Image source: MS PowerPoint
Please note - there are extensive comments below this post, including from me. Readers are encouraged to review these and of course to engage there if they wish.
In my travels around schools and conversations with teachers and leaders, it is common to be discussing the whys and wherefores of a pedagogical shift to explicit teaching. It’s worth noting, I think, just what a seismic shift this is for many, and how much it challenges some deeply held beliefs and equally deeply-embedded practices. It is hard for humans to change their behaviour (I’m looking at you, weight loss, exercise, diet, alcohol consumption, smoking, driving habits, spending patterns, …. the list goes on). If it was easy, we would all flick a metaphorical switch as soon as we felt the case had been made for change. Click! Old behaviour eradicated; new behaviour established.
But changing behaviour is not easy, and this applies no less to the adoption of a classroom practice like cold-calling than it does to any other established behaviour. Sometimes we don’t want to change our behaviour because we know that it will involve learning new knowledge and skills – i.e. it will be challenging and time-consuming and we may not be very good at it initially.
Sometimes teachers are reluctant to adopt new practices because changing pedagogical routines is difficult, and the motivation to do so is low when the new practices do not align with teachers’ beliefs about student learning and wellbeing, and what these should look like in the classroom.
The adoption of cold-calling is a case in point. Some teachers are horrified when they first encounter this practice and adopt a stance of needing to defend their current practices and believe they need to protect their students from what they see as sure-fire psychological harms.
Sometimes one concern is used as a fig-leaf, to conceal another.
Before looking at responding to these concerns, let’s unpack what cold calling is.
Cold calling is the only way to truly ensure inclusion of all students in the classroom learning they got out of bed and turned up for. It occurs as part of the well-paced teach-first-and-check-for-understanding formative assessment cycle that is central to explicit teaching and involves the following core elements:
1. Teachers socialise students into the process – they explain that in this class, I will teach first, and then I will call on you all, randomly, at different times, to check in quickly, in a low-stakes way, on your learning. This helps me to see how the learning is going and tells me when I need to teach something again.
2. Teachers explain that they will not be calling on students in an effort to catch them out on either not paying attention or not knowing an answer. They are calling on them to create opportunities for them to contribute equitably in their learning environment.
3. Cold calling is always done to provide opportunities to contribute and to be heard in the classroom.
4. Paradoxically, teachers cold call with warmth. They pose a question about something they have taught and then retrieve a pop-stick or similar with a student’s name on it, make eye-contact with the student, and invite them to respond.
5. Teachers use their knowledge of individual students to titrate (differentiate) their expectations, e.g., by waiting a little longer for some students, by providing a prompt, or by asking a little extra of more able students.
6. Once a student has been called, they see their name go “back in the draw” which means they are motivated to remain focused and attentive. They are not “one and done”. This is good for shared attention and enables the teacher to lift the pace, as they become more familiar with the cycle of teaching first and checking for understanding in tandem.
7. If a student responds with some form of “I don’t know”, they are encouraged to listen to other students’ responses, before the teacher loops back to them (which they know about in advance) to give them another opportunity to show their learning, sometimes in small, incremental steps.
8.
“I don’t know” and incorrect responses are
real-time, invaluable (formative) feedback to teachers that their explanations or examples
may not have been as clear as they had hoped, and some on-the-spot
re-teaching is needed. Sometimes too, there are surprises for teachers regarding students' responses - more able students who are not up to speed and less able ones who are travelling better than expected.
Above all, cold-calling is done to foster a climate of safety and trust in the classroom, because of its patterned routines and the way it normalises contributions from all students across the ability spectrum. It in fact gives the quieter, more reticent students a voice in the classroom that they may not otherwise have.
Cold-calling by-passes the natural human tendency for students (and adults) to say they understand something when in fact they don’t, or they have only a partial understanding. We have all indicated “yes” to some version of “Does that make sense?” (usually asked with a hopeful nod) when it makes little or no sense at all, but we erroneously believe that we are the only ones in the room who “don’t get it”, so we nod back. This is not what learning looks like.
It’s true that some students are more anxious about speaking in class than are others, but it’s also true that we overcome situations and experiences that make us anxious by walking towards them, not by avoiding them – this is a central tenet of exposure activities in cognitive behaviour therapy. The longer we don’t do that thing that makes us anxious, the more anxiety-provoking it becomes. On the other hand, nothing succeeds like success, and success that is experienced in a safe, warm learning environment reduces anxiety and builds students’ self-efficacy for learning.
Let’s look at this from the perspective of our “less able” students and/or those who are reluctant to speak in class for any range of reasons. What messages do they receive from being in classrooms with only hands-up practices? They learn that
· People who get to speak in this classroom are the ones who are confident, quick, and smart.
· I’m not confident, quick and smart, so speaking in class is not for me. It’s a party I don’t get invited to.
· I’m the spectator, while others participate.
· Other students have the opportunity to show their knowledge and receive feedback, but I don’t.
· It’s fine for my mind to wander or for me to distract others, because I’m not in the learning dress-circle.
· I can go through the whole school day without ever responding in class, because no one expects that of me.
· The teacher doesn't know what I’m understanding or not understanding, because I’m not asked to respond.
· I’m neurodiverse / from another language background, so putting my hand up will be embarrassing. Best to stay quiet.
· My peers get to practise becoming confident at public speaking, but I don’t.
· I’ll possibly never develop skills in public speaking, even though it’s part of the curriculum.
· Things that are challenging are best avoided.
Is cold-calling psychologically harmful to students?
Whether or not any teaching practice is psychologically harmful is largely a question of how it is used by the teacher. Calling the attendance roll can be done in a psychologically harmful way if we so choose. If there’s any evidence that when cold calling
Ø is used by teachers who understand its rationale and teach first,
Ø know their students,
Ø engage warmly, and
Ø have opportunities to discuss this new skill with peers and/or a coach
….. and psychological harm accrues, I would be at the front of the queue to read it.
Cold calling is used in the name of inclusion and learning to promote academic success, student wellbeing, and a positive classroom climate.
Additional resources on using cold calling well in classrooms:
Cold Calling: The #1 strategy for inclusive classrooms - Tom Sherrington
Cold Calling Explained – Jamie Clark Teaching One-Pagers
Cold Call is Inclusive – Doug Lemov, Teach Like a Champion
'Cold calling' builds better classrooms for kids with language difficulties – by Eamon Charles
Five Tips for ‘Cold Calling’ in the classroom - Kate Jones.
Videos resources about cold calling
Doug Lemov - What is Cold-Calling?
Tom Sherrington - Kitchen Pedagogy: Cold Call Variations
EL Education Kids Like Cold Call and No Opt Out
© Pamela Snow (2025)
Sorry but o simply can’t agree with the simplicity of explanation in this article. Many times children say ‘I don’t know’ not because they don’t know but because that is a more socially acceptable response than the wrong one. This also doesn’t take into account that many students do not prefer a spoken response but perhaps a written one. It doesn’t take into account demands or questions increasing the fight /flight response and reducing the impact on cognitive processing. Many teachers are confused on teaching that they can’t see the kids who this just doesn’t work for. I was one of those kids. I’m an autistic adhder. I know this was not ever an experience that wa helpful for my learning. I’d sit there anxiously unable to take anything in.
