A Publication & Podcast by ETFO and OISE
This publication and podcast is a joint project of ETFO and OISE, summarizing current research findings relevant to teaching in elementary schools. Each issue, written by university researchers, will focus on a body of research within a particular domain.
Podcast | Publication
Note: new podcasts will be added as they become available.
No. 1 - Parent EngagementDebbie Pushor - University of SaskatchewanSeptember 2010, 00:04:11
MP3 file (9.6 mb) | OGG file (3.2 mb)
No. 2 - Formative Assessment to Support Student LearningChristine Suurtamm - University of OttawaNovember 2010, 00:04:18
MP3 file (9.8 mb) | OGG file (3.3 mb)
No. 3 - School-Based Family Literacy Intervention ProgramsJanette Pelletier - Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of TorontoFebruary 2011, 00:04:13
No. 4 - Not Available
No. 5 - Why The Arts MatterDr. Rena Upitis - Queen’s UniversityMay 2011, 00:04:02
MP3 file (9.2 mb) | OGG file (3 mb)
No. 6 - Prevent Bullying by Promoting Healthy RelationshipsDebra Pepler - York University and the Hospital for Sick ChildrenDecember 2011, 00:07:11
MP3 file (7 mb) | OGG file (6.1 mb)
No. 7 - Not Available
No. 8 - Managing Teacher-Student Relationships: A Minimalist ApproachChristine RichmondFebruary 2012, 00:04:35
MP3 file (10.4 mb) | OGG file (3.6 mb)
No. 9 - Teaching English Language LearnersJim Cummins - Ontario Institute for Studies in EducationApril 2012, 00:07:21
MP3 file (16.8 mb) | OGG file (5.7 mb)
No. 10 - Equity, Social Justice, and the Inclusive ClassroomCarl E. James - Centre for Education and Community, York UniversityJuly 2012, 00:07:04
MP3 file (16.5 mb) | OGG file (5.0 mb)
No. 11 - Using Digital Technologies to Support Literacy Instruction Across the CurriculumClare Brett - Ontario Institute for Studies in EducationJuly 2012, 00:05:27
MP3 file (12.7 mb) | OGG file (3.9 mb)
No. 12 - TEACHER LEADERSHIP: WHAT DO WE KNOW SO FAR?Ann Lieberman - Emeritus Professor, Teachers College, Columbia University & Senior Scholar at Stanford UniversityFebruary 2013, 00:06:15
MP3 file (14.6 mb) | OGG file (4.5 mb)
No. 13 - PEER FEEDBACK ON WRITING: AN ASSESSMENT-FOR-LEARNING TOOLShelley Stagg Peterson - Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of TorontoFebruary 2013, 00:04:30
MP3 file (10.5 mb) | OGG file (3.4 mb)
No. 14 - PROMOTING CURRICULUM ACCESS IN CHILDREN AND YOUTH WITH READING DISABILITIESDr. Rhonda Martinussen - Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of TorontoApril 2013, 00:06:05
MP3 file (14.2 mb) | OGG file (4.4 mb)
No. 15 - TEACHING ELEMENTARY MATHEMATICSMarian Small - University of New Brunswick, EmeritaMarch 2013, 00:06:05
Expand titles below to view individual Research for Teachers issues. Downloadable PDF versions are listed under Related Documents.
Debbie PushorUniversity of Saskatchewan
A wealth of research concludes that students are more likely to be successful when their parents are engaged in their education. When parents are truly engaged, children:
In light of this evidence, meaningful relationships that enhance parents’ opportunities to make important contributions to student learning are vital to the work of teachers.
Recently, researchers have analyzed these findings to determine what parents do that makes this difference in students’ education. It seems it is not particular parent actions, such as attending school functions, establishing household rules, or checking student homework, that make the difference. Instead, it is more subtle aspects of parent engagement that prove to be the most important - such as creating an atmosphere in the home in which education is valued, and in which high expectations and levels of support are established. When parent engagement is linked to teaching and learning it contributes to enhanced student results. The benefits are greater when the parent is not expected to act as another teacher. These findings have important implications for teachers in how they build relationships with parents.
Three critical implications for teachers emerge.
1. Adopt a definition of parent engagement that embodies the role parents play in their children’s learning both in and out of school. Move away from promoting tasks for parents to perform such as reading with their children, helping with homework, or volunteering in the classroom.
Encourage parents to be engaged in their children’s learning on their own terms and in ways that fit their place in their children’s lives - playing games, cooking together, enrolling their children in language, cultural, or extra-curricular activities, or family outings.
2. Pay attention to the knowledge parents and families hold, the ways they instill a sense of educational standards and support, promote learning, engage with their children in varied experiences, and so on. Learn from parents and families about their lives out of school. For example:
3. Use the knowledge gained from parents and families to engage with parents, at home and at school, in ways that contribute to school improvement and student learning and benefit children, parents, families, and educators. Create opportunities for parents to contribute in meaningful ways to decision-making, For example:
With parent engagement, what both parents and teachers know and desire is central to teaching and learning.
Henderson, A.T., Mapp, K.L., Johnson, V.R. & Davies, D. (2007). Beyond the bake sale: The essential guide to family-school partnerships. New York: The New Press.
Henderson, A.T. & Mapp, K.L. (2002). A new wave of evidence: The impact of school, family, and community connections on student achievement. Austin, TX: Southwest Educational Development Laboratory. (National Centre for Family & Community Connections with Schools). Retrieved on November 4, 2005, from http://www.sedl.org/connections/resources/introduction.pdf.
Hill, N.E., Tyson, D.F. & Bromell, L. (2009). Developmentally appropriate strategies across ethnicity and socioeconomic status. In N.E. Hill & R.K. Chao (Eds.), Families, schools and the adolescent: Connecting research, policy, and practice (pp. 53-72). New York: Teachers College Press.
Jeynes, W.H. (2010, March). The salience of the subtle aspects of parental involvement and encouraging that involvement: Implications for school-based programs. Teachers College Record, 112 (3), pp. 747-774.
Lopez, G.R. & Stoelting. (2010). Disarticulating parent involvement in Latino-impacted schools in the Midwest. In M. Miller Marsh & T. Turner-Vorbeck (Eds), (Mis)understanding families: Learning from real families in our schools. New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 19-36.
Pushor, D. (2010). Are school doing enough to learn about families? In M. Miller Marsh & T. Turner-Vorbeck (Eds), (Mis)understanding families: Learning from real families in our schools. New York: Teachers College Press, pp. 4-16.
Formative Assessment to Support Student Learning
Christine SuurtammUniversity of Ottawa
We now have compelling research indicating that formative assessment may be the most significant single factor in raising the academic achievement of all students and especially that of lower-achieving students. Every teacher needs to consider how the principles of formative assessment can be applied in her or his work.Formative assessment provides teachers with evidence of the progress of student learning. Rather than taking place after classroom activities to see what has been learned, formative assessment helps to guide students to make improvements during the course of learning. It also informs teachers as to how to support individual students or to alter classroom instruction.Formative assessment can take many forms. It should focus on what students know and can do and provide them with suggestions for improving their learning rather than focusing only on what they are unable to do. Thus, pupils can begin to see themselves as successful or potentially successful. Research suggests that formative assessment that prompts students towards improvement helps to create a classroom culture of success.But what does formative assessment look like? My data from 500 Ontario teachers of grade 7 and 8 mathematics show that teachers use a wider range of assessment strategies to get a sense of students’ understanding than they do for a report card mark. Case studies of grade 7 and 8 teachers and research with Professional Learning Communities of teachers of grades 4 to 8 show that such things as quizzes, conferencing, portfolios, observation and focused questioning, listening, and responding are being used in many Ontario classrooms to help to give teachers a sense of students’ understanding and suggest next steps to teachers and students. For instance, a teacher may use short quizzes to provide formative feedback. Rather than give students marks, she writes comments on the quizzes about what areas they understand and the areas they still need to work on. This helps her to see where to go in her teaching as well.
Another example would be using conferencing with students and asking them to discuss their work, sometimes individually or with a group. The teacher asks questions such as “Tell me about your work, what were you thinking when you did this?” Another teacher states that before a unit he puts students into groups and gives them an exploration activity “so that they can pull from all of their prior knowledge and they do it on chart paper and we put it up and we just discuss what strategies they’re already using before we get into the unit. It helps me see what they already know.” He also recognizes that this is an opportunity for peer assessment as “their peers are giving them feedback on what they did and could they have started in a different place or done it an easier or faster way.”In summary, formative assessment plays a significant role in improving student learning. In all grades and subjects there are ways in which teachers can help students see where they need to improve outside the framework of grades and marks, with very positive effects on student achievement.
Black, P. and Wiliam, D. (1998). Inside the black box: Raising standards through classroom assessment. Phi Delta Kappan, 80 (2), 139-148.Brookhart, S. M. (2008). How to give effective feedback to your students. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Cooper, D. (2006). Talk about assessment: Strategies and tools to improve learning. Toronto: Nelson Education.Earl, L. (2003). Assessment as learning : Using classroom assessment to maximize student learning. Thousand Oaks, CA : Corwin.Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007). Checking for understanding: Formative assessment techniques for your classroom. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.Gardner, J. (Ed.) (2006). Assessment and Learning. London : Sage Publications.McMillan, J. H. (Ed.) (2007). Formative classroom assessment: Theory into practice. NY: Teachers College Press.Reeves, D. (Ed.) (2007). Ahead of the curve: The power of assessment to transform teaching and learning. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.Shepherd, L. (2000). The role of assessment in a learning culture. Educational Researcher. 29, 7, 4 – 14.Small, M. (2009). Good questions: Great ways to differentiate math instruction. Reston, VA: NCTM.
