Better Teaching: Only Stuff That Works

Gene Tavernetti: Welcome to Better Teaching, Only Stuff That Works, a podcast for teachers, instructional coaches, administrators, and anyone else who supports teachers in the classroom.

This show is a proud member of the BE Podcast Network shows that help you go beyond education.

Find all our shows@bepodcastnetwork.com.

I Am Gene Tavernetti the host for this podcast.

And my goal for this episode, like all episodes, is that you laugh at least once and that you leave with an actionable idea for better teaching.

A quick reminder, no cliches, no buzzwords.

Only stuff that works.

My guest today is Marcy Samoa Marcy's, a high school science teacher from Los Angeles, California with nearly a decade of classroom experience.

She's very passionate about bringing evidence-based practices into the classroom.

Through her blog scientists in the Making, she shares practical strategies that integrate the science of learning with science instruction.

She recently presented at research Ed New York, where she spoke about using concept maps as a pre-training tool to build background knowledge and increase student comprehension.

I think you're gonna like this one.

Good morning, Marcy.

Good to see you.

Marcie Samoya: Hello.

Good morning, Jean.

It's so nice to see you too.

Gene Tavernetti: you are someone, and I think it's a common story these days that you meet people online and then you finally have a chance to meet them in person and it's so exciting.

We had a chance to meet in, in New York City at research ed.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

I was so excited to finally meet you in person.

I think I, I walked up to you during the little get together that we had the night before.

We would start research ed and it was just so nice to see it.

Everyone.

That's when, that's where I met Zach as well.

And I met so many other teachers that I met on the Twitter platform.

So it, it was so fun.

I had a great time.

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah, it was.

It was.

It was great.

It was great.

So was that your first.

Research Ed.

Marcie Samoya: Yes, it was I got invited to, to apply to research Ed and I decided to go for it.

And, was really happy to hear that they accepted my application.

So honestly, it was one of the most useful PDs I've ever attended.

You attend a lot of PDs and they're not really applicable to the classroom or they're not really realistic, so it was so nice to see a bunch of educators.

Some who are still in the classroom sharing the strategies that has worked that have worked with their students.

So I got a lot out of research Ed and I always tell other educators, check it out if you have the chance, you will learn a lot of information and a lot of practical strategies that you can implement into your classroom the next day.

Gene Tavernetti: So when did you become interested in research around instruction?

Marcie Samoya: Oh, that's a interesting story.

I've always actually been interested, but I never really looked into it until after the pandemic, and I think a lot of teachers can relate when I say that.

When I came back from the pandemic, from distance learning, it was just different.

The students were different, and the lessons that I've used previously were no longer as effective, so I got really frustrated that year because.

I'm just gonna admit it.

I think it did hurt my ego a bit because I did put in a lot of time and effort into those lessons for five years, and now they're no longer working.

And now that I think back, I'm like, I don't think they worked as well as I thought they did.

That's when I decided to look more into, research about instruction and because we were in the pandemic, I did have a lot of time to look into it and that's the first time I encountered the science of learning and cognitive science.

I guess I've encountered it a little bit before, but it was the first time I really looked at it into detail and I started reading books
about the concept, and I finally started applying those principles into my classroom and I saw huge academic gains, so I never looked back.

Gene Tavernetti: All right great.

And it's, I had never thought about it at that, the pandemic being sort of an impetus for change.

I've always heard about kids being different, but, but seeing the kids are different.

I need to do something differently.

So you got started, you started looking into the research.

So what were one of the big aha moments or something that, that you realized like, wow, this could have impact if I made these changes?

Marcie Samoya: The when students came back from the pandemic from distance learning, I realized that they didn't have a strong foundation of knowledge as the prior kids did, like the kids prior to COVID.

And so when I. Was looking to the research, even though it seems so obvious to me right now.

It wasn't so obvious to me back then, and once I looked at it, I was like, wait a second.

That's right.

Like the students are lacking math skills, their grade levels behind in reading.

That was the big aha moment.

Another surprise I got from the research was the forgetting curve.

So often, and I was one of them.

You would hear teachers complain I just taught this content two days ago and it's as if I never taught it right.

And it's so frustrating.

But once you learn about the forgetting curve and learn that forgetting is a natural part of the learning process, you don't take it so personally anymore.

And because you know what's causing it.

Now you can, do something about it.

And that's what I started doing.

