Strategies For Effective Teaching, Third Edition

i e J o r Third Edition
Effective
Teaching
{Jr
T H D D O N
Strategies for
Effective Teaching
Allan C. Ornstein
Loyola University of Chicago
St. John’s University:
Thomas J. Lasley, II
University of Dayton
Boston Burr Ridge, IL Dubuque, IA Madison, WI New York San Francisco St. Louis
Bangkok Bogota Caracas Lisbon London Madrid
Mexico City Milan New Delhi Seoul Singapore Sydney Taipei Toronto
McGraw-Hill Higher Education g7
A Division of The McGraw-Hill Companies
STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING, THIRD EDITION
Copyright © 2000, 1995 by The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc. All rights reserved. Previous edition
© 1990 HarperCollins Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Printed in the United States of America.
Except as permitted under the United States Copyright Act of 1976, no part of this publication may be
reproduced or distributed in any form or by any means, or stored in a data base or retrieval system,
without the prior written permission of the publisher.
This book is printed on acid-free paper.
1234567890 QPF/QPF 09876 543210
ISBN 0-697-29885-X
Editorial director: Jane E. Vaicunas

Sponsoring editor: Beth Kaufman
Editorial coordinator: Teresa Wise
Marketing manager: Daniel M. Loch
Project manager: Joyce M. Berendes
Senior production supervisor: Mary E. Haas
Designer: Rick Noel
Photo research coordinator: John C. Leland
Senior supplement coordinator: David A. Welsh
Compositor: Shepherd, Inc.
Typeface: 10/12 Times Roman
Printer: Quebecor Printing Book Group/Fairfield, PA
Cover designer: Heidi Baughman

Cover image: ©Comstock/Tom Grill
Photo research: Feldman & Associates
Photo Credits
p. 170 © Michael Siluk/The Image Works, p. 190 © Robert Finken/Photo Researchers, Inc., p. 224 © Ulrike Welsch/Photo
Researchers, Inc., p. 240 © Michael Siluk/The Image Works, p. 264 © Spencer Grant/Photo Researchers, Inc., p. 292 © Tim
Davis/Photo Researchers, Inc., p. 300 © Ned Haines/Photo Researchers, Inc., p. 311 © Spencer Grant/Photo Researchers, Inc.,
p. 348 © James Shaffer, p. 355 © Michael Weisbrot/The Image Works, p. 390 © Bob Daemmrich/The Image Works, p. 396
© Mitch Wojnarowicz/The Image Works, p. 412 © James Shaffer, p. 450 © Michael Weisbrot/The Image Works, p. 481
© James Shaffer, p. 494 © Robert Kalman/The Image Works, p. 529 © James Shaffer, *Any photos not credited are courtesy of
the author.
Library of Congress Cataioging-in-Publication Data
Omstein, Allan C.
Strategies for effective teaching / Allan C. Omstein, Thomas J.
Lasley. — 3rd ed.
p. cm.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
, ISBN 0-697-29885-X
1. Teaching. 2. Effective teaching. 3. Classroom management.
4. Lesson planning. 5. Teachers—Training of. I. Lasley, Thomas J.
LB 1025.3.076 2000
371.102—dc21 99-34637
CIP
www.mhhe.com
D E D I C A T I O N
All of us have had teachers whom we remember fondly and who apparently
were good teachers. We remember them here:
Mrs. Katz, P.S. 42 Queens: a warm, Dr. Kohn, City College of New York:
friendly, and understanding teacher the scholar type, who through
who was concerned more with social dialogue and questioning made one
development than cognitive think.
development.
Dr. Greene, Brooklyn College:
Mrs. Schwartz, P.S. 42 Queens: a tough humanistic and philosophical, she
schoolmarm who drilled the facts and emphasized the personal, emotional,
enforced the rules. and moral aspects of education.
Mr. Tietz, Far Rockaway High School: a Dr. Clift, New York University: both
good-natured, quick-witted teacher friend and teacher, he balanced the
with a booming voice. talents and tempers of his students,
Dr. Charles Galloway, University of and animated the best plans for their
North Florida: a friend and colleague good.
who always treated people as Dr. Joseph Rogus, University of
being better than they might Dayton: friend, colleague, and
actually be. consummate teacher.
BRIEF CONTE N T S
SECTION I
The Art and Science of Teaching
Chapter 1 The Art of Teaching 3

Chapter 2 The Science of Teaching 35
SECTION II
The Technical Skills of Teaching
Chapter 3 Instructional Objectives 83

Chapter 4 Instructional Planning 123
Chapter 5 Instructional Strategies 171
Chapter 6 Instructional Materials 219
Chapter 7 Technology in the Classroom 261
Chapter 8 Instructional Grouping 293
Chapter 9 Classroom Management
and Discipline 349
Chapter 10 Assessing Student Progress 391
Chapter 11 Evaluating Student Progress 451
SECTION III
Professional Growth
Chapter 12 Professional Growth 495
IV
c O N TEN T S
Preface xi 2 The Science of Teaching 35

Tips for Teachers xv
Professional Viewpoints xvii Review of the Research on Teaching 36
To the Instructor xix Teacher Interaction Patterns 39
Acknowledgements xxi Verbal Communication 39
To the Student xxii Nonverbal Communication 41
Teacher Expectations 44
SECTION I
Labeling Students 45
Teacher Characteristics 48
The Art and Science of Teaching Research on Teacher Characteristics 48
Teacher Competencies 51
Teacher Effects 54
1 The Art of Teaching 3
The Rosenshine and Furst Model 54
The Reasons for Teaching 3 The Gage Model 55
The Art of Effective Teaching 5 The Good and Brophy Model 56
Effective Teachers in the Movies 6 The Evertson and Emmer Model 57
Effective Teachers in Literature 9 The Master Teacher or Star Teacher 57
Artful Teaching and Knowledge The Expert Teacher 59
Construction 15 Cautions and Criticisms 61
Critical Thinking 17 Beyond Effective Teaching 66
Creative Thinking 23 Metaphors 67
The Role of the Teacher in Fostering Stories 67
Creativity 26 Biographies and Autobiographies 68
A Final Reflection 28 Voice 69
Theory into Practice 29 Theory into Practice 70
Summary 30 Summary 71
Questions to Consider 30 Questions to Consider 72
Things to Do 30 Things to Do 72
Recommended Readings 31 Recommended Readings 72
Key Terms 31 Key Terms 73
End Notes 31 End Notes 73 v
vi Contents
SECTION II Lesson Plans 139

Lesson Plans by Authorities 140
The Technical Skills of Teaching
Components of the Lesson Plan 140
Reflections on Planning 150
3 Instructional Objectives 83 Sample Lesson Plans 151
Flexible Grouping Lesson Plan 152
The Aims of Education 85 Thinking Skills Lesson Plan 153
Goals 86 Mastery Learning Lesson Plan 154
Types of Objectives 92 Inquiry-Discovery
Program Objectives 93 Lesson Plan 157
Course Objectives 95 Theory into Practice 162
Classroom Objectives 95 Unit Planning 163
Formulating Goals and Objectives 97 Lesson Planning 165
Goals: The Tyler Model 97
Summary 165
Taxonomy of Educational Questions to Consider 166
Objectives 99 Things to Do 166
Establishing Specific Objectives 106
Recommended Readings 166
General Objectives and Specific Learning Key Terms 167
Outcomes 108
End Notes 167
Applying Gronlund’s Objectives 108
Specific Objectives 110
Applying Mager’ s Obj ectives 111 5 Instructional Strategies 171
Writing Your Own Goals and
Instructional Approach I 173
Objectives 112
Problems of Lecturing 173
Additional Thoughts on Objectives 115
Benefits of Lecturing and
Theory into Practice 116
Explaining 174
General Objectives 116
Presenting Lectures and
Precise Objectives 116
Explanations 174
Summary 117
Instructional Approach II 179
Questions to Consider 117
Types of Questions 179
Things to Do 118
Asking Questions Correctly 184
Instructional Approach III 190
Key Terms 118
Applications of Practice
End Notes 119
and Drill 190
Implementing Practice and Drill 195
4 Instructional Planning 123
Instructional Approach IV 197
How Teachers Plan 124 Problem Solving Teaching 198
Planning by Level of Instruction 126 Experiential Teaching 201
Mental versus Formal Planning 128 Instructional Approach V 204
Courses of Study 128 Theory into Practice 208
Strategic Planning 129 Summary 210
Unit Plans 129 Questions to Consider 210
Components of the Unit Plan 130 Things to Do 210
Approaches to Unit Planning 133 Recommended Readings 211
Guidelines for Developing Unit Key Terms 211
Plans 138 End Notes 212
Contents vii
6 Instructional Materials 219 Electronic Mail 284

Courses On-Line 285
Selecting Instructional Materials 220
A Final Word 285
Duplicated Materials 224
Developing Materials 224
Summary 287
Copying Materials 225
Presenting Instructional Materials 226
Things to Do 288
Textbooks 228
Disadvantages 228
Key Terms 289
Advantages 229
End Notes 289
Issues in Textbook Selection 230
Stereotyping 230
8 Instructional Grouping 293
Readability 232
Cognitive Task Demands 233 Classroom Seating Arrangements 294
Textbook Aids and Pedagogical Aids 235 Special Classroom Designs 296
Reading Across the Content Areas 237 Factors to Consider in Classroom
Metacognition and Text Structure 239 Designs 297
Workbooks 243 Whole-Group Instruction 301
Disadvantages 244 Achievement and Class Size 303
Advantages 244 Classroom Tasks 305
Journals, Magazines, and Newspapers 246 Altering Instructional
Simulations and Games 248 Variables 307
Theory into Practice 250 Small-Group Instruction 311
Summary 251 Ability Grouping 312
Questions to Consider 252 Nongraded Instruction 318
Things to Do 252 Peer Tutoring 320
Recommended Readings 253 Cooperative Learning 323
Key Terms 253 Group Activities 329
End Notes 253 Individualized Instruction 332
Mastery Learning 333
7 Technology in the Classroom 261 Theory into Practice 337
For Whole-Group Instruction 337
Pros and Cons of Using Technology 263
For Small-Group Instruction 337
Assistive Technology (AT) 264
For Individualized
Chalkboard and Display Board 266
Instruction 338
Overhead Projectors 267
Summary 338
Films 268
Television and Videos 269
Things to Do 339
Television’s Influence 269
Utilizing Television 272
Key Terms 340
Computers 274
End Notes 340
Computer Software 278
Computer Simulations and Virtual
9 Classroom Management
Reality 279
and Discipline 349
Telecommunication Systems 282
Teleconferences and Computer Approaches to Classroom Management 351
Conferences 283 Assertive Approach 352
VH1 Contents
Applied Science Approach 354 Test Anxiety 435

Behavior Modification Approach 358 Returning Tests and Feedback 436
Group Managerial Approach 360 Assessment 436
Acceptance Approach 363 Theory into Practice 442
Success Approach 367 Summary 443
Implementing Alternative Approaches Questions to Consider 443
to Classroom Management 371 Things to Do 443
Discipline Issues 375 Recommended Readings 444
Issue 1: Dealing with Misbehaviors 377 Key Terms 444
Issue 2: Preventing Misbehaviors 380 End Notes 445
Summary 385 11 Evaluating Student Progress 451
Things to Do 386 Types of Evaluation 453
Recommended Readings 386 Placement Evaluation 453
Key Terms 387 Diagnostic Evaluation 454
End Notes 387 Formative Evaluation 454
Summative Evaluation 455
10 Assessing Student Progress 391 Evaluation Methods and
Approaches 456
Criteria for Selecting Tests 392 Quizzes 457
Reliability 392 Observation of Student Work 458
Validity 394 Group Evaluation Activities 459
Usability 395 Class Discussions and Recitations 460
Standardized and Nonstandardized Homework 460
Tests 395 Notebooks and Note Taking 462
Norm-Referenced Tests 397 Reports, Themes, and Research
Criterion-Referenced Tests 397 Papers 462
Differences Between Norm-Referenced Discussions and Debates 462
and Criterion-Referenced Tests 398 Peer Evaluators 463
Types of Standardized Tests 401 Student Journals 464
Questions to Consider in Selecting Student Portfolios 464
Tests 403 Grading 467
Trends in Testing 405 Form of Grades 470
Cognitive Levels of Testing 405 Absolute Grade Standards 471
Authentic Assessment 406 Relative Grade Standards 471
High-Stakes Tests 408 Combining and Weighting
New Tests and Standards 409 Data 472
Classroom Tests 412 Contracting for Grades 474
Differences Between Short-Answer Mastery and Continuous Progress
and Essay Tests 415 Grading 474
Short-Ans wer Tests 416 Grading for Effort
Essay Questions 426 or Improvement 475
Testing Issues 430 Records and Reports of
Test-Taking Skills 430 Performance 475
Test Routines 431 Report Cards 476
Contents ix
Electronic Recordkeeping All Support from Other Beginning

Cumulative Record 479 Teachers 512
Communication with Parents 481 Support Through Computer
Parent Conferences 482 Networks 514
Letters to Parents 484 Self-Evaluation 515
A Cautionary Note 485 Reflection 516
Theory into Practice 486 Supervisory Evaluation and
Summary 487 Assistance 520
Questions to Consider 487 New Forms of Evaluation 523
Things to Do 488 Artifacts of Teaching 523
Recommended Readings 488 The National Board for Professional
Key Terms 488 Teaching Standards 526
End Notes 489 Professional Associations and
Activities 527
SECTION III Teacher Associations 527
Professional Organizations 528
Professional Growth
Professional Activities and
Collaboration 530
12 Professional Growth 495 Researcher-T eacher
Collaboration 531
Reforming Teacher Education 496
Helping the Beginning Teacher 500
Summary 535
Problems of Education Students and
Beginning Teachers 500
Things to Do 536
Teaching Inner-City and Culturally
Diverse Students 503
Key Terms 537
How Beginning Teachers (Novices)
End Notes 537
Teach 506
Support from Colleagues for Beginning Name Index 543
Teachers 509 Subject Index 546
'
■
P R E F A C E
Becoming a teacher is an extraordinarily complex venture. Some of what is

needed for success is learned; some is attributable to who you are as an individ¬
ual. As you will see, we argue for the art and science of teaching. Clearly, the
science of educational practice is growing and in several chapters of this text we
document what is now known. But you can know all that science and still be in¬
effective, and ironically, some few individuals are relatively successful without
knowing much of it. Such individuals may be good teachers, but they are not, at
least in a technical sense, professionals. Professionals intentionally possess a
discrete body of specialized knowledge . . . that type of knowledge now exists
about teaching.
This book is intended for any general methods or specialized methods class
that seeks to show students how to plan what to teach (objectives), how to deter¬
mine how to teach (methods), how to consider what is taught (reflection), and
how to determine whether students learned the requisite concepts (assessment).
As you begin your journey toward acquiring professional knowledge, you
need to understand that successful teaching is predicated on several fundamental
assumptions.
1. Teachers must possess thorough disciplinary knowledge.

2. Teachers must know content knowledge in more than superficial ways.
3. Teachers must know how learners learn in order to design instruction
meaningfully.
4. Teachers must know how to present content based on context and
purpose.
Assumption 1 was fulfilled if you have had a good general education. As¬
sumption 2 was addressed if you pursued some disciplinary coursework in
depth—that is, you have a disciplinary major (or selected academic minors). As¬
sumption 3 was fulfilled through educational psychology courses that emphasize
xi
Xll Preface
work by people such as Jean Piaget, B.F. Skinner, Edward Thorndike, and L.S.
Vygotsky. Assumption 4 is the focus of this book. Specifically, this book fo¬
cuses on how to teach—the process of communicating what you know (and is
known) in ways that help students to construct their own knowledge.
Organization
The book is organized into three parts. Section I focuses on the art and science
of teaching. Section II breaks down the teaching act into specific, discrete skills.
And, Section III addresses issues related to on-going professional development
and suggests ways in which the skills of teaching are part of both the art and sci¬
ence of what you do (or any teacher does) in the classroom.
The book has several features that should make it highly useful to a
prospective teacher.
Research-Based
We intentionally draw on the growing body of literature that shows that teachers
really do make a difference in the achievement of students. In the 1960s educa¬
tors were told that family socioeconomic status was so important that teachers
were “secondary.” In the 1990s, new “value-added” research suggested that
teachers do dramatically influence student achievement. What students bring to
school (the socioeconomics of their families) makes a difference. But what hap¬
pens to them once they are at school is just as important. Wow! This means that
you are potentially just as important to a student’s achievement as are the par¬
ents. What a responsibility and opportunity.
Standards-Based
Many states are embracing some type of standards (or criteria) for assessing
teacher competence. Some of those standards are national in nature (PRAXIS
Series and INTASC) and others are state or regional (such as California’s
CFASST). We decided to link what we present with what those national stan¬
dards emphasize. Chapters 3-12 begin with a specific description of the Path-
wise/PRAXIS III and INTASC criteria and principles that we determined were
relevant to the content of each chapter. Not everyone will agree with how we
have aligned these criteria with our content; there is room for disagreement. But
you will be able to see how we think these standards are connected to the skills
(or “inputs”) of teaching. If you are in an INTASC or PRAXIS Series state, the
“markers” that we provide should be helpful. And, even if you are not, you
should find them useful as a way to frame the content.
Preface xiii
Example-Based
One of the real problems with many methods texts is that they are heavy on the¬
ory and light on applications (examples). In this text, we err on the side of appli¬
cations. Good teachers need theory, but that theory is meaningless if you do not
know how to apply the knowledge. We provide several examples (tables, fig¬
ures, charts, analogs) to make certain that what we describe theoretically can be
applied practically. We also provide case studies and Tips for Teachers to help
you connect the theory and practice.
Expert-Based
A variety of individuals have shaped education in America. Many of their voices
are part of this text—we call them “professional viewpoints.” Some of those
viewpoints are also written by current practicing teachers. Our experts are a com¬
bination of those who have shaped teaching through their writing and thinking
and those who are shaping it through their teaching. Both sets of perspectives are
extremely important and should help you see that most educational issues are not
new. Rather they are old problems that require new thinking by you.
Technology-Based
The use of technology is prevalent increasingly for America’s young people.
Many of the preservice teachers who read this text are individuals who are used
to accessing web sites to gather information about topics of interest. Throughout
the text, but especially in Chapter 7, we provide you with web site information
that we think will be helpful in enhancing your effectiveness.
Conclusion
We are privileged that you are reading this textbook as part of your journey to
become a teacher. Our hope is that your journey is a long and fruitful one and
we hope that our text stimulates you to learn even more about what it means to
be a classroom teacher.
xiv Preface
Reviewers Who Made It Possible

No textbook of this type is possible without the critical assistance of a number of
very able reviewers. We are especially grateful to the following individuals for
their thoughtful suggestions:
Joan Black Anne Mungai

Governor’s State University Adelphi University
Jewell Cress Lyle Smith
Northeastern State University Augusta State University
David Englund Athena Waite
Bridgewater State College The University of California
Vickie Harry at Riverside
Clarion University of Pennsylvania Colleen Willard-Holt
Constance Hoag The Pennsylvania State
The University of South Dakota University at Harrisburg
Donna J. Merkely
Iowa State University
TIPS FOR T E A C HERS
Chapter 1 1.1 Strategies and Methods for Motivating Students 18

Chapter 2 2.1 Observing Other Teachers to Improve
Teaching Practices 38
2.2 Inattentive and Attentive Nonverbal Behaviors 43
2.3 Reaching and Teaching Students 64
Chapter 3 3.1 Key Words for the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:
Cognitive Domain 102
3.2 Key Words for the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:
Affective Domain 104
3.3 Key Words for the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:
Psychomotor Domain 105
3.4 Stating Classroom Objectives 114
Chapter 4 4.1 Organizing and Implementing Unit Plans 132
4.2 Monitoring the Lesson Plan 142
4.3 Organizing and Implementing Lesson Plans 163
Chapter 5 5.1 Enhancing Your Lectures/Explanations 175
5.2 Don’ts in Asking Questions 185
5.3 Do’s in Asking Questions 187
5.4 Improving Practice and Drill 197
Chapter 6 6.1 Selecting and Using Instructional Materials 223
6.2 Student Use of Textbook Aids 236
6.3 Appraising the Worth of a Textbook 243
Chapter 7 7.1 Tips for Parents for Guiding Children’s
TV Watching 270
7.2 Welcome to the “Teaching with Technology” Web Site:
http://www.fastforward.com 275
Chapter 8 8.1 Components of Direct Instruction 302
8.2 Detracking Classrooms 314
8.3 Meaningful Methods for Cooperative Learning 324
xv
xvi Tips for Teachers
Chapter 9 9.1 Suggestions for Analyzing Preventative Measures 360

9.2 Enhancing Your Classroom Management Approach 364
9.2 Strategies for Managing Problem Students 379
Chapter 10 10.1 Improving Your Assessment Procedures 399
10.2 For Students Needing Adaptations in
Testing/Assessment 413
10.3 Preparing Classroom Tests 417
10.4 Test-Wise Strategies 432
Chapter 11 11.1 Alternative Assessment Criteria 457
11.2 Learning Prescription 459
11.3 Advantages and Disadvantages of Point System
of Grading 473
11.4 Innovative Practices for Reporting Student
Performance 478
11.5 Directing a Parent Conference 484
Chapter 12 12.1 Professional Interaction in Staff
Development Programs 511
12.2 Questions Interviewers Ask Teacher Candidates 534
PROFESSIONAL VIEWPOINTS
Chapter 1 E. Paul Torrance, Be a Great Teacher! 15

Robert J. Sternberg, Critical Thinking in the Everyday
World 22
Kathryn Kinnucan-Welsch, Providing the Space and Time for the
Construction of Meaning 25
Chapter 2 Neil Postman, The Teacher with Wisdom 40
Madeline Hunter, The Science and Art of Teaching 59
Chapter 3 Herbert J. Walberg, Goal Setting 93
David R. Krathwohl, Using the Taxonomy 109
Chester E. Finn, State Academic Standards 113
Chapter 4 Lyn Corno, On “Teaching Formulas” 125
Ralph W. Tyler, Integrating Real-Life Experiences 151
Albert Shanker, Lesson Plans and the Professional 164
Chapter 5 Herbert M. Kliebart, The Persistence of Practice and Drill 192
Howard Gardner, Teach Them to Write 203
Benjamin S. Bloom, Methods for Teaching 207
Chapter 6 Barak Rosenshine, On Using Many Materials 221
Thomas A. Shannon, Textbook Controversy 231
Diane Ravitch, Beyond the Textbook 246
Chapter 7 Bob Lazzaro, Technology + Thinking = More Learning 263
Henry A. Giroux, Educational Technology 265
Harvey S. Long, The Pencil Makes the Point 274
Harold G. Shane, Some Quandaries in Instructional
Technology 280
Chapter 8 Professor Anonymous, On Being “Dumb” 315
Ernest R. Hilgard, Psychology of Instruction 335
Chapter 9 Carolyn M. Evertson, Effective Classroom Management 350
Ernest R. House, Learning from Your Mistakes 352
Vincent Rogers, On Humanistic Approaches 368
xvii
XV1U Professional Viewpoints
Chapter 10 Bruce W. Tuckman, Rules of Thumb for Taking

a Short-Answer Test 418
Roger Farr, Test Performance and Students’ Thinking 431
Robert E. Yager, Testing What We Intend to Teach 439
Chapter 11 Daniel L. Stufflebeam, Reasons for Evaluation 453
Robert E. Stake, Great Expectations 468
Martin Haberman, Evaluating Students in Schools 480
Chapter 12 Arthur E. Wise, Enhancing Teacher Professionalism 499
Julian C. Stanley, Becoming a Teacher 501
James Raths, Thinking About Teaching 510
Beth Lazzaro, Teacher Reflections on Professional Growth 519
T O THE I N S T R U C T O R
Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition, is written for all who are inter¬
ested in learning how to teach or improve their teaching, as well as in teaching
students how to learn. It will help prepare novice teachers for their new roles,
and provide seasoned teachers with new insights into what they are doing.
The text focuses on the theory and practice of teaching. It attempts to blend
theory with practice by reporting and analyzing important research, then pre¬
senting practical procedures and adaptive strategies for teachers to use. For ex¬
ample: How do successful teachers start a lesson? How do they monitor class¬
room activities? How do they deal with disruptive students? How do they
proceed with a student who doesn’t know the answer? These are problems that
teachers must deal with daily. The answers to these questions depend on how we
apply the theory we have learned in our coursework to the classroom setting.
Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition, is also grounded on the new
INTASC and PRAXIS Series standards. Many states are using these standards
as a means of ensuring better-quality teacher education. Our hope is that you
will be able to use this book to relate required teaching skills to defined and ac¬
cepted teaching standards.
Prospective teachers and beginning teachers need to master theoretical con¬
cepts and principles and then integrate these concepts and principles into prac¬
tice by developing specific methods and strategies that work on the job. The in¬
tegration process, or the leap from theory to practice, is not easy. Strategies for
Effective Teaching, third edition, helps by interweaving practical strategies and
methods with research. Many theories and practices are presented with the un¬
derstanding that readers can pick and choose among the methods and strategies
to select the ones that fit their personality and philosophy. In each chapter, look
for “Tips for Teachers.” These instructional aids are designed to help the reader
apply the theory to practice.
Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition, adopts a cognitive science ap¬
proach, blending cognitive-developmental research with information-processing
xix
XX To the Instructor
research. Consequently, a good deal of the subject matter is rooted in educational

psychology, linguistics, and subject-related methods—and there is little that deals
with the philosophy, history, or sociology of teaching.
Cognitive science focuses on how teachers teach and how learners learn,
and it can be used to derive strategies that guide effective teaching and learning.
This text presents research on how students process information, or what we call
learning strategies”: how to skim data, summarize information, take notes, do
homework, read text material, take tests, and so forth. Existing research can be
used to teach students to think critically: to classify, infer, interpret, extrapolate,
evaluate, and predict.
Research also exists to help identify effective teaching strategies. Strate¬
gies for Effective Teaching, third edition, is one of the first books to use recent
cognitive science research to discuss how to teach by explaining, questioning,
monitoring, and reviewing; how to diagnose, assess, and place students into
groups for instruction; how to teach basic skills, concepts, and problem solving;
how to manage the sutface behavior of students on an individual and group
basis; how to plan for instruction and utilize instructional technology; and how
to use textbooks and improve instructional materials.
The new emphasis in cognitive science, and in this text, is concerned not
with students answers, but rather with how students derive answers and what
strategies teachers use to help students learn. This book informs teachers about
recent research on how students process information and how teachers can mod¬
ify their instruction to help students learn more effectively.
The many distinctive features of Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edi¬
tion, include the following:
• Pathwise (PRAXIS Series) and INTASC standards that ground teaching

skills (see Chapters 3 to 12)
Focusing questions at the beginning of each chapter to help orient the
reader, set the stage for what is to follow, and highlight the main ideas in
the chapter
Easy-to-read headings and subheadings that facilitate understanding and
illustrate relationships among ideas
• Short descriptors and categories that help classify and conceptualize
information
Tables and charts organized as overviews that make learning more
meaningful
Current research findings applied to classroom teaching
Professional Viewpoints,” original statements by experts in the field,
written specifically for this text, that highlight a major concept or
principle and/or give advice for both the beginning and the experienced
teacher
Lists of practical tips that give insights into teaching
• Chapter summaries that present a short list of main ideas, in the same
sequence as the chapter’s narrative
K N O W E D M N
Many people wrote the “Professional Viewpoints” features in Strategies for Ef¬
fective Teaching, third edition. They were kind enough to take time from their
busy schedules to jot down some valuable advice or personal views about teach¬
ers and teaching. Their thoughts add a timely and unusual dimension to the text
while providing useful information in an appealing manner. We appreciate their
contributions to this text. And finally, to Esther, who fulfills my life, and has
provided me with much needed understanding, support, and encouragement
while revising this book.
Allan C. Ornstein
Many people made it possible to revise this text. I give thanks to each for their
particular contributions: Jane Perri and Debbie Byrd for help with the photogra¬
phy; Vickie Hodges for her assistance with the massive task of keyboarding the
revised text; Chad Raisch for all the detail work associated with putting together
a text of this sort; Carmen Giebelhaus for her efforts to ensure that the INTASC
and Pathwise Standards were aligned correctly (or at least logically!); Beth
Kaufman for her editorial support; my colleague Mea Maio for doing extra work
so that I could be free to write; my wife, Janet, for allowing me to work on Sat¬
urday and not to do work around the house; and, of course, the University of
Dayton for its wonderful support.
Thomas J. Easley II
xxi
o H E U D E N
Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition, has five major purposes. The
first is to help beginning teachers develop an understanding of what goes on in
the classroom, and what the job of teaching involves. Despite your familiarity
with education from a student’s point of view, you probably have limited experi¬
ence with teaching from a teacher’s point of view. And even if you are experi¬
enced, you can always integrate your own experiences about teaching with new
information to achieve professional improvement and development.
A second purpose is to provide classroom teachers with concrete and realis¬
tic suggestions about ways of teaching—and how they can improve the teaching-
learning process. Many teachers are unaware of their behavior, or the effects they
have on students; others can sharpen their expertise in what methods and strate¬
gies work with different students.
Another purpose is to apply theoretical and research-based data to teaching
practices. Social scientists and educators have discovered many things about
human behavior, and they have established many principles that can be trans¬
lated into practice. In still other cases, existing practices of the teacher can be
clarified and refined through an understanding of research. The idea is to con¬
vert “knowledge of teaching” into “knowledge of how to teach.”
A fourth purpose is to show how teachers can make a difference, and how
they can have a positive influence on students. The data in this text suggest that
teachers affect students, and that some teachers, because of their practices have
better results than others.
Finally, Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition, deals with how
teachers can teach students how to learn—that is, with learning strategies that
will increase students’ chances for achievement and reduce the loss of human
potential so pervasive in our society today. Coming to know is the goal of the
learner; helping students learn how to learn is the goal of the teacher. The extent
to which students come to know and learn how to learn is influenced by how
Allan C. Omstein
Thomas J. Easley II
xxii
E C T I O N
The Art and Science

of Teaching
In these first two chapters we describe the art and science of teaching. We start
in Chapter 1 with the concept of teaching as an art because it suggests the power
and complexity of the teaching act and it illustrates how teaching connects with
the reality of student learning. In Chapter 2, we outline the growing body of sci¬
entific literature about teachers and teaching.
This first section examines teacher behaviors and how those behaviors in¬
fluence your ability to teach and a student’s desire to learn. As you will readily
notice, the teaching act is incredibly dynamic. It demands a great deal of teach¬
ers, physically and emotionally, but it also has real psychological rewards.
Chapter 1 focuses on teaching as an art because we want to create a simple set
for the teacher: Good teachers use and combine a variety of technical skills in
ways that create fluid opportunities for learning. It would be wrong to write a
book like this as though teaching consisted of a discrete set of technical skills. It
would be equally wrong to treat teaching as an art that one could or could not
perform based on natural gifts. There is, in essence, a scientific basis for the art
of teaching. We start with the artful side and then we move to the science.
CHAPTER
1 The Art of Teaching
Focusing Questions
1. What reasons do people give for teaching? How do these reasons compare
with your own reasons?
2. What does artful teaching look like, and why do teachers need to know both
the art and the science of teaching?
3. What paradigms dominate teaching practice?
4. How do effective teachers encourage students to learn how to learn?
5. How do effective teachers foster student creativity?
This first chapter briefly asks why you wish to teach—with the hope that you
will honestly explore your own reasons. Then we move to the heart of the chap¬
ter: the art of teaching. Specifically: Why is it that some teachers have the same
skills but experience different levels of success? That variation is due to the art¬
ful nature of the teaching act—some have that art, some do not. And finally, we
examine how teaching influences student learning and creativity.
The Reasons for Teaching

There are many reasons why people choose teaching as a career. One strong mo¬
tivation for many teachers is their identification with adult models—parents and
especially teachers—during their childhood. Research indicates that women are
influenced by their parents slightly more than by their teachers in their decisions
to become teachers. Men are influenced by their teachers more than twice as
often as by their parents.1
The data suggest, further, that parents encourage daughters more than sons
to become teachers. Perhaps this is due to the wider range of professional
choices that have been available for men in the past and the traditional view that
3
4 Section I The Art and Science of Teaching
teaching is a respected occupation for women but does not hold similar status
for men.2 Although job opportunities for women have increased recently, fe¬
males still made up 70 percent of the public school teaching force in the early
1990s. More than 80 percent of the elementary teachers and 45 percent of the
secondary teachers were females. Moreover, these percentages have not changed
much since the mid 1960s.3
The view that the choice of teaching as a career is based on early psycho¬
logical factors has been explored by many researchers. For example, Wright and
Tuska contend that teaching is rooted in the expression of early yearnings and
fantasies.4 Dan Lortie holds that early teaching models are internalized during
childhood and triggered in adulthood.5 Although these two investigations have
different theoretical bases, both hold that to a considerable extent the decision to
teach is based on experiences that predate formal teacher training and go back to
childhood. How accurate is this in your own case?
Motives for choosing a career in teaching can be both idealistic and practi¬
cal. People who are thinking of entering the teaching profession, and even those
who are already teaching, should ask themselves why they are making this
choice. Their motives could include (1) a love of children, (2) a desire to impart
specific content knowledge (e.g., mathematics, English), (3) an interest in and
excitement about trying to change society, and (4) a desire to perform a valuable
service to help society. Other reasons might include job security, pension bene¬
fits, and the perception that the training required to become a teacher is rela¬
tively easy compared to the training required by some other professions.6
Prospective teachers need to understand the importance of this career deci¬
sion. Your reasons for choosing teaching as a career undoubtedly will affect
your attitude and behavior with your students when you eventually become a
teacher. Whatever your reasons for wanting to teach, it might be helpful for you
to consider your own thoughts and feelings and those that have motivated oth¬
ers, such as your classmates, to become teachers. One way to do that is to exam¬
ine the five categories in Table 1.1 and determine which one best describes you.
Table 1.1 Categories of Reasons for Deciding to Teach
Type Description
Crusader One who seeks to change the system or society
Content Specialist One who wants to teach a specific content area
Convert One who starts another career but then “discovers’ ’ that teaching is really
better for him or her
Free Floater One who is in teaching until a “real” career choice emerges
Early Decider One who knows from an early age that teaching is the right direction
Which One Best Describes You?
Source: Robert J. Sternberg, “How Can We Teach Intelligence?” Educational Leadership. (September 1994)- 42
1:40, Figure 1. ''
The Art of Effective Teaching

This chapter is intended to inspire you to see “the possible,” regardless of the
reason that best describes why you want to teach. The remainder of this book il¬
luminates how the possible becomes standard practice for some gifted teachers.
In the actions of these people you will see the art of teaching. In the rest of this
text (Chapters 2-12) you will-read about the science of teaching. Over twenty ®
years ago, one researcher (Nate Gage) argued for a better understanding of the
scientific basis for the art of teaching. In essence, good teaching is neither ex¬
clusively art nor essentially science, but rather a combination of both. Good
teachers do things well and know conceptually why they do them well—they
have an explanation for what grounds their practices. Good teachers also know
what goals they plan to achieve and how they will “move” students toward real¬
izing those goals. These teachers are centered on learning—student learning.
And having such a focus demands that teachers think about the art and science
of teaching.
If you learn all the ideas in this book but you are focused on your behavior
and not on what the students are learning, your effectiveness will be dimin¬
ished. If you are focused exclusively on the students and not on the content you
should be teaching, you are nothing more than a high priced, well-educated
baby-sitter.
A focus on learning
demands that
teachers think about
the art and science
of teaching.
6 Section I The Art and. Science of Teaching
Pay close attention to the following descriptions of “star” teachers and you
will see an emphasis by teachers on learning, not teaching. Robert Barr and John
Tagg would describe these teachers (Jaime Escalante, LouAnn Johnson) as ori¬
ented toward the learning paradigm.7 We begin, then, by describing the differ¬
ences between the learning and instructional paradigms of teaching. And we will
use those concepts to begin to analyze teacher effectiveness.
Effective Teachers in the Movies
A number of teacher movies draw attention to the power of effective teaching.

Stand and Deliver, Dangerous Minds, and Mr. Holland’s Opus are but a few of
these films. Some of the movies capture the real lives of dynamic teachers
(Jaime Escalante in Stand and Deliver)-, others are fictionalized depictions of
idyllic classroom pedagogues (Robin Williams as John Keating in Dead Poets
Society). In this section we will rely heavily on teacher movies to illustrate our
points about the art of teaching. Clearly, there are problems with using movie
depictions of teachers: often they are romanticized versions of classrooms and
resolve problems artificially. Still, we use them because they capture some es¬
sential truths and they do so in a vivid, poignant way.
Well documented in the literature is the fact that classrooms are complex
places. Movies capture part of that complexity in ways that stir an array of emo¬
tions. Jaime Escalante confronts students who are difficult, if not disrespectful,
and makes them want to learn. As we watch him succeed, our personal passion
to make a difference suggests that we, too, could make it at Garfield High
School or at our own local high school. Even the most negative of teachers is
inclined to think I know I can do better” after exiting the cinema or turning off
the video.
The movies also offer a powerful lesson about the nature of classroom
teaching. In most of the popular teacher movies, the viewer is able to see a shift
in how teachers view students. Indeed, what makes these movies emotionally
is that a pedagogical shift occurs before our eyes, and once the shift
occurs, neither the teacher nor the students (nor the viewer) is the same. All are
transformed.
Robert Barr and John Tagg argue that within American classrooms two par¬
adigms dominate: one instructional, the other learning (see Table 1.2).8 Al¬
though the term paradigm can be used to represent many different ideas, we use
it here to mean a teacher’s approach to the way students are to “engage” content
material. Barr and Tagg focus on undergraduate education, but their ideas have
K-12 implications. The instructional paradigm focuses on what the teacher
does in the classroom (e.g., how the teacher presents content material), and the
instructional-paradigm teacher is one who views the teaching act as relatively
remote from the learner: “I taught Hamlet, but the students didn’t learn it.”
Instructional-paradigm teachers (and administrators) talk in terms of technique
and the quality of a technique: “He’s a greater lecturer” or “She’s fantastic with
hands-on activities.”
Table 1.2 Paradigms for Teaching
The Instructional Paradigm The Learning Paradigm
Mission and Purposes
• Provide/deliver instruction • Produce learning

• Transfer knowledge from faculty • Elicit student discovery and construction
to students of knowledge
• Offer courses and programs • Create powerful learning environments
• Improve the quality of instruction • Improve the quality of learning
• Achieve access for diverse students • Achieve success for diverse students
Teaching/Leaming Structures
• Atomistic; parts prior to whole • Holistic; whole prior to parts

• Time held constant, learning varies • Learning held constant, time varies
• One teacher, one classroom • Whatever learning experience works
• Covering material • Specified learning results
• Private assessment • Public assessment
Source: Robert Barr and John Tagg, “From Teaching to LearningChange, 27(6) (1995): 16. Reprinted with
permission of the Helen Dwight Reid Educational Foundation. Published by Heldref Publications, 1319 Eighteenth
St., N.W., Washington D.C. 20036-1802.
Learning-paradigm teachers focus on whether and how students learn.

