From Doing to Learning: Writing, Thinking, and Understanding

One of the greatest joys of this process has been the conversations. Teachers and students have welcomed me into their classrooms with openness and trust, and our discussions have been equally generous and insightful. This culture of dialogue, where wonderings are met with reflection and opportunity, is a bright spot in itself. It reflects our shared belief that we are already strong educators and learners, and we can continue to grow together.

When we plan, we give shape to an intended curriculum. In our context, this sits in Stage 1 of our planners (learning goals) and Stage 2 (assessment criteria). From this, we design the taught curriculum - Stage 3 - where sequences of learning engagements and classroom experiences bring those goals to life. But between these stages, a gap often appears. This is not unique to us; it is a familiar challenge across schools.

The Balcony View

In conversations with colleagues, one theme that surfaced is how easily we, as teachers, can carry the “big picture” in our heads without sharing it with our students. As one colleague admitted: “I know where we’re going, but I keep forgetting to tell them.”  When we remember to give students that balcony view - where they can see not only the next step but the direction of travel - their sense of purpose and motivation changes profoundly.

This week, I saw both ends of the spectrum. In some classrooms, students spoke with real clarity about what they were learning and why it mattered. In others, students could explain the activity, but not always the big picture learning intention behind it. Sometimes they described knowing the practical skill but not the conceptual “why.” 

Why Would We Not Share?

Throughout my career, I have been struck by how often teachers are hesitant to share assessment criteria or the broader learning with students at the start of the journey. But my question was and remains always, "Why would we not share this with them?" If assessment is to be meaningful, it must be something we do with students, not to them. Making our journey transparent does not diminish the challenge; it merely clarifies it. Ultimately, we aim to integrate assessment into the learning cycle itself, empowering students to visualise success and take greater ownership of their learning. 

Bright Spots 

• Clarity of learning. Many students were able to explain not only what they were doing but also what they were learning, and in some cases, how today’s work built on what had come before.

• Strong modelling and use of vocabulary. Teachers made learning visible by modelling thinking and reinforcing these with precise academic language.

• Feedback that prompted reflection. Learners were challenged to reflect on the gap between intention and impact, to make metacognition explicit, and to apply feedback immediately in their work.

• Positive climates of trust. Structures for accountability, affirmation, and encouragement created environments where students felt safe to engage, take risks, and admit when they were unclear.

Wonderings

• From doing to learning. How do we ensure that all students can articulate not only the task but also the bigger learning intention - moving beyond compliance to clarity of purpose?

• Linking skills to concepts. How might we make visible how practical skills connect to broader concepts so that every task feels purposeful and progressive?

• Progression across years. How can we more systematically track and build progression of skills and concepts across middle school, so that learning feels coherent rather than repetitive?

• Making assessment visible earlier. How might we use success criteria and rubrics as tools within learning, giving students that “balcony view” so they can self-assess, plan next steps, and own their progress?

Emerging Wondering

In many conversations with students over the past weeks, I have noticed a hesitation: “I don’t know how to put it into words.”  This has led me to reflect on the deep relationship between writing and thinking, and whether we are providing students with sufficient opportunities to utilise writing as a tool for clarity.

As an English-medium school, we are all teachers of writing. Of course, this does not mean every subject must teach writing to the same extent or in the same way as English. However, it does mean that across disciplines, students benefit from opportunities to put pencil to paper, engage with recall, articulate their thinking in sentences, and consolidate their understanding. Research consistently shows that the physical and cognitive 'struggle' of writing out thoughts reinforces memory, strengthens coherence, and builds the ability to formulate and communicate complex ideas (Hochman and Wexler, 2025). 

Our curriculum is built on conceptual understanding, and conceptual learning demands articulation. If students cannot yet put their ideas into words, they risk holding onto only fragments of understanding. This is not about forcing writing into spaces where creativity and performance are essential. Instead, it is about recognising that writing itself can be a form of creativity, and one that connects directly to deep thinking.

As Hochman and Wexler (2024) remind us, writing and thinking are indelibly linked. They are the tasks of idea formation. A sentence is not only a structure of language; it is a building block of thought. When students “write ideas into being,” they clarify, extend, and memorialise their thinking. Without structured opportunities to practise this, their understanding can remain tacit - felt but not fully formed.

The Power of Making Thinking Visible reinforces this point:

“Learning is a consequence of thinking … We need to make thinking visible because it provides us with the information we need to plan opportunities that take students’ learning to the next level and enable continued engagement with the ideas being explored.” (Ritchhart & Church, 2020, p. 23, citing Perkins, 1992)

This alignment between writing and thinking suggests that when students say, “I don’t know how to explain it,” it may not be because the thinking is absent, but because we have not provided enough opportunities to practise articulation. As Ritchhart and Church (2020) remind us, “we are as likely to find thinking in the messy process of working through ideas over time as we are in the final product.” In this sense, Hochman and Wexler’s (2024) assertion that “the writing process is a learning process” reinforces the idea that writing does more than record thought; it is a way to develop it. Writing, then, becomes a tool to “advance learning, not merely capture it” (Ritchhart and Church, 2020).

Moving Forward

The challenge for us as educators is to bridge the gap between what is written on paper and what is enacted in practice, while ensuring that students are not merely following tasks but are active partners in the learning journey.

As I continue these classroom visits, my focus is shifting within the question“What are you learning today?” to seeking notions of how we are providing clarity and intention. I want to foreground more deliberately how writing, thinking, and clarity intersect, and how we might embed micro-writing opportunities across the curriculum to honour the fact that clarity of thought is forged in the act of writing.

When we invite students into that bigger picture by making our learning goals, success criteria, and assessment transparent, we move from compliance to clarity. And it is in that shift that agency, engagement, and deeper learning take root.

References

• Hochman, J. C., & Wexler, N. (2025). The Writing Revolution 2.0. Jossey-Bass.

• Ritchhart, R., & Church, M. (2020). The Power of Making Thinking Visible: Practices to Engage and Empower All Learners. Jossey-Bass.