And you mentioned this in your book for the review session, it's important to have students recall the information from previous lessons.

That way they don't forget the information when you're teaching the new content.

Gene Tavernetti: You know it is I'm gonna paraphrase something that you said or restate it or say it so that to be sure that people hear it clearly is that many things that we think are.

It's because we're not doing something as a teacher or the kids aren't trying, or it has nothing to do with that.

It's just that this is how we learned.

And knowing that information in many ways is liberating.

It's okay, now that I know this, I can do something about it.

And like you said, I address it in my book.

There's lots of work around, around that.

You talked about the forgetting curve.

So what else did you learn in the science of learning and this research that, that you started implementing that you hadn't, that you hadn't done before?

Marcie Samoya: Oh my gosh.

It's like I was creating a brand.

It's as if I was creating lessons from.

Not from scratch.

I wouldn't say from scratch, but it was like starting all over again.

And yes, it was a lot of work, but it was, for the first time I felt like I wasn't guessing about my practices.

So for the first five years that I was teaching, I was guessing as to what worked and what didn't.

If that makes sense.

I'm like, okay, I'm gonna try this.

Let's see if it works.

I'm gonna try this.

Let's see if that works.

And while, yes, you do learn as a teacher that way, I feel like you.

You spend valuable instructional time doing that instead of, looking at the research and going wait, they're saying that this works.

Okay, let's try it.

It, it's more like it's giving you direction instead of just guessing.

And that was liberating for me.

So another thing that I have done that has changed my practice is implementing, I believe it's called the multimedia principles.

I didn't realize that a lot of the information I was putting on the board was overloading my students' working memory.

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah.

Marcie Samoya: I thought the more information, the better.

And then once I learned that our working memory is limited I was more conscious about that.

And, I think Zach explains this really well in his book, the Multimedia Principles, how to apply it into Your Instruction.

So I started implementing those and again, the students were more attentive.

They were more engaged because I feel like they were understanding the concepts a lot better than when I was just throwing information up on the board.

Gene Tavernetti: And you teach a very content rich.

I'm not sure if that's the right description, but you teach chemistry.

Marcie Samoya: Yes

Gene Tavernetti: what else do you teach?

What other science topics

Marcie Samoya: That's it.

I'm only credential in chemistry, but I have taught various levels of it.

So I teach chemistry, honors chemistry, and I have taught AP chemistry before.

Gene Tavernetti: Okay, so it's not it's content rich.

I'm just gonna leave it, I'm just

Marcie Samoya: No it really is.

And what makes science difficult for students to understand is that, especially chemistry, is that you don't really, obviously you see it in everyday life, right?

But you don't see atoms.

With the naked eye.

So everything in chemistry is really abstract.

So you really have to think about how to present that information to students in a way that they're able to understand it.

It takes a lot of thinking.

Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: It's difficult.

One of the most difficult things, and I guess this is the, the novice expert thing is to try to remember what it's like, not to know it.

The way students come in, because I was listening to somebody one time and I don't remember who it was, but he was saying that he could teach things better.

There was some topic that he had.

He goes, I just learned it two weeks ago.

I could teach it better than experts because I understand what it's like not to know it.

I know how to explain it to people who don't know it.

And I don't know if that's, that generalization that it's good for everything, but I think that's a good thing to keep in mind for teachers is how do I present it?

Because otherwise, how do you know what not to include in that slide?

That you're putting too much information in

Marcie Samoya: Yes, I agree.

Gene Tavernetti: It is.

So you became interested in the science of learning.

You're going, utilizing some of the research.

So was there anything that you'd ever tried that it, oh, this is supposed to be magic, this boy, if you do this with your students, it's really gonna make a difference, but it didn't, something you tried that bombed or.

Marcie Samoya: Okay, so this might, so I'm gonna mention flashcards.

Okay?

And now I know a lot of teachers go wait.

I'm like, wait, hear me out.

When I first started implementing flashcards in the classroom, I would have students use index cards to create their flashcards and study them.

But realistically, what would happen is students would lose them.

And that was so frustrating.

Or sometimes you would find like a flashcard on the floor after class was over and it was very discouraging.

So I moved on to an online platform and I thought, okay, this is gonna solve my issues.

We're good.

But the problem with that platform is that it caused the split attention effect.

It had advertisements so students would get distracted with the advertisements, especially when it's tailored to their interests, right?

