I make a claim and explain why it is controversial. I make a claim but don't explain why it is controversial.
A series of studies have confirmed what was probably obvious from the beginning. If we are to hope to attain the goal of "no child left behind," we must focus on creating a substantially larger number of effective, expert teachers.
Good teachers, effective teachers, manage to produce better achievement regardless of which curriculum materials, pedagogical approach, or reading program is selected.
Instead, I am going to describe what the teaching of exemplary elementary teachers looks like and challenge school administrators to examine whether their daily practice and their longer-term planning is designed to foster such teaching.
In other words, I believe school administrators should be crafting policies that ensure that more effective teachers are created each year in their schools. These teachers were selected, primarily, from schools that enrolled substantial numbers of poor children and schools that reflected the racial, ethnic, and linguistic diversity of the nation.
In each case we spent at least ten full instructional days, and often more, observing, interviewing, and videotaping in each room.
Two books, a number of articles, and related technical reports provide documentary details the books and articles are cited throughout and the technical reports, along with research summaries, can be found at http: We studied teachers found to be particularly effective in developing reading and writing proficiency.
Over the course of the study, however, it became clear that the teachers we were studying developed academic proficiencies well beyond higher reading and writing achievement test scores though the evidence we gathered did demonstrate that these teachers did produce significantly better standardized test performances as a matter of course.
The hundreds of days of classroom observation and the hundreds of interviews with teachers and students provide a clear portrayal of what good elementary teaching looks like.
Time These teachers had a "reading and writing vs. In typical classrooms, it is not unusual to find that kids read and write for as little as ten percent of the day 30 minutes of reading and writing activity in a minute, or five hour, school day. Worse, in many classrooms, 20 minutes of actual reading across the school day Knapp, is a common event, which includes reading in science, social studies, math, and other subjects.
Thus, less than ten percent of the day is actually spent reading and 90 percent or more of the time is spent doing stuff. The issue is less stuff vs. When stuff dominates instructional time, warning flags should go up. This is true even when the activity, in some form, has been shown to be useful.
But three to five minutes of building background knowledge is probably enough; spending most of a 90 minute reading block on building background knowledge seems an unlikely strategy for improving reading proficiencies. In less-effective classrooms, there is a lot of stuff going on for which no reliable evidence exists to support their use e.
Extensive reading is critical to the development of reading proficiency Krashen ; Stanovich, Extensive practice provides the opportunity for students to consolidate the skills and strategies teachers often work so hard to develop.
The exemplary elementary teachers we studied recognized this critical aspect of instructional planning.
Their students did more guided reading, more independent reading, more social studies and science reading than students in less-effective classrooms. Texts If children are to read a lot throughout the school day, they will need a rich supply of books they can actually read. This seems a simple statement of fact.
But there also exists a large and potent research base supporting supplying children with books of appropriate complexity Allington, Simply put, students need enormous quantities of successful reading to become independent, proficient readers.
By successful reading, I mean reading experiences where students perform with a high level of reading accuracy, fluency, and comprehension. When a nine-year-old misses as few as two or three words in each one hundred running words of a text, the text may be too hard for effective practice.
That text may be appropriate for instructional purposes but developing readers need much more high-success reading than they need instructional difficulty reading. It is the high accuracy, fluent, and easily comprehended reading that provides the opportunities to integrate complex skills and strategies into an automatic, independent reading process.
The exemplary teachers we studied too often had to teach against the organizational grain. They rejected district plans that "required" all children be placed in the same textbook or tradebook and do the same worksheets on the same day.
They recognized such schemes for what they are: Truly anti-scientific, non-research-based fads designed more, it seems, as an attempt to exert administrative power than to produce high levels of student achievement. Some were lucky to work in "smart" organizations.
These organizations provided a rich and expansive supply of texts that supported children's learning across the school day multi-level texts available for social studies and science as well as for reading classes. Organizations that knew that "one-size-fits-all" mandates contradicted virtually everything we have learned about effective teaching.
While students of all achievement levels benefited from exemplary teaching, it was the lowest achievers who benefited most.
In these classrooms, lower-achieving students spent their days with books they could successfully read. This has not typically been the case in less effective classrooms Allington, In too many schools, the lower-achieving readers receive appropriate reading materials only when they participate in special support instruction e.
In other words, in too many cases the lower-achieving students receive, perhaps, an hour of appropriate instruction each day and four hours of instruction based on grade-level texts they cannot read.Common Core State StandardS for engliSh language artS & literaCy in hiStory/SoCial StudieS, SCienCe, and teChniCal SubjeCtS appendix a | 3 rarely held accountable for what they are able to read independently (Heller & Greenleaf, ).
Questions not just topics. While the topics are predictable enough, the actual questions are invariably extremely precise. Again, there is also a good reason for this: the examiners do not want you to learn an essay, they want to test your English and see if you can answer a precise question, rather than produce a general answer to a general topic.
Research Paper & 6 + 1 Traits of Writing Research Paper Rubric For this particular assignment, a special emphasis will be placed upon three traits: Ideas and Content, Organization, and Presentation.
For the other traits (voice, • Paragraph structure presents supporting evidence in a unified and coherent. Learn why the Common Core is important for your child.
What parents should know; Myths vs. facts. C:\Users\Courtney\Desktop\Rubric Examples\writing\Ubalt writing rubric rev 08 21 doc WRITING ASSESSMENT RUBRIC EFFECTIVE ADEQUATE ESL Writing: A Simple Scoring Rubric.
A writing rubric is one possible solution. Below is a suggested scoring guide. It is simple, yes. Though I hope it provides useful guidance. This rubric is suitable for one paragraph writing submissions. In addition, it is useful for classes where the emphasis is on three main elements.