Laying the Foundations
One teacher's journey
I was going to start this blog relatively safely by sharing some insights into what happens in my class and providing tips to other teachers. Then I read an article in The Age newspaper by Adam Carey. In it whole-class instruction is portrayed as “The children sit in rows, engaged in a half-hour game of call and response with their teacher that is part reading exercise, part endurance test.” (Read it here [paywall]: https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/no-student-left-behind-phonics-push-for-disadvantaged-schools-20210421-p57l0n.html) This dismissal of whole-class instruction is common and I am tired of it. Too much whole class instruction is often rejected as ‘drill & kill’, ‘chalk & talk’ or being the dreaded ‘sage on the stage’. For years I thought that I needed to minimise whole-class instruction. I ended up having multiple groups at different ability levels. I thought I was doing a great job at differentiation. I was being ‘student-centred’ and believed I was meeting my students ‘at their point of need’. This focus on small group instruction has some major consequences. Firstly, it reduces the amount of instructional time each student receives. I would have between 3-5 groups. In a 60 minute reading session, I might see 3 groups for 20 minutes each (on a good day). The other groups would be doing ‘independent tasks’. And while I tried to make these tasks meaningful activities, I now recognise that they often ended up being little more than busy work. By shifting to more whole-class instruction, I maximise the time each child spends on meaningful work. Secondly, I was suddenly doing three-five times the amount of planning! This is a significant increase in workload and an unrealistic expectation on teachers- especially graduates. Now that I am doing less planning, I am finding that the learning activities we do in class have a much more significant impact on my students' learning. Thirdly, using ability-based groups can doom students to a trajectory of under-performance. One 2016 review by Marshall Jean of the National Education Policy Center found that “Tracking is often implemented in ways that hinder the learning of students assigned to low tracks” (Read it here). Despite the claims that small groups creates a more equal system for instruction, the opposite is true! Moving to whole-class instructions means that I am providing opportunities for ALL my students to achieve at a high level. Last year I started using Heggerty’s Phonemic Awareness with a Grade 1/2 class. I knew that this would be a powerful session for my weaker readers. I knew that it would help them segment and blend sounds. What I didn’t realise was how much my stronger readers would benefit. These students were reading Harry Potter, yet struggled to identify the final phoneme of a word. If I’d stuck with small groups then these students would have missed out on meaningful learning. So, what does whole-class instruction look like in my classroom? All students complete the same tasks. I want all children to achieve the same learning. Otherwise a gap in learning will emerge, and I will doom some of my students to a trajectory of under-achievement. I used to set different comprehension tasks for each group. All students would be learning about finding the main idea but the complexity of texts and topics explored. How much richer is it for students to explore the same texts and hear the thoughts of all of their peers? Would you be happy if your child was getting a watered down version of what their peers receive? Differentiation still occurs. I am still able to meet each child at their point of need. One example of this is my paired-fluency reads. Each child reads a list of sounds and words to their partner for 30 seconds. This list is the same for every child, but some students may only say a few sounds, while others may read the whole list. Their partner follows along and corrects them if they hear a mistake. One task for the whole class that is still differentiated for each child. My students sit in rows for table-work. This allows every child the opportunity to see the whiteboard clearly. It also gives me the chance to monitor EVERY child’s learning and provide feedback immediately. I Check for Understanding frequently. I once heard that the average number of times that a teacher hears from a student was about 3-6 times in a lesson. So I decided to measure it. Within the space of 1 hour reading session I heard from students about a dozen times each IF they were in one of my instructional groups for the day. For those students who were not in my instructional groups, their number was zero. One hour of learning and all some students got was a cursory glance at their work. Nowadays, I regularly use a variety of devices to check for understanding. This means that I hear from ALL students over 50 times in a one-hour session (this is a very conservative estimate), through the use of mini-whiteboards, choral responses, cold-calling and other strategies. Checking for Understanding techniques will be a great topic for a future blog. Would I rather my 5-year-old’s teachers to hear from 0 or 50 times in an hour? Would you like me to give feedback to your child half a dozen times in a day, or over two hundred times? Which one is more student-centred? Whole class instruction is powerful. Let’s not dismiss it with silly caricatures and catchphrases. If you want to find out more about shifting reading groups to a more whole-class approach, then I strongly recommend the video Rethinking Guided Reading by Natalie Campbell & Stephanie Le Lievre.