School-Based Family Literacy Intervention Programs
Janette PelletierOntario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto
It has long been known that what parents do in the home regarding language stimulation and literacy related activities can boost children’s language abilities and school literacy. Recent evidence has shown the power of intervention programs to help parents support their children’s developing literacy. The U.S. National Early Literacy Panel (2008) reports that literacy interventions with parents have medium to large effects on children’s oral comprehension and cognitive abilities. Sénéchal’s (2005) meta-review shows that family involvement, particularly parents helping their kindergarten to grade 3 children learn to read, has a moderate to large effect on children’s reading performance.
Family literacy interventions come in a variety of forms ranging from home visiting to school-based programs that run over a course of weeks (Phillips, Hayden & Norris, 2006). Our own research shows that effective family literacy programs in the kindergarten years can be delivered in a variety of ways (Pelletier, Hipfner-Boucher & Doyle, 2010). One example of an effective strategy brings parents and children to school at lunchtime, after school, or in the evening for joint parent-child literacy learning, facilitated by primary teachers or early childhood educators.
This intergenerational literacy focus is effective in producing both adult and child literacy benefits (Wasik, Dobbins & Herrmann, 2001). We employ the format of parent-only and child-only breakout groups in which one facilitator provides information about an aspect of children’s early literacy development to parents while another facilitator engages children in literacy learning on the same topic. This is preceded and followed by shared family literacy time. The program has been tailored to families in the Chinese communities (Zhang, 2010). Another model brings family literacy programs to apartment buildings where families tend not to come into the school (Press, 2008).
Across all these models there is an emphasis on supporting parents’ in both oral and text-based activities. Oral language involves conversation in the home (Snow, 1993), paying attention to rare words and enhancing vocabulary (Biemiller, 2003; Neuman & Dickinson, 2001), talking about things not in the here and now, that is, using decontextualized language (Curenton, Craig & Flanagan, 2008) and letter-sound knowledge (Dickinson et al; 2003). Text-based language involves shared book reading and enjoyment, concepts of print (Rvachew & Savage, 2006), understanding story characters’ motivations and intentions for higher-level reading comprehension (e.g., Pelletier & Astington, 2004), attention to environmental print (Evans & Saint-Aubin, 2005), and making letter-sound connections in naturalistic ways (Purcell-Gates, 1996).
Although the effects of a single teacher or school working with parents on one or a few of these dimensions has received little attention in the research literature, partnering with parents to enrich literacy practice on any of these dimensions will be productive and will meet the needs of all parents to support the language and literacy development of their children. Mobilizing knowledge by sharing it with parents is more effective than just giving them activities to do at home.
1) Family literacy program guide: Pelletier, Hipfner-Boucher Doyle (2010). See References.
2) Encyclopedia of Language and Literacy Development: http://www.literacyencyclopedia.ca/index.php?fa=home.show.
Biemiller, A. (2003). Vocabulary: Needed if more children are to read well. Reading Psychology, 24(3), 323-335. Curenton, S., Craig, M., & Flanigan, N. (2008). Use of decontextualized talk across story contexts: How oral storytelling and emergent reading can scaffold children’s development. Early Education & Development, 19(1), 161-187. Evans, M.A., & Saint-Aubin, J. (2005). What children are looking at during shared storybook reading: Evidence from eye movement monitoring. Psychological Science, 16(11), 913-920.National Early Literacy Panel (2008). Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.Neuman, S., & Dickinson, D. (Eds.) (2001). Handbook of early literacy research. New York, NY: Guilford Press.Pelletier, J., & Astington, J. W. (2004). Action, consciousness and theory of mind: Children’s ability to coordinate story characters’ actions and thoughts. Early Education and Development, 15 (1), 5-22.Pelletier, J., Hipfner-Boucher, K., & Doyle, A. (2010). Family literacy in action: A guide for literacy program facilitators. Toronto, ON: Scholastic Education.Phillips, L., Hayden, R., & Norris, S. (2006). Family literacy matters: A longitudinal parent-child literacy intervention study. Calgary, AB: Temeron.Press, A. (2008). Developing a home-based family literacy program and evaluating the effects on the social ecology of learning. PhD Thesis, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Toronto, ON.Purcell-Gates, V. (1996). Stories, coupons and the TV Guide: Relationships between home literacy experiences and emergent literacy knowledge. Reading Research Quarterly, 31, 406-428.Rvachew, S., & Savage, R. (2006). Preschool foundations of early reading acquisition. Paediatric Child Health, 11, 589-593.Sénéchal, M. (2005). The effect of family literacy interventions on children’s acquisition of reading from kindergarten to Grade 3. Portsmouth, NH: National Center for Family Literacy.Snow, C. (1993). Families as social contexts for literacy development. In C. Daiute (Ed.), The development of literacy through social interaction (pp. 11-24). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Wasik, B., Dobbins, D., & Herrmann, S. (2001). Intergenerational family literacy: Concepts, research and practice. In S. Neuman & D. Dickinson (Eds.), Handbook of early literacy research (pp. 444-458). New York, NY: Guilford.Zhang, J. (2009). Implementation and evaluation of a Chinese language family literacy program: impact on young children’s literacy development in English and Chinese. PhD Thesis, Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto. Toronto, ON.
Why The Arts Matter
Dr. Rena UpitisQueen’s University
Experiences in the arts spark creativity and nurture the imagination. Imagination and creativity are hallmarks of great thinkers; many prominent scientists are also active in the arts. When a young student writes a poem, choreographs a dance, takes part in theatre, or composes a piece of music, the student, too, has a chance to create, to wonder, and to learn.
Many teachers are aware that the arts can be key in reaching students who do not respond well to traditional forms of learning. The arts also help students analyze complex issues from multiple perspectives. There is mounting evidence that the arts develop critical thinking skills, contribute to self-confidence, encourage risk-taking, and bolster achievement in other subjects. In a study involving over 600,000 students in Georgia (USA), it was found that when school districts made the arts a priority, students had higher test scores and were more likely to graduate from college. A longitudinal Pan-Canadian study offered complementary results: after three years of arts-based programming, Grade 6 students performed better than their peers in non-arts schools on math computation tests. Studies like these tell us that one art form isn’t better than any other: what matters is that teachers engage their students in arts activities in regular and sustained ways.
We often hear that the Canadian workforce requires employees to think creatively, to communicate well, to adapt to change, and to learn throughout their careers. An education rich in the arts lays the groundwork for those skills to emerge. Regions with thriving arts programs benefit by job creation, the development of community networks, increased responsiveness of public service organizations, and better quality of life for people in poor health. In these indirect ways, too, the arts are a vital part of our culture.
Much excitement has also been generated by research on brain development. For example, the brain contains specialized neurons that respond to musical stimuli, leading scientists to conclude children’s earliest experiences should include music. But even though we learn more easily in the early years, people learn at all ages. When we become lifelong learners in the arts, we have opportunities to develop to our full potential. Elementary teachers can provide such opportunities by setting up permanent arts centres (for listening, sketching and drawing, puppetry), incorporating arts into routines (e.g., music for transitions, inviting parent-artist guests on a monthly basis), and creating larger works (e.g., class quilts, choreographed dance movement routines for daily physical activity, and school-wide annual productions). The importance of the arts is also clearly evident to children in classrooms filled with visually arresting images, beautiful sounds, and a sense of playfulness and activity. Teachers who create the feeling of an art studio or a workshop give their students the sense new things can be discovered and created in the classroom.
Bertrand Russell was one of the greatest mathematicians and philosophers of the 20th century. In his last essay, written at the age of 95, Russell reflected that the time had come to ask whether his life’s work had taught men and women not to hate people other than their own. The final lines of his final essay state: “There is an artist imprisoned in each one of us. Let [the artist] loose to spread joy everywhere.” Why did Russell attach such importance to the arts? Perhaps it was the simple fact that the arts enrich our lives. Or perhaps he had come to realize that the arts have formed a fundamental component of culture since the beginning of time - and that everything we think, feel, or know cannot be described by words alone.
Bruer, J. (1999). The myth of the first three years: A new understanding of early brain development and lifelong learning. New York: Free Press.Deasy, R. J. (2002). Critical links: Learning in the arts and student academic and social development. Washington, DC: Arts Education Partnership. Retrieved from http://www.aep-arts.org.Eisner, E. W. (2002). The state of the arts and the improvement of education, Art Education Journal, 1(1), 2–6.Fowler, C. (1996). Strong arts, strong schools: The promising potential and shortsighted disregard of the arts in American schooling. New York: Oxford University Press. Greene, M. (1995). Releasing the imagination: Essays on education, the arts, and social change. New York: Teachers College Press.Music in World Cultures (1996). The Georgia project: A Status report on Arts Education in the State of Georgia. St. Boniface, MN: Author. Richards, T. L., & Berninger, V. W. (2002). Brain literacy for educators and psychologists. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Russell, B. (1967). Last Essay. http://www.humanities.mcmaster.ca/~russell/bressay.htm.Smithrim, K., & Upitis, R. (2005). Learning through the arts: Lessons of engagement. Canadian Journal of Education, 289(1 & 2), 109–127.Solusa, D. (2006). How the arts develop the young brain. School Administrator, 63(11)26–31. Weber, E. W., Spychiger, M., & Patry, J. (1993). Music makes the school. Schlussbericht zu Bessere Bildung mit mehr Musik. Padagogisches Institut der Universitat, Freiburg/C.H.
