High Quality Teaching of Foundational Skills

in Mathematics and Reading

High Quality Teaching of Foundational Skills

in Mathematics and Reading

UMCP/MCPS Partnership Study of High Quality Teaching in Mathematics & ReadingSupported by a grant from

Interagency Education Research Initiativea combined effort of

the USDE, NIH, and NSF

Background of the HQT StudyBackground of the HQT Study

Assumption importance of teachers and teaching

Context lack of foundational skills 4th grade slump achievement gap

HQT Participants

Year 1: 67 teachers 11 schools

Year 2: 73 teachers 16 schools

Year 3: 76 teachers 18 schools

Year 4: 72 teachers 16 schools

Data Sources

Observation InstrumentObservation Instrument: Time sampling protocol focuses on Instructional Practices. It’s completed by trained observers, entered on lap top. Over 10,000 episodes for reading and for mathematics.

Daily LogDaily Log: Focuses on Curriculum Coverage. Completed by teacher, data on time and content for one student from class roster entered into PDA. Over 3,300 daily log entries in reading and in mathematics (average length 74 class minutes per entry)

InterviewsInterviews With 16 principals; focused on support for high-quality teaching and student learning in Grades 4 & 5 and how the achievement gap was addressed. With focus groups of teachers and staff developers

High Quality Teaching Study Data Sources

Schools

Classes

Student demographic & achievement records

Web-rostering of students to teachers' classes

Contextual investigationsprincipal interviewsteacher focus-groupsteacher interviewsartifact collection

Beginning of School Year

End of School Year

DailyLessons

DailyLessons

DailyLessons

Classroom observations (6-8 per class)pre-post interviews with teacherstime sampling (roughly 20 episodes per observation)

Daily lesson logs (max. 180 records per class)

Selected case studies of classroom practices

Attribution scores for each observation

Research QuestionsResearch Questions What do teachers do to help

students achieve above expectations in reading and mathematics?

How do they change their pedagogical practices?

What is the correspondence between high quality teaching constructs and student learning?

What is the influence of education policies and organizational factors?

High Quality Teaching in Reading & Math: Common Constructs

How teachers understand and represent subject matter

The existence of a classroom discourse community

Level of cognitive demand of activities and context

Cognitive Demand

The degree to which a teacher: presses for or evokes reasoning,

reflection on learning, and higher order thinking, and

Engages students in demanding content using challenging genres.

Example of Attribution Data

0

1

2

3

4

5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Know ledge Strategy Development & IndividualDifferences

Motivation Context & Situation

Teacher A

Teacher B

Teacher C

Mathematics Classes Mathematics Classes

Math Attribution:Mean & Range of Overall Scores by Teacher

Teacher

Overall S

core

5

4

3

2

1

0

Maximum

Minimum

Mean

Classroom OrganizationClassroom Organization

Whole Class: 54%

Independent Work 25%

Small Group 12%

Mixed Group & Independent 8%

Some Features of High Quality Mathematics Instruction

Some Features of High Quality Mathematics Instruction

Engages students in high level thinking and tasks and maintains the tasks at a high level

Connects mathematical ideas with “real world”

Provides for linked conceptual and procedural knowledge

Manages Act. On Task11%

Manages Mats.,Behav., Off Task

17%

No Obvious Instruction6%

Watches/listens9%

Poses or elaborates- Problem/High

7%

Requests 4%

Poses or Elaborates-Routine

20%

Responds, Models, Lectures, Posts,

Defines26%

Requests

Poses or elaborates- Problem/High

Poses or Elaborates-Routine

Responds, Models, Lectures, Posts,Defines

Watches/listens

Manages Act. On Task

Manages Mats.,Behav., Off Task

No Obvious Instruction

Percent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher ActivitiesPercent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher Activities

Percent of Time on Various Student ActivitiesPercent of Time on Various Student Activities

Responds-Simple Answer

21%

Asks Question,Reads Text, Writes on

Board8%

Works on Routine Ex11%

Formal Assessment4%

Listen/Watch20%

Management and Mixed17%

No Academic Behavior

2%Works on Prob.,

Ext. Writing10%

Responds-Conj, Expl, Alt Meth.

7%

Responds-Conj, Expl, Alt Meth.

