Building A Thinking Classroom In Mathematics: My (Hopefully) Complete Guide To TOolkit #1

So you want to Build A Thinking Classroom in Mathematics this year?  Or maybe you want to Re-Build a new and improved one?  Wonderful!  I built one for the first time last year.  It was a wonderful experience for my 6th graders, and the constant problem-solving and growth made it an energizing experience for me, too. 

I'm happy to have you along for the ride!

So where do you start?  If you've studied the book carefully, chapter 15 lays out the answer to that question for us:  you start with Toolkit #1.​

Liljedahl recommends implementing the practices in sets called "toolkits" (p 281).

What Does Liljedahl Tell Us About Toolkit #1?

Toolkit #1 consists of three practices:

• Giving thinking tasks
• Forming visibly random groups
• Using standing, vertical, non-permanent surfaces ("vnps")

For this specific toolkit, Liljedahl also tells us that all three practices need to be implemented simultaneously, rather than sequentially" (​p. 282).

​Toolkit #1

Why simultaneously?  "Classrooms...operate with a rhythm of routines, expectations, and patterns that - over time - stabilize and become your classroom norms.  Once these norms are established, they are very difficult to change.... This is why you likely prefer to make changes at the beginning of the school year when the norms are yet to be established, are still in flux, and are pliable" (p. 283).

Bingo.  These practices set the culture.  They set the norms.  They tell the kids "how it will be" in this new class on their new schedule in this new school year.

Liljedahl goes on to say that the practices in the first Toolkit "shock the system, shock the students, and necessitate a different behavior.... These three practices are all about creating a new set of norms in the room that necessitate that the system change, and with it, your students" (p 284).

"Gotta admit, this is kind of a shock to my system."

One last note from Liljedahl: for those seeking to RE-build a Thinking Classroom - which is to say teachers who successfully built one in a past year - you have a much bigger version of Toolkit #1.  He still, however, doesn't recommend implementing all the practices from the get-go in this circumstance.  The reason, he tells us "is governed by the acclimatization rate of the students... Students will be shocked at how different your class experience is from other learning experiences, and this may result in some resistance and will definitely require an acclimatization period."  ​So even though YOU may be ready for the full suite of thinking practices, they're a bit too much for students all at once.

My experiences and advice in this post will be limited to the three practices for new Builders.  Nonetheless, I'm glad I re-read chapter 15 in order to write this because I had forgotten that it included advice for re-Builders, too.  I would certainly have started the year assuming I could have implemented everything from the get-go, and I would probably have ended up in a mess like I did last year when I overstepped the toolkits.

 

Re-Builders of Thinking Classrooms also have a first Toolkit.  For the sake of the students acclimatization, he doesn't suggest implementing all 14 at once, even for experienced practitioners.

What Do Visibly Random Groups Look Like In My Class?

Even more than thinking tasks, visibly random groups are my absolute favorite "shock to the system." I love them.  That's not an exaggeration - I'm literally in love with visibly random groups.  Never again will I have any class in any subject or any grade level where I don't seat students this way.  I'll have a science class this upcoming year - they're getting visibly random groups.  If future administrators tell me not to teach math through thinking tasks, I'll still keep visibly random groups.  The benefits go far beyond math and far beyond thinking.  

​Let's get to the details.

First, I use playing cards.  Three of each "rank" of cards are used to tell kids where to sit, and the fourth one tells them where to think.  For instance, I have the twos of diamonds, hearts, and clubs each taped to a desk in my room, and the two of spades taped to a whiteboard.  At the door, the students get a card that tells them what desk to sit at.  When it is time to go to the boards, all the twos go to the board with the two of spades.

​Cards on desks (hearts, diamonds, clubs) tell kids where to SIT.

