1. Generating & Testing Hypotheses
Research-Based Strategies for Increasing Student Achievement
Compiled from:
Classroom Instruction That Works!
By: Robert J. Marzano, Debra J. Pickering & Jane E. Pollock
Facilitator’s Manual
By: McREL
Participant’s Manual
Curriculum & Staff Development Center
Review Title of workshop and sources

2. Training Objectives Participants will:
Understand the purpose of generating and testing hypotheses as it relates to student learning.
Know and understand the two approaches of using this strategy in the classroom setting
Identify ways to integrate this strategy across the disciplines
Review objectives of training

3. Research & Theory Category Generating & Testing Hypotheses 63
Ave. Effect Size (ES)
Percentile Gain
No. of ESs
Identifying Similarities and Differences
1.61 45 31
Summarizing & Note Taking
1.0 34
179
Reinforcing Effort and Providing Recognition
.80 29 21
Homework & Practice
.77 28
134
Nonlinguistic representations
.75 27
246
Cooperative Learning
.73
122
Setting Objectives & Providing Feedback
.61 23
408
Generating & Testing Hypotheses 63
Questions, Cues, and Advance Organizers
.59 22
1,251
Meta-Analysis of the research on instruction identified nine categories of instructional strategies that have a high probability of enhancing student achievement. This chart illustrates the average effect size and percentile gains realized from the use of these strategies in the classroom.
Note the highlighted row for GENERATING & TESTING HYPOTHESES. Effect size is the unit of measurement that researchers use to report study results. A simple way to understand effect size is to translate into percentile gains, which is done with a mathematical formula. What this chart tells us is that on average, the use of this strategy produced a percentile gain of 23 points.
Keep in mind…….
Even though the research has taught us a great deal….. There are still some things we don’t yet know, such as…
Are some instructional strategies more effective:
~ in certain subject areas?
~ at certain grade levels?
~ with students from different backgrounds?
~ with students of different aptitude?
No strategy works will in ALL situations
AND
the effectiveness of any strategy depends on the thoughtfulness and skill the teacher brings in using the strategy

4. Generating and Testing Hypotheses
Enhance students’ understanding
of and ability to use knowledge by
engaging them in mental
processes that involve making and
testing hypotheses.
The process of generating and testing hypotheses involves the application or use of knowledge. Most often this process is associated with and isolated to science classes.
It’s simply a matter of asking, “IF I dot this, WHAT might happen? IF that things acts or responds in a certain way, WHAT might happen?”:

5. Add more spokes if you need.
Complete the graphic organizer handout by writing words that you associate with “generating & testing hypotheses”.
Add more spokes if you need.
Table Activity
Complete the graphic organizer by writing words that you associate with “generating and testing hypotheses”. Add more circles if needed.
Next slide matches the Hand-Out

6. Generate and test hypotheses
Graphic Organizer Hand=Out
Generate and test hypotheses
Hand-Out for group activity

7. Four Planning Questions for Instruction
What knowledge will students learn?
Which strategies will provide evidence that students have learned that knowledge?
Which strategies will help students practice, review, and apply that knowledge?
Which strategies will help students acquire and integrate that knowledge?
When planning, teachers can use four questions to help understand the interaction between promoting student learning and the nine categories of effective instructional strategies. If you have been to other Marzano trainings, these four questions may look familiar to you. To review:
Question # 1 Having the objective stated in clear and specific terms. When teachers tell students, what they are going to learn, it provides a “hook” for student to place their thinking, and helps them to focus their learning goals.
State the learning objective in clear and specific terms.
Question # 2 Asks how the teacher will know whether a student has learned the knowledge that was presented. Formative and summative
Clearly identify the expected level of performance for the knowledge that students are supposed to learn
Provide multiple opportunities for students to engage in activities that allow them to demonstrate what they are learning.
Collect additional evidence as necessary (end of unit tests, observations, self assessment.)
Use the evidence to determine the level of proficiency students are attaining
Question # 3 Asks the teachers to think about what he or she will do to teach the objective.
Help students access prior knowledge
Help students make connections between their prior knowledge and the new knowledge
Help students organize info and see patterns
Provide students with the steps and/or component parts if they are learning a skill or process
Model the steps and/or how to engage in the component parts if they are learning a skill or process
Question # 4 This final question asks teachers to think about what they will do to provide opportunities for student practice, review and application of that knowledge.
Help students clear up confusions and misconceptions they might have about information
Help students correct errors they are making as they perform a skill or process
Engage students in projects (e.g., performance tasks) that ask them to apply what they have learned in meaningful contexts.