Prevent Bullying by Promoting Healthy Relationships
Teachers are critical in socializing children and shaping their relationships through moment-to-moment interactions with their students. Through 20 years of research, we have come to understand bullying as a relationship problem in which an individual uses power and aggression to control and distress another. Our work in the Promoting Relationships and Eliminating Violence Network (PREVNet) is based on this research. (Please visit www.prevnet.ca for resources for teachers, parents and students.)
If bullying is a relationship problem, then it requires relationship solutions. Family, peer, and school relationships affect all aspects of children’s development – intellectual, social, emotional, physical, behavioural, and moral. When relationships are positive, children develop positive social skills, understanding, and confidence. When these relationships are destructive, as in bullying, children’s social-emotional development is compromised (Vaillancourt et al., 2011). Children’s healthy development depends on healthy relationships.
We can expect that children who have developed unhealthy relationship patterns, such as bullying, have experienced relationships that may have failed to support them in developing the essential skills, understanding, and behaviours for positive relationships. Some children who bully lack emotional and behavioural regulation and are generally aggressive (Pepler et al., 2008a), whereas others are quite socially skilled and popular, but have learned that bullying is a way to gain status in the peer group (Feris & Felmlee, 2011). Both types of children need to learn how and why to relate to others prosocially, rather than aggressively. In other words, we should think about bullying primarily as an educational challenge rather than as a matter of crime and punishment.
Relationship solutions for teachers in relation to students who bully include: 1. Establishing consequences that teach how others feel when bullied and how to act differently next time (educational or formative consequences). Students can be engaged in discussing together ways to reduce negative behaviour; 2. Providing opportunities to experience positive leadership in which they are helping others, so they recognize the value and reinforcement that comes from helping, not hurting; 3. Strengthening their strategies to resist peer pressure. These youth are the most susceptible to pressure from peers to engage in deviant behaviours (Pepler et al., 2008a); and 4. Helping them find their moral compass. Youth who bully are often morally disengaged and don’t care or recognize the harm they do to others.
Relationship solutions for teachers in relation to students who are victimized include:
1. Making sure that students know they can and should report being bullied to adults, who will take steps to protect them; 2. Protecting them from further peer abuse by careful structuring of classroom groups and activities; 3. Providing opportunities for positive peer relationships by setting them up with prosocial peers for group assignments, sports, and lunch/recess times; 4. Supporting them in developing social skills and assertiveness if they struggle in these areas; and5. Helping them find strengths and domains of competence so that they can be recognized for these by peers and adults at home and school (Pepler et al., 2008b).
Everyone involved in children’s lives plays an important role in promoting healthy development (Pepler et al., 2009). We believe that four strategies are essential to prevent bullying problems. These include:
1. Self-awareness on the part of adults involved in the lives of children, which is essential to ensure they are modeling and interacting in ways that promote children’s healthy behaviours and relationships. Children must know that we will take active measures to prevent or respond to bullying, but equally we cannot bully children into stopping their own bullying. Similarly, we must be mindful of our relationship style with other adults to ensure there is no element of bullying; 2. Scaffolding or coaching – children need constant coaching and support from adults in learning the skills needed in a socially complex world. Explicit teaching of different social skills may be needed to help students change their behaviour; 3. Social architecture – adults need to play an active role in organizing children’s groupings to promote positive interactions and discourage negative interactions; and 4. Systems change – children do not change unless the environments in which they are growing up change; therefore, it is necessary to sustain improvements in the quality of relationships within all the places where children live, learn, and play.
Preventing and addressing bullying problems is up to all of us! When we address this challenge in our moment-to-moment interactions and programming, we can help to create safe, secure, and equitable schools, families, and communities that activity foster healthy relationships and eliminate violence.
Champagne, F. A., Weaver, I. C. G., Diorio, J., Dymov, S., Szyf, M., & Meaney, M. J. (2006). Maternal care associated with methylation of the estrogen receptor-1b promoter and estrogen receptor-expression in the medial preoptic area of female offspring. Endocrinology, 147, 2909-2915.
Feris, R. & Felmlee, D. (2011). Status struggles: Network centrality and gender segregation in same- and cross-gender aggression. American Sociological Review, 76, 48-73.
National Scientific Council on the Developing Child. (2004). Young children develop in an environment of relationships. Working Paper No. 1. Retrieved from www.developingchild.net.
Pepler, D., Jiang, D., Craig, W., & Connolly, J. (2008a). Developmental trajectories of bullying and associated factors. Child Development, 79, 325-338.
Pepler, D., Craig, W., Jiang, D., & Connolly, J. (2008b). The development of bullying and considerations for intervention. International Journal of Adolescent Mental Health, 20, 3-9.
Pepler, D., Cummings, J., & Craig, W. (2009). Steps to respect for everyone by everyone. In W. Craig, D. Pepler, & J. Cummings (Eds.) (2009). Rise Up for Respectful Relationships: Prevent Bullying. PREVNet Series, Volume 2, 199-206. Kingston, Canada: PREVNet Inc.
Vaillancourt, T., Duku, E., Becker, S., Schmidt, L., Nicol, J., Muir, C., & MacMillian, H. (2011). Peer victimization, depressive symptoms, and high salivary cortisol predict poor memory in children. Brain and Cognition. 77, 191-199.
Managing Teacher-Student Relationships: A Minimalist Approach
Teachers can have two types of conversations with students in class. In the ideal situation the most potent conversation is focused on learning, with minor support from the managing conversation. However, when teachers experience lessons where conversation about managing dominates, the learning agenda can disappear and poor outcomes are much more likely (Richmond, 2007).Literature concerning how best to manage for learning is huge and complex. It ranges from traditional, authoritarian styles articulated by Canter and Canter’s (1976) Assertive Discipline, through the sophisticated version of behaviourism exemplified by Alberto and Troutman’s (1995) Applied Behaviour Analysis for Teachers, to the democratic approach of Rogers (1993) and the more constructivist style of Glasser (1990). It includes material developed to support disenfranchised students such as the Restorative Justice movement (Macfarlane, Glynn, Cavanagh, & Bateman, 2007) and systems of school-wide support (Lewis and Sugai, 1999).These multiple models are confusing to teachers. A Balance Model (Richmond, 2007) provides a more generic approach (see Figure 1) that avoids having to choose between a wide range of student management approaches while retaining the core message within each. Despite their individual styles, when teachers are effective they typically do three things within the management component of their work. These teachers clearly establish expectations with students, generously acknowledge pro-social and on-task behaviour, and discretely correct anti-social and disruptive behaviour.
Figure 1: The Balance Model
Problematic imbalances easily occur in teachers' managing talk. Imbalances almost inevitably lead to an escalation in these managing conversations resulting in less time for learning and more frustration for everyone. The imbalance modelled in Figure 2 shows a teacher assuming that students know what to do and failing to be explicit about his or her expectations. Feedback is heavily weighted towards correction, while acknowledgement is parsimonious, particularly for those students who may deserve it least but need it most. This type of imbalance in management talk develops when teachers see the managing task as maintaining order through quashing disruption rather than as facilitating learning by communicating clearly with students.
Figure 2: A problematic imbalance
In this scenario, students who have difficulty connecting with the curriculum tend to become increasingly despondent, and less engaged with learning over time as they attract more and more correction. Teachers who articulate this imbalance are at risk of sliding into a pattern of over-correcting as frustration escalates and relationships with fragile students deteriorate.A way out of such a self-perpetuating, counter-productive communication cycle is for the teacher to resist the temptation of over-correcting the student who persistently challenges. To re-balance the management-focussed conversation, the teacher should explicitly teach a small number of achievable expectations and generously acknowledge even the slightest improvement in pro-social and on-task behaviour.The Balance Model can be used by teachers to reflect on the efficacy of their own management-focused interactions with students no matter what specific approach is used in the school. Teachers who achieve such a balance, maximising their opportunities to engage students in learning:
1. are organised and project an energetic, enthusiastic, professional demeanour (Wong & Wong, 2005);2. directly instruct students in how to behave in class (Lewis & Sugai, 1999);3. acknowledge students when they are on-task by saying the student’s name, making eye-contact, smiling and moving into proximity. They frequently give positive verbal feedback and use concrete reinforcement strategies when appropriate (Alberto & Troutman, 1995);4. discretely correct students by using hand and face signals, giving re-directions and rule-reminders, asking questions and gently applying consequences. They appreciate the metaphor of correction as salt … more is not better (Richmond, 2007); and5. follow through persistently evoking the principle of certainty not severity (Rogers, 1993).*Dr Richmond has spent her career studying behaviour management in schools, including experience as a special, mainstream and tertiary educator. She has worked as a Senior Guidance Officer, family therapist and academic, and is an experienced teacher of students with severe behaviour challenges in clinical and school settings. She held academic positions at the University of New England and then Bond University before moving into private practice.
