High Quality Teaching of Foundational Skills
in Mathematics and Reading
High Quality Teaching of Foundational Skills
in Mathematics and Reading
UMCP/MCPS Partnership Study of High Quality Teaching in Mathematics & ReadingSupported by a grant from
Interagency Education Research Initiativea combined effort of
the USDE, NIH, and NSF
Background of the HQT StudyBackground of the HQT Study
Assumption importance of teachers and teaching
Context lack of foundational skills 4th grade slump achievement gap
HQT Participants
Year 1: 67 teachers 11 schools
Year 2: 73 teachers 16 schools
Year 3: 76 teachers 18 schools
Year 4: 72 teachers 16 schools
Data Sources
Observation InstrumentObservation Instrument: Time sampling protocol focuses on Instructional Practices. It’s completed by trained observers, entered on lap top. Over 10,000 episodes for reading and for mathematics.
Daily LogDaily Log: Focuses on Curriculum Coverage. Completed by teacher, data on time and content for one student from class roster entered into PDA. Over 3,300 daily log entries in reading and in mathematics (average length 74 class minutes per entry)
InterviewsInterviews With 16 principals; focused on support for high-quality teaching and student learning in Grades 4 & 5 and how the achievement gap was addressed. With focus groups of teachers and staff developers
High Quality Teaching Study Data Sources
Schools
Classes
Student demographic & achievement records
Web-rostering of students to teachers' classes
Contextual investigationsprincipal interviewsteacher focus-groupsteacher interviewsartifact collection
Beginning of School Year
End of School Year
DailyLessons
DailyLessons
DailyLessons
Classroom observations (6-8 per class)pre-post interviews with teacherstime sampling (roughly 20 episodes per observation)
Daily lesson logs (max. 180 records per class)
Selected case studies of classroom practices
Attribution scores for each observation
Research QuestionsResearch Questions What do teachers do to help
students achieve above expectations in reading and mathematics?
How do they change their pedagogical practices?
What is the correspondence between high quality teaching constructs and student learning?
What is the influence of education policies and organizational factors?
High Quality Teaching in Reading & Math: Common Constructs
How teachers understand and represent subject matter
The existence of a classroom discourse community
Level of cognitive demand of activities and context
Cognitive Demand
The degree to which a teacher: presses for or evokes reasoning,
reflection on learning, and higher order thinking, and
Engages students in demanding content using challenging genres.
Example of Attribution Data
0
1
2
3
4
5
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20
Know ledge Strategy Development & IndividualDifferences
Motivation Context & Situation
Teacher A
Teacher B
Teacher C
Mathematics Classes Mathematics Classes
Math Attribution:Mean & Range of Overall Scores by Teacher
Teacher
Overall S
core
5
4
3
2
1
0
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
Classroom OrganizationClassroom Organization
Whole Class: 54%
Independent Work 25%
Small Group 12%
Mixed Group & Independent 8%
Some Features of High Quality Mathematics Instruction
Some Features of High Quality Mathematics Instruction
Engages students in high level thinking and tasks and maintains the tasks at a high level
Connects mathematical ideas with “real world”
Provides for linked conceptual and procedural knowledge
Manages Act. On Task11%
Manages Mats.,Behav., Off Task
17%
No Obvious Instruction6%
Watches/listens9%
Poses or elaborates- Problem/High
7%
Requests 4%
Poses or Elaborates-Routine
20%
Responds, Models, Lectures, Posts,
Defines26%
Requests
Poses or elaborates- Problem/High
Poses or Elaborates-Routine
Responds, Models, Lectures, Posts,Defines
Watches/listens
Manages Act. On Task
Manages Mats.,Behav., Off Task
No Obvious Instruction
Percent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher ActivitiesPercent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher Activities
Percent of Time on Various Student ActivitiesPercent of Time on Various Student Activities
Responds-Simple Answer
21%
Asks Question,Reads Text, Writes on
Board8%
Works on Routine Ex11%
Formal Assessment4%
Listen/Watch20%
Management and Mixed17%
No Academic Behavior
2%Works on Prob.,
Ext. Writing10%
Responds-Conj, Expl, Alt Meth.
7%
Responds-Conj, Expl, Alt Meth.
