Constructive intervention is the only way to facilitate transformational change in learners as they grow their process skills. This module is a complement to 3.2.7 Constructive Intervention in which the theory and principles are explained. This module focuses on applications based on the steps in the intervention cycle: preparing the context, spotting the growth opportunity, identifying a limiting skill, deciding on learner readiness, choosing an intervention, implementing the intervention, assessing the results, and deciding on follow-up actions. To illustrate the types of constructive interventions, the module presents case studies from two of the three major domains from The Classification of Learning Skills (2.3.3). A table classifying intervention techniques is presented and the implications of using these techniques beyond one-on-one interactions is suggested.

Importance of Planning Constructive Interventions

It is difficult to identify, on the spot, the critical underlying skill deficit that is impeding student performance. Therefore, facilitators must analyze ahead of time what learning skills are most essential for the upcoming performance, and in which skills students are most likely to be deficient; and plan how to intervene to help students grow these skills. See 3.2.5 Creating a Facilitation Plan for a template to guide a facilitator through this planning process.

Planning also enables the facilitator to anticipate and seize the moment when learners are most receptive to growing the skill(s) that are so lacking that they limit their performance (Davis, 1993). If a facilitator is less prepared, he or she may make the mistake of delaying in order to better identify the underlying skill and to prepare the intervention. The recipient may become so frustrated by the time the intervention occurs that he or she cannot respond appropriately.

Before presenting case studies that will help facilitators understand the planning process, it is necessary to classify the different constructive intervention techniques. Table 1 provides a “toolkit” for facilitating learning skill growth (Apple, Duncan-Hewitt, Krumsieg, & Mount, 2000). See the more detailed discussion of these techniques in 3.2.9 Facilitation Tools.

Examples of Constructive Intervention

Two detailed examples are presented in this section to illustrate how constructive intervention for individual learning skills could occur in three different settings. The “constructive intervention cycle” described in an accompanying module (3.2.7 Constructive Intervention) is followed in each of the case illustrations.

Example 1—Classroom Scenario

The captain of a team needs to grow her cognitive skill of “thinking skeptically.” This skill requires the user to test conclusions against fundamental principles. The context is an activity in which the team is given the number of miles a vehicle is driven (1500), the average price of gasoline ($2), and the vehicle’s average miles per gallon (30). The team is asked to compute the cost of gasoline for the trip in the vehicle. The correct answer requires the team to divide the miles driven by miles per gallon and multiply the resulting gallons by the price per gallon. The team has no math-savvy members and has concluded that they should divide 2 into 30 and multiply by 1500, obtaining 22,500. Team members appear to apply the skill of “identifying inconsistencies” by recognizing that this seems unreasonable, so they decide to put a decimal point after the 225, still erroneous but not as obviously so.

The facilitator has had much experience with the difficulties that students tend to have with this problem and has already identified the “thinking skeptically” skill in his facilitation plan for the activity. He notices the incorrect team reasoning while he skims the room and eavesdrops on the conversations of each team. He waits for the captain or skeptic to correct the error before intervening, but this does not happen, and the team is ready to record the erroneous value. Because everyone on the team seems confused by the problem, he decides to intervene at a relatively low level: he challenges the captain to self-assess her thinking process and request an intervention. He considers, but rejects, giving a mini lecture on working with units of measure because the other teams seem to have grasped this concept.

The facilitator asks the captain, “Are you willing to bet five dollars that your answer is correct?” The team is clearly not ready to do this. “Would you like a hint on how to assess your reasoning process?” The captain says that she would appreciate such a hint. “If you used only the units miles, dollars-per-gallon, and miles-per-gallon and conduct the same arithmetic operations that you did with the numbers 2, 30, and 1500, what would you come up with?” After a period of blank stares, someone on the team writes down the units under their numerical computation 30 ÷ 2 × 1500. “What arithmetic operation does the ’per’ in ’miles per gallon’ or ’dollars per gallon’ represent?” Finally, the captain works out that the units do not yield the desired answer, but she sees that if they divided “dollars per gallon” by “miles per gallon” and multiplied by “miles,” they would get “dollars.”

The facilitator asks each team reflector to prepare a verbal report about the most important thing the team has learned from the exercise, and the reflector from the above team describes the experience with the units. To make sure the whole class has understood, the facilitator rephrases the team’s discovery; “After solving a problem, it is important to think skeptically about the process and identify the principles at work.” As a follow-up activity, the facilitator decides to give a different more difficult problem, also involving units, a few days later to see if the class has internalized this cognitive skill.

Of the ten constructive intervention principles (3.2.7 Constructive Intervention), the ones at work in this example are: Facilitation success can be enhanced by identifying target skills, their triggering scenarios, and standards of performance in the facilitation plan; Constructive intervention can be used to redirect learner attention or to challenge the level of performance; and Requesting self-assessment as a constructive intervention will enhance learners’ consciousness of their levels of competency.

Example 2—Peer Coach Scenario

A teacher new to Process Education has asked one of his more experienced colleagues to attend a class and suggest ways in which he can improve his facilitation skills. The peer coach immediately asks the teacher to identify areas in which he would especially like her to focus her assessment. He responds that even though he prepares stimulating activities for learning the content, the students just do the bare minimum and seem to think all this team activity is a waste of time. The peer coach observes the class and it is clear that the students have not bought into the importance of learning to improve their performance. The teacher seems powerless to change this attitude and simply proceeds by rote to manage the activity.

