The Classroom Lie Series: Learning Styles

If you, like me, attended a traditional education school prior to starting your career in education, you probably spent at least a little time learning about the concept of learning styles. You might recognize the terms visual, auditory, linguistic, or kinesthetic. You may also have been asked to design lessons with different learning styles embedded. If you were like me, you may have even had a poster of the different learning styles in your classroom. Some of us may even still refer to learning styles at times – in fact, the same day I sat down to start writing this post, even after having done some research, I made reference to being a visual learner as I was adding a visual into some notes I was taking.

The lie that we’re trying to dispel today is that students learn better when taught in their preferred learning style. You might have thought, or maybe still believe, that some students learn better anytime they are provided a visual to support the learning, while others learn better when we bring movement into a learning task. But what does the research say?

Decades of controlled studies have failed to find evidence that a teacher’s effort to match a student’s preferred learning style to instructional practices leads to better outcomes. The research suggests that the best instructional learning style is the one that best fits the content being taught.

In Psychological Science in the Public Interest, Pashler, McDaniel, Rohrer, & Bjork (2008) conducted research on the effects of style-based learning. The study ultimately notes that there is little evidence to support the claim that teaching tailored to students’ learning styles improves student outcomes. Despite this, a 2020 review of educators found that almost 90% of teachers believe their instructional methods should match their students’ preferred learning styles.

If the research doesn’t support this belief, why does it continue to exist? A 2016 study by the National Council on Teacher Quality found that 67% of teacher preparation programs require learning styles in their lesson planning assignments, and nearly 60% of textbooks continue to advise future teachers to take learning styles into account. Cognitive psychologist Daniel Willingham shares:

This is clearly an example of the research-to-practice gap. Sometimes also referred to as the 17-year gap, this idea holds that it takes about 17 years for educational theory to become educational practice. But that gap represents a passive form of adapting to research. When we know better, we should do better. If the research shows that learning styles do not improve outcomes, we have to make a change.

So if learning styles don’t exist, what should we do? Well, first of all, the research shows that we can improve student outcomes by designing the learning modality around what is best suited to the topic. For example, if you were teaching students about plate tectonics, you’d want to include diagrams to help students visualize the process. If you’re teaching phonics and early reading, the combination of auditory and verbal would be a necessity to help build letter-sound correspondence. In physical education, students would need a worked demonstration of a skill – say, practicing throwing techniques – and then a chance to try it on their own. This might involve the teacher modeling the skill, then allowing students to simulate the throwing technique while receiving feedback from the teacher.

There are other, more research-supported, techniques to improve student outcomes. I’ll share a few of those below:

Spaced repetition: This would involve reviewing material at increasing intervals over time. This would be like a spiral review or creating flashcards for practice. Spaced repetition suggests that you might review something an hour later, then the next day, then a few days later, then maybe a week later. Each time a skill is reviewed, the neural pathway to that information is strengthened, making the learning more “sticky.”

Based on the work of Hermann Ebbinghaus – learn more at https://elearningindustry.com/forgetting-curve-combat

Retrieval practice: Actively recalling information strengthens memory and understanding. Ways to incorporate this would be to have students quiz themselves, use low- or no-stakes quizzes for practice, or have students summarize new learning without looking at notes or resources.
Interleaved practice: Mixing different topics or skills into study sessions. In practice, this might mean starting your class with a warm-up that includes a review question from yesterday, last week, and last month. It could also include randomizing the practice questions rather than grouping them by topic.
Elaboration: Explaining and describing concepts in detail. You might put this into practice by having a student explain their thinking to others or share their understanding of a concept with a peer. Or you might use follow-up questions like “why does this work?” or “How is this related to something I already know?”

If you’d like to learn more about this topic, one of the best resources for work around learning styles is Daniel Willingham. One option would be to check out his YouTube explainer titled “Learning Styles Don’t Exist” (I shared this below). You could also dig a little deeper by reading his book, “Why Don’t Students Like School?” I’ve added this title to my To-Read List!

What are your beliefs about learning styles? Were you taught about them in your teacher preparation program? What do you think about this research? Share your thoughts in the comments below.

Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction (Part 2)

In the last post, I shared a bit about Barak Rosenshine and the work he did to bring together research in cognitive science, master teachers, and cognitive supports. His principles were created to support teachers in bringing research theory into regular classroom practice. In the last post, we briefly discussed the first five of the principles: Begin a lesson with a short review, present new material in small steps, ask a large number of questions, provide models, and guide student practice. In case you missed that last post, you can find it here. In the previous post, I highlighted principles 1-5. Today, I’ll pick up where I left off and highlight principles 6-10.

As a reminder, Barak Rosenshine was a teacher and educational researcher who worked to serve as a bridge between educational research and classroom practice. You can link to one of his original articles here. On this blog, we’ve talked again and again about how we move students from novice to mastery. As a classroom teacher, implementing all of Rosenshine’s principles regularly should lead to higher rates of mastery among students in your classroom.