8. Four Planning Questions for Instruction
What knowledge will students learn?
Which strategies will provide evidence that students have learned that knowledge?
Generating & Testing Hypotheses
Because students are required to engage in complex reasoning procedures that deepen their understanding of the content, this category of instructional strategies best fits with the question
“Which strategies will help students practice, review and apply that knowledge?”
Which strategies will help students practice, review, and apply that knowledge?
Which strategies will help students acquire and integrate that knowledge?

9. Generalizations from the Research on Generating & Testing Hypotheses
The generating and testing of hypotheses can be approached in an inductive or deductive manner.
Teachers should ask students to clearly explain their hypotheses and their conclusions.
There are two generalizations from the research.

10. The Two Approaches Deductive Thinking
…..is the process of using a general rule to make a prediction.
Inductive Thinking
….. is the process of drawing new conclusions based on information we know or are presented with.
First generalization states there are two way to approach hypothesis generation and testing either a deductive or inductive manner.
Deductive Thinking: Students will likely come up with similar results because they started with the same information that was the basis for the principle. This approach works well when the needs is for ALL students to discover and discuss the same information.
Research – shows the average effect size for deductive techniques is much larger than that for inductive techniques.
Inductive Thinking: Students are first asked to discover the principle or principles and then to generate hypotheses. This allows room for error as well as room for different questions, different observations, and different conclusions.

11. Recommendations for Classroom Practice
Make sure students can explain their hypotheses and conclusions.
Use a variety of structured tasks to guide students through generating and testing hypotheses.
There are two recommendations for classroom practice related to Generating and Testing Hypothoses.
Review points on slide.
Teachers need to provide time for students to explain both their hypotheses and their conclusions. While students may already be doing this frequently – they don’t use a rigorous and systematic approach to the process. All of the processes have steps that students should follow.

12. Recommendation # 2
Use a variety of structured tasks to guide students through generating and testing hypotheses.
Decision Making
Problem Solving
Invention
Experimental Inquiry
Historical Investigation

13. Recommendation # 1
Make sure students can explain their hypotheses and conclusions.
Provide students a set of steps for the task.
Use familiar content to teach the students the steps in the process.
Use graphic organizers to record information when carrying out the process.
Review points of recommendation # 1

14. Decision Making:
~ is about choosing an option around a decision that needs to be made and examining criteria and alternatives related to that decision.
Making a decision generally requires making a prediction and weighing that prediction against possible other alternatives. For example, when deciding on what vehicle to purchase or what college to send your child to, you will most likely make a prediction and weigh its merits against other possible alternatives.
Making decisions is not the same as problem solving. When we make decisions the process calls for us to select a solution from a variety of plausible options.

15. Problem Solving:
~ is about removing constraints or barriers to find the best solution to an unstructured problem.
This relates to problems we have in everyday life. The strategy is intended to work with unstructured problems – problems that do not have clearly defined goals or constraints and that usually have more than one solution. Problems involve obstacles and constraints.
When solving these problems, students must generate and test hypotheses related to the various solutions they predict.
EXAMPLE: Teachers might present students with a task that requires them to build a bridge with the requirements that it be made of specific materials provided by the teacher, span a certain width and height, and hold a certain weight is suspended from the center of the completed bridge. Students will generate many predictions to meet these requirements, and in the process, they likely will revise their predictions.

16. Invention:
~ involves creating something to fit a need or to improve upon something that already exists in order to make it better.
The invention process involves hypothesizing about what might work, developing the idea, and testing the invention. Usually requires generating and testing multiple hypotheses until one proves effective.
Works well when students are asked to think of a need they have or someone else has. They then generate an idea for an invention that meets that need.
If a product or solution currently exists that meets that need, students might think of another product to better meet that need or a modify the existing product to better fit the need.

17. Experimental Inquiry:
~ is the process of developing and testing hypotheses of things we observe.
Often identifies with the scientific method, but we can practice this strategy across the content areas to help students use knowledge meaningfully. We can use the same process that drives inquiry in science class to describe observations, generate explanations, make predictions, and test them in a world history class, P.E. class, etc.
Experimental inquiry is the process of generating and testing explanations of things we observe.