Works on Prob., Ext. Writing

Responds-Simple Answer

Works on Routine Ex

Formal Assessment

Asks Question,Reads Text, Writeson Board

Listen/Watch

Management and Mixed

No Academic Behavior

Percent of Time for VariousLesson ContextsPercent of Time for VariousLesson Contexts

Hooks/Motivates3%

Connects3%

Class Agenda1%

No Specific Connection

93%

Connects

Hooks/Motivates

Class Agenda

No Specific Connection

Percent of Time on Various Mathematics ContentPercent of Time on Various Mathematics Content

Procedural40%

Conceptual21%

Linking Con. & Procedural

13%

Learning Strategies2%

Other, Management, Non-Inst.

20%

Mixed4%

Procedural

Conceptual

Linking Con. & Procedural

Learning Strategies

Other, Management, Non-Inst.

Mixed

Mathematics Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)Mathematics Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)

4th

Grd

. M

ath

em

atic

s L

es

so

ns

(S

D U

nits

)

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

-1.0

Procedural

Conceptual

Linking 5th

Grd

. M

ath

em

atic

s L

ess

on

s (S

D U

nits

)

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

-1.0

Procedural

Conceprual

Linking

4th Grade Classes

5th Grade Classes

Reading ClassesReading Classes

Reading Attribution:Mean & Range of Overall Scores by Teacher

Teacher

Overall S

core

5

4

3

2

1

0

Maximum

Minimum

Mean

Features of High Quality Reading InstructionFeatures of High Quality Reading Instruction

Allows students to have choice about interesting and challenging text of a variety of genres

Encourages students to respond personally to what they read

Promotes dialogue about reading and writing

Creates a balance between comprehending and reasoning about texts and necessary skill instruction

Variety of Genres in HQT ClassroomsVariety of Genres in HQT Classrooms

Exposition: 32% Articles: 6% Essays: 2% Trade books: 2% Textbook: 2% Procedural: 1% Reference: 1% Research: 1%

Narrative: 35.2% Realistic Fiction:

7% Historical Fiction:

5% Fantasy: 4% Autobiography: 1% Biography: 1% Fables: 1% Mystery: .6%

Classroom OrganizationClassroom Organization

Whole Class 44%

Mixed Group & Independent 25%

Independent Work 20%

Small Group 11%

Percent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher ActivitiesPercent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher Activities

Requests5%

Poses or Elaborates Low17%

Poses or Elaborates High5%

Responds, Models, Posts, Lectures,

Reads Aloud26%

Listens to, Watches, Reads Student

Work, Reads silently14%

Manages Act. On Task10%

Manages Mats., Behav., Off Task

14%

No Obvious Instruction

9%

Requests

Poses or Elaborates High

Poses or Elaborates Low

Responds, Models, Posts,Lectures, Reads Aloud

Listens to, Watches, Reads StudentWork, Reads silently

Manages Act. On Task

Manages Mats., Behav., Off Task

No Obvious Instruction

Percent of Time on Various Student ActivitiesPercent of Time on Various Student Activities

Respond With or State Simple Answer

20%

Assist, Discuss, Read Aloud, Read Silently, Use

Resources14%

Manage/Mixed25%

No Apparent Academic Behavior in Reading

4%

Listen/Watch17%

Write Low, View9%

Respond With or State Hypo., Predict, Expla.,

Just., Alt., Elab.11%

Write High, Perform0%

Respond With or State Hypo.,Predict, Expla., Just., Alt., Elab.

Write High, Perform

Respond With or State SimpleAnswer

Assist, Discuss, Read Aloud,Read Silently, Use Resources

Write Low, View

Listen/Watch

Manage/Mixed

No Apparent AcademicBehavior in Reading

Percent of Time on Different Types of ContentPercent of Time on Different Types of Content

ManagementMixed, 24%

Conventions, 6%

Performing, Viewing,

I llustrating, 4%

Writing, 17%

Reading, 46%

Non-instructional, 3%

Reading

Writing

Conventions

Performing, Viewing,Illustrating

ManagementMixed

Non- instructional

Reading Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)Reading Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)

4th Grade Classes 5th Grade Classes

May/June

AprilM

arch

February

January

December

November

September/O

ctober

5th

Grd

. R

ea

din

g L

ess

on

s (S

D U

nits

)

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

-1.0

Reading

Writing

Conventions

4th

Grd

. R

ea

din

g L

ess

on

s (S

D U

nits

)

1.0

.8

.6

.4

.2

.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

-1.0

Reading

Writing

Conventions

HQT Reading InstructionHQT Reading Instruction

Uses a variety of both exposition and narrative chosen by the teacher to be personally relevant to students’ lives

Promotes dialogue about reading primarily in teacher-led small groups

Creates a balance between reading and writing about texts and conventions

What Do We Learn About High Quality Teaching from Teacher-Student Oral Interactions?