Alberto, P.A. & Troutman, A.C. (1995). Applied Behaviour Analysis for Teachers (5th Editio.). Merrill, Columbus, Ohio.Canter, L. & Canter, M. (1976). Assertive Discipline: A Take Charge Approach for Today’s Educator. Lee Canter & Associates: Santa Monica, California.Glasser, W. (1990). The Quality School. New York: Harper Collins.Lewis, T. & Sugai, G. (1999). 'Effective behaviour support: a systems approach to proactive schoolwide management', Focus on Exceptional Children, 31(6), 1–24.Richmond, C. (2007). Teach More, Manage Less: A Minimalist Approach to Behaviour Management. Australia: Scholastic.Rogers, W. A. (1993). The Language of Discipline: A practical approach to effective classroom discipline. Plymouth, England: Northcoat House.Wong, H.K. & Wong, R.T. (2005). How to Be an Effective Teacher: The First Days of School. Harry K. Wong Publications, Inc. Mountain View, CA.
Teaching English Language Learners
Jim Cummins Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
English language learners are a highly diverse group whose defining characteristic is that their first language is other than English or a variety of English significantly different from that used in schools. Many of these students were born in Canada; those born outside of Canada may have arrived at any stage in their school careers. Some arrive with their families as voluntary immigrants; others are refugees fleeing disasters in their home countries. Those who arrive as voluntary immigrants after the age of six are likely to have received formal education in their home countries and may enter Canadian schools with strong academic skills in their first languages. Refugee students may have missed out on formal schooling for several years and some may have experienced physical or emotional trauma.
This diversity is reflected in patterns of academic achievement. Research across Canada over 30 years shows that when given sufficient time to catch up academically, English language learners, as a group, perform at least as well as students whose home language is English. However, this pattern masks significant variation across different groups. In general, students from refugee backgrounds experience more academic difficulties than students from higher socioeconomic backgrounds whose families were voluntary immigrants. Students whose home language literacy skills are well-developed also tend to develop stronger English literacy skills, reflecting cross-linguistic transfer of concepts and learning skills.
An important question for educators supporting English language learners is the length of time required to learn the language. The acquisition trajectories vary along three dimensions:
The fact that many students require instructional support across the curriculum for several years after they have become reasonably fluent in conversational English gives rise to several implications for classroom instruction and the development of school-based language policies.
School-based policies are developed collaboratively by educators in a school or district to articulate shared principles underlying effective classroom instruction. Policies that address the academic paths and learning realities of English language learners will start from the fact that language is infused in all academic content (e.g., science, math, social studies, etc.) Thus, effective classroom instruction will enable English language learners to gain access to grade-appropriate curriculum content and support students in expanding their knowledge of academic English as they learn curriculum content. Based on this understanding of effective instruction, a school policy might include provisions for teachers to articulate language objectives in addition to content objectives in the teaching of all content subjects. Such policies might also address strategies for:
Within the classroom, research points to a set of instructional strategies that all teachers can implement to expand students’ grasp of academic English:
Coelho, E. (2004). Adding English: A guide to teaching in multilingual classrooms. Toronto: Pippin Publishing.
Cummins, J. (1981). Age on arrival and immigrant second language learning in Canada: A reassessment. Applied Linguistics, 2(2), 132-149.
Cummins, J. & Early, M. (Eds). (2011). Identity texts: The collaborative creation of power in multilingual schools. Stoke-on-Trent, England: Trentham Books.
Geva, E. (2006). Learning to read in a second language: Research, implications, and recommendations for services. In: R. E. Tremblay, R.G. Barr, R. DeV Peters, (Eds.) Encyclopedia on early childhood development [online] (pp. 1-12). Montreal, Quebec: Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development. Retrieved October 8, 2007.
Guthrie, J. T. (2004). Teaching for literacy engagement. Journal of Literacy Research, 36(1), 1-30.
McAndrew, M., Anisef, P., Garnett, B., Ledent, J., Sweet, R. (2009). Educational pathways and academic performance of youth of immigrant origin: Comparing Montreal, Toronto, and Vancouver. Ottawa: Canadian Council on Learning. Retrieved December 10, 2010 from http://www.ccl-cca.ca/pdfs/OtherReports/CIC-CCL-Final12aout2009EN.pdf.
OECD (2010). PISA 2009 results: Learning to learn – Student engagement, strategies, and practices (Volume III). Paris: OECD. Retrieved December 15, 2010 from http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/11/17/48852630.pdf.
Roessingh, H. & Elgie, S. (2009). Early language and literacy development among young ELL: Preliminary insights from a longitudinal study. TESL Canada Journal 26(2), 24-45.
Equity, Social Justice, and the Inclusive Classroom
Carl E. James Centre for Education and Community, York University
Commenting on his experience in trying to engage his “high energy and at-risk” grade 6 students, a young male teacher noted:
I tried to design an educational program with an array of cultural resources that I thought would speak to the diverse needs and interests of the students. But my attempts at being a critical and reflexive educator were having no effect on them, and so very little learning was occurring. The ways in which the students reacted to my lessons was all over the place. This continued for a few weeks, until we engaged in a community walk. I told the students that the assignment was for them to teach me about their community, about their lives, about their individual reality. And with a class of eight students, each student was able to take a turn being the tour guide and explaining significant and meaningful sites in their community. They showed me routes they took walking to school, where they played, which areas they were not to venture into late at night. Many of the students also invited me into their homes. This experience, for me, was informative and paradigm changing. It radically altered the ways I have come to construct, direct, and articulate my pedagogy, as well as altered my perception and orientation toward teaching and learning. And from this experience, a deeper relationship was forged between myself and the students.
While this “critical and reflexive” teacher’s use of “cultural resources” is germane to engaging students, it was not until he acknowledged his students as agents with knowledge and experiences shaped by their community – i.e., taking turns being ‘tour guides’ – that they became responsive to his efforts. Such community lessons enable students to exercise agency, tell their individual stories, and affirm their voices. This orientation to the teaching/learning process provides opportunities for teachers to know the students, build relationships with them, engage them in their learning, and ultimately co-construct curriculum and educational programs – all of which are essential to creating educational and schooling environments for equity, social justice, and inclusivity (Ayers, Quinn & Stovall, 2009; Farnsworth, 2010; James, 2010; Zajda, Majhanovich & Rust, 2006). Indeed, as teacher, Julie Landsman, points out in the video, White Teacher/Diverse Classroom (DVD Stylus Publishing, 2007), teachers too often tend to “rush over” the significance of community in the lives of students, and in doing so fail to build the necessary relationships with students and parents.
Critical to the work of educators who take a social justice and equity approach to teaching is their understanding – which they will pass on to their students – of the societal or structural roots and causes of the inequity and resultant social conditions and problems that they and their students encounter in their daily lives. Within this framework, students learn to make the connections between their privileges and/or disadvantages as related to classism, racism, sexism, homophobia, their social and cultural capital, and their social and economic situation. In this way students learn the “systemic causes of issues that shape their lives” (Ginwright, 2008, p. 21), and come to understand the reasons for their struggles and social conditions.
As a grade 2 teacher concerned with equity and social justice, Allen (1997) worked with his students to identify inequities, biases, and stereotypes in their reading materials. His action research showed that his students were “developmentally capable” to question and analyze particular patterns in representations and omissions – based on race, colour, class (or poverty), and gender – in their reading materials and act upon their observations.
Based on her study of preservice elementary teachers’ emerging identities as science teachers, Moore (2008) concluded that it is at the classroom level that many felt that they had control or agency in teaching to modify curriculum and meet the needs of students. A “social justice science teacher identity”, she writes, “is essential for teaching and acting to improve science learning experiences for traditionally marginalized students, many of which (sic) are in urban schools” where they need to “have access and opportunity to learn science in empowering and transformative ways” (p. 608).
One of the challenges faced by today’s teachers is adhering to the principles of social justice, equity, and inclusivity in a schooling context that promotes standardized testing. Such tests tend to be aligned with a common curriculum which in the existing educational system privilege those students whose cultural and social capital are similar to that of the school’s, as opposed to a curriculum which caters to the diverse needs, interests, and aspirations of the students in the various school communities. As such, teachers in schools where students are at a disadvantage – typically because of cultural and language differences – tend to teach to the test and students tend to learn by rote in order to be able to handle the requirements of the tests. This situation provides a very narrow learning experience for already educationally and socially disadvantaged students. Given his experience administering the EQAO test, one teacher commented: “… there were so many things that were on the tests that the students had never heard of … Some students had never gone camping, and there were questions on different [camping] equipment” (in Solomon et al., 2011, p. 85).
In sum, teachers committed to creating an equitable, social justice, and inclusive classroom cannot avoid being activists if they are to address the inequities that account for the social and educational conditions that impact their students’ educational performance and outcomes. As critical self-reflective practitioners and advocates, they must work as allies with marginalized communities to help construct culturally relevant and transformative teaching practices that provide students hope, open opportunities, and show “the democratic possibilities of education” (Hytten, 2006, p. 235; see also Brown, 2004; James, 2012; Moore, 2007).
