nationals 2007 handouts

8/22/2019 Nationals 2007 Handouts

1/22

Active Engagement Strategies for WholeGroup Instruction

Sarah Sayko, M. Ed.National Center for Reading First Technical Assistance

RMC Research Corp.

Sheryl Turner, M.A.Eastern Regional Reading First Technical Assistance Center


2/22

10:2 Theory Reflection Sheet

Active Engagement:_______________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Effectiveness Studies:________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Classroom Management:________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Instructional Planning:________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Instructional Delivery:_______________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Active Engagement Strategies:


3/22

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

_____


4/22

Active Learning Self-Assessment

Please reflect on the following statements about your learningenvironment. Use the following notations: 3: Almost

always 2: Sometimes 1: Never

1. ___The classroom environment lends itself to variedformats of instruction.

2. ___All students feel comfortable expressing theirideas in my classroom.

3. ___I differentiate instruction for all students based on

need as determined from assessment data.

4. ___I have students use manipulatives during wholegroup phonemic awareness and phonics instruction.

5. ___Students work with partners during fluencybuilding activities.

6. ___My students think critically and creatively because

I ask questions that have more than one answer.

7. ___I encourage students to think and discuss answerswith a partner or a small group before answering in alarger group.

8. ___I encourage my students to reflect on theirexperiences when learning something new anddiscuss new ideas before, during, and after learning.

9. ___I help students examine their own thinking andbuild on their ideas.

10. ___I active students background knowledge andmake clear the big ideas before instruction.


5/22

11. ___I use essential questions and key concepts tohelp students organize new information in ways thatmake sense to them.

12. ___Students have time throughout the day todiscuss their thinking with others.


6/22

Strategy Matrix

Active Engagement

Structure

How I Might Use This

StrategyThink-Pair-Share

Purpose:

Anticipation Guide

Purpose:

Signal Cards

Purpose:

I Have The Question, Who Has the

Answer?

Purpose:


7/22


8/22

Task Analysis

Objective:______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__

Skills and Knowledge Required for Task Completion:1. ____________________________________2. ____________________________________3. ____________________________________4. ____________________________________5. ____________________________________

Is there background knowledge the entire group is lacking?_______________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

Is there background knowledge individual students are lacking?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Are there skills the entire group is lacking?______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

__

Are there skills individual students are lacking?________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

What steps will be taken to anticipate instructional difficulties forstudents?

Student Name Potential Problem Action Steps


9/22


10/22

Examples of Anticipating InstructionalDifficulties

Review the teaching scenarios and discuss witha partner how the teachers were proactiverather than reactive in their instruction.

1. A teacher anticipated the inappropriatequestions that students might generate. Thestudents read a paragraph followed by threequestions on might ask about the paragraph.

The students were asked to look at eachexample and decide whether or not thatquestion was about the most importantinformation in the paragraph. The studentsdiscussed whether each question was toonarrow, too broad, or appropriate.

(Palincsar, 1987)

2. Students were taught specific rules todiscriminate a question from a non-question, anda good question for a poor one. The teacherprovided the following statements:-A good question starts with a question word.-A good question can be answered by the story.-A good question asks about an important detail

of the story.

(Cohen, 1983)


11/22

Corrective Feedback-Immediately directed toward group of

students

-Repeat I do, we do, you do procedure

-Firm up understanding by repeating the series

of items preceding error and then error item to

provide repeated practice

-Delayed check: teacher checks group/student

understanding on error item at later time inlesson

I do, we do, you do Procedure-Teacher models skill

-Teacher responds with student

-Student responds on own

Application-Firm up understanding by repeating the series

of items preceding new skill and then new skill

item to provide repeated practice

-Delayed check: teacher checks group/student

understanding on item at later time in lesson

-Teacher corrects error again

-Firm up understanding by repeating the series

of items preceding error and then error item to

provide repeated practice

-Teacher keeps track of student errors forreteaching and practice the next day

-Several delayed checks may be given during alesson for repeated practice

Adapted from Carnine, D. et al. Teaching Struggling andAt-Risk Readers (2006)

Conceptual Framework for Corrective FeedbackProcedure

Explicit Instruction-Skill taught in a direct manner

-I do, we do, you do procedure

-Corrective feedback

Student Demonstrates Understanding Student Does Not Demonstrate Understanding

Student Error on Delayed Check


12/22

Examples of Group Alertness

Read teaching scenarios and discuss with apartner what the qualities of group alertnessare.