6) Check for student understanding: Checking for student understanding at each point can help students learn material with fewer areas. Earlier this year, we spent some time in our professional learning digging into the input/output cycle for teachers and students. What this calls for is sharing some learning, then asking some questions to ensure students understand. Then we share some more learning and ask more questions. Research says that frequent checks for understanding were noted in the classrooms of the most effective teachers. These moments of checking for understanding could be as simple as solving problems or answering questions, or as complex as thinking aloud about how they’d solve a problem, plan an essay, or identify the main idea of a paragraph. It could also involve having students explain or defend a position or opinion.

By implementing regular checks for understanding, we’re able to build knowledge with our learners and adjust if they aren’t getting it. Without checks for understanding, students might have errors, and we’d have no way of knowing. Providing guided practice with checks ensures our students truly understand the material and have a solid foundation.

7) Obtain a high success rate: It is important for students to achieve a high success rate during classroom instruction. When we are doing our check for understanding (see item 6 above), we want to be sure that more than just the majority of students are showing a success rate before moving on to the next task. This could be checked through verbal responses, whiteboards, or turn-and-talk with a neighbor. In a study of elementary classrooms, the most successful teachers had 82% of their students answering correctly. On the other hand, the least successful classrooms had a 73% rate. That’s a really narrow difference, and in some of our classrooms, it may be the difference of one student answering correctly. Other research indicates that an optimal success rate of 80% shows that students are learning the material.

So what might this look like in the classroom? First of all it requires short steps before students are expected to reply to a question, and then several opportunities to practice, with meaningful feedback to the students who are not yet showing understanding. As we know, practice makes perfect. But if you practice something the wrong way, you are solidifying the learning in the wrong way. And sometimes, we might get to independent practice and suddenly realize that our students don’t yet have the skill. That may mean pulling the group back together and going back to guided practice or modeling. When we move forward before we reach at least the 80% mastery, our students who are behind are sure to fall further behind as more gaps appear in their knowledge.

8) Provide scaffolds for difficult tasks: The teacher provides students with temporary supports and scaffolds to assist them when they learn difficult tasks. Ultimately, our teaching goal is to ensure that students learn. For this to happen, sometimes they need support to move towards success. That could include teacher modeling, think-alouds as the teacher solves a problem, tools or checklists, or a model of the task in a completed format to serve as a guide for independent work.

One way we might do this is by providing students with a suggestion for the appropriate graphic organizer. You might be working on finding the main idea and details in a piece of text, so you might remind students how to set up a box-and-bullet graphic organizer on their paper. Additional supports might include a reminder to place the article title at the top, listing the main ideas in each box, or listing a few details under each box. Or in math, you might use partially completed problems, modeling the problem until the last step, slowly stopping the model earlier in the process, until students are doing the entire thing. Another scaffold could be a checklist that students can use at the end of their task to check their work.

9) Require and monitor independent practice: Students need extensive, successful, independent practice in order for skills and knowledge to become automatic. Let’s use math facts as our example for this section. We all know that automaticity with math facts is very helpful for our students when they try to solve multi-step problems or complete word problems. When they don’t have automaticity with facts, then they have to stop thinking about the main task of the problem, and use a heavy cognitive load just to work out the addition, subtraction, multiplication, or division. When facts are known automatically, we remove all that cognitive load, and a student’s full brainpower can go to focusing on the problem at hand. To get to automaticity in any skill, there has to be A LOT of practice. Students need independent time to work on skills, but they also need meaningful feedback from their teacher to ensure they are practicing them correctly. We hear the phrase “Practice makes perfect,” but really it should be “Perfect practice makes perfect.”

To ensure that students can practice the skill correctly, we, as teachers, need to make sure that the independent practice we provide aligns with what they did during the guided practice. Most successful teachers provide for extensive successful practice both in the classroom and after class. That means during independent work time, teachers need to circulate, monitor students’ work, and provide short, targeted feedback on how students are doing. One way a teacher might ensure students have a solid grasp of how to do something is by using this monitoring time to ask, “How did you solve that?” By having a student explain their thinking to you or to a peer, you are increasing their depth of knowledge in a task.

10) Engage students in weekly and monthly review: Students need to be involved in extensive practice in order to develop well-connected and automatic knowledge. To move a task from working memory into long-term memory, they must have extensive practice. Each time a student performs a task, it strengthens the neural pathway for that task. If you teach a task today, research suggests that about half of the knowledge is lost by tomorrow – that’s why each lesson should start with a review of what we did yesterday. But each time you engage in a task, you increase that half-life. After the second time, it will still be for 5-7 days. After the second practice, it will stick for about a month. For this reason, spiral review is so important.

To plan for spiral review, when you finish a task, jot yourself a note: “What problem could I have my students do tomorrow to practice this skill?” Then ask what they could do in a week to practice this skill? And finally, ask what they could do in a month to practice this skill. If you do this, you have a warm-up for every day of the school year based on 3 questions: what you did yesterday, what you did a week ago, and what you did a month ago.

By doing this, you help students move knowledge into their long-term memory and strengthen the pathways and associations that allow them to access those memories. The more chances students have to rehearse and review a task, the stronger their understanding of the material becomes. The best way to become an expert at any skill is through practice. More practice equals better performance!

Hopefully, this pair of posts on Rosenshine’s Principles has provided you with the opportunity to reflect on your own instruction. As with anything else, even as adults, we don’t have the cognitive load to take on all these topics at one time. Take some time to reflect on your own practices and your students. Which of these principles do you think would benefit your students most? How could you try to implement them in the coming weeks or months? Then, as you become comfortable with that principle, you can come back to these posts and think about which one to try next.

