What does Nuthall really say about multiple exposures?

I made this table in 2014, it is based upon a now unsearchable document, namely the now illusive

"Nuthall, G. A. (2001a). Manual: Procedures for identifying the information content of student classroom experiences and predicting student learning."

If anyone has one lying around I would love a copy.

What is it? Well, these are the codes (albeit slightly incomplete, and slightly compiled from other Nuthall research documents) used by Nuthall and his fellow researchers to analyse the interactions students had with a concept. Their purpose was to allow them to predict if learning would occur based upon the "kinds" of interaction.Astonishingly they could oredict if learning would occur to an accuracy of 88%. This is to an extent that it will certainly do for me!

These may be a researcher’s tool, but they certainly illuminate a teachers understanding of how learning takes place, and as such are worthy of a little thought by teachers. It is indeed these research tools that presented us with the multiple exposure rule that if a concept is engaged with three or four times, depending upon the concepts difficulty and the students, then it will be learned. But they might tell us even more.

The codes are categorised into two types: A full set of information that is required for a concept to be learned, here coloured green. Sensationally the other category is a partial set of information that includes important information about the concept being learned.   Here these are shaded blue, and you will see that these are of several different forms. 

	Description
Full set of accessible information needed to learn a concept: picture, words.	The exact information that that students need to hear, read, see, discuss or use in an activity. Information that must be engaged with. Students need the chance to identify and extract relevant information. Any prior knowledge they express is very much part of this.
Partial set of information with some important parts about a concept.	As above, but just not the full information. Chunked explanations. Corrections to work. Relevant prior knowledge that they express too.
Working out Information. Information that can lead to an inference or deduction.	Implicit use of key terminology. Concept use when teaching another concept.[??1]
Background information	Such as: definitions analogies examples non-examples personal experiences
Activities that lead to a full use/view of the information.	These activities are more than just reading, writing and talking about a concept.   Science practical Making a model The information is clearly about the concept
Activities that lead to a partial use/view of the information.	These activities are more than reading, writing and talking, but in this case do not give the full information. This may be information that can be used to lead students to make inferences and deductions.

It must first be noted that students not gaining access to a full set of information is not the result of crap teaching. There are numerous valid, and beneficial reasons why we would not want to present everything all at once: complex ideas need breaking down, or we may be helping students think through the content via definitions, analogies,  examples and non-examples and so forth. This information provides students with useful background information so that they can work out the meaning of concepts through induction and deduction.

 The partial information works in different ways: sometimes it provides a context for the learning and potential sources of useful prior knowledge, and sometimes we give information that will allow students to work out what the concept is in a more direct way.

 Nuthall then pieced together through observation, and interviews when and how students interacted with or engaged with information about a concepts. This really is a marvel. As a teacher you rarely get to see where and when students actually interact with the ideas behind a concept, our classrooms are too busy, with too many students and too many ideas being learned (and forgotten) all at once. So this schematic view of it is certainly worth pondering the interactions our students take in a process of a lesson: When? Where?  How?  How many? First exposure? Second? Did they think? Did they infer? Did they copy? Of course this is impossible to know as much of the important interaction  hidden in the mind of the learner. 

Nuthall used the categorisations

1. Full set of information FSI
2. Partial set of information PSI
3. Activity that leads to a full set of information ALF
4. Activity that leads to a partial set of information ALP
5. Back ground Information BI
6. Working out Infromation WOI

 to work out what was needed for a concept to be learned as summarised in the next table.

Interaction/ Exposure number	1	2	3	4	5	Additional information
Learned occurs with	FSI	FSI	FSI	FSI		Only four required
Learned occurs with	FSI	FSI	FSI	PSI/ WOI/ BI/ ALF/ALP		Only four required. Any one of the blue.
Learned occurs with	FSI	FSI	ALF	ALF	ALF	Any combination of blue .
Learned occurs with	FSI	FSI	ALF	ALP	ALP	any combination of blue.
Learned occurs with	FSI	FSI	PSI	WOI	BI	And any combination.
Learned occurs with	FSI	PSI	WOI	WOI	ALP	And any combination.