Allen, A.M.A. (1997). Creating space for discussions about social justice and equity in an elementary classroom. Language Arts, 74(7), 518-524.Ayers, W., Quinn, T., & Stovall, D. (eds.) (2009). Handbook of Social Justice in Education. New York: Routledge.Brown, K.M. (2004). Leadership for social justice and equity: Weaving a transformative framework and pedagogy. Educational Administration Quarterly, 40(1), 77-108.Farnsworth,V. (2010). Conceptualizing identity, learning, and social justice in community-based learning. Teaching and Teacher Education, 26, 1481-1489.Ginwright, S.A. (2008). Collective radical imagination: Youth participatory action research and the art of emancipatory knowledge. In J. Cammarota & M. Fine (Eds.), Revolutionizing Education: Youth Participatory Action Research (pp. 13-22). New York: Routledge.Hytten, K. (2006). Education for social justice: Provocations and challenges. Educational Theory, 56 (2), 221-236.James, C.E. (2010). Life at the Intersection: Community, Class, and Schooling. Halifax: Fernwood Publishing.Landsman, J. (2007). White Teacher/Diverse Classroom. DVD, Stylus Publishing.Moore, F.M. (2008). Agency, identity, and social justice education: Preservice teachers’ thoughts on becoming agents of change in urban elementary science classrooms. Research in Science Education, 38, 589-610.Solomon, R.P., Singer, J., Campbell, A., & Allen, A. (2011). Brave New Teachers: Doing Social Justice Work in Neoliberal Times. Toronto: Canadian Scholars’ Press.Zajda, J., Majhanovich, S., & Rust, V. (2006). Introduction: Education and social justice. Review of Education, 52, 9-22.
Using Digital Technologies to Support Literacy Instruction Across the Curriculum
Clare Brett Ontario Institute for Studies in Education
While the Internet is now the number one information source for both children and adults, research is showing that online reading does differ importantly from print-based reading (Coiro & Dobler, 2007; Coiro, 2007). In fact, learning how to obtain sound, relevant information from online locations requires specific kinds of practice and experience (e.g. Leu et al., 2011; Turcott, Hamel & Laferriere, 2011), and there is little evidence that schools are currently providing this experience (Leu et al., 2011). Children need to learn effective strategies for identifying valid information and information sources, and navigating hypertext links. These are elements of information literacy but also involve a lot of print literacy elements such as good reading comprehension strategies (e.g. Coiro, 2005, 2011; Leu et al., 2011; Bertelson & Fischer, 2003) along with an understanding of digital literacy (how to find, evaluate, and effectively use online information).
Gathering information online may require even more sophisticated reading comprehension strategies (Leu et al., 2011; Schmar-Dobler, 2003), and, interestingly, students are aware that they need help learning to evaluate online information (Media Smarts, 2012). The combination of reading comprehension and digital literacy is an important instructional focus and can be incorporated into any given subject area.
Start with identifying important questions: helping students develop generative and interesting questions (not just factual information-gathering ones) in groups to set the stage for their online inquiry.
Help students navigate complex information networks to locate appropriate information by using age appropriate web search tools, or select some sites yourself beforehand that seem useful. Help students develop some basic knowledge about websites, such as how to “read” a URL; how to find the publisher of a website; and how to validate a website (see list in Web-based Resources for students and teachers at the end of this article).
Work with students to question and evaluate that information through group activities and following up with class sharing of their experiences: Practice looking at and deconstructing the content of particular websites by considering questions such as: Where is the important information? What sources of information did the website use and are those good sources? How do you identify the sources? (Alan November’s site has useful questions to pursue, and the Media Awareness Network also provides some very helpful curriculum examples, activities, and suggestions.)
Work with students to decide what the most important and valid information seems to be from these searches and help them synthesize it to address those questions. Make sure that students discuss and understand what information gets left out in this process and why. Also, discussing what new questions may have been raised by the first web search may prompt a second, more focused, round of searching. Raising questions such as how web-based research differs from the experience of regular library searches can lead to discussions about particular online features such as hyperlinks, that provide detailed information about a word or idea, right when you need it, and then allow you to continue the thread of reading you were already engaged in (Look at the section of resources called Literacy & Technology for more curriculum ideas).
You can create activities for individuals, small groups, or the whole class to communicate the learnings from these investigations using different online formats, where each one supports a different multi-literacy experience: a class blog, a web page, or a class or small group video presentation, for example. Creating a web-based resource that summarizes your student’s learning (such as a blog) both makes students value their collective efforts and can also serve as a potential online resource for other teachers and their classes to use.
Worried you don’t have the expertise to do this? Remember to bring in your students’ knowledge and skills as a resource to help you plan and create an effective learning experience. This will prevent you from feeling that it has to be “right” the first time. Instead, you can be learning along with the students. Even quite young students these days have some online knowledge to bring to such activities, and research with second language learners has found the online context supportive for language learning (e.g. Brandl, 2002; Hanson-Smith, 2003; Graham, Lui, Lee, & Moore, 2003).
Very young students and students with learning difficulties have also benefited from using e-readers (e.g. Moody, 2010), and there a lot of different ones to choose from. Those that allow font size manipulation, text-to-speech, and hyperlinks can be really helpful classroom tools.
Check out how some other teachers in your school or district might be doing Internet-based research and reading in their classrooms observing how someone else does that can be helpful and teachers are usually very happy to explain what and why they are doing. Or, start by planning such an activity with another teacher. Having a buddy to discuss things with later provides both support and motivation to continue to try new things.
Additionally, the links below provide some curriculum suggestions for incorporating digital tools to enhance literacy in your classroom:
References and Further Reading:
Research on Web Literacy
Bertelsen, C. & Fischer, J. (2002/2003, December/January). Mediating expository text: Scaffolding and the use of multimedia curricula. Reading Online, 6(5), n.p. from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/bertelsen/Brandl, K. (2002). Integrating internet-based reading materials into the foreign language curriculum: from teacher- to student-centered approaches, Language Learning & Technology, Vol. 6, No. 3, September 2002, pp. 87-107Coiro, J. & Dobler, E. (2007). Exploring the online reading comprehension strategies used by sixthgrade skilled readers to search for and locate information on the Internet. Reading Research Quarterly, 42(2), 214–257Coiro, J. (2011). Predicting reading comprehension on the internet: Contributions of offline reading skills, online reading skills, and prior knowledge. Journal of Literacy Research, 43: 352-392Coiro, J. (2007). Exploring changes to reading comprehension on the Internet: Paradoxes and possibilities for diverse adolescent readers. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Connecticut, StorrsCoiro, J. (2005). Making sense of online text. Educational Leadership, 29-35. October. http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/rt/2-03_Column/index.htmlGraham, L., Lee, S., Lui, M., & Moore, Z. (2002). A look at the research on computer-based technology use in second language learning: a review of the literature from 1990-2000. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 34 (3), 250-274Guy, M. (2005). Finding someplace to go: Reading and the internet http://www.ariadne.ac.uk/issue43/guy/Hanson-Smith, E. (2003). Reading Electronically: Challenges and Responses to the Reading Puzzle in Technologically-Enhanced Environments. The Reading Matrix Vol. 3, No. 3, November http://www.readingmatrix.com/articles/hanson-smith/index.htmlKarchmer, R. A. (2001). The Journey Ahead: Thirteen Teachers Report How the Internet Influences Literacy and Literacy Instruction in Their K-12 Classrooms. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(4), 442–466Leu, D. J., McVerry, G., O’Byrne, W. I., Kiili, C., Zawilinski, L., Everett-Cacopardo, H., Kennedy, C., & Forzani, E. (2011). The New Literacies of Online Reading Comprehension: Expanding the Literacy and Learning Curriculum. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 55(1), 5-14Moody, A. K. (2010). Using electronic books in the classroom to enhance emergent literacy skills in young children. Journal of Literacy and Technology, 22, Vol. 11, No. 4 http://www.literacyandtechnology.org/volume_11_4/JLT_V11_4_2_Moody.pdfScholastic Inc. Strengthening reading and writing skills using the Internet. http://teacher.scholastic.com/professional/teachtech/internetreadwrite.htmLiteracy and TechnologyAtchison, B. (2004). Hypertext Literacy: Are We Teaching Students to Read and Write Hypertext? Journal of Educational computing, Design and Online Learning (5) Fall. http://coe.ksu.edu/jecdol/Vol_5/html/hypertext.htmCoiro, J. (2003). Reading Comprehension on the Internet: Expanding Our Understanding of Reading Comprehension to Encompass New Literacies. http://www.readingonline.org/electronic/rt/2-03_Column/index.htmlSchmar-Dobler, E. (2003). Reading on the Internet: The link between literacy and technology. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 47(1). Retrieved September, 12, 2004, from http://www.readingonline.org/newliteracies/jaal/9-03_column/MultiliteraciesLeu, D. J. , Leu, D. D., & Coiro, J. (2004). Teaching with the Internet; K-12 New Literacies for New Times http://www.sp.uconn.edu/~djleu/fourth.htmlNew London Group. (1996). A pedagogy of multiliteracies: Designing social futures. Harvard Educational Review, 66(1), 60-92. http://www-personal.umich.edu/~jaylemke/courses/HistLit/New-London-multiliteracies.htmWeb-based Resources for students and teachers:Using appropriate search engines and learning how to construct searches e.g. http://www.ivyjoy.com/rayne/kidssearch.html and http://www.learnwebskills.com/search/main.htmlAsk Jeeves For Kids http://www.ajkids.com/Yahoo for kids http://yahooligans.yahoo.com/Google scholar for academic work http://scholar.google.comBloggers you can follow with ideas for elementary teachers using IT http://www.edutopia.org/spiralnotebook/mary-beth-hertzIn the elementary art classroom http://voices.yahoo.com/using-technology-elementary-art-classroom-6257142.htmlFor literacy purposes for children with learning difficulties http://www.ldaofmichigan.org/articles/early_intervention.pdfThe most recent winners of Canada’s teaching with technology award: get a sense of what some teachers are doing. The winner for 2012 was a Grade 1 elementary teacher! http://www.teachingwithtechnology.ca/winners.phpAlan November’s site: November Learning: Information Literacy resources http://novemberlearning.com/resources/information-literacy-resources/Young Canadians in a Wired World, Phase III: Teacher Perspectives (2012). Media Awareness Network (now called Media Smarts): http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/index.cfmYoung Canadians in a Wired World, Phase II (2012): Talking to Youth and Parents about Life Online. Media Awareness Network: http://www.media-awareness.ca/english/index.cfmUsing technology to support reading and information literacy http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/content/cntareas/reading/li300.htm
Teacher Leadership: What Do We Know So Far?
