and buildon one another's knowledge. Notationalsystems, specialized vocabulary, andvarious technological and other toolsalso free up memory for more complextasks.

m Good thinking is not only a matter ofskills, but also a matter of dispositions.Open-mindedness, curiosity, attentionto evidence, skepticism, and imagina-tiveness all make for good thinking(Perkins & Ritchhart, 2004; Perkins,Tishman, Ritchhart, Donis, & Andrade,2000). Such characteristics concern notso much a person's abilities as how theperson invests those abilities. Childrenand adults often greatly underutilizetheir thinking capabilities. Accordingly,besides nurturing relevant skills, educa-tion needs to promote open-mindednessover closed-mindedness, curiosity overindifference, and so on. Several studiessupport this dispositional view ofthinking.

m The development of thinking is a socialendeavor. In classrooms, as in the world,there is a constant interplay between thegroup and the individual. We learn fromthose around us and our engagementwith them. The sociocultural characterof classrooms and schools shouldensure that thoughtful learning is perva-sive, not sporadic.

* Fostering thinking requires makingthinking visible. Thinking happens

ants exploring questions about a mining disasterure the length of the mine shaft with unifix cube.-

mostly in our heads, invisible to othersand even to ourselves. Effective thinkersmake their thinking visible, meaningthey externalize their thoughts throughspeaking, writing, drawing, or someother method. They can then direct andimprove those thoughts. VisibleThinking also emphasizes documentingthinking for later reflection.

m Classroom culture sets the toneforlearning and shapes what is learned. Wehave identified eight forces that shapeclassroom culture: (1) classroomroutines and structures for learning,(2) language and conversationalpatterns, (3) implicit and explicitexpectations, (4) time allocation,(5) modeling by teachers and others,(6) the physical environment, (7) rela-tionships and patterns of interaction,and (8) the creation of opportunities.Depending on their form, these forcescan support or undermine the rhythmof thoughtful learning (Ritchhart,2002, 2007).

m Schools must be cultures of thinking forteachers. Professional learning commu-nities-in which rich discussions ofteaching, learning, and thinking becomea fundamental part of teachers' experi-ences-provide the foundation fornurturing thinking and learning in theclassroom. Administrators need tovalue, create, and preserve time for

teachers to discuss teaching andlearning, grounded in observa-tion of student work.

First Grade Thinkersat Work ...To show these principles inaction, let's look inside anotherclassroom at Bialik College, aprivate preK-12 school inMelbourne, Australia. Theschool includes students with

Ssevere learning disabilities asR well as gifted students. First

grade teacher Roz Marks hasbeen implementing visiblethinking in her classroom fortwo years through our Cultures

of Thinking project. She has found thethink-puzzle-explore routine a goodway to uncover students' thinking andplan her inquiry-based curriculum.When her class showed interest in theApril 2006 Beaconsfield Mine collapsein Tasmania and the subsequent rescueof two miners, Roz used this routine tohelp define students' inquiry.

Gathering her class, Roz asked,"What do you think you know aboutthe Beaconsfield Mine?" To providethink time, she gave them paper to drawtheir ideas. Students were soon eager toshare.

"I think Larry Knight [the solefatality] was a good person," Yasminoffered. Roz recorded Yasmins commenton chart paper and gently pushed herthinking by asking, "What makes yousay that?" The 6-year-old paused beforespeculating, "Because maybe he offeredto drive the truck and didn't mind thathe wasn't protected."

Ivan added, "I think Larry Knight wasscared when the rock was falling."

Roz probed, "What makes you saythat?" Ivan pointed to his picture:"Because the rock was so big."

As the sharing continued, Rozfollowed each student's statement with"What makes you say that?" and docu-mented responses to keep the collectivethinking visible. Soon students justified

58 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP/FEBRUARY 2008

their ideas without prompting. "I thinkone of the miners is ill," Jade offered,quickly adding, "because I heard it onthe news."