Nuthall himself said “ Provided a student is able to piece together, in working memory, the equivalent of three complete definitions or descriptions of a concept, that new concept will be constructed as part of the students long term memory” From the table It suggest that four  Full sets of information (FSI) will do the job, as will three provided there is an additional set of partial information.

If there is less than two full sets of information then students will require a total of five interactions with partial information sets.

This makes it essential for teachers to be aware what a full set of information may look like. This is difficult to achieve for every fact and idea you want students to learn.  Ergo, I do not think this is a planning tool, but a key piece of pedagogical content knowledge that will help us plan better teaching sequences.

 This research primarily suggests some useful planning suggestions. So that for learning to take place, students must:

• interact with a full explanation of concept at least once.
• interact with the information on at least four separate occasions.

 and that:

• the more often they interact with the full picture the better for their learning.
• perhaps breaking down concepts is not always the best strategy as more exposures will be needed for learning to occur for each of the smaller parts and then for the big idea you intended to teach.
• related information can be deduced, collated and learned from many pieces of information.
• we have to remember that, no matter how much we manage knowledge, we are entirely reliant upon students engaging with it!

The importance of a full set of information is problematic for teachers as We instinctively strive to break down immense potential complexity into neat, bite-sized chunks appropriate for student consumption. Sadly, this well-intentioned process may not actually benefit student learning; as the most effective teaching activities are often linked to big questions or ideas. This is probably best defined by David Perkins who, in his book “Making Learning Whole”, labels the breaking down of learning into small chunks, rather tongue in cheekly,  as a disease, naming it ‘elementisis’. The problem with elemetisis is that students never get to join the elements back together after they have been broken down for them, so that they may see how the knowledge works as part of a whole.

---

 Graham Nuthall 2007 The Hidden Lives of Learners NZCER page 127.

 Graham Nuthall Vol. 99, No. 4 (Mar., 1999), pp. 303-341 The Elementary School Journal The Way Students Learn: Acquiring Knowledge from an Integrated Science and Social Studies Unit
David Perkins - making Learning Whole 

David Perkins on Threshold Experiences

Found at http://tv.unsw.edu.au/video/professor-david-perkins#.VGY7qr68xlw.twitter

What can High Tech High tell us about learning communities?

The opening images in this 14 minute video show the interactive , installation art which is striking . Beyond that they are normal, normal in a ubiquitous sense. It's everywhere.

Larry Rosenstock's opening lines about "ignoring certain axioms" is equally stark. Identifying the current segregation's in education that are taken as normal and actively creating a school that serves and is part of community it represents should be a central to education. These two quotes clearly shows this thinking.

"Public education is the only institution designated and funded as the agent of the  larger society in protecting the core value of its citizens:democracy" Glickman

"What we teach and how we teach it- both directly , in terms of our academic curriculum , and indirectly, in terms of the social curriculum we model- should reinforce our social ideals and values"  Kathy Greely 


The public display and exhibition with family members and local experts are key tenets of this approach. The choice of ART as another is no accident either.

"Art communicates to everyone " Jeff Robin
"People make art to communicate....." George Lucas

It makes the "tool" approach (enabling students to make things that demonstrate to people what has been learned) vital. Projects do this. 

This video really highlights the quantity of high quality work that you'd want to display, and the painstaking curation of the work, the 40,000sq foot of  area is just the start.

Again Greely sums this up 
" The culture of the whole school- in the classroom, in the hallway, on the playground, in the cafeteria, on the bus- should reflect and reinforce what we strive for: respect, tolerance, hard work, informed literacy and critical thinking."  

At High Tech High they go beyond the schools and into the wider community with work displayed at local art galleries, used at other schools and on global projects such as the Bushmeet project. Although my favourite, is the story of Mathew Moss School in Rochdale where students stepped into the breech to direct traffic. Which exemplifies Rosenstocks quote from Thomas Jefferson

 " The purpose of public education isn’t to serve a public but to make a public".
 In fact he sees in very concrete terms 

"Consider the class as a fulcrum for the community." 