1. Instead of telling students information, theteacher involves her students at every turn. Asthe students listen to the sounds in fan, they slidtheir hand from their shoulder to their elbow,

then to their wrist and chorally chimed, /fff-aaa-nnn/. For rhymes, the students came up withthe words themselves.

2. During making words activities, the studentsmanipulated their own set of letters as theteacher coached, Lets do tub. Listen to the

middle sounds. Its not tab, its not tob. Its /ttt-uuu-bbb/. You need a letter for /u/.

3. When the class couldnt answer a question abouthow a character had changed, the teachersuggested that they search the book for a clueinstead of telling them the answer.


13/22

Pre-Lesson Planning Reflection

Question AnswerWhat do students already know and what are their needsbased on data?

What should students know and be able to do as a result ofthis lesson? (teaching objectives)

How are your objectives aligned to state and districtstandards?

How will students demonstrate what they know and can do?

How will student understanding be assessed?

How will new knowledge, concepts, and skills be introduced?

How will active engagement occur for all students?

What do I need to do to differentiate instruction so learningoccurs for:

On-grade level learners?

Below-grade level learners?

Above-grade level learners?

How will I make clear to students the learning objectives,directions, procedures, and activities at the beginning of thelearning process?


14/22

What adjustments need to be made in the learningenvironment so that work and learning can occur efficiently?


15/22

Post-Lesson Analysis

Questions Theme: Week: Lesson:Outcomes

What were the student results of the lesson?

Does the assessment data support those outcomes?

Who were the students that did not demonstrateunderstanding?What might be the factors that account for that?

What else do I need to consider in pre-planning next time Ifocus on this skill/standard?Instructional Delivery

In what ways was I explicit and systematic in my delivery?

Were all student actively engaged in the lesson? If not, whatcan I do to increase student participation?For whom did the instructional strategies facilitate studentlearning? For whom did they not?What are the adaptations, additions, or deletions in instructionthat I need to make to help more students achieve mastery ofthe skill/standard?Activities

Did all of the activities guide students toward mastery of the

skill/standard?What are the activities that need to be added, modified, oreliminated?Am I using these activities because I have always used them orhave I analyzed them to be sure that they are the mosteffective and efficient tools at my disposal?Reflection

Over all, was this lesson effective for addressing theskill/standard?When do additional lessons of this skill/standard occur in thecurriculum?


16/22

Will the cumulative review in the curriculum be sufficient for allof my students or will I need to provide additional review?When will the additional instruction take place?


17/22

Blooms Taxonomy

Descripti

on

Key

Words

Sample Question

StemsKnowledge testing recallandrecognition,factualanswers

WhoWhatWhereWhenHowWhy

How many?Can you name the?Describe what happenedwhen?What happened before?After?Who went to the?Define the?

Comprehension

translating,interpretingand

extrapolating

ClassifyTellTranslate

SelectMatchExplain

What does this mean?State in your own wordsCan you write a brief

outline?Who was the keycharacter?What differences?Similarities?What do you think couldhave happened next?

Application use factualsituations tosolveproblems,apply to

situations thatare new

IllustrateCalculateConstructComplete

From the informationgiven, can you create aset of instructions?How much change wouldthere be if?

Predict what wouldhappen if?

Analysis break downinto parts,break downideas, parts toidentifypatterns orrelationships

DistinguishIdentifyCompare,contrastInvestigate

Ifhad happened, whatmight have been theending?What do you see as otherpossible outcomes?What is the relationshipbetween?

Synthesis combineelements intoa pattern that

was notclearly therebefore, newproducts,ideas, orsolutions

CreateChooseDevelop

PlanDesign

What would happen if?How would you feel if?How many ways can

you?Propose and alternativeHow else would you?

Evaluation make criticaljudgments

DecideJustify

Which is more important?Why?


18/22

and state why DebateRecommendPrioritize

Which is better? Why?Is there a better solution?How would you feel if?Do you think.is a goodor bad thing?