Their focus is on a student’s learning, not the teacher’s behaviors. Ted Sizer’s
emphasis on exhibitions would be oriented toward a learning-paradigm because
the teacher places attention on the student’s ability to personally construct and
represent content understandings.9 For example, the student might be required to
draw a freehand map of the world and place properly on the map a predeter¬
mined number of “key” countries.
Most teachers and a majority of administrators focus on the instructional para¬
digm. That is not their espoused theory, but it does emerge as their theory-in-use.
They and the larger community they serve (parents and a variety of significant oth¬
ers) want to see students looking busy and getting their work done—indeed, for years
many state legislators worried more about the hours allocated for instruction than
about the learning outcomes expected of students. Instructional-paradigm teachers
focus on the tasks of teaching and keeping students focused on specific activities
such as dittos or workbook pages, or the “odd-numbered problems on page 54.”
The far fewer teachers who embrace the learning paradigm function in a
very different way relative to their role as a facilitator of learning. They are con¬
stantly “reading” the students to determine how to create a better atmosphere for
student growth. Learning-paradigm teachers get outside themselves (a personal
performance) and get inside the minds of the students: How do they learn? How
do they construct knowledge? How do they make sense of the world? How can I,
as the teacher, participate in the learning process with my students? In short,
these teachers connect with their students.
What most of the excellent teacher movies depict is a pedagogical paradigm

shift toward student learning. Mr. Holland (Mr. Holland’s Opus) is a reluctant
first-year teacher. He wants to be a composer, but reality forces him to become a
teacher. As the movie begins, the viewer sees Mr. Holland “teaching” and the
students passively enduring his “performance.” Mr. Holland feels defeated by
the students’ intellectual withdrawal. In one scene, he shares his sense of per¬
sonal and pedagogical defeat with his wife:
Mr. Holland: “I hate teaching, Iris. I hate it! Nobody can teach
these children! Nobody! I don’t know what I’m going to do. They just
sit there staring up at me. There’s no one there. I’ve been trying to teach
them.”
Iris: “You’ve taught a lot of tough classes when they didn’t listen.
Did you quit and go home?”
Mr. Holland: “Wait a minute. Wait a minute. Aren’t we supposed to be on
the same side?”
Instead of accepting his assessment, Iris Holland challenges her husband to

respect his audience. That respect necessitates a paradigm shift. It’s subtle, but
it’s real. He starts with the music in the students’ heads (Lover’s Concerto) as a
way of getting them to learn the music that is within his heart (Johann Sebastian
Bach). The movie depicts a teacher who moves outside himself as the students
make the connection. The knowledge he seeks to teach is not “out there.” In¬
stead it is a part of the students’ lived experiences—he just needs to tap that
experience.
Similar shifts occur in other teacher movies. LouAnn Johnson (Dangerous
Minds) wants students to learn about sentence structure. As an instructional-
paradigm teacher, she finds herself teaching but the students not learning. She
searches frantically for assistance (e.g., from a colleague, even from Lee Can¬
ter’s book Assertive Discipline, which we will describe in Chapter 9), but the
use of simple solutions or more “canned” discipline techniques does not help be¬
cause they are part of the instructional paradigm. Finally, she is forced to use the
reality of the students in order to enable them to see the beauty of ideas that are
both within and beyond their reality. She makes a change—she focuses on stu¬
dent learning. Many teachers do not; they continue to use practices that they
know are not working. In the language of Alcoholics Anonymous: “Insanity is
doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results.”
In most of the Hollywood teacher movies, the paradigm shift occurs soon
after the teacher understands that the instructional paradigm simply will not
work. In real classrooms far too many teachers refuse to make the shift to a
learning paradigm, and far too many administrators fail to encourage the shift.
Though this happens for a variety of reasons, we will suggest three.
The learning-paradigm classroom is emotionally and intellectually demand¬
ing. The demands on a teacher who seeks to foster a learner-centered classroom
are many. Lesson planning takes more time. It takes more effort to determine
how to reach the students. The teacher is less free to resort to teacher control to
try to force students to conform to the teacher’s personal will. Given the fact that
the average American teacher is at school (and teaching or on duty) for 7.6
hours per day, it is little wonder that the instructional paradigm dominates
American education.10 Harold Stevenson and James Stigler documented this re¬
ality several years ago, and there is no reason to believe that the circumstance
has changed. Indeed, Stevenson and Stigler argue that some of the success of the
Japanese is attributable to enhanced teacher planning time: Japanese teachers are
at school in excess of 9 hours per day, but they teach for less than 4.11
The learning-paradigm teacher takes more personal risks and creates more
administrative challenges. In Dangerous Minds, Mr. Holland’s Opus, or Stand
and Deliver, the viewer is struck by the number of directives issued (by the prin¬
cipal or school board) that require the teacher to explicitly “get in line” and to
implicitly use the instructional paradigm. Most of the excellent teachers we
know are less than affable people. They are persistent. They fight for the stu¬
dents, and they are passionate about student learning. They do anything they
have to do in order to make certain that students learn, even if it means con¬
fronting an administrator or tossing a disrespectful student out of the classroom.
The learning-paradigm school is a “messy” place. Because learning is such
a personal endeavor, schools that really embrace this paradigm struggle to find
ways to connect students with their environment. Escalante offered special tutor¬
ing; Johnson used karate and a variety of very powerful pedagogical messages to
connect students with ideas. Students, even those who are most unmotivated and
defiant, are exploring, assessing, and examining their environment for ideas. In
learning-paradigm classrooms, the students become active learners rather than
teacher-controlled intellectual pawns.
For a learning-paradigm teacher, the curriculum is a guide, not a dictate; as
a consequence, the sequence of learning often conflicts with the prescribed
learning sanctioned by the school. Learning is less linear and more nested in the
students’ experiences. Learning-paradigm teachers are passionate and deter¬
mined. In Robert Fried’s words:
Some of the most passionate teachers are quiet, intense, thoughtful people. They
patiently insist on high standards of quality in a language lab or drafting class.
They talk with students in conference about their work and where their talents and
persistence might lead them. They stop to respond to a comment thrown out by a
student that has more than a germ of truth in it. They bring in something from
their current reading or their personal history that demonstrates the power of
ideas.12
Effective Teachers in Literature

The movie depictions of teachers make certain names, such as Jaime Escalante,
almost household names. But anyone pursuing teaching as a career should also
read about the lives and experiences of real teachers whose realities are less
glamorized. During the past couple of decades a number of authors have care¬
fully studied or documented the reality of what good teachers do to make the
learning paradigm dominant in their classrooms.
Two examples of this literature base are Ken Macrorie’s Twenty Teachers,
which was published in 1984, and Mike Rose’s Possible Lives, which was pub¬
lished in 1995. Both texts illustrate powerfully the ways in which learning-
paradigm teachers function. For example, as you visit classrooms (or as you
have experienced school on a personal level) you will notice that teachers show
a lot of films. Many of those films are (or have been) shown by instructional-
paradigm teachers—teachers who want to keep students busy. The film becomes
a celluloid baby-sitter. Notice, on the other hand, how Don Campbell uses films
to help students learn. Campbell is one of the learning-paradigm teachers
Macrorie describes in Twenty Teachers:
I have five sections of physics this year. I’ll tell you what I did in class on the first
day. I saw the students for just fifteen minutes, I told them what physics is—a way
of understanding one’s natural universe by codifying five aspects of it. We try to
measure length, mass, time, electric fields and magnetic fields.
The next day I told them we were going to start this class out with a movie
by Dr. Richard Little of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who put it
together for the old Physical Science Committee Study Program sponsored by
the National Science Foundation. In the film he does some rather simple experi¬
ments that would be difficult to perform in the classroom. The students go along
with most of these and some of them begin to get caught up in the ideas. Then
with the use of the camera he demonstrates refraction. The viewers of the film
are placed in a swimming pool, down there underneath the water looking up at
the feet of a swimmer hanging over the edge of the pool. When those feet sepa¬
rate from the swimmer, who seems to float in the air above the water, the film is
demonstrating internal reflection and refraction. Suddenly, my students want to
see that part of the film again to check what they’re seeing. Then they begin to
think about the explanation, and I tell them that as we go along in this course,
we’re going to look at a lot of phenomena and then try to pull them together and
explain them.
While the film is running, I stop it, run it back, and we talk about a point.
Very quickly the kids realize they can ask questions, and some of them do. The
film runs for 20 minutes, but we take the whole hour to go through it. The dis¬
cussion becomes free flowing. Sometimes I initiate it, sometimes they do.
When they start to ask, “Why did that happen?” or “What’s going on there?” I
tell them to remember the question and we’ll take a look at it later. Maybe they
will be able to answer it themselves. I start off giving students a chance to
respond.13
What Don Campbell did was to take a movie that could have made stu¬
dents passive learners and forced them into more active learning. That’s what
effective teachers do—they take the ordinary and make it extra-ordinary. Mike
Rose describes how one teacher, Michelle Taigue, makes Oedipus the King
come to life for her students. Oedipus can be accessible or arcane, depending
on how a teacher approaches it. Michelle sought to make the Greek tragedy real
for students by having them see the parallels between what was to the Greeks
and what is to the Native American students. Michelle takes her class on a field
trip to the Center for Creative Photography (a gallery at a local university) and
then she begins to teach.
We [the students] spent an hour with the photographs, then Michelle walked to the
center of the floor. She slowly passed her hand over the photographs of the temples
and started talking about the myth and the presence of the spiritual. She asked how
the Greeks in Oedipus the King defined the meaning of events, and the students vol¬
unteered: “From the blind guy” and “that place, the o-oracle?” and “from birds—
like my grandmother does.” And she developed this into a discussion of the power
of the spiritual and drew some specific comparisons between Greek mythology, her
native Yaqui, and the students’ Navajo and Hopi traditions. She paced back and
forth, the hem of her maroon dress flipping around her ankles, and as she told these
tales she assumed a range of storyteller’s voices: old, cracking voices, children’s
voice, voices mixing Yaqui and Spanish, even animal clicks and trills.
One of the stories she told was of Arachne, the proud Greek maiden who
Athena turned into a spider. Both the Navajo and the Hopi have spider women in
their lore—though each is a very different kind of figure from Arachne—and
Michelle used this link to set out on the story. “Arachne was a maiden, beautiful,
young, just about your age . . .” And she stopped and turned, feigning mild puz¬
zlement. She reached out to the girl closest to her. “Uh, Hana, how old are you?”
“Sixteen,” Hana said. “Ah, sixteen,” repeated Michelle, not missing a beat. “That
was ex-actly her age. So, anyway, here’s the lovely Arachne at her loom . . .”
And having drawn Hana—and, through Hana, all the girls—into the story, she
continued telling us of Arachne’s pride in her tapestries and her bold challenge to
Athena, the best of the weavers among the goddesses. “So, of course, they had a
contest,” she exclaimed, her fingers picking up the air as though she were weaving
the figures herself. “They spun and spun, and these beautiful gods and goddesses
appeared in the fabric. Why, Hana, you could even see the expressions on the
faces of the gods! And they spun and spun. And when they were done, whose ta¬
pestry do you think was better?” Murmurs here: “Athena’s ... no Arachne’s . . .
Whose?” “It was hard to tell,” said Michelle, dropping her hands to her side. “But
Athena, indignant, shredded Arachne’s tapestry (Michelle slashed the air) and
turned her into a spider. She shriveled up and her arms got skinny and crooked,
like this.” The storyteller hooked her right arm and let it quiver. “And today this
spider woman continues to weave her web. We see her all over . . . everywhere
... all around us.” The students were smiling; a few applauded. Michelle turned
her head slightly, closing her eyes momentarily, dramatically, and raised a hand.
She had more to say.
She talked about the spider woman in Leslie Silko’s Ceremony and about Navajo
tales in which pride and retribution are the central themes. She shifted between the
ancient Greek and the Native American, not looking for neat parallels, but suggest¬
ing correspondences. The myths and tales, she said, were “compelling and beautiful
because they’re so invested with power.” But, though powerful, they were also pre¬
sent, kind of everyday. They were real for Michelle, not an artifact, not sealed away.
I had read Oedipus a number of times in the past—had taught it, in fact—and had
never understood, no, felt, the spiritual dimension of the play as I did sitting in that
little room. I was suddenly curious to reread a classic that I figured I knew, that I
had wrapped up in its historical gloss, nicely under control. But looking at Misrach’s
12 Section 1 The Art and Science of Teaching
photographs and listening to Michelle made the world of the Greeks real and
disturbing.14
Both of these teachers, Don Campbell and Michelle Taigue, are able to
move students toward a deeper understanding of ideas. Some might suggest that
such teachers are exceptions. A few people have the gift and are possessed with
a capacity to make the classroom into something exceptional. We disagree.
Some teachers are naturally more creative, more reflective, but all teachers have
the capacity to create the learning paradigm in their classrooms. However, in
order for the possible to become a reality, teachers (you!) need to take pedagogi¬
cal risks, try new approaches, explore different avenues for communicating con¬
tent. Mike Rose observes that good teachers develop an understanding for varia¬
tion, a phenomenon that we will document empirically in Chapter 2, just as we
have done anecdotally in this chapter. In Rose’s terms,
[T]here is no one best way [to teach]: lecture-discussion, Socratic dialogue, labora¬
tory demonstration, learning centers, small-group collaborative learning, a kind of
artisans’ workshop where students pursue independent projects. Not infrequently,
these approaches existed in combination in the same classroom. In a number of
cases, the current organization evolved. Teachers experimented with ways to create
a common space where meaningful work could be done. This quality of reflective
experimentation, of trying new things, of tinkering and adjusting, sometimes with
uneven results, sometimes failing, was part of the history of many of the classrooms
in Possible Lives.15
Books such as this one communicate to you the science of teaching. The
following chapters describe in detail the multiplicity of detailed, empirically
based information that we now have about what good teachers do. But the sci¬
ence of teaching is not enough. You also need to be artful in what you do in the
classroom—and acquiring that art takes time, requires reflection, and demands
dedication. To acquire the art, you need to embrace three opportunities and deal
with three threats.
Opportunity 1: Practice, practice, practice. Good teachers work hard at what

they do, and just because an idea fails on one occasion does not mean the
idea lacks merit. No golfer developed skill by playing once; no artist
became proficient by painting one watercolor or oil. It takes time and
practice to become good at what you do. Take the time! Practice!
Opportunity 2: Watch, watch, watch. Observe good teachers in classrooms
and read about good teachers in popular books. This chapter is about the
artful dimension of teaching, and you can become aware of that art as you
watch Mr. Holland’s Opus, Stand and Deliver, or Dangerous Minds. You
can also see it in the lives of Ken Macrorie and Mike Rose’s teachers. Good
golfers watch other good golfers. Great artists study other great artists.
Similarly, we encourage you to find great teachers and watch them to see
how they create vital classrooms.
Opportunity 3: Reflect, reflect, reflect. Think about how you teach.
Contemplate what you are going to do, and then reflect on what you did do.
Teaching requires a lot of mental effort. Focus your effort on designing

lessons that make sense and then after the lesson reflect on what parts of the
lesson did and did not accomplish what you intended.
These opportunities, however, will be difficult for you to see because of

some very real threats. In Dead Poets Society, John Keating is an English
teacher who functions within,.the learning paradigm as a beginning teacher at a
private school. Such a circumstance is probably somewhat unique; it exists
more frequently in fiction than in reality. Most new teachers start out with a
certain passion but, because they are so focused on surviving, they begin to un¬
intentionally embrace the instructional paradigm; they then either do or do not
shift to the learning paradigm. Most do not make the shift. No empirical data
document this assertion, but our guess is that the number who shift is relatively
small and might be getting smaller. With the emphasis today on state standards
and assessments, three threats militate against teacher effectiveness.
Threat 1: Schools are busy places. Most American teachers have little time
for planning and critical reflection. While at school they are either teaching or
monitoring students. Learning-paradigm teachers need time: time to think and
time to plan. Some schools are moving toward block scheduling as a means of
enhancing teacher planning time, but the nature of the learning paradigm is such
that teachers will need opportunities (and that means time) to consider the learn¬
ing needs of students if they are going to create environments that meet those
needs, and students will need to have time structures that allow for the messiness
of active learning. Schools and most educators treat learning as a linear process,
and the school day is structured to accommodate that assumption of linearity.
Threat 2: Canned programs and techniques. The proliferation of canned or
commercialized learning programs for dealing with students is clearly evident in
the multitude of teacher magazines. Too many teachers embrace these programs
singularly as possible solutions to the learning problem. Assertive discipline (see
Chapter 9) becomes a means of managing students, of keeping them on task, but
teachers fail to see how behavioristic class structures subsequently influence stu¬
dent self-discipline. Direct instruction (see Chapter 5) becomes a technique for
teaching skills, but teachers who are disciples of the technique fail to understand
the myriad ways in which it falls short of achieving higher learning outcomes
(such as critical thinking or problem solving). A popularized aphorism captures
how canned approaches influence problem solving: “If the only tool you have is
a hammer, you see all problems as nails.” This facile observation is equally apt
for teachers. Many teachers enter the classroom with too few teaching-learning
tools. Give them assertive discipline or direct instruction or whole language, and
suddenly the classroom world is pounded into one shape—a shape that might or
might not fit each child’s needs. Jaime Escalante’s words are poignant in this re¬
gard: “The most important thing is not knowing the subject [or the right disci¬
pline technique]. The important thing is transmitting knowledge.”16 To transmit
knowledge, teachers need to become passionate about their own learning as well
as the learning of the students. That means, quite simply, moving beyond the
surface of technique to the depth of ideas. In Robert Fried’s words:
14 Section l The Art and Science of Teaching
Rightly understood, engaging students in content requires us to change our peda¬

gogy by limiting the amount of stuff we teach, so that our students learn the impor¬
tant things well and dig deeply into the subject; by posing interesting questions, set¬
ting up a framework for inquiry; and then by getting out of the way to let the
students do the work.17
Threat 3: Legislative mandates. Legislatures around the country are seek¬

ing to solve the educational crisis by using their own strategies. For many, the
solution rests in one word: testing. By testing students more often and by
making schools more demanding, America’s goal of having a world-class ed¬
ucational system can be attained. Many students are responding to testing
mandates in the only way they know: withdrawal. That withdrawal is psycho¬
logical at the younger age levels and physical once students are 16. Because
testing implicitly promotes the instructional paradigm (a need to cover mater¬
ial), students who cannot achieve on the teacher’s timeline or with the
teacher s approach simply withdraw (they drop out). Many city systems have
high dropout rates and graduate fewer than 50 percent of the students. Stu¬
dents drop out once they realize they cannot compete. Raymond McDermott
writes:
Our schools divide people into halves; those who can and those who cannot.
Dropouts are doing what the culture tells those in the losing half to do; they are get¬
ting out of the way. There are thousands of students every day who are insured suc¬
cess simply because the dropouts have disappeared from the competitive roles.
Where would the successful be without the dropouts?18
The secret to lowering the number of dropouts and enhancing the gradua¬
tion rate is not finding ways to make schools more demanding, though plac¬
ing emphasis on academics can have positive effects on student learning.19
Rather, the secret is in finding ways to create a curriculum that is more re¬
sponsive. Escalante was not an easy teacher; he was a responsive one. John¬
son did not cut the students a break; she simply broke the curriculum into
pieces that the students could digest (after first seeking to understand their
tastes).
In Dead Poets Society, John Keating urges his students to seize the day
( Carpe Diem! ) and to write their own life “poems.” If American education is
to be competitive on a worldwide scale, American teachers will need to find
ways to seize the day themselves. How? By disdaining an instructional paradigm
that focuses on the teacher and embracing a learning paradigm that centers on
the student. The shift is not easy, but it is just as possible in real classrooms as it
is in the celluloid worlds of Michele Pfeiffer (LouAnn Johnson) and Richard
Dreyfuss (Mr. Holland).
In Chapter 2 we describe the rather substantial empirical data that docu¬
ments the science of teaching. As you read that information, reflect on the ways
in which that science can be used to describe Jaime Escalante’s or LouAnn
Johnson s success. You will also notice that artful teachers enable students to
learn how to learn, to construct their own knowledge.
Professional Viewpoint
Be a Great Teacher!
E. Paul Torrance
Distinguished Professor Enieritus of Psychology
University of Georgia
There are far too few great teachers and society des¬ much of it can be influenced by our efforts are im¬
perately needs them. Great teachers are great artists. portant aspects of our being human.
Teaching is perhaps the greatest of the arts because There is considerable evidence that our future
the medium is the human mind and spirit. image is a powerful motivating force and determines
My experience and research have made me aware what we are motivated to learn and achieve. In fact, a
of the importance of falling in love with what you person’s image of the future may be a better predictor
are going to do—a dream, an image of the future. of future attainment than his past performances.
Positive images of the future are a powerful and I would encourage you to begin developing a fu¬
magnetic force. These images of the future draw us ture image of yourself as a great teacher—a new,
on and energize us, giving us the courage and will to positive, compelling and exciting image. Then, fall in
take important initiatives and move forward to new love with this image—your unique future image! You
solutions and achievements. To dream and to plan, to can become a great teacher—and that is a great thing!
be curious about the future, and to wonder how
Artful Teaching and Knowledge Construction

The concept of learning in this text differs from the notion that the learner
merely remains passive, reacts to stimuli, and waits for some reward. Here
learners are regarded as active and able to monitor and control their cognitive
activities. The learner takes possession of new information through assimilation
and integration with previous information, but the learner is structuring that
learning in ways that make personal sense. Without this integration and structur¬
ing, new information is lost to memory and task performance dependent on the
information is unsuccessful.20 Learning new information results in modification
of long-term memory. The responsibility for engaging in learning, including
control, direction, and focus, belongs to the individual.
When students want to identify, categorize, and process new information,
they search their cognitive structures. If the cognitive structures are disorga¬
nized, unclear, or not fully developed (for the person’s age), then new informa¬
tion will not be clearly identified, categorized, and assimilated. On the other
hand, new learning based on previous learning should be meaningful to
students—in context with prior knowledge and real-life experiences, regardless
of whether the students are low or high achieving.
Compared to low-achieving students, high-achieving students have a more

expanded prior knowledge base in terms of in-depth knowledge and multiple
forms of knowledge.21 This mature knowledge base permits learners to inte¬
grate important and complex information into existing cognitive structures.
Similarly, students who are capable of learning on their own are better able to
(1) narrow, identify, place information into preexisting categories, (2) sharpen
or distinguish prior information from new information to avoid confusion or
overlap, (3) tolerate or deal with ambiguous and unclear information without
getting frustrated, and (4) assimilate existing schemata to interpret problematic
situations.22
Low-achieving students, on the other hand, lack much of the relevant back¬
ground knowledge to connect with new ideas. Because they have not con¬
structed cognitive structures that make sense, they cannot assimilate new ideas
in ways that make sense. Jeanne Ormrod identifies some specific practices or
strategies that effective (and artful) teachers use to help students connect with
new ideas. We will highlight three of those and relate them back to our learning-
paradigm teachers.
Strategy 1: Students can use sophisticated strategies only when they have a
knowledge base to which they can relate new material. . . .
Strategy 2: Teachers can model effective [thinking] strategies by thinking
out loud about new material. . . .
Strategy 3: Students can . . . learn effective strategies by working
cooperatively with their classmates.23
Artful teachers understand that ideas have to connect (strategy 1), that stu¬
dents have to be given time to think out loud about the old and the new ideas
(strategy 2), and that they need to be able to explore with others their common
understandings (strategy 3). In Ken Macrorie’s descriptions of Twenty Teachers,
he captures how one learning-paradigm teacher, Stanyan Vukovich, encourages
students to want to learn. Compare the strategies outlined by Jeanne Ormrod
with this description by Macrorie:
I break the I-Search project down into four steps:

I have them tell me what they know about their subject. In some instances stu¬
dents have a lot of misinformation that sort of justifies the project to them.
Then they describe how they went about gathering their material, how they con¬
ducted their interview.
Then they write the actual report and include the notes.
And then they tell what they learned from the entire project.
That girl who wrote on abortion did some preliminary reading on the pro-life
movement and so she had some objectives. And then she set off on her own. Some
students did the reading but never got to the point of doing the interviews. Their pa¬
pers didn’t become as personal or as immediate, and consequently the quality wasn’t
as good. . . .
I use role-playing also. It entices students. They regard it as a fun situation. It’s
the bait, the candy, that gets them to eat the rest of the meal. For example, last
month I gave them four cases from American history: Gideon vs. Wainwright; Mi¬
randa vs. Arizona; Rabinowitz vs. U.S., the Fourth Amendment, search and seizure;
and Terminello vs. Chicago, which is a First Amendment case. I set them up in
teams. They have to argue cases before our Supreme Court—three or four students
acting as the court. And then I give them the tests for the Amendments. Go over all
the amendments thoroughly. And the judges give the verdicts.24
Learning-paradigm teacher's know how to foster leaming-to-leam skills be¬

cause they understand the dynamic nature of the learning process. Although some
of these learning skills are generic and can be taught solely as general strategies,
without reference to content, it is impossible to avoid a certain number of subject
matters, especially in the upper (secondary) grades.25 This assumption seems to
make sense—for example, a good mathematical learner might not be as good in
English or history. That does not mean there is no transfer of learning skills from
one subject to another, rather it might be less than we used to think. Jerome
Bruner may have been right: Different disciplines have their own principles, con¬
cepts, and methods that are distinguished from those of other disciplines.26 Or, as
Lauren Resnick claimed: What is learned in one area is not easily transferable to
another area of learning because it is context-based.27
Some educators and learning theorists believe generic learning skills can
be taught to most students and transferred across subjects. Most of such learn¬
ing skills can be incorporated into regular classroom activities or taught in a
special course that incorporates cognitive processes that cut across subjects.
Separate programs designed to teach thinking include Adler’s Padeia Program,
Feurestein’s Instrumental Enrichment, Lipman’s Philosophy for Children (dis¬
cussed below in greater detail), and Pogrow’s Higher-Order Thinking Skills
(HOTS).28 These special thinking programs and others are designed to make all
students independent learners in all subjects. Advocates of this approach sug¬
gest that the training should begin early in the elementary grades, in third or
fourth grade. It should continue thereafter with additional time devoted to these
skills, perhaps twice the allotted time by sixth or seventh grade, when students
must gather and organize increasing amounts of subject-related information. It
cannot be postponed until high school, when the job of learning how to learn
has become more difficult because of increasing academic deficiencies and
lower levels of student motivation. Learning-paradigm teachers are those who
use a wide variety of strategies to get students to connect with and construct
ideas. (See Tips for Teachers 1.1.) They are also teachers who help students
think critically.
Critical Thinking
One of the most important things a teacher can do in the classroom, regardless
of subject or grade level, is to make students aware of their own metacognition
processes—to teach students to examine what they are thinking about, to make
distinctions and comparisons, to see errors in what they are thinking about and
how they are thinking about it, and to make self-corrections. This is, in fact,
Tips for Teachers 1.1
Strategies and Methods for Motivating Students
The teacher has the responsibility to help the learner with effort and also excel in other areas.
feel and be successful. Students should not be bored, Build on the strengths of students; work
but be interested in their schoolwork. Below are around (don’t ignore) their weaknesses
some basic applications of theories of motivation for through support and encouragement.
producing learner success in school. 7. Help students set reasonable goals.
Encourage students to set realistic, short¬
1. Be sure students can fulfill their basic school
term goals. Discuss the need for planning,
needs. Provide time to discuss academic and
practice, and persistence.
social expectations, responsibilities, and
behaviors. 8. Provide variety in learning activities.
Changes in instructional activities help
2. Make sure the classroom is comfortable,
students pay attention and renew interest.
orderly, and pleasant. A student’s sense of
Younger students and low-achieving
physical and psychological comfort is
students need more variety to avoid
affected by such factors as room
boredom.
temperature, light, furniture arrangement,
pictures and bulletin boards, and cleanliness. 9. Use novel and interactive instructional
methods. The idea is to get students to ask
3. Help students perceive classroom tasks as
“Why?,” “How come?,” and “What will
valuable. Learners are motivated when
happen if I do x, y, or z?” The goal is to get
they believe the tasks they perform are
students interested and then to think. Most
relevant to their personal needs, interests,
important, avoid too much “teacher talk”; it
and goals.
leads to a bored, passive audience.
4. Be sure tasks are suitable for students’
capability. If the tasks are too difficult, 10. Use cooperative learning methods. Get
students will quickly become frustrated and students to participate and work together.
lose self-confidence. If the tasks are too Have them work as a team so one student’s
easy, they will eventually become bored and success helps other students to succeed.
lose interest in the work. Cooperative learning also reduces stress and
anxiety, especially among low-achieving
5. Recognize that students have different levels
students.
of anxieties and need for advancement.
Some students need extra time, support, or 11. Monitor students ’ work; provide feedback.
help because they seem to be unmotivated. Knowledge of results, notes on homework or
Most of this behavior is a defense written assignments, even nods or verbal
mechanism brought on by previous failure, praise are information that students receive
lack of stimulation, or poor self-esteem. and need for purposes of reinforcement and
Other students are reared in environments recognition.
that result in stress and the need to excel. 12. Provide ways for improving. Comments
6. Help students take appropriate responsibility about skill performance and on how to
for their successes and failures. Students improve are important because they allow
need to be taught they cannot excel in all students to make corrections, avoid bad
activities, and students who do not habits, and better understand the content of
adequately perform in one area can improve the subject.
One of the most

important things
a teacher can do
is to make students
aware of their
own metacognitive
processes.
what good (artful) teachers like those in Twenty Teachers or Possible Lives do:
they make distinctions and comparisons in ways that illustrate the power of
ideas.
Some argue that critical thinking is a form of intelligence that can be taught.
The leading proponents of this school are Matthew Lipman, Robert Sternberg,
and Robert Ennis.29
Lipman’s program was originally designed for elementary school grades,
but it is applicable to all grades. Lipman sought to develop students’ ability to
use concepts, generalizations, cause-effect relationships, logical inferences, con¬
sistencies and contradictions, analogies, part-whole and whole-part connections,
problem formulations, reversibility of logical statements, and applications of
principles to real-life situations.30
In Lipman’s program for teaching critical thinking, children spend a con¬
siderable portion of their time thinking about thinking and about ways in which
effective thinking differs from ineffective thinking. After reading a series of sto¬
ries, children engage in classroom discussions and exercises that encourage
them to adopt the thinking process depicted in the stories.31 Lipman’s assump¬
tions are that children are by nature interested in such philosophical issues as
truth, fairness, and personal identity, and that children can and should learn to
explore alternatives to their own viewpoints, to consider evidence, to make dis¬

tinctions, and to draw conclusions.
Lipman distinguishes between ordinary thinking and critical thinking. Ordi¬
nary thinking is simple and lacks standards; critical thinking is more complex
and is based on standards of objectivity, utility, or consistency. He wants teach¬
ers to help students change from guessing to estimating, from preferring to eval¬
uating, from grouping to classifying, from believing to assuming, from basic in¬
ferring to logical inferring, from associating concepts to grasping principles,
from noting relationships to noting relationships among relationships, from sup¬
posing to hypothesizing, from offering opinions without reasons to offering
opinions with reasons, and from making judgments without criteria to making
judgments with criteria.32
Sternberg seeks to foster many of the same skills (see Table 1.3), but in a
different way. He points to three categories of components of critical thinking:
meta-components (higher-order mental processes used to plan, monitor, and
evaluate what the individual is doing), performance components (the actual
steps the individual takes), and knowledge-acquisition components (processes
used to relate old material to new material and to apply new material).33 Stern¬
berg does not specify how to teach these skills; rather, he gives general guide¬
lines for developing or selecting a program. He does suggest, however, that
when teachers do use all the skills, students can process information more
effectively.
Robert Ennis identifies thirteen attributes of critical thinkers: Critical
thinkers tend to (1) be open minded, (2) take a position (or change a position)
Table 1.3 Critical Thinking Skills Underlying Intelligent Behavior
1. Recognizing and defining the nature of a problem

2. Deciding upon the processes needed to solve the problem
3. Sequencing the processes into an optimal strategy
4. Deciding upon how to represent problem information
5. Allocating mental and physical resources to the problem
6. Monitoring and evaluating one’s solution processing
7. Responding adequately to external feedback
8. Encoding stimulus elements effectively
9. Inferring relations between stimulus elements
10. Mapping relations between relations
11. Applying old relations to new situations
12. Comparing stimulus elements
13. Responding effectively to novel kinds of tasks and situations
14. Effectively automatizing information processing
15. Adapting effectively to the environment in which one resides
16. Selecting environments as needed to achieve a better fit of one’s abilities and interests to the
environment
17. Shaping environments so as to increase one’s effective utilization of one’s abilities and interests
Source: Robert J. Sternberg, “How Can We Teach Intelligence?” Educational Leadership (September 1984): 40.
when the evidence calls for it, (3) take into account the entire situation, (4) seek
information, (5) seek precision in information, (6) deal in an orderly manner
with parts of a complex whole, (7) look for options, (8) search for reasons,
(9) seek a clear statement of the issue, (10) keep the original problem in mind,
(11) use credible sources, (12) remain relevant to the point, and (13) be sensitive
to the feelings and knowledge level of others.34
One might argue that all this fuss about thinking is nothing more than old-
fashioned analysis and problem solving—what good teachers have been infusing
into their classroom instruction for years. Moreover, it can be argued that teach¬
ing a person to think is like teaching someone to swing a golf club or cook a
stew: It requires a holistic approach, not the piecemeal effort suggested by Lip-
man, Sternberg, and Ennis. “Trying to break thinking skills into discrete units
may be helpful for diagnostic proposals,” Sadler and Whimbely maintain, “but it
does not seem . . . the right way in the teaching of such skills.” Critical thinking
is too complex to be divided into small steps or processes; teaching must involve
“a student’s total intellectual functioning, not . . . a set of narrowly defined
skills.”35 Similarly, Fred Newmann argues that teaching thinking is too
reductionist—it pays too much attention to parts rather than the whole. The best
way to teach thought is to ask students to explain their thinking, to require them
to support their answers with evidence, and to ask them thought-provoking
(Socratic) questions.36 Formulating thinking into discrete skills or a special unit
or course is artificial, and dividing thinking skills by subject matter is unwieldy
and mechanistic.
Perhaps the major criticism of thinking skills programs has been raised by
Sternberg himself. He cautions that the kinds of critical thinking skills stressed
in school and the way they are taught “inadequately [prepares] students for the
kinds of problems they will face in everyday life.”37
Further caution is needed. Thinking skills programs often stress “right” an¬
swers and “objectively scorable” test items; therefore, they are not very relevant
to real-world experience.38 Most problems and decisions in real life have social,
economic, and psychological implications. They involve interpersonal relation¬
ships and judgments about people, personal stress and crisis, and dilemmas in¬
volving responsibility and choice. How a person deals with illness, aging, or
death, or with less momentous events such as starting a new job or meeting new
people, has little to do with the way a person thinks in class or on critical think¬
ing tests. But such life situations are important matters. In stressing cognitive
skills, educators tend to ignore the realities of life. Being an A student in school
guarantees little after school and in real life. There are many other factors asso¬
ciated with outcomes in life, and many of them have little to do with critical
thinking, or even intelligence. Thus, we need to keep in mind social, psychologi¬
cal, and moral components of learning, as well as “luck”—or what some of us
might call the unaccounted-for variables in the outcomes of life.
Part of the reason critical thinking is so important is that you as a teacher
cannot teach students everything they need to know. Even if you are the most
brilliant, artful learning-paradigm teacher, your students will still leave your
room without large “chunks” of essential knowledge. We placed this material on
Critical Thinking in the Everyday World
Robert J. Sternberg
IBM Professor of Psychology and Education
Yale University
Every teacher believes she teaches children to think. School problems, in contrast, are often decontex-
If she didn’t, she would probably have tried a differ¬ tualized, with the result that children come to think
ent occupation. But the way we teach children to that problems can be stated much more simply than
think in schools often has little to do with the every¬ is true outside academia. School problems, too, are
day world, and, indeed, what works in school think¬ well-structured: There is usually a clear path to a so¬
ing may not work outside. For example, in the every¬ lution. In contrast, everyday problems tend to be ill-
day world, we need to recognize problems when structured, with no clear path leading to an answer.
faced with them; in school, teachers hand problems Indeed, in everyday life, usually there is no one right
to students. In the everyday world, we have to figure answer, so unlike the multiple-choice and fill-in-the-
out the exact nature of the problem confronting us at blanks tests we give. Schools also ill-prepare us for
a given time; in school, teachers define problems for working in groups, despite the fact that in the every¬
us. In the everyday world, problems are highly con¬ day world, there are few problems that are solved to¬
textualized: There is a great deal of background in¬ tally on one’s own, without the need to talk to others
formation that enters into our solutions to problems about possible solutions. The bottom line is that to
and the decisions we make. For example, the infor¬ teach children to think, we need to teach them in a
mation needed to decide whether to buy a car, and, if way that prepares them for life outside of school, not
so, what kind to buy, can’t be stated in a couple of just life in the classroom, which may bear little re¬
sentences. semblance to what goes on outside it.
learning in this first chapter because we want you to know that your job is not to
teach everything, but rather to help students construct and secure their own
knowledge. In Janet Astington’s words:
In a rapidly changing society, we cannot teach children all the facts they will need to
know in their lifetime. But we can teach them how to assess their knowledge state,
how to find out things for themselves, and how to evaluate conflicting sources of in¬
formation. The emphasis in the modern classroom is less on the memorization of
facts than on the acquisition of cognitive skills—thinking, learning, and reasoning.
Once the focus shifts, the child s understanding of mind becomes important.
The theory of mind that children acquire in the preschool years provides the con¬
ceptual foundation for the metacognitive skills they require in school. Most impor¬
tant, teachers can build on this foundation. By consciously introducing and using
language about thinking in the classroom, teachers can lead children to reflect on
and to aiticulate their thinking. Metacognitive talk serves to bring cognition into
consciousness. It enables the sophisticated social understanding that preschoolers
have of people as thinking beings to be earned over into classroom life, where it in¬
forms their understanding of how they think and learn in school.39
Creative Thinking
In the past decade, the term creativity has been used to describe at least three dif¬
ferent kinds of human abilities: the process by which a symbolic domain is al¬
tered; innovative problem-solving abilities; and personal expression through the
arts.40 In books describing research into the lives of highly creative people,
Howard Gardner and Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi found creativity to be an ability to
shape or change a new world view through one’s ideas or works.41 Csikszentmi¬
halyi and Gardner discuss other contemporary applications of the terms creative
and creativity, including using them to denote a range of abilities from problem¬
solving to personal artistic expressions, but they do not consider these abilities to
be those they have uncovered in their research about highly creative people. Csik¬
szentmihalyi also points out that the terms talent and genius are often used as
synonyms for creative abilities. However, he did not find these designations to
necessarily fit the creative individuals he interviewed.42 What Gardner and Csik¬
szentmihalyi point out is that creativity functions within a system in which the
domain, the gatekeepers of the domain, and the new idea or pattern identified by
an individual interact to shape or change the domain. Thus highly creative indi¬
viduals are a product of timing, culture, and personal creativity.
Standardized tests do not always measure creativity accurately; in fact, we
have difficulty agreeing on what creativity is and who is creative. All children
who are normal are potentially creative, yet many parents and teachers impose
so many restrictions on their natural behaviors that the children learn that cre¬
ativity gets them into trouble and earns them disapproval. Parents often react
negatively to children’s inquisitiveness and “messing around.” Teachers and
parents impose rules of order, conformity, and “normalcy” to suit themselves,
not the children.
There are many types of creativity—artistic, dramatic, scientific, athletic,
manual—yet we tend to talk about creativity as being an all-encompassing abil¬
ity, and similar to the way many define intelligence. That is, just as educators
tend to assess people as being smart or “dumb” based on their performance in
one or two areas of intelligence, such as linguistic or mathematical ability, so,
too, do teachers often judge people as creative based on their performance in one
or two areas. In fact, as a teacher your goal is not really to assess how smart a
student is, but rather to explore in what ways a student is smart or creative and
then to use those ways to help a student learn how to learn. Because of the nar¬
row view of human abilities (a focus on narrowly defined intelligence) and this
insensitivity to how individuals differ, schools often prevent the development of
a positive self-concept in young children who have creative abilities other than
in the cognitive domain. The potential talents of many creative children are lost
because of our fixation on specific and limited kinds of knowledge.
Creative students are often puzzling to teachers, especially instructional-
paradigm teachers who tend to want “set” answers. These students are difficult
to characterize, their novel answers are threatening, and their behavior often
deviates from what is considered normal or proper. Curriculum specialists tend
to ignore them in their plans, and teachers usually ignore them in their program
and classroom assignments. Little money is earmarked to support special
programs and personnel for them. Even if they recognize creativity, educators
often lump ‘gifted” children together without distinguishing between intellectual
and creative talents or between different types of creativity.
Robert Sternberg identified 6 attributes associated with creativity from a list
of 131 mentioned by laypeople and professors in the arts, science, and business:
(1) a lack of conventionality, (2) intellectuality, (3) aesthetic taste and imagina¬
tion, (4) decision-making skills and flexibility, (5) perspicacity (in questioning
social norms), and (6) a drive for accomplishment and recognition.43 He also
makes important distinctions among creativity, intelligence, and wisdom. Al¬
though they are relatively discreet categories, they are interrelated constructs.
Wisdom is more clearly associated with intelligence than is creativity, but dif¬
fers from intelligence in its emphasis upon mature judgment and use of experi¬
ence with difficult situations. Creativity overlaps more with intelligence than it
does with wisdom, but involves more imagination and unconventional methods.
Intelligence deals with logical and analytical constructs.
According to Carl Rogers, the essence of creativity is novelty and hence we
have no standard by which to judge it. In fact, the more original the product, the
more likely it is to be judged by contemporaries as foolish or evil.44 The individ¬
ual creates primarily because creating is self-satisfying and because the behavior
or product is self-actualizing. (This is the humanistic side of creativity, even
though the process and intellect involved in creating are cognitive in nature).
Erich Fromm defines the creative attitude as the willingness to be puzzled
(to orient oneself to something unknown without frustration), the ability to con¬
centrate, the ability to experience oneself as a true originator of one’s acts, and
the willingness to accept the conflict and tension caused by the lack of tolerance
for creative ideas.45
These studies show that there is little agreement on a definition of creativity
except that it is a quality of mind and is associated with intelligence. For teach¬
ers, the definition of creativity comes down to how new ideas have their origin.
We are dealing with processes that are both conscious and unconscious and both
observable and unrecognizable. Because unconscious and unrecognizable
processes are difficult to deal with in the classroom, there is often misunder¬
standing between teachers and creative students.
Teachers generally require “reactive” thinking from their students; that is,
they expect them to react to questions, exercises, or test items and give a pre¬
ferred answer. They tend to discourage “proactive” thinking, that is, generating
novel questions and answers. This is the way most teachers were taught, and
they feel uneasy about not having “right” answers. Some teachers do try to de¬
velop critical thinking in their students, but they need to go beyond reactive
thinking and even beyond critical thinking and encourage learners to generate
ideas. Society needs generative thinkers to plan, to make decisions, to deal with
social and technological problems. Teachers need to let students know that hav¬
ing the right answer is not always important, that depth of understanding is
important, that different activities require different abilities. Teachers need to
understand that nearly all students have the potential for creative thinking.
To stimulate creative thinking, learning-paradigm teachers encourage stu¬