Works on Prob., Ext. Writing
Responds-Simple Answer
Works on Routine Ex
Formal Assessment
Asks Question,Reads Text, Writeson Board
Listen/Watch
Management and Mixed
No Academic Behavior
Percent of Time for VariousLesson ContextsPercent of Time for VariousLesson Contexts
Hooks/Motivates3%
Connects3%
Class Agenda1%
No Specific Connection
93%
Connects
Hooks/Motivates
Class Agenda
No Specific Connection
Percent of Time on Various Mathematics ContentPercent of Time on Various Mathematics Content
Procedural40%
Conceptual21%
Linking Con. & Procedural
13%
Learning Strategies2%
Other, Management, Non-Inst.
20%
Mixed4%
Procedural
Conceptual
Linking Con. & Procedural
Learning Strategies
Other, Management, Non-Inst.
Mixed
Mathematics Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)Mathematics Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)
4th
Grd
. M
ath
em
atic
s L
es
so
ns
(S
D U
nits
)
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
-1.0
Procedural
Conceptual
Linking 5th
Grd
. M
ath
em
atic
s L
ess
on
s (S
D U
nits
)
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
-1.0
Procedural
Conceprual
Linking
4th Grade Classes
5th Grade Classes
Reading ClassesReading Classes
Reading Attribution:Mean & Range of Overall Scores by Teacher
Teacher
Overall S
core
5
4
3
2
1
0
Maximum
Minimum
Mean
Features of High Quality Reading InstructionFeatures of High Quality Reading Instruction
Allows students to have choice about interesting and challenging text of a variety of genres
Encourages students to respond personally to what they read
Promotes dialogue about reading and writing
Creates a balance between comprehending and reasoning about texts and necessary skill instruction
Variety of Genres in HQT ClassroomsVariety of Genres in HQT Classrooms
Exposition: 32% Articles: 6% Essays: 2% Trade books: 2% Textbook: 2% Procedural: 1% Reference: 1% Research: 1%
Narrative: 35.2% Realistic Fiction:
7% Historical Fiction:
5% Fantasy: 4% Autobiography: 1% Biography: 1% Fables: 1% Mystery: .6%
Classroom OrganizationClassroom Organization
Whole Class 44%
Mixed Group & Independent 25%
Independent Work 20%
Small Group 11%
Percent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher ActivitiesPercent of Lesson Time in Various Teacher Activities
Requests5%
Poses or Elaborates Low17%
Poses or Elaborates High5%
Responds, Models, Posts, Lectures,
Reads Aloud26%
Listens to, Watches, Reads Student
Work, Reads silently14%
Manages Act. On Task10%
Manages Mats., Behav., Off Task
14%
No Obvious Instruction
9%
Requests
Poses or Elaborates High
Poses or Elaborates Low
Responds, Models, Posts,Lectures, Reads Aloud
Listens to, Watches, Reads StudentWork, Reads silently
Manages Act. On Task
Manages Mats., Behav., Off Task
No Obvious Instruction
Percent of Time on Various Student ActivitiesPercent of Time on Various Student Activities
Respond With or State Simple Answer
20%
Assist, Discuss, Read Aloud, Read Silently, Use
Resources14%
Manage/Mixed25%
No Apparent Academic Behavior in Reading
4%
Listen/Watch17%
Write Low, View9%
Respond With or State Hypo., Predict, Expla.,
Just., Alt., Elab.11%
Write High, Perform0%
Respond With or State Hypo.,Predict, Expla., Just., Alt., Elab.
Write High, Perform
Respond With or State SimpleAnswer
Assist, Discuss, Read Aloud,Read Silently, Use Resources
Write Low, View
Listen/Watch
Manage/Mixed
No Apparent AcademicBehavior in Reading
Percent of Time on Different Types of ContentPercent of Time on Different Types of Content
ManagementMixed, 24%
Conventions, 6%
Performing, Viewing,
I llustrating, 4%
Writing, 17%
Reading, 46%
Non-instructional, 3%
Reading
Writing
Conventions
Performing, Viewing,Illustrating
ManagementMixed
Non- instructional
Reading Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)Reading Lesson Content Over Time (2003-2004)
4th Grade Classes 5th Grade Classes
May/June
AprilM
arch
February
January
December
November
September/O
ctober
5th
Grd
. R
ea
din
g L
ess
on
s (S
D U
nits
)
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
-1.0
Reading
Writing
Conventions
4th
Grd
. R
ea
din
g L
ess
on
s (S
D U
nits
)
1.0
.8
.6
.4
.2
.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
-1.0
Reading
Writing
Conventions
HQT Reading InstructionHQT Reading Instruction
Uses a variety of both exposition and narrative chosen by the teacher to be personally relevant to students’ lives
Promotes dialogue about reading primarily in teacher-led small groups
Creates a balance between reading and writing about texts and conventions
What Do We Learn About High Quality Teaching from Teacher-Student Oral Interactions?
