There are few classroom responses more efficient than “I don’t know.” A teacher asks a question. The student looks down, shrugs, and says it. Sometimes it comes quietly. Sometimes it arrives with enough confidence to sound almost definitive: “I don’t know.”

And then comes the decision. You can call on someone else. You can answer the question yourself. You can simplify it until the student has something easy enough to say. Or, you can tell the student, “That’s okay,” and move along.

All of those choices keep the lesson moving, and on a busy Tuesday when twenty-seven other students are waiting, keeping things moving can feel like the right thing to do. The problem is that when the same students routinely get to end difficult thinking with “I don’t know,” the classroom may begin teaching them something we never intended: difficulty is where your participation ends.

Where the Marzano Academies Instructional Model Fits

Elements IXc and IXd of the Marzano Academies Instructional Model ask us to disrupt that pattern. IXc focuses on asking in-depth questions of reluctant learners, while IXd addresses what happens when those learners respond incorrectly. Together, the elements point toward an important idea: reluctant learners should not be protected from complex thinking simply because participating in it is uncomfortable. Element IXc specifically calls for teachers to provide these students with complex questions, equal opportunities to respond, follow-up questions, encouragement, and ways to remain engaged when answering becomes difficult. Element IXd then carries that expectation forward when the response is incorrect by asking teachers to respond positively, temporarily provide space when needed, help students revise their thinking, and use partners strategically.

Ultimately, the goal is not to eliminate “I don’t know.” It is to stop treating it as the end of the interaction.

Use It Tomorrow #1: Change What “I Don’t Know” Means

A student who says “I don’t know” could mean any number of things. I genuinely have no idea. I have an idea, but I’m not sure it is right. I need more time. I don’t understand the question. I would rather say nothing than be wrong in front of everyone. Teachers cannot always know which one they are hearing.

They can, however, change what happens next.

Instead of immediately moving to another student, teachers can respond in a way that keeps the original learner connected to the thinking. They might say, “Okay. Let’s figure out what you do know,” or “You don’t have the whole answer yet. What part can you start with?” If the student has nothing to offer, provide a cue, reframe the question, or allow the learner to hear another idea before returning.

That last part matters. The research associated with element IXd explicitly recognizes that there are moments when a reluctant learner becomes frustrated or embarrassed and should temporarily be allowed to step away from the interaction. But temporarily is different from finished. The folio recommends returning to the learner later rather than allowing the pass to become a permanent exit from the thinking.

That creates a very different classroom norm. “I don’t know” no longer means someone else will do the thinking. It means I may need another pathway into the thinking.

Quick proactive starting point: Before your next lesson, choose one question that requires more than recall and decide what you will say if a reluctant learner responds with “I don’t know.” Planning the follow-up before you need it makes it much easier to resist automatically moving on.

Use It Tomorrow #2: Give Students Something to Come Back To

There is another common classroom moment that deserves attention. A student answers incorrectly. The teacher responds respectfully, calls on someone else, gets the correct answer, and continues teaching.

Nothing particularly negative happened. The student was not embarrassed or criticized. But the student also never got another chance. This is where a small shift can make the original response far more useful. After another student contributes information, return to the first learner. Instead of asking the original question again, ask the learner to do something with what they just heard:

“Does that change any part of your thinking?”

“What would you add to your first answer now?”

“Which part of that explanation helps you rethink yours?”

“Try your answer again with that new information.”

The purpose is not to catch the student being wrong twice. It is to make revision visible as part of learning.

That idea is particularly important in a competency-based classroom. An incorrect response provides information about a learner’s current understanding, but current understanding is not a permanent status. The research associated with element IXd describes misconceptions as a natural part of learning and emphasizes helping students examine their reasoning and revise what they believe they know. When students are invited back into the question, they experience something more valuable than simply hearing the correct answer: they get to participate in changing their own thinking.

Quick proactive starting point: The next time you move from an incorrect response to another student, mentally mark the first learner as “not finished.” After additional thinking enters the conversation, circle back with one question: “What would you change about your answer now?”

Use It Tomorrow #3: Let Students Borrow Confidence Without Borrowing the Thinking

Sometimes a reluctant learner needs more than a teacher prompt. They need to hear themselves think before they are willing to let anyone else hear it. That does not require turning every question into a formal cooperative-learning structure. A brief opportunity to rehearse with one other person can change the risk involved in participating.

Pose the question, but before asking anyone to respond publicly, give students a short opportunity to formulate an answer and test it with a partner. Then change the expectation for sharing. A student might share their own thinking, build from something their partner said, or explain how the two ideas were different.

The IXd folio uses partner thinking specifically as a way for reluctant learners to rehearse and correct responses before public sharing. The research associated with element IXc similarly emphasizes response structures that create opportunities for reluctant learners to participate rather than relying exclusively on students who volunteer.

There is an important distinction here, though. The partner should not become an escape hatch. If the same student always lets someone else speak, we have made participation more comfortable without necessarily making it more equitable. The rehearsal is the support; the learner still needs opportunities to own the thinking.

Quick proactive starting point: Identify one question tomorrow that you would normally pose to the whole class. Give everyone thirty seconds to think independently and another minute to test the idea with a partner before you begin taking responses. As you listen, intentionally notice the students who normally disappear during whole-group questioning and use what you hear to determine who may now be ready to contribute.

Use It Tomorrow #4: Notice Who Gets the Second Question

There is one final habit worth watching, and it may be the hardest because it is usually invisible to the teacher doing it. Pay attention to who gets your follow-up questions.

When a confident learner gives an incomplete response, we often instinctively probe: “Why?” “What makes you think that?” “Can you give me evidence?” “What would happen if...?”

When a reluctant learner gives us anything at all, there can be a temptation to accept the contribution quickly. We may even believe we are encouraging the student by doing so.

But the follow-up question communicates something important: I think there is more thinking in you.

The IXc folio cautions against the pattern in which some students routinely receive complex questions while students for whom lower expectations are held receive fewer opportunities to engage in difficult thinking. This does not mean every student needs identical questions or identical support. In fact, a reluctant learner may need a more carefully constructed pathway into the question. What should remain consistent is the expectation that the learner is capable of going somewhere intellectually meaningful.

Quick proactive starting point: During one class period, keep a small tally beside your lesson notes every time you ask a student a genuine follow-up question. At the end of the lesson, look at the names rather than the number. Who did you push to explain, defend, revise, or extend? More importantly, who did you allow to stop after the first response?

One Final Thought

The reluctant learner may never become the student whose hand shoots up first, and that does not need to be the goal. A more meaningful change may be much quieter. “I don’t know” becomes “Can I think about it?” An incorrect answer becomes something the learner is willing to revise. A student who once waited for someone else to rescue them stays in the conversation for one more question.

Those moments matter because agency is not built by repeatedly telling students that they are capable. Students need opportunities to experience their own capacity. When a teacher stays with a learner long enough for that learner to reconsider, revise, contribute, and eventually succeed, the message is bigger than I believe in you. The student begins collecting evidence for a much more important belief: I can do something when I don’t know what to do yet.

Continue Your Learning

Elements IXc and IXd are two components of the Marzano Academies Competency-Based Instructional Model, which helps teachers intentionally develop student efficacy and agency through practical, research-based instructional practices. If you'd like to explore these ideas more deeply, the Marzano Academies Learning Hub provides access to Dr. Marzano's research folios, Badging Experiences, Virtual Office Hours, coaching opportunities, and classroom resources designed to help teachers build more independent, self-directed learners.