Share your thoughts in the comments below. I’d love to hear your ideas.

Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction

As many of you know, my go-to strategy for professional development is typically through podcasts or reading, and often it’s a podcast that drives me to read something. One of the podcasts that I like to listen to is called Chalk and Talk. It is hosted by Anna Stokke, a mathematics professor at the University of Winnipeg in Winnipeg, Canada. While the topics can be wide-ranging, it typically comes back to math instruction. You can check out that podcast episode by clicking here.

On this episode, Tom Sherrington, an education consultant, author of Rosenshine’s Principles in Action, co-author of the Teaching Walkthrough series, and a former teacher and school leader with over 30 years of experience, was there to talk about Rosenshine’s Principles of Instruction. What struck me about this research is that it is directly related to our work on Explicit Instruction by Anita Archer.

Rosenshine’s Principles serve as an excellent guide to evidence-based teaching. You can read the piece that Rosenshine wrote by clicking here. I’m going to try to distill that 9-page article into something a little more digestible.

Just for some background, Barak Rosenshine was a teacher and educational researcher, and his principles are described as a bridge between educational research and classroom practices. Rosenshine created the principles based on his work with three sources: 1) research in cognitive science, 2) research on master teachers, and 3) research on cognitive supports. If you’d like to know more about each of these areas, check out the first page of the article linked above.

As I’ve shared before, education is ultimately about moving a novice towards mastery by building strong background knowledge. Below, I’ll share a bit about the first 5 of the 10 principles from Rosenshine’s research. Implementing each of these principles consistently should lead to higher mastery rates for our students.

1) Begin a lesson with a short review: Cognitive science tells us that one of the most successful ways to solidify learning is through retrieval practice. This means generating answers to questions. By asking students to answer questions about a previous lesson, you create additional retrieval practice, which leads to automaticity. In math, this might mean beginning a lesson by reviewing a few questions students got wrong during independent practice or homework. In ELA, it might include a daily review of key vocabulary words. Rosenshine’s research supports 5 to 8 minutes each day to review previously covered material and create some retrieval practice opportunities.

But the review at the beginning of the lesson was not limited just to things done yesterday. It would also include a review of the prerequisite skills for the lesson that is planned for today. If we don’t take the moment to review, those neural pathways may not fire as quickly as we’d like, increasing the cognitive load for students.

2) Present new material in small steps with student practice after each step: Too often in teaching, we will teach our whole lesson, which may ask students to accomplish multiple new skills, before any chance at practice. A student’s working memory cannot hold all that information at once, and we will invariably forget some of what we learned at the beginning of the lesson when it’s time for independent practice. Effective teachers recognize this, model the skill, do some guided practice, and then include a little bit of independent practice multiple times within one lesson. This means teachers may have to spend more time moving between modeling, guided practice, and independent practice.

In an ELA classroom, while working on summarizing a paragraph, an effective teacher might model identifying the paragraph’s topic in a think-aloud. Then, there might be guided practice using structured questioning to identify the topic in new paragraphs. Then students would work independently to identify the topic of at least one paragraph. Once practiced, the same gradual release could be used to identify the main idea, and finally, we’d gradually release, identifying the supporting details in paragraphs. Finally, students would practice putting it all together, the topic, main idea, and supporting details, from yet another paragraph. The cycling back and forth between different skills reduces cognitive load.

3) Ask a large number of questions and check the responses of ALL students: Questions force that retrieval practice mentioned earlier. Expecting all students to answer increases the amount of practice for each student, and seeing answers lets you know whether some, most, or all kids know the skill. If we aren’t at a minimum of 80% mastery, we aren’t ready for a new skill yet! Follow-up questions that ask students to explain how they found the answer further strengthen process learning, as opposed to the teacher repeating the steps. This means fewer questions that require just one student to share an answer. When we do that, some students can choose to opt out.

In practice in the classroom, we can increase chances for students to respond and decrease chances for students to opt out by:

Using a turn and talk
Written 1-2 sentence summary to share with a neighbor
Repeat the procedures to a neighbor (have both partners do this!)
Raise your hands if you know it (quick check of who knows)
Dry-erase board to show an answer
Raise their hand if they agree/disagree with the answer given
Choral response

4) Provide models: Models and worked examples help students learn the process to solve problems correctly. This happens during the “I do” portion of a lesson. When we have novice learners, we need to just tell them what to do the first time. Too often, teachers seem to jump to “What do you think we should do here?” on the first problem given. This allows incorrect answers and is not a question that guides students to success.

As you move into the “we do” portion of a lesson, in math, you might use worked examples, but ask students to complete the last step, then the last 2 steps, and so forth until they seem to have reached mastery. In reading or writing, this might look like the teacher modeling a skill, then doing the same skill a couple of times together, and finally having students do the thing independently.

Fundamentally, the process to think about is start with a question/prompt, model what to do, use guided practice through a similar prompt/question, and then supervise independent practice with clear academic feedback on the skills.