Ann Lieberman Emeritus Professor, Teachers College, Columbia University & Senior Scholar at Stanford University
Teacher leadership has been defined as a set of roles, part of the discussion about distributive leadership and as a key part of educational improvement efforts. The research reveals both the strength and power of these ideas as well as the tensions and conflicts that arise in the practice of leadership.
York-Barr and Duke (2004) in their review of two decades of research on teacher leadership discuss such questions as: What do teacher leaders do? What conditions influence teacher leadership? How are teacher leaders prepared? What are the effects of teacher leadership? Researchers write about coordination and management; the professional development of colleagues, and participation in school improvement. The findings consistently stress the importance and value of teacher leadership, while at the same time researchers describe some forms of tension or conflict that seems inevitable. Why is that? What do we know so far?
In Depth Studies
In 2004, Lieberman & Miller organized the research on teacher leadership into three categories which begins to tell some of the story:
In 1991, Wasley studied three teacher leaders in-depth and found that despite different locations, focus, and role, they shared some common problems. Each had difficulties working in schools organized as bureaucracies, teachers lacked incentives for assuming these new roles, and many teachers resisted being involved in reform efforts.
Smylie & Denny (1990) documented the various tensions and ambiguities that supported or constrained thirteen teacher leaders in the district they studied. This organizational perspective was to change the way researchers focused on teacher leadership.
Little (1995) introduced two important perspectives. She proposed that when teachers tried to work for improvements in the school, it was for collaboration, experimentation and flexible use of time. But in an environment that supported hierarchical control of evaluation and alignment of curriculum there was bound to be “contested ground”. This “ground” is often the place where conflict ensues, but also where teachers learn to negotiate their position as leaders.
Learning from Practice
When Donald Schon (1983) and Atul Gawande (2002) wrote about various professions, they laid a foundation for researchers to study direct practice to better understand what professionals did in their work, how they coped and, most importantly, what they learned on the job.In much the same way, research on professional learning communities elevated our understanding of what it would take to work for professional learning with teachers playing a leadership role. McLaughlin & Talbert (1993) introduced the idea of a professional learning community where teachers talk openly, discuss curriculum and pedagogy, and commit themselves to collective discussion. Their research was seminal in understanding the different kinds of communities, Grossman, Wineburg, & Wentworth (2001) further documented the development of a professional learning community including the conflicts over different disciplines, gender, and race when a Social Studies and English Department tried to collaborate.
Making these fault lines visible as teachers work to ameliorate them, helped educators see for the first time how professional learning communities develop. Conflict and tension is inevitable, yet it can be made productive as teacher leaders learn to build professional learning communities in bureaucratic settings. Teacher leaders do this by negotiating the “contested ground” and, in part, by making conflict productive as the “fault lines” are exposed, discussed and recognized during the development of collaborative work.
What can we learn from this research?
This continuous work on understanding how teachers lead can help us treat these new roles like we did when we were teachers. It is about learning to work in different contexts, with different people who may have learned norms of individualism, rather than collaboration. It is about negotiating the tensions between a professional orientation to our work, even though most schools are run bureaucratically (Talbert, 2010).
It is about learning to build supports for teacher leadership as we continue to learn the necessity of teachers working together, forming professional relationships and teaching and learning from each other. Learning to teach took us a while to feel comfortable with all the unknowns. So too is becoming a teacher leader and learning to handle a new position, a new way of working, and forming new kinds of relationships.
Gawande, A. (2002). Complications: A surgeon’s notes on an imperfect science. New York: Henry Holt.
Grossman, P., Wineburg, S., & Woolworth, S. (2001). Toward a theory of teacher community. Teachers College Record, 103, 942-1012.
Lieberman, A. & Wood, D. (2003). Inside the national writing project: Connecting network learning and classroom teaching. New York: Teachers College Press.
Lieberman, A. & Miller, L. (2004). Teacher leadership. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lieberman, A., Hanson, S. & Gless, J. (2012). Mentoring teachers: Navigating the real-world tensions. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lieberman, A. & Friedrich, L. D. (2010). How teachers become leaders: Learning from practice and research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Little, J.W. (1995). Contested Ground: The basis of teacher leadership in two restructuring high schools. Elementary School Journal 96 (1), 47-63.
McLaughlin, M.W. & Talbert, J. (1993). Contexts that matter for teaching and learning. Stanford, CA: Context Center for Teaching and Learning in Secondary Schools.
Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action. New York: Basic Books.
Smylie, M. A. & Denny J.W. (1990). Teacher leadership: Tensions and ambiguities in organizational perspective. Educational Administration Quarterly, 26, 235-259.
Talbert, J. (2010). Professional learning communities at the crossroads: How Systems Hinder or Engender Change. In A. Hargreaves, A, Lieberman, A, Fullan, M. Hopkins (Eds.), Second International Handbook of Educational Change. (pp. 555-571). The Netherlands: Springer.
Wasley, P. A. (1991). Teachers who lead: The rhetoric of reform and the realities of practice. New York: Teachers College Press.
York-Barr, J. & Duke, K. (2004). What do we know about teacher leadership? Findings from two decades of scholarship. Review of Educational Research, Fall 2004, 94 (3), 255-316.
Danielson, C. (2006). Teacher leadership that strengthens professional practice. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD).
Darling-Hammond, L., Bullmaster, M.L., & Cobb, V. L. (1995). Rethinking teacher leadership through professional development schools. Elementary School Journal, 96, 87-106.
Lieberman, A., Hanson, S. & Gless, J. (2012). Mentoring teachers: Navigating the real-world tensions: San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Lieberman, A. & Friedrich, L. (2010). How teachers become leaders: Learning from practice and research. New York: Teachers College Press.
Little, J.W. & Bartlett, L. (2002). Career and commitment in the context of comprehensive school reform. Theory and Practice, 8 (3), 345-354.
National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality. (2007). Key issue: Enhancing teacher leadership. Washington, D.C: National Comprehensive Center for Teacher Quality.
Talbert, J. (2010) Professional learning communities at the crossroads: How systems hinder or engender change. In A. Hargreaves, A. Lieberman, M. Fullan, D. Hopkins (Ed.), Second Handbook of Educational Change. London: Springer.
Weiss, C. H. ,Cambone, J., & Wyeth, A. (1992). Trouble in paradise: Teacher conflicts in shared-decision making. Education Administration Quarterly. 28, 350-367.
Peer Feedback on Writing: An Assessment-for-Learning Tool
Shelley Stagg Peterson Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto
Peer feedback, when guided by teacher modeling and assessment criteria, is a useful assessment-for-learning tool that has been shown to support students’ writing development and contribute to students’ revisions to improve their writing (Boscolo & Ascorti, 2004; Graham & Perin, 2007). Peer feedback can be helpful across the elementary grades, though extensive teacher support is needed in grades one and two. Peers’ comments about how the writing made them think or feel, together with their commendations or suggestions about the content (e.g., characters or plot of narratives; inclusion of examples and other needed information in essays or persuasive arguments), or about the language and other elements of the author’s writing style, provide helpful starting points for revisions that improve students’ writing. Certain types of feedback, such as emotional responses that show what kind of effect the writing has on the audience, and feedback that focuses on scoring criteria, have been shown to be most useful to student writers (Hansen & Liu, 2005; Peterson, 2003).
In a grade eight classroom (Peterson, 2003), for example, students were more likely to revise their writing when peers suggested that particular events did not seem plausible. Three of the four focus students did not revise their writing in response to feedback indicating a need for greater clarity, as they viewed such peer feedback as a reflection of their peers’ carelessness in reading the writing, rather than a need for revisions.
Peer feedback benefits not only the students who receive suggestions for improving the writing, but also the feedback providers, as they gain a greater awareness of qualities of good writing through assessing and commenting on peers’ writing. Peer feedback also develops students’ self-assessment abilities, as they gain experience in using the criteria to read their own writing (Cho & MacArthur, 2010; Lundstrom & Baker, 2009). In these respects, peer feedback is truly an assessment-for-learning tool (Black, Harrison, Lee, Marshall, & Wiliam, 2003) that should be an ongoing part of writers’ workshop (Graves, 1994).