You would see like the sheen advertisements and so all my students would get distracted from it, and I thought, okay, maybe this is not the best way to present the flashcards.

So what I did is I started doing flashcards on Google Slides first.

It's free.

And second, I can easily upload it to Google Classroom.

And third, it's very simple.

It is just word definition with an image and no advertisements to distract them.

I can also control what they see on their computers from from teacher dashboard.

We use hapa.

I believe that's how you pronounce it, so I can make sure that students are only looking at the flashcards.

Once I did that, it was very successful because I would teach them about retrieval and this is how you study flashcards.

No, you cannot just read the flashcards.

You have to recall the definition from memory.

And I would have them study as partners that way.

There was accountability.

Their partners will hold them accountable to having them recall the definition instead of just reading it.

And it's so funny because when you get them to when you, when students are studying, you could hear a student go Hey, no cheating.

You can't look at it.

You have to tell me the definition from memory.

And it was very successful.

So the reason why I say that story is because I think often as teachers, we try one thing and if it doesn't work out the first time, we completely.

Disregard it.

And I really recommend teachers trying it out like two or three times before you decide to, not use that practice anymore.

Gene Tavernetti: And I think the other thing that your story illustrates is that yeah, flashcards is a way to do it.

And what you really, and then you found the flashcards on the floor.

You go this isn't working.

But the system that you eventually went to, you were still.

You're, you were grounded in what the research was.

You go, okay I need to do something and it needs to accomplish these goals because this is why it works.

I can't just willy-nilly, try something else.

Because even if you do the, the one image, one, one definition.

On a card, it still has to be implemented in such a manner that you obviously taught your kids because there's no cheating.

You have to, you can't look, you can't look first.

So that's great.

One of the things when I talk to teachers and they talk about, doing using science of learning strategies what they've learned from Science of learning, they say, I've completely redone my classroom.

I've completely redone how I teach.

And then I watch 'em teach.

I might watch 'em teach before and after, but it doesn't look that different.

Okay.

Because it's just that they have their more focused, it's I'm not doing flashcards.

I'm doing this.

It looks a little different, but it's not that much different.

You said you had your lessons that you did before COVID, and then you came back and you had to do them.

Is there much difference in the structure of the lessons?

Are they more explicit?

What else changed?

What else did you change to make them work for your students?

Marcie Samoya: It's so funny that you bring that up, Jean, because you're right now that I think about it, now that I'm reflecting, there isn't many.

It wasn't like drastic changes that I made.

They were just little changes I did that led to academic growth.

So I think the reason why teachers think that it's completely new is because they see gains from it that they did not see previously.

So they must think, okay, if I see these huge academic gains, it's because I'm doing something completely different.

At least that was my thought process.

But now looking back, no.

The few things that I've changed as I mentioned before, the multimedia principle, right?

Making sure that I don't just throw.

A bunch of information on the board.

And second, I do a lot more check for understanding a lot more.

And after I read your book, actually now I do check for understandings, not just on, conceptual understanding, but also on procedural knowledge.

And the way I do check for understanding is instead of having students do.

The whole problem at once.

I have them do it step by step to see exactly which step students are struggling in.

So it was those little changes, right?

Like instead of having students solve the whole problem, have them solve it a step at a time.

That way you can pinpoint exactly where students are struggling.

And if you do see students struggling, instead of stopping the whole lesson just for one or two students that are struggling.

Continue with the lesson and then go back to the one, go back to those one or two students by pulling them out for small group instruction, which is something that is adopted in elementary education, but we don't really see a lot in high school education.

But I think we need to bring that back because it's so helpful.

I started doing that this year, sorry, the last academic year and I saw huge improvements and confidence.

When it came to teaching procedural knowledge, so yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: Why do you think, why do you think teachers in high schools don't?

Pull the groups.

'cause I've seen exactly the same thing.

I, in fact, was working with one teacher.

She did pretty much the way you described it.

She taught the lesson she went through the procedure step by step.

And then she, pulled a group and I talked to her after about it.

And I wanted, I, I commended her on the fact that she did it.

She said, I told her I've never seen it done in high school before, and she was just flabbergasted.

She was a veteran teacher and she said she didn't believe me, that I hadn't seen it before.

She said, they talk about this, they talk about pulling a small group in every conference I've ever been to.

said, but nobody does it.