Cards on boards (spades) tell kids where to THINK

Second, I give students a new, random seat every single day.  Their seat is new every day.  Their thinking groups is new every day.  I talk about the reasons for and benefits of this in my love letter to visibly random groups, so I won't repeat those here.  But suffice it to say, I think new every day is the best way to reap all the benefits visibly random groups have to offer.  Talk about a shock to the system - no assigned seat?  Not trying to manipulate me with who you group me with?  Sometimes I get to work with my best friends?  No obvious, pre-ordained leaders and slackers in the groups?  

The kids have never experienced anything like it.

Many others in the Thinking Classroom community either assign or allow students to choose seats, then visibly randomly assign thinking groups using a projected randomizer.  If that's what you already do and it works for you, proceed by all means.  If you're new, however, I don't recommend that.  I think that students finding out their seat one by one as they enter the room is less likely to lead to complaining or low-key bullying than revealing thinking groups all at once might open you up.  Additionally, letting students choose a card at the door feels truly random, whereas seeing a projection might come across as secretly non-random (and, indeed, many teachers choose these digital randomizers in order to take away certain random outcomes).
​

Do Kids ever try to "cheat" the random grouping assignment?

They do.

But rarely.

Let's talk about it.

At some point in the year, a few students will test out swapping cards to get where they want to be.  They'll do it while they're in the room and I'm still at the door handing out cards.

This isn't something to worry about.  It'll happen.  It isn't a big deal.  Here's how I handle it.
 
One, I stand in the doorway where I can be seen looking into the room.  This drastically reduces the chances of card swapping.  The kids who want to swap have to locate where they want to get to, find a willing swapper, and make the move - that's a good bit to do secretly if I'm looking (or even just perceived to be looking).    So not many will try it.

Two, it isn't long into the year before I know who to keep an eye on.  Once I do, I make sure to take a long look at their card and at them before they enter so that they perceive that I have memorized where I expect them to be.  I don't have to do that for many kids, just the ones who like to push it.

Three, the kids who pull off a swap successfully one day usually don't have the sense to stop there.  They do it over and over again.  By the third day in a row I see someone sitting with their best friend, I'm onto it.  I'll catch them the next day, and they'll get a (public) consequence for not following directions, which usually deters the whole class from trying it again for a while.  

Fourth, in dire circumstances, you can keep track of where they should sit.  Once they pull a card, write it down (or just appear to write it down).  I did this for about a week with one of my classes last year, and they didn't notice when I stopped.

Fifth, as I say in my love letter, visibly random groups make it so all the kids get to know each other.  More than kids trying to force their way to their friends, by mid-year I have the opposite problem - everybody is friends.  They're perfectly happy however things end up.  
​

Do Behavior Problem Kids Get Random Seats?

Yes. As I say in my guide to influencing student behavior, kids not getting a fresh start every day fuels further misbehavior.  Michael Linsin - my guru for behavior management - tells a great story in his book Dream Class that illustrates how chronically misbehaving students use their "special status" as a behavior problems to manipulate teachers in myriad ways.  Don't give them that status.  Treat them like everyone else.

Everybody gets a random seat every day.  Everybody.
​

Do I Break Up Groups That End Up With Multiple Behavior Problems or Multiple Struggling Learners?

No.  I manage those groups more, but I don't reassign them.  Managing behavior and managing attention are still part of a Thinking Classroom.  So is managing struggling learners.  In Toolkit #3, you'll work on using hints to keep struggling groups in "flow," but in the meantime, expect to have to work with your struggling learners just like you would in a mimicking classroom.  Additionally, if you plan your thinking tasks carefully and keep the mild portion of the tasks mild enough, struggling learners should be able to access the thinking tasks well, too.

​All of these groups are truly, genuinely random.

Do I really devote 3-5 Days To Non-Curricular Thinking Tasks To Start the YEar? 

I do!  In my first year, I tried one non-curricular tasks of each type from Liljedah's website.  We worked on a card trick on days 1-2, a numeracy task on day 3, and a "good question" on day 4.  On day 5, we did a "launching" curricular task that felt like a fifth non-curricular task.
​

Doesn't "losing" A week To Non-Curricular Tasks Put Me "Behind" My Pacing Calendar?

