I would love to do this. Major pushback is having teachers leave a classroom to do a lesson study. I think lesson study is incredibly valuable and one of the most effective ways or teachers to collaborate.

Unfortunately, most PD is one-shot and drive-by, sometimes not even lasting more than an hour. It is hard to change teacher actions and perceptions is such a short amount of time.

I have always believed that there should be more rigorous training for teachers. We need to be pushed and directed by clear leadership.

Interesting that leadership is the second factor. However I understand it. A good leader strives to help all teachers and has a great connection to the community. Especially in underserved schools, this can cause good talent to stay and the school to be well run.

Fascinating. Previously, the author states "All new learning involves transfer." However, I am thankful for the authors perspective on cultural influences on this learning. Students' background information that they bring to school is a direct result of their cultural influences, as is students' ability to apply their learning to other situations.

Effective learning means being able to transfer learning in school to everyday environments.

This is an interesting point. I have never thought that schools place so much more emphasis on individual work than other environments. What is the take-away for the classroom? Should we be emphasizing group work in classrooms more?

Close reading, when done well, should focus on knowledge acquisition strategies. Same thing with vocabulary. At a PD, I wrote down this applicable quote "Don't teach words, teach the skills."

This paragraph is what I was waiting for. What are ways that teachers can ensure that student learning can be applied in other scenarios and be used in multiple (possibly unrelated contexts?)

1) As learners to solve one problem, but then provide them with similar problem. If students can apply their first experience to their second? 2) What-if questions are powerful to lead to learner flexibility. What if this part of the problem was changed? 3) Make sure the case is generalized, instead of one specific case. For example, don't have learners plan one specific boat trip, but plan a trip with more than one possibility of transport. In this way, students test their fluency in more than one scenario while working on the same task.

This is a very frustrating response as a teacher. Often, students respond with that and completely shut down. How can teachers change our student thinking to ensure that students don't respond this way? How can teacher make sure this is a a permanent change, not just one to placate the teacher?

I am extremely interested in this anecdote. This student spent an extraordinary amount of time and effort in one specific skill, one that isn't particularly useful in other applications.

Often teachers expect their students to be similar learners to themselves, which is never going to be the case. Important for teachers to view the lesson from the students' point of view, often.

Though I am not an expert by any means, I see this often in my classroom. Sometimes I truely forget what is easy or difficult for student. Many times I use vocabulary or terms that students do not understand to my great surprise.

This is why it is so important that students see their teacher as a learner as well. Students need to see their teachers go through the same process that they do everyday.

This statement is very silly For me, this really shows that just because an answer is correct, doesn't mean understanding is proven.

This speaks to the importance of having clear and visible learning goals visible to the students. Control the narrative by using a common language of trying to problem solve and learn rather than 'just get the answer.'

While reading the previous paragraphs, I found myself nodding in agreement with the author. However, I often struggle to implement these characteristics of effective instruction in Social Studies. I am glad they added this practical example.

This goes on my previous annotation where I brought this point up. Another question arises, what is a sufficent number of cases of in-depth study? Who decides this? What does this look like in Social Studies where it is normally taught in a linear fashion?

The importance of preassessment and knowing your students is paramount in to have true understanding take place. Without those elements, the students will never reveal their misunderstandings and not have an opportunity to see where it falls short.

What I like about this is that this is not only a positive for classroom growth, but character building as well. Something that obviously should be emphasized in public education, but often is not.

This reminds me of the "Marshmallow Challenge," where kindergarteners often-times outperform college kids due to their propensity for learning by trial and error. This also reminds me of Malcolm Gladwell's book (forget which one... I think David and Goliath) where Gladwell describes various scenarios where kindergarteners outperform adults.

It is important to not underestimate the abilities of our students (especially the young ones) and this research shows the power of inquiry based teaching.

I found this entire paragraph interesting. The author seems to be showing that students need a deep understanding of each concept. I.e. students need to know not only what a vein is, but why they have specific properties.

This springs a question for me which I have often had discussions with colleagues about standards (particularly Social Studies). There are far too many standards for teachers to be able to cover each standard in depth. What should a classroom teacher do, teach all the standards but only scrape the surface, or skip other standards in order to ensure deep understanding of topics covered?

Technology has made this statement a necessity. Memorization of dates, facts, and definitions is superfluous as these are very easy to Google. This next step of being able to locate and use information is the most important, and difficult, to teach. This is a major reason that I joined MAET.

I often put much more weight into techniques and research done by classroom teachers, as opposed to people who haven't worked in a classroom setting. It is extremely important for researchers to include teachers in every step of their research.