Roz turned the class's attention to themysteries of the mining disaster. "Whatare you puzzling over or wonderingabout the mine?" Hands shot up andquestions flew. Some questions focusedon causes of the tragedy: "How did thecollapse happen?" "Why was the cage[part of the vehicle in which minersworked] so small?" "Why was LarryKnight not in the cage?" Others exploredthe rescue: "Why were the last threemeters of rock the hardest?" Still others

Children and adults often greatlyunderutilize their thinking capabilities.

expressed personal puzzles: "Why wasn'tI allowed to watch it on TV?"

After collecting students' "puzzles"the questions students puzzled over-Roz discussed with the class how variedthey were and asked, "How will weexplore our puzzles?" Studentssuggested various media sources, suchas newspaper and television. A fewrecognized the need for "the truth," not

just information, and suggested visitingTasmania or phoning the miners them-selves. The class decided to keeplooking at and listening to news reports.Roz and the students regularly broughtarticles to class, and students continuedto form theories about the collapse andrescue on the basis of new evidence.Roz also made books about geology andmining available to students.

Thinking Routines: Tools for Making Thinking VisibleProject Zero researchers developed more than 30 thinkingroutines in collaboration with K-12 teachers. Below are afew popular routines used by teachers. See www.pz.harvard.edu/vt/ for more information, including actual classroomexamples, on these routines and many others.

HeadlinesThis routine uses newspaper headlines to capture theessence of an event, idea, concept, or topic. It works espe-cially well at the end of a class discussion in which studentshave explored a topic and gathered new information andopinions. Ask students,

m If you were to write a headline for this topic or issueright now that captured the most important aspect toremember, what would that headline be?

If you ask the first question at the beginning of thediscussion, follow up with these questions:

* How would your headline change after today's discus-sion? How does it differ from what you would have saidyesterday?

Connect-Extend-ChallengeThis routine helps students make connections. Ask studentsthese three questions:

n How are the ideas and information presentedconnected to what you know and have studied?

m What new ideas extended or pushed your thinking innew directions?

mWhat is still challenging or confusing for you? Whatquestions, wonderings, or puzzles do you have?

See-Think-WonderThis routine helps stimulate curiosity and sets the stage forinquiry. Ask students to make observations about an object,image, or event, answering these three questions:

"nWhat do you see?",What do you think about that?",What does it make you wonder?

Compass PointsThis routine helps students explore various facets of aproposition or idea (such as a school dress code) beforetaking a stand on it. Ask students these four questions,recording their responses as the directions of a compass toprovide a visual anchor.

* E = Excited. What excites you about this idea orproposition?

* W = Worrisome. What do you find worrisome aboutthis idea?

m N = Need to Know. What else do you need to know orfind out about it? What additional information would helpyou?

m S = Stance, Steps, or Suggestions for Moving Forward.What is your current stance on the idea or proposition?What steps might you take to increase your understandingof the issue?

ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 59

Source: Activities are adapted from Project Zero's Visible Thinking Web site (www.pz.harvard.edu/vt) created by David Perkins, Ron Ritchhart, Patricia Palmer,and ShariTishman © 2007 by the president and fellows of Harvard College on behalf of Project Zero at the Harvard Graduate School of Education.Used with permission.

... And HowTheirTeacherFostered ThinkingIn this interaction, Roz fosteredthinking and made it visible inmultiple ways. Even before the discus-sion, Roz signaled interest in herstudents' ideas. Through observingstudents' conversations and play, sherecognized the opportunity for richlearning related to the topic of theBeaconsfield Mine. In Roz's classroom,student thinking is noticed, respected,and encouraged, fostering a culture ofpervasive learning.