dents to make inferences, encourage them to think intuitively, and to use
inquiry-discovery teaching techniques. Three types of inferences have creative
potential:
1. Elaboration of characteristics, categories, or concepts (e.g., a student is

told that some of the objects in a category are “right,” some are “wrong,”
and the problem is to infer from this information the definition of the
category).
2. Elaboration of causality (What were the causes of World War I? Why
did the compound turn into gas?)
3. Elaboration of background information (making inferences about
possible effects of events or facts from past events or facts in order to
make decisions and solve problems.)46
Providing the Space and the Time

for the Construction of Meaning
Kathryn Kinnucan-Welsch
Assistant Professor of Education
University of Dayton
One of the aspects of teaching that I treasure most After that flash of insight, I brought to my gradu¬
fondly is recalling those times that I was a partici¬ ate and undergraduate classes a fresh perspective on
pant in a powerful learning experience, one that of¬ what it means to encourage students to construct
fers a flash of insight, that “a-ha,” leaving one their own meaning and understanding of the im¬
changed forever. I recall such a time some years ago mense knowledge base required of all teachers. My
when I was working with a group of teachers who goal for developing teachers is that they engage in
were trying to bring a more student-centered, con¬ constructing their own knowledge, both in the disci¬
structivist way of being to their classrooms. We were plines and in pedagogy, so that they may bring a
talking about questioning, and how often teachers more constructivist orientation to their own class¬
ask those questions which merely require students to rooms. We learn best when we are actively engaged
“guess what’s in the teacher’s head.” Each of us took in making sense of what we are trying to learn. That
a turn role-playing by asking questions that would is true for children as well as adults. In every class¬
encourage students to think deeply about a concept, room that will mean time for students to ponder,
to grapple with alternative explanations. It suddenly time to ask each other questions, time to explore pos¬
hit me. I was still asking my students in preservice sibilities. How teachers provide students the oppor¬
education classes to give me the right answer, to tunity to construct meaning will evolve differently in
please the teacher. every classroom. How might it evolve in yours?
Intuitive thinking is a cognitive process that has been discouraged by tradi¬

tional teaching’s reliance on facts and rote. A good thinker, according to Jerome
Bruner, is creative and has an intuitive grasp of the subject matter. Intuition is
part of the process of discovery; investigating hunches and playing with ideas
can lead to discoveries and additions to the storehouse of knowledge. The steps
involved in intuitive thinking often cannot be differentiated or defined; intuition
involves cognitive maneuvers “based on implicit perception of the total prob¬
lem. The thinker arrives at an answer, which may be right or wrong, with little,
if any, awareness of the process by which he reached it.”47 Teachers must en¬
courage students to make educated guesses, to follow hunches, and to make
leaps in thinking. To instill fear of being wrong, to discourage independent
and/or innovative thinking, on the basis that the student does not have the right
answer, means to stifle creativity.
The Role of the Teacher in Fostering Creativity
Not having a clear account of how we obtain an answer is sometimes secondary; un¬
derstanding the nuances and larger concepts is more important. And such understand¬
ings often require the use of creative imagery. Artful learning-paradigm teachers have
this ability to use metaphors and imagery to help students understand complex mater¬
ial. The mathematics in the following example is sophisticated, but note how Escalante
uses creative images to expand student thinking about the concept of absolute zero:
“You guys play basketball? You know the give and go?” He bounced an imaginary
ball in front of him. ... He crouched with his back to an imaginary basket, passing
the ball to an imaginary guard crossing on his right. He repeated the routine, this
time passing to the left.
“The absolute value function is the give and go. I have two possibilities. If this
fellow on this side is open, it is going to be from the left.” He wrote x < 0 on the
board. “If it is from the right, then x > 0.”
So my little ball is going to be the absolute value. I don’t know which ball I’m
going to use. This guy has two options, come from the left, he’s gonna make it, or
come from the right. Every time you see a number between two bars”—he wrote Ixl
on the board—“you have to, you have to, you have to say, well, all right, it’s coming
from the left or from the right. You have to break it down into two parts I can do
that.”
He wrote:
lal = a if a > 0
lal = -a if a < 0
“But you must take into consideration three positions, I call, the three-second vi¬
olation. Now. I don’t really understand what is the three-second violation. Can
somebody explain to me?”
“. . . I use the three-second violation my own way. The three-second violation
is, this is one ball: Ixl < a; this is the second ball: Ixl = a; and the third ball: Ixl > a
That right?”
“Yeah, right.”
“How many you see?”
“Three.”
“You know, you gonna be in bad shape if you don’t know how to solve these
three things.” He thumped the board next to each expression. “When the absolute
value is greater than a, when the absolute value is equal to it, when the absolute
value is less than a. You have to know this three-second violation. Look.”
He wrote, with sweeping gestures, the meaning of each expression in turn:
-a < x< a x=a x <-a or x> a
x = -a
“As soon as you see that, absolute value of x is more than a, be able to say, immedi¬
ately, minus a is more than x or x is more than a.”48
Notice how Escalante helps students construct their own ideas about ab¬
solute zero by not imposing the concept in the abstract but instead using
metaphors and imagery so that students could use what they know to learn what
they did not know.
In inquiry-discovery techniques of teaching, students are not presented
with subject matter in its final form (Escalante did not impose the definitions);
rather questions, answers, solutions, and information are devised for and de¬
rived by the students. The techniques can be adapted to students of all ages. In
this connection, Ronald Bonnstetter summarizes the most desirable teacher be¬
haviors observed over a five-year period in more than a thousand exemplary
science programs across the country.49 These behaviors were considered most
effective in fostering inquiry-discovery skills among students in science
courses. In general, the behaviors listed in Table 1.4 encourage students to
“mess around,” to explore, to experiment, to appreciate new techniques, to re¬
spect differing (as well as novel) ideas, to make mistakes and learn from them.
Students taught by teachers who use these behaviors tend to be more creative,
more innovative, and more at ease with themselves as well as their peers and
teachers than students taught by teachers who use more conventional methods
of teaching.
Most people would agree that it is tremendously important to society, and
for the welfare of our civilization, that the creative abilities of our children and
youth be identified and developed. Teachers need to recognize that highly cre¬
ative children learn in different ways and that children who have high IQs are
not always highly creative, and vice versa. The teacher needs the courage and
maturity to analyze (and “accept”) students’ original answers—which is not an
easy concept for some teachers to accept. By saying that the teacher should ana¬
lyze and “accept,” we do not mean that the teacher should declare students’ an¬
swers “right.” Instead, artful teachers learn from the constructed answers of stu¬
dents how else to engage students with requisite content material. Teachers are
better able to free up and develop the creative capacities of their students when
they embrace the learning paradigm.
In the final analysis, learning-paradigm teachers learn to accept and encour¬
age inquiring and divergent minds—minds that question and challenge common
thinking and are willing to avoid the ordinary and think of the unusual. The in¬
formation age is upon us, and those who can digest, assimilate, and question
28 Section / The Art and Science of Teaching
Table 1.4 Teaching Behaviors That Correlate with Student

Inquiry-Discovery Behaviors
The teacher
1. Accepts student ideas
2. Develops student interests and creative potential
3. Recognizes personal limitations of students
4. Provides a stimulating and accepting environment
5. Has high expectations of students
6. Views learning beyond classroom boundaries
7. Develops effective communication skills
8. Wants students to apply knowledge
9. Puts more emphasis on process of learning than outcomes
10. Stimulates in-depth learning of subject
11. Allows students to pursue activities, thus students decide the point of closure
12. Creates in students a sense of ownership in learning
13. Permits student choices and decisions concerning classroom activities
14. Designs learning experiences around students’ life experiences, needs, and interests
15. Encourages risk-taking and a questioning attitude
16. Reduces classroom anxiety
17. Encourages divergent thinking and new ideas
18. Encourages frequent self-evaluation by students
19. Provides sufficient structure for students to understand goals, rules, and routines without stifling
creative behavior
20. Provides students with an awareness of the interrelationships of science, technology, and social
science
Source: Adapted from Ronald J. Bonnstetter, “Teacher Behaviors That Facilitate New Goals,” Education and
Urban Society (November 1989): 31-32: John E. Penick and Ronald J. Bonnstetter, “Classroom Climate and
Instruction,” Journal of Science Education and Technology (June 1993): 394.
data and see different perspectives and opportunities when they are confronted
with problems will be better able to cope with the future. Managers and execu¬
tives of business and industry, even the government and military, are going to
have to learn to deal with creative people—who can creatively deal with com¬
plex information—in order to stay ahead. The quicker teachers come to realize
that a narrow classroom mold that breeds conformity, complacence, and rote
learning is old-fashioned and out of tune with the future, the better off our stu¬
dents, schools, and society will be.
A Final Reflection
We conclude this chapter—on the artful nature of teaching and the importance
of teaching students how to learn—with a caution. Some teachers become so
preoccupied with teaching and learning that they fail to see how their daily ac¬
tions convey the hidden messages of school, and those types of messages can be
more powerful than any paradigm we adopt or critical thinking skills we encour¬
age. Read carefully the words of one teacher and then consider how what you do
(your daily actions) with kids might supersede anything you ever intentionally
plan.
One year I was working with this boy who had been a D student all the way
through. I could hardly keep him in his seat. He was just a rascally boy. He never
stepped over the line completely, but he was a thorn in my side all year long. In
the lab he would always do-something offbeat. By the end of the year he was com¬
ing along in his work o.k. I didn’t see him after that for two or three years. Then
one day here was this young man coming down the hallway dressed in a smart
business suit, and lo and behold, it was that fellow. I said, “Well, what have you
been doing?” and he said, “I’ve been in the Marines and I came back to thank
you.”
I said, “What for?” because I thought I’d never taught that boy any science.
And he said, “It’s not for the science. It’s because you taught me to be honest
and to say what I observed. That was really important to me.”
I’ll carry that with me forever.50
Theory into Practice

Questions Related to Students
1. Am I genuinely interested in the education and welfare of my students?

2. Am I sensitive to the needs and abilities of my students?
3. Do I modify my instruction to meet these needs and abilities?
4. Do I “protect the learners” in ways that enable students to learn?
5. In what ways do I foster critical and creative thinking in my classroom?
Questions Related to Subject

1. Do I have sufficient knowledge of my subject matter?
2. Can I organize the content so that students get a clear understanding of the
relationships between concepts and different units of study?
3. Do I use a variety of methods, materials, and media to make the subject more
relevant and interesting to students?
4. Do I provide class time, as well as my own professional time, assisting
students who need additional time to learn the fundamentals of the subject?
5. Do I spend time preparing my lessons and updating and improving my
previous lessons?
Questions Related to Self

1. What does the art of teaching look like in my classroom?
2. What are the threats to my artful teaching and the students’ learning?
3. What philosophical assumptions and learning theories undergird my

teaching? Do the school philosophy and learning theories coincide with my
personal views? If not, how does that influence my artful teaching?
4. In what ways do I define intelligence and creative thinking?
5. Am I aware that some of my own behaviors might need to be changed, and
am I accepting of this?
Summary
1. The kind of teacher you choose to be is based in part on your reasons for
teaching.
2. Teachers must provide methods and materials that are motivating for students
by recognizing that students are individuals with their own set of needs,
abilities, and self-esteem.
3. Learning-paradigm teachers focus on what students do to construct their own
knowledge. Such teachers focus on the essence of the teaching act, not on
keeping students busy.
4. Students have different ways of thinking, including, but not limited to, visual,
auditory, and tactile responses.
5. Students can be taught learning-to-learn skills, critical thinking skills, and
creative thinking skills. The idea is for the teacher to move from teaching
the facts and right answers to nurturing problem solving and creative
thinking.
Questions to Consider
1. Why is it important to understand your own reasons for teaching?
2. What factors keep teachers from becoming more like Jaime Escalante or
LouAnn Johnson?
3. What teaching methods and approaches can be used to improve students’
thinking skills?
4. What are the attributes of critical thinking and of creative thinking? Which
type of thinking is more important for students to develop in school?
Things to Do
1. Observe two or three teachers at work in the classroom and try to describe
how they motivate their students. How successful are they in motivating their
students?
2. Observe the same teachers and students again. Make a list of the dominant
student behaviors that the teachers have to deal with.
3. Is the teacher you are observing a learning-paradigm or instructional-
paradigm teacher? Explain.
4. Describe your own experiences with teachers. Which of your teachers have
been learning-paradigm teachers? Which have been instructional-paradigm
teachers? Explain.
5. School success is partially based on the students’ ability to think critically.
Identify the cognitive processes, or the things teachers can do to foster critical
thinking among students. -- '
Recommended Readings
Beyer, Barry K. Teaching Thinking Skills. Needham Heights: MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991.
Explains the thinking process, including critical thinking, information processing,
problem solving, and decision making, and gives guidelines for improving thinking
skills programs.
Covington, Martin V. Making the Grade: The Self-Worth Perspective on Motivation and
School Reform. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992. A discussion of how
classroom life can hinder the student’s sense of self-worth, and in turn affect the
student’s motivation and academic performance.
Fried, Robert. The Passionate Teacher. Boston: Beacon Press, 1995. A thoughtful
description of how excellent teaching can be learned through practice.
Rogers, Carl. Freedom to Learn, 2nd ed. Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1983. Methods of
building freedom and choice in classrooms and developing person-centered
(humanistic) teachers.
Rose, Mike. Possible Lives. New York: Houghton Mifflin, 1995. A compilation of
teacher stories taken from different social and economic contexts.
Sternberg, Robert J., ed. Thinking and Problem Solving, 2nd ed. San Diego: Academic
Press, 1998. A handbook on the research on and the methods of problem solving.
Key Terms
art of teaching 5 instructional paradigm 6
cognitive structures 15 learning 15
creativity 23 learning paradigm 7
critical thinking 19 metacognition 17
inquiry-discovery techniques 27 science of teaching 14
End Notes
1. Susan M. Johnson, Teachers at Work (New York: Basic Books, 1990); Ann
Liberman and Lynne Miller, Teachers—Their World and Their Work (New York:
Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1992).
2. Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught, 2nd ed. (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1993); John I. Goodlad, Teachers for Our Nation’s Schools
(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990).
3. The Condition of Education, 1993, vol. 1 (Washington, D.C.: Government Printing

Office, 1991), Table 1.28, 96; Digest of Education Statistics, 1993 (Washington,
D. C.: Government Printing Office, 1993), Table 73, 85.
4. Benjamin D. Wright and Shirley A. Tuska, “From a Dream to Life in the Psychology
of Becoming a Teacher,” School Review (September 1968): 259-393.
5. Dan Lortie, “Observations on Teaching as Work,” in Second Handbook of Research
on Teaching, ed. R. M. Travers (Chicago: Rand McNally, 1973): 474-497.
6. Allan C. Ornstein and Daniel U. Levine, Foundations of Education, 7th ed. (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 2000); Nathalie J. Gehrke, On Being a Teacher (West Lafayette,
IN: Kappa Delta Pi, 1987).
7. Robert Barr and John Tagg, “From Teaching to Learning.” Change, (June 1995): 16.
8. Ibid.
9. Theodore R. Sizer, Horace’s School (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992).
10. Harold Stevenson and James Stigler, The Learning Gap (New York: Summit, 1992).
11. Ibid.
12. Robert Fried, The Passionate Teacher (Boston: Beacon Press, 1995): 12
13. Ken Macrorie, Twenty Teachers (New York: Oxford University Press, 1987): 138-139.
14. Mike Rose, Possible Lives: The Promise of Public Education in America (New
York: Houghton Mifflin, 1995): 374-375.
15. Ibid., p. 421.
16. Jay Mathews, Escalante: The Best Teacher in America (New York: Henry Holt,
1988), 46.
17. Fried, The Passionate Teacher, 57.
18. Raymond McDermott, “Making Dropouts,” in What Do Anthropologists Have to Say
About Dropouts? ed. Henry Trueba, George Spindler, and Louise Spindler (New
York: Falmer Press, 1989), 20.
19. Ibid.
20. John Flavell, Cognitive Development, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1985); Robert Glaser, Advances in Instructional Psychology, vol. 4 (Hillside, NJ:
Erlbaum, 1993).
21. Gaea Leinhardt, “What Research on Learning Tells Us About Teaching,”
Educational Leadership (April 1992): 20-25.
22. Charles Letteri, “Teaching Students How to Learn,” Theory Into Practice (spring
1985): 112-122; Richard E. Mayer, “Models for Understanding” Review of
Educational Research (spring 1989): 43-64; and Richard S. Prawat, “The Value of
Ideas,” Educational Researcher (August-September 1993): 5-16.
23. Jeanne Ellis Ormrod, Human Learning (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1999): 342-343.
24. Macrorie, Twenty Teachers, 132-133.
25. Gerald G. Duffy, “Rethinking Strategy Instruction,” Elementary School Journal
(January 1993): 231-248; Alan H. Schoenfeld, “Teaching Mathematical Thinking
and Problem Solving,” in Toward the Thinking Curriculum, ed. L. B. Resnick and L.
E. Klopfer (Alexandria, VA: ASCD, 1989): 83-103.
26. Jerome Bruner, The Process of Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1960).
27. Lauren Resnick, Education and Learning to Think (Washington, DC: National
Academy Press, 1987).
28. Justin Brown and Ellen Langer, “Mindfulness of Intelligence: A Comparison,”
Educational Psychologist (summer 1990): 305-336; David Perkins, Eileen Jay, and
Shari Tishman, “New Conceptions of Thinking,” Educational Psychologist (Winter
1993): 67-75.
29. Barry K. Beyer, Teaching Thinking Skills (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991).
30. Matthew Lipman, “The Culturation of Reasoning Through Philosophy,” Educational
Leadership (September 1984): 51-56.
31. Matthew Lipman et al., Philosophy for Children, 2nd ed. (Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1980); Lipman, Philosophy Goes to School (Philadelphia: Temple
University Press, 1988).
32. Matthew Lipman, “Critical Thinking—What Can It Be?” Educational Leadership
(September 1988): 38^43.
33. Robert J. Sternberg, “How Can We Teach Intelligence?” Educational Leadership
(September 1984): 38-48; Sternberg, “Practical Intelligence for Success in School,”
Educational Leadership (September 1990): 35-39.
34. Robert H. Ennis, “A Logical Basis for Measuring Critical Thinking Skills,”
Educational Leadership (October 1985): 44-48; Ennis “Critical Thinking and
Subject Specificity,” Educational Researcher (April 1989): 4-10.
35. William A. Sadler and Arthur Whimbely, “A Holistic Approach to Improving
Thinking Skills,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1985): 100.
36. Fred Newmann, “Beyond Common Sense in Educational Restructuring: The Issues
of Content and Linkage,” Educational Researcher (March 1993): 4—13.
37. Robert J. Sternberg, “Teaching Critical Thinking: Possible Solutions,” Phi Delta
Kappan (December 1985): 277. Also see Robert J. Sternberg and Peter A. French,
Complex Problem Solving (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1991).
38. Ennis, “A Logical Basis for Measuring Critical Thinking Skills.”
39. Janet Wilde Astington, “Theory of Mind Goes to School” Educational Leadership
(November 1998): 48.
40. Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and
Invention (New York: HarperCollins, 1996): 8.
41. Howard Gardner, Creating Minds: An Anatomy of Creativity Seen Through the Lives
of Freud, Einstein, Picasso, Stravinsky, Eliot, Graham, and Ghandi (New York:
Basic Books, 1994); and Mihaly Csiksentmihalyi, Creativity: Flow and the
Psychology of Discovery and Invention (New York: HarperCollins, 1996).
42. Csikszentmihalyi, Creativity, 27.
43. Robert J. Sternberg, “Intelligence, Wisdom, and Creativity: Three is Better than
One,” Educational Psychologist (Summer 1986): 175-190.
44. Carl Rogers, “Toward a Theory of Creativity,” in Conference on Creativity:
A Report to the Rockefeller Foundation, ed. M. Barkan and R. L. Mooney
(Columbus, OH: Ohio State University Press, 1953): 73-82.
45. Erich Fromm, “The Creative Attitude,” in Creativity and Its Cultivation, ed. H. H.
Anderson (New York: Harper & Row, 1959): 44-54.
46. Gaea Leinhardt, Ralph T. Putnam, and Rosemary A. Hattrup, Analysis of Arithmetic
for Mathematics Teaching (Hillside, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992); Robert Marzano,
Dimensions of Learning (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1991).
47. Jerome S. Bruner, The Process of Education (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 1960): 57.
48. Mathews, Escalante, 118-120.
49. Ronald Bonnstetter, Jr., J. E. Penick, and R. E. Yager, Teachers in Exemplary
Programs: How Do They Compare? (Washington, D.C.: National Science Teachers
Association, 1983).
50. Macrorie, Twenty Teachers, 147.
H A P T E R
The Science
of Teaching
Focusing Questions
1. What is the difference between teacher processes and teacher products?
2. How can the interaction between the teacher and students in the classroom be
measured?
3. What are the characteristics of a good teacher as defined in the research
literature?
4. What is the difference between teacher characteristics and teacher
competencies?
5. How can we determine teacher effectiveness?
6. How would you define an expert teacher? A novice teacher? How do experts
and novices differ in the role they assume in classroom instruction and
classroom management?
7. What are some current alternative forms for understanding how teachers
teach and what they are thinking about when they are teaching?
To help you appreciate the research findings in this chapter, you might try this exer¬
cise. Make a list of the learning-paradigm teachers you have had about whom you
have pleasant memories. Then list the instructional-paradigm teachers in whose
classes you were assigned. What do you remember about the attitudes and behav¬
iors of these teachers? As you read this chapter, a chapter that we have intentionally
“packed” with lots of information on what we now know about teaching, think
about how the attitudes and behaviors of the teachers on your two lists correspond
to research findings and information about effective and ineffective teachers.
We will first present an overview of the research on effective teaching (the
scientific basis for teaching) and then discuss some basic aspects of teachers:
teacher characteristics, teacher competencies, and teacher effects. In these as¬
pects of teaching, the art of teaching becomes evident. Knowledge alone does
not make a teacher effective; a teacher’s effectiveness lies in how she or he uses
35
that knowledge. In the early stages of educational research, up to the mid 1970s,
theorists were concerned with teacher processes—teacher behaviors that were
evident in the classroom. More recently, researchers have become concerned
with teacher products—student outcomes. The assessment of products focuses
on teacher competencies and teacher effects.
Review of the Research on Teaching: The Science

Over the years, thousands of studies have been conducted to identify the behav¬
iors of successful and unsuccessful teachers. However, teaching is a complex
act; what works in some situations with some students might not work in differ¬
ent school settings with different subjects, students, and goals. There will always
be teachers who break many of the rules of procedures and methods and yet are
profoundly successful. There will always be teachers who follow the rules and
are unsuccessful.
Some educational researchers maintain that we cannot distinguish between
“good” and “poor” or “effective” and “ineffective” teachers, that no one knows
for sure or agrees what the competent teacher is, that few authorities can “define,
prepare for, or measure teacher competence.”1 We do know, however, that good
teachers do make a difference . . . a big difference, in how and how much stu¬
dents learn. Researchers are less certain of how good teachers are really differ¬
ent. They point out that disagreement over terms, problems in measurement, and
the complexity of the teaching act are major reasons for the negligible results in
judging teacher behavior. The result is that “much of the data have been confus¬
ing, contradictory, or confirmations of common sense (i.e., a cheerful teacher is
a good teacher), and that so-called acceptable findings have often been repudi¬
ated.”2 The more complex or unpredictable one views teaching as being, the
more one is compelled toward concluding that it is difficult to agree upon gener¬
alizations about successful teaching.3
Other researchers assert that teaching behaviors can be defined (and
learned by teachers), that good or effective teachers can be distinguished from
poor or ineffective teachers, and that the magnitude of the effect of these dif¬
ferences on students can be determined.4 They conclude that the kinds of ques¬
tions teachers ask, the ways they respond to students, their expectations of and
attitudes toward students, their classroom management techniques, their teaching
methods, and their general teaching behaviors (sometimes referred to as
“classroom climate”) all make a difference. However, in some cases the posi¬
tive effects of teachers upon student performance can be masked or washed
out by the relative negative effects of other teachers in the same school.5
Teachers might not be the only variable, or even the major one, in the teaching¬
learning equation, but they can make a difference, either positive or negative.
Our argument is simple: Negative teacher influences have a greater impact
than positive ones, in that students can be turned into nonlearners and lose mo¬
tivation to learn in a matter of weeks as a result of having a hostile, intimidat¬
ing or poor teacher.
If teachers do not make a difference, and few people argue that this is true,
then the profession has problems. If teachers do not make a difference, the no¬
tions of teacher evaluation, teacher accountability, and teacher performance are
nonworkable—sound educational policy cannot be formulated, and there is little
hope for many students, and there is little value in trying to learn how to teach.
However, even if we are convinced that teachers have an impact, and current re¬
search clearly supports this assertion, it is still true that we are unable to assess
with confidence the specific teacher actions that influence student performance,
because the learning variables are numerous and the teaching interactions are
complex.
Existent empirical findings that suggest that teachers do make a difference
are often rule-like in nature: “Teachers should develop clear, workable rules and
procedures to foster good classroom management.” Such “Teachers should”
statements suggest that teaching is more like a science than an art: Apply the
rules, and students will learn. In fact, many teachers do apply the rules, and stu¬
dents still fail to learn. The reason for this circumstance is simple: Teaching is
not a total science. As we suggested in Chapter 1, it is both art and science.
Good teachers do know, implicitly at least, what research has to say about
student learning. But they also are bound by the following assumptions:
Assumption 1: Research findings need to be critically examined and

analyzed.
Assumption 2: Research findings are not universally applicable.
Assumption 3: Research-based “best” practices require critical reflection.
A word about those assumptions. No research findings should be interpreted

into practice without thoughtful consideration of their implications for the class¬
room. Teachers do not apply what they learn without critically examining what
it potentially means for their students. They also understand that what they learn
might not be applicable to their students in all situations. For example, research
suggests that direct instruction (see Chapter 5) is a very powerful means of
teaching skills and procedures. It is not, however, a particularly useful strategy
for enhancing critical thinking or creativity. Teachers need to understand both
who they are teaching and what they are teaching in order to know how they
should be teaching.
The process-product approach (i.e., the view that certain teacher behaviors
influence student achievement) limited teachers’ understanding of classrooms in
a number of ways. It placed too much emphasis on the frequency of teacher be¬
haviors (How often does the teacher praise students? How many examples does
the teacher provide?) and insufficient attention to the ecology of the classroom—
the multiple relationships that exist between teachers and students, in response
to the natural setting of the classroom. Ecological understandings of the class¬
room do not obviate the process-product approach; they simply suggest the com¬
plexity of the classroom reality.
Empirical findings are needed if we are to establish realistic expectations
concerning teacher effects. In the meantime, we must find strength and confi¬
dence in the belief that we can, and do, make a difference with our students. You
might not be successful with all of your students all the time. But, most of you
will succeed—through experience, knowledge of best practice, self-reflection,
and thoughtful, purposeful supervision. See Tips for Teachers 2.1.
Your success will be dictated by a number of dynamics. We will look at
each of those classroom dynamics in some detail in order to address these ques¬
tions: What is the nature of the teacher-student interactions in the classroom?
How do teacher expectations influence the nature of teacher-student interac-
Observing Other Teachers to Improve Teaching Practices
The statement “Teachers are bom, not made” fails to Teaching-Learning Processes
take into account the wealth of knowledge we have
1. Which instructional methods interested the
about good teaching and how children leam. Teachers
students?
can supplement their pedagogical knowledge and
2. How did the teacher provide for transitions
practices by observing other good teachers. Assuming
that your school has a policy of observation or your between instructional activities?
supervisor can make arrangements with experienced 3. What practical life experiences (or activities)
teachers, you will be able to see how other teachers were used by the teacher to integrate concepts
organize their classrooms. Which of their practices are being learned?
compatible with your approach to teaching and which 4. How did the teacher minimize student
might you be able to use? Here are some of the things frustration or confusion concerning the skills
to look for when you are observing. or concepts being taught?
5. In what way did the teacher encourage
Student-Teacher Interaction creative, imaginative work from students?
6. What instructional methods were used to
1. What evidence was there that the teacher truly
make students think about ideas, opinions, or
understood the needs of the students?
answers?
2. What techniques were used to encourage
7. How did the teacher arrange the groups?
students’ respect for each others’ turn to talk?
What social factors were evident within
3. What student behaviors in class were the groups?
acceptable and unacceptable?
8. How did the teacher encourage independent
4. How did the teacher motivate students? (or individualized) student learning?
5. How did the teacher encourage student 9. How did the teacher integrate the subject
discussion? matter with other subjects?
6. In what way did the teacher see things from
the students’ point of view?
Classroom Environment
7. What evidence was there that the teacher
responded to students’ individual differences? 1. How did the teacher utilize classroom
8. What evidence was there that the teacher space/equipment effectively?
responded to students’ affective 2. What did you like and dislike about the
development? physical environment of the classroom?
tions? What characteristics are most evident in teachers who are effective? And
what “effects” emerge because of teachers’ classroom actions?
Teacher Interaction Patterns: Verbal and Nonverbal

The analysis of teacher-student interaction often deals with a specific teacher
behavior and a series of these behaviors constituting a larger behavior, described
and recorded by an abstract unit of measurement that can vary in size and time
(for example, every three seconds a recording is made) of what a teacher or stu¬
dent is doing.
Verbal Communication
In a classic study of teacher-student interaction, Amo Bellack and colleagues ana¬

lyzed the linguistic behavior of teachers and students in the classroom.6 Classroom
activities are carried out in large part by verbal interaction between students and
teachers; few classroom activities can be carried out without the use of language.
The research, therefore, focused on language as the main instrument of communi¬
cation in teaching. Four basic verbal behaviors, or “moves,” were labeled:
1. Structuring moves serve the function of focusing attention on subject

matter or classroom procedures and beginning interaction between
students and teachers. They set the context for subsequent behavior. For
example, beginning a class by announcing the topic to be discussed is a
structuring move.
2. Soliciting moves are designed to elicit a verbal or physical response. For
example, the teacher asks a question about the topic with the hope of
encouraging a response from the students.
3. Responding moves occur in relation to and after the soliciting behaviors.
Their ideal function is to fulfill the expectations of the soliciting
behaviors.
4. Reacting moves are sometimes occasioned by one or more of the above
behaviors, but are not directly elicited by them. Reacting behaviors serve to
modify, clarify, or judge the structuring, soliciting, or responding behavior.7
According to Bellack, these pedagogical moves occur in combinations he

called “teaching cycles.” A cycle usually begins with a structuring or soliciting
“move” by the teacher; continues with a responding move from a student; and
ends with some kind of reacting move by the teacher. In most cases the cycle be¬
gins and ends with the teacher. The investigators’ analysis of the classroom pro¬
duced several insights:
1. Teachers dominate verbal activities. The teacher-student ratio in words

spoken is 3:1. (This evidence corresponds with the findings of other
researchers who suggest that teachers’ talk is 80 percent of classroom
activity.)
2. Teacher and student moves are clearly defined. The teacher engages in
structuring, soliciting, and reacting behaviors, and the student is usually
limited to responding. (This also corresponds with findings that suggest
that teachers dominate classrooms in such a way as to make students
dependent.)
3. Teachers initiate about 85 percent of the cycles. The basic unit of verbal
interaction is the soliciting-responding pattern. Verbal interchanges
occur at a rate of slightly less than 2 cycles per minute.
4. In approximately two-thirds of the behaviors and three-fourths of the
verbal interplay, talk is content-oriented.
5. About 60 percent of the total discourse is fact-oriented.
In summary, the data suggest that the classroom is teacher-dominated,

subject-centered, and fact-oriented. The students’ primary responsibility seems
to be to respond to the teacher’s soliciting behaviors. This is an apt description
of instructional-paradigm teachers. Learning-paradigm teachers, on the other
hand, facilitate rather than dominate, they talk less and allow students to raise
questions, comment, and analyze the content in class.
In another study, Smith and Meux focused on the linguistic behavior of the
teacher.8 Teacher linguistic behavior was divided into “episodes” and “mono-
The Teacher with Wisdom
Neil Postman
University Professor of Culture and Communication
New York University
There is a sense in which the following aphorism is ignorance as a means of inviting students to partici¬
true: The dumber the teacher, the better the student. pate actively in the quest for knowledge. For if stu¬
What is meant by this is that a teacher’s knowledge dents believe that everything is known and the
can often be an obstacle to learning. If teachers teacher knows it, the students must remain out¬
know a great deal and spend most of the time siders to the “great conversation.”
telling what they know, students are often intimi¬ Of course, if the teacher is truly a learned person
dated, rendered passive, and made entirely depen¬ then there is no need for him or her to feign igno¬
dent on the source of knowledge. But this is not rance. A learned person knows how ignorant he is
what most good teachers want to accomplish. What and, in teaching, simply gives more prominence and
is required of teachers is to be restrained and to be emphasis to what he does not know than to what he
sparing in how they employ their knowledge in a does. Moreover, truly learned teachers are never
classroom. This is not to argue that teachers should, frightened or defensive about making what is not
in fact, be ignorant. It is to say that they may use known the focus of their lessons.
logues.” The teacher episode is defined as one or more verbal exchanges

between two or more speakers. A question by the teacher and an answer by a
student constitutes the most common episode. The teacher monologue consists
of a solo performance by a speaker addressing the group; the teacher who gives
directions or a command (“John, sit down!”) is engaged in a monologue. Effec¬
tive teachers tend to engage in more episodes and fewer monologues. The ideal
episode seems to be an exchange in which several speakers respond to an origi¬
nal question or statement. Thus the most effective linguistic behavior is not
teacher to student or student to teacher, but teacher to several students.
A series of episodes or monologues form a “cycle” that includes one or more of
several verbal “entries” (that is, questions or statements that initiate the exchange):
1. Defining entries are concerned with how words are used to refer to
objects: “What does the word_mean?”
2. Describing entries ask for an explanation or description about
something: “What did John find out?”
3. Designating entries identify something by name: “What mountain range
did we see in the film?”
4. Stating entries involve statements of issues, proofs, rules, theories,
conclusions, beliefs, and so on: “What is the plot of the story?”
5. Reporting entries ask for a summary or a report on a book or document:
“Can you summarize the major points of the book?”
6. Substituting entries require the performance of a symbolic operation,
usually of mathematic or scientific value: “Who can write the equation
on the chalkboard?”
7. Evaluating entries ask for judgment or estimate of worth of something:
“Would you like to assess the validity of the argument?”
8. Opinioning entries ask for a conclusion, affirmation, or denial based
upon evidence: “How do you feel President Clinton will be judged by
historians?”9
Most teachers interact with their students at the level of the first three verbal
entries; that is, defining, describing, and designating. This basically leads to the
teaching of knowledge and facts, not high-order thinking. Good teaching re¬
quires that teachers use all the entries. Not just the “lower entries.” Again, think
of some of the learning-paradigm (artful) teachers you have had. Our guess is
that you experienced most, if not all, the entries in their classrooms. But the ver¬
bal dimensions of their teaching were not the only thing that made them unique.
Nonverbal Communication
According to Miles Patterson, nonverbal behavior in the classroom serves five

teacher functions: (1) providing information, or elaborating upon a verbal state¬
ment; (2) regulating interactions, such as by pointing to someone; (3) expressing
intimacy or liking, such as by smiling or touching a student on the shoulder;
(4) exercising social control, reinforcing a classroom rule, say, by creating
proximity or distance; and (5) facilitating goals, as when demonstrating a skill

that requires motor activity or gesturing.10 These categories are not mutually ex¬
clusive; there is some overlap, and nonverbal cues can serve more than one
function depending on how they are used.
Although the teaching-learning process is ordinarily associated with verbal
interaction, nonverbal communication operates as a silent language that influ¬
ences the process. What makes the study of nonverbal communication so impor¬
tant and fascinating is that some researchers contend that it constitutes about 65
percent of the social meaning of the classroom communication system.11 As the
old saying goes, “Actions speak louder than words.”
In a study of 225 teachers (and school principals) in 45 schools, Stephens
and Valentine observed ten specific nonverbal behaviors: (1) smiles or frowns,
(2) eye contact, (3) head nods, (4) gestures, (5) dress, (6) interaction distance,
(7) touch, (8) body movement, (9) posture, and (10) seating arrangements.12 In
general, the first four behaviors are easily interpreted by the observer; some
smiles, eye contact, head nods, and gestures are expected, but too many make
students suspicious or uneasy. Dress is a matter of professional code and expec¬
tation. Distance, touch, body movement, posture, and seating are open to more
interpretation, are likely to have personal meaning between communicators, and
are based on personalities and social relationships.13 Different types of these five
behaviors, especially distance, touch, and body movement, can be taken as indi¬
cations of the degree of formality in the relationship between the communica¬
tors, from intimate and personal to social and public. Teachers should maintain a
social or public relationship—that is, a formal relationship—with their students.
Behaviors that could be interpreted as indicating intimate and personal relations
should be avoided. It is difficult to define the point in a student-teacher relation¬
ship where friendliness can be misconstrued. To some extent that point differs
for different students and teachers. To be warm, friendly, and caring is impor¬
tant, but too much warmth and friendliness (proximity, touch, body movement,
posture, etc.) in dealing with students can get teachers into trouble. You will
need to be aware of the message you are sending to students, especially if they
are teenagers and you are in your twenties.
When the teacher’s verbal and nonverbal cues contradict one another, ac¬
cording to Charles Galloway, students read the nonverbal cues as the “true” re¬
flection of the teacher’s real feelings. Galloway developed global guidelines for
observing teachers’ nonverbal communication, which he referred to as the
“silent behavior of space, time, and body.”14
1. Space. A teacher’s use of space conveys meaning to students. For

example, teachers who spend most of their time near the chalkboard or at
their desk might convey insecurity, a reluctance to venture into student
territory.
2. Time. How teachers utilize classroom time is an indication of how they
value certain instructional activities. The elementary teacher who
devotes a great deal of time to reading but little to mathematics is
conveying a message to the students.
3. Body maneuvers. Nonverbal cues are used by teachers to control

students. The raised eyebrow, the pointed finger, the silent stare all
communicate meaning.
Galloway suggests that various nonverbal behaviors of the teacher can be

viewed as encouraging or restricting. By their facial expressions, gestures, and body
movements, teachers affect student participation and performance in the classroom.
Whether you realize it or not, these nonverbal behaviors—ranging from highly fo¬
cused to minimal eye contact, a pat on the back or a frown, to a supporting or angry
look—all add up and suggest approval and support or irritability and discourage¬
ment. In sum, they affect your relationship with your students. What you should do,
both in your personal and professional pursuits, is to become aware of how your
mannerisms influence your communication and relations with others.
The related concept of attentive and inattentive nonverbal behavior by stu¬
dents is also important in analyzing teacher-student interactions. See Tips for
Teachers 2.2.
Inattentive and Attentive Nonverbal Behaviors
The teacher should look for nonverbal student be¬ 8. Poking or annoying a classmate
havior to determine whether the student is attentive 9. Being unprepared (no pencil, pen, notebook)
(or engaged in an appropriate activity) or inattentive 10. Tipping the chair back and forth
(not engaged). This awareness on the part of the
teacher should take place regardless of the classroom
activity. Below are cues that are useful in recogniz¬ Attentive Behaviors
ing attentiveness and inattentiveness. 1. Raising a hand to volunteer a response
2. Maintaining eye contact with the teacher
Inattentive Behaviors 3. Working on the assigned activity;
1. Moving around the room without permission academically engaged
or at an inappropriate time 4. Turning around to listen to a student who is
2. Reading a book or doing homework during speaking
class discussion 5. Engaging in some task during a free activity
3. Doodling with a pencil; drawing instead of or independent study period
doing the assigned activity 6. Being prepared (with pencil, pen, notebook)
4. Laying head on desk 7. Exhibiting alert, energetic, positive facial