Teachers' Support for Peer Feedback
It is important to teach students how to give feedback to their peers and how to work with the feedback. This includes setting parameters to ensure that students do not feel discouraged or hurt after receiving peer feedback and maintaining a sense of ownership over the writing: students should be aware that they do not have to use feedback that they feel will not improve their writing. It is also important to provide guidelines for the content of the feedback. Researchers recommend teaching students revision strategies and qualities of good writing assessed by scoring criteria that students know (MacArthur, 2007).
Students in a grade one class, for example, provided feedback that their peers felt was useful and made many revisions and edits that incorporated peers’ suggestions after receiving such formal instruction. Their teacher used ongoing modeling, examples, and reinforcement through posting reminder charts around the classroom and giving students feedback on how well their peer feedback matched the helpful feedback criteria established by the class (Peterson & Portier, 2012). Another effective practice involved students observing two peers using a set of criteria to give feedback, discussing how effective the feedback was, and then applying what they learned when giving feedback to peers on their writing (Van Steendam, Rijlaarsdam, Sercu, & Van den Bergh, 2010).
When desk or tables are arranged so students can easily talk to each other while they write, informal peer feedback is often a natural part of students’ writing processes. Students may ask each other for help with ideas, words, spellings, etc. or they may run a sentence or idea by peers to get a sense of audience reaction. Authors’ groups (Graves & Hansen, 1983) are a commonly-used forum for peer feedback. Students read their writing aloud to each other in turn and often take a “two stars and a wish” or “sandwich” approach where two positive comments are included alongside a more critical comment that identifies an element that could be improved (Peterson & McClay, 2010). In one study, students working in pairs as one student read the other’s writing, identified an aspect that was not clear to her/him, and then discussed with the author possible ways to revise in order to clarify the point (Boscolo & Ascorti, 2004). In addition, a successful peer feedback context implemented by a grade 8 teacher involved inviting students to exchange their drafts with a partner, write comments on the draft and then give oral feedback to each other (Peterson, 2003).
In summary, peer feedback on writing develops students’ self-assessment abilities through providing opportunities to learn and apply scoring criteria. It also provides helpful information to guide revisions that improve students’ writing. Teacher support through modeling, providing examples, and giving reinforcement on the content and processes for exchanging peer feedback, is necessary to ensure the effectiveness of peer feedback.
Black, P., Harrison, C., Lee, C., Marshall, B., & Wiliam, D. (2003). Assessment for learning: Putting it into practice. Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Boscolo, P. & Ascorti, K. (2004). Effects of collaborative revision on children’s ability to write understandable narrative texts. In L. Allal, L. Chanqouy, & P. Largy (Eds.), Revision: Cognitive and instructional processes (Vol. 13, pp. 157-170). Boston, MA: Kluwer.
Cho, K. & MacArthur, C. (2010). Student revision with peer and expert reviewing. Learning and Instruction, 20, 328-338.
Graham, S. & Perin, D. (2007). A meta-analysis of writing instruction for adolescent students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 445-476.
Graves, D. (1994). A fresh look at writing. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Graves, D. & Hansen, J. (1983). The author’s chair. Language Arts, 60(2), 176-183.
Hansen, J. & Liu, J. (2005). Guiding principles for effective peer response. ELT Journal, 59, 31-38.
Lundstrom, K. & Baker, W. (2009). To give is better than to receive: the benefits of peer review to the reviewer’s own writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 18, 30-43.
MacArthur, C.A. (2007). Best practice in teaching evaluation and revision. In S. Graham, C. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best practice in writing instruction (pp. 141-162). New York: Guilford.
Peterson, S. (2003). Peer influences on students’ revisions of their narrative writing. L-1 Educational Studies in Language and Literature, 30, 239–272.
Peterson, S.S. & McClay, J. (2010). Assessing and providing feedback for student writing in Canadian classrooms. Assessing Writing, 15(2), 86-99.
Peterson, S.S. & Portier, C. (in press). Grade one peer and teacher feedback on student writing. Education 3-13, 40(4).
Van Steendam, E., Rijlaarsdam, G., Sercu, L., U Van den Bergh, H. (2010). The effect of instruction type and dyadic or individual emulation on the quality of higher-order peer feedback in EFL. Learning and Instruction, 20, 316-327.
Promoting Curriculum Access in Children and Youth with Reading Disabilities
Dr. Rhonda Martinussen Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto
Children and youth with a learning disorder (LD) are one of the most prevalent groups of students receiving special education services in Ontario (43% of students receiving services; Ministry of Ontario Special Education Update, 2012). Many students with an LD display weaknesses in reading as well as demonstrating concurrent difficulties in the area of written expression. As a large proportion of students with LD receive their education in general education classrooms, it is important for general and special education teachers to enable curriculum access for these students.
The term “curriculum access” refers to the ability of a student to participate in the curricular activities related to his or her grade level and meet age-appropriate curriculum expectations (Lee, Soukop, Little, & Wehmeyer, 2009; Soukop, Wehmeyer, Bashinski, & Bovaird, 2007). Children with reading difficulties may struggle to access the curriculum for many reasons. First, students with word reading difficulties often read less accurately and fluently than their peers; in turn, these weaknesses often constrain text comprehension (Fletcher, Fuchs, Barnes, & Lyon, 2007). These students may take more time to complete assignments and struggle to acquire pertinent information from content area texts. Students with specific comprehension deficits (i.e., those who demonstrate average or better word reading skills and below-average reading comprehension skills) are also more likely than their peers to show difficulties with comprehension of grade-level text and comprehension monitoring (e.g., Oakhill, Hartt, & Samols, 2005).
It is important for educators working with children with a reading disability to employ a range of approaches to promote curriculum access. In this article, we highlight three steps teachers can take to promote curriculum access in students with reading disabilities. The first step, universal design for learning, is a global approach that identifies strategies to use to design an accessible curriculum (Rose & Meyer, 2001); the next two steps focus on the individual student and promote access by strengthening key skills and providing bypass strategies.
Universal Design for Learning
The first step educators can take is to examine their curriculum and the methods they use to assess student progress to identify whether any barrier to learning exist (Rose & Meyer, 2002). One curriculum barrier may be the nature of the written text used to share content information. Texts vary in length, syntactic complexity, and coherence; some of these features facilitate understanding, whereas others hinder it (White, 2012). Barriers may also exist in assessment tools. For example, a student with reading and written expression difficulties may perform poorly if the assessment requires her/him to read questions independently and provide written responses. Educators should determine whether assessments that require other modes of delivery and responding (e.g., oral) are appropriate to eliminate this barrier. They can also examine whether the acquisition of one or more of their curriculum goals is associated with a particular form of communication (e.g., students will provide a written description of the technological advances of early civilizations) or not. The inclusion of a broader range of assessment tools provides students with greater opportunity to show their understanding of content domains. There are websites where teachers can access templates they can use to identify and eliminate barriers in their curriculum (see Web-Based Resources).
The second step is to provide students with evidence-based interventions that promote the development of their core reading-related skills. Fortunately, there is a well-developed body of research highlighting effective methods to improve word recognition and reading comprehension skills in early elementary school children with reading disabilities (Fletcher et al., 2007). In general, this instruction should be systematic in nature, explicit, and of sufficient duration and intensity to meet the needs of the students (Fletcher et al., 2007; Foorman & Torgesen, 2001). Web-based tools are available to provide general and special education teachers with important information and guidance regarding the design and implementation of interventions for students with reading and other learning difficulties.There is also growing evidence that older elementary students (e.g., grade 4 to 6 students) with reading difficulties benefit from age-appropriate and evidence-based interventions to improve their word recognition and reading comprehension skills (e.g., Edmonds et al., 2009). A practice brief describing the findings of a recent systematic review is available from the Centre on Instruction website (Boardman et al., 2008). It highlights the need to target multiple skill domains with older students including word analysis strategies (e.g., how to identify multisyllabic words), vocabulary knowledge, reading fluency, and text comprehension. It also highlights the need to use strategies to promote students’ motivation for reading.
The third important step is to provide students with appropriate accommodations that reduce or eliminate the impact of reading difficulties on performance. These may include low-technology tools such as advance organizers that support students’ ability to understand the essential ideas in a text. Assistive technology (AT) also can provide students with reading difficulties with tools to circumvent their areas of weakness. Assistive technology is "any item, piece of equipment, or product system, whether acquired commercially off-the-shelf, modified, or customized, that is used to increase, maintain or improve the functional capabilities of individuals with disabilities" (Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988 (P.L.) 100-407). There are a range of such tools including accessible media word processing software with speech feedback, text-to-speech programs, and word prediction software. It is important for educators to consider factors such as task demands as well as student’s strengths, specific needs, and goals when making decisions about AT supports (see Special Education Technology-British Columbia, http://www.setbc.org/lcindexer/ for information about various forms of AT and decision-making supports).When educators and schools implement these various strategies, more students can achieve success and develop the skills required by the Ontario curriculum and the demands of daily life.
Boardman, A. G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C. S., & Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective Instruction for Adolescent Struggling Readers: A Practice Brief. Center on Instruction.
Edmonds, M. S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262-300.