What Do We Learn About High Quality Teaching from Teacher-Student Oral Interactions?
Roughly one-quarter to one-third of observed time in reading and mathematics classes involved oral interactions about lesson content
Students twice as likely to provide simple answers than complex, cognitively demanding answers (18% v. 10%) to teacher inquiries about reading
Student three times as likely to provide simple answers than complex, cognitively demanding answers (22% v. 7%) to teacher inquiries about mathematics
Quality of Teacher Requests Mirror Quality of Student Responses
Quality of Teacher Requests Mirror Quality of Student Responses
More cognitively demanding teacher inquiries result in more cognitively demanding student responses; just as simple teacher inquiries result in simple answers from students
Students respond more positively to teachers’ requests for higher cognitive demands in reading classes where management is more focused on instruction
Students respond more positively to teachers’ requests for higher cognitive demand in mathematics classes where small group instruction used more frequently
More Cognitively Demanding Requests and Responses Vary Across the Year
More Cognitively Demanding Requests and Responses Vary Across the Year
Mean L
esson C
onte
nt (in S
D U
nits
) .8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
Teacher Requests Hi
Student Responds Hi
M
ean L
esson C
onte
nt (in S
D U
nits
)
.8
.6
.4
.2
0.0
-.2
-.4
-.6
-.8
Teacher Requests Hi
Student Responds Hi
Mathematics Classes Reading Classes
More Cognitively Demanding Student ReponsesMore Cognitively Demanding Student Reponses
IN READING Classes where teachers
made more requests for cognitively demanding responses from students
Classes that had lower proportions of English language learners
Schools that had greater emphasis on cognitively demanding content across all classes
IN MATHEMATICS Classes where teachers
requested more cognitively demanding responses from students
Classes with less emphasis on procedural knowledge
Schools with lower proportions of at-risk students (ELL, FARM, Special ED)
How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Barriers
How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Barriers
School personnel must respond to too many different initiatives at once
Materials or training that enable teachers to meet expectations are insufficient
The over-emphasis on testing is a detriment to teaching and learning
A climate of blame and punishment hinders collaborative, supportive problem solving
How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Supports
How Policies And Organizational Factors Influence High Quality Teaching: Perceived Supports
Goals and objectives are clearly communicated
School personnel are encouraged to develop a common language and vision for teaching and learning
The learning needs of struggling learners are made a priority
Opportunities and incentives are in place for teacher collaboration on student learning
Data-based decision-making is valued
Schools’ Responses to the Policy EnvironmentSchools’ Responses to the Policy Environment
Use data and data analysis to Determine students’ learning needs Assign resources to particular categories
of students Shape the focus and content of working
team meeting
Organize teams of specialists and teachers for
Plug-ins, pull-outs, plug-in and pull-asides Double-dips Collaborative teaming and problem-
solving
In Principals’ Own WordsIn Principals’ Own Words
“There’s a lot more dialogue going on about the needs of individual students. And that’s in part attributable to what I’m doing as a leader, but it’s also in part attributable to the county. Things are coming into play here. . .the implementation of a collaborative action process program. . . All these things are coming together and creating a very positive team.”
“My vision for next year is to have more individual data conversations about how kids are doing, have less nervousness about that because certainly there was apprehension about that; having more collegiality among team members to where people don’t feel the need to hide what they’re doing and tell me everything is fine when everybody knows it’s not.”
This study is supported by a grant from the Interagency Education Research Initiative, a combined effort of the U.S. Department of
Education, National Institutes of Health,
and National Science Foundation.
This study is supported by a grant from the Interagency Education Research Initiative, a combined effort of the U.S. Department of
Education, National Institutes of Health,
and National Science Foundation.
THE ENDTHE END
Critical QuestionCritical Question
What would you like others—teachers, administrators, policy makers—to know about high quality teaching?
Special Acknowledgment
Special Acknowledgment
Our deepest appreciation for your participation, allowing so many of us into your classrooms and schools so often, and for your daily efforts to engage in high quality teaching
What Teachers Say They Do to “Close the Gap”What Teachers Say They Do to “Close the Gap”
Identify gaps and address needs
(using data—student written work
and assessments—to plan future
instructional needs)
Function as an instructional team
Build student confidence while
maintaining high expectations
Use flexible, small group instruction
In mathematics, connect to the real
world and using writing to develop
deeper understandings
In reading, connect with other
subjects, build vocabulary and
vocabulary skills, explicitly teach
strategies so students can become
independent readers