5. Gazing out the window or at someone in the expressions
hallway
6. Staring fixedly at an object not related to a
class activity Source: Adapted from Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy,
Looking in Classrooms, 5th ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1992),
7. Sitting with elbows on desk or hands 89-90. About half of the inattentive and attentive behaviors are
underneath thighs based on Good and Brophy; the remaining items are the author’s.
i/*
Students’ nonverbal behavior, in turn, influences teachers’ impressions, atti¬

tudes, reciprocal behavior, expectations, and existing and future student-teacher
interactions. Students’ nonverbal communication has been sorted by researchers
into four categories:
1. Location/proximity. Where a student chooses to sit at the beginning of

the year, assuming choice is available, influences the teacher’s
impression of how likable, initiating, and responsive the student is.
2. Attentiveness. Nonverbal behaviors such as erect posture, eye contact,
and smiling communicate attention and are related to positive
evaluations of the student’s competence, learning, and attitude.
3. Disruptive behaviors. The absence of eye contact and verbal
responsiveness is associated with negative teacher impressions.
Rejecting help from the teacher and responding to teacher initiatives with
negative nonverbal behaviors indicate uninterest or dislike to many
teachers, and teachers often respond in kind with negative nonverbal
behavior.
4. Timing. Students who make requests at inappropriate times are perceived
negatively by teachers. Students who respond quickly to teacher requests
appear to be perceived more positively by their teacher. “Successful
interrupters” pick the best time to engage in mischief or deviant
behavior; that is, when the teacher is engaged in an activity.
“Unsuccessful interrupters” get caught because their timing is wrong.15
The point is, we also need to be aware of students’ nonverbal behavior:

what kind of messages they send, how interested or uninterested they seem in
class; whether they exhibit understanding or confusion; or whether they are at¬
tentive or inattentive.
Teacher Expectations
Teachers communicate their expectations of students through verbal and nonver¬
bal cues. It is well established that these expectations affect the interaction be¬
tween teachers and students and, eventually, student performance. Teacher ex¬
pectations often become self-fulfilling prophecies; that is, the teacher who
expects students to be slow or exhibit deviant behavior, treats them accordingly,
and in response they adopt such behaviors.
The research on teacher expectations is rooted in the legal briefs and argu¬
ments Kenneth Clark prepared during his fight for desegregation of schools in
the 1950s and in his subsequent description of the problem in New York City’s
Harlem schools.16 He pointed out that prophesying low achievement for black
students not only provides teachers with an excuse for their students’ failure, but
also communicates a sense of inevitable failure to the students.
Clark’s thesis was given empirical support a few years later by Rosenthal
and Jacobsen’s Pygmalion in the Classroom, a famous study of students in the
San Francisco schools.17 After controlling for the ability of students, teachers
were told that there was reason to expect that certain students would perform
better, and the expectancy was fulfilled. However, confidence in the Pygmalion
effect diminished when Robert Thorndike, one of the most respected measure¬
ment experts, pointed out that there were several flaws in the methodology and
that the tests were unreliable.ia '
Interest in teacher expectations and self-fulfilling prophecy reappeared in
the 1980s and 1990s. Several researchers outlined how teachers communicate
expectations to students and in turn influence student behavior.
The teacher expects specific achievement and behavior from particular

students.
I
Because of these different expectations, the teacher behaves differently
toward various students.
I
This interaction suggests to students what achievement and behavior the
teacher expects from them, which affects their self-concepts, motivation,
and performance.
i
If the teacher’s interaction is consistent over time, it will shape the students’
achievement and behavior. High expectations for students will influence
achievement at high levels, and low expectations will produce lower
achievement.
i
With time, student achievement and behavior will conform more and more
to the original expectations of the teacher.19
The work of Tom Good and Jere Brophy in particular shows that many
teachers vary sharply in their interactions with high and low achievers
(Table 2.1). These two researchers contend that it is not necessary for the teacher
to engage in all the behaviors listed in Table 2.1 to have an impact. For example,
if a teacher assigns low achievers considerably less content than they can han¬
dle, that factor alone will inhibit their learning.
The most effective teacher is realistic about the differences between high
and low achievers. The teacher who develops a rigid or stereotyped perception
of students is likely to have a harmful effect on them. The teacher who under¬
stands that students differ and adapts realistic methods and content accordingly
will have the most positive effect on students.
Labeling Students
Dona Kagan outlined a comprehensive model on how teachers (and their stu¬
dents) alienate low achievers by making assumptions about their behavior and
achievement, thus labeling and tracking them into a second-class status in class¬
rooms and schools.20 Once a label is attached to a student, according to Kagan,
the teacher tends to adjust his or her teaching methods so they are consistent
with the label (underachiever, slow learner, disabled learner, etc.)- The antici¬
pation and expectations associated with the label constitute a “rational response”
by the teacher in understanding and reacting to the students. This “typing” of
students is often reinforced by school specialists, counselors, and psychologists,
which in turn reinforces the teacher’s perceptions and can have an overwhelming
effect upon the student.
Table 2.1 Teacher Behavior with Low Achievers and High Achievers
1. Waiting less time for low achievers to answer questions. Teachers often give high-achieving
students more time to respond than low-achieving students.
2. Interrupting low achievers more often. Teachers interrupt low achievers more often than high
achievers when they make reading mistakes and/or are unable to sustain a discussion about the
content or lesson.
3. Giving answers to low achievers. Teachers more frequently respond to incorrect responses of
low achievers by giving them the answer or calling on another student to answer the question
than they do with high achievers.
4. Rewarding inappropriate behavior. Teachers at times praise inappropriate responses of low
achievers, which serves to dramatize the weakness of such students.
5. Criticizing low achievers more often and praising them less often. Some teachers criticize low
achievers more than high achievers, a practice that is likely to reduce initiative and risk-taking
behavior. Moreover, low achievers seem less likely to be praised, even when they get the correct
answer.
6. Not confirming responses of low achievers. Teachers sometimes respond to answers from low
achievers with indifference. Even if the answers are correct, they call on other students to
respond without confirming answers, a practice that is likely to sow seeds of doubt concerning
the adequacy of their response.
7. Paying less attention to low achievers. Teachers simply pay less attention to low achievers. For
example, they smile more frequently and maintain more eye contact with high achievers, give
briefer and less informative feedback to low achievers’ questions, and are less likely to follow
through on time-consuming instructional methods with low achievers.
8. Calling on low achievers less often. Teachers seem inclined to call on high achievers more often
than low achievers.
9. Using different interaction patterns. Contact patterns between teachers and students are different
for high and low achievers. Public response patterns dominate in interaction with high achievers,
but low achievers have more private contacts with teachers. For low achievers, private
conferences may be a sign of inadequacy.
10. Seating lows further from the teacher. Teachers often place low achievers in locations that are
more distant from them.
11. Demanding less from lows. Teachers are more likely to demand little from and give up on low
achievers and let them know it. Teachers demand more work from high achievers and ask more
high-level questions.
12. Administering different tests and grades. Teachers often give low achievers less demanding tests
and assignments. They are more likely to give high achievers the benefit of the doubt in
borderline cases involving grades.
Source: Adapted from Thomas L. Good, “Two Decades of Research on Teacher Expectations: Findings and Future
Directions,” Journal of Teacher Education (July-August 1987): 32-47; Good and Brophy, Educational
Psychology: A Realistic Approach, 6th ed. (New York: Longman, 1998): 490-492.
Little wonder, then, that some theorists attribute academic failure of some
black students to an oppositional cultural frame of reference, an oppositional
identity, and a continuous distrust of white educators.21 For some low achievers
and minority students, dropping out of school might be regarded as a process of
disengagement from school, a means of preserving one’s own personal and cul¬
tural identity, and a way of alleviating the negative effects associated with low
self-concept, low motivation, and low achievement—and only secondarily fulfill¬
ing the expectations associated with school failure. In fact, dropouts are doing
what culture tells those in the bottom half to do: they are getting out of the way.22
A dilemma evolves in helping teachers work with low achievers and with
culturally diverse students. Generalizations are needed to inform teachers
about various instructional methods and techniques that can be applied to stu¬
dents with differing backgrounds. On the other hand, a universal concept of
multicultural education exposes teachers to the problems inherent in prejudg¬
ing individuals on the basis of membership of a particular group.23 Thus, we
raise a number of questions for you to consider within the context of your own
teacher expectations and views of teaching low achievers or minority groups.
How can you avoid the dangers inherent in generalizing about low achievers
or diverse cultural groups? Given your own prior experiences, how can you be
objective about examining your own views about low achievers or culturally
different students?
Fortunately, there is evidence that when teachers connect learning to the
students’ background and culture, the students become engaged in their educa¬
tional experiences. Gloria Ladson-Billings referred to this type of connective
learning as culturally relevant pedagogy. In her study of effective teachers (with
African American students), she found that they treated knowledge as changing
and evolving and the learning process as dynamic (see Table 2.2).
Ladson-Billings’s work is supported by findings from other researchers. In
a study of 140 high-poverty classrooms in 15 schools and across three states,
Table 2.2 Conceptions of Knowledge
Culturally Relevant Assimilationist
Knowledge is continuously recreated, recycled Knowledge is static and is passed in one

and shared by teachers and students. It is not direction, from teacher to student.
static or unchanging.
Knowledge is viewed critically. Knowledge is viewed as infallible.
Teacher is passionate about content. Teacher is detached, neutral about content.
Teacher helps student develop necessary skills. Teacher expects students to demonstrate
prerequisite skills.
Teacher sees excellence as a complex standard Teacher sees excellence as a postulate that is
that can involve some postulates but takes independent of student diversity or individual
student diversity and individual differences differences.
into account.
Source: Gloria Ladson-Billings, The Dreamkeepers (San Francisco: Jossey Bass, 1994), 81.
Michael Knapp found that teachers who “taught for meaning” (were learning-
paradigm oriented) rather than focusing on basic skill development that was not
contextualized were more likely to respond to diversity by connecting students’
backgrounds and culture to learning, achieving higher levels of student engage¬
ment and academic success.24
Teacher Characteristics
In the reams of research published on teacher behavior, the greatest amount con¬
cerns teacher characteristics. Researchers disagree on which teacher characteris¬
tics constitute successful teaching, on how to categorize characteristics, and on
how to define them. In addition, they give a variety of names to what they are
trying to describe, such as teacher traits, teacher personality, teacher perfor¬
mance, teacher outcomes. Descriptors or characteristics have different meanings
to different people. “Warm” behavior for one investigator often means some¬
thing different for another, just as the effects of such behavior can be seen differ¬
ently. For example, it can be assumed that a warm teacher’s effect on students
would vary according to student age, sex, achievement level, socioeconomic
class, ethnic group, and subject and classroom context.25
Such differences tend to operate for every teacher characteristic and to af¬
fect every study on teacher behavior. Although a list of teacher characteristics
might be suitable for a particular study, the characteristics (as well as the results)
cannot always be compared with another study.
Lee Shulman, a prominent thinker on teaching practice, points out that
teacher behavior researchers often disregard factors such as time of day, point
during the school year, and content, and combine data from an early observation
with data from a latter observation. Data from the early part of the term might be
combined with data from the latter part of the term; data from one unit of con¬
tent (which could require different teacher behaviors or techniques) are com¬
bined with data from other units of content.26 All these aggregations assume that
instances of teaching over time can be summed to have equal weights, which is
rarely the case. The accuracy issue is further clouded when such studies are
compared, integrated, and built upon each other to form a theory or viewpoint
about which teacher characteristics are most effective.
Despite such cautions, many researchers feel that certain teacher character¬
istics can be defined, validated, and generalized from one study to another, and
that recommendations can be made from such generalizations for practical use
in the classroom and elsewhere.
Research on Teacher Characteristics
Although researchers have named literally thousands of teacher characteris¬

tics over the years, A. S. Barr organized recommended behaviors into a man¬
ageable list.27 Reviewing some fifty years of research, he listed and defined
twelve successful characteristics (Table 2.3). Other authorities have made other
Table 2.3 Barr’s Characteristics Important for Successful Teaching
1. Resourcefulness. Originality, creativeness, initiative, imagination, adventurousness,

progressiveness
2. Intelligence. Foresight, intellectual acuity, understanding, mental ability, intellectual capacity,
common sense
3. Emotional stability. Poise, self-control, steadfastness, sobriety, dignity, nonneuroticism,
emotional maturity, adjustment, constancy, loyalty, easy-going realism in facing life, not
excitable, stable, integrated character
4. Considerateness. Appreciativeness, kindliness, friendliness, courteousness, sympathy, tact,
good-naturedness, helpfulness, patience, politeness, thoughtfulness, tolerance
5. Buoyancy. Optimism, enthusiasm, cheerfulness, gregariousness, fluency, talkativeness, sense of
humor, pleasantness, carefreeness, vivaciousness, alertness, animation, idealism,
articulativeness, expressiveness, wit
6. Objectivity. Fairness, impartiality, open-mindedness, freedom from prejudice, sense of evidence
7. Drive. Physical vigor, energy, perseverance, ambition, industry, endurance, motivation,
purposefulness, speediness, zealousness, quickness
8. Dominance. Self-confidence, forcefulness, decisiveness, courageousness, independence,
insensitiveness to social approval, self-sufficiency, determination, thick-skinnedness, self-
reliance, self-assertiveness
9. Attractiveness. Dress, physique, freedom from physical defects, personal magnetism, neatness,
cleanliness, posture, personal charm, appearance
10. Refinement. Good taste, modesty, morality, conventionality, culture, polish, well-readness
11. Cooperativeness. Friendliness, easy-goingness, geniality, generosity, adaptability, flexibility,
responsiveness, trustfulness, warm-heartedness, unselfishness, charitableness
12. Reliability. Accuracy, dependability, honesty, punctuality, responsibility, conscientiousness,
painstakingness, trustworthiness, consistency, sincerity
Source: A. S. Barr, “Characteristics of Successful Teachers,” Phi Delta Kappan (March 1958): 282-283.
summaries of teacher characteristics, but Barr’s work is considered one of the

earliest and most comprehensive.
Though Barr presented an overview of hundreds of studies of teacher char¬
acteristics, perhaps the single most comprehensive study was conducted by
David Ryans.28 More than 6,000 teachers in 1,700 schools were involved in the
study over a six-year period. The objective was to identify, through observations
and self-ratings, the most desirable teacher characteristics. Respondents were
asked to identify and describe a teaching act that they felt made a difference be¬
tween success or failure. These critical behaviors were reduced to the list of 25
effective behaviors and 25 ineffective behaviors (Table 2.4). The lists, combined
with Barr’s recommendations, serve as good guidelines for beginning and even
experienced teachers. The teacher should examine them in terms of her or his
own personality and perceptions of good teaching.
Ryans went on to develop a list of eighteen bipolar teacher characteristics
(for example, original vs. conventional, patient vs. impatient, hostile vs. warm).
Respondents were asked to identify the approximate position of teachers for
each pair of characteristics on a seven-point scale. (A seven-point scale makes it
easier for raters to avoid midpoint responses and nonpositions).
Table 2.4 Ryans’s Critical Teacher Behaviors
Effective Behaviors Ineffective Behaviors
1. Alert, appears enthusiastic. 1. Is apathetic, dull, appears bored.

2. Appears interested in pupils and classroom activities. 2. Appears uninterested in pupils and classroom activities.
3. Cheerful, optimistic. 3. Is depressed, pessimistic; appears unhappy.
4. Self-controlled, not easily upset. 4. Loses temper, is easily upset.
5. Likes fun, has a sense of humor. 5. Is overly serious, too occupied for humor.
6. Recognizes and admits own mistakes. 6. Is unaware of, or fails to admit, own mistakes.
7. Is fair, impartial, and objective in treatment of pupils. 7. Is unfair or partial in dealing with pupils.
8. Is patient. 8. Is impatient.
9. Shows understanding and sympathy in working with pupils. 9. Is short with pupils, uses sarcastic remarks, or in other
ways shows lack of sympathy with pupils.
10. Is friendly and courteous in relations with pupils. 10. Is aloof and removed in relations with pupils.
11. Helps pupils with personal as well as educational problems. 11. Seems unaware of pupils’ personal needs and problems.
12. Commends effort and gives praise for work well done. 12. Does not commend pupils, is disapproving, hypercritical.
13. Accepts pupils’ efforts as sincere. 13. Is suspicious of pupils’ motives.
14. Anticipates reactions of others in social situations. 14. Does not anticipate reactions of others in social situations.
15. Encourages pupils to try to do their best. 15. Makes no effort to encourage pupils to try to do their best.
16. Classroom procedure is planned and well organized. 16. Classroom procedure is without plan, disorganized.
17. Classroom procedure is flexible within over-all plan. 17. Shows extreme rigidity of procedure, inability to depart
from plan.
18. Anticipates individual needs. 18. Fails to provide for individual differences and needs of
pupils.
19. Stimulates pupils through interesting and original materials 19. Uninteresting materials and teaching techniques used.
and techniques.
20. Conducts clear, practical demonstrations and explanations. 20. Demonstrations and explanations are not clear and are
poorly conducted.
21. Is clear and thorough in giving directions. 21. Directions are incomplete, vague.
22. Encourages pupils to work through their own problems and 22. Fails to give pupils opportunity to work out their own
evaluate their accomplishments. problems or evaluate their own work.
23. Disciplines in quiet, dignified, and positive manner. 23. Reprimands at length, ridicules, resorts to cruel or
meaningless form of correction.
24. Gives help willingly. 24. Fails to give help or gives it grudgingly.
25. Foresees and attempts to resolve potential difficulties. 25. Is unable to foresee and resolve potential difficulties.
Source: David G. Ryans, Characteristics of Teachers (Washington, DC: American Council on Education, 1960), 82.
The eighteen teacher characteristics were defined in detail and further

grouped into three “patterns” of successful vs. unsuccessful teachers:
1. Pattern X: understanding, friendly, responsive, versus aloof, egocentric

2. Pattern Y: responsible, businesslike, systematic, versus evading,
unplanned, slipshod
3. Pattern Z: stimulating, imaginative, original, versus dull, routine
These three primary teacher patterns were the major qualities singled out for
further attention. Elementary teachers scored higher than secondary teachers on
the scales of understanding and friendly classroom behavior (Pattern X). Differ¬
ences between women and men teachers were insignificant in the elementary
schools, but in the secondary schools women consistently scored higher in
Pattern X and in stimulating and imaginative classroom behavior (Pattern Z),

and men tended to exhibit businesslike and systematic behaviors (Pattern Y).
Younger teachers (under 45 years) scored higher than older teachers in patterns
X and Z; older teachers scored higher in pattern Y.
A similar but more recent list of teacher characteristics was compiled by re¬
searcher Bruce Tuckman, who,has developed a feedback system for stimulating
change in teacher behavior.29 His instrument originally contained 28 bipolar
items and was expanded to 30 items (for example, creative versus routinized,
cautious versus outspoken, assertive versus passive, quiet versus bubbly) on
which teachers also were rated on a seven-point scale.
The 30 characteristics cluster into four teacher “dimensions,” similar to
Ryans’s three patterns.
1. Creative: The creative teacher is imaginative, experimenting, and

original; the noncreative teacher is routine, exacting, and cautious.
2. Dynamic: The dynamic teacher is outgoing, energetic, and extroverted;
the nondynamic teacher is passive, withdrawn, and submissive.
3. Organized: The organized teacher is purposeful, resourceful, and in
control; the disorganized teacher is capricious, erratic, and flighty.
4. Warm: The warm teacher is sociable, amiable, and patient; the cold
teacher is unfriendly, hostile, and impatient.30
Teacher Competencies
Because of the lack of agreement in defining teacher characteristics, some
researchers recommend the use of a more precise term, such as teacher compe¬
tencies.31 These competencies might or might not stem from broad teacher char¬
acteristics, but they are “specific items of behavior” that can be defined carefully
for inclusion in a manual of instruction or in a teacher appraisal system.
Several teacher preparation institutions and school districts have developed
reliable lists of competencies. The indicators developed by the University of
Toledo in the 1980s are perhaps the best known examples of a competency-based
teacher preparation program for grades K-12. As many as 49 competencies—reflect¬
ing 2,000 behavioral objectives—were developed that teachers are expected to ex¬
hibit. The 10 competencies listed here give the flavor of how the system operates:
1. Plans instruction at a variety of cognitive levels

2. Can state pupil outcomes in behavioral terms
3. Identifies and evaluates learning problems of students
4. Knows how to organize and use appropriate instructional materials
5. Uses a variety of instructional strategies
6. Uses convergent and divergent inquiry strategies
7. Establishes transitions and sequences in instruction that are varied
8. Modifies instructional activities to accommodate learner needs
9. Demonstrates ability to work with individuals, small groups, and large

groups
10. Demonstrates knowledge in the subject areas32
Competencies offer one way teachers can be evaluated and also suggest that
a knowledge base underlying teaching can be devised and agreed upon. The
movement is not without its critics, however. Some critics argue that the compe¬
tency approach plays into the hands of those who see teaching as a simple skill
that can be broken down into discrete behaviors that can be acquired by almost
anyone capable of standing and delivering.33
As the samples from the Toledo list indicate, teacher competencies deal
mainly with what the teacher is doing while teaching; they deal with specific be¬
haviors as opposed to broad teaching patterns. Because the competencies are
more specific, long lists are needed to get an idea of the teacher’s performance.
The longer the list, however, the greater the chance that the competencies will
overlap and cluster in other broad categories—which brings us back to what is
faulty with many other inventories of teacher characteristics.
It is especially important to determine which competencies are believed to
be significant by school principals, because they invariably play a role in devel¬
oping teacher evaluation plans, observing and judging teachers (usually at the el¬
ementary and junior high level), and assigning supervisors to evaluate teachers’
performance (usually at the high school level). In a nationwide study of 202 sec¬
ondary schools selected for special recognition for effectiveness in educating
their students (conducted under the aegis of the U.S. Department of Education),
principals were asked to identify and rank the competencies they emphasized
with teachers.34 The top 11 competencies are presented in Table 2.5.
The five competencies most important to principals—task orientation, en¬
thusiasm and interest, direct instruction, pacing, and feedback—emphasize the
“active” dimension of teaching and businesslike behaviors. Principals of effec¬
tive schools expect their teachers to teach and in a way that can be observed and
measured. One might assume, however, that elementary principals might have
emphasized fewer task-oriented, explicit behaviors and more socially oriented
and humanistic behaviors.
In general, most measurements of teacher competence focus on minimal
competencies. According to Arthur Wise, the current executive director of the
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Evaluation, (NCATE), (a national
teacher education accrediting body), as school districts and administrators evalu¬
ate competencies of teachers, they spend “little time evaluating teachers who ap¬
pear to be competent.” Therefore, competent teachers often are not threatened by
the process and do not consider it useful. This does not mean that teacher com¬
petency instruments are invalid or unreliable measures, only that their present
utility is linked to identifying teacher incompetence. In some school districts, for
example, “the absence of minimal teaching competence, especially the inability
to manage the classroom, triggers remediation, probation, or intervention.”35
A further word of caution is needed. Many school districts (even entire
states such as Florida and North Carolina) have developed a specific list of
teacher competencies as a basis for appraisal and merit pay plans. Teachers who
Table 2.5 Principals’ Ranking of Effective Teacher Competencies
Rank of Importance Competency Definition
1 Task orientation The extent to which the classroom is businesslike, the students
spend .their time on academic subjects, and the teacher presents
clear goals to the students
2 Enthusiasm and interest The amount of the teacher’s vigor, power, and involvement
3 Direct instruction The extent to which the teacher sets and articulates the learning
goals, actively assesses student progress, and frequently makes
class presentations illustrating how to do assigned work
4 Pacing The extent to which the level of difficulty and the pace of the lesson
is appropriate for the students’ ability and interest
5 Feedback The extent to which the teacher provides the students with positive
or negative feedback
6 Management The extent to which the teacher is able to conduct the class without
instruction being interrupted
7 Questioning The extent to which the teacher asks questions at different levels
and adjusts them appropriately in the classroom
8 Instructional time The allocation of a period of time for a lesson adequate to cover the
material yet flexible enough to allow for the unexpected
9 Variability The amount of flexibility or adaptability of teaching methods; the
amount of extra material in the classroom
10 Structuring The extent to which the teacher directs instruction
11 Opportunity to learn The extent to which criterion material is covered in class

criterion material
Source: John W. Amn and John N. Mangieri, “Effective Leadership for Effective Schools: A Survey of Principal Attitudes,” NASSP Bulletin
(February 1988): 4. For more information concerning NASSP services and/or programs, please call (703) 860-0200.
do not exhibit explicit behaviors are often penalized, labeled as “marginal” or

“below standard,” and some lose their jobs. As you will see in Chapter 5, we
will argue that how you teach will be dictated by what (content) you plan to
teach. According to critics of the Florida System (Florida Performance Measure¬
ment System) and the North Carolina System (Teacher Performance and Assess¬
ment Instrument), these lists of competencies tend to reflect a narrow and behav-
iorist view of a “good” teacher and to ignore humanistic or affective behaviors
that also contribute to good teaching.36 The point is that competency indicators,
or for that matter any prescribed or close-ended evaluation instrument of teach¬
ers, must permit sufficient latitude to fit the context of varied teaching styles and
teaching behaviors. Teachers must be permitted to incorporate their own person¬
ality and philosophy of teaching, and they should not have to suppress effective
teaching behaviors that conflict with some “approved” appraisal instrument.
The Pathwise criteria and INTASC principles (which are used to ground
each of the skills in Chapters 3 to 11 of this text) are yet another manifestation
of the teacher competency approach. They are structured and grounded some¬
what differently than other competency-based systems, but they represent an ef¬
fort to reduce the teaching act to an essential set of teacher behaviors.
Despite potential limits in the competency approach, the national movement
for reform in education, coupled with the influence of the behaviorist movement
in psychology, has pushed for an appraisal system (Pathwise, INTASC, even

National Board certification) based on specific teacher competencies. Some
appraisal approaches also require a degree of willingness to give the teacher who
is being appraised the benefit of the doubt and a chance to remediate before
being terminated.
Teacher Effects
In this section we present research findings from the applied science literature,
organizing them around the researchers who popularized certain perspectives to¬
ward the research.
The Rosenshine and Furst Model

Teacher behavior research has shown that teacher behaviors, as well as spe¬
cific teaching principles and methods, make a difference to student achieve¬
ment. Rosenshine and Furst’s now-classic study analyzed some 42 correla¬
tional studies in their often-quoted review of process-product research. They
concluded that there are 11 teacher processes (behaviors or variables)
strongly and consistently related to products (outcomes or student achieve¬
ment). Positive outcomes were most strongly correlated with the first 5 teacher
processes:
1. Clarity of teacher’s presentation and ability to organize classroom activities

2. Variability of media, materials, and activities used by the teacher
3. Enthusiasm, defined in terms of the teacher’s movement, voice
inflection, and the like
4. Task orientation or businesslike teacher behaviors, structured routines,
and an academic focus
5. Student opportunity to learn, that is, the teacher’s coverage of the
material or content in class on which students are later tested37
The 6 remaining processes were classified as promising: use of student

ideas, justified criticism, use of structuring comments, appropriate questions in
terms of lower and higher cognitive level, probing or encouraging student elabo¬
ration, and challenging instructional materials.
Rosenshine himself later revised his conclusions; subsequent analysis
showed that only 2 behaviors or processes consistently correlated with student
achievement: (1) task orientation (later referred to as direct instruction) and
(2) opportunity to learn (later referred to as academic time, academic engaged
time, and content covered). On a third behavior, clarity, he wavered, pointing
out that it seemed to be a correlate of student achievement for students above the
fifth grade. The other 8 processes appeared to be less important, and they varied
in importance not only according to grade level, but also according to subject
matter, instructional groups and activities, and students’ social class and abili-
ties.38 Nevertheless, the original review remains a valuable study on how teacher
processes relate to student products or achievement.
More recently, Rosenshine summarized the important instructional ad¬
vances of the last thirty years and identified four key instructional procedures:
1. Providing procedural prompts

2. Teaching in small steps
3. Modeling the use of cognitive strategies
4. Directing and guiding student practice
The Gage Model

Nate Gage analyzed 49 process-product studies. He identified four clusters of
behaviors that show a strong relationship to student outcomes: (1) teacher indi¬
rectness, the willingness to accept student ideas and feelings, and the ability to
provide a healthy emotional climate; (2) teacher praise, support, and encourage¬
ment, use of humor to release tensions (but not at the expense of others), and at¬
tention to students’ needs; (3) teacher acceptance, clarifying, building, and de¬
veloping students’ ideas; and (4) teacher criticism, reprimanding students and
justifying authority. The relationship between the last cluster and outcome was
negative—where criticism occurred, student achievement was low.39 In effect,
the four clusters suggest the traditional notion of a democratic or warm teacher
(a model that has been emphasized for several decades).
From the evidence on teacher effects upon student achievement in reading
and mathematics in the elementary grades, Gage presented successful teaching
principles and methods that seem relevant for other grades as well. These strate¬
gies are summarized below. Bear in mind that they are commonsense strategies.
They apply to many grade levels, and most experienced teachers are familiar
with them. Nonetheless, they provide guidelines for education students or begin¬
ning teachers who say, “Just tell me how to teach.”
1. Teachers should have a system of rules that allow students to attend to then-
personal and procedural needs without having to check with the teacher.
2. Teachers should move around the room, monitoring students’ seatwork
and communicating an awareness of their behavior while also attending
to their academic needs.
3. Teachers should be sure that the assignments are interesting and
worthwhile, yet still easy enough to be completed by each student
without teacher direction.
4. Teachers should keep to a minimum such activities as giving directions
and organizing the class for instruction. Teachers can do this by writing
the daily schedule on the board and establishing general procedures so
students know where to go and what to do.
5. Teachers should call on volunteers and nonvolunteers by name before
asking questions to give all students a chance to answer and to alert the
student to be called upon.
6. Teachers should always aim at getting less academically oriented

students to give some kind of response to a question. Rephrasing, giving
clues, or asking leading questions can be useful techniques for bringing
forth some answer from a silent student, one who says “I don’t know,” or
one who answers incorrectly.
7. Teachers should give a maximum amount of brief feedback and provide
fast-paced activities of the “drill” type during reading group
instruction.40
The Good and Brophy Model
Over the last twenty years Tom Good and Jere Brophy have identified several
factors related to effective teaching and student learning. They focus on basic
principles of teaching, but not teacher behaviors or characteristics, because
both researchers contend that teachers today are looking more for principles
of teaching than for prescriptions. The principles they articulate would
include:
1. Clarity about instructional goals (objectives)

2. Knowledge about content and ways for teaching it
3. Variety in the use of teaching methods and media
4. “With-it-ness,” awareness of what is going on, alertness in monitoring
classroom activities
5. “Overlapping,” sustaining an activity while doing something else at the
same time
6. “Smoothness,” sustaining proper lesson pacing and group momentum,
not dwelling on minor points or wasting time dealing with individuals,
and focusing on all the students
7. Seatwork instructions and management that initiate and focus on
productive task engagement
8. Holding students accountable for learning, accepting responsibility for
student learning
9. Realistic expectations in line with student abilities and behaviors
10. Realistic praise, not praise for its own sake
IT Flexibility in planning and adapting classroom activities
12. Task orientation and businesslike behavior in the teacher
13. Monitoring of students’ understanding; providing appropriate feedback,
giving praise, asking questions
14. Providing student opportunity to learn what is to be tested
15. Making comments that help structure learning of knowledge and
concepts for students, helping students learn how to learn41
The fact that many of these behaviors are classroom management tech¬
niques and structured learning strategies suggests that good discipline is a pre¬
requisite for good teaching.
The Evertson and Emmer Model

The Carolyn Evertson and Ed Emmer model is similar to the Good and Brophy
model (in fact, Evertson has written several texts and articles with Brophy). The
models are similar in three ways: (1) Teacher effectiveness is associated with
specific teaching principles and methods; (2) organization and management of
instructional activities are stressed, and (3) findings and conclusions are based
primarily on process-product studies.
Evertson and Emmer identify effectiveness with raising student achieve¬
ment scores, and they focus much more exclusively on classroom management.
At the core of Evertson’s work with Emmer and, to a lesser extent, with Brophy,
are nine basic teaching principles:
1. Rules and procedures. Rules and procedures are established and

enforced, and students are monitored for compliance.
2. Consistency. Similar expectations are maintained for activities and
behavior at all times for all students. Inconsistency causes confusion in
students about what is acceptable.
3. Prompt management of inappropriate behavior. Inappropriate behavior
is attended to quickly to stop it and prevent its spread.
4. Checking student work. All student work, including seatwork, papers,
and homework, is corrected, errors are discussed, and feedback is
provided promptly.
5. Interactive teaching. This takes several forms and includes presenting
and explaining new materials, question sessions, discussions, checking
for student understanding, actively moving among students to correct
work, providing feedback, and, if necessary, reteaching materials.
6. Academic instruction, sometimes referred to as “academic learning time”
or “academic engaged time.” Attention is focused on the management of
student work.
7. Pacing. Information is presented at a rate appropriate to the students’
ability to comprehend it, not too rapidly or too slowly.
8. Transitions. Transitions from one activity to another are made rapidly,
with minimum confusion about what to do next.
9. Clarity. Lessons are presented logically and sequentially. Clarity is
enhanced by the use of instructional objectives and adequate illustrations
and by keeping in touch with students.42
The Master Teacher or Star Teacher

The national interest in education reform and excellence in teaching has focused
considerable attention on teachers and the notion of identifying “master” or “star”
teachers. The teaching behaviors suggested by the Rosenshine, Good, Brophy,
and Evertson models correspond with Walter Doyle’s task-oriented and business¬
like description of a master teacher. Such teachers “focus on academic goals,
are careful and explicit in structuring activities . . . promote high levels of
student academic involvement and content coverage, furnish opportunities for

controlled practice with feedback, hold students accountable for work, . . . have
expectations that they will be successful in helping students learn, [and are] ac¬
tive in explaining concepts and procedures, promoting meaning and purpose for
academic work, and monitoring comprehension.”43
When 641 elementary and secondary teachers were asked to “rate criteria
for recognition of a master teacher,” they listed in rank order: (1) knowledge of
subject matter, (2) encourages student achievement through positive reinforce¬
ment, (3) uses a variety of strategies and materials to meet the needs of all stu¬
dents, (4) maintains an organized and disciplined classroom, (5) stimulates stu¬
dents’ active participation in classroom activities, (6) maximizes student
instruction time, (7) has high expectations of student performance, and (8) fre¬
quently monitors student progress and provides feedback regarding perfor¬
mance.44
Although the sample of teachers was predominantly female (71 percent), so
that it can be argued that the recommended behaviors reflect female norms, it
must be noted that the teaching profession is predominantly female (somewhere
close to 70 percent). Most important, the teachers surveyed were experienced
(77 percent had been teaching for at least 11 years) and their rank-order list of
criteria corresponds closely to the principals’ rank-order list (see Table 2.5) and
to Doyle’s notion of a master teacher.
Based on a study of several hundreds of teachers who teach in multiracial
and multilinguistic schools, Martin Haberman (a man committed to urban edu¬
cation) produced a portrait of what he termed “star” urban teachers. This portrait
includes a host of behaviors and attitudes that are missing from what many edu¬
cators say make master or effective urban teachers.45 Star teachers develop an
ideology that is a pervasive way of believing and acting. These teachers do not
depend on decontextualized theory to guide their practice; they do not necessar¬
ily even reference their actions to the axioms or principles of Piaget, Skinner, or
Excellence in teaching
is recognized and
rewarded by
communities
nationwide.
the like. Star teachers might not even consider the research on teacher effective¬
ness or school effectiveness. However, many star teacher characteristics mirror
the qualities of effective teaching. Star teachers have internalized their own view
of teaching (a working theory), their own organization of subject matter (a con¬
tent framework), and their own practices through experience and self-discovery
(a personal pedagogy). Star teachers reflect on what they are doing in the class¬
room, why they are doing it, and the best way to do it. These teachers are also
guided by expectations that inner-city and poor children can learn, can think,
and do reflect. In many respects Haberman’s star teachers are like Gloria
Ladson-Billings’s culturally relevant teachers (see Table 2.2)—they are teachers
who view teaching as an art (not a strictly technical craft) and the classroom as a
community.
The Expert Teacher

