Observations and Conversations¶

Strategy · All strategies
Evidence · 2 claims (2 for) · 8 studies (3 quant-synthesis, 2 causal, 2 review, 1 qualitative), q2–q4 · 2 of 8 report an effect size

Description¶

Observations and conversations are formative assessment practices in which instructors monitor learning by watching students work and by engaging them in purposeful dialogue — asking probing questions, listening to peer discussion, and documenting what they hear and see through anecdotal notes. The goal is to surface student thinking as it happens, so instruction can be adjusted before misconceptions consolidate rather than after a summative test reveals them.

Design Implications¶

Observation and conversation are core moves of formative assessment, and formative practices that feed forward into instruction show some of the largest documented effects on achievement Formative assessment practices improve achievement. [+S]. Their value depends on the quality of the questions asked and the instructor's responsiveness: open prompts that elicit reasoning ("How did you decide that?") reveal far more than yes/no checks, and the resulting data must actually change instruction to count as formative Formative assessment practices improve achievement. [~M].

Context¶

Requirements¶

• Skilled questioning: instructors must elicit reasoning, not just answers, and respond contingently to what they hear (Coaching, Class Discussion)
• A documentation system — anecdotal notes, checklists, or conferencing records — that makes observations usable for later instructional decisions
• Time built into the lesson for circulating, listening, and conferring; a classroom culture where students talk through their thinking publicly
• A plan for acting on the evidence: regrouping, reteaching, or adjusting task difficulty

Constraints¶

• Judgments from observation are subjective and vulnerable to instructor bias (halo effects, attention concentrated on vocal or struggling students) [-M]
• Sampling is incomplete: a few students' responses may not represent the class, and some outcomes (e.g., retention over time) are poorly captured [-M]
• Time-intensive; difficult to sustain in large classes without structured routines [-M]
• Conversations can become evaluative interrogation, suppressing the honest disclosure of confusion they are meant to elicit [~W]

Implementation Variability¶

• Circulating observation: instructor moves among groups during collaborative work, listening for reasoning patterns
• Conferencing: brief one-on-one conversations (e.g., 5-minute writing conferences) focused on a specific piece of work
• Structured check-ins: whole-class routines such as exit questions or Check-In prompts that scale observation to larger groups
• Peer observation: students observe and question each other, extending coverage and building evaluative capability

Target Learners¶

• All levels, K–12 through adult education; especially valuable for emergent bilinguals and young learners whose understanding outpaces their written output [~W]
• Students in hands-on, exploratory settings (STEM labs, projects, Case Studies) where the process of reasoning matters as much as the product
• Struggling learners benefit most when observation leads to contingent, in-the-moment support Contingent scaffolding responsive to real-time evidence improves learning. [+M]

Target Learning Goals¶

• Assessing conceptual understanding and problem-solving processes, not just final answers
• Developing self-regulation: students who expect to explain their thinking monitor it more carefully
• Gathering qualitative evidence on collaboration, strategy use, and misconceptions that tests miss

Instructions¶

1. Define what evidence of understanding would look like for the current task before the lesson begins.
2. Circulate during work time, listening to student dialogue and asking open probes ("Why does that work?" "What would happen if…?") (Coaching).
3. Record brief anecdotal notes tied to specific students and specific evidence, not general impressions.
4. Hold short conferences with individual students on their work in progress (Assess Performance).
5. Use the same day's evidence to adjust instruction — regroup, reteach, or raise challenge — and close the loop with Feedback.

Related Strategies¶

• Active Listening — the conversational skill that makes student talk diagnostic rather than performative
• 5-Minute Writing Conferences — a structured conferencing implementation of this strategy
• Questioning — the probe design that determines the quality of what conversations reveal
• Gather formative evidence through embedded, discipline-specific tasks rather than separate tests or language assessments

Related Elements¶

• Check-In — scalable whole-class conversation routine
• Coaching — the responsive, in-the-moment support that observation enables
• Class Discussion — a group-level venue for hearing student reasoning
• Articulation — asking students to verbalize their reasoning makes thinking observable
• Assessment — observation data feeds the broader assessment cycle

Patterns That Use This Strategy¶

• Formative Assessment — observation and conversation are the primary evidence-gathering moves
• Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI for Math) — teachers elicit and build on students' informal problem-solving strategies through conversation

Examples¶

• Cognitively Guided Instruction (CGI) — elementary teachers interview students about how they solved arithmetic word problems, using the conversations to select the next problems (https://www.education.wisc.edu/ci/cognitively-guided-instruction/).
• Reading and writing workshops (e.g., Teachers College Reading & Writing Project) — teachers confer one-on-one with students during independent work, keeping dated anecdotal records that drive subsequent mini-lessons.
• Inquiry-based science labs — instructors circulate among lab groups, listening to hypothesis talk and probing with "What's your evidence?" before deciding whether to intervene.

Key Sources¶

• Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom learning. Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice, 5(1), 7–74. doi:10.1080/0969595980050102
• Ruíz-Primo, M. A., & Furtak, E. M. (2007). Exploring teachers' informal formative assessment practices and students' understanding in the context of scientific inquiry. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 44(1), 57–84. doi:10.1002/tea.20163
• Hattie, J., & Timperley, H. (2007). The power of feedback. Review of Educational Research, 77(1), 81–112. doi:10.3102/003465430298487
• Shepard, L. A. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher, 29(7), 4–14. doi:10.3102/0013189X029007004