## Key Ideas > [!abstract] Core Concepts > > - **All Students, All the Time**: See responses from everyone, not just confident volunteers > - **No Opt-Out**: Every student must engage with thinking. "I don't know" is not acceptable > - **Teach Then Question**: Avoid "guess what's in my head". Teach explicitly first, then check understanding ## Definition **Check for Understanding**: Systematic gathering of reliable data about student learning through strategic questioning and assessment techniques, enabling responsive teaching decisions (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Hattie, 2009). ## Connected To [[Responsive Teaching]] | [[Mini-Whiteboards]] | [[Cold-Call]] | [[Culture of Error]] | [[No Opt-Out]] | [[Diagnostic Questions]] --- ## Why check for understanding matters Many teachers spend excessive time explaining concepts students already understand whilst rushing through areas of genuine confusion. This happens because they lack reliable data about student learning. Systematic checking for understanding addresses this problem by providing data to allocate time appropriately based on actual student needs rather than assumptions, identify misconceptions before they become entrenched in long-term memory, adjust instruction in real-time based on evidence rather than intuition, and ensure all students are progressing, not just confident volunteers (Black & Wiliam, 1998; Rosenshine, 2012). This shift from assumption to evidence changes teaching effectiveness (Hattie, 2009). ## Core principles ### Check with all students Basing understanding on responses from confident volunteers creates a dangerous illusion of class-wide comprehension. Confident volunteers provide an unrepresentative sample of class understanding. Most students can mentally opt out whilst appearing engaged. The same students dominate participation, skewing perception. Teachers develop a false sense of class progress based on their strongest learners. The result: teachers progress whilst leaving many students behind, unaware of the growing gaps. Several methods address this problem (Lemov, 2015; Rosenshine, 2012). Mini-whiteboards allow teachers to see every response immediately for any question type, making them the primary checking tool. Diagnostic questions work efficiently whilst revealing misconceptions during concept checking. Strategic cold-call enables targeted sampling across ability levels for follow-up questions. Multiple cold calls provide wider sampling than single responses when mini-whiteboards are unavailable. ### Implement no opt-out Allowing students to opt out with "I don't know" sets the expectation that participation is optional. Every student must engage with thinking through questions like "What do you know about this?", "What's your best guess?", or "Listen to Sarah's answer, then repeat it back and tell me if you agree." The message: in this classroom, thinking is non-negotiable, but being wrong is completely acceptable. ### Don't give hints before checking Pre-empting student difficulties with helpful hints feels supportive but undermines assessment validity. Hints like "Watch out, there are numbers you don't need here," "Be careful with this one (watch for hidden brackets)," or "Remember, we need to add the powers" create several problems. Teachers will never know if students actually needed the hint. They might have succeeded independently. The assessment data becomes invalid because their success reflects the hint, not their understanding. The cognitive demand of the question is reduced, preventing genuine assessment. Dependency develops as students learn to wait for teacher support rather than thinking independently. Teachers should do the check first, then provide hints based on what they discover, letting evidence guide support rather than assumptions about what students will struggle with. ### Use strategic cold-call Rather than asking "Can anyone tell me...?", teachers should use strategic questioning where they choose who responds. Ask the question first, then name a student ("What's the first step?... Sarah"). This keeps everyone thinking. Allow adequate wait time (minimum 3 seconds for processing). This allows thought development. Question the students least likely to know. Targeting struggling students first provides more honest assessment. Require full sentences ("Give me a complete answer"). This deepens processing. ### Teach, then question Teachers should avoid using questioning to deliver content that should be taught explicitly ("guess what's in my head"). The better sequence: teach clearly (explain the concept or method explicitly), check understanding (see if students can retrieve or apply it), and respond appropriately based on what is discovered. For example, asking "How do you think we solve this equation?" before teaching is poor practice. Better practice involves teaching the method explicitly, then asking "What's the first step to solve this equation?" ## Strategic tools and techniques ### Use diagnostic questions Diagnostic questions are multiple-choice questions with one correct answer and three wrong answers (distractors) designed to reveal specific misconceptions. They work because teachers can see all student responses quickly. Wrong answers are interpretable, revealing specific misconceptions. Specific concepts can be assessed efficiently. They are more cognitively challenging than they appear. Implementation can be done with mini-whiteboards or technology. Plan 5-10 seconds thinking time plus 10 seconds rehearsal. Always clarify the correct answer afterward. Use