ReplyDeleteHi Beck, Not sure if there is a way I can contact you but would like to connect. I am based in Melbourne (Australia). Regards, Clare Blake
DeleteI completely agree, may anxiety was through the roof when teachers randomly called upon the class and my daughters were the same. We went into fight/flight with such a demand (all attention on you) and could not remember anything learnt. The fear of being wrong was also strong. My youngest daughter developed ‘school can’t’ in high school when one of her teachers introduced the pop sticks in class and severe anxiety. I think that there are other methods of communication such as written response on white boards or in small groups rather than whole class to demonstrate student learning/ knowledge.
DeleteI really relate to this. Being called on unexpectedly can be overwhelming—it puts pressure on my working memory and makes it difficult to focus on what's being taught. Even activities like answering at the whiteboard can feel challenging, as I often need more time to process the question.
DeleteMy granddaughter, who has SEND, also struggled with this. Her school anxiety seemed to appear almost overnight, around the same time cold-calling techniques, like those popularized by Doug Lemov, were introduced in her classroom.
While cold calling can increase accountability and engagement for some students, research suggests it may not benefit everyone equally. For example, Tobin (1987) found that students who need more processing time often disengage when rapid questioning is used. Additionally, studies in inclusive education (e.g., Florian & Black-Hawkins, 2011) emphasize the importance of differentiated approaches that account for varied learning needs. Cold calling, when used without sensitivity to individual differences, can inadvertently increase anxiety and reduce participation for neurodivergent learners or those with SEND.
Agree. Saying 'I don't know' is common among ND. For me it mostly meant 'I can't speak'. I masked & fawned at school till I broke and developed school can't. There is absolutely no way to do cold calling without harm. For many students they will be fine with it, but there would be students in every classroom it is harming. The harm won't show till later on, and they will eventually be unable to go to school.
DeleteCold calling should never be done without establishing clear ground rules and a safe culture in the classroom. I think that is a clear message in the blog.
DeleteWhen cold calling is done well and set up with clear and consistent routines and expectations as part of a suite of practices that support students to achieve success in their learning, then students lose the fear of their name being called because they know they will be supported to successfully provide an answer. The key is in the instruction that has taken place before the cold calling happens. When learning is scaffolded and structured so all students achieve success during a lesson then cold calling becomes just a check for understanding.
ReplyDeleteI agree - the set up is crucial. Knowing your students is also crucial, so your method of gaining responses is sensitive to their needs, as are your error correction techniques.
DeleteI agree. There needs to be a routine and acceptance of failure. I give my students an 'out' (which is then followed up with later).
DeleteI encountered cold calling two decades ago when my co-teacher pointed to the jar of colored tongue depressors on her desk, explained that these were the 'equity sticks', and modeled how to use them. I thought it was a brilliant idea, and I've used them ever since for all the reasons you describe. Zaretta Hammond wants us all to be "warm demanders". Mindful of the importance of lowering the level of concern in the classroom, cold calling is a simple way to include all voices within a warm, non-threatening environment. Everyone's participation becomes business as usual. Thanks for making such a compelling argument.
ReplyDeleteI like the term ‘equity’ sticks
DeleteA more accurate name would be “standardisation sticks,” not “equity sticks.” They treat all students the same, regardless of need — and that’s the definition of standardisation, not equity.
DeleteThank you for this thoughtful post. I’d like to gently offer a different perspective, as someone living with ADHD and PTSD.
ReplyDeleteFor me, any unexpected attention in a classroom — even when it’s warm and well-meant — can feel deeply unsafe. I’ve experienced this as an adult in professional learning: the moment I saw a popstick jar being used to choose speakers, I couldn’t focus on anything else. I used all my energy just to stay in the room — and eventually, I left. $250 down the drain. That wasn’t about the facilitator’s tone. It was about the sense of exposure. If it’s that hard for me as an adult, I can only imagine what it’s like for children.
I also want to gently challenge the use of exposure therapy as a justification. I’ve been through exposure therapy. It retraumatised me. My psychologist advised stopping. In clinical settings, exposure is done with full consent, preparation, and a deeply trusting therapeutic relationship — and even then, it can fail. A classroom can’t replicate those conditions. The absence of choice alone makes it fundamentally different.
I also live with auditory processing difficulties. I often mishear verbal questions, and my responses — though logical to me — can sound bizarre or off-topic, which leads to embarrassment. You probably wouldn’t notice this if you met me — I mask well — but cold calling, for me, feels like being ambushed. It’s not inclusive; it’s dangerous.
I understand the intent behind cold calling. But we need to acknowledge that some trauma is too big to be resolved by routine or warmth. I’ve had years of one-on-one therapy, and I still live with a nervous system that reacts to being put on the spot. Sometimes trust doesn’t arrive. Sometimes it’s not about the teacher — it’s about the weight the student is already carrying. The most respectful choice in those moments is not to wait for a threshold of safety to be reached, but to let the student choose if that threshold ever comes.
Thank you for creating space for discussion. I hope this adds another layer to the conversation.
I agree wholeheartedly with you, this was my daughter in school and she continues to have lasting effects from her experience. She coped by masking at school and now at work. Thanks for sharing your experience.
DeleteThank you for presenting strategies and information for teachers to consider in the classroom. For most students, it’s important for teachers to offer every opportunity to share - knowledge, opinion, misunderstandings. Cold calling is ONE strategy. when teachers know their students, they also carefully plan strategies which match the situation and the students.
ReplyDeleteYes!! I completely agree with this statement. Cold calling is ONE strategy - not the ONLY strategy. Teachers know their students - for some, cold calling would be petrifying. Even at a university level, a tutor would cold call and I'd become so tongue tied and nervous. Perhaps it's in the way it is introduced, but for me cold calling is not a strategy I'd feel comfortable using on a daily basis in my classroom.
DeleteThis was an interesting article - some great points about "cold calling" (though perhaps it needs renaming as you made a good point about doing so in a warm and personable way.).
ReplyDeleteOne phrase I do disagree with is the following - "Cold calling is the only way to truly ensure inclusion of all students in the classroom learning they got out of bed and turned up for." In my experience, it is NOT the ONLY way nor does each child turn up at school to learn (unfortunately). The use of mini whiteboards and technology means that each child can respond immediately in their own way (not just verbally in front of a whole class). For example , I can send my students a picture stimulus with a question or visual - they can use their iPad to answer by creating a drawing, video, voice recording, typing...
Additionally, some children do not come to school 'to learn' - some are there for safety, routine and just to be loved. Children need to feel safe before they truly engage with their learning. I like the idea of speaking to children about being responsible learners and engaging with what is being presented.
I would also ask how you might use cold calling to engage a student who is selective mute or suffers from extreme anxiety (particularly in relation to feeling like people are looking at them and judging them). I would really be hesitant to use cold calling if it might cause additional angst for these children? (I had a casual teacher cold call one of my students and she became so anxious she entered into weeks then months of school refusal - it was so heartbreaking). Thank you!