The expert teacher concept involves new research procedures—such as simula¬
tions, videotapes, and case studies—and a new language to describe the work,
prestige, and authority of teachers.46 The research usually consists of small sam¬
ples and in-depth studies (the notion of complete lessons and analysis of what
transpired), in which expert (sometimes experienced) teachers are distinguished
from novice (sometimes beginning) teachers. Experts usually are identified
through administrator nominations, student achievement scores, or teacher
awards (e.g., Teacher of the Year). Novices commonly are selected from groups
of student teachers or first-year teachers.
The Science and Art of Teaching
Madeline Hunter*
University of California-Los Angeles
Teaching is both a science and an art. The science is Teaching in kindergarten or calculus, literature or
based on psychological research that identifies auto shop manifests the same elements of instructional
cause-effect relationships between teaching and effectiveness. Teachers need to learn the science of
learning. The art is how those relationships are im¬ pedagogy so they, in their own classrooms with their
plemented in successful and artistic teaching. own personalities, can implement it artistically.
All excellent teaching does not look the same but Teaching excellence is not a genetically endowed
it does contain the same basic psychological ele¬ power but a result of rigorous study and inspired
ments: In the same way, the Taj Mahal and the Lin¬ performance.
coln Memorial are very different in appearance but
they both commemorate a person, are made of mar¬
ble, and follow the same principles of aesthetics and ^Madeline Hunter died in the early 1990s, but her presence
engineering. is still felt throughout many American schools.
Dreyfus and Dreyfus delineate five stages, from novice to expert, across
fields of study. In stage 1, the novice teacher is inflexible and follows principles
and procedures the way she or he has learned them; the advanced beginner,
stage 2, begins to combine theory with on-the-job experiences. By stage 3, the
competent performer becomes more flexible and modifies principles and proce¬
dures to fit reality. In stage 4, the proficient performer recognizes patterns and
relationships and has a holistic understanding ot the processes involved. Experts,
stage 5, have the same big picture in mind but respond effortlessly and fluidly in
various situations.47 Cushing and her colleagues point out that “expert teachers
make classroom management and instruction look easy," although we know that
teaching is a complex act, requiring the teacher “to do many many things at the
same time.”48
Data derived from recent studies suggest that expert and novice teachers
teach, as well as perceive and analyze information about teaching, in different
ways. Whereas experts are able to explain and interpret classroom events,
novices provide detailed descriptions of what they did or saw, and refrain from
making interpretations. Experts recall or see multiple interactions, and explain
interactions in terms of prior information and events, whereas novices recall spe¬
cific facts about students or what happened in the classroom. Novices provide
literal and concrete descriptions of what occurred.
What experts (or experienced teachers) say or do about teaching is now
considered important for building a science of teaching. Studies of expert and
novice teachers show they differ in many specific areas of teaching and
instruction:
1. Experts are likely to refrain from making quick judgments about their
students and tend to rely on their own experiences and gut feelings,
whereas novices tend to lack confidence in their own judgments and are
not sure where to start when they begin teaching. For example, experts
look at student profiles left by previous teachers as reference material but
don't place too much stock in them. Novices consider the previous
teachers' comments on student information cards to be good starting
. points, even valid indicators of what to expect,49
2. Experts tend to analyze student cues in terms of instruction, whereas
novices analyze them in terms of classroom management. Expert
teachers assess student responses in terms of monitoring student
learning, providing feedback or assistance, and identifying ways
instruction can be improved. Novices fear loss of control in the
classroom. When given the opportunity to reassess their teaching on
videotape, they focus on cues they missed that deal with students’
inattentiveness or misbehavior. Although negative student cues appear to
be of equal importance to experts and novices, positive cues figure more
frequently in the discussion of expert teachers.50
3. Experts make the classroom their own, often changing the instructional
focus and methods of the previous teacher. Novices tend to follow the
previous teacher’s footsteps. Experts talk about stalling over and
breaking old routines; they tell us about how to get students going and
how to determine where the students are in terms of understanding
content. Novices, on the other hand, tend to begin where the previous
teacher left off. They have trouble assessing where the students are, what
their capabilities are, and how and where they are going.51
4. Experts engage in a good deal of intuitive and improvisational teaching.
They begin with a simple plan or outline and fill in the details as the
teaching-learning process unfolds, and as they respond to students.
Novices spend much more time planning, stay glued to the content, and
are less inclined to deviate or respond to students’ needs or interests
while the lesson is in progress.52
5. Experts seem to have a clear understanding of the types of students they
are teaching and how to teach them. In a sense, they seem to “know”
their students before they meet with them. Novices do not have a well-
developed idea of the students they are teaching. Whereas novices have
trouble beginning the new term, experts routinely find out just what it is
the students already know and proceed accordingly.53
6. Expert teachers are less egocentric and more confident about their
teaching. Novices pay more attention to themselves, worrying about their
effectiveness as teachers and about potential discipline problems.
Experts are willing to reflect on what they were doing, admit what they
did wrong, and comment about changes they would make. Although
novices recognize mistakes and contradictions in their teaching, they are
defensive about their mistakes and seem to have many self-concerns and
doubts about where and how to improve.54
For the casual observer it might seem that all teachers generally perform
the same way. Going beyond the data is the inference that star teachers, master
teachers, or expert teachers are different from the average; they have a well-
thought-out ideology that gives their performance a different meaning. They
appear to be “mavericks” (at least, atypical) and confident in the way they orga¬
nize and operate their own classrooms (Jaime Escalante was a pedagogical
maverick!). They are sensitive to their students and teach in ways that make
sense to their students, not necessarily according to what researchers or their
administrators and colleagues have to say about teaching. These teachers seem
to be driven by their own convictions of what is right, and not by how others
interpret the teacher’s role or teacher’s pedagogy.
Cautions and Criticisms

Although the notions of teacher competencies and teacher effectiveness are
often identified as something new in research efforts to identify good teaching,
they are nothing more than a combination of teaching principles and methods
that good teachers have been using for many years prior to this recent wave of
research. What these product-oriented researchers have accomplished is to
■j'
summarize what we have known for a long time, but often passed on in the form
of “tips for teachers” or practical suggestions that were once criticized by re¬
searchers as being recipe oriented. These researchers confirm the basic princi¬
ples and methods of experienced teachers. They give credibility to teaching
practices by correlating teacher behaviors (processes) to student achievement
(products). Product-oriented researchers also dispel the notion that teachers have
little or no measurable effect on student achievement.
However, there is some danger in this product-oriented research. The con¬
clusions overwhelmingly portray the effective teacher as task-oriented, orga¬
nized, and structured. But the teacher competency and teacher effectiveness
models tend to overlook the friendly, warm, and democratic teacher; the creative
teacher who is stimulating and imaginative; the dramatic teacher who bubbles
with energy and enthusiasm; the philosophical teacher who encourages students
to play with ideas and concepts; and the problem-solving teacher who requires
that students think out the answers. In the product-oriented researchers’ desire to
identify and prescribe behaviors that are measurable and quantifiable, they over¬
look the emotional, qualitative, and interpretive descriptions of classrooms, and
the joys of teaching. Most of their research has been conducted at the elementary
grade levels, where one would expect more social, psychological, and humanis¬
tic factors to be observed, recorded, and recommended as effective. A good por¬
tion of their work also deals with low achievers and at-risk students; perhaps this
is the reason many of their generalizations or principles coincide with tech¬
niques of classroom management, structure, and control.
The teacher effectiveness models also fail to consider that a good deal of ef¬
fective teaching might not directly correlate with student achievement. For one
famous philosopher of education, Maxine Greene, good teaching and learning
involve values, experiences, insights, imagination, and appreciation—the “stuff’
that cannot be easily observed or categorized. For her, teaching and learning are
an existential encounter, a philosophical process involving ideas and creative in¬
quiries, which cannot be readily quantified.55
Much of teaching involves caring, nurturing, and valuing behaviors—
attributes that are not easily assessed by evaluation instruments. Elliot Eisner, an
educator who emphasizes the artful elements of teaching, is concerned that what
is not measurable goes unnoticed in a product-oriented teaching model. By
breaking down the teaching act into dimensions and competencies and criteria
that can be defined operationally and quantified, educators overlook the hard-to-
measure aspects, such as the personal, humanistic, and playful aspects of teach¬
ing.56 To say that excellence in teaching requires measurable behaviors and out¬
comes is to miss a substantial part of teaching, what some educators refer to as
artistry, drama, tones, and flavor.57
Teacher behaviors that correlate with measurable outcomes often lead to
rote learning, “learning bits” and not wholes, to memorization and automatic re¬
sponses, not high-order learning. The new models also seem to miss moral and
ethical outcomes, as well as social, personal, and self-actualizing factors related
to learning and life—in effect, the affective domain of learning and the psychol¬
ogy of being human. In their attempt to observe and measure what teachers do,
and detail whether students improve their performance on reading or math

tests, these models ignore the learner’s imagination, fantasy, and intuitive
thinking—their dreams, hopes, and aspirations, and how teachers have an im¬
pact on these hard-to-define but very important aspects of students’ lives.
Learning experiences that deal with character, spiritual outlook, and philoso¬
phy are absent, too.58
The new and popular teacher competency and teacher effectiveness models
lock us into a narrow mold that misses many nuances of teaching. Many of these
prescriptions (which the researchers call principles) themselves are old ideas
bottled under new labels such as “with-it-ness,” “smoothness,” “clarity,” etc.
They seem to confirm what effective teachers have been doing for many years,
but the confirmation is needed so that beginning teachers have a better yardstick
or starting point.
Good teachers know, although they might not be able to prove it, that good
teaching is really about caring and sharing; the capacity to accept, understand,
and appreciate students on their terms and through their world; making students
feel good about themselves; having positive attitudes, and setting achievement
goals; and getting all fired up with enthusiasm and a cheerful presence.59 These
are basically fuzzy qualities that the scientific theories and paradigms of teach¬
ing tend to overlook. Indeed, teachers who place high priority on humanistic and
affective practices, and on the personal and social development of their students,
are not really interested in devoting much time to the empirical or behavioral lit¬
erature, or in teaching small pieces of information that can be measured and cor¬
related with their own teaching behaviors.
Teachers who are confident about themselves are not overly concerned
about their evaluation ratings, or even what the research has to say about their
teacher behaviors. How does the profession reconcile the fact that so many com¬
petent teachers consider teacher research as “irrelevant and counterintuitive” to
their own practice of teaching? Why do we often hear the complaint: “That’s all
good theory, but it does not work in practice.”
Teaching is a people industry, and people (especially young people) per¬
form best in places where they feel wanted and respected. To be sure, it is possi¬
ble for a teacher to “disengage” or “disinvite” students by belittling them, ignor¬
ing them, undercutting them, comparing them to other siblings or students, or
even “yessing” them (failing to hold them accountable for the right answer), and
still perform high on other discrete competencies or behaviors associated with
the teacher as a technician (“The teacher came to class on time.” “The teacher
checked homework on a regular basis.” “The teacher was clear about objectives
of the course.” “The teacher graded quizzes on a timely basis,” etc.). Such a
competency-based model, checklist, or behaviorist approach is very common as
we search for a research-based model of what a “good” teacher is. But it ignores
being part of a helping or caring profession, being a kind and generous teacher,
or working with students so they develop their own uniqueness. (See Tips for
Teachers 2.3.)
Research is now focusing on the learner, and on content, not just the behav¬
iors of the teacher; on the feelings and attitudes of the student, not only on
Reaching and Teaching Students
Most of the research on teacher competencies and Attitude

teacher effectiveness stresses direct and explicit in¬
1. Provide support, encouragement, and
structional techniques and overlooks attitudinal and
realistic praise.
motivational factors related to learning. Below are
some methods that deal with the human side of 2. Recognize good work, and provide
teaching children and youth. They have proven to be confirmation of success.
successful and complement and fill a void in the re¬ 3. Develop a class philosophy that each student
cent research on teaching, with special meaning for is worthwhile and can learn.
teaching at-risk students. 4. Help students build self-esteem, a sense of
responsibility, and self-respect.
Achievement 5. Help students clarify values, deal with

personal choices, and realize responsibility
1. Focus on teaching basic skills as well as for themselves and for learning.
higher cognitive functioning levels based
6. Involve students in school services and
on knowledge of the skills.
extracurricular activities to build self-
2. Develop individualization and self-pacing, confidence and group identification.
as well as mastery approaches to
7. Invite successful people to act as models and
learning.
to talk to students in class.
3. Recognize absolute achievement as well
8. Enforce classroom rules; instill a sense of
as individual improvement by
pride in the students and the classroom.
expanding achievement awards,
9. Involve students in real-life situations;
sending letters to parents, and
encourage them to deal with personal issues.
notifying school officials.
10. Use community resources by bringing
4. Involve parents in their children’s
learning. people into the schools and by taking
students on field trips.
5. Develop a peer-tutoring program
using classmates or upper-grade Source: Adapted from John V. Hamby, “How to Get an ‘A’ on
Your Dropout Prevention Report Card,” Educational Leadership
students. (February 1989): 21-28; Bettie B. Youngs, “The Phoenix
Curriculum,” Educational Leadership (February 1989): 24.
knowledge and skills (because feelings and attitudes will eventually determine
what knowledge and skills are sought after and acquired); and on long-term de¬
velopment and growth of the students, not only on short-term objectives or spe¬
cific tasks. But if teachers spend more time on the learner, on his or her feelings
and attitudes, and on the social or personal growth and development of their stu¬
dents, they might be penalized when cognitive outcomes (little pieces of infor¬
mation) are correlated with their teaching behaviors.
Students need to be encouraged and nurtured by their teachers, at all ages
and grade levels, but especially when they are young. They are dependent on ap-
proval from significant adults—first their parents, then their teachers. Parents
and teachers need to help young children and adolescents establish a source of
self-esteem by focusing on their strengths, supporting them, discouraging nega¬
tive self-talk, and helping them to take control of their lives and live by their
own values.60
People (including young people) with high self-esteem achieve at high lev¬
els; and the more one achieves, the better one feels about oneself. The opposite
is also true. Students who fail to master the subject matter get down on them¬
selves, and eventually give up. Students with low self-esteem give up quickly. In
short, student self-esteem and achievement are related, as are student self-esteem
and self-reliance.61 If we can nurture the students’ self-esteem, almost every¬
thing else will fall into place, including achievement scores and academic
outcomes.
This builds a strong argument for creating success experiences for students
to help them feel good about themselves. The long-term benefits are obvious.
The more students learn to like themselves, the more they will achieve; and the
more they achieve, the more they will like themselves. But that’s down the road;
that takes time, that’s nurturing for future benefits; that does not show up on a
classroom or standardized test within a semester or school year. It doesn’t help
the teacher who is being evaluated by a content-driven or test-driven school ad¬
ministrator. It certainly does not benefit the teacher who is being evaluated for
how many times she or he attended departmental meetings or whether the shades
in the classroom were even.
Most research on teaching is concerned with the present—with processes
and products that are measured in one term (or year) and by a standardized test
of cognitive (not affective) outcomes. Thus, one might conclude that the teacher
effectiveness research misses the main mark. Students need to engage in growth¬
enhancing experiences; and we need to recognize that the most effective teach¬
ers endow their students with a “you can do it” attitude, with good feelings
about themselves, which are indirectly and eventually related to cognitive
achievement. Though every teacher needs to demand high academic standards,
and teach the content, there needs to be understanding that the content interacts
with the process. If the process can be cultivated in a humanistic way, then the
outcomes of the content will be improved.62 It is possible in real classrooms for
this to occur. Jaime Escalante (Stand, and Deliver) did it at Garfield High School
with his calculus students and LouAnn Johnson (Dangerous Minds) did it with
her high school students.
Teachers need to incorporate specific teacher behaviors and methods ac¬
cording to their personalities, philosophies, and goals—to pick and choose from
a wide range of research and theory and to discard other teacher behaviors that
conflict with their style, without being considered ineffective. This process takes
time and reflection (What happened when I taught this material using direct in¬
struction? How could I improve the lesson?).
Certain behaviors contribute to good teaching, but there is little agreement
on exactly what behaviors or methods are most important. Some teachers will
learn most of the rules about “good” teaching, yet they will be unsuccessful.
Other teachers will break many of the rules of “good” teaching, yet they will be
profoundly successful. That’s what Jaime Escalante did. He broke certain
“rules,” but he did so only to benefit the students. Some teachers will gain theo¬
retical knowledge of “what works,” but they will be unable to put the ideas into
practice. Some teachers will act effortlessly in the classroom and others will
consider teaching a chore. All of this suggests that teaching cannot be described
in terms of a checklist or a precise model. Teaching is a holistic activity that
deals with whole people (not tiny behaviors or competencies) and how people
(teachers and students) develop and behave in a variety of classroom and school
settings.
Beyond Effective Teaching: New Research, New Paradigms

For the last fifty years or more, research on teacher behavior has been linear and
category-based: It has focused on specific teacher styles, interactions, character¬
istics, competencies, or effects. It has emphasized either the process of teaching
(how the teacher was behaving in the classroom) or the products of teaching
(that is student outcomes). As we enter the twenty-first century, the research on
teaching is examining the multifaceted nature and context of teaching; it exam¬
ines the relationship of teaching and learning, the subject matter knowledge of
the teacher, how knowledge is taught, and how it relates to pedagogy.
The new emphasis on teaching goes beyond what the teacher is doing and
explores teacher thinking from the perspective of teachers themselves. The
teacher is depicted as one who copes with a complex environment and simplifies
it, mainly through experience, by attending to a small number of important
tasks, and synthesizing various kinds of information that continuously evolves.
The impact of professional knowledge (that is, both subject matter and pedagog-
Research on teaching
goes beyond what
teachers and students
are doing and inquires
about what they are
thinking.
ical knowledge—knowing what you know, and how well you know it) is now
considered important for defining how teachers and students construct meaning
for their respective roles and perform tasks related to those roles.
An alternative for understanding the nature of teaching has evolved, one
that combines teaching and learning processes, incorporates holistic practices,
and goes beyond what teachers and students appear to be doing and inquires
about what they are thinking. This model relies on language and dialogue, and
not mathematical or statistical symbols, to provide the conceptual categories and
organize the data. It uses the approaches that reformers, reconceptualists, and
postliberal theoreticians have advocated—metaphors, stories, biographies and
autobiographies, conversations (with experts), and voices (or narratives). Such
research, which has surfaced within the last five to ten years, looks at teaching
“from the inside.” It focuses on the personal and practical knowledge of teach¬
ers, the culture of teaching, and the language and thoughts of teachers.
Metaphors
Teachers’ knowledge, including the way they speak about teaching, does not
exist only in propositional form (e.g., the “teacher should” type statements we
listed earlier in this chapter); it also includes figurative language or metaphors.
Teachers’ thinking consists of personal experiences, images, and jargon, and
therefore, figurative language is central to the expression and understanding of
the teachers’ knowledge of pedagogy.63
Metaphors of space and time figure in the teachers’ descriptions of their
work (e.g., “pacing a lesson,” “covering the content,” “moving on to the next
part of the lesson”).64 The studies on teacher style, examined in the earlier part
of the chapter, represent concepts and beliefs about teachers that can be consid¬
ered as metaphors: the teacher as a “boss,” “coach,” “comedian,” or “maverick.”
The notions of a “master” teacher, “lead” teacher, “star” teacher, “expert”
teacher, and so on, are also metaphors, or descriptors, used by current re¬
searchers to describe outstanding or effective teachers.
Using metaphors involves the way a person explains or interprets reality. In
traditional literature, this process of understanding evolves through experience
and study, without the influence of researchers’ personal or cultural biases. But
the use of metaphors also can be conceptualized in the literature of sociology to
include ideas, values, and behaviors that derive in part from a person’s position
within the political and economic order. Similarly, critical pedagogists and lib¬
eral theorists argue that personal and cultural factors, such as gender, class, and
caste, influence the formation of knowledge, especially metaphors.65
Stories
Increasingly, researchers are telling stories about teachers—about their work and
how they teach—and teachers are telling stories about their own teaching expe¬
riences. Indeed, some researchers are describing these stories as portraits, espe¬
cially when these portraits are intended to disclose something deeper about what
it means to be a teacher.66 Most stories are narrative and descriptive in nature;
a-
they are rich and voluminous in language, and those about teachers make a point
about teaching that would otherwise be difficult to convey with traditional re¬
search methods. The stories reflect the belief that there is much to learn from
“authentic” teachers who tell their stories about experiences they might other¬
wise keep to themselves.67
Stories have an important social or psychological meaning. Stories of teach¬
ers allow us to see connections between the practice of teaching and the human
side of teaching. The stories of individual teachers allow us to see their knowl¬
edge and skills enacted in the real work of classrooms, and lead us to appreciate
their emotional and moral encounters with the lives of the people they teach.
Stories by teachers such as Bel Kaufman, Herbert Kohl, Jonathan Kozol,
and Sylvia Ashton Warner have become best-sellers because of their rich de¬
scriptions, personal narratives, and the way they describe the very stuff of teach¬
ing. These stories are aesthetic and emotional landscapes of teaching and learn¬
ing that would be missed by a clinically based process-product research study of
teacher effectiveness, though some researchers criticize such personal stories for
lacking scholarly reliability and accuracy—flaws they see as grounded in ego¬
ism or exaggeration.
Stories of teachers by researchers are less descriptive, less emotional, and
less well known. Nevertheless, they are still personal and rich encounters of
teachers, and they provide us with teachers’ knowledge and experiences, not
quite on their own terms but in an in-depth way that helps us understand what
teaching is all about. These stories provide unusual opportunities to get to know
and respect teachers as persons—on an emotional as well as intellectual level.
Most important, these stories represent an important shift in the way researchers
are willing to convey teachers’ pedagogy and understanding of teaching.
Biographies and Autobiographies
Biography and autobiography try to encompass a “whole story” and represent

the full depth and breadth of a person’s experiences, as opposed to commentary
or fragments. Unity and wholeness emerge as a person brings past experience to
make present action meaningful—to make experiences understandable in terms
of what a person has undergone.68
The essence of an autobiography is that it provides an opportunity for peo¬
ple to convey what they know and have been doing for years, and what is inside
their heads, unshaped by others. (An example of such an autobiography, and one
well worth reading, is Sylvia Ashton Warner’s Teacher.)69 Whereas the biogra¬
phy is ultimately filtered and interpreted by a second party, autobiography per¬
mits the author, in this case the teacher, to present the information in his or her
own way and on his or her own terms.
As human beings, we all have stories to tell. Each person has a distinctive
biography or autobiography with a host of experiences and practices and a par¬
ticular standpoint or way of looking at the world. For teachers, this suggests a
particular set of teaching experiences and practices, as well as a particular style
of teaching and pedagogy.
A biography or autobiography of a teacher might be described as the life

story of one teacher, who is the central character, based in a particular classroom
or school, and the story of the classroom dynamics and school drama that unfold
around that individual. These types of stories are concerned with longitudinal as¬
pects of personal and professional experiences that can bring much detailed and
insightful information to the reader. They help us reconstruct teachers’ and stu¬
dents’ experiences that would not be available to us by reading typical profes¬
sional literature on teaching.70
The accounts in biographies such as Jay Mathews’s Escalante: The Best
Teacher in America or Lynley Hood’s Sylvia, which is a biography of Sylvia
Ashton Warner, suggest that the author is in a position of “authority” with re¬
spect to the particular segment of the life being described—hence the thoughts
and experiences of the author take on a sense of reality and objectivity not al¬
ways assumed in other stories.71 Biographies provide another view of the
teacher’s world. The question is: How accurate is that view?
Madeleine Grumet suggests a solution: Researchers should publish multiple
accounts of teachers’ knowledge and pedagogy, instead of a single narrative.
7*he problem is that this approach suggests taking stories out of the hands of
teachers 72
Voice
The notion of voice sums up the new linguistic tools for describing what teach¬
ers do, how they do it, and what they think when they are teaching. Voice corre¬
sponds with such terms as teacher’s perspective, teacher’s frame of reference,
and getting into the teacher’s head. The concern with voice permeates the
teacher empowerment movement and the work of researchers who collaborate
with teachers in teacher behavior projects. The idea should be considered against
the backdrop of previous teacher silence and impotence in deciding on issues
and practices that affect their lives as teachers. As Freeman Elbaz asserts, the
fact that researchers are now willing to give credibility to teachers’ knowledge,
teachers’ practices, and teachers’ experiences helps redress an imbalance which
in the past gave little recognition to teachers. The idea, now, is that teachers
have a right and role in speaking for teachers and about teaching 73
Although there have been some serious attempts to include teachers’ voices,
the key issue is to what extent these new methods permit the “authentic” expres¬
sion of teachers to influence the field of teacher behavior research and teacher
preparation programs. In the past, it has been difficult for teachers to establish a
voice, especially one that commanded respect and authority, in the professional
literature. The reason is simple: Researchers and theoreticians have dominated
the field of inquiry and decided on what should be published.
With the exception of autobiographies and stories written by teachers,
teachers’ voices generally are filtered through and categorized by researchers’
writings and publications. For decades, firsthand expressions of teacher experi¬
ences and wisdom fsometimes conveyed in the form of advice or recommenda¬
tions; were considered as nothing more than “cookbook recipes” or a list of “dos
and don’ts,” irrelevant to the world of research on teaching. Recently, however,

under umbrella terms such as teacher thinking, teacher processes, teacher cog¬
nition, teacher practices, and practical knowledge, it has become acceptable and
even fashionable to take what teachers have to say and adapt it and turn it into
“professional knowledge,” “pedagogical knowledge,” or “teacher knowledge.”
Yet although researchers are now collaborating with practitioners, taking teacher
views seriously, and sometimes accepting teachers on equal terms as part of
teacher training programs, teachers still do not always receive credit where it is
due. Whereas in scholarly publications researchers and practitioners are named
as co-authors, practitioners might be acknowledged only by pseudonyms such as
“Nancy” or “Thomas.” The culture of schools and universities, and of teachers
and professors, should be compatible enough to bridge this gap in the near
future.
We close this chapter with an example of one teacher’s voice. As you read
this passage, contrast the ideas with many of those we have captured in this
chapter. Also, notice what the author suggests is important that is not a part of
the research base on effective teaching.
The idea of the teacher as a flawless moral exemplar is a devilish trap for the teacher
as well as a burden for the child. I once had a pupil, Narciso, who was overburdened
by the perfection of adults, and especially, of teachers. His father demanded he be¬
lieve in this perfection as he demanded Narciso believe in and acquiesce to absolute
authority. It was impossible to approach the boy for his fear and deference. I had ter¬
rified him. He wouldn’t work or disobey. He existed frozen in silence. One day he
happened to pass by a bar. Some other teachers and I were sitting having beers. He
was crushed; teachers don’t do that. He believed so much in what his father and
some teachers wanted him to believe that his world collapsed. He stayed away from
school for a while, then returned. He smiled and I returned the smile. After a while
he was at ease in class and could be himself, delightful and defiant, sometimes bril¬
liant, often lazy, an individual reacting in his unique way to what happened in the
classroom.
Of course the teacher is a moral exemplar—an example of all the confusion,
hypocrisy, and indecision, of all the mistakes, as well as the triumphs, of moral man.
The children see all this, whatever they pretend to see. Therefore, to be more than an
example, to be an educator—someone capable of helping lead the child through the
labyrinth of life—the teacher must be honest with the children about his mistakes
and weaknesses; he must be able to say that he is wrong or sorry, that he hadn’t an¬
ticipated the results of his remarks and regretted them, or hadn’t understood what a
child meant. It is the teacher’s struggle to be moral that excites his pupils; it is hon¬
esty, not rightness, that moves children.74

Knowing the latest theories and research on teaching does not guarantee that you
will become a good teacher. The kind of teacher you become is to a large extent
influenced by whether you are honest about your own strengths and weaknesses,
and willing to make changes in your teaching. The questions below should help
you become more introspective about yourself, and hopefully more effective.
The questions are divided into three areas: students, subject, and self. The more
you answer yes, the better you have a chance to be effective.
Questions Related to Students
1. Do I respect and encourage diverse opinions among the students?

2. Am I considerate of my students’ thoughts and ideas?
3. Do I encourage students to take responsibility for their own work?
Questions Related to Subject
1. Do I allocate adequate learning time to the material students need to learn?

2. What “process” teaching behaviors appear to be most related to the actual
delivery of subject matter?
3. What “process” approaches need to be used to maximize students’ intrinsic
interests in subject matter?
Questions Related to Self
1. Which “process” teaching behaviors do you think you will have the most
difficulty exhibiting? Why?
2. What “process” teaching behaviors do you think learning-paradigm teachers
exhibit the most? The least? Which ones are instructional-paradigm teachers
least likely to exhibit?
3. What learning experiences have you had that most influenced your decision
to be a teacher?
Summary
1. Research on teacher behavior has looked at teacher styles, teacher-student
interactions, teacher characteristics, teacher competencies, and teacher effects.
2. Although much remains to be learned about successful teaching, research has
identified some teacher behaviors that seem to be effective and to influence
student performance.
3. Recent research on effective teaching has shifted from the process of teaching
to the products of teaching (i.e., are the students really learning?).
4. The classic, important research on teaching prior to the 1970s was the work
of A. S. Barr and David Ryans. These researchers focused on teacher styles,
teacher-student interactions, and teacher characteristics—that is, on the
process, what was happening in the classroom or the behavior of the teacher.
5. In the 1970s and 1980s, research on teaching was based on the work of Jere
Brophy, Walter Doyle, Carolyn Evertson, N. L. Gage, Thomas Good, and
Barak Rosenshine. Their research tended to focus on teacher effectiveness
and on the products or results of teaching on student achievement.
6. During the 1990s, two basic trends influenced research on teaching. One was
the nature of expertise in teaching and how expert and novice teachers differ
in approach and in seeing and analyzing classroom events. The second trend
promoted different forms of investigating teaching, based on language and
dialogue: metaphors, stories, biographies, autobiographies, expert opinions,
and voice.
1. How would you describe your teaching style?
2. What teacher characteristics and competencies listed in the tables of this
chapter seem most important to you? Why?
3. What behaviors listed by Brophy and Good and by Evertson and Emmer
coincide with your own teacher style? What behaviors seem to conflict with
your teacher style?
4. What makes an expert teacher an expert? How would you compare expert
teachers with novice teachers?
Things to Do
1. Recall three or four of your favorite teachers. Compare their teacher
characteristics, as you remember them, with the list of successful
characteristics compiled by Barr. Which characteristics on Barr’s list do you
think they possess?
2. Interview several experienced teachers concerning the recommended teacher
principles and methods of Rosenshine, Gage, Brophy, and Evertson. Do the
teachers support or reject the recommendations? What reservations do
teachers bring up? What do they like about the recommendations?
3. Observe two or three teachers (or professors) while they teach. What
characteristics discussed in this chapter do you see in this teaching? Defend
your reasoning.
Ellis, Arthur K., and Jeffrey T. Fouts. Research on Educational Innovation. Larchmont,
NY: Eye on Education, 1997. An excellent overview of the vast empirical data that
supports or contradicts current teaching practices.
Gage, Nathaniel L. The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching. New York: Teachers
College Press, Columbia University, 1978. A discussion of teacher effectiveness
studies, successful teaching strategies, and the notion of teaching as a “practical” art
with a scientific basis.
Good, Thomas L., and Jere E. Brophy. Looking in Classrooms, 7th ed. Reading, MA:
Addison-Wesley, 1997. An important book that helped move the field from the
study of teacher processes to the study of teacher products, and a convincing
argument that teachers do make a difference.
Jackson, Philip W. Life in Classrooms, 2nd ed. New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1990. Focusing on elementary classrooms, the author
discusses various aspects of classroom life and teaching.
Joyce, Bruce, and Marsha Weil. Models of Teaching, 5th ed. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon, 1996. A book that combines theory with practice and examines
various cognitive and behavioral teaching models.
Waxman, Hersholt C., and Herbert J. Walberg, eds. Effective Teaching. Berkeley, CA:
McCutchan, 1991. A book of readings that emphasizes process-product research
on teaching.
Key Terms
expert teacher 59 student products 54
master teacher 57 teacher characteristics 48
metaphors 67 teacher competencies 51
nonverbal communication 42 teacher processes 54
novice teacher 60 teacher-student interaction
self-fulfilling prophecies 44 voice 69
End Notes
1. Bruce J. Biddle and William J. Ellena, “The Integration of Teacher Effectiveness,” in
Contemporary Research on Teacher Effectiveness, ed. B. J. Biddle and W. J. Ellena
(New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1964), 3.
2. Allan C. Omstein, “Successful Teachers: Who They Are?” American School Board
Journal (January 1993): 24-27. Also see Phillip W. Jackson, Life in Classrooms, 2nd
ed. (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1990).
3. Homer Coker, Donald M. Medley, and Robert S. Soar, “How Valid Are Expert
Opinions About Effective Teachers?” Phi Delta Kappan (October 1980): 131-134,
149; Lee S. Schulman, “A Union of Insufficiencies: Strategies for Teacher
Assessment,” Educational Leadership (November 1988): 35-41.
4. Jere E. Brophy, “Classroom Management Techniques,” Education and Urban
Society (February 1986): 182-194; N. L. Gage and Margaret C. Needels, “Process-
Product Research on Teaching,” Elementary School Journal (January 1989):
253-300; and Richard S. Prawat, “Teacher Beliefs About Teaching and Learning,”
American Journal of Education (May 1992): 354-395.
5. Thomas L. Good, Bruce J. Biddle, and Jere E. Brophy, Teachers Make a Difference
(New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975); Allan C. Ornstein, “Theoretic Issues
Related to Teaching,” Education and Urban Society (November 1989): 96-105; and
Omstein, “A Look at Teacher Effectiveness Research: Theory and Practice,” NASSP
Bulletin (October 1990): 78-88.
6. Arno A. Bellack et al., The Language of the Classroom (New York: Teachers
College Press, Columbia University, 1966).
7. Ibid.
8. Othaniel Smith and Milton Meux, A Study of the Logic of Teaching, 2nd ed.
(Urbana: University of Illinois Press, 1970).
9. Ibid.
10. Miles L. Patterson, Nonverbal Behavior: A Functional Perspective (New York:
Springer-Verlag, 1983).
11. Aron W. Siegman and Stanley Feldstein, eds., Nonverbal Behavior and
Communication (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1987).
12. Pat Stephens and Jerry Valentine, “Assessing Principal Nonverbal Communication,”
Educational Research Quarterly (Winter 1986): 60-68.
13. Ibid.
14. Charles M. Galloway, “Nonverbal Communication,” Theory into Practice (December
1968): 172-175; Galloway, “Nonverbal Behavior and Teacher Student Relationships:
An Intercultural Perspective,” in Nonverbal Behavior: Perspectives, Applications,
Intercultural Insights, ed. A. Wolfgang (Toronto: Hogrefe, 1984), 411 —430.
15. Walter Doyle, “Classroom Organization and Management,” in Handbook of
Research on Teaching, 3rd ed., ed. M. C. Wittrock (New York: Macmillan, 1986),
392-431; Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Educational Psychology: A Realistic
Approach, 5th ed. (New York: Longman, 1994).
16. Kenneth B. Clark, Dark Ghetto (New York: Harper & Row, 1965).
17. Robert Rosenthal and Lenore Jacobsen, Pygmalion in the Classroom (New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968).
18. Robert Thorndike, “Review of Pygmalion in the Classroom,” American Educational
Research Journal (November 1968): 708-711.
19. Jere E. Brophy and Thomas L. Good, Teacher-Student Relationships (New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1974); Harris M. Cooper, “Pygmalion Grows Up: A
Model for Teacher Expectation Communication and Performance Influence,” Review
of Educational Research (Summer 1979): 389-410; Cooper and Good, Pygmalion
Grows Up (New York: Longman, 1983); and Thomas L. Good and Rhona G.
Weinstein, “Teacher Expectations: A Framework for Exploring Classrooms,” in
Improving Teaching, ed. K. Zumwalt (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision
and Curriculum Development, 1986), 63-85.
20. Dona M. Kagan, “How Schools Alienate Students at Risk,” Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1990): 105-125.
21. John U. Ogbu, “Variability in Minority School Performance: A Problem in Search of
an Explanation,” Anthropology and Education Quarterly (December 1987): 312-334;
Ogbu, “Understanding Cultural Diversity and Learning,” in Curriculum Issues, eds. A.
C. Omstein and L. Behar (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995): 349-366.
22. Henry Trueba, George Spindler, and Louise Spindler, What Do Anthropologists
Have to Say About Dropouts? (New York: Falmer Press, 1989): 20.
23. G. Williamson McDiarmid, “What to Do About Differences? A Study of
Multicultural Education for Teacher Trainees,” Journal of Teacher Education
(March-April 1992): 83-93; Stephen J. Trachtenberg, “Multiculturalism Can Be
Taught Only by Multicultural People,” Phi Delta Kappan (April 1990): 610-611.
24. Michael S. Knapp and Patrick M. Shields, “Reconceiving Academic Instruction for
the Children of Poverty,” Phi Delta Kappan 71 (June 1990) 752-758; Also, see
Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle, “Interrogating Cultural Diversity:
Inquiry and Action,” Journal of Teacher Education (March-April 1992): 104-115;
and Gary C. Wehlage and Robert A. Rutter, “Dropping Out: How Much Do Schools
Contribute to the Problem?” Teachers College Record (May 1986): 374-392.
25. Allan C. Ornstein, “Research on Teaching: Issues and Trends,” Journal of Teacher
Education (November-December 1985): 27-31; Ornstein, “A Look at Teacher
Effectiveness Research.”
26. Lee S. Shulman, “Paradigms and Research Programs in the Study of Teaching,” in
Handbook of Research on Teaching, 3rd ed., ed. M. C. Wittrock (New York:
Macmillan, 1986), 3-36; Shulman, “Ways of Seeing, Ways of Knowing: Ways of
Teaching, Ways of Learning About Teaching,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
(September-October 1991): 393-396.
27. A. S. Barr, “Characteristics of Successful Teachers,” Phi Delta Kappan (March
1958): 282-284.
28. David G. Ryans, Characteristics of Teachers (Washington, DC: American Council
of Education, 1960).
29. Bruce W. Tuckman, “Feedback and the Change Process,” Phi Delta Kappan
(January 1986): 341-344; Tuckman, “An Interpersonal Construct Model of
Teaching” (paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, Chicago, April 1991).
30. Bruce W. Tuckman, “The Interpersonal Teacher Model,” Educational Forum
(Winter 1995): 177-185.
31. Donald M. Medley, Homer Coker, and Robert S. Soar, Management-Based
Evaluation of Teacher Performance (New York: Longman, 1984).
32. Thomas Gibney and William Wiersma, “Using Profile Analysis for Student Teacher
Evaluation,” Journal of Teacher Evaluation (May-June 1986): 43.
33. Edgar Stones, Quality Teaching: A Sample of Cases (New York: Routledge &
Kegan Paul, 1992).
34. John W. Arnn and John N. Mangieri, “Effective Leadership for Effective Schools:
A Survey of Principal Attitudes,” NASSP Bulletin (February 1988): 1-7.
35. Arthur E. Wise et al., “Teacher Evaluation: A Study of Effective Practices,”
Elementary School Journal (September 1985): 94.
36. Joseph O. Milner, “Working Together for Better Teacher Evaluation,” Phi Delta
Kappan (June 1991): 788-789; Allan C. Ornstein, “The Evolving Teacher
Accountability Movement,” Peabody Journal of Education (spring 1988): 12-20.
37. Barak V. Rosenshine and Norma F. Furst, “Research in Teacher Performance Criteria,”
Research on Teacher Education, ed. B. O. Smith (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1971): 37-72; Rosenshine and Furst, “The Use of Direct Observation to Study
Teaching,” Second Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. R. M. Travers (Chicago:
Rand McNally, 1973): 122-183. Note that the first five processes also appear in Arnn
and Mangieri’s list of competencies (Table 2.7) but in different order of importance.
38. Barak V. Rosenshine, “Content, Time and Direct Instruction,” in Research on
Teaching: Concepts, Findings, and Implications, ed. Peterson and Walberg
(Berkeley, CA: McCutchen, 1979.): 28-56.
39. N. L. Gage, The Scientific Basis of the Art of Teaching (New York: Teachers College
Press, Columbia University, 1978).
40. Ibid. The author disagrees with item 5; see Chapter 5 on questioning.
41. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, “Teacher Behavior and Student Achievement,”
Macmillan, 1986), 328-375. Also see Andrew C. Porter and Jere Brophy, “Synthesis
of Research on Good Teaching,” Educational Leadership (May 1988): 74-85.
Brophy, Advances in Research on Teaching (Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1990).
42. Edmund T. Emmer, Carolyn M. Evertson, and Jere E. Brophy, “Stability of Teacher
Effects in Junior High Classrooms,” American Educational Research Journal
(Winter 1979): 71-75; Emmer et al., Classroom Management for Secondary
Schools, 4th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998); Evertson, “Do
Teachers Make a Difference?” Education and Urban Society (February 1986):
195-210; Evertson and Emmer, “Effective Management at the Beginning of the
School Year in Junior High Classes,” Journal of Educational Psychology (August
1982): 485^498; and Evertson et al., Classroom Management for Elementary
Teachers, 4th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
43. Walter Doyle, “Effective Teaching and the Concept of Master Teacher,” Elementary
School Journal (September 1985): 30. Also see Doyle, “Curriculum and Pedagogy,”
in Handbook of Research on Curriculum, ed. P. W. Jackson (New York: Macmillan,
1992), 486-516.
44. Jann E. Azumi and James L. Lerman, “Selecting and Rewarding Master Teachers,”
Elementary School Journal (November 1987): 197.
45. Martin Haberman, “The Pedagogy of Poverty Versus Good Teaching,” Phi Delta
Kappan (December 1991): 290-294; Haberman, “The Ideology of Star Teachers of
Children of Poverty,” Educational Horizons (Spring 1992): 125-129.
46. Robert Welker, “Reversing the Claim of Professional Status,” Educational Horizons
(Spring 1992): 115-119.
47. Hubert L. Dreyfus and Stuart E. Dreyfus, Mind Over Machine (New York: Free
Press, 1986).
48. Katherine S. Cushing, Donna S. Sabers, and David C. Berliner, “Investigations of
Expertise in Teaching,” Educational Horizons (Spring 1992): 109.
49. Kathy Carter, “The Place of Story in Research on Teaching,” Educational
Researcher (January 1993): 5-12; Donna S. Sabers, Katherine S. Cushing, and
David C. Berliner, “Differences Among Teachers in a Task Characterized by
Simultaneity, Multidimensionality, and Immediacy,” American Educational
Research Journal (Spring 1991): 63-88.
50. Cecil M. Clark and Penelope L. Peterson, “Teachers’ Thought Processes,” in
Handbook of Research on Teaching, ed. M. C. Wittrock (New York: Macmillan,
1986), 255-296; Donna M. Kagan and Deborah J. Tippins, “Helping Student Teachers
Attend to Student Cues,” Elementary School Journal (March 1991): 343-356.
51. Cushing, Sabers, and Berliner, “Investigations of Expertise in Teaching”; Carol
Livingston and Hilda Borko, “Expert-Novice Differences in Teaching,” Journal of
Teacher Education (July-August 1989): 36^-2.
52. Hilda Borko and Carol Livingston, “Cognition and Improvisation: Differences in
Mathematics Instruction by Expert and Novice Teachers,” American Educational
Research Journal (Winter 1989): 473-498. Kathy Carter, Walter Doyle, and Mark
Riney, “Expert-Novice Differences in Teaching,” in Teaching: Theory and
Practice, ed. Allan C. Ornstein (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995),
257-272.
53. James Calderhead, “The Nature and Growth of Knowledge in Student Teaching,”
Teaching and Teacher Education (April 1992), 531-535; Kathy L. Carter,
“Teachers’ Knowledge and Learning to Teach,” in Handbook of Research on
Teacher Education, ed. W. R. Houston (New York: Macmillan, 1990), 291-310.
54. Kagan and Tippins, “Helping Student Teachers Attend to Student Cues”; Terry M.
Wildman et al., “Promoting Reflective Practice Among Beginning and Experienced
Teachers,” in Encouraging Reflective Practice in Education, ed. R. T. Clift, W. R.
Houston, and M. C. Pugach (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia
University, 1990), 139-162.
55. Maxine Greene, “Philosophy and Teaching,” in Handbook of Research on Teaching,

