Teacher Tech: Magic Words

You’ve been taught that the magic words are please and thank you.  These are indeed effective, but teachers need more than just two magic words.  There are certain words that tap deep into a child’s brain and, if used, allow a teacher to be more effective.

Raise your hand if . . .

Many teachers will address the class and say something like, “Did everyone understand?”  or “Anyone remember what we did last time?”  Questions like these do not tell a student how to respond.  Students might wonder if they should call out the answer or raise a hand.  Also, think about the first question, there’s a certain amount a shame involved when admitting that you are not part of everyone.

Show me the correct way to . . .

Contrary to the way many students behave, they are actually hard-wired into wanting to please their mentors.  Not only that, but most children have a need to show-off to the mentor.  When you ask a student to Demonstrate the correct way to line up/pick up supplies/share with a partner, you are tapping into basic needs seated in a child’s brain.

Think about . . .

Think about what a student does during a lecture.  Does the student just open his brain and allow information in?  Kids are active creatures inside as well as outside.  One way to keep their attention during a lecture is to make sure you, the teacher, control the activity in their brain.  To do this, make your lecture active.  Tell your students what to do, think about, draw or write.  Use magic active words like: think about, imagine, picture in your mind, and so forth.

I would like you to . . .

Children can’t help but want to know what would please their teacher.  Some conduct disordered children want to know this so they can do the opposite, but most children just want to know.  When giving directions, use phrases like: I would like you to . . . , It would make me happy if . . .,  I want you to . . ., and so forth.  Be open about what you would like to see happen and what might not please you.  When a student does something counter to what you asked for, you can use phrases like, It makes me uncomfortable when . . ., It makes me unhappy when . . .

When I’m making an observation in a skilled teacher’s classroom, I’ll always hear more than just two magic words.

Policy: School Vouchers

Vouchers, where parents receive a certificate that they can apply towards a private school, have been touted as a way to improve education.  The argument goes something like this; if students take public money and use it to attend a private school, the public school will improve due to competition.  The students benefit because they can leave a failing public school in order to attend a private school that is unencumbered by an elected school board or unions.

What may seem on the surface as a great idea has developed into a disaster for students and public schools.  In Milwaukee, home of vouchers for 21 years, black students in public or private schools have the lowest scores of any city.  The Milwaukee vouchers have not improved schools or given students a better education.  They have taken public money and spent it without the oversight of an elected school board.

Governors Scott Walker (WI) and Mitch Daniels (IN) have pushed through or expanded voucher programs knowing they don’t improve schools.  Experts speculate that their goal was to curry political favors or deconstruct public schools.

Jeb Bush’s voucher program (FL) allows public money to be spent on completely unregulated “schools” that allow “teachers” with criminal records to “teach” by having students do workbooks and watch TV in dingy homes.

Everyone benefits from strong pubic neighborhood schools that are held accountable to elected school boards.  School reform resources should go towards efforts that have proven to be effective like early childhood education, professional development for teachers and a strong, vigorous curriculum.

Policy: Is the Bluebird a Phoenix?

This appeared in Reading Today.

I held her shaking body and cooed daddy/daughter things until she began to relax. When she finally caught her breath, all she could croak out was, “I’m going to be a bluebird.” I mouthed to Sharon, “What’s a bluebird?” Mystified, I held my despondent daughter until she could breathe normally.

It turns out; Lindsey had read poorly with Mrs. Richardson that day. Afterwords Lindsey convinced herself that she would be moved into the low group: the bluebirds. We assured her, as teachers ourselves, that first grade teachers would not move a student just because of one mistake.

After school the next day, Lindsey chirped that she was still a red bird. Parent/Teacher conferences were coming up, and we put this issue on our talk-list. At the conference, Mrs. Richardson explained that she grouped the students according to their ability to read so she could better meet their needs. We were stunned when she told us that none of the students knew which group was high or low.

When I was student teaching, my master teacher showed me how to teach reading. I learned about the three reading groups, placement tests, the basal reader and workbooks. I was told that if I followed the teacher’s manual, my students would become strong readers.

By the time my daughter entered Mrs. Richardson’s class I had long abandoned ability grouping when the weaknesses of the practice revealed themselves to me. The low students, who needed to do the most reading, actually read less. Middle students were trapped in a group that lacked the spark of the high kids. The high readers, since they were usually independent, got less teacher-time than they deserved. It just didn’t work.

I remember looking at my low group and musing that, although they shared a similar score on the placement test, that was about all they shared. Roman was bright, but recently arrived from Mexico. Margaret had low cognitive abilities, but her parents refused special education services, Jimmy had attention problems and couldn’t seem to function well on a test even though he loved to read. Ricky puzzled me. He did fine in math, but struggled to read fluently. The other members of the group also appeared so diverse, how could one lesson be appropriate for all?

Another element of ability grouping that irked me was when I noticed that, in order for my students to work independently, I needed to spend precious group-time teaching them how to do the workbook pages or seatwork. As a result, when I got a group back to the table, we would discuss their seatwork from the day before, then I would show them how to do the next pages, and finally, we would use the last few moments to try to learn a skill.

