Coaching
conversations sometimes focus around a scope and sequence of instruction: What
to teach now and what to teach next. Sometimes there is a pacing guide involved;
in some schools, this is a strict page-by-day requirement; more generously, it
is what its name implies: A guide that can be adjusted to meet the needs of
students. In any case, we hope that a scope and sequence is guided by
developmental trajectories of how students learn. This knowledge is invaluable
as teachers consider which skills to teach to individual students and to whole
classes. But let’s caution teachers to use knowledge of developmental processes
in conjunction with ongoing formative assessment to determine instructional
next steps. Instruction should target only what is necessary and unknown.
I
heard this concise guideline (Teach only what is necessary and unknown) at this
year’s ALER conference in an
excellent presentation by Mary Roe about the Science of Reading. But it
reflects my long-held beliefs about rigor and relevance.
As
a classroom teacher, I worked with students who might have been labeled “high-risk,”
because of family income levels, language knowledge, etc. For me, this translated into “high
responsibility” for ensuring that every minute counted, Yes, that meant
bell-to-bell teaching and efficient transitions, but more importantly, it meant
that instruction was intentional. Intentional
instruction is focused on what is essential for students to know, understand,
and be able to do.* Intentional
instruction means that each lesson targets an ever-escalating zone
of proximal development. Teachers can do this only if they know what their
students already know – thus, the focus on formative assessment that includes both
formal evaluations and lots of kid-watching.
The
conversation about necessary and unknown arose multiple times this week, I talked with a parent whose second-grade son
has independently read the first 3 Harry Potter books but is sitting through
whole-class phonics instruction every day and developing behavior problems
because of boredom. Not only is Nick already a reader, he already has solid
phonics knowledge (this can’t be assumed). Classroom phonics instruction does
not fit the “unknown” criteria for Nick.
A
similar concern arose this week when an applicant for an open faculty position
emphatically described the need for every child to have explicit,
systematic phonics instruction, “even if they were already a reader.” While it
is true that every child benefits form extensive phonics knowledge, it is not
true that every child needs to be marched through the paces of daily
whole-class phonics instruction. They may already possess this knowledge. Let’s
test and see!
Sandy,
a veteran first-grade teacher I was talking with this week was well-aware of the
“as needed” concept. Again, the focus was phonics instruction, and again, there
are students in the class that don’t need it. As we talked, Sandy focused on Christy,
who she knows already has the knowledge taught in the weekly phonics lessons
prescribed by her district. In addition to targeting Christy’s needs during
small group instruction, Sandy was thinking with me about which parts of the
literacy block Christy could appropriately participate in to maintain social
participation and whole-group experiences while moving her own learning
intentionally forward. Since Christy is an independent technology user, Sandy
is thinking of valuable extensions and projects that will engage Christy’s
interests and help her grow as a learner. Such differentiation isn’t easy, but
it is important. Ask Nick’s mom.
Although
the examples that surfaced for me this week focused on phonics instruction, the
necessary and unknown principle applies across the curriculum. Don’t
teach use of active verbs to writers who already do it. Don’t drill students on
mathematical equations they can already solve. Don’t assign “main idea/detail”
worksheets to students who clearly understand these concepts, even if that worksheet
is the next one in the resources or the next step on the pacing guide. Whether
a student is considered advanced or at risk, the necessary and unknown principle
guides responsible teaching. Teaching
what is necessary and unknown is high-responsibility teaching, and
coaching teachers to take this stance is high-responsibility coaching.
------------------------
*Here
I am mainly discussing skills. Of course, students’ interests should
play a major role in determining content.
------------------------
