Tag Archives: best practices

Many Teachers Try To Teach As They Were Taught – Stop Doing That!

Posted on by
Reply

If imitation is the greatest form of flattery, then many teachers of yore are buttered with adulation.  When people decide to become schoolteachers, they often do so thinking they will teach like their favorite teachers taught them.  You see it in the eyes of an interviewee when asked “Tell us about your favorite teacher when you were in school”.  Imitation later is demonstrated as a new teacher settles into patterns of mannerisms, classroom layout, and, most significantly, interacting with students.  Vestiges of a favorite teacher try to appear in a new teacher constantly. 

Stop doing that!  Most of what we admired in a favorite teacher was personality and charisma not teacher effectiveness.  Teach as you were taught to teach not as you were taught as a student. 

What do we know?

There is art to teaching.  Most favorite teachers touched us with their artful teaching, their personality, and their caring for each student.  They proved the statement that children do not care what a teacher knows until they know that a teacher cares.  Good teaching is an art form of connecting with children. Remembering a favorite teacher is like having that person’s arm around you or basking in her smile.  It is an emotional, affective warm feeling, often of kindness and support.  It grew from all the “atta-boys and atta-girls” she showered on students.  Children, as people pleasers, will do most anything to get a smile or a nod or a note to take home from a favorite teacher.  “How many books do I need to read?  I’ll read every day after school!”.  And the warmth of her smile gains even greater emotionality over time.

We would like to think that every teacher is a “favorite” to some students, but truth be told, there are some teachers who do not create adoring followers.  The art of teaching is not distributed equally among all teachers.

Favorite or Most Effective

An equally telling question for a teacher interview is “Tell us about the teacher who most effectively challenged you to learn”.  Effective teaching is causing children to learn and causation lies in the science of teaching.  Children may learn to please a favorite teacher; they learn from highly effective teachers due to an application of best teaching strategies. 

Highly effective teachers are not simply born.  They are the product of their study of theories and practices of pedagogy that consistently cause children, or anyone for that matter, to learn.  These theories and practices include –

  • Motivation.  Every child responds to positive triggers that encourage them to engage in learning.  Effective teachers pull those triggers.  They make learning personal by referencing a student’s name and that student’s high interest in the subject or skill as they introduce a lesson.  They make the new learning sound unique and special.  They attach new learning to recent successful learning.  They create a mystery children are to solve.  Effective teachers understand the need to continue to motivate throughout the lesson and unit not just as its beginning.
  • Direct instruction, inquiry-based instruction, and problem- or project-based instruction.  These three strategies are the arsenal for effective teachers, and they are masters of each.  Any lesson can be taught by one of these three strategies, yet there always is a most appropriate strategy for the nature of the learning.  Effective teachers provide variety in classroom work by rotating among these strategies. 
  • Practice and reinforcement.  Effective teachers understand that practice does not make perfect, it makes permanent.  They use immediate and massed practice and interval and distributed practice.  They don’t practice just to practice but for strategic reinforcement to build short- and long-term memory.  Effective teachers avoid the drudgery of drills while knowing that learning will erode and be lost without practice over time.  Reinforcement over time is a mantra.
  • Assessment and corrective teaching.  Effective teachers pre-assess, teach in chunks, model, practice, and use formative assessments to check the accuracy and strength of student learning.  They understand that very few lessons will immediately cause all children to be successful learners.  They use assessments to tell them “Correct this now before uninformed practice makes it harder to unlearn”.  They unteach, reteach, and teach differently based on assessments to move children from early errors to later success.  Effective teachers also are very good at observing student proficiency without testing; they have a mental rubric for the level of proficiency children need to achieve.
  • Extended and advanced learning.  Effective teachers know that some children will grasp and master new learning accurately and quickly.  Those children will need extended and advanced learning rather than corrective teaching.  Effective teachers plan enrichments and accelerated learning for children who need these to stay connected to the classroom.
  • Lesson planning.  Effective teachers are immaculate lesson planners understanding the steps of a plan that causes learning to happen.  In the 1980s school districts taught teachers to use Madeline Hunter’s Model of Mastery Learning.  Hunterisms became standard operating procedure for more than a decade.  Splashback against No Child Left Behind caused some educators to consider Hunter too mechanistic.  However, in the decades since, a Hunter lesson design rebounds as best practice.

https://www.csun.edu/sites/default/files/Holle-Lesson-Planning.pdf

  • Curricular design.  Effective teachers understand that some children really respond to direct instruction while others jump aboard for inquiry-based teaching and still others are excited by problem-based and project-based instruction.  These teachers strategically use all three strategies to engage children as active learners.  They also use Universal Design thinking in their curriculum to ensure learning is not hindered by avoidable barriers. 