If it is true that cold calling will "foster a climate of safety and trust in the classroom," then why wouldn't it work to allow students to gradually opt in? In other words, the teacher could explain the practice and its benefits as you have done here - ie you will have better understanding and retention and I will be a better teacher etc - and those students who are comfortable trying it can be in the cold calling pool while those students who are still reticent can opt out and watch until they choose to opt in. If it is indeed true that the environment will feel safe and students will feel nurtured and encouraged by it, then won't the reticent students eventually opt in? I am not convinced that this can be done in a way that doesn't require quieter, introverted, perhaps neurodivergent students to conform to a model that is ill-suited to them (I think the sheer exhaustion of this type of cognitive processing for students who are dyslexic and ADHD is underestimated and that many would not ever find this practice helpful) but it seems if it can then it should be something students would want to do.
ReplyDeleteImagine I live with anorexia.
ReplyDeleteYou place a dish in front of me and insist I eat it — not privately, but in front of my peers. I gobble it up, smile wide, and make delighted noises. I perform enjoyment so convincingly you believe I loved it. Meanwhile, I’m already planning to vomit it up the moment I’m alone.
You take that as a sign the experience helped me.
But what really happened?
I left more afraid of food, more ashamed of myself, and more anxious about the next time.
That’s what cold calling can feel like for students living with trauma, anxiety, or neurodivergence.
There is nothing more humiliating than being forced to perform in front of others when your body and brain are screaming no.
We are good at masking — very good. We’ve learned to hide anything to avoid more attention, more pressure, or the disappointment of the adult in charge.
We don’t want you to know it makes us suffer — because that’s dangerous. That’s a weakness you might exploit.
So we pretend to love it. Because we hate it that much.
If you can understand why that’s harmful in the context of anorexia, but can’t apply the same logic to a cold calling classroom — then you’re not listening to the lived experience of trauma.
You have adults in this very discussion saying: “This harmed me.” Not theoretically. Not as a metaphor. It happened.
If your response is to defend the method rather than reflect on the impact, that’s not evidence-based practice — that’s protecting a system.
And it reveals a deeper problem:
Every time someone describes being harmed by cold calling, the response is, “Then it wasn’t done properly.”
That’s a classic No True Scotsman fallacy — shifting the definition of the practice to protect it from criticism.
No matter how much harm it causes, defenders claim “real” cold calling wouldn’t do that.
When a practice becomes immune to feedback, it stops being pedagogy and starts becoming dogma.
And that’s exactly what many of us were harmed by in the past.
Cold calling a student should not be compared to forcing someone with anorexia to eat in front of a crowd. I wouldn't force an 80 year old who was sick to run a marathon, I think that's cruel as well.
DeleteYou can't apply that logic in those different scenarios.
Dont drive your car there has been some accidents on a road at some time before 🤣
Scarier than a cold call is a classroom where the students fear getting an answer wrong so thoroughly that someone would compare it to having significant mental health issues.
Hi Nick — I think there’s been a misunderstanding of my point.
DeleteI’m not comparing cold calling to mental health conditions — I’m saying that serious mental health conditions exist, and they are often invisible. The anorexia example wasn’t meant as a direct comparison but as a thought experiment to show how easily we can misread someone’s internal experience based on what they show us. People who are distressed often smile, perform, say they’re fine — but that doesn’t mean they are.
When people say “kids love cold calling,” my concern is that we’re equating behaviour with experience. But for some students, especially those living with trauma, anxiety, or PTSD, the opposite can be true. We mask. We comply. We perform — and we pay for it later.
As for the marathon example — I’d say a more accurate analogy is forcing someone to run a marathon by drawing names from a hat, without knowing their fitness. Sure, you might get someone who’s ready. Or you might get someone who’s unwell or unable. That’s the danger of blanket strategies — they don’t account for individual needs.
And on the car crash point: yes, if I’d experienced a serious car accident, I absolutely would avoid driving for a while. That’s not irrational — that’s a trauma-informed response. Just like someone avoiding being called on in class. It’s not fear of trying. It’s a nervous system saying this feels unsafe, even when everything appears fine on the outside.
This isn’t about saying cold calling never works. It’s about recognising that it doesn’t work for everyone — and for those it harms, we need alternatives.
Nick, the logic can definitely be applied here. You are asking something of some students that is cruel to them & to do it in front of a class. Our nervous systems aren't going to change. You don't understand the reactions in our bodies & minds when we are called upon. You don't understand how it affects us after we have had to speak. You are forcing us to go against our brain & body on your terms. It is extreme anxiety. Extreme anxiety doesn't go away with exposure therapy. It isn't as simple as a fear of getting the answer wrong & creating a "safe" environment for us to speak. It causes harm to us, regardless of how well you do it. If we appear fine then we are masking or fawning and eventually we break.
DeleteIt can't be applied in such extreme circumstances.
DeleteThis is the part where I drew my comparison conclusion.
Quote/
Imagine I live with anorexia.
You place a dish in front of me and insist I eat it — not privately, but in front of my peers. I gobble it up, smile wide, and make delighted noises. I perform enjoyment so convincingly you believe I loved it. Meanwhile, I’m already planning to vomit it up the moment I’m alone.
You take that as a sign the experience helped me.
But what really happened?
I left more afraid of food, more ashamed of myself, and more anxious about the next time.
That’s what cold calling can feel like for students living with trauma, anxiety, or neurodivergence.
Quote/
Thank you everyone for reading this post and taking part in what I think is an important discussion.
ReplyDeleteI am not necessarily convinced that we’re all thinking of the same thing when we hear the term “cold calling”, but that’s perhaps not unexpected, because the same term can have different connotations and associations for different people.
I am posting below my thoughts on the concerns articulated here and the assumptions, stated or otherwise, that may underlie them. This will be in two parts as the site said it was initially too long :-)
PART 1
1. Firstly, I note that we’re talking about cold calling because it’s relatively new to a lot of people, in spite of the fact that it has been part of the explicit teaching paradigm for some decades. Explicit teaching, by the way, has a strong evidence-base, for students across ability and neurodiversity spectrums. Because it is relatively new, people have varying levels of background knowledge about where cold-calling “fits” in a broader pedagogical context.
2. Comments here and on some social media platforms suggest that what some are envisaging and may even have experienced (themselves or vicariously via their children) is NOT what I am referring to when I describe the skilled, responsive, and differentiated use of cold-calling in classrooms. Conversely, many supportive comments by teachers (here and on Facebook, X and LinkedIn) indicate that learning to use cold-calling as intended has been a game-changer in their classrooms. It improves students’ focus and engagement, allows them to hear all of their peers’ voices, lifts the pace, and ensures that teachers are re-teaching in responsive, real-time ways. If readers of this blog have access to other social media platforms, I encourage them to read some of these comments.
3. We don’t have a shared short-hand term for the opposite of cold calling, which is the established “hands-up” practice that is widely used, so let’s just call it hands-up, for our purposes here.
4. Where is the debate about the potential harms and inequities for students who are not naturally inclined to speak in class, of spending all their time in hands-up contexts?
5. How do we know that it is not painful, demeaning, and anxiety-provoking for our reluctant hands-up students, to not have a scaffolded and supported way to speak in class? Just because a practice has been the norm for a long time, does mean it is working well or fairly for all students. It also does not mean that fairer alternatives are not available for consideration.