What Do We Learn About High Quality Teaching from Teacher-Student Oral Interactions?

Roughly one-quarter to one-third of observed time in reading and mathematics classes involved oral interactions about lesson content

Students twice as likely to provide simple answers than complex, cognitively demanding answers (18% v. 10%) to teacher inquiries about reading

Student three times as likely to provide simple answers than complex, cognitively demanding answers (22% v. 7%) to teacher inquiries about mathematics

Quality of Teacher Requests Mirror Quality of Student Responses

Quality of Teacher Requests Mirror Quality of Student Responses

More cognitively demanding teacher inquiries result in more cognitively demanding student responses; just as simple teacher inquiries result in simple answers from students

Students respond more positively to teachers’ requests for higher cognitive demands in reading classes where management is more focused on instruction

Students respond more positively to teachers’ requests for higher cognitive demand in mathematics classes where small group instruction used more frequently

More Cognitively Demanding Requests and Responses Vary Across the Year

More Cognitively Demanding Requests and Responses Vary Across the Year

Mean L

esson C

onte

nt (in S

D U

nits

) .8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

Teacher Requests Hi

Student Responds Hi

M

ean L

esson C

onte

nt (in S

D U

nits

)

.8

.6

.4

.2

0.0

-.2

-.4

-.6

-.8

Teacher Requests Hi

Student Responds Hi

Mathematics Classes Reading Classes

More Cognitively Demanding Student ReponsesMore Cognitively Demanding Student Reponses

IN READING Classes where teachers

made more requests for cognitively demanding responses from students

Classes that had lower proportions of English language learners

Schools that had greater emphasis on cognitively demanding content across all classes

IN MATHEMATICS Classes where teachers

requested more cognitively demanding responses from students

Classes with less emphasis on procedural knowledge

Schools with lower proportions of at-risk students (ELL, FARM, Special ED)

How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Barriers

How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Barriers

School personnel must respond to too many different initiatives at once

Materials or training that enable teachers to meet expectations are insufficient

The over-emphasis on testing is a detriment to teaching and learning

A climate of blame and punishment hinders collaborative, supportive problem solving

How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Supports

How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Supports

Goals and objectives are clearly communicated

School personnel are encouraged to develop a common language and vision for teaching and learning

The learning needs of struggling learners are made a priority

Opportunities and incentives are in place for teacher collaboration on student learning

Data-based decision-making is valued

Schools’ Responses to the Policy EnvironmentSchools’ Responses to the Policy Environment

Use data and data analysis to Determine students’ learning needs Assign resources to particular categories

of students Shape the focus and content of working

team meeting

Organize teams of specialists and teachers for

Plug-ins, pull-outs, plug-in and pull-asides Double-dips Collaborative teaming and problem-

solving

In Principals’ Own WordsIn Principals’ Own Words

“There’s a lot more dialogue going on about the needs of individual students. And that’s in part attributable to what I’m doing as a leader, but it’s also in part attributable to the county. Things are coming into play here. . .the implementation of a collaborative action process program. . . All these things are coming together and creating a very positive team.”

“My vision for next year is to have more individual data conversations about how kids are doing, have less nervousness about that because certainly there was apprehension about that; having more collegiality among team members to where people don’t feel the need to hide what they’re doing and tell me everything is fine when everybody knows it’s not.”

This study is supported by a grant from the Interagency Education Research Initiative, a combined effort of the U.S. Department of

Education, National Institutes of Health,

and National Science Foundation.

This study is supported by a grant from the Interagency Education Research Initiative, a combined effort of the U.S. Department of

Education, National Institutes of Health,

and National Science Foundation.

THE ENDTHE END

Critical QuestionCritical Question

What would you like others—teachers, administrators, policy makers—to know about high quality teaching?

Special Acknowledgment

Special Acknowledgment

Our deepest appreciation for your participation, allowing so many of us into your classrooms and schools so often, and for your daily efforts to engage in high quality teaching

What Teachers Say They Do to “Close the Gap”What Teachers Say They Do to “Close the Gap”

Identify gaps and address needs

(using data—student written work

and assessments—to plan future

instructional needs)

Function as an instructional team

Build student confidence while

maintaining high expectations

Use flexible, small group instruction

In mathematics, connect to the real

world and using writing to develop

deeper understandings

In reading, connect with other

subjects, build vocabulary and

vocabulary skills, explicitly teach

strategies so students can become

independent readers