The HLTP exhibited here is Eliciting and Interpreting Individual Student Thinking
Eliciting and interpreting individual students’ thinking consists of teachers posing questions and tasks that provoke or allow students to share their thinking about specific academic content. As a result, teachers are able to assess a student’s understanding of the content, make instructional decisions, and surface ideas that will benefit other students. To do this effectively, a teacher draws out students’ thinking through carefully chosen questions and tasks and considers and checks alternative interpretations of students’ ideas and methods
For this lesson, the students did a short reading about campaign ad techniques. We talked about them in depth and went over both non-political/corporate ads and campaign ads so that there was a plethora of examples for the students to connect to. After we went over the definitions and examples, I showed a series of campaign ads, starting from President Eisenhower's 1952 famous "I like Ike" ad. When I elicited and followed the student who answered in the video below, we had just watched Nixon's 1968 Vietnam campaign ad. I asked the students as a whole, which campaign advertisement technique was being used. One student replied with a transfer, this student was not wrong, but I wanted to know how they arrived to that conclusion and if they could describe the connection. I asked questions that followed his thinking to see if he would define one of the other techniques that was present in the ad. Through questioning the student, I got a picture into his thinking that the Vietnam pictures were bad and that was bad. I continued to follow his thinking to see if he could clarify it for me and we got to that the leadership was bad. I followed this, hoping to hear that the leadership was bad for extending U.S. involvement in the Vietnam war. I did not quite get there, I prompted the student to continue on their "leadership" answer to see if that would trigger a different ad technique to come to mind. It did not, and I continued to follow this students thinking.
Although I followed this students thinking, I did not ask really thought provoking questions. I could not get really robust answers from this student, so I did not have an in depth analysis of their thinking. Because the student could not give me a deeper connection or attribute any other campaign ad techniques to this video, I understood he had a simple understanding of the subject. He was able to perceptive the one advertisement technique, and could connect what happened in the video to the appropriate definition. The interaction above is comfortable and does not follow the script of the activity we were working on. It did start that way and we did get there, but because good eliciting goes off script to follow student thinking, the video is a prime example of the everyday eliciting in my classroom. This is a typical interaction in class, sometimes I can get students to think critically and talk me through their thought process, but most interactions are like the one above. I think I could improve eliciting a more thorough response with a longer wait time and questions that are more open-ended.