Do, have you talked about that with teachers in, in, on your staff about pulling small groups?

Has it been anything that you've talked about or in your PLCs or anything?

Marcie Samoya: You know what's so interesting, Jean?

I think the reason why a lot of high school teachers don't know this is because we don't collaborate with elementary school teachers.

And I think that's a huge problem in education.

And here's why.

For the first five years of teaching, I did not understand why students read the word thermal chemistry as thermometer.

Every single time I would ask students read the word thermo chemistry.

They would read it as thermometer and it would just throw me off.

I did not understand.

So I would tell them, okay, sound it out because it's not thermometer.

And the students would look at me confused and, I'm just gonna be honest.

I would be like, okay, you're just not trying.

You're just not trying.

Again, blaming the student.

But then, on, on the Twitter platform I do follow a few elementary school teachers.

I read more about the reading wars, right?

And I had no idea that balanced literacy was a thing.

And once I read more into that and looked.

Listen to the Soul, the Story podcast.

I realized, wait, these kids weren't were taught to guess the words and not really decode them.

And so I had to tell the other teachers this.

I'm like, Hey I want to bring this to your attention.

I think a lot of our students were taught reading through.

I believe it's called balanced literacy.

And they didn't believe me.

They're like, no, Marcy no.

That's not true.

Of course not.

And I'm like, yes, this is why the students are guessing the words.

So you see, I would've known that sooner if I just collaborated with elementary school teachers.

And we don't, and I think we need to collaborate more because I think they have a lot of.

Valuable information to share that will be very useful for secondary teachers.

So, yeah, I think that's why we're not very well aware of small group instruction, right?

Pulling out the kids.

That way we can give them more tailored instruction instead.

The advice that we get as high school teachers is, oh, just differentiate more, just differentiate.

And we, to be realistic, no one gives us like a set definition as to what that looks like or what that entails.

So that can be very confusing for us as well.

Like no one, at least for me, when I was in PDs, no one mentioned pull out the kids for a small group instruction.

No one has ever mentioned that.

Gene Tavernetti: To be, in thinking about that, why that may not have occurred, you were able to pull that small group because of the manner in which you delivered the content.

Had you not delivered the content in such a discreet way to be able to determine exactly what the kids couldn't do, it would've been very difficult for you to pull a group.

And I think that's what happens a lot of times, even in elementary the groups.

Or predetermined because in your class, I'd be willing to bet the way that you described how you present lessons, that small group that you pull is pretty fluid, because some days some students get stuff and other days they don't.

And and then it becomes, a part of the culture is no, there's nothing wrong with us.

If I'm going with Miss Sam, to do this because I just didn't get this piece today.

So it's, I guess what I'm trying to say it's not just pulling that small group.

It has to be part of your system of checking for understanding, and the, and as you alluded to that you're actually teaching the students why
you're doing things, why you don't look at the cards, why you don't do this, that this is the, that this is the, that this is the science.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

I'm so glad that you bring that up because when it came to retrieval practice, the first time I did it, it wasn't successful because the students were not trying, they just shut down and, I thought maybe I should teach the why behind retrieval.

Like why is it beneficial for us to build strong neural pathways, et cetera, et cetera.

So I did take it doesn't take long.

I did take 10, 15 minutes teaching them the why.

Behind retrieval, why we recall the information instead of just rereading the notes.

Because that's a bad habit that students have rereading the notes because they've been told to do that for years.

And now you have a teacher telling them, don't do that.

And they're a little bit confused as to why that is.

So I do dedicate the time to teach them the why.

Again, it doesn't take long.

I do it through explicit instruction and yeah, after I taught the why students I got a lot more buy-in that way.

Gene Tavernetti: How about, um.

Your students come to you, you're teaching them, you teach 'em about retrieval practice, you teach 'em science of learning things, and then they go into another classroom and the teacher asks them, okay, get out your notes.

Let's review your notes for the test tomorrow.

Do they ever come back and rat out another teacher saying, oh, would you go please talk to Ms.

Smith because she's having us do this and.

Marcie Samoya: Always.

I get that once in a while.

Especially from the honors kids.

I get that from the honors kids a lot.

And it's funny 'cause I tell 'em, look, at the end of the day you can explain to your teacher why that is, but you have to do it in a very respectful manner.

'cause kids will be rude.

They'll be like, no.

Oh, ms. Sam said, so I told them, you have to do it in a respectful manner.