6. How many students simply never speak in class, and why is that OK? Acquiring oral language skills across a range of discourse genres is important for academic success (they are part of the curriculum) and for psychosocial functioning in everyday life. Hands-up classrooms risk playing into the well-established Matthew Effect when it comes to oral language skills – the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer.
Apologies - I left a word out in Point 5 above. It obviously should read:
DeleteJust because a practice has been the norm for a long time, does NOT mean it is working well or fairly for all students. It also does not mean that fairer alternatives are not available for consideration.
PART 2
ReplyDelete7. Yes, there are other ways that teachers can check for understanding, including the use of mini-whiteboards, and I strongly encourage those practices. But they are not always the most efficient and seamless way to check for understanding and speaking in class is an important skill for all students, not just those who are already confident and proficient in doing so.
8. The “soft bigotry of low expectations” is a slippery slope for students who initially find anything difficult, whether it’s learning to swim, learning to read, or giving brief spoken responses in class. We counter this by moving in incremental steps towards mastery, so that opportunities for success are on the table for all students, not just those who are already comfortable. I do not believe, as some suggest, that it’s just enough that some students are at school. Attendance is certainly a bigger win for some students than for others. But our responsibilities to them do not stop there.
9. From the moment we are born, we are learning to tolerate and adapt to different types of discomfort – physical, social, emotional, and cognitive. Dealing with the unpredictability of the world around us is made easier when children learn in classrooms with routines that are clam, consistent, and supportive. We need to be able to have conversations about ways of supporting students in tolerating and dealing with the challenges and opportunities of learning in classrooms, and this blog is part of that endeavour.
10. Students who are electively/selectively mute require an interdisciplinary assessment, with a team-based plan in place to support their learning. Teachers should not be left to navigate such spaces on their own. Options I have heard teachers describe include the use of mini-whiteboards / post-it notes, yes/no or multiple-choice cards the the student can hold up, and / or the use of nonverbal response systems. If the student agrees, a trusted peer can be asked to read their response aloud.
The proof-reading gods are not with me today ;-)
DeletePoint 9 above should of course read:
9. From the moment we are born, we are learning to tolerate and adapt to different types of discomfort – physical, social, emotional, and cognitive. Dealing with the unpredictability of the world around us is made easier when children learn in classrooms with routines that are CALM, consistent, and supportive.
No student is electively/selectively mute. They are situationally mute. The situation causes them to be mute. They don't choose to be mute.
DeleteWe understand what you mean by cold calling. We still know the harm it does regardless of how well it is done. We mask and fawn so of course there are comments about how "well" it is works in classroom. We can only mask & fawn for so long before we break. We experience extreme anxiety, and no amount of exposure therapy is going to change that (and this article isn't how you do exposure therapy anyway). May be talk to us/our parents/pay attention to whether we look like we want to speak or are fine without speaking. So we force students to mask & fawn and eventually break for efficiency??? We are saying it harms us, that there are students like us & we know how they are reacting as we would do the same. Why don't you listen to us?? Regardless of how safe & supportive you think your classroom is, we will never feel safe there. Our brains & bodies are on continual alert.
I’ve used cold calling regularly for 3 years and I’ve never had trouble with students not wanting to participate. Some of my neurodiverse students actually loved being called on from the start, so neurodiverse students not being comfortable to answer in this fashion is definitely not a blanket kind of issue. Where I have had shy, reluctant or anxious students, I used different methods to safely and slowly allow them to participate in call calling. Of course I set up a whole class team culture where they felt safe to have a go but
ReplyDeletethe particular things that I initially did do for students that I knew were not comfortable was
- ask them to answer a question that I knew they could answer
- deliberately create a question that is catered for them
- ask a question that requires a one word response
- give them a multiple choice question
- give a sentence stem to prompt and support their response
- leave the answer on the board while I ask the question and prompt them to look there if they appear stuck
- initially choose them for cold calling only in the subject they feel confident in
- do a pair share before asking them so that they can first hear the answer from someone else
- when another student answers incorrectly, I make a big deal about how wonderful their thinking is and how impressed I am, so that they get used to seeing other students making errors and it being received positively.
It usually only takes a few weeks to get all students on board. When you are fast to give positive feedback, have high expectations for participations and work hard to reframe errors as a natural part of learning, cold calling can allow shy or anxious students a voice in the classroom for the very first time.
We mask & fawn and eventually break. You don't understand what is like for us. Asking simple questions - leaves us feeling stupid, ruminating over why you asked us a simple question but others harder questions, or how the rest of the class thinks of us when we were given a simple question. Regardless of how safe & supportive you think your classroom is, we will never feel safe. Of course some ND students will be fine with cold calling. For others is causes harm even if students appear to be "thriving". ND parenting FB groups are filled with posts about how teaching approaches are breaking their "thriving" child. Also keep in mind, some students don't respond to praise. For them it is pressure & they eventually break under it. Please listen to us & stop using cold calling. There is no way to do it without causing us harm (the harm most likely won't show till we are out of your classroom).
DeleteThat is not my experience at all. It may be the experience for you, but you can’t really speak to the experiences of the children in my class that have done just fine with cold calling and thrived in my class.
DeleteI guarantee that some of your "thriving" students are high masking & you are doing them harm. Just because they appear to be thriving doesn't mean they are. All those commenting against cold calling are doing so because we were those "doing fine" students. We appear fine in class & break later on. Majority of your students will be fine but there likely is at least one student every year you are harming.
DeleteI’m pretty certain they’re actually fine and thriving, like I said. If they’re happy, making friends, and progressing strongly with their learning, I’d say they're surviving cold calling without harm. One of the best ways of breaking anxiety is supporting students to gently face it. Luckily most educators are beginning to realise that all neurodiverse students are not the same as it is absolute discrimination to exclude them from anything just based off a diagnosis. I’ll continue to have high expectations for all of my students and whilst I thank you for sharing your personal experiences, I won’t use them to inform my practice. I’ll continue to read from experts and studies as they arise, to inform my practice and will continue cold calling all students safely, as it has changed my classroom culture and participation for the better.
DeleteJust to add - not cold calling on students just because they’re autistic is far more likely to harm imo.
DeleteThank you for writing this piece Dr Snow. I think it’s a conversation that needs to happen before cold calling becomes something it’s not, and from some of the comments here and online, maybe that’s already happened. I feel like this happens often in education when we’re not given proper training before we start implementing things in our classrooms. We did find implementing cold calling, we didn’t have enough understanding and so we didn’t do it because we were worried about our students. After some feedback from Bronwyn Ryie Jones in a playbook pd we did our research and we’re doing way better. Some things we had to address included, cold calling isn’t a behaviour management strategy, or a way to catch kids off guard, upset or shame. We don’t pull out sticks and ask a question. It’s deliberate and planned for, with adjustments made for particular students. Lots of work needs to happen before cold calling is successful including, routines, expectations, teacher knowledge of students and questioning techniques.
ReplyDeleteThank you for the thoughtful response. I appreciate this conversation. That said, I want to gently highlight a core misunderstanding.
ReplyDeleteWhen people say cold calling is only harmful when it’s “not done right,” it assumes that if a student is triggered, something must have gone wrong in the delivery. But that doesn’t reflect how trauma — especially PTSD — works.
