The Academic Achievement Challenge What Really Works in the Classroom?

CALIFORNIA TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE CENTER (C-TAC) Reading First Cohort 4 LEA Orientation Session September 13, 2006

Presenters: Kathi Cooper and

Sharon Ruiz Van Vleck Reading Lions Center Sacramento County Office of Education

The Academic Achievement Challenge To provide: – An overview of key ideas in Jeanne Chall’s book, The Academic Achievement Challenge – A rationale for research supported, teacher-centered instruction – Connections between this work and California’s approach to reading initiatives and core and intervention materials – Theoretical underpinnings for faithful implementation of adopted programs

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Changes in School Practice

What Should Change? • Change in the instructional practices • Change the students – Motivation – Aspects of child development “These two kinds of proposals for improving students’ learning and academic achievement have been debated, implemented in various forms, and researched for nearly a century in American schools. Is there any evidence that one approach is more effective than others?” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Research Seems to Take a Back Seat Discussions & decisions about new programs are often made with: – Disregard to past relevant research – Taking opposite direction from research – Unconnected to student achievement

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

The Voice of Experience

Jeanne Chall “In various research studies I have been a part of over the past fifty years, I have found that many popular, respected practices were not supported by research. Indeed, practice often went in a direction opposite from the existing research evidence.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

The Voice of Experience

Jeanne Chall “Thus, while educational practice kept moving in the direction of progressive, student-centered approaches, the research evidence kept growing in support of traditional, teachercentered learning. This is particularly evident in beginning reading instruction. Although research evidence from the early 1900’s found benefits for a structured, systematic teaching of phonics and other skills, practice went in the opposite directiontowards a progressive, student-centered approach. (Chall, 1967, 1983a, 1996a)” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Why? • We try actions before they are tested • Good Intentions – we want kids to succeed NOW! • We react emotionally to new ideas

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Are We Asking Questions? About How We Approach Teaching and Learning

• Do educational practices, philosophies, and beliefs fit into broad patterns and types? • Do some students learn better when exposed to one pattern or another?

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Educational Practice Most educational practices fall into two broad approaches:

• Student-Centered • Teacher-Centered

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Student-Centered Learning comes naturally to learner – – – –

Emphasizes joyfulness Relies on child’s curiosity and natural desire to learn Emphasizes individual needs and interests Learning is viewed as natural as growth and development

Teacher is in background – Facilitates and coaches – Limited role

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Teacher-Centered – Learning is responsibility of both the teacher and student – Interest alone cannot be relied upon – Acquire knowledge, values and skills through education, training, and discipline

Teacher is in the foreground – Learning requires direction, work, and practice – Dull but necessary with the exciting and interesting – Thrill of skill

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Who’s in Charge? “What is perhaps of greatest importance in the change from teacher-centered to student-centered schools was the change in the roles of teachers and students. In the ideal teacher-centered school the teacher is in control; in the ideal student-centered school, the students are in control.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Does One Approach Serve Students Better Than the Other? THEORY • Learning is most effective when it is under the control of the learners • Learner decides what to learn, when to learn, and how to learn

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

RESEARCH • Students do less well academically when given freedom to choose, select, and pace their own learning (see Chapter 5; see also Barth, 1972;Chall & Curtis, 1991; Chall, Jacob, & Baldwin, 1990; and Chall & Peterson, 1986) J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

Research Support the Efficacy of Teacher-Centered Learning • Develops fundamental skills • Builds new knowledge • Supports students with limited knowledge, language, experiences, and skills

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

The Conflict If research supports a teacher-centered approach, …

Why do student-centered practices prevail?