And if she decides that she doesn't want to change, then you do it at home.

I'm like, don't fight with the teacher.

It is what it is.

And it's funny because a lot of students have come back and they're like, miss, because of you, I passed English.

Because of UI Pass Math, which just goes to show that these strategies don't only have to apply in science.

They apply for all subjects, and it makes me really happy to get those emails or to get those comments.

One time a teacher actually, because we have access to their screens during school time.

So a teacher screenshot a conversation that a student was having with another student and they said, yeah, Ms. Sam taught me how to study, and that's the reason why I passed history.

She's the goat.

I do try to spread this message to other teachers in my school.

Slowly but surely, I have led about four PDs already.

So again, it's very slow, but we're getting, we

Gene Tavernetti: So have you the PDs that you have led, have they been multidisciplinary or just in your department, or

Marcie Samoya: now.

For not just in my department.

And I think the one that I'm most proud of are the mini whiteboards.

One, I held the PD on mini whiteboards and after I did that, four teachers put in an order for mini whiteboards and they said, Marcy, this is great.

We like, all the students can participate.

We don't just have to call on one student.

And I said, yeah.

And, I taught them the procedures as to how to get students to get their mini whiteboards, and they were very happy with it.

Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: It's interesting that you said that, that you taught them those procedures.

Because there's the idea of many whiteboards and it's hard to argue with that.

The argument, the pushback that I've always received, it has to do with the logistics.

Marcie Samoya: Yes.

Gene Tavernetti: And I have, I can give some suggestions to teachers, that I've seen, here's what some other teachers have used, but they need to incorporate it in such a way so that it meshes with the procedures that they already have.

You, and it's important.

It's important that you give them enough, you, you have provided them something that works for you.

It works for you.

And you probably get to tell them a little bit about your progression when it wasn't working and all the things that you know, because it's just like the, a question I asked you previously, did you ever try something and it wasn't working?

Many whiteboards is one of those things that people give up very quickly.

Because they don't understand or they haven't anticipated what the issues are.

What are one of the issues?

The ink's gonna run out.

Marcie Samoya: Yes.

Gene Tavernetti: You just gotta have a bunch of, you just have things ready.

You can't let those things stop you.

Unless you've done them, you can't anticipate what they are.

But having somebody like you with your experience yeah, here's a list of problems that you're gonna have.

And you can't let it, you can't let 'em stop you.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

I actually showed them my blog on the mini whiteboards.

I'm like, Hey, if you forget.

I have a whole blog on it.

I tell you exactly like how to anticipate the problems, that you might have with mini whiteboards, for example, when they run out of ink.

So like before you start doing mini whiteboards, you should ask students, Hey, test your markers and if you marker doesn't work, let me know now because if you come in the middle of the lesson, I am not gonna be happy.

Gene Tavernetti: Yes.

Yeah, no, it's exactly, and it's little things like that, that make a difference.

Okay.

Um, was there anything that was really difficult for you to do?

And you mentioned your kids having some difficulties and just in the beginning of learning some of the procedures, and you talked about learning the procedures about explicit instruction.

So what were the changes?

What was the most difficult thing for them to learn, or what did they have to learn with respect to explicit instruction?

Marcie Samoya: As in respect to like retrieval or

Gene Tavernetti: you mentioned earlier about, that the explicit instruction was different for them and they had to get used to it.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: So was it the fact that you were checking for understanding more, was it, because explicit instruction, kids have to, they're pretty accountable.

Marcie Samoya: It's interesting that you mentioned that when I moved more towards explicit instruction, I actually had less classroom management issues.

And the reason for that is because students were actually understanding the content.

They were not confused.

And because there was always this constant check for understanding I was able to address misconceptions before they built onto themselves.

So to be completely honest Jean, I really didn't have any.

Big issues when it came to implementing more explicit instruction in my classroom.

If anything, it solved a lot of issues.

I always tell teachers if students start misbehaving in your lesson, most likely, not always, but most likely is because they don't understand something.

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah.

Marcie Samoya: Kids do not like to feel quote unquote dumb.

I don't use that label, but they don't like to feel that way.

So what they're going to do is that they're going to misbehave that way they can be labeled as a quote unquote troublemaker instead of quote unquote dumb, right?

So you as a teacher need to make sure that when students walk out of your classroom, they feel successful.