My teaching colleague, Mary, told me to teach them how to score well on the placement test so I could get them out of the low group. This logical idea seemed counter to the notion that I should be teaching them to be better readers, not better test-takers.

My principal loved to schedule morning assemblies that seemed to occur just when we were doing reading groups. When an announcement about the latest assembly came over the PA system, I noticed that my students seemed happy to miss their reading groups. Worse, I noticed I was happy to miss it, too. I realized that reading was the one subject my students and I didn’t enjoy.

Later, we had a three-day week due to Thanksgiving. Too short a period to run my reading groups. Instead, we began a whole class literature activity with a short story written just above the ability of my average student. After providing motivation and preparation to read the story, we had a fabulous lesson where my lowest students actually read more words in a day than they typically did in a week. The high kids loved the well-written story.

We decided to do literature the next week as well. I found it interesting that the whole class groaned when an assembly was announced. My students and I were enjoying reading.

Something was going right. Even though I witnessed obvious progress by all my students, I remained uneasy about bucking the ability-defined-three reading-group model; I looked to see what research said about the topic. Slavin’s research seemed to be the most thorough look at the subject, and I found it supported what I was doing. It surprised me that years later, Mrs. Greenseth hadn’t gotten the message.

Now my daughter is a confident, capable educator herself. I’m passionately loving my 36th year of teaching and still meeting the needs of my students without using ability grouping. Still, countrywide, classrooms are full of sincere, well-intentioned teachers like Mrs. Richardson, who attempt to diversify instruction by ability grouping.

Policy makers and educational leaders are tacitly or openly approving an ineffective strategy that outwardly meets the instructional needs of a diverse population. Publishers print materials that support ability grouping in response to the buying habits of these educational consumers.

New teachers look around at what their more experienced colleagues are doing and assuming that, despite what they learn in their education classes, ability grouping seems to be the right way to teach reading. Robert Marzano, in his 2001 book, Classroom Instruction That Works, points out that research does not support ability grouping and that it’s probably less common than in the 80’s.

However, I’m seeing pressure on teachers to resurrect this grouping strategy out of its own ashes. Educational leaders need to give teachers permission to abandon this ineffective teaching strategy. Leaders need to provide their teachers with materials and research that will help the Mrs. Richardsons make good educational decisions for their students. We need to put an end to the bluebirds. 

Family Connections: Can You Make Your Child Smarter?

Sarah was the kind of fifth grader who was irresistible to peers and teachers.  She would brighten a room simply by entering it, and everybody wanted to be on her team, in her group, or somehow near her.  Always a delight in the classroom, when I would say something like, “Take out your spellers,” she would joyfully announce how much she liked spelling.  

Despite having an IQ only moderately above average, she went on to capture the number two slot behind her high school valedictorian.  She received thousands of dollars in scholarships, made a big impression at her college, and is now a financial analyst with a prestigious firm in San Francisco.

Sarah is gifted with the kind of intelligence that can be much more important than I.Q. for future success.  She has emotional intelligence.  This means she is diligent, persevering, cheerful, empathetic, and able to draw friends, teachers, coaches and others to her.  When she picks out a goal, she is able to focus her attention to it and delay gratification until that goal is achieved. 

Is she lucky?  Absolutely, but fortunately for those of us who are not naturally like Sarah, emotional intelligence (EI) can be nurtured and learned.  This is largely not true of IQ, which is hard-wired into our brains during the earliest months years of life. 

There are several ways to help your child develop a strong EI.  One is to encourage your child when he or she is acting emotionally intelligent.  Catching your child “being good” and pointing this out can help a person develop a strong self-view.  Some parents point out other family members who show strong EI and tell the child that he or she is like Aunt Grace in the same way.

Meanwhile, if you want an excellent book on the subject, read Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman.  He often speaks directly to parents in this fascinating and readable book.

Sarah is one of several former students who still keep in touch with me. Few students will be able to develop their EI to the same degree as she, but all students will be able to have their EI raised with some effort.

Family Connections: Spring Behavior Changes

  A change is coming.  Your child has noticed this and understands that soon summer will bring huge and often wonderful changes to the normal routines.  It’s good-bye to comfortable classmates and teachers and hello to family summer plans.

  Is your child showing some different behavior at home lately?  Welcome to the club.  Children often react to the stress of change – even positive change – by unconsciously retesting limits and possibly reverting to an earlier developmental stage for a short while.

  If you think this is happening to your child, I suggest you patiently show your child that the limits haven’t changed.  Gently but firmly, your child needs to know that he or she must still live up to responsibilities and expectations.  See if you can do this in an unemotional and reassuring manner.

  Parents can help their children work through the stress caused by changes by maintaining routines and making extra time to listen to a child’s concerns and comments.  Plenty of rest resulting from a normal bedtime is helpful to your child.  This can be hard when other children (perhaps with less enlightened parents) are playing noisily outside or sports schedules keep your child up later than usual.