~ DISCUSS WITH YOUR NEIGHBOR ~

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Why do student-centered practices prevail? • Many of today’s teachers trained in student-centered approach • Intuitively very satisfying • Teach from our hearts • Believe student-centered practices accommodate individual differences

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

What About Individual Differences? Considering individual differences is humane, but can easily mask low expectations

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

What About Individual Differences? • Today, in California’s system – Outcomes are standard – Children are not

• To ensure that all students meet common outcomes, the variability is in instruction. Variation in – Intensity – Time and duration

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Students Need Specific Direct Instruction “If students who lag behind are not given the additional instruction they need to continue to make progress, they will fall further and further behind at each successive grade. If teachers accept the student’s low achievement as a manifestation of individual differences, the deceleration in achievement in later grades becomes ever greater. When such students reach high school, they usually are placed in special classes that are less challenging academically. Many drop out of school with minimal achievement.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge © 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Closing the Achievement Gap “The research findings, as well as the experiences of teachers and the preferences of parents…point to the benefits of a teacher-centered, educational approach for low income children.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Closing the Achievement Gap Closing the gap requires • Keeping the end in mind • Avoiding confusion between the means and end

“Low expectations prevent many students from ever reaching the end” - Marion Joseph (2003)

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Research to Support Our Actions “Rosenshine (1987), for example, found that children in the primary grades, and particularly low-income children, did better when they had direct rather than indirect instruction. Similarly, Gage (1989; Gage & Berliner, 1992) and other investigators found fewer differences between higher -and lower-socioeconomicstatus children when they received direct instruction.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Direct Teaching Works for All Students • Applies to all content areas • When new skills are required and/or new knowledge is being developed • Essential for less prepared students

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Models of Schools Using TeacherCentered Approaches Mann and Lawrence (1980-1981) reviewed seven research studies on school effectiveness and found great consistency in their findings. – Principal’s characteristics, especially strong leadership – Teacher’s characteristics, especially high expectations – School “climate” or atmosphere, especially one that is conducive to learning – Instructional emphasis that is concentrated on pupil acquisition of basic skills – Pupil evaluation that is frequent and linked to what children and teacher do next © 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Effective Schools Research “He (Ron Edmonds) proposed to raise the achievement of poor children by focusing on the following: strong leadership by the principal, a healthy school climate, high expectations of achievement, a basic skills emphasis, and frequent assessment.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Effective Schools Use Traditional Approach • Focus on instruction, more time on instruction • Increased monitoring of instruction by the principal • Teachers are task oriented – Homework – High expectations

• Achievement is the first goal of the school • Direct instruction preferred to indirect instruction (whole class and/or small group) • Teachers observed and evaluated © 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Strong Models are Teacher-Centered “…(in the 1990’s), in a study of twenty-four school wide approaches to reform, the three approaches found to have the strongest evidence of effectiveness-Success for All, Direct Instruction, and High Schools That Work- all follow a traditional, teacher-centered approach. Earlier a traditional reading program for poor African American children in the elementary grades was developed by Marva Collins (1990), who claims that children do so well with it that they can read original classics from the early grades on.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Teaching Reading Is Teacher-Centered “Traditional reading instruction favors the systematic teaching of phonics and other skills in the early grades, and the research constantly finds that it leads to higher reading achievement.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

RECOMMENDATION A Greater Emphasis on a Traditional Teacher-Centered Approach

“Based on research, history, and experience,, my first recommendation is that schools that are not already doing so put a greater emphasis on a traditional, teacher-centered education. Traditional, teacher-centered schools, according to research and practice, are more effective than progressive, student-centered schools for the academic achievement of most children. And that approach is especially beneficial for students who come to school less well prepared for academic learningchildren of less educated families, inner-city children, and those with learning difficulties at all social levels.” J. Chall (2000) The Academic Achievement Challenge

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Sound Familiar? Chall asserts that effective programs are built on: – Strong, highly structured instruction – Focus on specific skills and knowledge – Use of frequent assessments

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Where Are We? • The California Reading Initiative, 1997, calls for explicit systematic instruction in phonics and spelling as well as in comprehension, and independent reading of quality books • Language Arts Standards, 1998, calls for common outcomes for all students • 2002 Language Arts Curriculum adoption provides standards-aligned materials based on a direct instruction model © 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

Implications for Our Work • Faithful implementation of our research-based, direct instruction language arts programs – Monitor classrooms, student work, and student results to provide needed support and intervention – Increase time and intensity of instruction when students need it

• Support teachers in perfecting a teacher-centered approach – Engagement – Scaffolding © 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education

The Academic Achievement Challenge: What Really Works in the Classroom? This power point presentation will be available on the web site: www.calread.net/lea_sessions

© 2006 Reading Lions Center / Sacramento County Office of Education