I don’t just react that way in a classroom. I don’t like being called on at the dinner table with my own family. It’s not about safety — my nervous system can’t always tell the difference.
And that’s not just a feeling — it’s the clinical definition of PTSD. It’s a neurological condition in which the body responds to perceived threat even when the person knows they are safe.
My PTSD is tied to failure. I live with a deep-seated belief that I am a failure — even though I know I’m not. Praise and kindness feel unsafe. The moment I start to believe I might be good at something, I lose the only defence I’ve ever had: hypervigilance. Expecting the worst is how I stay safe.
So when I’m called on — even if I respond well — I still walk away calling myself stupid. The humiliation doesn’t come from the teacher. It comes from me. That’s PTSD.
I also live with ADHD and slow processing. When I’m focused — truly engaged — I often go still. I may look blank, but I’m learning. Cold calling, pair work, or whiteboard activities often disrupt that. These strategies assume fast, visible responses equal engagement — but they pull me out of my process.
I’ve sat in on Year 3 phonics lessons that moved so fast I couldn’t keep up — and I’m a trained literacy teacher. If it overwhelms me, imagine what it does to kids with slow processing or anxiety.
You also asked, “How do we know it’s not painful for students who never speak?”
We ask.
If you asked me, I’d say: I never put my hand up. Not because I want to and can’t — but because I’m terrified of being called on. When someone else answers, I feel relief.
“Thank god, I can keep thinking without fear.”
Forcing me to speak doesn’t scaffold my success — it removes one of the few conditions that makes learning possible for me: safety.
I’m not saying cold calling doesn’t work for some. I’m saying it doesn’t work for everyone. And in a truly inclusive classroom, that should matter.
I’m sharing this not because I’m broken. I’m successful. I function well. If you met me, you’d never know any of this — unless I told you.
And that’s the point.
Cold calling is just as important for teachers as it is for students. Even the most polished of teachers will admit to calling on those who they know will 'have the right answer' in order to move a class along. But this is an inaccurate representation of learning. The only way to ensure you are seeing an honest representation of understanding is through randomised selection. For graduate teachers, this is one less concept to focus on during teaching, and removes the cognitive load.
ReplyDeleteEven the term 'cold calling' has such negative connotations. Don't assume that what's happening is a sudden, passive agressive 'ambush' from teachers. What may look like a cold call will in fact often be a deliberate and well-thought out question that has in fact been:
- explicitly taught
- given opportunity for oral rehearsal during partner turn and talk
- scaffolded with a sentence stem
- established as part of a whole-school teaching and learning model
- part of classroom practice through the establishing of expectations and routines
- included in student IEP's as a goal with associated strategies to support this
In my own classroom, additional support is given to those who may struggle with options such as:
- picking 3 sticks at a time and warning a student that they will be asked in 2 turns
- giving students the option to pass, but always returning to them after several more turns
- Recommencing a turn and talk so that a student who 'doesn't know' can re-rehearse with their partner, often supported by myself
Cold calling is a skill and needs extreme sensitivity from teachers, in my opinion. Some of the training videos that accompany a certain well known book (raised eyebrows) don't show it done with any notable amount of skill and, it could be argued, shows how NOT to do it.
ReplyDeleteIn 2013 a piece of research was written by Elise Dallimore et al. concluding that cold-calling can promote equitable participation if done thoughtfully and consistently, but it requires clear norms, supportive teaching practices, and sensitivity to student needs—particularly for those who may be more vulnerable to anxiety or slower processing. The paper is available here https://www.researchgate.net/publication/258153531_Impact_of_Cold-Calling_on_Student_Voluntary_Participation
Michelle Heelis
I looks like this was research done with adults at University? I'm not sure it's applicable. There are very different power dynamics at Uni. Not to mention everyone choose to be there and participate and we can probably assume they were academically proficient.
DeleteAgree completely with those commenting against cold calling. Those commenting their experiences using cold calling are only positive don't understand what it is like for us. Of course there will be ND students that are fine with cold calling, but for others it is harmful. ND parenting FB groups are full with posts & comments of teaching practices breaking their kids even though they appear fine in the classroom. Even if you think you are helping these students by only asking questions they know, you don't understand the reactions they are having in their bodies and minds. Do you not think they work out that you asked them a simple question in front of the class & that can cause a flood of negative thoughts?? Leaving them feeling stupid and experiencing other negative thoughts. We ruminate over these situations over & over again, thinking about what we should have said, why you asked us a simple question, what other students think of us etc. That the thought of having to speak in class raises our anxiety and we are unable to learn. We are masking & fawning if we are appearing to be "fine" and will eventual break. Regardless our how safe and supportive you think your classroom is, our nervous systems won't ever feel safe in your classroom. Please don't respond by saying you are preparing us for the real world/teaching us to handle discomfort. We are facing fears continually all day, every day. We know discomfort well as we continually experience it. Our nervous systems aren't going to change so in the real world we will make choice that suit our nervous systems - we won't require the oral skills that others do, job interviews are being done by AI, we can be entrepreneurs, we can work from home or choose careers/jobs with low social interactions. With other disabilities there are accommodations & realistic expectations - why are you expecting us to have/develop the same skills as others when our nervous systems aren't going to change??? Why is OK that some students don't speak in class - because we are all different, there are a various ways to communicate and for own mental health. If you pay attention you will pick up whether a student is fine with not speaking or whether they want to say something & can help them develop that confidence. Listen to us - it is harming some students in every classroom regardless of how well you are doing it, regardless of whether your students appear to be fine. Why do you want our anxiety so high we can't learn, why you do you us to have to mask & fawn to get through the school day, why do you want to push us to breaking point??? Why won't you listen to us - we are adults now, we know the harm cold calling does to some students, we know we appeared fine to teachers, we know our nervous systems won't change, we know what is like in the real world & cold calling doesn't help prepare us for the real world. I was an ideal student & seen as "thriving" in school till I broke and could no longer attend school. Do you not realise that your students eventually are unable to attend due to teaching approaches like cold calling??? Facts are that you are harming some students regardless of how well you are doing it. Please stop causing harm to us. Please don't do exposure therapy on us, it doesn't work.
ReplyDeleteThanks for this thoughtful post. I just wanted to share that cold calling has actually been really beneficial in my own classroom. When used carefully and with clear expectations, it helps keep all students engaged—not just the ones who always have their hands up. I’ve noticed that students start to come more prepared and feel a stronger sense of responsibility for their learning, knowing that anyone might be asked to contribute.
ReplyDeleteIt’s also been a great way to check for understanding across the whole room, rather than relying on a handful of vocal students. I totally get the concern about causing anxiety, but I’ve found that if I frame cold calling as a normal part of our learning routine (and make sure it’s low-stakes), most students respond really positively. It feels more inclusive in the long run, and encourages quieter students to find their voice too.
Appreciate you starting this conversation—it's an important one!
ReplyDeleteCold calling has been a real game changer in my classroom. When it’s done well—within a supportive, well-structured lesson—it’s one of the most effective ways to keep students engaged. It helps me respond to what’s happening in the moment and keeps everyone on their toes. My class is no longer dominated by the same few voices; now, everyone has a chance to contribute and feel successful. Sure, if it’s done poorly it won’t work, but when it’s used respectfully and purposefully, it boosts confidence and genuinely lifts engagement across the board.