ed. M. C. Wittrock (New York: Macmillan, 1986), 479-500; Greene, The Dialectic
of Teaching (New York: Teachers College, Columbia University Press, 1988).
56. Elliot W. Eisner, The Educational Imagination, 3rd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1993).
57. Allan C. Ornstein, “Theoretical Issues Related to Teaching.”
58. Ornstein, “Teacher Effectiveness Research: Theoretical Considerations,” in Effective
Teaching, ed. H. C. Waxman and H. J. Walberg (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1991),
63-80; Ornstein, “Research for Improving Teachers,” in Curriculum Issues, ed.
A. C. Ornstein and L. Behar (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995), 77-89.
59. Donald E. Langlois and Charlotte R. Zales, “Anatomy of a Top Teacher,” American
School Board Journal (August 1991): 44—46; Russell F. Proctor, Richard L. Weaver,
and Howard W. Cotrell, “Entertainment in the Classroom,” Educational Horizons
(Spring 1992): 146-152.
60. Judy Arin Krupp, “How Do You Feel About Yourself?” Teaching K-8 (January
1991): 63-68; T. R. Ellis, “Touch Therapy: When Hugging Helps,” Principal
(September 1990): 34-36.
61. Carol Ames, “Motivation: What Teachers Need to Know,” Teachers College Record
(Spring 1990): 409-421; Nancy A. Madden, “Success for All,” Phi Delta Kappan
(April 1991): 593-599.
62. Ornstein, “Teacher Effectiveness Research.”
63. Christopher Clark, “Real Lessons from Imaginary Teachers,” Journal of Curriculum
Studies (September-October 1991): 429—434; Donna M. Kagan, “Ways of Evaluating
Teacher Cognition,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1990): 419-469.
64. Hugh Munby, “A Qualitative Approach to the Study of Teachers’ Beliefs,” Journal
of Curriculum Studies (April-May 1986): 197-209.
65. James A. Banks, “The Canon Debate, Knowledge Construction, and Multicultural
Education,” Educational Researcher (June-July 1993): 4-14; Henry A. Giroux,
“Curriculum, Multiculturalism, and the Politics of Identity,” NASSP Bulletin
(December 1992): 1-11.
66. Sara Lawrence Lightfoot and Jessica Huffman Davis, The Art and Science of
Portraiture (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997).
67. Freeman Elbaz, “Research on Teacher’s Knowledge: The Evolution of a Discourse,”
Journal of Curriculum Studies (January-February 1991): 1-19.
68. Raymond Butt and Daniele Raymond, “Arguments for Using Qualitative
Approaches in Understanding Teacher Thinking: The Case for Biography,” Journal
of Curriculum Theorizing (Winter 1987): 62-93; Donna Kagan, “Research on
Teacher Cognition,” in Teaching: Theory and Practice, ed. A. C. Ornstein (Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995), 225-238.
69. Sylvia Ashton-Wamer, Teacher, reissue ed. (New York: Simon & Schuster Books, 1986).
70. Grace E. Grant, “Ways of Constructing Classroom Meaning: Two Stories About
Knowing and Seeing,” Journal of Curriculum Studies (September-October 1991):
397—408; John Solas, “Investigating Teacher and Student Thinking About the
Process of Teaching and Learning Using Autobiography and Repertory Grid,”
Review of Educational Research (Summer 1992): 205-225.
71. Elbaz, “Research on Teacher’s Knowledge”; Diane R. Wood, “Teaching Narratives:
A Source for Faculty Development and Evaluation,” Harvard Educational Review
(Winter 1992): 535-550.
72. Madeleine R. Grumet, “The Politics of Personal Knowledge,” Curriculum Inquiry
(Fall 1987): 319-329.
73. Elbaz, “Research on Teacher’s Knowledge.”
74. Herbert Kohl, Thirty-Six Children (New York: Plume, 1967): 25-26.
J
SECTION
I The Technical Skills

of Teaching
In the nine chapters that make up this section, we describe the technical skills
that are needed in order to use the science of teaching and move toward the art¬
ful practice of those skills. During the past several years, several organizations
have structured those skills around certain domains or principles of practice. We
selected two of those frameworks that have substantial importance: Pathwise,
which is used in several states as a form of teacher assessment and is part of the
Educational Testing Service’s PRAXIS Series, and the Interstate New Teacher
Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), which was developed and is
used by some thirty-five states as a way of creating standards for teaching prac¬
tice. We will use Pathwise criteria and INTASC principles to introduce each of
the skills of teaching. Provided below are the nineteen Pathwise assessment cri¬
teria (divided into four domains) and the ten INTASC principles.
As we introduce each technical skill of teaching, we will identify which
Pathwise or INTASC elements relate to each of the skills. If you are in a state
that uses either of these structures, this should help you relate our presentation of
the content with those larger assessment schema. Linda Darling-Hammond (a
major voice in teacher education reform) notes that teachers who are involved in
Pathwise or INTASC programs find that they enhance their professional devel¬
opment.* We use Pathwise criteria and INTASC principles to frame our presen¬
tation of teaching skills, with the hope that it will enhance your “connectedness”
to the skills.
*Linda Darling-Hammond, The Right to Learn (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997).
w
80 Section II The Technical Skills of Teaching
Pathwise Criteria
Domain A—Organizing Content Knowledge Domain B—Creating an Environment

for Student Learning for Student Learning
Al: Becoming familiar with relevant aspects of students’ B1: Creating a climate that promotes fairness
background knowledge and experiences
A2: Articulating clear learning goals for the lesson that are B2: Establishing and maintaining rapport with students
appropriate for the students
A3: Demonstrating an understanding of the connections B3: Communicating challenging learning expectations to
between the content that was learned previously, the each student
current content, and the content that remains to be
learned in the future
A4: Creating or selecting teaching methods, learning B4: Establishing and maintaining consistent standards of
activities, and instructional materials or other resources classroom behavior
that are appropriate for the students and that are aligned
with the goals of the lesson
A5: Creating or selecting evaluation strategies that are B5: Making the physical environment as safe and conducive to
appropriate for the students and that are aligned with the learning as possible
goals of the lesson
Domain C—Teaching for Student Learning Domain D—Teacher Professionalism
Cl: Making learning goals and instructional procedures Dl: Reflecting on the extent to which the learning goals
clear to students were met
C2: Making content comprehensible to students D2: Demonstrating a sense of efficacy
D3: Building professional relationships with colleagues to
share teaching insights and to coordinate learning
C3: Encouraging students to extend their thinking activities for students
D4: Communicating with parents or guardians about student
learning
C4: Monitoring students’ understanding of content through a
variety of means, providing feedback to students to
assist learning, and adjusting learning activities as the
situation demands
C5: Using instructional time effectively
Source: Teacher Performance Assessments: A Comparative View (Princeton, NJ: ETS, 1995).
INTASC Principles
Principle # 1: The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry,
and structures of the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning
experiences that make these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students.
Principle # 2: The teacher understands how children learn and develop, and
can provide learning opportunities that support their intellectual, social, and
personal development.
Principle # 3: The teacher understands how students differ in their
approaches to learning and creates instructional opportunities that are
adapted to diverse learners.
Section II The Technical Skills of Teaching 81
Principle # 4: The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional

strategies to encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem
solving, and performance skills.
Principle # 5: The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group
motivation and behavior to create a learning environment and encourages
positive social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-
motivation.
Principle # 6: The teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal,
and media communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration,
and supportive interaction in the classroom.
Principle # 7: The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of
subject matter, students, the community, and curriculum goals.
Principle # 8: The teacher understands and uses formal and informal
assessment strategies to evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual,
social and physical development of the learner.
Principle # 9: The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually
evaluates the effects of his/her choices and actions on others (students,
parents, and other professionals in the learning community) and who
actively seeks out opportunities to grow professionally.
Principle #10: The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues,
parents, and agencies in the larger community to support students’ learning
and well-being.
Source: Teacher Performance Assessments: A Comparative View (Princeton, NJ: ETS, 1995).
H A P T E R
Instructional Objectives
Pathwise Criteria Relevant to This Chapter

Becoming familiar with relevant aspects of students’ background knowledge
and experiences. (Al)
Articulating clear learning goals for the lesson that are appropriate for the
students. (A2)
Demonstrating an understanding of the connections between the content that
was learned previously, the current content, and the content that remains to be
learned in the future. (A3)
INTASC Principles Relevant to This Chapter

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of
the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make
these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. (Principle #1)
The teacher understands how children learn and develop, and can provide
learning opportunities that support their intellectual, social, and personal
development. (Principle #2)
The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning and
creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.
(Principle #3)
The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students,
the community, and curriculum goals. (Principle #7)
Focusing Questions
1. What should the schools teach?
2. How are aims, goals, and objectives formulated?
i/' 83
3. How do aims, goals, and objectives differ?

4. How would you characterize the approaches to writing objectives by the
following: Tyler, Bloom, Gronlund, and Mager?
5. How does each approach differ? In what way should teachers use enabling
objectives?
6. How specific should course objectives be? Classroom objectives?
The teacher who understands why and how to use instructional objectives can
more effectively teach and test. Instructional objectives help the teacher focus on
what students should know at the end of the lesson plan or unit plan (a series of
lessons related to a specific topic) and, likewise, help students know what is ex¬
pected of them. Instructional objectives help the teacher plan for teaching and
organize instruction; they identify what to teach and when to teach it, and thus
serve as a “map” or guide for both teachers and students. Instructional objectives
are stated in observable and measurable terms, and clarify whether what we in¬
tended was achieved or to what extent it was (or was not) achieved.
Aims, goals, and objectives are terms that can be defined in many ways. We
use the term aims to refer to broad statements about the intent of education.
They are value-laden statements, written by panels, commissions, or policymak¬
ing groups, that express a philosophy of education and concepts of the social
role of schools and the needs of children and youth. In short, they are broad
guides for translating the needs of society into educational policy. Aims, some¬
times called purposes, are written on a societal (or national) level. They are de¬
scriptive and vaguely written statements. For example, what does the phrase
preparing students for democratic citizenship mean? What do we have in mind
when we stress “citizenship preparation”?
Educators need to translate aims into statements that will describe what
schools are expected to accomplish (which is more focused than stating the pur¬
pose of education). These translations are called goals. Goals make it possible to
organize learning experiences in terms of what the state, school district, or
school decides to stress on a systemwide basis. In effect, goals are statements
that cut across subjects and grade levels and represent the entire school program.
Goals are more definite than aims, but they are still nonbehavioral and therefore
nonobservable and nonmeasurable. Goals provide direction for educators, but
they do not specify achievement levels or proficiency levels. Examples of goals
are “Development of reading skills,” “Appreciation of art,” and “Understanding
of mathematical/scientific concepts.” Goals are usually written by professional
associations and state educational agencies and local school districts to be pub¬
lished as school and curriculum guidelines for what all students should accom¬
plish over their entire school career. Historically, goals are developed at the
local, regional, or state level. A new movement proposes that one way of equal¬
izing opportunity is to nationalize goals for education.1
Objectives are descriptions of what eventually is to take place at a specific
subject or grade level and/or at the classroom level. They specify content and
sometimes the proficiency level to be attained. Objectives are stated in behavioral
terms. They state specific skills, tasks, content, and attitudes to be taught and
learned, and give teachers and students a standard by which to judge whether
they are achieving the objectives. According to Hilda Taba, a prominent educator
who influenced the nature of classroom teaching during the middle of the twenti¬
eth century, “The chief function of. . . objectives is to guide the making of . . .
decisions on what to cover, what to emphasize, and what content to select, and
what learning experiences to stress.”2 Because the possibilities of content, learn¬
ing, and teaching are endless, teachers face the problem of selection: What con¬
tent is most important? What learning activities are most appropriate? What unit
plan is most effective? Objectives supply criteria for these decisions, according to
Taba. No matter what its nature, the statement of objectives in terms of desired
outcomes “sets the scope and limits for what is to be taught and learned.”3
Naturally, objectives should be consistent with the overriding goals of the
school system and state and the general educational aims of society. Each
teacher, when planning for instruction, might contribute to these goals and aims
in a different way. Recalling our three examples of goals, we can now give ex¬
amples of objectives to be attained in their pursuit:
1. Goal: Development of reading skills. Objective: To identify the main

ideas of the author.
2. Goal: Appreciation of art. Objective: To recognize the paintings of
major artists.
3. Goal: Understanding of scientific concepts. Objective: To determine
how hydrogen and oxygen change to water.
The relationships among aims, goals, and objectives are shown in Figure 3.1.
Aims are the broadest, and objectives are the most specific. Objectives are further
divided into program, course, unit, and lesson plan objectives.
The Aims of Education

Aims are important statements that guide our schools and give educators direc¬
tion. However, we will discuss them only briefly because they are not written by
teachers. Perhaps the most widely accepted list of educational aims in the twen¬
tieth century was compiled by the Commission on the Reorganization of Sec¬
ondary Education in 1918. Its influential bulletin was entitled Cardinal Princi¬
ples of Secondary Education. The seven principles, or aims, designated by the
commission focused on (1) health, (2) command of the fundamentals, (3) worthy
home membership, (4) vocational education, (5) civic education, (6) worthy use
of leisure, and (7) ethical character.4
The commission’s work was the first statement of educational aims to ad¬
dress the need to assimilate immigrant children and to educate an industrial
workforce, reflecting events in the country at that period. The most important as¬
pect of the document is that it emphasized the need to educate all students for
“complete living,” not to educate only students headed for college and not to de¬
velop only cognitive abilities. It endorsed the concept of the whole child,
Figure 3.1 Level
Relationship between
National
educational aims,
goals, and objectives
and the appropriate
level of State
implementation. School District
School
School
Subject/Grade
Classroom
(School) (Subject/Grade) (Classroom) (Classroom)
meeting the various needs of students, and it provided a common ground for
teaching and enhancing American ideals and educating all citizens to function in
a democratic society. These aims are still relevant for all levels of education and
are still found today in one form or another in statements of educational aims.
For example, the report A Nation at Risk, compiled sixty-five years later by
a panel appointed by the Department of Education, indicated that the well-being
of the nation is being eroded by a rising tide of mediocrity. This mediocrity is
linked to the foundations of our educational institutions and is spilling over into
the workplace and other sectors of society.5 The report seeks to upgrade the cur¬
riculum (that is, command of the fundamentals) by improving basic skills for
young children, improving textbooks, increasing homework, strengthening high
school graduation requirements, and raising college admission requirements. It
also focuses on parental training for children’s early learning (overlapping with
worthy home membership) and improving adult literacy and the knowledge base
essential for a democratic and technological society (which coincides with civic
education and vocational education).
Goals
Goals tend to reflect the developmental needs of children and youth. According
to one educator, goals “are timeless, in the sense that no time is specified by
which the goals must be reached” and at the same time they “are not perma¬
nent,” in the sense that they “may be modified wherever necessary or desirable.”
Goals usually cut across subjects and grades and apply throughout the school.
They do not delineate specific items of content or corresponding activities.
Goals should be stated broadly enough “to be accepted at any level of the educa¬
tional enterprise,” but specifically enough to lead to desired outcomes.6
Increasingly, the schools are being burdened by the rest of society with
roles and responsibilities that other agencies and institutions no longer do well
or want to do.7 The schools are seen as ideal agents to solve the problems of the
nation, community, and home. Many people and groups refuse to admit to their
own responsibilities in helping children develop their capabilities and adjust to
society. More and more, the schools are being told that they must educate and
socialize all children, regardless of the initial input and support from home. The
schools might now be attempting to accomplish too many things and therefore
not be performing many of them effectively.
In preparing his classic 1979 Study of Schooling, John Goodlad surveyed
the school goals that had been published by state and local boards of education
across the country. From approximately 100 different statements of goals,
Goodlad constructed 12 that represent the spirit of the total list (Table 3.1). He
further defined each with subgoals and a rationale statement. The goals sum¬
marize what educators are expected to attend to and what they might be held
accountable for.
Another set of goals guiding American education are the Goals 2000,
which are a result of efforts by both President Bush and President Clinton.
Those goals are receiving a tremendous amount of press and are being regularly
assessed by educators (see Table 3.2). Progress toward meeting the goals is reg¬
ularly being assessed on a national level, which is what the information in
Table 3.2 documents. You can see whether progress can be characterized as
worse, better, or no change in relationship to baseline data collected several
years ago.
Goal 1: All children in the United States will start school ready to learn.
Goal 2: The high-school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent.
Table 3.1 John Goodlad’s Major Goals of American Schools
1. Mastery of basic skills or fundamental processes. In our technological civilization, an

individual’s ability to participate in the activities of society depends on mastery of these
fundamental processes.
2. Career or vocational education. An individual’s personal satisfaction in life is significantly
related to satisfaction with her or his job. Intelligent career decisions require knowledge of
personal aptitudes and interests in relation to career possibilities.
3. Intellectual development. As civilization has become more complex, people have had to rely
more heavily on their rational abilities. Full intellectual development of each member of society
is necessary.
4. Enculturation. Studies that illuminate our relationship with the past yield insights into our
society and its values; furthermore, these strengthen an individual’s sense of belonging, identity,
and direction for her or his own life.
5. Interpersonal relations. Schools should help every child to understand, appreciate, and value
persons belonging to social, cultural, and ethnic groups different from the child’s own and to
increase affiliation with and decrease alienation toward them.
6. Autonomy. Unless schools produce self-directed citizens, they have failed both society and the
individual. As society becomes more complex, demands on individuals multiply. Schools help
prepare children for a world of rapid change by developing in them the capacity to assume
responsibility for their own needs.
7. Citizenship. To counteract the present human ability to destroy humanity and the environment
requires citizen involvement in the political and social life of this country. A democracy can
survive only with the participation of its members.
8. Creativity and aesthetic perception. Abilities for creating new and meaningful things and
appreciating the creations of other human beings are essential both for personal self-realization
and for the benefit of society.
9. Self-concept. The self-concept of an individual serves as a reference point and feedback
mechanism for personal goals and aspirations. Factors for a healthy self-concept can be
provided by the school environment.
10. Emotional and physical well-being. Emotional stability and physical fitness are perceived as
necessary conditions for attaining the other goals, but they are also worthy ends in themselves.
11. Moral and ethical character. Development of the judgment needed to evaluate events and
phenomena as right or wrong and a commitment to truth, moral integrity, moral conduct, and a
desire to strengthen the moral fabric of society are the values manifested by this goal.
12. Self-realization. Efforts to develop a better self contribute to the development of a better society.
Source: John I. Goodlad, What Schools Are For (Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan, 1979), 44-52. Also see
Goodlad, A Place Called School (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984).
Goal 3: U.S. students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated

competency in a range of challenging subject matter that includes English,
mathematics, science, history, and geography; and every school in the
United States will ensure that all students learn to use their minds well, so
that they may be prepared for responsible citizenship, further learning, and
productive employment in our modem economy.
Goal 4: U.S. students will be first in the world in science and mathematics
achievement.
Goal 5: Every adult American will be literate and will possess the
knowledge and skills necessary to compete in a global economy and
exercise the rights and responsibilities of citizenship.
Goal 6: Every U.S. school will be free of drugs, unauthorized firearms, alcohol,
and violence and will offer a disciplined environment conducive to learning.
Goal 7: The nation’s teaching force will have access to programs for the
continued improvement of their professional skills and will be given the
opportunity to acquire the knowledge and instructional skills needed for the
next century.
Goal 8: Every school will foster partnerships that will increase parental
involvement and participation in promoting social, emotional and academic
growth of children.8
Most schools, however, put more emphasis on cognitive and intellectual goals,
especially at the secondary school level, and usually give lip service to moral and
ethical considerations. In fact, in those instances where goals have become too ori¬
ented toward moral outcomes, the results have sometimes resulted in controversy.
The goals for elementary schools tend to treat the whole child and pro¬
vide more balance with cognitive, personal, and social growth and develop¬
ment. A number of schools are becoming increasingly concerned with and
formulating goals pertaining to social, multicultural, and global understand¬
ing, but the debate about how far schools should go in teaching affective
goals, especially as they relate to moral and ethical considerations, is a topic
of heated debate.9
When we formulate our goals, we might ask the following questions: To
what extent should our schools emphasize the needs of society and the needs of
the individual? Should schools emphasize excellence or equality? Should we put
equal emphasis on academic, vocational, and general education? Should we put
more emphasis on cognitive learning or humanistic learning? Which is more
important—national commitment or a higher morality? Should we educate stu¬
dents to their own ability level (and for some, that might only mean an eighth-
grade education) or should we push students beyond their aptitude and achieve¬
ment level? How should we apportion money to be spent on talented and gifted
students, average students, and students with disabilities? How do we compare
the payoff to society and the obligations of society in educating different student
populations?
These questions are tough and complicated. Educators disagree about
the answers. Indeed, the way we answer these questions both reflects and de¬
termines the kind of people we are. Most people in this country readily say
they believe in democracy, but how they answer these questions determines
what democracy means and how it affects and controls our lives. Trying to
resolve these questions, at least in this country, ideally involves a balancing
act—balancing moral and legal restraints with political and economic con¬
siderations, and balancing the needs of the group with the rights of the
individual.
Increasingly, school districts are strategically outlining specific goals for their
learners. One of the most forward thinking of these endeavors is the effort of the
Alameda Unified School District to outline a profile of graduates for the year 2004.
The Alameda Graduate Profile describes specific outcomes for graduates, including
specific personal qualities, work habits, and attitudes. The district also outlines the
Table 3.2 Progress Report on National Education Goals
Since 1989, the nation has been working toward the achievement of national education goals crafted
by Presidents Bush and Clinton and the nation’s governors. Following are measures of those goals
that schools, students, educators, and policymakers were expected to meet by 2000. As indicated,
the nation has made progress in some areas, but no measurable headway in others.
Goal 1 Ready to Learn Baseline Update Progress

All children in America will start school ready to learn.
Children’s Health Index: Has the U.S. reduced the percentage of infants born with
1 or more health risks? (1990 vs. 1996). 37% 34% Better
Immunizations: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of 2-year-olds who have been
fully immunized against preventable childhood diseases? (1994 vs. 1997). 75% 78% Better
Family-Child Reading and Storytelling: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of 3- to 5-year-olds
whose parents read to them or tell them stories regularly? (1993 vs. 1996) . 66% 72% Better
Preschool Participation: Has the U.S. reduced the gap (in percentage points) in preschool participation
between 3- to 5-year-olds from high- and low-income families? (1991 vs. 1996) . 26 points 29 points* No change
Goal 2 School Completion

The high school graduation rate will increase to at least 90 percent.
High School Completion: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of 18- to 24-year-olds who have a
high school credential? (1990 vs. 1997). 86% 86% No change
Goal 3 Student Achievement and Citizenship

All students will leave grades 4, 8, and 12 having demonstrated competency over challenging subject matter including English, mathematics, science,
foreign languages, civics and government, economics, arts, history, and geography.
Reading Achievement: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who meet the goals panel’s performance standard in reading? (1992 vs.
1994)
• Grade 4. 29% 30%* No change
• Grade 8. 29% 30%* No change
• Grade 12. 40% 36% Worse
Writing Achievement: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who can produce basic, extended, developed, or elaborated responses to
narrative writing tasks? (1992)
• Grade 4. 55%
• Grade 8. 78%
• Grade 12
Mathematics Achievement: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who meet the goals panel’s performance standard in mathematics?
(1990 vs. 1996)
• Grade 4 ..... . .... 13% 21% Better
• Grade 8... 15% 24% Better
• Grade 12... 12% 16% Better
Science Achievement: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who meet the goals panel’s performance standard in science? (1996)
• Grade 4. 29%
• Grade 8. 29%
• Grade 12. 21%
History Achievement: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who meet the goals panel’s performance standard in U.S. history? (1994)
• Grade 4. 17%
• Grade 8. 14%
• Grade 12. 11%
Geography: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of students who meet the goals panel’s performance standard in geography? (1994)
• Grade 4. 22%
• Grade 8. 28%
• Grade 12. 27%
Goal 4 Teacher Education and Professional Development

The nation’s teaching force will have access to programs for the continued improvement of their
professional skills and the opportunity to acquire the knowledge and skills needed to instruct and
prepare all American students for the next century.
Teacher Preparation: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of secondary school teachers who hold
an undergraduate or graduate degree in their main teaching assignment? (1991 vs. 1994). 66% 63% Worse
Teacher Professional Development: Has the U.S. increased
the percentage of teachers reporting that they participated
in professional-development programs on one or more topics since
the end of the previous school year? (1994). 85%
Goal 5 Mathematics and Science Baseline Update Progress
United States students will be first in the world in mathematics and science achievement.
International Mathematics Achievement: Has the U.S. improved its standing on international
mathematics assessments? (1996)
• Grade 4. 7 out of 25 countries scored above the U.S.
International Science Achievement: Has the U.S. improved its standing on international science
assessments? (1996)
• Grade 12.,,. 11 out of 20 countries scored above the U.S.
Mathematics and Science Degrees: Has the U.S. increased mathematics and science degrees (as a
percentage of all degrees) awarded to:
• all students? (1991 vs. 1995) . 39% 42% Better
• minorities (Blacks, Hispanics, American Indians/Alaskan Natives)? (1991 vs. 1995) . 39% 40% Better
• females? (1991 vs. 1995). 35% 37% Better
Goal 6 Adult Literacy and Lifelong Learning

Every adult will be literate and possess the knowledge to compete in a global economy and exercise
the responsibilities of citizenship.
Adult Literacy: Has the U.S. increased the percentage of adults who score at or above Level 3 in
prose literacy? (1992). 52%
Participation in Adult Education: Has the U.S. reduced the gap (in percentage points) in adult-
education participation between adults who have a high school diploma or less and those who have
additional postsecondary education or technical training? (1991 vs. 1995). 27 points 32 points Worse
Participation in Higher Education: Has the U.S. reduced the gap (in percentage points) between
white and black high school graduates who:
• enroll in college? (1990 vs. 1996) . 14 points 11 points* * No change
• complete a college degree? (1992 vs. 1997) . 16 points 21 points Worse
Has the U.S. reduced the gap (in percentage points) between white and Hispanic high school
graduates who:
• enroll in college? (1990 vs. 1996) . 11 points 9 points* No change
• complete a college degree? (1992 vs. 1997) . 15 points 17 points* No change
Goal 7 Safe, Disciplined, and Alcohol- and Drug-free Schools

Every U.S. school will be free of drugs, violence, and the unauthorized presence of firearms and alcohol.
Overall Student Drug and Alcohol Use: Has the U.S. reduced the percentage of 10th graders
reporting doing the following during the previous year:
• using any illicit drug? (1991 vs. 1997). 24% 40% Worse
• using alcohol? (1993 vs. 1997). 63% 65%* No change
Sale of Drugs at School: Has the U.S. reduced the percentage of 10th graders reporting that someone
offered to sell or give them an illegal drug at school during the previous year? (1992 vs. 1997). 18% 33% Worse
Student and Teacher Victimization: Has the U.S. reduced the percentage of students and teachers
reporting that they were threatened or injured at school during the previous year?
• 10th grade students? (1991 vs. 1997). 40% 33% Better
• public school teachers? (1991 vs. 1994) . 10% 15% Worse
Disruptions in Class by Students: Has the U.S. reduced the percentage of students and teachers
reporting that student disruptions interfere with teaching and learning?
• 10th grade students? (1991 vs. 1997). 17% 18%* No change
• public school teachers? (1991 vs. 1994) . 37% 46% Worse
Goal 8 Parental Participation

Every school will promote partnerships that will increase parental involvement and participation in
promoting the growth of children.
Schools’ Reports of Parent Attendance at Parent-Teacher Conferences: Has the U.S. increased
the percentage of K-8 public schools which reported that more than half of their parents attended
parent-teacher conferences during the school year? (1996). 78%
Schools’ Reports of Parent Involvement in School Policy Decisions: Has the U.S. increased the
percentage of K-8 public schools which reported that parent input is considered when making
policy decisions in three or more areas? (1996). 41%
Parents’ Reports of Their Involvement in School Activities: Has the U.S. increased the percentage
of students in grades 3-12 whose parents reported that they participated in two or more activities in their
child’s school during the current year? (1993 vs. 1996). 63% 62%* No change
—Data not available.

*Change considered not statistically significant.
Source: National Education Goals Panel and Education Week, January 13, 1999, p. 29. Reprinted with permission from Education Week.
Table 3.3 New Basics: Alameda Unified School District
A. Communication and Languages—Has a functional command of the standard English language

and communicates competently in at least one other language.
B. Reading—Understands, interprets, and appreciates written information in literature, in prose, and
in documents and constructs meaning from a variety of materials.
C. Writing—Communicates thoughts, ideas, information, and messages responsibly, clearly, and
eloquently in writing in a form that is grammatically correct.
D. Arithmetic/Mathematics—Performs basic computations, and approaches practical problems by
choosing appropriately from a variety of mathematical techniques. Communicates and thinks
mathematically with confidence and enthusiasm.
E. Listening—Receives, attends to, interprets, and responds to verbal messages and other forms of
communication.
F. Speaking—Organizes thoughts and communicates ideas, knowledge, and information through
fluent, responsible speech.
G. Historical, Social, and Global Awareness—Knows how the American society, political systems,
and economy function within a global context; understands and appreciates the diversity in
America and in the world community; knows the general shape of world history and the specific
history of the United States.
H. Geography—Applies locational skills and knowledge of geography to practical situations and
current issues.
I. Civics—Understands the political institutions and processes, civil rights and justice in a free
society and participates as a responsible citizen in a democracy.
J. Fitness and Health—Applies nutritional, hygienic, and physical knowledge to maintain health; is
free from substance abuse.
K. Arts—Develops appreciation and use of the arts and media as an expressive tool and a way to
enrich life.
L. Science—Understands how things work and the underlying scientific principles; applies the
scientific method to everyday life.
Source: Alameda Unified School District, Graduate in the Year 2004 Profile (Alameda, California, 1998).
Author note: The school district is missing a goal related to computer/technology.
“basics” of what students need to know when they graduate (see Table 3.3). Those
basics will shape what and how teachers teach, and what and how students learn.
In addition, some states, such as North Carolina and Texas, are carefully
outlining goals and aligning textbooks (with those goals) that are used by school
districts. The alignment is a necessary way of ensuring that all students learn
what they must learn, and the result in states where this alignment occurs sug¬
gest that it does have a positive influence on student achievement, especially if
the state is involved in some form of high-stakes, statewide testing.
In essence, depending on where you teach, you will find a different primary
source for learning goals. Our hope is that regardless of where you teach, you
will know that good teaching requires a clear sense of what you want to achieve
and of what students need to learn.
Types of Objectives
Instructional objectives help the teacher focus on what students should know at
the end of a lesson, unit, or course, and also help students know what is expected
Goal Setting
Herbert J. Walberg
Research Professorof Education
University of Illinois at Chicago
Part of my academic heritage came from Benjamin “higher thought processes.” Through long-term re¬
Bloom and his teacher Ralph Tyler—both professors search, Bloom tried to find the best conditions of goal
at the University of Chicago and among the most in¬ attainment not only in ordinary classrooms but in
fluential and eminent educational thinkers of the sports, intellectual competitions, and the professions.
20th century. Writing on curriculum, Tyler identified His work extended Tyler’s thinking by showing that
goals, learning activities, and evaluation as the es¬ challenging goals, effort and time, encouraging parents,
sential components of teaching. He argued that for friendly but demanding teachers, and accurate feedback
efficient learning, goals should be clear; learning ex¬ on progress are the common ingredients of success.
periences should be carefully chosen to match the An environmentalist, Bloom argued that, given
goals; and that evaluation should be employed to as¬ such ideal conditions, any child can learn anything
sess the degree of goal attainment. any other child can learn. Although this argument
Bloom kept Tyler’s portrait in his office where I may claim too much, it had the useful consequence
used to meet with him. As an educational psychologist, of challenging educators to seek higher standards for
Bloom spent several decades working out ways of set¬ children’s learning. Following Tyler and Bloom,
ting learning goals and finding the best conditions for subsequent research showed that extraordinarily ac¬
their attainment. In what is referred to as “Bloom’s tax¬ complished adults set their own high standards and
onomy,” he specified six levels of cognitive learning goals. Even young children, however, can learn how
which encouraged educators to teach not merely factual to set their own goals, concentrate their time on at¬
knowledge but also analysis, synthesis, and other taining them, and measure their progress.
of them. They help the teacher plan and organize instruction by identifying what
is to be taught and when it is to be taught. Instructional objectives are stated in
observable and measurable terms (outcomes, proficiencies, or competencies).
Their specificity enables the teacher to determine whether what was intended
was achieved, and to what extent.
When we move from goals to instructional objectives, the role and responsi¬
bility of the teacher become evident. Objectives are behavioral in nature and are
more precise than goals. They are formulated on three levels with increasing
specificity: program, course, and classroom. Objectives at the classroom level
can be further divided into unit plan and lesson plan objectives.
Program Objectives
Program objectives stem from the goals of the school or school district and are
written at the subject and grade level. Although they do not usually state specific
content or competencies, they do focus on general content and behaviors. Like
goals, they refer to the accomplishments of all students, rather than to those of
individual students.10
Nearly every state and school district has an overview or set of program ob¬
jectives at the subject and grade level to facilitate what teachers should be teach¬
ing. In most cases these instructional objectives are formulated by curriculum
committees made up of administrative, teacher, and community (or parent)
groups. Table 3.4 provides a detailed list of the instructional objectives for math¬
ematics in one major midwestern city. The table helps the reader envision pro-
Table 3.4 Dayton Public Schools Mathematics Curriculum, Grade 5

Sample Strands, Goals, General Objectives, and Specific Objectives
Strand 1: Patterns, Relations and Functions Specific Objectives
The student will be able to . . .