The Big Duh! 

Teacher preparation programs teach us how to be effective in causing children to learn.  Effective teachers remember their favorite teachers from their school years and emulate many of those veteran teachers’ mannerisms.  Beyond that emulation, effective teachers are masters of the science of teaching and use all the tools they have been taught to cause all children to be successful learners of their annual curriculum. 

Saying No to What Is Not Right Is Always Right

Posted on by
Reply

We mocked it and made it into a gag line, but we still remember what Nancy Reagan asked us to do forty years ago.  “Just say no”.  It was the 1980s and there was a national war on drugs.  A personal statement of “No, not me” was her encouragement to the youth of that time to abstain from using illegal drugs.  A simple, clear, and non-argumentative statement is powerful in declaring where a person stands on an issue.  Public education today is confronted with numerous hot button issues.  As educators we are required to be agnostic in our instruction of children; we inform but do not proselytize.  Yet there are essential issues today that require a “Just say no”.  Saying no to what is not right is always the right thing to do.

Say no to bullying of all types.  We have been properly sensitized over time to recognize bullying and harassment in school.  We have policies and procedures to correct those who bully and harass the vulnerable.  We know how to deal with classic bullies and harassers.  Recently we are confronted with non-physical and non-verbal behaviors, like ghosting, that damage a vulnerable child as much as a punch from the meanest playground bully.  When children are active in social media, it is easy for a bully to lead gullible groupies in ghosting or raising digital innuendo about a targeted child.  We see children at school who clearly are victimized although we see and hear no typical bullying behavior.  This is silent bullying.  Vulnerable children are targets for more sophisticated bullying and we need to say no to these machinations.

Say no to book banning.  This is quite simple.  Books and media portray and represent ideas and information that have value for intellectually informing student minds.  Just as a collection of books presents a range of readability levels, so ideas and information in books and media are available for the different intellectual and personal maturity levels of children.  As soon as a parent says that a book or item of media is not appropriate for their child, I say, “Great!  Tell your child not to read or look at it.  Be the parent your child needs”.  Parents and other adults who demand that library collections conform to their personal values need to hear a simple and non-argumentative “no”.  A parent can direct her child on what materials are appropriate for her child; she is not the parent of all children in the school.  Sadly, the issue of access to materials is more about parenting and power demonstrations than about library collections.

Say no to making any children second class or ignored students.  Purposefully not educating children is not new organizational behavior in our schools.  Historically, the majority or those in positions of power denigrated groups of people based on race and ethnicity. 

From the beginning, there was no consideration of educating American Indian children until decisions were made within the last century to create Indian schools for the purpose of “teaching out” any semblance of Indian culture in their children.  This was bad practice based on political motivation.

Enslaved children were prevented from learning to read or write.  In the post-emancipation era segregated schools for black children were the rule in southern and border states.  While desegregation was national policy in the post-civil rights era, today we observe re-segregation based upon parent choice.  In southern states and affluent northern urban communities choice policies allow parents to create publicly-funded charter schools for selected student membership.  By law, any parent may apply for enrollment, but charter school policies allow these elite schools to expel children without cause or redress.  The result is a resegregated school.

Today we observe state governors and legislatures discriminating against LGBTQ+ children with laws that refuse to accept any gender identity or role other than that of biological birth.  Like Indian and enslaved children, LGBTQ+ are being discriminated against with politically motivated policy. 

Say no to all behaviors that segregate or discriminate against children for any reason.  The quality of our national character often is inadequate to prevent us from doing organizational harm to selected groups of children.  Every instance of organizational discrimination that is ignored creates an opportunity for more discriminatory behavior.   No one can make discrimination a right thing to do.  Say no to all discriminatory practices in public education.

Say “no not me” when someone says, “everyone agrees that we should…” and you are not everyone.  The herd mentality lives on today.  I observe parents at board meetings who are passive when a parent speaker says, “everyone here agrees with me that we should…”.  Passive parents who do not agree give apparent weight to false representations. 

Herd behavior also lives in faculty and staff meetings.  When a colleague says, “I speak for our faculty (or department or grade level) and you do not agree with what the colleague represents as your position on an issue, just say “no, this does not represent what I think”.  Every time you remain silent in your disagreement, someone thinks you agree.  Say “no, not me”.

In our hotter political climate, those who break from the herd may be reproached by herd leaders.  However, it is right to say “I don’t agree” when you do not agree with the herd. 