It does, yes.  But on page 151, Liljedahl tells us that in a Thinking Classroom, there will be a time when you can start expecting to cover a huge amount of content in a single lesson.  I had that experience eventually last year.  It doesn't happen every single day, but I assure you that you'll be able to recoup the three, four, or five days devoted to setting your culture with non-curricular tasks.

So confident am I in this that I'm actually adding a week of content to my first semester calendar this year.  I'm banking on not only making up for the "lost week," but actually gaining one additional week once we get things humming.

Non-curricular tasks are totally worth it.  They're fun, they're a shock to the system, they give you and the kids a chance to get things going with lower stakes.  You'll make up for the lost time.

Once I've Done 3-5 days of non-curricular tasks, how Do I make the transition to curricular tasks?

I just wrote a whole post about this!  This is a big leap of faith in Building A Thinking Classroom.  Non-curricular tasks are fun, they're low stakes, they're naturally engaging, and they're fairly easy to plan.  Getting the same effect from curricular tasks - plus getting meaningful content learning - is indeed a major step.  My post explaining my process for doing so, hopefully, will give you an outline to follow for any topic or standard.  The new, green Mathematics Tasks for the K-5 Thinking Classroom also has outstanding, updated advice on planning curricular tasks, even if you're a middle or high school teacher. 

What If I'm Not Ready (Or Allowed) To Give Up Direct Instruction?

In Toolkit #1, you don't have to! 

The first practice is Give Thinking Tasks, not Teach Entirely Through Thinking Tasks. 

While you're Building Toolkit #1, other than giving thinking tasks, forming visibly random groups, and using non-permanent vertical surfaces, you have full permission to keep doing everything else as you have always done.  These practices are plenty to adjust to at first.

Last year, when I was struggling to hold on because I thought I could implement the first THREE toolkits all at once, I decided to back up, stop Toolkit #3, and shore up all the practices in Toolkit #2 to get back on track.  During that time, I had a lesson ready to teach after the thinking task if it didn't go well or if I just wanted to be extra sure the kids had figured it out during the task.

It's ok to still teach.
​

That said, I've heard Liljedahl warn that, if the kids know that you'll "rescue" them with a normal, mimicking lesson, they're less apt to really try to learn from the thinking task, which makes sense to me.  So you'll probably, over time, find yourself naturally making leaner lessons as you begin to trust that the kids really will "figure it out" during the thinking tasks.  For me, my lessons gradually become so lean that the transition to consolidation was easier than I expected in Toolkit #3.  But at first, I had them ready to go as usual until I developed trust in my task building.
​

Toolkit #1 demands that you "give thinking tasks," but it does not necessarily demand that you "teach entirely through thinking tasks."  Some direct instruction still makes sense as you adjust to the tasks doing most of the work for you.

How Long Do I give the kids To work on the THinking Tasks?

My personal, general flow in a normal, 4-toolkit Thinking Classroom is roughly:

• 5 minutes to launch the task
• 25 minutes of task time
• 30 minutes for closing activities (consolidation, note-making, check-your-understanding)

Once we were in the groove last year, that always felt pretty good.  While you're still in Toolkit #1, I'd still recommend a similar time breakdown, just with traditional practices (teaching, notes, practice) in the last 30 minutes. 

You can start with my breakdown, and you'll quickly get a feel for the right time frames for you.

If you have very short classes, or you're still just really having a hard time trusting that kids will learn through "figuring it out" in thinking tasks, I have an even lower-stakes idea for using your time at first if you just want to "dip your toes" into the idea of a Thinking Classroom before building even Toolkit #1.
​

What Do I use for Vertical Non-Permanent Surfaces?