1. investigate patterns that occur when changing numerators 1 A. (Knowledge/Skill) Given five fraction or decimal
and denominators in equivalent fractions and describe patterns the student will be able to complete each pattern
these patterns verbally. to 70% accuracy.
Strand 2: Problem-Solving Strategies Specific Objectives

2. read a problem carefully and identify subgoals that need 2B. (Concept) The students will demonstrate understanding
to be attained in order to solve the problem. of the concept of problem solving by solving four word
problems and explaining the steps taken to achieve their
answer.
Strand 3: Numbers and Number Relation Specific Objectives

3. multiply and divide decimals. 3A. (Knowledge/Skills) Given five multiplication and five
division problems the student will calculate accurately
the solutions to 70% accuracy.
4. find equivalent fractions. 4A. (Knowledge/Skills) Given ten fractional equivalency
problems the student will correctly identify and provide
a missing numerator and write equivalent fractions to
70% accuracy.
6. order combinations of whole numbers, fractions, and 6A. (Knowledge/Skills) Given four graphing problems the
decimals using the symbols, <, <, >, >, and = and by student will be able to order combinations of whole
placing them on the number line. numbers, fractions, and decimals and place them on a
number line to 70% accuracy.
Strand 4: Geometry Specific Objectives

1. compare and contrast angles in relation to right angles. 1 A. (Knowledge/Skills) Given a set of six angles the student
will use a right angle to determine if the angles are
obtuse or acute to 70% accuracy.
4. build models of previously encountered shapes and 4B. (Concept) The student will demonstrate understanding of
figures and describe the process in words. the concept of geometric figures by using pattern blocks
and geoboards and explaining in words how they were
constructed.
Source: Excepts from Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice by Hilda Taba and Willard B. Spalding, Copyright © 1962 by Harcourt, Inc.
and renewed 1990 by Margaret A. Spalding, reprinted by permission of the publisher.
gram objectives on a vertical and horizontal basis. The Dayton curriculum also
illustrates how school district curricula are being structured to conform to both
state mandates and national professional association (in this case, National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics) guidelines.
Course Objectives
Course objectives are derived from program objectives and are formulated at the
subject or departmental level. They categorize and organize content and some¬
times concepts, problems, or behaviors, but do not specify the exact content to be
examined or exact instructional methods and materials to be used. Course objec¬
tives are stated in the form of topics, concepts, or general behaviors.
Objectives stated as topics for an American history course might be “The
Colonial Period,” “The Revolutionary Period,” “The Framing of the Constitu¬
tion,” “Manifest Destiny,” “The Civil War Period,” “The Reconstruction Period,”
“Industrialization and Colonialization,” “Immigration and Nationalism,” and
“World War I.” Objectives stated as concepts for a science course might be “Sci¬
ence and Knowledge,” “Science and Method,” “Science and Humanity,” “Sci¬
ence and Environment,” “Science, Products, and Technology,” and “Science and
Space.” Examples of objectives stated as general behaviors (which are not easy to
measure or observe) might be phrased “To develop critical thinking in . . .,”
“To increase understanding of. . .,” and “To have experience for. ...”
Course objectives (as well as program objectives) help the teacher organize
the content in terms of scope (topics, concepts, behaviors to be covered), conti¬
nuity (recurring and continuing opportunity to teach important content and prac¬
tice certain skills and tasks), sequence (cumulative development or successive
treatment of topics, concepts, or behaviors that build upon preceding ones), and
integration (relationships of content in one course to content in another
course).11
Classroom Objectives
Classroom objectives are usually formulated by the teacher. Classroom objec¬
tives divide course objectives into several units. Unit plan objectives usually en¬
compass one to three weeks of instruction, organized in a sequence and corre¬
sponding to expectations for the entire class, not for particular individuals or
groups. Unit plan objectives are then further divided to create lesson plan objec¬
tives, organized ideally around one day of instruction on a particular subject.
Unit plan objectives are usually categorized into topics or concepts. Recall
the history course objective, “The Framing of the Constitution.” This topic
might be divided into the following units: “To understand the system of Ameri¬
can government,” “To comprehend the rights of American citizens,” “To iden¬
tify characteristics of a democratic society,” and “To apply the principles of
American government to classroom and school activities.”
The science objective, written as a concept, “Science and Method,” might
be broken down into the following unit plan objectives: “To organize inductive,
deductive, and intuitive methods in answering questions about the (a) biological
world, (b) chemical world, and (c) physical world;” “To organize scientific in¬
formation according to (a) logic, (b) explanations, (c) causal relations, (d) hy¬
potheses, and (e) projections”; “To acquire the methods of (a) inquiry, (b) exper¬
imentation, and (c) problem solving”; and “To show interest in scientific
hobbies or projects.”
Unit plan objectives are sometimes called general instructional objectives.
They should be specific enough to provide direction for instruction, but not so
specific that they restrict the teacher’s selection of instructional methods, materi¬
als, and activities. Almost any appropriate instructional technique—lectures, dis¬
cussions, demonstrations, laboratory work, textbook assignments, additional
readings—might be used to achieve the unit plan objectives. If you are in a state
that utilizes INTASC or PRAXIS, you will be required to perform certain plan¬
ning tasks—see the beginning of this chapter for the specific criteria (Pathwise)
or principles (INTASC).
Lesson plan objectives, sometimes called specific instructional objectives,
further define the unit objectives by providing clear direction for teaching and
testing. Instructional objectives at the lesson plan level state (1) expected behav¬
iors, in terms of specific skills, tasks, or attitudes, and (2) content. They may
also state (3) outcomes, sometimes called standards, in terms of level of achieve¬
ment, proficiency, or competency, and (4) conditions of mastery. There is cur¬
rently debate on how detailed these objectives should be and whether too much
specificity leads to concern with the trivial.
Lesson plan objectives are more specific than unit plan objectives. Whereas
lesson plan objectives may include outcomes and conditions for a specific in¬
structional sequence, unit plan objectives do not. Whereas lesson plan objectives
usually include specific methods, materials, or activities, unit plan objectives
may or may not, and if they do they are more general. However, the two levels
of objectives do have several characteristics in common. Such characteristics as
described by Taba are listed in Table 3.5. Taba presents historical grounding for
the lesson planning process.
Table 3.5 Characteristics of Instructional Objectives

at the Classroom Level
1. A statement of objectives should describe both the kind of behaviors expected and the content or
the context to which that behavior applies.
2. Complex objectives need to be stated analytically and specifically enough so that there is no
doubt as to the kind of behavior expected, or what the behavior applies to.
3. Objectives should also be formulated so that clear distinctions are required among learners to
attain different behaviors.
4. Objectives are developmental, representing roads to travel rather than terminal points.
5. Objectives should be realistic and should include only what can be translated into . . .classroom
experience.
6. The scope of objectives should be broad enough to encompass all types of outcomes for which
the school [or teacher] is responsible.
Source: Hilda Taba, Curriculum Development: Theory and Practice (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich,
1962), 200-205.
To illustrate the kind of specificity involved in the two levels of classroom

objectives, consider the unit plan objective, stated as a concept, “To gain under¬
standing of graphs.” Lesson plan objectives for this unit might read:
1. To identify different types of graphs when using different types of data

2. To identify important terms of a graph
3. To implement practical application of graphs
Some educators would feel that these lesson objectives are not specific
enough, because they lack outcomes and mastery level.12 They might rewrite the
above instructional objectives in the following way:
1. All students will be required to identify which sets of data are best
represented by a bar graph, line graph, and circle graph. Seventy-five
percent of the class are expected to earn 75 percent or higher.
2. High-achieving students will be required to demonstrate understanding
of five terms associated with graphs by (a) defining them and
(b) supplying appropriate illustrations of each term. No more than one
error will be permitted for moving to the next sequence of material.
3. All students will be required to read an annual corporate report and translate
the narrative into at least three graphs to state the financial condition of the
company: (a) income, (b) operating cost, and (c) assets and liabilities. A
panel of three students must unanimously agree that the graphs are accurate.
Formulating Goals and Objectives

In our discussion so far, we have been using several words—aims, goals, objec¬
tives, standards, conditions, outcomes—that have subtle differences in meaning
related to different levels of education (national to classroom) and different lev¬
els of abstractness. At one end of the continuum are the value-laden abstract
aims of society; at the other end are concrete objectives describing a specific be¬
havior. Most teachers tend to favor the middle of the continuum, where goals
and objectives are observable but not necessarily clearly measurable, or if they
are measurable, they are stated without proficiency levels. They might use such
terms as list, describe, and identify in writing their classroom objectives, but un¬
less they are behaviorists or advocate outcome-based education, they might not
always incorporate precise outcomes and conditions of mastery.
Goals: The Tyler Model

Ralph Tyler, who developed the basic structure for what most now call a cur¬
riculum plan, uses the term purposes when discussing what we call the goals of
the school.13 He indicates that educators need to identify purposes (goals) by
gathering data from three sources: learners, society, and subject specialists. Edu¬
cators then filter their identified purposes (or goals) through two screens: philos¬
ophy and psychology. What results from the screening are more specific and
agreed-upon objectives, or what he calls instructional objectives (Figure 3.2).
Figure 3.2 Learner Philosophy
Tyler’s method for

formulating objectives.
Even though Tyler uses the term instructional objectives, he is not advocat¬
ing narrow behavioral objectives. For Tyler, objectives cannot be deduced from
tiny bits of data or only from objective data. The formulation of objectives in¬
volves intelligence, insight, values, and attitudes of people involved in making
decisions. Wise choices cannot be made without the most complete data avail¬
able, but judgments must still prevail. We now turn to Tyler’s three sources
from which to select goals and two screens for refining goals into objectives:
Source 1. Studies of the learners. The responsibility of the school is to help
students meet their needs and develop to their fullest potential. Studies that
focus on educational needs of students, that distinguish between what the
schools do and what other social institutions do, that distinguish between what is
done and what should be done, that identify or differentiate gaps between stu¬
dents of the particular school (or school district) and students elsewhere, provide
a basis for the selection of goals for the school program. It is possible to identify
needs that are common to most students on a national, state, and local basis, as
well as other needs that are common to all students in a school or to a certain
group of students within a school or school district.
Source 2. Studies of contemporary life outside of school. Educators must be
aware of the tremendous impact of the increasingly rapid rate of change, the ex¬
plosion of knowledge, and the increasing complexity of technology on our lives
today and tomorrow. The trouble is that preparation for the future involves skills
and knowledge that we might not fully understand today. As we analyze con¬
temporary life, we need to study life at the community level in terms of needs,
resources, and trends, as well as larger societal issues that extend to state, na¬
tional, and international levels. For example, in preparing students for the world
of work, it is necessary to look at local conditions, but some students will move
to other states or regions. Furthermore, we live in a “global village” with strong
interconnections: State, national, and international conditions eventually affect
conditions at the community level.
Source 3. Suggestions from subject specialists. Every subject area has its
professional associations that list goals and important knowledge in its field.
Over the past several years, professional associations such as the National Coun¬
cil of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM) and National Science Teachers Associ¬
ation (NSTA) have been more active in defining what students need to know.
An example of NSTA learning goals is shown in Table 3.6. What schools need
to ask is not what a specialist in a particular field needs to learn, but what the
subject can contribute to the general education of young people who are not
going to be specialists in the field.
Screen 1. The use of philosophy. Once purposes have been identified from
studies of the learner, society, and subject areas, the educator must review and
refine them in light of philosophy-and psychology—or, as Tyler says, filter them
through two screens. The first screen is philosophy. As a school tries to outline
its educational program, “the educational and social philosophy of the school
can serve as the first screen.”14 We should be aware of the values and way of life
we are trying to preserve and what aspect of society we wish to improve. Goals
should be consistent with the democratic values and ideals of our society, in all
aspects of living. In this country, education is for democracy, and this overriding
philosophy must be reflected in our school goals.
Screen 2. The use of psychology. Goals must be in conformity with the psy¬
chology of learning; that is, the theories, concepts, and specific findings we ac¬
cept. “A psychology of learning includes a unified formulation of the processes
involved, such as how learning takes place, under what conditions, and what
mechanisms and variables operate.”15 Moving beyond Tyler, in formulating
goals, teachers need to consider how appropriate the goals are in terms of what
is known about learning—whether they can be achieved, how they can be
achieved, and what the cost and time will be. Goals that conflict with an accept¬
able psychological viewpoint about learning should be rejected. Of course, there
is more than one psychological viewpoint, and many theories, concepts, and
even data are contradictory. However, even opposing theorists of learning can
agree on many of the same goals.
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives
Another way of formulating instructional objectives is to categorize the desired

behaviors and outcomes into a system analogous to classification of books in a
library, chemical elements in a periodic table, or divisions of the animal king¬
dom. Through this system, known as a taxonomy of educational objectives,
standards for classifying objectives have been established, and educators are
able to be more precise in their language. The taxonomy is rooted in Tyler’s
ideas that all words in a scientific system should be defined in terms of observ¬
able events and that educational objectives should be defined operationally in
terms of performances or outcomes. This method of formulating objectives can
be used for writing objectives at the program and course level. By adding spe¬
cific content, the objectives can be used at the classroom level, including the les¬
son plan level.
The educational taxonomy calls for the classification of learning into three
domains: cognitive, affective, and psychomotor. The Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives, Handbook I: Cognitive Domain was developed by a committee of
thirty-six researchers from various universities headed by Benjamin Bloom.16
The cognitive domain includes objectives that are related to recall or recognition
of knowledge and the development of higher intellectual skills and abilities. The
Table 3.6 National Science Teachers Association

Learning Goals for Students
Science Content Standards
Content Standard: K-l 2
Unifying Concepts and Processes

STANDARD: As a result of activities in grades K-12, all students should develop understanding
and abilities aligned with the following concepts and processes:
• Systems, order, and organization
• Evidence, models, and explanation
• Constancy, change, and measurement
• Evolution and equilibrium
• Form and function
Content Standards: K—4
Science as Inquiry
CONTENT STANDARD A: As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
• Abilities necessary to do scientific inquiry
• Understanding about scientific inquiry
Physical Science
CONTENT STANDARD B: As a result of the activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
an understanding of
• Properties of objects and materials
• Position and motion of objects
• Light, heat, electricity, and magnetism
Life Science
CONTENT STANDARD C: As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
understanding of
• The characteristics of organisms
• Life cycles of organisms
• Organisms and environments
Earth and Space Science

CONTENT STANDARD D: As a result of their activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
an understanding of
• Properties of earth materials
• Objects in the sky
• Changes in earth and sky
Science and Technology

CONTENT STANDARD E: As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
• Abilities of technological design
• Understanding about science and technology
• Abilities to distinguish between natural objects and objects made by humans
Table 3.6 Continued
Science in Personal and Social Perspectives

CONTENT STANDARD F: As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
understanding of
• Personal health
• Characteristics and changes in populations
• Types of resources
• Changes in environments
• Science and technology in local challenges
History and Nature of Science

CONTENT STANDARD G: As a result of activities in grades K-4, all students should develop
understanding of
• Science as a human endeavor
Source: Lawrence F. Lowery, ed., NSTA Pathways to the Science Standards: Elementary School Edition
(Arlington, VA: National Science Teachers Association, 1997), 134.
Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook II. Affective Domain, edited by

David Krathwohl and associates, is concerned with aims and objectives related
to interests, attitudes, and feelings.17 The description of the psychomotor do¬
main, dealing with manipulative and motor skills, was never completed by the
original group of researchers. A classification of psychomotor objectives by
Anita Harrow closely resembles the intent of the original group.18 The fact that
it was published by the same company that published the original two tax¬
onomies adds to the validity of this version of the psychomotor domain. Follow¬
ing is a brief listing of the levels of objectives in the three domains of learning.
Cognitive Domain
1. Knowledge. This level includes objectives related to (a) knowledge of
specifics, such as terminology and facts; (b) knowledge of ways and
means of dealing with specifics, such as conventions, trends and
sequences, classifications and categories, criteria, and methodologies;
and (c) knowledge of universal and abstractions, such as principles,
generalizations, theories, and structures. Example: To identify the capital
of France.
2. Comprehension. Objectives at this level relate to (a) translation,
(b) interpretation, and (c) extrapolation of materials. Example: To
interpret a table showing the population density of the world.
3. Application. Objectives at this level relate to the use of abstractions in
particular situations. Example: To predict the probable effect of a change
in temperature on a chemical.
4. Analysis. Objectives relate to breaking a whole into parts and
distinguishing (a) elements, (b) relationships, and (c) organizational
principles. Example: To deduce facts from a hypothesis.
5. Synthesis. Objectives relate to putting parts together in a new form such
as (a) a unique communication, (b) a plan of operation, and (c) a set of
abstract relations. Example: To produce an original piece of art.
Key Words for the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:

Cognitive Domain
Taxonomy Classification Examples of Infinitives Examples of Direct Objects
1. Knowledge specifics To define, to distinguish, to acquire, Vocabulary terms, terminology,

to identify, to recall, to recognize meanings, definitions, referents,
elements, facts, sources, names,
dates, events, persons, places, time
periods, properties, examples,
phenomena forms, conventions,
uses, rules, ways, devices,
symbols, representations, styles,
formats, actions, processes,
developments, trends, causes,
relationships, influences, types,
features, classes, sets,
arrangements, classifications,
categories, criteria, methods,
techniques, uses, procedures,
structures, formulations
2. Comprehension To translate, to transform, to Meanings, samples, definitions,
illustrate, to prepare, to read, to abstractions, representations,
represent, to change, to rephrase, words, phrases, relevancies,
to restate, to interpret, to rearrange, relationships, essentials, aspects,
to differentiate, to distinguish, to qualifications, conclusions,
make, to explain, to demonstrate, methods, theories, abstractions,
to estimate, to infer, to conclude, consequences, implications,
to predict, to determine, to extend, factors, ramifications, meanings,
to interpolate corollaries, effects, probabilities
3. Application To apply, to generalize, to relate, to Principles, laws, conclusions, effects,
choose, to develop, to organize, to methods, theories, abstractions,
use, to employ, to transfer, to situations, generalizations,
restructure, to classify processes, phenomena, procedures
6. Evaluation. This is the highest level of complexity and includes

objectives related to judging in terms of (a) internal evidence or
logical consistency and (b) external evidence or consistency with facts
developed elsewhere. Example: To recognize fallacies in an argument.
Affective Domain
1. Receiving. These objectives are indicative of the learner’s sensitivity to
the existence of stimuli and include (a) awareness, (b) willingness to
receive, and (c) selective attention. Example: To identify musical
instruments by their sound.
4. Analysis To distinguish, to detect, to identify, Elements, hypotheses, conclusions,

to classify, to discriminate, to assumptions, arguments, particulars,
recognize, to categorize, tS relationships, interrelations,
analyze, to contrast, to compare, to relevancies, themes, evidence,
deduce fallacies, cause-effects,
consistencies, parts, ideas,
assumptions, forms, patterns,
purposes, points of view,
techniques, biases, structures,
themes, arrangements, organizations
5. Synthesis To write, to tell, to relate, to Structures, patterns, products,
produce, to transmit, to originate, performances, designs, works,
to modify, to document, to communications, efforts,
propose, to plan, to design, to compositions, plans, objectives,
specify, to derive, to develop, to specifications, operations, ways,
combine, to organize, to solutions, means, phenomena,
synthesize, to classify, to deduce, taxonomies, concepts, schemes,
to develop, to formulate theories, relationships,
abstractions, generalizations,
hypotheses, discoveries
6. Evaluation To judge, to argue, to validate, to Accuracies, consistencies, fallacies,
assess, to decide, to consider, to reliability, flaws, errors, precision,
compare, to contrast, to exactness ends, means, efficiency,
standardize, to appraise economies, utility, alternatives,
course of action, standards,
theories, generalizations
Source: Newton S. Metfessel, William B. Michael, and Donald A. Kirsner, “Instrumentation of Bloom’s and Krathwohl’s Taxonomies for
the Writing of Educational Objectives,” Psychology in the Schools (July 1969): 227-231. Reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons,
Inc.
2. Responding. This includes active attention to stimuli such as

(a) acquiescence, (b) willing responses, and (c) feelings of satisfaction.
Example: To contribute to group discussions by asking questions.
3. Valuing. This includes objectives regarding beliefs and evaluations in the
form of (a) acceptance, (b) preference, and (c) commitment. Example:
To argue over an issue involving health care.
4. Organization. This level involves (a) conceptualization of values and
(b) organization of a value system. Example: To organize a meeting
concerning a neighborhood’s housing integration plan.
Key Words for the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:

Affective Domain
1. Receiving To differentiate, to separate, to set Sights, sounds, events, designs,

apart, to share, to accumulate, to arrangements, models, examples,
select, to combine, to accept, to shapes, sizes, meters, cadences,
listen (for), to control alternatives, answers, rhythms,
nuances
2. Responding To comply (with), to follow, to Directions, instructions, laws,
commend, to approve, to policies, demonstrations,
volunteer, to discuss, to practice, instruments, games, dramatic
to play, to applaud, to acclaim, to works, charades, speeches, plays,
augment presentations, writings
3. Valuing To increase measured proficiency Group memberships, artistic
in, to relinquish, to specify, to productions, musical productions,
assist, to subsidize, to help, to personal friendships, projects,
support, to deny, to protest, to viewpoints, arguments, deceptions,
debate, to argue irrelevancies, abdications,
irrationalities
4. Organization To discuss, to theorize (on), to Parameters, codes, standards, goals,
abstract, to compare, to balance, to systems, approaches, criteria,
organize, to define, to formulate limits
5. Characterization To revise, to change, to complete, to Plans, behaviors, methods, efforts,

require, to be rated high by peers humanitarianism, ethics, integrity,
in, to be rated high by superiors in, maturity, extravagance(s),
to avoid, to manage, to resolve, to excesses, conflicts,
resist exorbitancy/exorbitancies
Source: Newton S. Metfessel, William B. Michael, and Donald A. Kirsner, “Instrumentation of Bloom’s and Krathwohl’s Taxonomies for
the Writing of Educational Objectives,” Psychology in the Schools (July 1969): 227-231. Reprinted by permission of John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
5. Characterization. This is the level of greatest complexity and includes

behavior related to (a) a generalized set of values and (b) a
characterization or philosophy of life. Example: To demonstrate in front
of a government building on behalf of a cause or idea.
Psychomotor Domain
1. Reflex movements. Objectives relate to (a) segmental reflexes (involving
one spinal segment) and (b) intersegmental reflexes (involving more than
one spinal segment). Example: To contract a muscle.
Key Words of the Taxonomy of Educational Objectives:

Psychomotor Domain
1. Reflex movements To flex, to stretch, to straighten, to Reflexes

extend, to inhibit, to lengthen, to
shorten, to tense, to stiffen, to
relax
2. Fundamental To crawl, to creep, to slide, to walk. Changes location, moves in space
movements to run, to jump, to grasp, to reach, while remaining in one place,
to tighten, to support, to handle moves extremities in coordinated
fashion
3. Perceptual abilities To catch, to bounce, to eat, to write, Discriminates visually,
to balance, to bend, to draw from discriminates auditorially,
memory, to distinguish by discriminates kinesthetically,
touching, to explore discriminates tactually,
coordinates two or more
perceptual abilities
4. Physical abilities To endure, to improve, to increase, Exerts tension, moves quickly, stops
to stop, to start, to move precisely, immediately, endures fatigue
to touch, to bend
5. Skilled movements To waltz, to type, to play the piano, Changes or modifies basic body
to plane, to file, to skate, to juggle, movement patterns, uses a tool or
to paint, to dive, to fence, to golf, implement in adaptive or skilled
to change manner
6. Nondiscursive To gesture, to stand, to sit, to Moves expressively, moves
communication express facially, to dance interpretatively, communicates
skillfully, to perform skillfully, to emotions, communicates
paint skillfully, to play skillfully aesthetically, expresses joy
Source: Adapted from Anita J. Harrow, A Taxonomy of the Psychomotor Domain (New York: McKay, 1972),
2. Fundamental movements. Objectives relate to (a) walking, (b) running,

(c) jumping, (d) pushing, (e) pulling, and (f) manipulating. Example: To
run a 100-yard dash.
3. Perceptual abilities. Objectives relate to (a) kinesthetic, (b) visual,
(c) auditory, (d) tactile, and (e) coordination abilities. Example: To
distinguish distant and close sounds.
4. Physical abilities. Objectives relate to (a) endurance, (b) strength,
(c) flexibility, (d) agility, (e) reaction-response time, and (f) dexterity.
Example: To do five sit-ups.
5. Skilled movements. Objectives relate to (a) games, (b) sports, (c) dances,
and (d) the arts. Example: To dance the basic steps of the waltz.
6. Nondiscursive communication. Objectives relate to expressive movement
through (a) posture, (b) gestures, (c) facial expressions, and (d) creative
movements. Example: To act a part in a play.
One point needs to be made about the cognitive domain. Although Bloom ac¬
knowledges that the teaching of knowledge is essential, he asserts that “many
teachers . . . prize knowledge . . . because of the simplicity with which it can be
taught or learned.”19 Quite frequently we stop at the knowledge category, because
it is easy to teach and test. Thus we ask our students: “What are three products of
Brazil? What is the chemical formula for water?” Also, we tend to equate knowl¬
edge with intelligence. This is illustrated by our misconception that when someone
can recall trivia information on a television quiz show, we often consider the per¬
son to be intelligent. It is not how much knowledge an individual possesses, but
what the individual can do with the knowledge, that characterizes intelligence.
Once we study the taxonomy, it becomes apparent that most teaching and
testing we have been exposed to as students stressed knowledge—knowledge of
facts, terms, conventions, classifications, categories, methods, and principles. As
a teacher, you should not make the same mistake; rather, you should advance
into other cognitive dimensions that use knowledge for advanced teaching and
learning. And one way to do that is to alter the way you present material to stu¬
dents. We will discuss this more fully in Chapter 5, but we want to highlight
here the fact that good teachers do more than just present knowledge to students
for them to “consume.” Good teachers are able to move away from the “tyranny
of scope and sequence” (or a set of concepts presented for students in a
prescribed order) and focus on promoting thoughtfulness and inquiry, not just
curriculum coverage.20
Establishing Specific Objectives

The categories of the three taxonomies sort skills into levels of complexity from
simple to more advanced. Each level is built upon and assumes acquisition of
skills of the previous level. One must have knowledge of facts, for example, be¬
fore one can comprehend material. The taxonomy as a whole is a useful source
for developing educational objectives and for categorizing and grouping existing
sets of objectives. Perhaps the greatest difficulty is deciding between adjacent
categories, particularly if the objectives have not been clearly stated. To avoid
becoming frustrated while categorizing objectives into appropriate categories,
classroom teachers are advised to work in groups and share opinions. By study¬
ing and using the taxonomy, they might eventually appreciate it as a valuable
tool for implementing objectives and formulating test items.
After you have decided you want to use the taxonomy and after you have
determined what you want your students to learn, you might systematically re¬
view the major classifications of the various domains to make sure you are fa-
A teacher’s willingness
to help students is
important in achieving
desired outcomes of
the lesson.
miliar with each classification. You might then ask the following questions
when formulating objectives in the cognitive domain.
1. Knowledge. What specific facts do you want the students to learn? What
trends and sequences should they know? What classifications, categories,
and methods are important for them to learn? What general principles
and theories should they learn?
2. Comprehension. What types of translation will students need to perform?
What types of interpretation? What types of extrapolation?
3. Application. What will students be required to perform or do to show
they can use the information in practical situations?
4. Analysis. What kinds of elements should students be able to analyze?
What relationships? What organizational principles?
5. Synthesis. What kinds of communication should students be able to
synthesize? What kinds of operation? What kinds of abstraction?
6. Evaluation. What kinds of evaluation should students be able to perform?
Can they use internal evidence? Can they use external evidence?
When asking these questions and when formulating instructional objectives

according to the taxonomy, the teacher should keep in mind that the classifica¬
tions represent a hierarchy. Before students can deal with analysis, they must be
able to function at the three previous levels, that is, knowledge, comprehension,
and application. The same kinds of questions should be asked when writing ob¬
jectives in the affective and psychomotor domains. The teacher needs to look at
each level within the domain and ask what students are to be expected to achieve.
As an aid in writing and categorizing objectives, a list of key infinitives and
direct objects for the cognitive, affective, and psychomotor domains are shown
in Tips for Teachers 3.1, 3.2, 3.3. In all of these examples, no specific content is
described so as to keep them applicable to all subjects.
General Objectives and Specific Learning Outcomes: The Gronlund Method

Norman Gronlund has developed a flexible way of formulating instructional ob¬
jectives, whereby the teacher moves from a general objective to a series of spe¬
cific learning outcomes, each related to the general objective. Gronlund’s gen¬
eral objectives coincide with program (subject and grade) and course level
objectives, and his specific learning outcomes coincide with unit plan and les¬
son plan objectives. He recommends that teachers start with general objectives
because learning is too complex to be described in terms of specific behaviors or
specific outcomes and because higher levels of thinking cannot be achieved by
one specific behavior or outcome. To illustrate the difference between general
objectives and specific learning outcomes, Gronlund prepared a list of general
objectives that can be used for almost any grade, subject, or course:
1. Knows basic terminology

2. Understands concepts and principles
3. Applies principles to new situations
4. Interprets charts and graphs
5. Demonstrates skill in critical thinking
6. Writes a well-organized theme
7. Appreciates poetry, art, literature, dance, etc.
8. Demonstrates scientific attitude
9. Evaluates the adequacy of an experiment.21
Note that the behavior (verb) in each statement is general enough to permit
a host of specific learning outcomes. Such outcomes provide useful guides for
teachers and students. There might be six or seven related specific outcomes for
each general objective to clarify what students will do to demonstrate achieve¬
ment of the general objective.
Applying Gronlund’s Objectives

The two examples below illustrate how we move from general objectives to a
series of related, intended learning outcomes.
I. Understands concepts and principles

1. Explains the concept in own words
2. Identifies the meaning of a concept in context
3. Differentiates between proper and improper instances of a concept
4. Distinguishes between two similar concepts on the basis of meaning
5. Uses a concept to explain an everyday event
II. Demonstrates skill in critical thinking
1. Distinguishes between fact and opinion
2. Distinguishes between relevant and irrelevant information
3. Identifies fallacious reasoning in written material
4. Identifies the limitations of given data
5. Formulates valid conclusions from given data
6. Identifies the assumptions underlying conclusions.22
Using the Taxonomy
David R. Krathwohl
Hannah Hammond Professor ofEducation, Emeritus
Syracuse University
I have always been surprised at how timid many indi¬ 4.2 Items requiring the student to apply a unique
viduals seem to be about modifying the taxonomy combination of principles to solve a problem
frameworks. I thought some words of encouragement of a novel type
from one of the authors might make everyone freer to 5.0 Evaluation: Items requiring the evaluation of
use them in their own way. Not only will we not take a total situation
offense at your modifying them, we are delighted to
6.0 Synthesis: Items requiring synthesis of a
have you make the structures your own and invest
variety of elements of knowledge into an
some of your talent in their further development.
original and meaningful whole.*
Unlike the ten commandments, which are said to
have come down from heaven, the taxonomies are The literature contains a variety of such adapta¬
not set in stone! They are just frameworks to make tions of taxonomies. For example, all the chapter au¬
easier such tasks as curriculum and test develop¬ thors in Bloom, Hastings, and Madaus (specialists in
ment. Use them as jumping off places for modifica¬ art education, industrial arts, language arts, mathe¬
tion; many people have! Look at how Christine matics, pre-school, science, and social studies)
McGuire changed the cognitive domain to better fit struck off from ours to construct their own.1'
measuring the goals of medical education. She col¬ Consider these samples of their modifications of ap¬
lapsed knowledge into two subcategories, expanded plication—“functional application vs. expressive ap¬
the application category (2.0, 3.0, and 4.0 below), plication” and “solve routine problems, make com¬
and discarded the subcategories under evaluation and parisons, analyze data, and recognize patterns,
synthesis: isomorphisms, and symmetries”; or of evaluation—
“objective evaluation vs. subjective evaluation” and
1.1 Items testing predominantly the recall of “empirical evaluation vs. systemic evaluation.”
isolated information These adaptions are a long way from the original
1.2 Items testing recognition of meaning or framework aren’t they! Many authors even blend af¬
implication fective and cognitive objectives in their structures!
2.0 Generalization: Items requiring the student to Our experience suggests that the frameworks are
select a relevant generalization to explain most useful as you adapt them to fit your situation.
specific phenomena Consider developing your own modifications or find
3.0 Problem solving of a familiar type one that fits your purposes.
3.1 Items requiring the student to make simple

interpretations of data *Christine McGuire, “A Progress Approach to the
3.2 Items requiring the student to apply a single Construction and Analysis of Medical Examinations”
Journal of Medical Education, vol. 38 (1963): 556-563.
principle or a standard combination of
^Benjamin S. Bloom, J. Thomas Hastings, and George F.
principles to a situation of a familiar type
Madaus, Handbook on Formative and Summative
4.0 Problem solving of an unfamiliar type Evaluation of Student Learning (New York: McGraw-Hill,
4.1 Items requiring the analysis of data 1971).
The learning outcomes listed on page 108 are good examples of content-
free objectives that can fit many different grade levels, subjects and courses. Be¬
cause Gronlund feels it is important to keep specific learning outcomes content-
free, they are not really applicable to the lesson plan level, which should be
content-oriented.
The teacher can add content to objectives. For example, an objective might
be to identify three causes of World War I or to differentiate between a triangle
and a rectangle. Gronlund maintains that once a teacher identifies content, there
is a risk of writing too many objectives for each general objective or topic. But
instead of identifying the causes of World War I, as most teachers would do,
Gronlund would say the objective is to identify important historical causes and
events. Instead of differentiating between a triangle and a rectangle, the objec¬
tive, for Gronlund, is to differentiate between geometric shapes. Gronlund’s
content-free specific outcomes can be used up to the unit plan level that focuses
on concepts; only by including content can they be used at the lesson plan
level.
Table 3.7 highlights Gronlund’s steps for setting instructional objectives,
both general and specific, and serves as a guide if you wish to adopt this
method.
Specific Objectives: The Mager Method

Robert Mager is more precise in his approach to formulating instructional objec¬
tives. His objectives have three components:
1. Behavior, or performance, which describes what the learner is expected

to do. Example: To know, to use, to identify.
2. Condition, which describes under what circumstances or condition the
performance is to occur. Example: Given five sentences with adjectives
. . ., Based on the statement. . . .
3. Proficiency level, or criterion, which states an acceptable standard,
competency, or achievement level. Example: 80 percent, 9 out of 10,
judged correctly by the teacher.23
Mager is controversial in his approach to writing instructional objectives,

and therefore it might be worthwhile to state some of the arguments for and
against his approach. Some educators (including Tyler and Gronlund) claim that
Mager’s method produces an unmanageable number of objectives, leads to
trivia, and wastes time. They also contend that the approach leads to teaching
that focuses on low levels of cognitive and psychomotor objectives, emphasizes
learning of specific bits of information, and does not foster comprehension and
whole learning.24
Mager and other educators argue that the approach clarifies what teachers
intend, what students are expected to do, and what to test to show evidence of
learning.25 It provides a structured method for arranging sequences of skills,
Table 3.7 Steps for Stating General Objectives

and Specific Learning Outcomes
Stating General Instructional Objectives

1. State each general objective as an intended learning outcome (i.e., pupils’ terminal performance).
2. Begin each general objective with a verb (e.g., knows, applies, interprets).
3. State each general objective to includeonly one general learning outcome (e.g., not “Knows and
understands”).
4. State each general objective at the proper level of generality (e.g., it should encompass a readily
definable domain of responses). Eight to twelve general objectives will usually suffice.
5. Keep each general objective sufficiently free of course content so that it can be used with various
units of study.
6. State each general objective so that there is minimum overlap with other objectives.
Stating Specific Learning Outcomes

1. List beneath each general instructional objective a representative sample of specific learning
outcomes that describes the terminal performance pupils are expected to demonstrate.
2. Begin each specific learning outcome with an action verb that specifies observable performance
(e.g., identifies, describes). Check that each specific learning outcome is relevant to the general
objective it describes.
3. Include a sufficient number of specific learning outcomes to describe adequately the performance
of pupils who have attained the objective.
4. Keep the specific learning outcomes sufficiently free of course content so that the list can be used
with various units of study.
5. Consult reference materials for the specific components of those complex outcomes that are
difficult to define (e.g., critical thinking, scientific attitude, creativity).
6. Add a third level of specificity to the list of outcomes, if needed.
Source: Adapted from Norman E. Gronlund, Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching, 5th ed. (New York:
Macmillan, 1985), 46.
tasks, or content, provides a guide for determining instructional methods and

materials, and adds precision for constructing tests. Most teachers prefer a less
specific approach, corresponding more to the methods of Bloom or Gronlund.
Applying Mager’s Objectives

Using Mager’s approach, a teacher could write hundreds of objectives for each
unit, certainly for each course. If we decide on his approach, we would first ask
ourselves to identify or describe what the learner will be doing. Next we would
identify or describe the conditions under which the behavior is to occur. Finally,
we would state the performance criteria or achievement level we expect the
learner to meet.
Here are some examples. The behavior, condition, and proficiency level are
identified.
1. Given six primary colors, students will be able to identify five. The
behavior is to identify, the condition is given six primary colors, and the
proficiency level is five out of six.
tr'
2. Based on the reading passage in Chapter 7, students will compare the

writing styles of Ernest Hemingway and John Steinbeck. Performance
will be judged pass-fail by the teacher. The behavior is to compare
writing styles, the condition is after reading the passage in Chapter 7, and
the proficiency level is to pass (a subjective judgment by the teacher).
3. From the required list of 10 words, students will correctly spell 9 of
them. The behavior is to spell, the condition is the required list of words,
and the proficiency level is 90 percent (9 out of 10).
4. From the foul line, students will make 6 out of 10 baskets. The behavior
is to throw a basketball, the condition is from the foul line, and the
proficiency level is 60 percent (6 out of 10).
5. The student will be able to complete a 100-item multiple-choice
examination on the topic of pollution, with 80 items answered correctly
within 60 minutes. The behavior is to complete an exam, the condition is
60 minutes, and the proficiency level is 80 percent (80 out of 100).
Mager lists eight words or phrases that he considers “fuzzy” and to be

avoided in formulating objectives: to know, to understand, to appreciate, to
grasp the significance of, to enjoy, to believe, to have faith in, and to internalize.
He lists nine words or phrases that are open to fewer interpretations and are
more appropriate to use: to write, to recite, to identify, to sort, to solve, to con¬
struct, to build, to compare, and to contrast.
Writing Your Own Goals and Objectives

The task of writing goals and objectives for a school district, school, program, or
course usually falls to a school committee. Individual classroom teachers are
usually responsible for developing unit plans or lesson plans. For example, in
the state of Ohio, there are over 600 school districts and each one has its own
course of study in each subject area from which each teacher creates personal
lesson plans. If you are a member of a district or school committee, it is advis¬
able to consult the following sources to be sure that your list corresponds to pre¬
scribed educational goals and objectives.
1. Federal and state mandates and legislation, including analysis of state

curriculum models
2. National and state commission reports that identify aims and goals
3. Professional association reports (e.g., NSTA or NCTM) that identify
goals and objectives
4. Parental concerns expressed in parental advisory committees, parent-
teacher associations, and individual letters from parents
5. Professional literature on student needs, assessments, and career choices
6. Books and reports on college and employee requirements
7. Subject specialist reports and comments

8. Evaluation reports about school programs and curriculum
9. Reports and studies about trends in society26
It is also advisable to consult already published lists of goals and objectives.

For example, many of the professional learned societies (e.g., the National
Council of Teachers of Mathematics, National Science Teachers Association)
argue for selected goals that schools should address.
Most published lists of objectives deal with the cognitive domain; only a
few concern the affective and psychomotor domains. Lists of goals and
State Academic Standards
Chester E. Finn
John M. Olin Fellow, Hudson Institute,
and President. Thomas B. Fordham Foundation
State standards can be both a help and hindrance to what knowledge and skills to impart and who can in¬
teachers striving to develop an effective curriculum stead concentrate on the sequence, materials and in¬
and pedagogy for their students. structional methods most apt to succeed with their
They help by setting subject-matter parameters, students.
delineating the knowledge and skills that the state This becomes far harder, of course, if the state
deems essential, and thus providing a scaffolding on did a mediocre job of developing its academic
which district, school and teacher can construct their standards—and one is bound by them anyway. Un¬
own version of what students will actually study. fortunately, this worrisome situation exists in many
They hinder by narrowing the curriculum to an un¬ parts of the country, or did in 1997 when the Thomas
fortunate degree or, paradoxically, inflating it to ab¬ B. Fordham Foundation undertook an appraisal of
surd proportions, by establishing divisions that make state standards in the five key subjects of English,
it harder to bridge disciplines, by insisting on “cover¬ math, science, history and geography.
age” of material that may be unrealistic or inappropri¬ Our viewers were generally dismayed by the va¬
ate in actual class settings, and occasionally by creat¬ pidity and shoddiness of much that they found. The
ing sequences that don’t work for practitioners—yet typical state’s “grade” on the quality of its academic
must be honored because of the tests that accompany standards across the five subjects was D+. That’s the
the standards. Still, state standards are a fact of life in bad news. The good news is that in every subject at
most places, and the teachers ignore them at their (and least a few states developed exemplary standards—
their students’) peril, particularly where assessments proof that this can be done well. I am also encour¬
and accountability mechanisms are keyed to them. It’s aged by the fact that many states took our criticism
best to view them as the skeleton of the curriculum in a constructive vein and have indicated that im¬
and then work at supplying the flesh, the nerves and proving their academic standards is a high priority.
the blood supply. This can actually be a blessing to Let’s hope they follow through.
teachers who need not fret over much about deciding
objectives that have been published can be obtained from government agencies
(state departments of education and regional educational agencies), profes¬
sional agencies (Association of Supervision and Curriculum Development, Phi
Delta Kappa), publishing companies and businesses, universities, and school
districts. Objectives published by the government and schools can be obtained
free of charge; professional agencies might charge a nominal fee. Some private
foundations have undertaken systematic analyses of the state standards that are
in place. An example of this can be found by visiting the Thomas B. Fordham
Foundation web site (http://www.edexcellence.net). The Fordham Foundation
has analyzed state standards in English, math, science, history and geography.
See Professional Viewpoint, “State Academic Standards.”
In formulating classroom-level objectives—either unit or lesson plans—
several general rules should be kept in mind. See Tips for Teachers 3.4.
Stating Classroom Objectives
Theoretically sound and practical recommendations Form

concerning the content and form of objectives are
given below. These recommendations should help in 1. Objectives should be stated in the form of
the formulation of your own objectives at the unit expected student changes.
plan and lesson plan level. 2. Objectives should be stated in behavioral or
performance terms.
3. Objectives should be stated singly.
Content 4. Objectives should be parsimonious [and]
trimmed of excessive verbiage.
1. Objectives should be appropriate in terms of
the level of difficulty and prior learning 5. Objectives should be grouped logically, so
experience of students. they make sense in determining units of
instruction and evaluation.
2. Objectives should be “real” in the sense that
they describe behaviors the teacher actually 6. The conditions under which the expected
intends to act on in the classroom situation. student behavior will be observed should be
specified.
3. A useful objective will describe both the
content and the mental process or behavior 7. If possible, the objective should contain
required for an appropriate response. criteria for acceptable performance. Criteria
might involve time limits or a minimum
4. The content of the objectives should be
number of correct responses.*
responsive to the needs of the individual and
society.
*Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein and Francis P. Hunkins,
5. A variety of behaviors should be stated, since
Curriculum: Foundations, Principles and Issues, 3rd ed.
most courses attempt to develop skills other (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998); Grant
than “recall” [or simple motor or affective Wiggins, Educative Assessment, (San Francisco: Jossey-
skills]. Bass, 1998.) Adapted by permission.
1. They should be related to the developmental needs and tasks of the

learners, which in turn are related to the age and experiences of the
students.
2. They should be an outgrowth of diagnostic data (achievement, aptitude,
personality, behavioral tests) and student records.
3. They should be consistent with professional and subject specialist opinions.
4. They should be consistent with teaching and learning theories and
procedures.
5. They should build on student interests and strengths, not on adult
interests and student weaknesses.
6. They should relate to the whole child, and several domains of learning,
not only one aspect of learning or the cognitive domain.
7. They should foster higher-order thinking skills, rather than focus mainly
on knowledge or busy work.
8. They should be based on subject and grade level content.
9. They should be flexible enough to keep pace with changing educational
and social situations.
Finally, no matter how carefully you plan your objectives, there are likely
to be some unintended outcomes of instruction. These outcomes may be desir¬
able or undesirable, and most are likely to fall into the affective domain of atti¬
tudes, feelings, and motivation about learning. For example, as a result of a
language arts lesson on a Tolstoy novel, some students might become more in¬
terested in reading novels on their own or be motivated to read more books by
Tolstoy. Other students might become bored with language arts or uninterested
in reading novels. Even worse, teachers might fail to notice or might ignore
such side effects, because they result more from the method than from the con¬
tent of instruction, more from the teacher’s behavior than from students’
attitudes.
Additional Thoughts on Objectives

Both PRAXIS and INTASC require that teachers demonstrate an ability to cre¬
ate and define clearly articulated learning objectives. And even in those states
that do not rely on PRAXIS or INTASC, teachers are expected to show that they
can establish a meaningful lesson outline or guide. As a result, it is clear that as
a teacher you are going to have to establish both general and specific objectives.
At the present time and in almost all states, the teacher uses the school district
curriculum guide to establish specific learning objectives for the classroom. This
could change in the future. E. D. Hirsch, and others are arguing for nationalizing
the curriculum. Hirsch contends that a nationalized curriculum better accommo¬
dates itself to a mobile student population—and American students are mobile.27
Although it is doubtful that the nationalizing idea will immediately take hold, it
is clear that the push for national standards (and even national testing) will influ¬
ence what you as a teacher do when you enter the classroom. And, even if the
nationalizing effort does not take hold, it does seem likely that increased state¬
wide testing practices will lead to more states specifying particular goals for
school districts to use in aligning curriculum and for you as a teacher to use as a
basis for the classroom learning objectives.