The students concur and see themselves as part of the community.

"[Robots], gives us a role in the community." 

It is very evident at HTH, with the public exhibition, through critique and through the places the student work ends up. It is clear  that this is THE pedagogy for student motivation and learning.

"Beautiful work and curation, benefit of looking the work together and considering where to go next, to get better."


Although HTH systematically sends their students around the world, as " they would only go yo university as far as they had travelled", take for example Jay Vavra's Bushmeat project, which develops global citizens. Although, it's also the projects that connect students to their own community, giving them a sense of place that make a big difference. The long running San Diego Bay project is a great example of this. This is the inspiration behind "Wild about Cramlington" Project (more detail here and here ) Several of the students freely using the word pride in what they have on their doorsteps. We found a similar, positive feeling to their locality in the "Call of the Wild". 


The accretion of this culture leads to the "reverse peer effect", where success and working at a consistent high level becomes normal.

"You can study the WORLD through just about anything"  


This is not learning for learnings sake (although this would be most luxuriant), the learning is purposeful and professional. Allowing the students to sample the adult world in a safe junior version (a la David Perkins).

"What is adolescence but on try on new roles and trying on new identities?"


"Make work that work matters, that has a lasting impact."


The skills of an adult are explicitly taught, especially in the middle schools. The Critical Skills approach is visible and used, As well as structures and protocols, a large amount of trust and responsibility is needed. Students need to learn this, and learn to trust one another. This has to be "on the curriculum". Incidentally and wonderfully the tag line on the Critical Skills blog is 

" Within a community anything is possible, without one nothing is".

The integrated nature of the knowledge that comes from their projects, is how knowledge is actually used.

"It's in an adult mileu they have reason, it gets there attention so you can then pack in the biology etc"


This point is more or less made by this exultation of design thinking. It's what projects allow you to do.




Summary

All of the following are easier and more effective using project based learning.

Beautiful work not only deserves to be displayed but needs to displayed. 

Curation is a big part of a teachers job.

The best projects not only present their findings to their community,but, help connect the students to where they are.

Consider how the project can involve the community and how it can impact upon the community.

Peer culture can be manipulated through display, building and maintaining classroom communities and sharing " an ethic of excellence".

Explicitly develop the adult skills that are need, for example use the Critical Skills approach. 

Speak and work with students as you would adults. 

Create safe environment for students to take risk, don't be averse to creating junior versions of the real world.

Do the Project First- Olympics Style.

This video is not intended for you to watch, you can if you want, but it serves merely as evidence that I have indeed followed the advice of Jeff Robin at High Tech High and I have done the project first.

My year 8 students have just began a Science Project on the Science of the Olympics, where they had to choose an Olympic sport, research the Forces that are employed in the sport along with the antagonistic muscles that create them. So just simple Physics and naming of a few muscles are expected as the content. But in the one lesson that I have had with these classes I have already noticed a benefit to this paired down content. That the students have began to unlock the content that belongs to them and is allowing for genuine co-construction to take place. So amongst some of the notable queries and discussions we have had are:-

1. "Sir, it says that people who go on a Skeleton for the first time have a 50% of dying! I wonder how they worked out the probability?" which left me ruing that this is not a maths and science project.

2. "Sir, what do you call the shape of the pattern that an Arrow flies in...you know that curve thing?" "A parabola. " So how does that work then ?". This conversation has taken place in three out of the four lessons, and not always with the top end of the KS3 levelling hierarchy that we use to determine intelligence and success in this country. One of the students had just scraped a level 5 in the last topic test. (Irony).

3. "Sir is it OK if I video myself Ice Skating, Swimming, Running, Playing Basketball....I have not done it for ages!"

4. Two girls jumping up and down flailing their arms about who said " Sorry sir we were just trying to work out if your arms help pull you up when jumping!"