  If your family is not able to have dinner together nightly, this might be a good time to begin a family book or other ritual that gives the family a chance to be together and talk over the joys and frustrations of the day.  Talking over the feelings and problems of the characters in a book can give your family an extra feeling of togetherness.  

  When spring brings changes and stress to your child, you can show your child that the family is a secure and normal place.

Teacher Tech: One Reluctant Reader

      She entered class ready to fight.  Jennifer informed me straightaway that she hated me, my school and my class.  At recess she was seldom out of trouble for hitting, name calling or both.  She refused to do any of the activities the other students performed, pronouncing each undertaking “for babies”.  After two weeks of this I was able to find a quiet table in the library with just her and me.  It was there, her chin quivering and her chest heaving with emotion, that she told me she couldn’t read and she knew she was stupid.

            I had to teach her to read.

            My approach with Jennifer had four components: 

            •Using her own words, I would write them on strips and have her read them back.  We collected these in a log that she illustrated.

            •She participated in our class reading lessons pretending to read.  Sometimes I'd set her up with a memorized paragraph that I'd ask her to "read" to the class.

            •Reading an easy, but high-interest book with me, I gave her the support to read parts of it back to me and, eventually with peers.

            •Reading great children’s books from the easy book section of the library, she soon discovered a world that was safe and alluring.

            Although I saw steady changes in Jennifer’s reading skills, she still seemed defeated, angry and reluctant to try.  Every lesson was a struggle between us.  Frustrating my efforts was that she would not work with peers or other adults.  And like a steady rain, the behavior referrals continued to drown out the sounds of her progress.

            Why did she continue to resist my efforts to teach her?  Perhaps she did not see the progress so evident to me.  Soon, part of each lesson included recognizing her progress and learning how she should be expected to feel about it.  In essence, I had to force her to be successful, then compel her to notice it.  The result was like watching a tropical flower bloom in time lapse.

            Jennifer changed.  First I’d notice she was reading with another student.  Then, she’d read with my parent volunteer.  I’d see her read for pleasure during her free time.  She’d check out library books and bring them back the next day to exchange for more.  Her shiny nose was constantly in a book.  Her progress became less of a trickle and more like a roaring waterfall, breathtaking in its beauty and significance. 

            Like a tap shutting off abruptly, the behavior referrals stopped.  Jennifer was reading.  Jennifer liked to read, and she was proud of herself.  Her self-esteem was so high, she could learn other things as well, like how to play nicely with others.

            The rest of that school year was not without problems for Jennifer, but she had gained the key to future success.  She could read.

            I’ve been teaching for 35 years, and have received many kind notes from students and parents, but the one I treasure most is the lopsided note that Jennifer wrote thanking me for teaching her how to “read and be good”.  For Jennifer , reading was everything.

Family Connections: Why We Don't Ability Group

Message to Parents:

Why We Don’t Ability Group in Our Class

1.            It doesn’t work.  A huge body of research shows that it's actually harmful to many students.  We don't use the technique if it's proven to be ineffective.

2.            It has a negative effect on students’ self-esteem.  It can change a kid from thinking, “I think I can,” to “I know I can’t.”   Despite claims by teachers that students don’t know who’s in the low group — kids know. 

3.            It reduces a teacher’s ability to use thematic teaching.  Thematic teaching has proven to be an effective teaching tool, yet putting kids into different groups often fragments learning so there's no whole class vocabulary or shared experiences.  Instead of a class, there's just a bunch of people in the same room.

4.            Between-class grouping results in lost instructional time.  All that transition time is not instructional time.   In addition, there is less accountability when students have different teachers for different subjects.  The younger a student is, the more harm this practice causes.  Locking three or four teachers into a schedule reduces flexibility and a teacher’s ability to take advantage of serendipitous moments.

5.            Within class grouping has flaws that render it marginally useful.   When students are grouped within a class, the students not meeting with the teacher often do low-value “busy work” in workbooks.  Teachers then must spend precious instructional time teaching students how to do these activities instead of teaching reading. In addition, when a teacher is stuck behind a table with a group, it’s more difficult to monitor the other students.  Whole-class teaching has more kids on task for more time.

6.            The practice results in low kids reading fewer words each day and focusing on skills they may or may not be developmentally ready to learn.  Midlevel students have the class spark plugs removed when the highest students are sent to, what is typically, the most experienced teacher.  To cap it all, the bulk of studies show that high students do not benefit from ability grouping.

7.            Ability grouping causes more parental concerns.  As soon as a child receives a “low book” and is told she is in the bluebirds, that parent is rightly concerned about the social stigma.

8.            Often ability grouping places students of similar economic backgrounds in the same group.  This can rightly be viewed as discrimination. 

9.            It’s not fun.  It’s work.  In a whole class lesson, a teacher can build joy, excitement and enchantment into lessons involving good literature.  The writing lessons can be connected to the reading of fantastic stories, poems and plays.  No matter how skillfully it’s done, grouping kids removes the heady feeling of joy and belonging a whole class lesson can achieve.

10.            Ability grouping prevents or limits a teacher’s capability to run long, complex language arts lessons that involve speaking, writing, singing, acting, researching and plain reading.  Everything must be done in a week.