Heather Register-Strategy Share

“My students just don’t know how to research.” I’ve heard this statement countless times when I try to guide teachers to incorporate inquiry into their classrooms. “We get to the end of the day and I see that my kids have nothing written down.” I agree, attempting to get kids to research and pursue their interests has gotten more difficult. We’ve managed to drain curiosity out of them with traditional approaches to education. Students don’t know how to question and they definitely don’t know how mature researchers go about finding the answers to those questions. Sure they can navigate smart phones and post on social media, but do they know what it really means to Google something? A strategy I found in my search for answers was detailed in an interview with Harvey Daniels and teachers engaged in using technology as a tool for inquiry, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fL6d_rRHZMo. Daniels questions them on their techniques for guiding students through the research and production stages of the inquiry process. Of course students can’t simply jump right in to researching a topic. No one has ever shown them. This idea was supported time and time again in my journey to find answers. Daniels and Harvey address the topics in Comprehension and Collaboration: Inquiry Circles for Curiosity, Engagement, and Understanding. Videos from The Teaching Channel, Heinneman, and articles from Literacy Today all provide resounding support for explicitly guiding students through a process of research instead of assuming they know the steps.

The teachers in the interview share the ways they explicitly guide students through developing a question and a plan of action for finding the answer to that question. One lesson in particular seemed to be especially pertinent to the population in my school. The lead teacher discussed how she asked students to define what it means to Google something. It never occurred to me that using such a common phrase these days might not be clear to all students. After collecting information on students’ ideas of Google, the teachers clarified misunderstandings. Google isn’t a resource to cite. It’s a search engine that reaches to all ends of the internet to find information that matches the words  you typed in the search bar. The results it gives are your resources to cite. The process doesn’t end there. The teachers pulled up a Google search and showed students how some cites are ads trying to persuade you to buy, some sites are subject to the whims of their authors and not authentic, and some sites are simply dangerous to pursue. They discussed the idea of the URL addresses and how they can be clues as to what information can be found on that site. It seems so obvious that this approach would remedy some of the struggles with internet research, but I never thought of it. I could see extending the lesson to explaining the different between searching for information on websites and through images. Our kids love to click that image tab, look at a few pictures, and assume they know all they need to about their topics. Instead, they should view images as a supplement to information read on reputable websites. This strategy is one I’ve already tried with one fifth grade class. Surprisingly, they knew less than I thought they did about the Google results page. It was an important first step in helping them sift through the barrage of information that crowds their computer screen after entering that search. I’d like to try it in more classrooms and follow up to gauge what works and doesn’t. It’s a great strategy that can help remedy at least one concern plaguing teachers tasked with adding more inquiry.

Resources:

“Balancing Text and Tech”

Literacy Today January/February 2016

http://viewer.zmags.com/publication/800584ef#/800584ef/34  

Scaffolds for Critical Thinking

https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/scaffolding-critical-thinking

Informational Texts: Reading for Inquiry

https://www.teachingchannel.org/videos/informational-text-lesson-equip