19/22

Active Engagement Teaching Strategies

Direct Explanation of Comprehension Strategies (DECS) (Duffy,2002):

DECS is a five component procedure with teacher scaffolding. The firststep is (1) an explicit description of the strategy and when and how itshould be used, (2) the teacher and/or student models the strategy inaction, (3) there is collaborative use of the strategy in action, (4) nextis guided practice using the strategy with gradual release ofresponsibility, and (5) finally independent use of the strategy.

Peer-Assisted Learning Strategies (PALS) (Fuchs et al., 1997):Students are engaged in three strategic reading activities moretypically addressed during teacher directed instruction: partnerreading with retell, paragraph summary, and prediction relay. PALSprovides students with intensive, systematic practice in reading aloud,reviewing and sequencing information read, summarizing, stating mainideas, and predicting.

Skim, Question, Read, Recite, Review (SQ3R) (Robinson, 1946):SQ3R is a reading comprehension strategy which involves a series ofsteps - surveying, asking questions to be answered by the reading,then reading, reciting the important points, and reviewing.

Classwide Peer Tutoring (CWPT) (Greenwood, Del quadri, & Hall,1989):This is an instructional practice which requires 30 minutes ofinstructional time during which 10 minutes is planned for each studentto serve as a tutor, 10 minutes to be tutored, and 5 to 10 minutes toadd and post individual and team points. Tutees begin by reading abrief passage from their text to their tutor, who in turn providesimmediate corrective feedback as well as points for correctly readingthe text. When CWPT is used for reading comprehension, the tuteeresponds to who, what, when, where, and why questions provided bythe tutor concerning the text passage. The tutor corrects responsesand provides the tutee with feedback.

Questioning the Author (QtA) (Beck et al., 1996):QtA enables teachers to guide and facilitate students during-readingcomprehension as they progress through successive sections of text.Teachers do so by posing certain questions called queries that enablestudents to cooperatively construct meaning as they read and reflecton ideas in the text. Queries are open-ended and are intended to help


20/22

students to understand, interpret, and elaborate an authors meaningas they read.


21/22

Active Engagement Teaching Strategies(cont)

Reciprocal Teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1989):This is a technique for teaching a coordinated set of fourcomprehension strategies-questioning, summarizing, clarifying, andpredicting. The teacher and a small group of students read anddiscuss a text. Before beginning the discussion, the teacher directlyinstructs students on each of the four strategies and evaluatesindividual students proficiency with them so that she or he will knowhow to scaffold each student during the discussion. Then, as the groupprogresses through the text segment by segment, the teacher modelsand guides student through the four strategies. The teachers role isthe discussion is to assist students during reading as they work to

comprehend text and to focus and direct the dialogue.

Scaffolding Reading Experience (SRE) (Graves & Graves, 2003):This is a flexible framework that teachers can use to assist students inunderstanding, learning from, and enjoying both narrative andexpository text. The teachers role is to structure and orchestrate thereading experience so that students may optimally comprehend. TheSRE as two phases: planning and implementation. During the planningphase, the teacher considers the students who will be selecting,determining the purpose, and doing the reading. On the basis of theseconsiderations, the teacher then creates a set of pre-reading, during-

reading, and post-reading activities designed to assist this particulargroup of students in reaching those purposes.

Adapted from Scaffolding Students Comprehension of Text(Clark & Graves, 2004) &Grouping Students Who Struggle with Reading retrieved from readingrockets.org


22/22

BibliographyAlvennan, D. E., and S. F. Phelps. Content Reading and Literacy. Boston: Allyn and Bacon, 1994.American Federation of Teachers. Foundations of Effective Teaching: Organizing the Classroom Environment for

Teaching and Learning. (1996). Educational Research and Dissemination Program.Anderson, L.M., Evertson, C.M., and Emmer, E.T. (1979). Dimensions in Classroom Management Derived from Recent

Research. Research and Development Center for Teacher Education, University of Texas at Austin, Report No.6006.Archer, A. (2007). Active participation: Engaging them all. National Reading First Comprehension Conference.Blair, T., Rupley, W. & Nicolas, W. (2007). The effective teacher of reading: Considering the what and how of

instruction. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 60, No. 5, p. 432-438.Brophy, J. (1979). Teacher Behavior and Its Effects. Journal of Educational Psychology, 21:733-750.Darling-Hammond, L. (1998). Teachers and teaching: Testing policy hypotheses from a national commission report.