5) Guide student practice: Successful teachers spend more time guiding student practice of new material. Many of you know that I spent time coaching both basketball and football. During practice, if we were learning a new play, we would start by running it “against air” (no opponent) so my players would know what to do. Once we were consistently doing the right thing without an opponent, I would add a defense to run the play against, but we’d walk through the play a few steps at a time. Then we’d run the play at half speed. Finally, we’d get to the point of running the play at full speed against an opponent. What might that look like in the classroom with an academic skill?

As a teacher, you can facilitate the practice by asking questions directly related to the steps of the new skill. In math, this might mean going over more examples with explanations, using check-for-understanding questions along the way, and then just a few targeted independent practice problems. If students are still having problems with the independent problems, then we go back to some more guided practice. In general, when students have seen more examples, they are better prepared and more engaged in independent work time.

The principles that we put into place as teachers can help create learning environments that reduce cognitive load and increase a student’s ability to reach mastery. Rosenshine’s research indicates that master teachers who achieved successful student learning outcomes were more likely to consistently implement these principles. So, as you reflect on the five principles above, are there things you feel like you do well? Are there areas where you feel that you could improve? I suggest picking one and setting a goal to implement it consistently in your classroom. The more you plan for a new thing, the more natural it becomes to do it without thought

The Commitment

As a teacher, what do you define your primary purpose as? We all know that a lot goes into supporting our students – we’ve been trained in SEL, Restorative Practices, Crisis Intervention, Maslow’s Hierarchy of Needs, and that list could go on. In addition to the training we’ve had, we have supervisory roles; we communicate with families, we manage our classrooms, we document student attendance, we collaborate with our colleagues, and we may even support students by organizing extra-curricular activities. Again, this list of additional duties could go on!

However, I would define our primary purpose as facilitating learning. If I were writing the job description for a teacher, the first bullet point would be “Plan, prepare, and deliver engaging lessons aligned with curriculum standards.” A second bullet point might be “Differentiate instruction to meet the needs of all students and ensure high levels of learning for all.” In addition, it’s important to remember that great teachers deliver the content and inspire curiosity, critical thinking, and a love for lifelong learning.

For a while now, the sign right outside of my office has said the following:

We must all commit as teachers: “If they didn’t learn it, then I didn’t teach it well enough.” Yes, we all want our students to be happy and to have fun. But we also need to ensure that they are learning. This may be a bit of a mindset shift, but that’s what is required for all students to achieve at the levels that we know they are capable of.

How often have you been sitting with someone, maybe in a meeting or even a conversation among friends, and you didn’t feel like you understood what they were discussing? What does that feel like? It has happened to me. My career path has been in education, so get me around a group of teachers or other educators, and I can make small talk all evening. But occasionally, I will be in a social situation where everyone there has been in the business world. They start talking about something relating to their business, and suddenly, I’m stuck in a conversation where I don’t understand what they are discussing or have nothing to add. I almost feel lost. While I can ask questions to learn more, it’s not a great feeling. But it’s essential to remember that for some of our students who haven’t learned what we expect them to know, that is what they feel like when they sit in our classrooms each day. Yes, they may be happy to be with friends, to have chances to socialize, or to go to recess. But should we settle for that being the times they feel happy at school?

If, as teachers, we spend all our time focused on making sure our students are happy, that takes away from our time to ensure that they are learning at the levels we need all students to achieve. I also find that when we worry about making sure they are happy, we will likely find excuses for not achieving where we hope they’d be. Remember that we only have 6 hours daily to help move our students forward.

Like me, I’m sure you have seen those lightbulb moments for students when something truly clicks. What was the facial expression of a student at that moment? It’s typically a massive smile for two reasons: first, they feel proud of themselves, and second, they are happy that they now “get it.” On the other hand, no amount of positive feelings due to SEL or other social justice type work will make them feel good when they realize they don’t get what you are teaching. They’ll feel lost, just like we do in those social situations I mentioned above.

I sometimes worry that we lower our standards for one reason or another. It never comes from wanting to negatively impact our students; I’m sure it comes from wanting to show them that we care. Eventually, our students will realize that they don’t get it, and the odds are that they will not feel good about themselves when that happens.

We must commit to pushing our students to mastery. Each of us must look at each student and think to ourselves that because of the work we are going to do with them, they will learn, they will find success, and that will bring about the greatest happiness of all.

That is the commitment of a teacher.

The LEGO Conundrum

Last week, we began a new round of professional development. One of our School Improvement Goals is to increase the number of students proficient in evidence and elaboration in their writing. In our most recent round of ILEARN testing (the test used in our state to check student proficiency in math and ELA in grades 3-8), only slightly more than 17% showed proficiency in this area. Our working theory is that by helping our students expand their sentences, add more details, and ensure that those details stay on topic, we will also see improvement in other areas of the written portion of the test.

But I also know that when I bring together a group of teachers ranging from kindergarten to fourth grade, some may have difficulty connecting to the data they see on the screen because “we don’t teach those standards.” To help get thinking about each person’s critical role in moving our students towards proficiency, we did an activity with one of my all-time favorite toys, LEGO! Each group received a box with a Minifigure inside, and then we put the following directions on the screen:

We asked one person to follow a step in the directions, revealing them one at a time and then passing the Minifigure to the next person. Once all tables had completed their Minifigures, we displayed the question: Which step could you skip and still have a completed Minifigure? The team reached a consensus that there were no steps we could forget and that we still had completed Minifigures.