Just as saying no to things that are not right, we must say yes to things that are right.

Say yes to programs that provide security for all children.  Say yes to all issues like food security that impact the health and safety of children.  The post-pandemic economy stretches the distance between families with ample resources and those without.  Food safety networks that gave every child a cost-free school lunch everyday are gone.  Subsidized networks that provide winter coats, hats, and boots are closing as subsidies expire.  Extended Internet capacities that were essential for distance learning are withdrawing free service and calling in pandemic-provided hardware.  

Children who suffer food insecurity, insufficient seasonal clothing, and lack of home technologies begin every school day behind their more fortunate classmates.  Once behind, it is ever more difficult to catch up.  Say yes to programs that are networks for needy and insecure children.

Say yes to evidence-based instruction that ensures all children are proficient readers.  And say yes to evidence-based instruction in all school curricula.  The erupting support for Science of Reading instruction ended several decades of disorientation in our reading programs.  I observed too many children being taught a reading curriculum that the teacher “liked”.  We need to eradicate “like” as a criterion for selecting any instructional program.  Say no to programs based upon “I like this one” and yes to evidence-based programs.

Arguments against phonics-based reading instruction abounded during the decades-long reading wars.  Whole language and blended programming was “liked” because they were popular, provided abundant class materials, and did not require teachers to understand phonics.  Popularity ignored the fact that non-intuitive readers did not learn to read, develop powerful vocabularies, or understand language structures.  Popularity also ignored the fact that teachers beginning classroom careers in the 90s and early 2000s did not know phonics.  They were not taught to read using phonics and their teacher preparation programs did not teach to use phonics in reading instruction for children.  Today we have decisive evidence that phonics-based reading instruction is the best practice for all children.  When the evidence is clear, say yes.

Say yes to an inclusive, four A education for all children.  A Four A education provides all children with opportunities to learn and grow in their school’s academic, activity, arts, and athletics programs.  Independently these A letter programs appeal to the individual child’s natural tendencies and interests.  Some children thrive in school because they are driven by academic learning.  They climb the curricular ladder into AP-leave courses and rigorous electives because learning success begets more learning success.  Other children thrive due to their involvement in the activity and club life of their school.  In our local schools large numbers of children engage in Destination Imagination, forensics, Mock Trial, and DECA.  They thrive in challenging problem-solving and performance-based activities.  Other children are driven by the arts.  Vocalists, instrumentalists, painters, potters, jewelers, and doodlers find their passion in school rehearsal halls and studios.  Athletics appeals to almost all children at one time or another and intramural and interscholastic sports give children opportunities to develop and display their talents.

Inclusive four A programs ensure a balanced school life for children.  Inclusive ensures that one A does not dominate a school to the detriment of other A’s.  And being a four A school assures intentional practices that grow with the changing student population.

Say yes to planning and funding and supporting these programs that grow student success knowing that success now begets future successes.

It is easy to be moot in the world of public education.  The life and times of a school are constantly changing.  Because of this, it is all the important to say no to things that are not right and to say yes to things that are right.  Speaking up and taking a stand on key issues where saying no or yes matters is how we assure the best education for our children today and tomorrow.

Speak Less and Listen More

Posted on by
Reply

The advice Aaron Burr gives to Alexander Hamilton in the musical Hamilton applies to the best practices in teaching.  Speak less and listen more.  If we recorded the audio only for one week in a school classroom, what would be the ratio of teacher speaking to listening?  On the other hand, don’t make such a recording.  The ratio of adult to child voices may be too embarrassing.

Instead, read and consider the following statements.  Don’t talk about what you are reading – read and listen to your own thoughts about each statement.

  • The algorithm of speaking and listening related to educational outcomes begins with an understanding that what a child says is much more important than what a teacher says.  Education is about children learning not adult’s telling what they know.
  • Listening to children allows us to know the quality and quantity of their learning and understanding.  Listen for both.
  • Listening to children informs us that a child may know and understand her learning much better than can be displayed in on demand testing.  Listening is your best formative and summative assessment.
  • Listening to children helps us to know what the child needs to learn next in order to have a more complete understanding of the lesson.  After listening, you can clarify, correct, redirect, expand, and extend a child’s understanding.  If you don’t listen, all you can do is tell them the same things you already told them.
  • Listening to children shows us how a child is processing new learning and integrating new with prior learning.  Listen to how a child thinks not just what a child tells you.
  • Listening leads to questions you ask the student that leads to more listening and to more questions.  Listening leads to causing students to learn.
  • Listening to children is one of the most respectful things adults can do.  It says, “you are important to me”.  Consider how many times a child passes through an entire school day without being heard.  What does silence tell a child about how we value her?
  • Listening is interactive.  The best teachers know when to listen and when to speak.  Listening before speaking assures that speech is focused and purposeful for the listening child.