Thank you Dr Snow. I am eternally grateful that my neurodivergent (autism and ADHD) child has been fortunate to be taught in classrooms where cold calling is used (always warmly, like you describe). It has helped make her less anxious and she loves that she gets to contribute, just like the other kids - sometimes giving correct answers and sometimes needing some extra practice. But she will not put her hand up because she knows other kids are faster & more confident. I agree with you that 'hands-up' classrooms are just perpetuating exclusion and favour the kids who are confident to speak. I hadn't heard of the Matthew Effect but it's so true! Thanks again.
ReplyDeleteYes! My son is autistic and ADHD and never raised his hand because he’s quiet and raising hands feels like a completion to him - who is the teacher going to pick? Just another way for him not to be chosen. But cold calling allows him to participate in a way where there is no competition and he is able to participate. I hope teachers in the future would not exclude calling on him just because of his diagnosis, as surely that’s another form of discrimination. All students are unique and have worries and things they’re not comfortable with.
DeleteIn my experience and research, cold calling is an effective tool when used by a teacher who fosters a safe, trusting environment. It encourages participation from all students, regardless of ability, and helps those who thrive on feeling successful and supported. It is important to assess some students' readiness before involving them but that is just a select few. Allowing students to sit through an entire class without being called on or checked for understanding seems far more unfair. Cold calling ensures everyone has the chance to engage, providing valuable insights into student comprehension and creating a more dynamic classroom.
ReplyDeleteI couldn’t agree more with the points made in this article about cold-calling. It’s an incredibly effective way to ensure every student is actively involved in the learning process, regardless of how confident they are. As the article rightly points out, *“cold-calling is always done to provide opportunities to contribute and to be heard in the classroom,”* and this is exactly what makes it such a game-changer for creating an inclusive environment. When done with care, cold-calling not only boosts student engagement but also gives teachers immediate, invaluable feedback, helping everyone grow. This approach truly makes a difference in fostering a classroom where every voice counts.
ReplyDeleteOk, let’s get one thing straight - there is good cold calling and bad cold calling.
ReplyDeleteDr Snow’s thinking here is 100% accurate. Cold calling changed my practice and changed the dynamic in my classroom. No longer do I have disengaged and unheard kids. Do I use cold calling on classes that I don’t know? Absolutely not. I would be horrified at the thought of adding anxiety to anyone. Do I cold call my regular classes? 100% of the time, and all kids are engaged in the learning. I have heaps of neurodiverse students in my classes both now and in the past. I am careful in my questioning. Guess what! There is such a thing as a soft cold call. Try a think pair share or a mini white board first. I don’t pick students that can’t answer or are anxious. That would suit no one.
Kids thrive in a cold calling environment. It is the only fully inclusive way to formatively assess students. To ignore kids because of neurodiversity or my discomfort is not inclusive. To not cold call relies on either not checking for understanding or relying on the same volunteers who essentially then become stigmatised as the ‘class geek’. Good cold calling is inclusive, supportive and helps children to experience success. It actually improves their self-esteem! Try cold calling without the sticks - just ask kids questions, bounce it around and watch the room come to life.
As for the comment about exposure therapy…I’m sorry you feel that this was your experience. I am not using cold calling for any therapeutic benefit and neither will most teachers. We teacher and then we check whether kids have got it. And guess what, it works rather well and kids get multiple chances and opt outs in my classroom.
Cold calling is inclusive teaching. Thank you Dr Snow’s for reminding us all of this .
I couldn’t agree more. Another teacher asked me the other day what my ‘secret sauce’ was for always having full attendance. Even from students who are dubbed school refusers. There is no secret sauce. Students enter each lesson knowing exactly what to expect. Every session is carefully planned to the minute, ensuring that they experience success. This predictability and structured approach provide students with a sense of security and confidence in their ability to contribute and succeed. Cold-calling is a consistent practice in my classroom, and all students, including those who may struggle in other settings, participate without hesitation, even if they don’t know the answer to the question they will happily reply ‘I don’t know’. This is true inclusion.
Delete“If there’s any evidence that when cold calling is used by warm, skilled teachers… and psychological harm accrues, I’d be first in line to read it.”
ReplyDeleteHere we are — adults with lived experience, saying harm does occur. Not because it was done poorly, but because cold calling itself triggered trauma, disrupted thinking, or fed shame — even when done gently, by teachers we trusted.
This isn’t just opinion. Lived experience is valid evidence, especially when it aligns with trauma-informed and neuroaffirming approaches that caution against forced participation.
Cold calling comes from 1950s compliance-based behaviourist models. It wasn’t designed for safety, inclusion, or neurodivergent learners.
Saying “cold calling works when it’s done well” is like saying, “mud pie is delicious — if it’s made by the right chef.” If someone says it made them sick, the response becomes, “Well, then it wasn’t made properly.”
That’s circular logic — it makes the practice immune to criticism. Any harm is blamed on delivery, never the method itself. But if a technique only “works” when done perfectly and still causes harm even when done kindly, then the method itself deserves scrutiny.
This! Ironic that the response to neurodivergent people commenting (quite eloquently) on the experience of cold calling is to tell them that cold calling is necessary so that neurodivergent students can learn to speak up and have a voice. Lots of neurodivergent people speaking up, but doesn't seem anyone is listening.
DeleteI’m a teacher, not a therapist. I want my kids to learn in a safe place. Cold calling allows me to do this and enables me to differentiate and adjust.
ReplyDeleteIt is the most important, inclusive and supportive thing that I do in my classroom. The key is having good questioning techniques that build support and trust.
This conversation reminds me that differentiation is one of the most difficult things we teachers do. From "The Devil is in the Details of Differentiation: Meditations from a Mere Mortal, Merely Teaching." (https://highfiveliteracy.com/2024/10/06/the-devil-is-in-the-details-of-differentiation-meditations-from-a-mere-mortal-merely-teaching/)
ReplyDelete"One student, Neveah, always arrived late, sometimes as much as a whole hour (this, in half-day kindergarten!). With a father behind bars and a mother battling drug addiction, just making it to school at all was an accomplishment. She had a ritual: wrestling with the heavy door, stepping over the threshold, stopping to assess the lay of the land, and then racing over to collapse into my outstretched arms, always flashing a wide “I made it” grin. Once again, I made it. I will never forget those precious, perilous moments. . .
Differentiation matters. But it’s a matter of dosage and degree as well as desirability. Kids have preferences, and sometimes theirs don’t align with those of their parents or their teachers. When a professional obligation bumps up against a personal reality, we need to take stock of the students in our care as well as the state of our profession and extend grace when our grandiose expectations fall flat for both. Forgiveness means giving up all hope for a better past (who can we credit for that great line?), so let’s just work on a better future within the realm of what’s humanly possible."
@Clive_Hill has an excellent thread on Twitter that addresses anxiety concerns around cold calling - I couldn’t have said it any better https://x.com/clive_hill/status/1908760379653607701?s=46&t=RELSNB-_Aypsal2xIYfnjQ
ReplyDeleteI asked my 9 year old about cold calling in her classroom. Her response ‘I love it. I get to have say now too. The same girls don’t always get to answer and if I don’t get the answer right, my teacher helps me’.