12 Comments
Jocelyn
4/25/2021 06:09:11 pm
I agree that so much can be done at the whole class level to maximise instructional time. The one area that I do think there is benefit to grouping is for the initial phonics instruction (including word level reading and spelling). Cognitive load theory tells us that we should be managing intrinsic load and asking children to participate in phonics lessons to learn new phoneme/grapheme connections while they are still learning the previously 'set' runs the very real risk of seriously overloading the memory of these students. But it doesn't have to mean 5 groups in a class. Working with our partner colleagues in flexible groupings can still maximise instructional time and prevent teach overload. All the best, Jocelyn
Reply
James
4/26/2021 03:05:14 am
Thanks for sharing your insight. Small groups can play an important role, especially when students need support. I'm not sure that small groups should be the default.
Reply
Paul
4/25/2021 06:14:01 pm
I don't think it is either or .... like you I hold high expectations for my students and like you I want my students to access the same material. So a combination is needed. I work in classrooms where many of the children are in the beginning stages of English and need in-classroom support to develop their English skills along with their social and cognitive development.. Those new to English frequently tune-out with long stretches of whole class teaching.
Reply
James
4/26/2021 02:53:53 am
Thanks for the comment. I think that there is still an important space for small group instruction. I think we need to reconsider how much teachers rely on it, and whether students can be better served through whole-class instruction.
Reply
Lorraine
4/25/2021 09:18:53 pm
Thank you for this post. I am regularly criticised for supporting whole class instruction. I do this because learning to read, write and spell are unnatural and hard for any novice brain.. When you provide teacher-led instruction, formative feedback and multiple opportunities for practice, you build a reading brain circuit. I expect to get a minimum of 110 responses in a 10-15 minute lesson.
Reply
James
4/26/2021 02:50:39 am
Thanks for the comment. Getting criticised supporting whole class instruction is baffling considering the evidence that supports it. Keep up the amazing work that you do!
Reply
Kristie
4/26/2021 04:04:38 am
Hello, I teach year 3/4 and I do whole class fluency reads too. The lists aren't the same for each child though...Instead students are given lists according to their spelling stage test. I find it hard to differentiate when the gap is so large! Some students are on cvc words, others are reading multisyllabic words.
Reply
James
4/27/2021 03:54:28 am
It's a shame when the gap grows, which is part of the power of whole class instruction. There is a need to support those students who need extra support in order to minimise the gap growing and growing. A big gap creates extra pressure on teachers to try an cater for a vast range of abilities.
Reply
Nathalie
4/27/2021 07:47:34 pm
Thankyou for sharing your insights James. I believe it is important for educators, whether beginning or experienced to ensure Tier 1 or whole class instruction is high quality first. As your blog names suggests, laying the foundations of the work and learning to come. While you are teaching 5 years olds phonological awareness, you are also teaching them how 'school' or your class operates. These too are important foundational skills for young children to master. Focusing on whole class instruction is more realistic for beginning teachers, but also for those transitioning towards practice which is aligned with the science of reading (or science of learning), otherwise it is easy to become overwhelmed.
Reply
James
5/10/2021 05:16:02 pm
Thanks for sharing Nathalie. Laying the foundations correctly is such an important part in setting students up for lifelong success.
Reply
Amy
5/12/2021 02:26:18 pm
I have to disagree with your explanation of differentiation here. Leaving it to chance is not differentiation. This should include well thought out, explicit and targeted teaching at point of need not a 'read as much as you can approch'. I see this as saying all students in my class are reading Harry Potter, it's differentiated beacsue some can only read the title and others the whole text. This is not differentiation, therfore relying on students to read more or less is not differentiation either. Give students what they need. More of what they can already do limits growth, more of what they can't do increases overwhelm and is confusing. Explicit teaching has it's place in a well balanced, structured classroom where needs are met as best as possible along side group or 1:1 work.
Reply
James
5/24/2021 03:56:29 am
Hi Amy,
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
I'm JamesI am a father of two (8 & 5), married to a future Early Childhood Educator. Archives
September 2023
Categories |