That way we can take care, we can take care of the root of those classroom management issues.

And so that's why I'm saying explicit instruction.

I didn't really have that many challenges.

If anything, it solved them.

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah.

And, one of the issues when a teacher hears what you just said is oh, miss Sam, you're blaming us, you're blaming the teacher again.

But no, I did not blaming the teacher.

You're talking about the structure of the lesson,

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: that just makes it more available to the students.

And I think the other thing that, that happens and I, there's a name for this and I never remember the names of things, but this has to do with student's attention.

Which we know is much more fleeting these days is another thing, and somebody described it as like, they need to be, they entertained is not the right word but they need something all the time.

And it and the analogy was coming to a stoplight.

And even though you're only gonna be there for a few seconds, you pick up your phone.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: And so they get to a part of the lesson and they didn't quite understand it.

Time to pick up my phone, either literally or metaphorically, because they just don't get it.

And even if they don't act out, they're checking out.

They're not paying attention.

So being able to use that, the strategies and explicit instruction to be able to really pull them, to pull them back in and allow them, and use that data to, to bring them along.

Because I'm with you.

The the more the students are successful, the more that they're gonna pay attention.

But it's not magic.

Even as adults, we don't do that.

We pretend to pay attention.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah, especially.

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah.

Yes.

In, in, in pd one, we're talking about explicit instruction, and yet you're in science, you teach science

And went through this whole thing about the new standards, that,

Marcie Samoya: yes.

Gene Tavernetti: are not really explicit.

Instruction is not really.

One of the recommended strategies.

So how do you deal, how do you deal with that?

Marcie Samoya: I think it's the way that I frame it.

Okay.

The new standards that we're using in science instruction, I, in California at least, are the next Generation Science standards.

And while it doesn't explicitly state that we need to use inquiry-based instruction, it is heavily implied every single time I have gone to a PD about NGSS.

It's always about inquiry based instruction.

I just wanna start off by saying I am not against inquiry based instruction.

If anything, that's the part of science, right?

We have to do labs, we have to, investigate and come up with conclusions.

It's, it is part of the scientific method.

However, I think we often confuse experts and novices.

So the common argument that they have for NGSS is that we need to teach science through inquiry-based learning because it mirrors how real scientists and engineers work.

So they're saying if scientists and engineers work this way, then our students need to do that as well.

That way they can truly understand science and engineering practices.

But my argument against that is the scientists and engineers are already experts in their content, right?

They took years to learn this stuff.

So if we have a, a chemist, they probably spent four years of undergrad.

Learning about chemistry and maybe three to four years in grad school, learning more details about it and earning their doctorate's degree.

We, they're the expert.

We cannot compare that to a student that is looking at the content for the first time.

And one example I always provide to teachers is, okay, as a chemistry teacher, when we see a chemical change.

The color changes, we automatically think, okay, bonds broke, and then new bonds formed to form new substances.

We think this because we have the schema to do we're the experts.

But when a student observes that same thing, they're not gonna think about bonds being broken and new bonds being formed.

They're just going to say, wow, that's cool.

It turned to red.

Like very surface level knowledge.

So I tell them if we want to do inquiry based learning successfully, we need to start building the foundations.

And the best way to do that is through explicit instruction.

We need to start with explicit instruction.

That way students gain a strong foundation of knowledge.

That way they can use that knowledge and apply it when we give them inquiry-based activities.

Gene Tavernetti: And you convince everybody with that argument, right?

Marcie Samoya: Sometimes I don't.

I still have some teachers going no, because what you're talking about is memorization.

What you're talking about is memorization.

I don't know when memorization got such a bad connotation in education.

I have no idea where that started, but I tell them, are you really going to tell me you don't memorize anything about science?

Are you really going to say that?

No.

Of course you do.

You're the expert.

We need to get students there as well.

And there is a difference between memorize, memorizing, and understanding and rote memorization.

We are not doing rote memorization through explicit instruction.

We are doing the understanding part through explicit instruction.

Gene Tavernetti: you know, and I think this last example that you just said, you know that there is a difference between just rote memorization
and what you're asking students to do, and there are just so many things that we talk about in education that we use a single word to describe it.

But it's much more complex and you're using a single word and you have an understanding.

I'm using that same word and my understanding is different, and we're just talking past each other.

There's so much of that.

You just have become a an advocate of, and a disseminator of the science of learning and I don't think there's any, I don't think you can look back now with what you know.