So then, we showed this:

I know the font is tiny, so don’t feel you need to zoom in. This is a vertical articulation guide for the essential writing standards for grades K-4. At first glance, without even digging into what they say, you might notice that they become more detailed as the grades advance. When we looked at this with our staff, several noted that they built upon one another. Suppose you were to look at the third row related to writing informative pieces—every grade level talks about being on a topic or having a central idea, and every grade level has something about including details, but the requirements and expectations of each grade level become more detailed.

The analogy we made as we discussed this is that we think of the writing process as a stairstep. Each grade level has a target level of proficiency. If one grade level does not hit their proficiency level, the work of the following grades becomes more challenging because they have to play “catch-up” with their students.

The State of Indiana has provided rubrics that are written based on the academic standards, and they are broken down into the different categories that students are assessed on during the writing portion of the ILEARN assessment. They include three focus areas – organization, evidence and elaboration, and conventions. So, we started by looking at the rubric section based on evidence and elaboration (our goal area). Unfortunately, since the ILEARN rubric only includes grades 3-8, we didn’t have a clear rubric for grades K-2 in this area. So, our leadership team had done some prework. We dug into the standards and rubrics from grades three & four and then walked the rubrics back, referencing what was included in the standards in each grade level, to create a simple bullet-pointed rubric for all grades K-4.

What we came up with was something that looked like this:

Next, we sent each grade level team to dig into their standards, the academic frameworks put together by the state, and the prework our lead team had done. We then took time to define success criteria. We asked ourselves, “What should my students’ writing look like to show they have met proficiency in the areas we’ve identified?” To ensure we clearly understood what proficient writing should look like, we utilized the Vermont Writing Collaborative writing samples, which had been scored based on common core standards. These standards are very close to the ones that we use in Indiana. My favorite thing about these samples is that when you look at the scored samples, there is information on the page about why they fall into the category they did on the rubric. Then, the person who scored it wrote a short section called “Final Thoughts,” which helped us better understand what to look for to show proficiency on the standard.

Moving forward, we will use these rubrics and success criteria to identify where our students currently fall in evidence and evaluation on a cold write (a piece of writing that our students have not had any direct instruction or support to write) and then plan instructional strategies that will support their needs. It was important to us to look at cold writes instead of a piece that the students may have been working on as part of a current unit because that will give us an idea of what our students can do entirely on their own without any direct teaching to support the writing process.

Much like building a LEGO, the writing process is a step-by-step learning process so that students may grow in the vertical articulation of the standard. No step can be missed for our students to get to proficiency. The scores on the ILEARN assessment are often tied to the classroom or grade level that took the assessment. I want our teachers to be fully aware that without the foundational steps that must happen in kindergarten, first grade, and second grade, our students will never get to proficiency in grades three & four. Those scores represent our work to build a student as a writer. If you skip a page in your LEGO instructions, you will encounter problems later in the build. At the same time, if we miss a step in building proficient writers, our students will struggle as they age.

What are your thoughts? Have you, like me, ever been leading a professional development and felt like some weren’t fully engaged because the data “wasn’t from their grade level?” Have you ever been the one who disengaged? How might you think differently about your role moving forward? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

The purpose of reading (part 2)

In last week’s post, I began to really dig into the concept of the purpose of reading. With our work around Science of Reading, we have really spent a lot of time, especially in our early grades, focused on structured literacy and skills like phonemic awareness, phonics, and decoding, but as Natalie Wexler reminds us:

What I was focused on in my last post (which you can see here) is digging into the idea that the ultimate purpose of reading is to comprehend the words that are on the page. At a conference I recently attended, Anita Archer shared the four things that all students must be able to do in order to comprehend:

Read the words accurately and fluently.
Understand the meaning of the words.
Have adequate background knowledge.
Focus attention on critical content.

Last week, I focused on the idea of accuracy and fluency. Today I’ll be digging into the idea of understanding words. In future posts, we’ll dig into building background knowledge and focusing on critical content.

As you know, I always love to understand the why behind what we do, so what does the research say about understanding the meaning of the words in relation to comprehension? I think we can all agree that vocabulary is related to reading comprehension. In fact:

“…one of the most eduring findings in reading research is the extent to which students’ vocabulary knowledge relates to their reading comprehension.”
~Osborn & Hiebert, 2004

I think we’d all agree that for our students to be able to read fluently, they need to know the words that they are reading. When our students don’t know the meaning of a word they are decoding during text reading, they must use context to figure out what the words mean. This added cognitive load takes away from fluency – one of the things that must be in place for solid reading comprehension.

There are several ways we can make sure that our students have that strong foundation in their vocabulary. Anita Archer suggests the following checklist to help build vocabulary:

Use high-quality classroom language.
Consistently use academic language.
Read narrative and informative read-alouds in primary grades.
Promote wide independent reading.
Teach word learning strategies (context clues, morphemes, and resources like dictionaries, thesauruses, etc.).
Explicitly teach critical vocabulary terms.

Over the years, I’ve spent time sharing about the work of John Hattie. His research says that vocabulary programs have an effect size of 0.67 (that’s pretty high, and definitely above the “hinge” point). In fact, Bob Marzano says:

“Direct vocabulary instruction has an impressive track record of improving students’ background knowledge and comprehension of academic content.”