The peer coach recognizes that the teacher needs to grow in the social domain skills cluster entitled “building and maintaining teams,” which includes the skills defining team roles, setting rules, and confronting poor performance. She judges from his positive interest in the assessment results that the teacher is more than ready to accept an intervention. In their debriefing meeting she chooses to use an SII assessment of the teacher’s performance and when giving her insights includes a “just-in-time” lecture about the importance of gaining student buy-in to the process of learning to learn, rather than just memorizing concepts that will soon be outdated. As strengths, she emphasizes how courageous the teacher is for striving to improve his teaching and for struggling with these new methods even though he doesn’t see much success yet. As areas for improvement, she points out the need to grow the skills of defining team roles, setting rules, and confronting poor performance.

At first, the peer coach is unsure what to suggest that would help the teacher grow the three skills. She considers inviting the teacher to observe her class, identifying points in the class at which the teacher might intervene in different ways, or taking over his class for a day and letting the teacher observe how she handles the poor student performance. She rejects all these approaches as either being too passive or as undermining the teacher’s authority. She decides instead to suggest a role-playing session. She set up a model class and encourages the teacher to assign roles, set rules, and intervene to challenge poor performance. She arranges with the students that they will play their resist-the-program roles. After the teacher finishes the exercise, the peer coach asks the students to describe their responses to his interventions. After a few rounds, the teacher feels more confident in his ability to challenge his class. In parting, the peer coach refers him to the Faculty Guidebook, especially the modules 3.1.5 Getting Student Buy-In and 3.1.3 Methodology for Creating a Quality Learning Environment.

As a follow-up, the peer coach asks to observe the class a few days later. There is a significant improvement. The teacher has stopped trying to teach the content and focuses on buy-in activities and requiring high student performance. The students’ improved buy-in is a typical student response when responsibility for learning is transferred to them and they are held accountable for their performance.

Levels of Constructive Intervention

After considering these case studies, let us examine the levels of intervention available to the facilitator of student activities (Table 2).

Note that this module has focused attention on Level 1 in the discussion of the intervention cycle because growing learning skills is the primary goal of education. Once students have mastered their learning skills, other interventions, as indicated by the tables above and below are appropriate.

Constructive Intervention Compendium

There are so many potential constructive interventions, but there is space in Table 3 to suggest only a few sound examples for each level and purpose of intervention suggested by Table 2.

Concluding Thoughts

This module has emphasized the essential role of planning before engaging in successful constructive intervention. Illustrations were provided of how to work through the intervention cycle and a number of intervention strategies were modeled at both micro and macro levels. The challenge for educators is to find a mentor and to start with a number of peer coach engagements. Although inadequate performance at the start may be discouraging, it is important to persevere, using frequent self, peer, and student assessments to improve constructive intervention skills. Although success with constructive interventions is one of the most difficult facilitation skills to master, it is also the most important tool for helping students grow their learning skills.

References

Apple, D. K., Duncan-Hewitt, W., Krumsieg, K., & Mount, D. (2000). Handbook on cooperative learning. Lisle, IL: Pacific Crest.

Davis, J. R. (1993). Better teaching, more learning: Strategies for success in postsecondary settings. Phoenix, AZ: Oryx Press.

---

Table 1  Classification of Constructive Intervention Techniques

Affirming	Inquiring	Infusing	Assessing	Challenging	Expediting
Public recognition: offer verbal or nonverbal congratulations	Directed questions: related to information processing	“Just in time” lecturing: supply needed clarifying information	Providing an SII of team performance	Divergent questions: related to doing research	Adjusting activity or assignment requirements
Evidence-based recognition: reward high achievers	Convergent questions related to critical thinking	Answering consulting questions	Requesting self-assessment SII by students or teams	Identifying students to serve as consultants to other teams	Providing resources, books, websites, handouts, etc.
Joining the group: sit down and listen only	Allowing students to ask consulting questions	Using student consultants to help a struggling team	Requesting SII of facilitation from students	Raising the bar: increase performance criteria	Refocusing: questions to get teams back on track
	Elevating a question 2.2.1 Bloom’s Taxonomy—Expanding its Meaning	Parallel reporting: e.g., all spokespersons go to the board	Doing midterm assessments regularly	Using venting session to deal with affective issues	Changing performance criteria to manage frustration
	Clarifying a question: rephrase it				Adjusting time constraints when needed
	Sending spies to eavesdrop on other teams

Table 2  Classification of Constructive Interventions

Levels of Intervention	Context by Level Use when:	Facilitator Skills by Level Use if:	Learner Readiness by Level Use to:
5. Challenge Growth Make conscious the demonstrated potential for integrated learning	Learners have strong learning skills and knowledge.	Learners display initiative and creativity beyond requirements.	Challenge whether current assumptions are optimal.
4. Deepen Knowledge Clarify the scope of the knowledge included in the objectives	Opportunities arise for improving knowledge goals.	Observe potential to make new knowledge connections.	Suggest new examples or models to enhance insights.
3. Enhance Facilitation Direct focus to improving facilitation planning	The facilitation plan did not predict all steps in a process.	Facilitation plan incomplete or not prepared.	Provide guidance for off-track learners.
2. Integrate Curriculum Direct focus to improving the curriculum	A learning activity has missing elements or resources.	Observe ways to improve instructions.	Provide support for missing prerequisite skills/knowledge.
1. Establish Learning Skills Clarify what learning skills are relevant	Learning skills enhancement is planned or needed.	Assess that learning skills are slowing performance.	Recommend diverse skills for addressing learning problems.

Table 3  A Compendium of Constructive Intervention Examples