ReplyDeleteI’m a primary school teacher and used cold calling last year with my Prep students to great effect. Establishing the right conditions and culture in the classroom prior to using the technique is essential, and all my students were able to experience success in a safe and supportive way. If students didn’t know an answer, that was fine! We’d go to other students to answer, then I’d always go back to the original student so they could respond after hearing from others. I also would use cold calling when I knew students could answer successfully, because they had the knowledge from previously taught content to do so, or could apply their background knowledge to the concept/skill being discussed. Combine cold calling with adequate think time prior (including turn and talk opportunities) and the right type of cold calling techniques, and it is a highly useful questioning technique that checks students understanding and makes all students accountable.
ReplyDeleteI use cold calling to interact with the whole class. Not using cold calling because a small minority feel negatively impacted by it is just plain neglectful of the majority. Cold calling makes my teaching responsive and therefore supports the learning of all. So long as I am mindful of the small minority that are not comfortable I can adjust and cater for these students without compromising the learning of everyone else. It is simple! We as teachers cannot dismiss any evidence based pedagogy based on a few ‘lived experiences’. Evidence trumps emotion on this one im afraid. So long as we, as professionals, are mindful of those that cannot grow into a cold calling classroom, and most actually can, then we are doing the best job that we can.
ReplyDeleteIf we have to throw a small minority under the bus for the good of the majority, then so be it, right?
DeleteI've got three horses in this race: I'm neurodivergent, I'm a teacher and I have two neurodivergent children. I wish I had learned about cold calling when I was at uni. For years I knew there were kids in my classes who were being excluded because they wouldn't put their hands up and I knew that wasn't fair. I've had to hone my skills to get cold calling right and my students not only thrive on it academically, but they love it too. I had to do research in my area to find a school that uses it so my kids would benefit from it as well.
ReplyDeleteIt's not up to teachers to decide what neurodivergent children don't need in their lives ahead - that's just good old fashioned discrimination. I thought we had moved past that kind of thinking.
Running Is Physically Damaging to Students. Discuss.
ReplyDeleteRunning improves health.
Running builds resilience.
Running is evidence-based.
So at our school every student runs each morning no matter what, no excuses no exceptions.
The PE teacher explains:
“All kids love running—just look at them in the playground!”
“This isn’t punitive—we’re not punishing kids by making them run laps like the old days.”
“This is 2025 Science of Running. We understand heart rate zones, the balance between high- and low-intensity pacing, and how to build fitness safely.”
“It’s for their long-term health. They’ll thank me later for a life full of fitness.”
And with pride:
“I once had a student with no legs rolling around the oval, keeping up with the others. Everyone can run with the right mindset.”
One student has a heart condition.
The doctor has provided clear instructions:
No strenuous activity.
No running.
But the teacher says:
“We’ll just start small—just to the cones and back.”
“He’ll build strength over time.”
“He can do more than he thinks. He just needs encouragement.”
The student trusts the teacher.
Wants to be good.
Wants to belong.
So he runs.
Every day, the damage builds.
He says nothing. He smiles. He pushes through. He trusts and believes the teacher.
Until one day, he doesn’t come to school.
And the teacher says:
“He was doing fine last week.”
“He just needs to build resilience.”
“Kids today give up too easily.”
This is what happens when belief in a method replaces responsiveness to real needs.
When kindness is used to package compliance.
When harm is reframed as inclusion.
When 'science' is used to justify ignoring a diagnosis.
Even the most modern, well-intentioned practice can cause real damage if the student isn't ready.
Oh I forgot to add that running is the only way to measure fitness. If they don't run there is no other way for us to be sure they are fit.
DeleteIt is perfectly reasonable for a teacher to call upon a student to see what they know, and do not. This is formative assessment. When teaching explicitly, cold call to retrieve information is not used unless something has first been learned. Also, teachers know their students best. Warn a student who is feeling anxious or call on them second, so they have just heard the correct answer. Think of a magician's hat. You won't get anything out unless you put something in first. Cold calling is used when students have previously pair-shared (for safety and to rehearse an answer) and repeated the new learning many times. How else do we know whether students are taking learning to long term memory?
ReplyDeleteI’ve been doing some thinking and reflecting on this. Teachers are not psychologists, they're teachers.They can only monitor and respond to the behaviour that they see. If a child (neurodiverse or not) is able to participate in class through cold calling and appears relaxed about it and willing to contribute, then that is what the teacher takes on board. We are heading into murky territory when we are asked to exclude neurodiverse students from a class-wide response based on an assumption or belief that they’re simply not capable of this level of participation without suffering psychological harm because of their diagnosis. It is the teacher’s responsibility (even in classes that do not use cold calling) to create a classroom environment that is calm, routine driven and safe for all students to participate freely. Autistic children are not cookie cutters of each other, they don’t all think and feel the same way. Autistic students do not all require identical accomodations and I’d hope an autistic child is never excluded from any classroom activity based simply on their diagnosis. I have had many autistic students that have eagerly raised their hands to answer questions. I appreciate the comments from neurodiverse adults on this blog as it is important that we hear their views and take them on board, but they do not speak for all neurodiverse people. If an autistic child is enrolled in my classroom, I am going to have the same high expectations for them as I would any other child and I will use my knowledge of that child to decide on the best ways for them to find success in the classroom. Is there a risk that the child is masking and looks relaxed and okay, when in actual fact they’re feeling anxious? Of course there is but that still would not change my approach because I can only make decisions on the behaviour I do see. I won’t exclude base on a what if. There’s also the real possibility that a neurotypical student is also hiding their anxiety and participates simply to mask their fear or fit in with their peers, but if we can’t see what is not visible. This is true for any classroom activity. If we start excluding children from being called upon in this manner because of their diagnosis then what else in the classroom will they also be excluded from, because potentially there are dozens of events each day that could cause them to feel worried or anxious. There is also a lot of evidence that tells us that completely avoiding a certain situation or event that causes anxiety, is not a good strategy - we are likely assisting in this becoming a life-long trigger for anxiety. Feelings of repeated success with a warm and supportive teacher is likely to reduce the anxiety. I would absolutely hate to think that my autistic son has ever been in a classroom where his teacher saw his diagnosis and instantly made modifications or accommodations based on that. I’d be horrified if they deliberately never called in him for an answer. I’d hope they’d get to know him, and assist and support him in the areas they could see him struggling with and do all that they can to ensure he is participating in the class like any other student.
ReplyDeleteYou don't have to guess, you could ask, or provide an alternative or opt-out option. Why must all students participate in the class in the same way?
DeleteThanks Pam for this post - it is clearly a topic that lots of stakeholders are thinking about at the moment, given the lively debate it has triggered. This is also why I presented on the topic at a conference recently, with a particular focus on how variations of Cold Calling could be used to support students with language difficulties and/or Developmental Language Disorder to participate as much they have capacity to. The main examples I used were dialogic discussions about texts. In my experience, the students I have worked with as a speech pathologist overwhelmingly want to participate in these rich discussions and share their thoughts, ideas and opinions with the group, but sometimes need support and scaffolding to do this. I think cold-calling, when used purposively, responsively and appropriately in a lesson cycle, is one tool that can help create the conditions needed for students with language difficulties to have their voice heard in the classroom. In this presentation I looked at some existing frameworks that utilise cold-calling/calling on non-volunteers/'equity sticks', and identified that many of them have built in variations of cold-calling that might be helpful when working with students with language difficulties. These variations could fit into the below broad categories:
ReplyDelete1. Purposively calling on students (rather than using random selection): this allows teacher to use their knowledge of students to call on them at a time when they will be most likely to feel they can be successful.