So, what might a vocabulary instructional routine look like? This is the format that Archer suggests – just like with any other part of the five pillars of reading, it should be systematic and explicit. To do that, we should introduce the word, introduce the word’s meaning, illustrate the word with an example (and non-examples when it’s helpful), and then check for understanding. Let me take you through those steps a little more in-depth:

Step 1: Introduce the pronunciation of the word: You should display the word in some way, maybe on the screen, written on the board, or on chart paper. Then, read the word to the students and have students repeat it. With multi-syllabic words or more difficult words, repeat it several times. You might also have students read the word by parts, tap the word, etc.

Step 2: Present a student-friendly explanation: Tell the students an explanation, or have the students read an explanation with you. This might include using the word in a sentence, providing synonyms or antonyms, etc.

Step 3: Illustrate the word with examples: You might use concrete examples like having an object or acting the word out. You might use a visual example like an image or picture. Or you might use a verbal example to explain the word.

Step 4: Check students’ understanding: You might choose to do this in a few ways. You could ask deep processing questions, give the students think time, and then ask partner A to tell partner B. You might have students discern between examples and non-examples, so you might share a sentence and then ask students to say whether it is an example of the word or not. A third way you might check for understanding is to have students compare the vocabulary term with another term. You might have partner A share examples of ways the words are similar, and partner B share examples of ways the words are different.

Linnea Ehri tells us that if words have been read before and stored in memory, prediction strategies are not required for a reader to decode. When we can introduce difficult vocabulary words to our students in an explicit way before teaching, then our readers are better able to focus on their primary task in reading, comprehension.

What strategies have you tried in building vocabulary with your students? What has worked well? What hasn’t? Let us know your thoughts in the comments below!

The connection between oral language and reading instruction

At the beginning of the month, I had the privilege to attend The Reading League’s 7th Annual National Conference in Syracuse, NY. I went with several others from our district. The goal of the conference is to develop a deeper understanding of the science of reading and learn about the implications for teaching and learning. In the coming weeks/months, I look forward to sharing with you some of my key takeaways from this conference. There were several amazing presenters!

One of the first sessions I attended was led by Pamela Snow. She is a Professor of Cognitive Psychology Much of her work is centered around the early transition from language to literacy and the ways this transition is supported in the classroom. In that session, she reminded me of something that I shared in our recent PD on the Science of Reading – Human brains weren’t originally meant to be a reading brain.

The chart below was one she shared during her presentation and served as a good reminder that less than 3% of human existence includes the use of written language.

What’s important for us to keep in mind given this information is the reminder that Language is a paradox (this theory comes directly from Pamela Snow) – “Humans have evolved a special facility for oral language, such that it is innate (biologically primary). We have a “language instinct.” However, it is highly vulnerable to a range of developmental conditions (e.g. hearing impairment, intellectual disability, autism spectrum disorder, brain injury, or developmental language disorder). For humans, language is highly sensitive to environmental exposure.”

At times, when a reader is struggling with transitioning from an oral language structure to learning to read a written language structure, or as a student expands their reading skills beyond the oral language skills they have been exposed to, students may struggle with their reading. Literacy (reading and writing), builds upon oral language skills (vocab, speaking/conversation skills, syntax, phonological/phonemic awareness). When students lack language comprehension (remember the reading rope?), they will struggle to read fluently, which will impact their reading comprehension.

Readers with strong oral language abilities are more likely to develop strong reading abilities. Those strong reading abilities in turn will increase a reader’s vocabulary and background knowledge, which will further strengthen their reading abilities.

So what does this mean in practice? It means that our classrooms need to not only be a literacy-rich environment (lots of reading and writing), it also needs to be an oral language-rich environment (listening and speaking). Whenever possible, for all levels of readers, we can strengthen oral language skills by building opportunities for conversation, narrative discourse (think storytelling), procedural discourse (explaining a procedure), and expository discourse (informative or persuasive). Ultimately we can think of the oral language as the engine of literacy skills, while high-quality instruction in language development and reading is the fuel for success.

What are some of the ways you support oral language in your classroom? Share your thoughts and ideas in the comments below!

Thoughtful in what we do

Far too often in education, we spend time thinking about a question. It’s a question that will sometimes cause stress. It will sometimes lead us to look for new programs or resources. And at times, it creates overwhelm because we then feel like there is too much to do. The question I’m thinking of is “What more should we be doing?”

Depending on your perspective, that question may not feel like that big of a deal. But here’s the issue, if we always ask about what we should be doing more of, we end up with so much to do that we aren’t able to do any of it well. We can’t sustain the practice. Adam Welcome loves to talk about how schools in general are really good at collecting programs and things, but they are really bad at getting rid of those programs or things that are obsolete. This is something that I have definitely noticed (I have seen your pile of textbooks from 3 adoptions ago that you just can’t bring yourself to get rid of!).

The other issue I see with asking about what more we can do is that it leads us to a deficit mindset. That’s the thinking that leads us to only focus on the things that aren’t going well or the things that we can’t do enough of. Deficit thinking leads to a sense of hopelessness before we have even started anything.