Roz gave her students time tobecome aware of their ideas and ques-tions, and then used the think-puzzle-explore routine to support theirinquiry. Like the familiar KWLstrategy-What do you Know? Whatdo you Want to know? What have youLearned? (Lyman, 1981)-think-puzzle-explore taps students' priorknowledge, but with a key difference.By asking what students "think theyknow" rather than what they "know,"the prompt uses conditional languagethat suggests possibilities and opennessrather than absolutes (Langer & Piper,1987; Ritchhart & Perkins, 2000). Thisencourages sharing of tentative ideas.All students can engage in a conversa-tion focused on personal thoughtsrather than definitive knowledge. Asthe conversation in Roz's class devel-oped, students adopted conditionallanguage in their responses ("I thinkLarry Knight was scared"). Suchlanguage communicates the messagethat learning begins with one's ownideas and truth is built over time.

Roz used the power of language toshape thinking by weaving in the "Whatmakes you say that?" prompt with itsgentle invitation to provide evidence.Over time, students took on this expec-tation for reasoned thinking. Finally, thequestion, What are you puzzling over?is subtly different from the traditional,What do you want to find out? andguides students toward investigatingrather than stockpiling facts.

Creating a Cultureof Thinking forTeachersAt Bialik, teachers like Naomi and Rozdiscuss their efforts to create a culture ofthinking in one of seven teacher studygroups. These groups use actionresearch, classroom observations, andreading and discussion to clarify howthe eight cultural forces mentionedearlier in this article shape learning inclassrooms.

The study groups regularly discussstudent work through the Looking atStudent Thinking protocol. Using docu-mentation of students' thinking, thisprotocol guides teachers through closely

Thinking routinesjump-start thinkingand make it visible.observing student responses, specu-lating about students' thinking, raisingquestions, and exploring implicationsfor teaching (information on thisprotocol is available at www.pz.harvard.edu/vt).

For example, Roz's group spent 90minutes exploring and analyzing herclass's conversation about the Beacons-field Mine. Her colleagues noticed thatstudent responses signaled greatempathy and curiosity and markedemerging mathematical and scientificideas about types of rock, weights,distances, and cause-and-effect relation-ships. They noted that studentspresented evidence for all their state-ments, sometimes without prompting,and showed rich awareness of informa-tional resources.

As the discussion expanded, ques-tions emerged about the power ofstarting with student interests, the roleof the media in presenting information,and adults' role in censoring that infor-mation. Issues arose about what oppor-tunities students should have to delvedeeply into ideas, explore their own

thinking, and pursue research. Teacherssuggested that Roz might extend theexploration into geology, Australiasnatural resources, and the process ofmining-or connect it to a discussion ofsurvival skills and how events affectcommunities. Roz not only could seeher students' thinking more clearly, butalso could better situate their learningwithin the school's collective efforts.

The Effects of MakingThinking VisibleWe have seen positive changes in schoolculture and student learning in Bialikand other schools implementing theVisible Thinking approach. Classroomactivities become more learningoriented rather than work oriented(Marshall, 1988). Students who previ-ously believed they lacked a voice orthat their ideas weren't valued,including students with learning disabil-ities, participate more actively andconfidently (Ritchhart, Palmer, Church,& Tishman, 2006); and students' aware-ness of thinking strategies dramaticallyincreases at all grade levels (Ritchhart,Hadar, & Turner, 2008). Teachers atBialik have told us that making thinkingvisible enables them to more accuratelyassess students' understanding.

Data from schools using the approachreflect improved student learning. Highschool students at Bialik reported thatthinking routines helped them structuretheir thinking before they began writingessays for their state graduation exams,which boosted their confidence andincreased the time they spent writing. AtLong Lake Elementary in Traverse City,Michigan, where our colleagues havebeen implementing Visible Thinkingideas since 2004, student scores havesignificantly increased on state anddistrict tests in reading, writing, andsocial studies. Efforts are underway toexpand the program throughout theTraverse City district.

The long-standing goals of the VisibleThinking approach-deepeninglearning in the content areas and

60 EDUCATIONAL LEADERSHIP/FEBRUARY 2008

fostering thinking skills and disposi-tions-are vital in schools today In ourexperience, this approach creates achemistry that can be truly transforma-tive for learners and teachers. M

'For the purist, most arthropods havemany legs, but only a few are hairy.