18. Historical Investigation:
~ is the process of identifying and resolving issues or contradictions from history about which there is confusion.
Students engage in historical investigation when they construct and investigate a plausible scenario for an event from the past about which there is mno general agreement.
EXAMPLE: There are conflicting versions of Roosevelt’s role in the events leading up to Pearl Harbor.
To use historical investigation, a student would have to understand the circumstances surrounding the bombing of Pearl Harbor, generate a hypothesis about Roosevelt’s role in that event, and collect evidence that supports or refutes that hypothesis.

19. Systems Analysis
~ is the process of analyzing the parts of systems and the way they work together.
Systems exist in all the content areas. Computer network systems, government systems, and weather systems are a few examples.
Students can increase their understanding of systems by asking them to generate and test hypotheses that predict what might happen if an aspect of a system changes. Studying the individual components of a system shows the functional relationship and how one part of system affects another part of the system.

20. Model of the decision making process using the
Classroom Example
Model of the decision making process using the
context of the family vacation.
Let’s take a look a classroom example of the first recommendation using the decision-making process.

21. Decision Making Matrix
Criteria
Alternatives
Washington, DC
San Francisco
New York City
1. A variety of appropriate activities
3 X ___ =
2. Low or moderate cost for activities
2 X ___ =
3. Short time to get there
TOTALS
Use facilitator’s Manual p OR
My family has decided to go on a summer vacation together, but we have not yet decided on the destination. Our choices are Washington, D.C., San Francisco, and New York City. The criteria selected were:
Variety of appropriate activities for all of us
Low or moderate cost for the activities
Short time to get there
Once we decided on the criteria, we had to decide how important each criterion was to us. We decided that the number of different activities is very important so we assigned it a weight of 3.
We also thought also thought that cost is important. We debated on whether to assign it a 3 as well but finally gave it a 2. We also assigned “short time to get “ a 2. We placed all the information into a matrix to help us organize our thinking. Here’s what is looks like. Note the “importance score” is the first number is each cell of the matrix.

22. Criteria Alternatives TOTALS 3 X 3 = 9 3 X 4 = 12 X =
Washington, DC
San Francisco
New York City
1. A variety of appropriate activities
3 X 3 = 9
3 X 4 = 12
2. Low or moderate cost for activities
X =
3. Short time to get there
TOTALS
Using a scale of 1 to 4, rate how well each destination meets each of the criteria. For example, there are many museums and monuments to visit in Washington, D.C., as well as the zoo and other attractions. We would give that a rating of 3 since there are many things to see, but they seem to be the same type of activity. San Francisco has many attractions, but we aren’t sure how varied the activities are. We rate that a 3 as well. We give New York a rating of 4 because we can go see plays, see a variety of historical and cultural sites, eat in great restaurants, visit Wall Street, and ride the subway. We multiply the “importance score” for each criterion by the rating for each criterion to get the results.

23. Completed Matrix Criteria Alternatives TOTALS 21 19 24 3 X 3 = 9
Washington, DC
San Francisco
New York City
1. A variety of appropriate activities
3 X 3 = 9
3 X 4 = 12
2. Low or moderate cost for activities
2 X 3 = 6
2 X = 8
2 X 3 = 6
3. Short time to get there
2 X 3 = 6
2 X 1 = 2
2 X 3 = 6
TOTALS 21 19 24
Complete the matrix following the same procedure then examine the matrix to find which alternative received the highest score.
Then ask how do we as a family feel about the results?
If we have a negative reaction, then examine the criteria, the importance scores, and the ratings to make sure they accurately reflect our thinking. Make changes to one or more if necessary.

24. Group Activity
Using the Decision Making strategy, work with your partners to create your matrices.
1. Identify a decision that must be made in your school.
2. Identify the criteria on which the decision will be made and the possible alternatives.
3. Assign weights to each criterion, assign a rating and complete the matrix.
Divide into groups of Draw or use Handout to create group matrices.
Complete activity and share out results. Debrief activity and other uses with large group.

25. Criteria Alternatives
X =
TOTALS
Use a hand-out and reference during presentation.

26. Key Points
Techniques for generating and testing hypotheses may be inductive or deductive.
Techniques for generating ideas and testing hypotheses that are more deductive in nature seem to have a greater effect on achievement than inductive techniques.
There are a variety of structural tasks that can be used to help students through the process of generating and testing hypotheses.
Review slide

27. Reflection on Learning
What have you learned about generating and testing hypotheses?
What questions do you have about generating and testing hypotheses?
What changes might you make in your practice related to generating and testing hypotheses?
What support might you need to make these changes?
Complete hand-out of Reflection on Learning