One of the pain points that I have noticed in my time as a leader is that every spring and summer, I spend time with our leadership team. We look at the data we have, the growth we’ve made, and the areas to target for continued growth. Based on that information, we develop a school improvement plan that is focused entirely on the data that we can connect to the learners that we know in our building. Then, invariably, we come together at a beginning of the year administrative meeting, and there seems to be some new initiative or some new curricular resource that must be added to our plans. When that happens, the intentional design of the school improvement plan that was developed as part of our thoughtful work must be either revamped or potentially scrapped for a period of time.

I do have one quick caveat since I know that some of the people who read this blog are colleagues of mine, or maybe even are among the group that sometimes brings those initiatives to us… Oftentimes those initiatives involve us in doing good work that is for the benefit of our students, but it sometimes feels for the leaders in the buildings that we have now been given one more new thing to cram into the already busy schedule of the school year PD plan.

So, imagine if you could, hearing the following statement at your back-to-school meeting:

Much like Chris Lehmann, I believe that “Schools are better when they create spaces and expectations for reflection.” A formalized process for reflection is a necessity. This reflection can certainly occur as an individual, but I think the power of the reflection comes from when you are able to chat with others about what happened in your classroom, how the students responded to the learning opportunity, and what your data shows you about student learning and growth.

This is why I see such value in the PLC process. It’s the perfect place for the reflective process to take place. The four key questions of the PLC guide us toward reflection on a question that is much better than the one I mentioned at the beginning. Instead of asking ourselves “What more can we be doing?” we should be asking “How can we do what we’re already doing, better?”

Think about the power of that mindset shift with your team. Instead of coming into a PLC meeting with a deficit mindset that might imply that we don’t yet have the tools to be successful, we come in with the belief that within our team, we have the answers to help ourselves improve. That’s collective teacher efficacy at work.

And here’s the reality of this process. Sometimes we will start with reflective practices, we will begin by trying to problem-solve within our team, and we may find that the tools we have available to us are not working. This is where things get exciting for me. Now, your PLC team can begin some work in action research. Do some professional reading, ask for help from an administrator, work with your curriculum coach, or collaborate with another team that might not be having the same problem as you. Whatever you do, find a way to keep trying until you find something that does work for your students. Again, this is not about finding something new, it’s about refining something that we were already doing, but wasn’t working as well as we’d like it to be.

Another thing to keep in mind: as you begin to refine your processes, be sure to identify the pieces that you feel are already going well. Having an idea of the things that are working will help us feel more comfortable as we make shifts in the areas that aren’t working as well. Also, keep in mind that if you try to solve too many problems at one time, you probably aren’t going to solve any of them. Pick one area of growth to focus on and stay focused on that. Remember what your team’s limitations are for time and energy!

So, the next time you are together with your team and able to reflect on what’s been happening, be sure to focus on the question “How can we do what we’re already doing, better?”

How do you think that might shift the conversations in your work? As you reflect on what you can do better, how might you use that to set your own short- or long-term goals for your own learning and growth? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

The power of the rerun

I try not to spend too much time sharing about the #educelebrities that I follow, or have had the privilege to meet, but for this week’s post, I’m back again with some more thoughts based on the day I spent recently with Cornelius Minor. One of the things he talked about was something he phrased as “The Power of the Rerun.” As a child of the 80s (I try not to date myself too much, but it’s my reality), reruns were a regular occurrence. Saturdays would often mean getting up, grabbing a bowl of cereal, and turning on cartoons. Unlike you millennials who might be reading or the Gen Z / post-millennials that we’re teaching, when you turned the TV on, you watched what was available. There were no streaming options. We couldn’t find what we wanted to watch on YouTube. Sometimes that meant watching an episode of GI Joe that you’d seen what felt like hundreds of times.

I have to be honest; I’ve always enjoyed reruns of shows. There are episodes of Friends that I have literally seen more than a hundred times, and yet I still laugh (pivot). I don’t know if I want to admit how many times I have watched the entire Breaking Bad series (probably still my favorite series of all time!), but I will share that it’s a lot!

What I love about rewatching a show is that often, I notice things I didn’t notice the first time. Maybe there’s a character that didn’t seem that important on the first watch that I now know is important later in the show. Or I might notice something that I missed in the background of a shot because I was so focused on the main action the first time. The rewatch allows me to dig a little deeper.

Now, I’m sure there are some that are wondering what in the world reruns of TV shows have to do with an education blog. This is where Cornelius comes in. While talking to us about ways we might model specific skills, he talked about the benefit of doing a reread of a text that was previously shared in class. The first pass of a story is a great time to introduce a concept or idea. If you are doing a lesson on character analysis, you might read a text where you want your students to notice what characters do over and over, so you read that text and ask students to pay attention to the actions of a specific character and ask them to think about what this teaches them about this character. That may meet a standard for you, but you recognize that your class seems to show clear understanding, or maybe even mastery right away. That might mean a reread of the book is a great time to do some deeper thinking about the text.

You see, once you’ve read a text one time, you have done most of the heavy lifting. The understanding of the story is already there. Vocabulary words have been defined and used in context. All your students have an initial understanding of what will happen in the story, so now we can go deeper.