2For more information on Project Zero'spractice and research, visit www.pz.harvard.edu/vt or www.pz.harvard.edu/tc.

ReferencesLanger, E., & Piper, A. (1987). The preven-

tion of mindlessness. Journal of Personalityand Social Psychology, 53, 280-287.

Lyman, F T. (1981). The responsive class-room discussion: The inclusion of allstudents. In A. Anderson (Ed.), Main-streaming Digest (pp. 109-113). CollegePark: University of Maryland Press.

Marshall, H. H. (1988). In pursuit oflearning-oriented classrooms. Teachingand Teacher Education, 4(2), 85-98.

Perkins, D. N., & Ritchhart, R. (2004).When is good thinking? In D. Y. Dai &R. J. Sternberg (Eds.), Motivation, emotion,

Thinking throughissues is not asolo endeavor.

and cognition: Integrative perspectives onintellectual functioning and development(pp. 351-384). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Perkins, D. N., Tishman, S., Ritchhart, R.,Donis, K., & Andrade, A. (2000). Intelli-gence in the wild: A dispositional view ofintellectual traits. Educational PsychologyReview, 12(3), 269-293.

Ritchhart, R. (2002). Intellectual character:What it is, why it matters, and how to get it.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Ritchhart, R. (2007). Cultivating a culture ofthinking in museums. Journal of MuseumEducation, 32(2), 137-154.

Ritchhart, R., Hadar, L., & Turner, T. (2008,March). Uncovering students' thinking aboutthinking using concept maps. Paper to bepresented at American EducationalResearch Association, New York.

Ritchhart, R., Palmer, P, Church, M., &Tishman, S. (2006, April). Thinking

routines: Establishing patterns of thinking inthe classroom. Paper presented at AmericanEducational Research Association, SanFrancisco.

Ritchhart, R., & Perkins, D. N. (2000). Lifein the mindful classroom: Nurturing thedisposition of mindfulness. Journal ofSocial Issues, 56(1), 27-47.

Author's note: Some of the ideas andresearch reported here were developed withsupport from Bialik College, Abe and VeraDoravitch, and the Stiftelsen Carpe Vitam.The views expressed by the authors are notnecessarily those of the foundations.

Copyright © 2008 Ron Ritchhart andDavid Perkins

Ron Ritchhart is Research Associateand Principal Investigator of the Culturesof Thinking Project at Project Zero,Harvard Graduate School of Education;617-495-4898; ron@pz.harvard.edu.David Perkins is Senior Professor ofEducation at Harvard Graduate School ofEducation; David-Perkins@pz.harvard.edu.

Reading Recovery:Powerful, Proven ResultsReading Recovery received high ratingsfrom USDE's What Works Clearinghouse.No other early reading interventionmeasures up across all four domains studied- alphabetics, fluency, comprehension, andgeneral reading achievement.httD://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/reports/beginning reading/

aReadingRecovery®Councilof North AmericaPhone614-31 0-READ (7323)For more informationwww.readingrecove[y.org

"* Reading Recovery provides powerful professionaldevelopment linked to student achievement.

" Reading Recovery produces cost benefits because itreduces referrals and placements to special education,limits retention, and has lasting effects.

" Reading Recovery delivers measurable resultsin weeks, not years.

"* Reading Recovery can support your school's responseto intervention (RTI) and early intervening services(EIS) in accordance with IDEA regulations.

ASSOCIATION FOR SUPERVISION AND CURRICULUM DEVELOPMENT 61

COPYRIGHT INFORMATION

TITLE: Making Thinking VisibleSOURCE: Educ Leadership 65 no5 F 2008

The magazine publisher is the copyright holder of this article and itis reproduced with permission. Further reproduction of this article inviolation of the copyright is prohibited.