2. Providing preparation time: you can inform students in advance (in subtle ways) that you would like to hear their response, so they have time to prepare to share.
3. Provide opportunities to practice/develop ideas prior to cold-calling: e.g. all students get a designated period of time to make some notes first, pair share with a peer to flesh out their thinking or practice their responses, or generate a written response from a provided sentence scaffold (which they could then read out loud).
4. Soft questioning techniques: teachers can demonstrate they are genuinely curious about the student and what they think/feel/believe about a topic - it is not a gotchya moment.
5. Extending the conversation: Cabel and Tucker talk about this in their 'Strive for Five' text, but Cold Calling can provide an opportunity for teachers to have an extended on-topic interaction with a student to provide additional oral language support for children who may need it. Teachers can extend (e.g. ask a more complex question requiring higher level language) or scaffold (e.g. ask a multiple-choice question) the student's learning in these interactions as required, which can be a quick but powerful activity for supporting language development.
Will the above variations work for every student? No - of course not, and as a practitioner I would never claim that. However, they are likely to be very valuable for many students, particularly if we are focused on improving the learning experience for students with language difficulties. For students who experience additional barriers with this technique (such as overwhelming anxiety), schools should obviously work with the student and the team around the student to identify how they can best support them to achieve their goals as a learner. There are obviously other response systems that can be used which may be a good fit for the learner at that point in time that allow teachers to formatively assess whether their teaching is effective, e.g. choral responses, mini-whiteboard routines, paired tasks etc. We also need to consider students who are pre-verbal, non-verbal or use AAC to support their communication, and think about how we can best support their use of AAC in class discussions.
ReplyDeleteThis is obviously a nuanced topic. How you would introduce this technique to a group of fresh-faced preps who are eager to share with the class, is potentially very different to how you would utilise the technique with a Year 7 student who has had a very negative experience of school so far, and is at risk of disengaging from school. This is where we need strong support systems around students (which may require a multidiciplinary team), to help give these students the best education possible at that point in time. Teacher cannot do that alone.
As a speech pathologist, I think we should be focused on working with teachers, and thinking about what our role is in supporting teachers with the aspects of Curriculum, Pedagogy and Assessment that will be impactful for the students we are likely to work with. For the overwhelming majority of students I have worked with, I would be professionally concerned if schools completely dropped cold-calling or variations of cold calling, as this would likely lead to a poorer learning experience for many of them.
As one of the lived experience participants here — someone who was genuinely damaged by this practice — I want to clarify that I’m not saying we should drop cold calling altogether. None of this is black and white. I was simply responding to the blog post’s central question with honesty and transparency.
ReplyDeleteIt seems clear — from the comments — that even advocates acknowledge cold calling can cause psychological harm in some circumstances. Even if we only consider the cases where it’s “done badly,” harm still happens. And many of us here have shared that we were harmed even when it was done with warmth and structure — we just masked or fawned through it at the time. That was my experience too.
So we have a dilemma.
If we know there are situations where cold calling causes harm — even if it’s only for a minority — do we keep using it anyway? Do we say that risk is justified by the benefits to the majority? What’s our threshold for that? And do we really believe, as a profession, that there is only one effective way to check for understanding?
I just ran an analysis of the comments on this post using ChatGPT:
15+ people describe harm to themselves or their children — even when cold calling was done “correctly.”
10+ educators support it but include caveats, opt-outs, or adjustments — which is, in itself, an admission of potential harm.
Multiple commenters call out the “No True Scotsman” fallacy — where any negative outcome is explained away as “it wasn’t done properly.” But if the method only works when done perfectly, and still risks harming vulnerable students, that’s not a robust or inclusive practice.
ChatGPT also gave me 30 trauma- and neurodivergent-friendly alternatives for checking understanding — so we’re not out of options. The question is: do we have the will to change?
Because if the answer to “What if this harms some students?” is “Do it anyway,” then we’re no longer talking about inclusion — we’re talking about control (which cold calling was originally invented for).
I think most practices in education have the potential to cause harm in some form. I have seen cases where trauma informed practice has been used as a rationale for delaying student learning for years, as schools focus on 'building a relationship' with a vulnerable child rather than supporting their learning while building a relationship. The end result = children going to secondary school reading at a pre prep level. This drastically reduces the likelihood of education being a protective factor in their lives. Under your definition, trauma informed practice couldn't be considered a robust or inclusive practice then, because of its potential to be misinterpreted. There might be cases where practices are inherently harmful ( I don't think Trauma Informed Practice fits in this category), such as whole language and balanced literacy, which have had a devastating impact on hundreds and thousands of lives (particularly the most vulnerable students). A poor attempt at Systematic Synthetics Phonics instruction can also be harmful, but it doesn't mean the overall approach is inherently harmful. It also doesn't mean we shouldn't use it. Instead we should strive to constantly improve our implementation of it to meet the needs of all learners. This is why education is so high stakes, and why we should carefully consider any decision we make.
DeleteI have seen many wonderful teachers use variations of cold calling as one of their techniques, which when coupled with brilliant explicit teaching, has transformed the experiences of the neurodiverse students in their classroom. Like you have identified, there are also other means of checking for understanding which may be better suited to some students at a point of time, and the benefits of using these other techniques may outweigh the potential benefits of using cold calling for those students at that point in time. I think this is part of differentiating and adapting support for different students, which should be guided by the teacher's knowledge of students specific learning needs in that particular lesson, and where appropriate, be collaborated on with the learner and the team around them. Teachers have a tough job of balancing these responsive practices, but maybe there's a way we can work together to support them. Meeting the needs of learners as best you can with the resources you have is clearly very nuanced, technical and challenging, and far easier said than done. I'm also not sure that it's something Chat GPT can give us answers for, and I would be concerned if professionals relied on Chat GPT to identify trauma informed or neurodivergent friendly practices. Professionals should be going to any existent research that's relevant, their training and professional learning , and then reflect on how this research does/does not relate to the students in front of them, which includes taking into consideration the experiences of the students in front of them. Hopefully we can all agree that's what we should expect from any service based professional.
By sheer Coincidence,, I attended a 3h online leadership workshop today and the facilitator used cold calling. It was an extremely valuable way of engaging all of us. Participants were all unfamiliar to each other. I appreciate the arguments that nany may have that As to why it worked in this context,- we are adults and in positions of leadership. But it was an effective, inclusive, engaging in valuable way to run their session.
ReplyDeleteThank you so much for this post Dr. Snow. I have shifted my practices more toward what you've described and have encouraged the teachers I work with to do the same. I'm wondering if you have any suggestions or resources for using this technique with multilingual learners, particularly those who are new to the language or have lower levels of proficiency. Thanks!
ReplyDelete