Recently in our building, we’ve been spending a lot of our time in Professional Development focused on the power of the PLC. We’re really digging into each of the 4 key questions of the PLC. If you aren’t sure what those questions are, these are them:

What do you want your students to know? (This one’s about knowing our standards, having a map, and identifying priorities)
How will we know they know it? (This is all about how we formatively assess our students along the way, or how we summatively assess at the end of a unit so that we are ensured of student learning)
What will we do if they don’t know it? (This is about what strategies might we try during a reteach to reach a student who didn’t understand the first time)
What will we do if they do know it? (This is about how will we enrich the learning of students who seem to have already mastered the standard or skill)

So, when we think about the rerun of a text, it’s a great opportunity to approach skills that will enrich our students. What is the next level of the standard you are trying to teach? You might check the vertical alignment of your standard so that you know what your students will be expected to know or be able to do next year. During a rerun, you can push your students to a higher depth of knowledge because there is already an initial understanding.

I’d love to hear about other ideas related to the concept of a “rerun” in reading. Have you ever used this strategy? How did it go? What worked well? What would you think about differently? Share your thoughts in the comments below!

What scares you?

When I was younger, I used to love to watch the television show Unsolved Mysteries. I still remember sitting in our basement with the TV on, trying to figure out about these strange things that happened in our world. It was probably during the same phase in my life when I loved books like Scary Stories to Tell in the Dark. I loved these types of things for a while until I didn’t. I don’t know if any of the rest of you went through a phase like that where horror and mystery were exciting. At the point I’m at in my life now, I don’t need fear like that – I have zero desire to read a scary story, or watch a horror movie… I can’t even get into the true crime fad that so many others I know love.

But it’s interesting to think about how much fear can impact us in our day-to-day lives. Most people, like me, have decided that they don’t want to put themselves in situations where they feel scared. That is something that is also true for many of our students too – they don’t want to go outside of their comfort zone, and often will do whatever it takes to avoid a feeling of shame or embarrassment. In fact, sometimes the behaviors that we see that seem outside the norm are actually related to their efforts to avoid shame and embarassment.

I think sometimes that fear of trying something new comes from a feeling of cognitive dissonance. You may know that phrase, but to make sure we’re all on the same page, cognitive dissonance is defined as having inconsistent thoughts, beliefs, or attitudes, especially as relating to behavioral decisions and attitude change. It’s not just our students who will try to avoid feeling embarrassed – many adults will do it too. It could be relating to something in our personal life, or it could have to do with trying that new classroom practice that feels a bit out of our comfort zone.

I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: I believe that all schools are learning organizations. Part of what makes a school a learning organization is that all the people who come here – students, teachers, staff members, parents, etc., can learn something while they are here. So, let’s dig into that idea of learning for teachers and staff members.

A previous administrator that I worked with used to talk about being on the “growing edge.” To be on the growing edge, you must feel a little bit uncomfortable. Think about schooling – what it looks like today is different from what it looked like when I was in school, and that is different from what it looked like when my parents were in school. A schoolhouse is a place of innovation. As we learn more about how kids learn, we implement new strategies and see if they help our students. These small changes over the course of many years are part of what has caused the school to look so different than in the past. The more we know about how kids learn, the greater impact we can have on their learning moving forward.

And the things we do in our classroom, that are considered “best practice” are meant to put our students on their own growing edge. In a place where there is some feeling of being uncomfortable, they also must work to figure it out. In a lot of ways, our efforts to move our students to higher levels of thinking is considered best practice because it helps push students beyond their comfort zone. It helps them create new neural pathways in their brain, and suddenly they have learned something new!

But here’s one of the things I’ve noticed – so often we as educators will learn about something new relating to student learning, but we hesitate to implement it. Maybe we want to start implementing Universal Design for Learning, or maybe we have seen some amazing examples of Project-Based Learning out there on social media. As an educator, it might be something we’re curious about, but at the same time are relatively early in the learning process. This is where the fear of teaching can sometimes come in. Does this sound familiar: 1) I’m curious about a new strategy; 2) I have done a little bit of learning about the topic; 3) I want to try, but I’m just not sure where to start; 4) I’m worried it won’t go well; 5) I put that idea on the shelf and go back to what’s comfortable.

The thing I know about most teachers is that there are some personality traits that are similar. One of those similarities has to do with a desire to make sure that whatever we put in front of our students is as close to perfect as possible. I’m sure that there are times that I felt that way, and probably held back on some of my more creative and innovative ideas because they didn’t seem quite perfect. What I’ve learned is:

Here’s the challenge we face as educators – innovative ideas help to push learning forward for our students, but our own perfectionism might get in the way of trying something that would be a benefit for our kids. How do we balance the need for innovative ideas with our personal feelings that our school or our classroom needs to be perfect?

I challenge you to take a moment to reflect on some of your new ideas that you might have been hesitating to try. Pick one and give it a try. What’s the worst that happens? If the lesson is a flop, you can use it as a chance to model for your students that imperfection is ok. And if the lesson goes well, you might find some ways to take that idea, do it again in the future, and make some small changes to make it better.

Learning is all about being on the growing edge. Part of that cognitive dissonance comes from doing the things that scare us before we feel they are perfect. But, it’s how we learn, it pushes learning for our students, and it models risk-taking, which is something we are constantly asking our students to do!

The View from 518

Tag: Best Practices