5. "Sir, can we make the music, the scenery, do stop gap animation as homework?"

6. Three boys who had chosen Table tennis and then regretted it as it had became boring. Responded to my request of "can you finding a way of making it interesting for you?" Found out that it was banned in Russia for 53 years, if memory serves as they thought it could make you blind!" They were skeptical (great scientific thinking I'd say) but are now in love with Table Tennis again.

But perhaps my favourite so far has been one from a student who I have struggled to engage. Who asked today " So Forces and Energy are different aren't they?" I felt like Mark Moorhouse (@MarkMoorhouseMM) !

The point I'm trying to make is by allowing students to find and define some of their own learning can take students to deeper and more interesting learning, by developing a true engagement as opposed to a learning compliance. I know I am going to have my work cut out but will endeavour to teach to the requests.

None of this would have happened if I had said "research and Olympic sport and make a video". I imagine that I would get a load of pilfered images, pixelated , inappropriate and compiled in an uncreative way. Do the project first!

The video above is not perfect but took me 9 hours to make. So imagine my joy when one class even gave a spontaneous round of applause. All the others sat perfectly through it, often glancing and smiling at me when I appeared on screen. I think my applause was for the error ridden guitar playing, which is my first public performance! I think they saw that I had taken a risk and was a learner too. I tweeted this and received a great response from Mr Moorhouse that simply said " Great Learning commons!" I love this notion that students and teachers are in this together! Read more in the latest Learning futures pamphlet here.

As I have said and not just as a disclaimer, the video is far from perfect. However it serves an important role in this project, and that is to set the minimum standard, I expect my students can and will produce better. I think I could have made a better one but did it on my own and with no critique, not an excuse but stating the power in the critiquing process. I will use this as model so that the students and I can define together and success criteria.

Another reason to do the project first.

I also manage to model a few techniques and strategies. that my students could use to avoid the pilfering of low quality images. It also has work of varying quality from me in that shows that I have learned too. My presentation with a box on my head is very self conscious but by the end hearing my voice in some of the voice overs I am more confident and clear. (Well if you are fluent in my native tongue!). I have learn to edit moving pictures in Movie maker and to edit sound files using Audacity. These skills are transferable and teachable now.

Another good reason to do the project first.

It also allowed me to figure out what I thought the minimum content should be, and what was difficult in the content and the process too. I'm now more prepared for differentiation, to support my students and design groups that will work. I have also been able to assess how long my students need to do this and plan a schedule that is appropriate.Deadlines were shared at the beginning of the project to allow my students can plan ahead. Or at least have the opportunity too. This is what used to happen when I worked outside of education, it is one way of "Making Learning Whole" as David Perkins fine book encourages, it helps make this a real experience.

So I will finally state in true Jeff Robin fashion that none of this would have been learned and applied if I had not DONE THE PROJECT FIRST.

Critiques- feedback and learning at High tech High.

Critiques an essential element to the success the students experience at High Tech High. Critiques are basically a formalised peer and teacher assessment session, but through their regularity, intensity and genuine sense of a learning community these turn into something all together more powerful. A real learning forum, as David Perkins would put it "an opportunity to learn from the team".

The foundation of these critiques are three simple norms, which are now proudly on display and referred to in my classroom.  I like the term norm as it makes it very easy for me to say that these things are normal in successful classroom). These are:

1. Hard on content, soft on people- I always exemplify for my students, for example "When Sean explained about how the light refracts in the eye he did not use any scientific words. Would become the explanation of the how the eye refracts light did not use any scientific language". So far, my students have liked this, giving them confidence to give critical advice to classmates and friends alike. Self correcting has been evident with students rephrasing sentences to give feedback. I feel it has really helped them talk about the content more rather than the presentation.

2. Step up, Step back - Focus on the age old problem that some students will not offer suggestions and others will dominate. Dylan William's advice on no hands up rule applies double here! I like the terminology here makes it a much more student friendly than a rule. This was expertly done at HTH with students being invited to give their advice ,opinions and feedback.