Educational Researcher, Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 5-15.Emmer, E.T., Evertson, C.M., and Anderson, L.M. (1980). Effective Classroom Management at the Beginning of the

School Year. The Elementary School Journal, 80(5): 219-231.Ferguson, Ronald F. 1991. "Paying for Public Education: New Evidence on How and Why Money Matters." Harvard

Journal on Legislation, vol. 28, no. 2 (Summer), pp. 465-98.Gage, N.L., (1978). The Scientific Basis for the Art of Teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.Gage, N.L., (1993). Address at the Pre QuEST Educational Research and Dissemination Conference. Washington,

D.C.:American Federation of Teachers.Guthrie, J.T., McGough, K., Bennett, L., & Rice, M.E. (1996). Concept-oriented reading instruction: An integratedcurriculum to develop motivations and strategies for reading. In L. Baker, P. Afflerbach, & D. Reinking (Eds.), Developing

engaged readers in school and home communities (pp. 165-190). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Guthrie, J.T., Van Meter, P., McCann, A.D., Wigfield, A., Bennett, L., Poundstone, C.C., Rice, M.E., Faibisch, F.M., Hunt,

B., & Mitchell, A.M. (1996). Growth of literacy engagement: Changes in motivations and strategies during concept-oriented reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 306-332.

Herber, H.L. & Herber, J.N. (1993). Teaching in content areas with reading, writing, and reasoning. Boston: Allyn andBacon.

Ketch, A. (2005). Conversation: The comprehension connection. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 59, No. 1, p. 8-13.Kounin, J. (1970). Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Lane, H. & Pullen, P. (2004). Phonological awareness assessment and instruction: A sound beginning. Boston:

Pearson.Meyers, C. & Jones, T. (1993). Promoting active learning. Strategies for the college classroom. San Francisco:Jossey-

Bass.Mohr, K. & Mohr, E. (2007). Extending english-language learners classroom interactions using the response protocol.

The Reading Teacher, Vol. 60, No. 5, p. 440-450.Rasinski, T. (2003). The fluent reader. New York: Scholastic.Rowe, M. B. (1986). Wait time: Slowing down may be a way of speeding up. Journal of Teacher Education.Rosenshine, B. and Meister, C. (1995). Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Order Cognitive Strategies. In A.C. Ornstein (ed.)

Teaching: Theory into Practice. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.Rosenshine, B. and Meister, C. (1992). The Use of Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Level Cognitive Strategies. Educational

Leadership,April: 26-33Rosenshine, B. (1997 ). Advances in research on instruction. Chap. 10 in J.W. Lloyd, E. J. Kamannui & D. Chard (Eds.)

Issues in educating students with disabilities. Mahwah, NJ.: Lavrence Erlbaum: pp. 197-221.Ryan, R. & Deci, E. (2000). Self-Determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and

well-being. American Psychologist. Vol. 55, No. 1, 68-78.Simmons, D. C., Fuchs, L. S., Fuchs, D., Mathes, P., & Hodge, J. P. (1995).

Effects of explicit teaching and peer tutoring on the reading achievement of learning-disabled and low-performingstudents in regular classrooms. Elementary School Journal, 95(5), 387-408.

Tableman, B. (2004). Characteristics of effective elementary schools in poverty areas.Best Practices Briefs. No. 29.

Taylor, B., Pearson, P., Clark, K. & Walpole, S. (1999). Effective schools/accomplished teachers.Article #99-01. Retrieved on from CIERA.

Taylor, B., Pearson, P., Clark, K. & Walpole, S. (1999). Beating the odds in teaching all childrento read. CIERA Report #2-006. Retrieved on from CIERA.

Taylor, B., Peterson, D., Pearson, P. & Rodriguez, M. (2002). Looking inside classrooms:Reflecting on the how as well as the what in effective reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, Vol. 56, No. 3, p.270-279.

Torgensen, J. (2007). Research related to strengthening instruction in reading comprehension: Part 2. National ReadingFirst Comprehension Conference.

Vaughn, S., Hughes, M., Moody, S. & Elbaum, B. (2005). Grouping students who struggle with reading. Retrieved onfrom readingrockets.org.

Vygotsky, L. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of High Psychological Processes. (trans. and edited by M. Cole,V. John-Steiner, S. Scribner and E. Souberman).Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

nationals 2007 handouts

Documents