This, it would seem, is different for everybody.  Most of us piece together what we can.  In my own case, my room already had a big whiteboard at the front (enough for three groups).  My school paid to have three more whiteboards mounted on my walls, plus an old chalkboard I happened to have.  I had two windows that could be used, and one tripod whiteboard that I had bought when I just "dabbled" with a thinking classroom the year before.  That got me to ten group areas.  When one of my classes increased to 36 second semester, I added two more groups spaces by having the kids write on my metal cabinet and a small group table I had or on my teacher desk (not vertical, but good enough).
​ 

A former student gave me a big chalkboard long before I Built A Thinking Classroom.  It was always a hit with the artsy kids.

Windows work pretty well if you have them.

In my class of 36, a group would use that metal cabinet.  You can see some thinking residue still on it if you look closely.

While not vertical, a big teacher desk or small group table works pretty well.

What About Kids Who don't Want to Stand?

Too bad.  Barring an IEP or 504 plan that says otherwise, I don't let them sit.

I do think it is a good idea to tell them why I make them stand up.  Even if they don't like the reason, I find that the kids respond better to any practice or rule I set if they know that there actually is a reason for it rather than just "because I said so."

I also enjoy reminding them that they complain about "just sitting there" in all their other classes, so I'm not open to the alternative complaint in math class.
​

What's the Biggest Mistake To Avoid In THe First Toolkit?

The biggest mistake to avoid is thinking this:

"If my kids are at the boards, I have Built A Thinking Classroom."

It's not about the boards.  Building an At-The-Boards Classroom is not the same as Building A Thinking Classroom.

The whole point of the vertical whiteboards is that they remove a lot of psychological barriers to thinking.

To thinking.

If I teach the kids how to do something, then have them go practice at the boards, they're not thinking. They're just mimicking on a whiteboard.

Standing at whiteboards is, far and away, the most noticeable difference between a Thinking Classroom and a traditional one.  But that doesn't mean that a classroom with kids standing at whiteboards is a Thinking Classroom.  Whiteboards are a tool to encourage better thinking.  They're a means, not an end.

Some of the groups like to use their boards on test review days.  While not technically thinking, I allow it, because, c'mon, it's adorable.
​

How Long Before I Move Onto Toolkit #2?

Toolkit #2 is all about practices to get more learning out of your thinking tasks.  When you're so comfortable giving thinking tasks daily and you're starting to see the kids learn more and more from them with less and less direct instruction from you afterward, the Toolkit #2 practices will start to beckon.  You'll look at the list, and at least one will feel like a natural, almost inevitable next step.

In short, when it's time, you'll know.

Don't put any pressure on yourself to make the move to Toolkit #2.  Toolkit #1 is the biggest "shock to the system" - both to your system and to the kids'.  Give it as long as it needs to feel like "this is how we do class now."  When I do anything new, six weeks  always feels like the magical amount of time for it to settle in.  I'm very comfortable and experienced with big changes, however.  It takes as long as it takes, and there's really no rush.

Fear not - I'll try to have my guide to Toolkit #2 out in plenty of time.
​

What Have I missed?

I sincerely want to help make your experience Building (or re-Building) a Thinking Classroom in Mathematics a successful one, and nailing Toolkit #1 is the foundation for that build.  I've tried to walk you through all the advice I could have used a year ago - but what have I missed?  Please consider leaving your additional Toolkit #1 questions in the comments, or sign up for my email notifications below and send me additional questions there.  I may even add them to the post!

I wish you a wonderful rest of the summer, and happy Building whenever your 24-25 school year begins!

If you enjoyed this post, please share it!

Want to make sure you never miss a new post?  Subscribe below for email notifications of new content.

Want to read more right now?  You're in luck - this is my 88th post! You can browse past posts by category:

• ​Building A Thinking Classroom
• Leaning Into The Science and Engineering Practices
• Classroom Practices
• Classroom Stories
• Ideas and Opinions
• Pandemic-Related Issues

Want to contribute to the conversation?  Or do you have an idea for a future post?  Leave a comment below!