3. Feedback should be kind, specific and helpful- requires no further explanation, although I was amused that the first time I held a critique in this style not one bit of positive feedback was given. I let my students go and did not correct this, as they were clearly trying to be helpful and were battling well trying to be specific. I told them at the end and they thought it was hilarious, in an embarrassed sort of way. The second time around they made sure that they had a bit of praise too. I only give this anecdote as a way of emphasising the need to give feedback on the process of critiquing as well as the content on show.

At High Tech High the Projects run for a long period of time, which naturally allows for the undertaking of what can be quite lengthy feedback sessions. The expert teachers I observed doing critiques were aware that it is hard work for students and can be monotonous, so they managed this situation with aplomb with great sensitivity to how students were responding and giving appropriate breaks and if necessary rescheduling of some group presentations to enable students to get the best feedback possible. It really mattered to everyone.

The teachers also had planned for the feedback that they wanted to be discussed. This tended to be around the content of what was being learned during the project, as well as the quality of the understanding, making this a real chance to explore misconceptions. The basic format was that each group of student in turn would present where their project was at the time, and then the class would discuss the work being guided by the questions the teacher had established. These were on display and guided the conversation as opposed to directing it, so there was plenty of scope for more explorative discussion. Every group also asked for specific advice about their own project which ranged from looking for tips and tricks on how to improve the presentation, yes/ no feedback on whether something was clear and too much more complex request about the content and context. These led to sophisticated dialogue between students, but, the art of the teacher was to interject and clarify, prompt and extend at opportune moments. The teachers role in subject content ( pedagogical content knowledge mostly) was vital, so that they did not revert to the "elementisis"(elements first) approach to teaching and learning. Instead it allows teachers to teach within the context of what the students need to know within the bounds of their projects. See David Perkins wonderful book "Making Learning Whole" for more about elementisis.

The ownership of this feedback by the students, facilitated (and sometimes) given by the teacher was one of the reasons that the quality of the student projects was so high. Due to the creative nature of (all?) the projects at HTH, I am reminded of Geoff Petty's Six phase model of the creative process:-Inspiration, Clarification, Distillation, Incubation, Perspiration and Evaluation. With these it is easy to see that you could indeed have critiques around most of these as they would match the different stages of any project. The least obvious is possibly Incubation, where you are "to leave your ideas alone", but what better way to do this than spend some time reflecting on the learning of others, which could lead to a new insight for your own learning. The notion of incubation challenges the need for "pace" within a lesson, our brains need time process and organise information. Project Based Learning does this.

Back at school, without the luxury of large projects, I have taken the chance during "create a presentation" tasks to utilise Critiques. I would normally rely on my circulation to provide feedback during these sessions, thereby taking the responsibility away from my students. I have therefore built in a mini presentation into these tasks, timed just before the half way point. These are timed, short (around 2 minutes) and focused not on the content but where they are in the development of the presentations. They also allow for discussions on improvement (or learning as you will) in subsequent presentations. I have also requested that each group has questions that they would like to ask, although this is something that they have found difficult so far. 

I have supported these by ensuring I have clear learning outcomes, so that they can assess coverage, and then questions about the content so that they can begin to assess understanding. Although this lengthens these activity substantially, I have so far been impressed by the depth of the knowledge that this time(incubation?) has allowed my students to acquire.

A great thing that High Tech High did that I am yet to emulate is having students work on similar yet distinct projects ( although one is in the pipeline!) This allows them to approach the content from different perspective and contexts. So during the Critique the students will "hit" the same information four or five times in different contexts. This would be music to Graham Nuthalls ears. Then factor in again that over a prolonged period of time you would have several critiques it is no wonder that the students at HTH learn so deeply.

Undoubtedly the high stakes nature of the projects at HTH is a huge motivational factor in offering and being willing to receive critical feedback with their peers. Although I was surprised that this did not dominate these discussions, as the content and learning of the content was central to the conversations I bore witness too. This excellent article on the Unboxed journal written by staff and students at HTH explains in more detail.