You can't go back.

This isn't a fad.

It's not a fad is what I'm trying to say.

Marcie Samoya: Yeah, of course not.

No.

And I've tried many things in my classroom.

I think when I advocate the science of learning, people assume that I automatically shut off inquiry based instruction as I've explained just a few seconds ago.

I'm not against inquiry based instruction.

I am against the sequence that we're using.

To introduce inquiry based instruction?

I don't think it should start with inquiry.

I think we should start with explicit instruction.

And also people think I never tried it.

We have tried it.

I've tried it in my classroom on my own.

And actually we tried it for three years as a science department, and we collaborated.

And every year.

We would incorporate more components of explicit instruction to make it better.

And by the third year, I was a little frustrated and I told them, why don't we just start with explicit instruction?

Why are we incorporating a little bit more and more?

Why don't we just start with it and then do the inquiry later?

And when we did that the third year, it was a lot.

More successful and the assessments improved as well.

So we had proof for it as well.

Of course, it was anecdotal.

This is not,

Gene Tavernetti: Yeah.

Marcie Samoya: randomized controlled trial.

But that, that was my experience.

And that was the other teacher's experience with inquiry-based instruction.

Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: Any other big takeaways that you'd like to share with teachers or as they are, maybe they're beginning an exploration in more educational research and science of learning.

Marcie Samoya: I say just keep an open mind.

And don't be afraid to ask for help.

I'm currently on the Twitter, the edu whatever edu Twitter community and everybody has been so helpful on there.

And whenever I ask for help, people are more than happy to do it without charging me.

And obviously Twitter is not perfect.

You're going to have some instances where you know you're gonna encounter, people that don't agree with your instruction, but, just I believe it's a net positive, more than a net negative.

So just learn to ignore that and just, just focus on your practices and focus on the students, see how the students respond and be patient with it.

You don't have to be perfect.

I wasn't perfect at it the first time.

Yeah, you're not alone.

And again, if you need help, feel free to ask.

People are really nice.

For the

Gene Tavernetti: Alright, great.

And and then you have in your substack, what is your substack called?

Marcie Samoya: I do not have a substack.

Instead, I have a blog.

Gene Tavernetti: Okay.

Okay.

Yes, that's what I meant.

That's

Marcie Samoya: Oh, okay.

Gene Tavernetti: blog.

So what is your blog called, which will be in the show notes, but what is your blog called?

Marcie Samoya: It's called Scientists in the making.com, and initially I started that blog to help with science instruction.

But because these strategies work across all subjects, all teachers are welcome and if they have any questions, they can feel free to email me.

Gene Tavernetti: Terrific.

Terrific.

And speaking of questions, do you have any questions for me?

Marcie Samoya: Yes, I do actually.

As an instructional coach, how do you navigate resistance from teachers who may be hesitant to receive constructive feedback?

Gene Tavernetti: First of all I think teach many teachers are resistant for good reason.

Especially from instructional coaches.

I think there's been instructional coaching that has just been terrible, and one of the big problems that I see in instructional coaching is many coaches want to give advice really early, in, in encounters with teachers.

I can't go in your classroom one time.

And be there for 20 minutes and watch you teach for 20 minutes, and now I'm gonna give you advice.

Marcie Samoya: That's crazy because that's how teachers get evaluated.

Gene Tavernetti: Evaluation is a different thing.

It's a,

Marcie Samoya: I, I get it.

I get it.

Gene Tavernetti: it's a different, it's a different thing.

And I don't even, and I don't wanna argue for that either, that doesn't make any sense either.

But for coaches, if I'm gonna go in and give Marcy advice, I better have seen her teach.

times.

See how Marcy runs her classrooms.

See how you do things, know what sort of training that you've had.

Marcie Samoya: Ooh, that's a good one.

Gene Tavernetti: And then, possibly we can, we can start talking about even doing any coaching.

But the other thing that I tell administrators, because I think administrators create many bad situations for coaches and teachers.

So I think one of the things that administrators need to do is to just tell teachers that, you know what we have a coach.

And the coach is gonna meet with every teacher.

Now I go into Marcy's class, that meeting I may watch Marcy and go wow, Marcy.

I can't be, this is great, is there, and then I could go into another room and say, Zach, and I'm thinking to myself, Zach, man, we have a lot of work to do here.