If a teacher is consistently speaking too much and listening too little, advise the teacher to change professions and become a broadcaster.  That is what broadcasters do, not teachers.

Room For Many On The High Ground

Posted on by
Reply

A lawyer-friend provides me with insight and advice that is invaluable.  She inserts into our conversation at just the right time, “… there is room for many people to stand on the high ground” or “there is room for more than one person to stand on the high ground.” 

In our democracy, we prize and favor free speech and the right of every person to their opinions and the opportunity to voice their opinions.  We start from this premise in every consequential discussion.  The more opinions expressed, the richer the discussion and likelihood of consensus with an outcome.

Knowing which opinions create the best answers can be subjective.  Today too many public conversations are dominated by loud voices that drown out other voices and loudness should not be equated with best.  Media can be a fog-horn – loud and blaring.  We are equally troubled with strong expressions of self-interest.  Those whose interests are threatened or ignored add to the cacophony of voices and noise.  A democratic process fundamentally is noisy.  As I have written in the past, Occam provides us with a tool for paring possible answers to the best answer.   Occam tells us to maintain the heart of the objective, its simplest expression, as the only objective to be achieved.  High ground is the simplest, most ethical, just-for-all response to the question.

Another writer, Sun Tzu, teaches us in The Art of War, to find and stake out the high ground.  He says the high ground allows a leader the strategic view of all that surrounds him.  He recognizes the low ground and its limitations for seeing all possibilities and for successful advancement against an elevated and often-obscured goal.  The analogy of the high ground translates from a military advantage of higher terrain to finding the highest ideals in a multi-opinioned syllogism leading to a best resolution of a question.  When all things are not equal, we should always seek the high ground.

Many claim they are on the high ground and often do so without examining where they stand.  It is as if the first person to claim a superior position is superior by default.  Not so.  The high ground is not where you stand but what you stand for.

Words help us understand the concept of high ground and I favor one word in particular – transcendent.  To transcend means to rise above or go beyond, to overcome adversity, and triumph over the negative.  Transcendence formulates an “ideal” that describes the “best” for all concerned and then works to make it “real”.  Taking the high ground is to not accept the usual or possible lesser outcomes.  Instead, taking is and strive for better and then best.  To be on the high ground is to have a better argument, one that overcomes negative and destructive comments.  A transcendent statement or belief shuts down opposition because it cuts to the heart of the matter and sheds prejudice, self-interest, and malice .  It is hard to argue against an ideal without painting oneself into the corner of one’s bias.

Public education contains many solid high ground positions.  In each, there is an aspiration for transcending what has been to what needs to be in order for the ideals of public education to live.  Equitable access.  Equal opportunity.  Just and fair treatment.  Free.  Diversity of opinion.  High standards.  Many chances.  Individual potential.  Universal literacy.  Each is an ideal we build practices to attain.

In every instance when education has moved to higher ground it has been the result of individuals and groups of people who have made aspirational arguments and pointed the way upward.  As an institution, public education tends to rest at a status quo – institutions are only what they are required to be. 

Schools, as expressions of their communities, have not always sought the high ground.  Often the judicial system of government has helped schools transcend lower ground practices regarding race, gender, poverty, and special education.  Even with legal decrees, it still takes local initiative to move an institution to higher ground.  Aspirational people are needed to hold an institution’s feet to the fire of doing what is right.

There are inherent problems with taking the high ground.  The high ground becomes personalized.  Those who claim it, assume a superior status over others.  The high ground becomes moralized.  Those who claim it assume a moral superiority over others.  It becomes possessive.  Those who claim the high ground want to personally own it and fight, often wrongfully, to retain it.  There is an assumption that the high ground is reality – it is not.  The high is an ideal to be striven for.

The power of a high ground position is when more and more people take a stand for it.  Some may think that the gravity of numbers defeats high ground.  Additional people necessitate compromise and compromise dissolves the clarity of high ground.  Too many people weigh down and flatten the argument.  Too many people look like a crowd and crowds do not comport with our conception of high ground.

To the contrary, when more people want to affirm a high ground ideal, they create a new standard for better practices.  This new standard becomes the base from an even high ground ideal can be postulated.  The higher the number of people who affirm a high ground ideal, the more likely higher ground can rise to new heights.

My lawyer-friend says, “affirm a high ground ideal and then move over so others can join”.