wrong answers as teaching opportunities. ### Don't round up Accepting partially correct answers and adding the missing details yourself creates problems. Students think they understand when they don't. Standards fall because partial answers become acceptable. Teachers do the cognitive work students should do. Opportunities for students to recognise gaps are removed. Better approaches push for excellence through prompts like "Let's improve this answer together," "What's the proper term for 'cancelling'?", "Can you be more precise with your language?", or "What do you mean by that?" ### Stretch it: ask follow-up questions After getting an initial response, teachers can ask "How do you know?", "Can you explain your reasoning?", "What made you think of that approach?", or "How is this similar to yesterday's problem?" This tests depth versus surface understanding. It requires students to articulate reasoning. It reveals whether correct answers are for the right reasons and builds mathematical communication skills. ## Advanced checking techniques ### Check for listening before understanding When students get questions wrong, the issue could be that they don't understand the concept or that they weren't paying attention to the explanation. Regular checks for listening during explanations address this diagnostic problem through questions like "What did I just say was the first step?", "What was the last instruction I gave?", or "What did Sarah just explain?" This rules out attention issues when students struggle, sustains focus during explanations, and allows targeted response to genuine confusion. ### Ask students least likely to know For the most honest assessment, teachers should target students who struggled with this topic before, those who missed previous lessons, lower prior-attaining students, students suspected of not listening, and those with identified misconceptions. If they understand, it is reasonable to assume others do too, making this more reliable than asking confident volunteers. Balance is required: teachers shouldn't only target struggling students but should mix with others to avoid patterns. ### Stop students from seeing or hearing answers Students copying or hearing answers before they've thought independently undermines assessment. Solutions include front-loading the participation method (telling students how to respond before asking the question), hovering mini-whiteboards face down (preventing copying cascade), using "heads down" voting for ABCD cards or fingers, setting clear expectations ("I want your thinking, not your neighbour's"), and holding students accountable by addressing calling out or copying immediately. ### Manage your "tell" Teachers accidentally reveal whether answers are correct through verbal tells ("Are you sure?" only for wrong answers), physical tells (smiling for right answers, sighing for wrong ones), and pattern tells (always asking correct answers first). Solutions include using consistent stock phrases ("Thank you" regardless of correctness), asking students if you have obvious tells, varying the order of questioning systematically, and holding off confirming correctness until after discussion. ## Assessment applications ### Exit tickets End-of-lesson assessment uses 2-3 specific questions about the day's learning as a quick temperature check on understanding, informing planning for the next lesson and identifying students needing additional support. The "divide, dig, decide" process sorts responses into three categories: "yes" (students definitely got it), "maybe" (students partially understood or included elements of good answer), and "no" (students definitely did not get it). ### Anonymous questions Rather than asking "Any questions about the homework?", teachers can have students write questions anonymously on the board as they enter. This removes personal risk from asking questions, often reveals more widespread confusion, makes students more honest about what they don't understand, and provides better data about common struggles. ## Troubleshooting common issues When students still hide confusion, teachers should check their culture of error (is it genuinely safe to be wrong?), use more anonymous systems, model their own uncertainty and mistakes, and celebrate students who ask questions or admit confusion. When responses don't represent true understanding, teachers should reduce hints and leading questions, increase use of mini-whiteboards versus volunteers, use diagnostic questions with good distractors, and follow up correct answers with "How do you know?" When checking takes too much time, teachers should plan follow-up questions in advance, use efficient systems like ABCD cards, focus checks on the most critical concepts, and build routines so procedures become automatic. When students aren't engaging, teachers should ensure no opt-out is consistently applied, check that questions are appropriately challenging, use warm call to build confidence, and make sure the success rate is around 80%. ## References Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. *Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice*, 5(1), 7-74. https://doi.org/10.1080/0969595980050102 Hattie, J. (2009). *Visible learning: A synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement*. Routledge. Lemov, D. (2015). *Teach like a champion 2.0: 62 techniques that put students on the path to college*. Jossey-Bass. Rosenshine, B. (2012). Principles of instruction: Research-based strategies that all teachers should know. *American Educator*, 36(1), 12-19, 39. ---