And even though we're meeting, it's very different.

The conversation is gonna be, is gonna be very different.

I'm I'm rambling here.

Let me get to my, let me get to my point.

Point is that there has to be a focus, there has to be an area of focus in the school.

the department, what, whatever it is, and now we can go in and we can have objective talks about whether or not this initiative is being implemented appropriately.

The strategy is being implemented appropriately.

So there's a common, there's a common language, a common focus.

But there's one other aspect about the teachers.

Okay.

The more resistant teachers, the principal might say, everybody's meeting with Jean, everybody's gonna meet with the coach.

But that doesn't mean you have to go first.

Okay?

Let's say Zach is not only Zach's a veteran teacher who's resistant.

I'm not gonna work with Zach first.

I'm gonna work with Marcy, who's a well-respected teacher on staff.

I'm gonna work with Ms. Jones.

I'm gonna work, with all of these teachers, and I'm gonna let them tell Zach, either directly or indirectly through conversations is that, wow, you should be with Jean.

It was, it was worthwhile.

Marcie Samoya: Oh, I see.

Strategy.

Gene Tavernetti: so you have to beat, but you don't have to be first.

Marcie Samoya: Gotcha.

And like building credibility.

Yeah.

Gene Tavernetti: It's building credibility.

It's word of mouth.

Because I can't go in and say, wow, you know what?

I've worked with experienced teachers before and I can't tell you how much benefit they were so grateful to work with me.

I can't say that as a coach, but you can tell a colleague that.

Marcie Samoya: Okay.

Gene Tavernetti: So you just, you can't rush it.

It's a relationship.

You can't rush the relationship.

You can't go and let 'em know how smart you are.

And boy, if you just change these things that doesn't work.

And I have to know what else.

I have to know what you believe.

We have to have some conversations.

When I work with teachers who are resistant, sometimes the first time I work with 'em, it's just a half hour of them venting about how awful their previous encounters were with coaches.

They're valid.

Most of the time they're valid, but I need to know that if I'm, if I think that we're gonna have a conversation,

Marcie Samoya: Yeah, that makes sense.

Gene Tavernetti: And the thing about knowing them like for example I, unsolicited, I watched your presentation and I was familiar with what you knew.

Based on, Twitter, following you on Twitter and all of that, and I reached out to you because I knew your attitude.

I knew you.

I had met you in person as well, and I said, I have a suggestion if you're interested.

Marcie Samoya: Which I was very appreciative by the way, because I did started implementing your suggestion in my classroom.

I'm like, okay, let's do this.

And yeah, like students responded by.

Positively to it.

So I was very grateful for that, Jean.

But again, like I think teachers need to have an open mind, right?

Gene Tavernetti: an open mind and I need to have, I needed to have context.

If I hadn't met you, if I hadn't met you and you posted that, I would've never reached out to you and to do that.

So it is, you have to know them.

You have to know them in the classroom.

You have to know again, you have to have conversations with them.

What do they believe about different issues?

How do you do it?

And now we'll work with them.

It's just like you working with a student.

You're assessing prior knowledge.

Marcie Samoya: That makes sense.

That makes sense.

Actually, I mentioned something very similar to my blog, my, my most recent blog how to Build Credibility in the Classroom.

And you touched a lot on those components make sure that you are, you're confident.

But not trying to build a relationship right away.

Just slowly build it through your credibility.

So yeah, I think you touched on a lot of that.

Gene Tavernetti: Marcy, it is always a pleasure to see you and thank you.

Thank you for being a guest today, and I think you brought up a lot of good points that are gonna be helpful to a lot of teachers.

Marcie Samoya: Thank you for having me, Jean.

I've been a fan of your podcast for a while, so being a part of it is a little surreal to me right now.

I'm very happy to be here.

Gene Tavernetti: All right.

Thank you.

We'll see you soon, Marcy.

Marcie Samoya: Okay, yeah, for sure.

Gene Tavernetti: If you're enjoying these podcasts, tell a friend.

Also, please leave a 5 star rating on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever you listen.

You can follow me on BlueSky at gTabernetti, on Twitter, x at gTabernetti, and you can learn more about me and the work I do at my website, BlueSky.

Tesscg.

com, that's T E S S C G dot com, where you will also find information about ordering my books, Teach Fast, Focus Adaptable Structure Teaching, and Maximizing the Impact of Coaching Cycles.