Fletcher, J. M., Lyon, G. R., Fuchs, L. S., & Barnes, M. A. (2007). Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. New York: The Guilford Press.
Foorman, B.R., & Torgesen, J. (2001). Critical elements of classroom and small-group instruction promoting reading success in all children. Learning Disabilities Research and Practice, 16, 203-212.
Lee, S., Soukup, J. H., Little, T. D., & Wehmeyer, M. L. (2009). Student and teacher variables contributing to access to the general education curriculum for students with intellectual and developmental disabilities. Journal of Special Education, 43, 29-44.
Oakhill, J., Hartt, J., & Samols, D. (2005). Levels of comprehension monitoring and working memory in good and poor comprehenders. Reading and Writing, 18(7), 657-686.
Rose, D. H., & Meyer, A. (2002). Teaching Every Student in the Digital Age: Universal Design for Learning. Alexandria:VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.
Soukup, J., Wehmeyer, M., Bashinski, S., & Bovaird, J. (2007). Classroom variables and access to the general curriculum for students with disabilities. Exceptional Children, 74, 101-120.
Technology-Related Assistance for Individuals with Disabilities Act of 1988 (P.L.) 100-407
Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable, A., Tackett, K. K., & Schnakenberg, J. W. (2009). A synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers. Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262-300.
White, S. (2012). Mining the text: 34 text features that can ease or obstruct text comprehension and use. Literacy Research and Instruction, 51, 143-164.
A Synthesis of Research on Effective Interventions for Building Reading Fluency with Elementary Students with Learning Disabilities. http://www.readingrockets.org/articles/researchbytopic/4897/
Assistive Technologies for Students with Learning Disabilities: An Overview. http://www.readingrockets.org/article/33074/
Center on Instruction. http://www.centeroninstruction.org/effective-instruction-for-adolescent-struggling-readers---second-edition
Children with Reading Disabilities (http://www.readingrockets.org/article/223/)
Intensive Interventions: A Teacher’s Toolkit. http://iitoolkit.rmcwebapp.com/
IRIS Vanderbilt Modules for Special Education: Language and Literacy. http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/resources.html
National Center on Accessible Instructional Materials. http://aim.cast.org/
Special Education Technology – British Columbia, includes information about various forms of AT and decision-making supports). http://www.setbc.org/lcindexer/
TechMatrix: Assistive and educational technology tools and resources to support learning for students with disabilities and their classmates. http://techmatrix.org
Universal Design for Learning (templates to identify and eliminate barriers in their curriculum). http://www.cast.org/
Using Technology to Support Struggling Students: Science Literacy, Vocabulary, and Discourse (National Centre for Technology Innovation). http://www.readingrockets.org/article/41187/
Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C. S., Roberts, G. (2012). Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research Corporation, Center on Instruction. http://www.centeroninstruction.org/intensive-interventions-for-students-struggling-in-reading-and-mathematics
Teaching Elementary Mathematics
Marian SmallUniversity of New Brunswick, Emerita
There is currently a great deal of discussion about using a problem-solving approach to teach mathematics in the elementary grades. It sounds simple –– students just need to solve problems. But not everyone agrees on what constitutes a problem (Chamberlin, 2008).
What is a problem?
Many teachers think of mathematical problems as ones that involve contextual stories. They associate the notion of a problem with a real-world situation. However, others point out that if a student has already encountered a number of similar stories, the stories used are not so much problems as applications of knowledge.Some suggest that a problem must be non-routine, i.e. there is an element of novelty to the problem (Schoenfeld, 1992). This would be in contrast to a set of similar “problems” which students solve after learning a certain mathematical concept. For those who focus on the non-routine nature of problems, there may or may not be a contextual story. For example, asking students in Grade 3 to determine the most common perimeter when three Cuisenaire rods are put together to form a triangle is certainly a problem.Many experts believe that reasoning and/or higher order or critical thinking must occur for a mathematical task to be called a problem, whereas others focus on the fact that there is some form of mathematical modeling of a situation (Lester and Kehle, 2003; Francisco and Maher, 2005).It is important to realize that a problem for one person might not be a problem for another person operating at a different developmental level. A problem for many kindergarten children such as figuring out how many more cents they need if they have 2¢ and want 10¢ is not a problem for many older students who are fluent with addition and subtraction. This means that a teacher must consider the audience when presenting what she/he believes is a problem.Many experts in the field suggest that problems can generally be solved with more than one approach and involve making assumptions and being aware of those assumptions (Chamberlin, 2008). Talking about alternate solutions and assumptions made is an important part of teaching through problem-solving.
What does teaching through problem solving require?
Teaching through problem solving requires a teacher to believe that students can solve problems using their own strategies, rather than depending on first being shown how to approach a similar problem.The success of this approach depends, in large measure, on teacher beliefs. Teachers need to see the value in alternative approaches. They also need to believe that the focus of learning should be conceptual, rather than procedural, and need to believe that mistakes are a valuable part of learning.Those beliefs are not typical teacher beliefs in mathematics since many teachers’ own experiences in learning mathematics emphasized an approach where teachers modelled first and where there was only one acceptable approach to a type of calculation or type of problem (van der Sandt, 2007). Although beliefs can be hard to change, there is a growing body of literature showing that students not only can develop their own strategies to solve problems, but that they benefit from doing so (Narode, Board, and Davenport, 1993).The success of teaching through problem solving also depends on student willingness to persevere.
To encourage perseverance, students need to see that sticking with a problem will ultimately lead to a solution (Colton, 2010). This makes it extremely important that the problems be at the appropriate developmental level for the child solving them and that they are presented in an accessible format. It also means that students view math as a subject in which they actually can learn on their own.Sometimes perseverance is enhanced by using co-operative groups. Students are more likely to stick to a problem when they are interacting with fellow classmates, moving forward together. Sometimes perseverance is cultivated by teachers modeling their own stick-to-itness, for example having students work with them as they struggle through unfamiliar problems aloud, in front of their students.There is much evidence that students need a certain level of confidence to be willing to persevere (Stodolsky, Salk, and Glaessner, 1991). Building that confidence requires not only that teachers set appropriate problems, but that they set as risk-free an environment as possible, and support and scaffold as needed, refraining, though, from directing.
Teaching through problem solving is about setting appropriate tasks, creating supportive environments and helping students to succeed without leading. Although some would argue that all mathematical tasks should be of this sort, others see it as one approach within a more varied menu. No matter the frequency of problem solving use, it is essential that students have opportunities to learn by thinking and doing and not by simply copying.
Chamberlin, S. A. (2008). What is problem solving in the mathematics classroom? Philosophy of Mathematics Education Journal, 23, Retrieved from http://people.exeter.ac.uk/PErnest/
Clarke, D. (2005). Written algorithms in the primary years: Undoing the ‘good work’? Presented at Making Mathematics Vital: Proceedings of the Twentieth Biennial Conference of the Australian Associationof Mathematics Teachers. Retrieved from http://morelandnumeracyaiznetwork.wikispaces.com/file/view/Using+Algorithms+in+the+classroom+Doug+Clarke.pdf
Colton, C. (2010). Justifying answers and providing explanations for mathematical thinking: The impact on student learning in a middle-school classroom. Retrieved from http://scimath.unl.edu/MIM/files/research/Colton_AR_FinalLA.pdfFrancisco, J. F. & Maher, C. A. (2005). Conditions for promoting reasoning in problem solving: Insights from a longitudinal study. Journal of Mathematical Behavior, 24, 361-372.
Kloosterman, P., Raymond, A.M., and Emenaker, C. (1996). Students’ beliefs about mathematics: A three-year study. The Elementary School Journal, 97, 39 – 55.
Lambdin, D. V. (2003). Benefits of teaching through problem solving. In Lester, F. Jr. (Ed.) Teaching mathematics through problem solving: Prekindergarten – Grade 6. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 3 - 14.
Lester, F. K. & Kehle, P. E. (2003). From problem-solving to modeling: The evolution of thinking about research on complex mathematical activity. In R. Lesh, & H. Doerr, (Eds.), Beyond constructivism: Models and modeling perspectives on mathematics problem solving, learning, and teaching. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, 501 - 518.
Narode, R., Board, J., & Davenport, L. (1993). Algorithms supplant understanding: Case studies of primary students’ strategies for double-digit addition and subtraction. In J. R. Becker & B. J. Preece (Eds.), Proceedings of the 15th Annual Meeting of the North American chapter of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education (Vol 1, pp. 254-260). San Jose, CA: Center for Mathematics and Computer Science Education, San Jose State University.
Ridlon, C. L. (2009). Learning mathematics via a problem-centered approach: A two-year study. Mathematical Thinking and Learning, 11, 188-225. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/10986060903225614.
Schoenfeld, A. H. (1992). Learning to think mathematically: Problem solving, metacognition, and sense-making in mathematics. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 334-370). New York: McMillan.
Stodolsky, S.S., Salk, S., and Glaessner, B. (1991). Student views about learning math and social studies. American Educational Research Journal, 28, 89 – 116.
Van der Sandt, S. (2007). Research framework on mathematics teacher behaviour: Koehler and Grouws’ framework revisited. Eurasia Journal of Mathematics, Science and Technology Education, 3, 343 – 350.
Podcast Feed Subscribe in iTunes iTunes Preview