Instructional Time?

Time is the most important commodity teachers control. Think about it. We don’t choose our clientele; we are not in control of our budgets; and, though in many cases choosing resources is somewhat within our control, this is nowhere as important as those moments students are in our rooms. Not even close.  

Re-imagining how time is used in the classroom and the teacher’s role in that room is fundamental to more effective instruction, according to the Expeditionary Learning’s Transformational Literacy. What does this look like?

Their design is really quite simple (check out and comment on their graphic: EL’s Read, Write, Speak, Think Graphic). In their model, daily instruction is centered on examination of a “Worthy Text,” and students are provided a chance to “read about it, think about, talk about it, write about.” “Worthy Text” is basically defined as one that is complex and relevant.

Now, is this really a re-imagining of how classroom time is spent? For many teachers, probably not; for others - definitely.

Of course, anyone in a school can find this out by walking through the building at any given time - what are students doing? I do this regularly in secondary schools throughout my district. It is part of my job.

And in truth, what struck me most when I began doing this was how infrequently I actually saw students read or write - even in ELA classrooms! According to Mike Schmoker in Focus (2011),  “... in the United States, instead of reading and writing, … students spent their time preparing for multiple-choice tests or working on ‘projects’ where students were instructed to do things like ‘glue this to this poster for an hour.’"

Sure, I saw some of that - test prep and projects gone awry. And as a teacher, I facilitated some of that. But what I witnessed more than anything was students engaged in vocabulary instruction, vocabulary activities, grammar lessons, and grammar activities, generally out of context from any text study. Is it the tangibility of these tasks that makes them so appealing? Is it because the abused becomes the abuser?

I’m not sure, but I know in my vision of classrooms, the time is spent differently. Students read with pencil in hand marking for questions, reactions, connections to a learning target. They discuss their thinking and confusion with their peers and their teachers. They revisit the text -  thinking, scratching ideas, and then they explain their thinking in some type of writing that actually means something to them and to their intended audience. Through all of this they dig into words - vocabulary, and seek to understand how to communicate effectively and efficiently, which is really the entire purpose for grammar instruction.

They do this because they are in school, but also because they understand that they are growing as learners - they can see this when they compare their initial work with current work, and because their work has meaning - a solution to a problem, an opinion on a controversial topic, an epiphany (I know, striking high for some middle schoolers!).

And this is the other thing Ron Berger and the other EL authors note as fundamental for transformational teaching and learning, that teachers must raise “their vision of the capacity of students for high-level work.”

So, if this is not the reality for classrooms - for students, should it be? If so, how do we make it happen?

Design your teaching and learning

"Deeper learning comes from great questions, not great answers."

(Transformational Literacy)

The authors of Expeditionary Learning's  Transformational Literacy contend that the Common Core demands deeper thinking, deeper critical analysis, deeper understanding from students - in short deeper learning. 

Of course, plenty of debate surrounds these standards (anyone who follows Diane Ravitch on Twitter reads about this every day). Nonetheless, districts across the country are grappling with these demands, working through the shifts of these standards: Building Knowledge through Content-Rich Non-Fiction & Informational Texts, Reading and Writing Grounded in Evidence from Text, Regular Practice with Complex Text and Its Academic Vocabulary. 

Even Mike Schmoker, who - in his widely-read book Focus, jabs at national standards as overwrought, supports these shifts. His framework for instruction in ELA classrooms centers on reading, writing and talking. He emphasizes a balance between fiction and non-fiction texts, the use of challenging texts, and student use of evidence in speaking and writing, which should be primarily argumentative in nature. Most importantly, though, according to Schmoker, is that students read and write a lot (60 minutes of reading and 40 minutes of writing per day). Does it need to be more complex than this?

And that is the focus of this blog. As a curriculum specialist, my goal is to engage as many voices in designing a secondary (middle grade/ high school) ELA instructional model that achieves these demands, that makes these shifts, and that works for students and teachers. 

So, let's begin (consider any/all/none of the questions below when responding):

What does your ideal ELA lesson look like?

What does your perfect day in your classroom look like?

How do we get students to "deeper learning"?

How does word work and grammar instruction fit in to the ELA curriculum?

In short: What are the key elements to effective ELA instruction in the Common Core Era?

Join the conversation.