Most teachers will be required to use objectives in the planning and implementa¬
tion of their instruction. Depending on the philosophy and beliefs of your school
(and supervisor), your formulation of objectives might be general or precise.
Below are a set of questions to cover both possibilities.
General Objectives
1. Have you determined the major objectives you wish to stress?
2. Are your objectives related to the goals of the school (grade level or
department)?
3. Are your objectives related to sound principles of teaching and learning?
4. Are your objectives realistic in terms of students’ abilities and the time and
facilities available?
5. Are your objectives related to important learning outcomes?
6. Have you arranged the objectives according to some order of importance,
domains of learning, or high-order/low-order cognitive, social, or
psychological categories?
7. Have you arranged the content and activities of the subject so they
correspond with the objectives?
8. Are you satisfied that your objectives coincide with the views (or values) of
the parents and community?
Precise Objectives
1. Have you clearly determined what you want the learner to accomplish? (Have
you completed a task analysis for the stated objectives?)
2. Have you decided on who is to perform the desired behavior (e.g., the entire
class, the more advanced group)?
3. Have you detailed through an action word the actual behavior to demonstrate
mastery of the objective (e.g., to write, to describe)?
4. Did you establish limiting and/or facilitating conditions under which the
learner is to do what is asked (e.g., in one hour, with the textbook closed)?
5. Have you described the product or performance to be evaluated to determine

whether the objective has been achieved (e.g., a report, a speech)?
6. Have you decided on a standard or achievement level that will be used
to evaluate the success of the product or performance (e.g., 80 percent
correct)?
Summary
1. Aims are broad statements about the intent of education as a whole. Goals are
general statements about what schools are expected to accomplish.
Objectives specify content and behavior, and sometimes a proficiency level
to be achieved at some level of instruction.
2. Objectives are written at several levels, including program, grade, subject,
course, classroom, unit plan, and lesson plan, and at several degrees of
specificity, from broad to precise.
3. The most popular approaches to formulating objectives are based on the work
of Tyler, Bloom, Gronlund, and Mager. Tyler identifies purposes and then
interprets them in the light of philosophical and psychological concerns to
arrive at instructional objectives.
4. Bloom’s work entails a focus on the cognitive domain; Krathwohl’s work
focuses on the affective domain.
5. Gronlund distinguishes between general objectives and specific learning
outcomes.
6. Mager relies on three major characteristics for writing objectives: behavior,
condition, and proficiency level.
7. A number of recommendations for writing objectives are provided to
facilitate teacher planning and instruction.
1. In terms of aims and goals, why is the question “What is the purpose of
school?” so complex?
2. Why is it important for aims and goals to change as society changes?
3. What sources of information does Tyler recommend in formulating his
objectives? Which source is most important? Why?
4. How does Gronlund distinguish between general objectives and specific
learning outcomes?
5. What are the three components of Mager’s objectives?
Things to Do
1. Find a list of school goals in a textbook or curriculum guide and revise them
to conform to the guidelines in writing objectives as outlined by Mager.
2. Arrange the six categories of the cognitive domain into a hierarchy from
simple to complex. Give an example of an instructional objective for each
category.
3. Arrange the five categories of the affective domain into a hierarchy from
simple to complex. Give an example of an instructional objective for each
category.
4. Formulate ten unit plan objectives in your area of specialization. Use either
Gronlund’s or Bloom’s method to write these objectives. Give an example of
an instructional objective for each category.
5. Write six objectives for the subject you wish to teach at the lesson plan level.
Use the methods of Bloom or Mager to write these objectives.
Benjamin S. Bloom et al. Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I. Cognitive
Domain. New York: Longman, 1984. Describes six categories of the cognitive domain
and objectives and test items related to knowledge and problem-solving skills.
Gagne, Robert M. The Conditions of Learning and Theory of Instruction, 4th ed. New
York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1985. How to plan and write objectives based on
learned capabilities and task analysis.
Krathwohl, David R., Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram Maisa. Taxonomy of Educational
Objectives: Handbook II. Affective Domain. New York: Longman, 1984. Describes
five categories of the affective domain, and objectives and test items related to
feelings, attitudes, and values.
Macdonald, Robert E. and Sean D. Healy, A Handbook for Beginning Teachers, 2nd ed.
New York: Longman, 1999. A brief book on teaching and lesson planning.
Mager, Robert F. Preparing Instructional Objectives, 3rd ed. Atlanta: Center for
Effective Performance, 1997. Describes objectives that specify behavior, condition,
and proficiency.
Posner, George J. and Alan N. Rudnitsky. Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum
Development for Teachers, 5th ed. New York: Longman, 1997. Presents the
methods of designing a course and unit plan.
Key Terms
affective domain 103 general objectives 108
aims 84 goals 84
classroom objectives 95 lesson plan objectives 96
cognitive domain 101 objectives 84
course objectives 95 program objectives 93
psychomotor domain 104 taxonomy of educational objectives 99

specific learning outcomes 108 unit plan objectives 95
End Notes
1. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday, 1996).
2. Hilda Taba, Curriculum Development: Theory and Research (New York: Harcourt
Brace Jovanovich, 1962), 197.
3. Ibid.
4. Commission on the Reorganization of Secondary Education, Cardinal Principles of
Secondary Education (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1918).
5. National Commission on Excellence in Education, A Nation at Risk: The Imperative
for Reform (Washington, DC: Government Printing Office, 1983).
6. Peter F. Oliva, Developing the Curriculum, 5th ed. (New York: HarperCollins,
2000), 265.
7. Harold Howe II, “America 2000: A Bumpy Ride on Four Trains,” Phi Delta Kappan
(November 1991): 192-203; Allan C. Ornstein, “The National Reform of
Education,” NASSP Bulletin (September 1992): 89-105.
8. Myra P. Sadker and David M. Sadker, Teachers, Schools, and Society (New York:
McGraw Hill, 1997), 154-155.
9. Ibid., p. 65.
10. George J. Posner, Analyzing the Curriculum (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992);
Posner and Alan N. Rudnitsky, Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum Development
for Teachers, 4th ed. (New York: Longman, 1997).
11. Ronald C. Doll, Curriculum Improvement: Decision Making and Process, 9th ed.
(Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1996); Allan C. Ornstein and Francis P.
Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Foundations Issues, 3rd ed.
(Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
12. W. James Popham, Modern Educational Measurement, 2nd ed. (Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1990); Robert E. Slavin, Educational Psychology: Theory into
Practice, 3rd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1992).
13. Ralph Tyler, Basic Principles of Curriculum and Instruction (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1949).
14. Ibid, p. 34.
15. Ibid., 41.
16. Benjamin S. Bloom et al., eds., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I.
Cognitive Domain (New York: Longman-McKay, 1956).
17. David R. Krathwohl, Benjamin S. Bloom, and Bertram Masia, eds., Taxonomy of
Educational Objectives: Handbook II. Affective Domain (New York: Longman-
McKay, 1964).
18. Anita J. Harrow, Taxonomy of the Psychomotor Domain: A Guide for Developing
Behavioral Objectives (New York: McKay, 1972).
19. Bloom, Taxonomy of Educational Objectives, Handbook I, 34.
20. Gerald W. Bracey, “Minds of Our Own,” Phi Delta Kappan (December 1998):
328-329.
21. Norman E. Gronlund, How to Write and Use Instructional Objectives, 5th ed.
(New York: Macmillan, 1995), 21, 52-53; Gronlund and Robert L. Linn,
Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching, 7th ed. (New York: Macmillan,

1995), 41-42.
22. Gronlund, “How to Write and Use Instructional Objectives. ”
23. Robert F. Mager, Preparing Instructional Objectives, rev. ed. (Belmont, CA: Fearon,
1984). The examples of each component are derived from Omstein.
24. Omstein and Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Issues; Merlin C.
Wittrock and Eva L. Baker, Testing and Cognition (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1991).
25. Robert J. Kibler, Larry L. Baker, and David T. Miles, Behavioral Objectives and
Instruction, 2nd ed. (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1981); Johanna L. Keirns, Design for
Instruction (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995); Popham, Modern
Educational Measurement.
26. Lynn L. Morris and Carol T. Fitz-Gibbon, How to Deal with Goals and Objectives
(Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1978); David Holdzkom, “The Influence of State Agencies
on Curriculum,” NASSP Bulletin (December 1992): 12-23.
27. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday, 1996).
H A P T E R
Instructional Planning

Articulating clear learning goals for the lesson that are appropriate for the
students. (A2)
Demonstrating an understanding of the connections between the content that
was learned previously, the current content, and the content that remains to be
learned in the future. (A3)
Creating or selecting teaching methods, learning activities, and instructional
materials or other resources that are appropriate for the students and that are
aligned with the goals of the lesson. (A4)
Creating or selecting evaluation strategies that are appropriate for the students
and that are aligned with the goals of the lesson. (A5)
Making learning goals and instructional procedures clear to students. (Cl)
Making content comprehensible to students. (C2)
INTASC Criteria Relevant to This Chapter

The teacher understands the central concepts, tools of inquiry, and structures of
the discipline(s) he or she teaches and can create learning experiences that make
these aspects of subject matter meaningful for students. (Principle #1)
The teacher understands how students differ in their approaches to learning
and creates instructional opportunities that are adapted to diverse learners.
(Principle #3)
123
The teacher understands and uses a variety of instructional strategies to

encourage students’ development of critical thinking, problem solving, and
performance skills. (Principle #4)
The teacher plans instruction based upon knowledge of subject matter, students,
the community, and curriculum goals. (Principle #7)
The teacher understands and uses formal and informal assessment strategies to
evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social and physical development
of the learner. (Principle #8)
Focusing Questions
1. How do teachers plan for instruction? At what levels do they plan?
2. How do teachers map a course of study?
3. What are the main components of a unit plan?
4. What are the main components of a lesson plan?
5. What components would be stressed in a mastery lesson plan? in a creativity
lesson plan?
6. How do unit and lesson plans facilitate teaching and instruction?
Effective planning is based on knowledge of (1) the general goals of the school,
(2) the objectives of the course or subject, (3) students’ abilities, aptitudes,
needs, and interests, (4) content to be included and appropriate units into which
the subject can be divided, and (5) techniques of short-range instruction or les¬
son planning.
Although planning is the shared responsibility of administrators, supervi¬
sors, and teachers, the individual teacher must modify any existing plans and
originate her or his own plans for instruction in the classroom.
How Teachers Plan

Teacher planning is a form of decision making. Planning a course, unit, or les¬
son involves decisions in two areas: (1) subject matter knowledge, concerning
organization and presentation of content, knowledge of student understanding of
content, and knowledge of how to teach the content; and (2) action system
knowledge, concerning teaching activities such as diagnosing, grouping, manag¬
ing, and evaluating students and implementing instructional activities and learn¬
ing experiences.1 Both kinds of knowledge are needed for effective planning for
instruction. Most teachers have knowledge of subject matter, but lack expertise
in various aspects of action system knowledge.
John Zahorik, a researcher who sampled some 200 teachers, argues that
most teachers do not engage in rational planning or make use of objectives.
They tend to emphasize content, materials, resources, and learning activities.2
And in a study of experienced teachers, researchers found that teachers

emphasize subject matter knowledge or content and instructional activities when
planning a daily lesson. Of five planning categories, they spend the least time on
planning objectives.3
According to one curriculum theorist, Gail McCutcheon, when plans are re¬
quired by supervisors, teachers fend to turn in “a shorthand description” of what
they plan to do in class. They “[list] objectives for a lesson in their plan books
only if requested to do so by the principal.” In the teachers’ view, objectives are
implicit in the content and activities of the lesson and need not be shown. For
many teachers, “planning serves as a memory jogger, a list of things to be sure
to accomplish.”4 Because of this view, most teachers do not value the use of ob¬
jectives or of detailed or elaborated plans. Although researchers tend to see logic
in planned lessons, Elliot Eisner at Stanford University points out that most of
what happens in the classroom cannot be observed, measured, or preplanned,
and much of teaching is based on impulse and imagination, and cannot be de¬
signed in advance.5
Regardless of how educational theorists think about the planning process, it
is clear to us that the decisions teachers make during planning strongly influence
their subsequent classroom instruction; plans serve as formal or informal scripts
to which teachers adhere in classrooms.6 In addition, collaborative planning has
On “Teaching Formulas”
Lyn Corno
Adjunct Professor of Education and Psychology
Teachers College, Columbia University
What are principles of teaching and learning? They a core repertoire of pedagogical or instructional
are propositions or “rules of thumb” about teaching knowledge on which to base practice. Teachers must
and learning that can be used to form a theory or the¬ carefully temper and polish this knowledge in their
ories of teaching, and/or to guide educational prac¬ own classrooms as they gain a special kind of “peda¬
tice. Principles of teaching are derived from princi¬ gogical intelligence.” For the novice, such principles
ples of learning and motivation, based on can be essential confidence aids—a kind of defense
psychological theory and research in educational against feelings of incompetence and ineptitude.
psychology, largely research on learning from teach¬ They provide a sense of the structure of the subject
ing. They have a “scientific basis.” Are these formu¬ matter of teaching and its powerful and generative
las to be applied to all teaching situations by all ideas. Teachers in training must systematically re¬
teachers? No! Teaching by formula would be no bet¬ flect on these ideas in light of their own and others’
ter than using a five-step procedure for creative experiences within the craft.
thinking. Principles of teaching and learning provide
an important influence on the behavior of beginning teachers whereby they tend

to consider content and activities, as well as pedagogy, in groups by themselves
or with mentors. What teachers plan together is associated with classroom in¬
struction and student performance on tests.7
Planning by Level of Instruction

Ideally, teachers should engage in four levels of planning: yearly (or term), unit,
weekly, and daily. Planning at each level involves a set of goals, sources of in¬
formation, forms or outlines, and criteria for judging the effectiveness of plan¬
ning. Whereas yearly planning usually is framed around state and school district
recommendations or curriculum guides, unit, weekly, and daily lesson planning
permits wider latitude for teachers to develop their own plans. At the elementary
school level, the principal is usually considered the instructional leader and is re¬
sponsible for checking and evaluating the teachers’ plans. At the secondary
school level, the chair of the various subject or academic areas usually performs
this professional role and works with teachers to improve instructional planning.
Figure 4.1 illustrates the relationship of the different sources of knowledge to
what teachers plan and the possible relationships among those sources.
One researcher points out that when they plan at the yearly level, middle-
grade teachers rely most heavily on (1) previous success and failures, (2) district
curriculum guides, (3) textbook content, (4) student interest, (5) classroom man¬
agement factors, (6) school calendar, and (7) prior experience. When they plan
at the unit, weekly, and daily levels, they are mostly influenced by (1) availabil¬
ity of materials, (2) student interest, (3) schedule interruptions, (4) school calen¬
dar, (5) district curriculum guides, (6) textbook content, (7) classroom manage¬
ment, (8) classroom activity flow, and (9) prior experience.8 According to
Robert Yinger, planning is perceived as rational, logical, and structured, and as
being reinforced by a number of instructional and managerial routines. By the
middle of the school year about 85 percent of the instructional activities are rou-
tinized. In planning, teachers use instructional routines for questioning, monitor¬
ing, and managing students, as well as for coordinating classroom activities.9
But the teacher needs to consider variety and flexibility in planning, as well
as structure and routine, to take into account the students’ differing developmen¬
tal needs and interests. Some students, especially high achievers, divergent
thinkers, and independent learners, learn more in nonstructured and independent
situations, whereas many low achievers, convergent thinkers, and dependent
learners prefer highly structured and directed environments. Similarly, many
teachers are holistic and intuitive in their planning. They do not use detailed
outlines that delineate objectives, content, and activities, but rather use sketchy
outlines and a few last-minute reminders. Some teachers—usually self-confident
and experienced ones—prefer not to be limited by prescriptive models. Subject
matter and grade level can also be factors. Some subjects, as well as the early
Figure 4.1
Flow of teaching
content from the state
level to the classroom
level.
Source: Gary D. Borich, Observational Skills for Effective Teaching (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1999): 185. Reprinted by permission.
y'
grade levels, might lend themselves to fewer prescriptive class activities and to
more exploratory activities.
Mental versus Formal Planning
Gail McCutcheon maintains that the most valuable form of teacher planning at
the classroom level is “the reflective thinking that many teachers engage in be¬
fore writing a unit or lesson plan, or while teaching a lesson.”10 Often the exact
weekly or daily lesson plan is sketchily outlined. Much of what happens is a re¬
flection of what happened in other years when a similar lesson was taught. The
structure develops as the teaching-learning process unfolds and as teachers and
students interact in the classroom. Many actions related to planning cannot be
predetermined in a classroom of thirty or more students who are rapidly interact¬
ing with their teacher.
Mental planning is the teacher’s spontaneous response to events in the
classroom; the teacher considers situations and responds intuitively. (Of course,
that intuition must be well grounded in subject matter and action system knowl¬
edge.) Mental planning is a part of teaching that is crucial for effectiveness, but
it cannot be easily observed, recorded, or detailed. Therefore, it often goes unno¬
ticed and unmentioned as part of the planning process. Mental planning suggests
that instruction (or teaching) is an art that cannot be planned in advance—that a
theory of teaching or a principles (or methods) approach to teaching cannot eas¬
ily be determined or agreed upon. But mental planning is a practical, common,
and effective method of instructional planning.
Formal planning is what most educators and researchers recognize as a le¬
gitimate and necessary instructional activity; it is the part of planning that is re¬
quired and can be seen. Perhaps it is examined so often simply because it can be
prescribed, categorized, classified, and viewed in written form. Formal planning
is structured and task oriented; it suggests that teaching and instruction can be
taught as part of teacher training and staff development.
Courses of Study
A long-range teacher guide is usually called a course of study. In large school

districts the course of study is often prepared by a committee of experts. In small
school districts the teachers, working as a group or as individuals, might develop
their own course of study, within limits defined by state guidelines. As teachers
create courses of study, they must consider (1) needs assessment data, if avail¬
able, from the school or district, (2) goals of the school (or school district),
(3) preassessment or placement evaluation data of the students, such as reading
tests, aptitude tests, self-report inventories, observational reports, and (4) in¬
structional objectives of the course according to district or state guidelines and
grade level or departmental publications.11
A course of study identifies and details the content, concepts, skills, and
sometimes, values to be taught for the entire course and/or discipline. Perform¬
ing this task places the teacher in a better position to do unit and lesson plan¬
ning. It helps teachers to view the course as a whole and to see all the conceptual
Good planning at the

subject or grade level
involves communication
with colleagues.
relationships. Some states require district courses of study in all subject areas, so
you need to see if one is available for the areas you plan to teach.
Strategic Planning
Teachers can make good use of collaborative or joint planning in preparing unit
and lesson plans. The object of strategic planning is to help teachers in plan¬
ning together and sharing their teaching experiences.12
Teachers need to design unit and lesson plans, or any other instructional ac¬
tivity, to help students learn content and process information. The idea is to
blend content with principles of cognition. The teacher continually asks himself
or herself what the students’ capabilities are and when to incorporate particular
instructional techniques. The goal of strategic planning is to enable teachers to
check and clarify various components of the planning stage. The teacher regu¬
larly revises the unit and lesson plan according to student outcomes.
When the planning takes place at the school district or school level, usually
the whole program is looked at—a process that involves students, parents, teach¬
ers, and administrators. Data are gathered and analyzed, which ultimately helps
identify and evaluate specific areas of concern.13 At the departmental or grade
level, strategic planning is usually prompted by teachers and supervisors. Instead
of looking at the whole school program, a part of it is explored by a small group
of teachers.
Unit Plans
A unit plan is a blueprint to clarify what content will be taught by what learning
experiences during a specific period of time. It is a segment of the course of
study. One reason for developing unit plans is related to the theory that learning
that is organized around wholes is more effective than piece-by-piece learning.

Another is the need for teachers to plan experiences in advance to meet the dif¬
ferent kinds of objectives. Advance planning at the unit plan level requires
teachers to survey the entire subject and enables them to be more effective in de¬
signing and structuring the instructional process. The overall view it provides
helps teachers anticipate problems that may arise, especially in terms of prereq¬
uisite content, concepts, and skills.
Components of the Unit Plan
The unit plan consists of six basic components: objectives, content, skills, activi¬
ties, resources and materials, and evaluation (Table 4.1). All should be consid¬
ered when planning a unit, although in many cases all six components do not
have to be specified.
Objectives
Objectives can be behavioral (e.g., given five fractions or decimal problems, the
student will be able to accurately complete at least four) or nonbehavioral (top¬
ics, problems, questions). Most teachers today rely on behavioral objectives (see
Chapter 3) partly because of recent emphasis on them in the professional
literature. The method you use as the core of your plan will depend on your ap¬
proach and the school’s approach to planning units.
Content
The scope of the content should be outlined. The content often includes three
major categories: knowledge, skills, and values. The development of skills is
usually more important at the elementary school level and with teachers who
emphasize mastery learning, although basic skills are being emphasized by more
educators. Knowledge is more important at the secondary school level and with
teachers who emphasize cognitive or inductive learning. Valuing is more a re¬
flection of the individual teacher and school than the specific grade level.
Skills
A list of cognitive and social skills to be developed is sometimes optional. The
skills should be based on the content to be taught but sometimes may be listed as
separate from the content. Important basic skills to develop include critical read¬
ing, skimming and scanning, reading graphic materials (maps, diagrams, charts,
tables), library skills, composition and reporting skills, note-taking skills, home¬
work skills, study skills, social and interpersonal skills, discussion and speaking
skills, cooperative and competitive skills, and leadership skills.
Learning Activities
Learning activities, sometimes called student activities, should be based on im¬
plementing objectives and students needs and interests. Only special activities,
such as guest speakers, field trips, debates and buzz sessions, research reports,
projects, experiments, and summative examinations, need to be listed. The re¬
curring or common activities can be shown as part of the daily lesson plan.
Table 4.1 Unit Plan Components
1. Objectives
General objectives and specific objectives
Behavioral objectives or nonbehavioral objectives (topics, problems, questions)
2. Content
Knowledge (concepts, problem solving, critical thinking)
Skills (cognitive, affective, psychomotor)
Values
3. Skills
Work habits
Discussion and specific communication skills
Reading skills
Writing skills
Note-taking skills
Dictionary skills
Reference skills (table of contents, glossary, index, card catalog)
Library skills
Reporting and research skills
Computer skills
Interpreting skills (maps, charts, tables, graphs, legends)
Inquiry skills (problem solving, experimenting, hypothesizing)
Social skills (respecting rules, accepting criticism, poise and maturity, peer acceptance)
Cooperative and competitive skills (leadership, self-concept, participation in group)
4. Learning activities
Lectures and explanations
Practice and drill
Grouping activities (buzz sessions, panels, debates, forums)
Role playing, simulations, dramatizations
Research, writing projects (stories, biographies, logs)
Experiments
Field trips
Reviews
5. Resources and materials
Written materials (books, pamphlets, magazines, newspapers)
Audiovisual materials (films, records, slides, television, video tapes)
Programmed or computer materials
Models, replicas, charts, graphs, specimens
6. Evaluation procedures
Demonstrations, exhibits, debates
Reviews, summaries
Quizzes, examinations
Reteaching
Remediation
Special Training
Resources and Materials

The purpose of including resources and materials in the plan is to guide the
teacher in assembling the reading material, library and research materials, and
audiovisual equipment needed to carry out instruction. This list at the unit plan
level should include only essential resources and materials. A list of resources is
often covered in a listing of learning activities and so is sometimes considered

an optional element in a unit plan.
Evaluation Procedures
The major evaluation procedures and culminating activities should be included.
These include formative and summative evaluations: student exhibits and
demonstrations, summary debates and discussions, quizzes and examinations,
reteaching, remedial work, and special tutoring or training. Evaluation can be
conducted by students or the teacher or both. The intent is to appraise whether
the objectives have been achieved and to obtain information for improving the
unit plan. See Tips for Teachers 4.1.
Organizing and Implementing Unit Plans
As you prepare your unit and lesson plans, you 8. Determine the order of the content by
should be aware of common mistakes. The idea is to considering cognitive processes (skills,
minimize them by following guidelines that have concepts, problems) and affective processes
proved to be practical, by discussing plans with your (attitudes, feelings, values) involved.
colleagues or supervisor, and by practicing. Below is Developmental theories, mastery learning, or
a list of suggestions that apply to all levels of unit task analysis can be used to determine the
planning and can be adapted to accommodate your order of the units.
school’s requirements and your teaching style and 9. Consider appropriate time allocation for each
instructional approach. unit. Most units will take one to three weeks
to complete.
1. Ask your principal or supervisor for
curriculum guides pertaining to your subject 10. Investigate resource materials and media
and grade level to guide your planning. available in your district and school;
incorporate appropriate materials and media.
2. Ask your colleagues or supervisor for a file
of unit plans to guide your planning. 11. Provide opportunities for student practice
and review.
3. Check the instructor’s manual of the
textbook or workbook, if you are using one; 12. Provide opportunities for evaluation (not
many have excellent examples of unit plans. necessarily testing or marks in early grades).
4. Consider vertical (different grades, same 13. Ask your colleagues or supervisor for
subject) and horizontal (same grade, feedback after you implement your unit
different subjects) relationships of subject plan; discuss questions, problems, and
matter in formulating your unit plans. Be proposed modifications.
sure you understand the relationship between 14. Rewrite or at least modify your unit plan
new information and prior knowledge. whenever you teach the same subject and
5. Consider students’ abilities, needs, and grade level; the world changes, classes
interests as you plan your unit. change, and students differ.
6. Decide on objectives and related content for 15. Be patient. Do not expect immediate results.
the various units of the subject. Practice will not make you perfect, but it
7. After objectives and content have been will make you a better teacher.
established, sequence the units.
Approaches to Unit Planning
Teachers should check with supervisors before planning a unit. Some school dis¬
tricts have a preferred approach for developing units, and others permit more lat¬
itude for their teachers. Some supervisors require teachers to submit units for
final approval, while other supervisors give more professional autonomy to
teachers. Below are basic approaches to unit planning that teachers may wish to
consider. Regardless of the approach you use, we would argue that it is impera¬
tive to consider depth and breadth when developing unit plans. Indeed, one char¬
acteristic of Japanese schools that are renowned for their success is their empha¬
sis on “less is more.” Good teachers cover less material but provide more
opportunities for students to learn specific content material; the teachers rein¬
force what students learn. Reform advocates in education such as E. D. Hirsch
emphasize this view of providing clear focus and specificity in what students are
to learn.
There is another inherent shortcoming in the overreliance on large-scale abstract ob¬

jectives (as opposed to “mere” content) as a means of determining a curriculum.
These general objectives do not compel either a definite or a coherent sequence of
instruction. This is because the large conceptual scheme and its concrete expressions
(through particular contents) have a very tenuous and uncertain relationship to each
other.
A big scheme is just too general to guide the teacher in the selection of particu¬
lars. For instance, one multigrade science objective in our superior local districts
states, “Understand interactions of matter and energy.” This is operationally equiva¬
lent to saying, “Understand physics, chemistry, and biology.” The teachers who
must decide what to include under such ‘objectives’ are given little practical help.14
Grant Wiggins (a leading thinker on assessment) describes more pointedly

the essentialness of depth and breadth thinking. He describes the importance of
“uncoverage” teaching that helps students look into, around and even under¬
neath the content the teacher is presenting. For Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe,
depth and breadth are part of uncoverage. They write:
To “go into depth” on a topic suggests getting below its surface. In what
sense is getting below the surface a key to understanding? A simple analogy re¬
veals what we mean: We may sit in a car and we may know how to drive it, but
that doesn’t mean we understand how it works. For that we need to look under
the hood, literally and figuratively: To be a mechanic, one must know how to
drive—but also know how a car works, why it works, and how to diagnose and
fix it.
By analogy, solving math problems using the algorithm for simultaneous
equations may enable a student to pass a test, but it may hide a lack of deeper un¬
derstanding. To get beyond superficial and somewhat rigid understanding, the
student must know what kind of problem it is, why the formula works in this
case, how to derive the formula, and how this problem is like or unlike other
kinds of problems. Without this ability, the student cannot hope to solve novel
problems or problems that are cast in different language or murky real-world
guise. Without fluid and flexible knowledge of how and why things work, one
cannot accomplish real world goals. . . .
But depth alone on a topic is insufficient; we need breadth, too. Breadth implies
the extensions, variety, and connections needed to relate disparate facts and ideas.
Indeed, breadth brings power and relates to Facet 4: perspective. The dictionary de¬
fines breadth of knowledge as “freedom from narrowness, as of viewpoint.”
To continue our analogy, the successful mechanic needs broad experience with
many different kinds of cars, customers, and diagnostic tools. Excessive and exclu¬
sive depth is no better than excessive coverage; that is, it isn’t effective to focus on a
single idea, digging deeper in the same hole. Any good course of study should pro¬
vide interesting and helpful detail as well as bridges to related topics.15
Taxonomic Approach
Table 4.2 illustrates a unit plan based on the taxonomy of educational objectives.
The objectives are divided into three domains of learning; cognitive processes,
attitudes and values, and psychomotor skills. The unit plan states a daily prob¬
lem that leads to the objectives and shows corresponding activities and materials
and resources. Evaluation is not listed separately, but is blended as part of the
activities. The taxonomic approach combines both behaviorist and cognitive
developmental theory.
Topic Approach
Table 4.3 illustrates the topic approach. The unit plan is organized by topics and
objectives. Objectives introduce the lesson, but the topics serve as the major
basis for outlining the unit. The objectives coincide with the recommendation
that content focus on concepts, skills, and values. Note that the objectives (re¬
lated to knowledge, skills, and values) do not build upon one another (they are
somewhat independent) nor are they divided into general and specific. The top¬
ics are arranged in the order in which they will be treated, suggesting that they
correspond to the table of contents of a textbook. Indeed, it is appropriate to fol¬
low a text, as long as it is well planned and the teacher knows when to modify or
supplement the text with related activities and materials.
The topics also represent daily lesson plans. The activities listed are nonre¬
curring, special activities; repeated activities can be listed at the lesson-plan
level. The activities are listed in the order in which they will occur, but there is
not one particular activity listed for each topic (as in Table 4.2). The evaluation
component is separate and includes formative and summative tests, discussion,
and feedback. Most secondary school teachers rely on the topic approach to unit
planning, since they are subject or content oriented.
Activities Approach
Table 4.4 illustrates a unit approach that deemphasizes topics and objectives
(which most units are based on) and emphasizes various activities. The activities
are sequenced, correspond with the first two (cognitive) objectives, and deter¬
mine the lesson plan schedule. The third objective (affective) overlaps with the
first two objectives—almost as a byproduct. The unit consists of a minimum of
six lessons, listed under activities (sometimes called “class sessions”), and a
possible seventh lesson (review) depending on the results of the unit examina¬
tion. The evaluation component consists of a pretest and a posttest, with follow-
^co co
X<D 'o
3 13
ts 3
I o <D co <D 0
a.
CD -a
5-i
Oh
x S' * K60 £
c O X O c3
O o g w> g -E 2? S
q o CD
" c §3 2 E —J C\J
o 0^ 2
X3
<D
5-i
bX)
3
co ^ cd 3cdO 3= E & g> .2 S'
3 3
3 O <D p, O O CO E 5-s
Source: Harris Cooper, Synthesis of Research on Homework (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. © ASCD. Reprinted by permission. All
0
X) o S 3 X O
E psss 1.2
& H <D —
H o H
3
X
O x
-o
2
CO
O
OX) 3
c CD 3 3
T33 O
o CD .2
co
O
"co
.2
"co > W)
3
CO CO
00 c 3 3 2
K
a. CD
c
O
CO
O
CO
3
• •— o £ c3
E *c
H—>
_3
TJ -E 3 & g X
5-4 O <D
X031)
§ g CO CO CD _3
2 Oh
CO CO T3
*3 13 3
cd 13 X
3 o3 3 5-4 *3
U Q E ffl 0 u 00 PQ
3 3 Xo o
— *o O o 3 c
c CO V
o o X
Co 3 ^ X
5s. c X CD (D 3
£ <D ^
LT3
C/3 CO
O O
o M E-2 T3 4—>
c (Vi
2
3
cd E g CO i
<D
£ 2 to g O £> ‘3 -S cd
3 Oh
Oh .£
4-4 3
0 £
0 3-5 .a e 3 (D O -O .Oh
<D CT^ CO
2 '^ £ e .£- 3
3
3 *3
£ cd
cj § *i-H2 3 5 ■3 a
*3 ? s cr
CO CD OJ
<D
GO 1) O
03 "E CO 2 j5 cs 3
3 CO
•3 > '3 cd <—h 8 '3 'O
3 C .2 > 3 o 13 E cr X 'q 3 5T
^ 0 EP 3 3
o ^ 33 O ^ 0 CD O O 5— cd O cd
H
Unit Plan: Taxonomic Approach for Environmental Science
H H H
CO
-3 q 5-4 3
CO O
-o E
<D P
03 t3 CO
b O <D 3 (D
■g
3 2
.„ x
<L>
^ x:
5—t ■*—» 2 § tt 2 a3
CO <D
2 ,—I CO "0.0 0 O
cd <d
T5 3 2 >, o O u'
G 13
.2
4-; E
0) § 2 -o cd
C3 cd J-
CO 4->
X T3
§ 3
sag <D 03
3 *
_ O
e co S£<2 CT o (U 3 03 3
O 2 <u 1 I
” CO co <U 3 X .2 3
X 3 3 N
D- 3 CO CO e- § ? g -
.2 3 O' d_) OD O
W O 52 ^ 9 'G
C 3 ^3 o .E o .b
<u -5 3 3 £ ^ X0
X <D 0
cP O § b “ 3 <D •2 c
o ^ ^ O > 2 § o 3 H 0 o 3 o -o X a)
H H H H
0 4-. CO
O
3 O 3 x
3 2
<D 3 53 ^ ^ O 0) CO <D u
•a 3 3 £ x X 5b e>x> x
S * <D p 3^2 <D
co o 3 a) ’S c 2 £ 3 o 2
E
3 y
S 3 o 53 o 1 y 3 x > w O CO 3 _ 03 o. o CO •rp 5-1
2 2 cd C4_ X Xo O 5-1 o3 X 0 0
5-h •— GO r03
4-h 0- 2
•2 -2
CO 2
cd
3 O
cd CO
*3
>
CO
^ 2 ^ CD ’> X _co E * 2 .3 X3 3
3 r- ^43 o • s 5 x £r* X 3 X .2 3 3
« H—
3 CD
0 o g
3‘3
N 2
3
DXo
a-. .
e 03
'3 c 3
§) 2 o3
3 £ ” 'g ^ £
o 2 g § 3
o s « «*
• r-
3 X)
OJ
<D CD
CO bX)
i | |!
•3 £
3
cd
X <D3
M O
CO 3
3 CD
cd c
s ^
§..So c
O ■X
o 3 X
3 3 -
•S ° ' 3
O .O
o 3
OX) O 3 o x .3 X
O
X)
0
£
■— •5b
3o o
W) 0)
<D T3
bX) O
3 ’O
Oh zr>
00 3 ~a «og 5-1 co H-* ‘— 0. 3 -o x8 3
0 0)co *oo cd<d .3> g o 2 T3 "O b ■o CD 3 <D C O 3
£
*0
• i-H C3 .2 5-3 8 a .2 O X X • •“» >
P=^» o3 3 -2 ’> ~a 3(U
3 ^3 3 3
(U
co O
X
B* Xcd
cd o5- 3>
§ x
x 2 cd £
X (D 'O O 5-4
3
O 4-
o -o x o o c ^ H o Oh O o <D O o 3 O O (D O O o o o O 3 O Oh O O
H H H H H H H
CD <D
CO CD C>X)
c & 3
O <D3 cd u c cd 3 o
Oh tu co x ^ o
X O <D
Oh £
3
£
O
2 p X 4-4 3 Oh -i-H
O cd XJ
’A 0 O la c
T3 O •S 2 O O
•— cd CO E X 3
cd
Co c CO X .b O CO <D § W) CO bX) O co X3
> 00-g _3 CD ’> .3 X bX)
■S E 3 (D
Problem
Other ways t
environment
13 3 •E g •E qj 3 3 bX) .3
eo u g> g CD N <0 3 0 3 <D
3 <D CD ba CD c "n bX)
■S g bX) (D ;> Q E .3 E cd .3
rights reserved.
3 <D "C
iE us •5c -go 03
3 3
Table 4.2
1l bX) O' "5b £ — 3 3 X E

§ § 04 0 .3 a CD O. 0 0> 05-h 0<D £ td
4-» 5-4
3 ■“ £ •>
Oh
6 > 4 c q
x CO 3 2 £ H a
<D > £ O4 (D
3 3 cd Oh '> 1-4 ’> >
3 3 cd
3
3 2
-O
►b (D3 r9 c
U (D H O
O 1I PQ ^5—o O X £ 0 3
D O CD <D C/3 CD X C/3 >
(D
4-3 (N rn 2 CX5 ON d
if' 135
Table 4.3 Unit Plan: Topic Approach for American History
Objectives
I. Knowledge
1. To recognize that the U.S. Constitution is rooted in English law
2. To identify the causes and events leading to the forming of the U.S. Constitution
3. To argue the advantages and limitations of the U.S. Constitution
4. To illustrate how amendments are enacted
II. Skills
1. To expand vocabulary proficiency
2. To improve research skills
3. To improve oral reporting skills
4. To expand reading habits to include historical events and people
5. To develop debating techniques
III. Values
1. To develop an understanding that freedom is based on laws
2. To recognize the obligations of freedom (among free people)
3. To appreciate how rights are protected
4. To develop a more positive attitude toward minorities
5. To develop a more positive attitude toward classmates
Topics
I. Historical background of the Constitution
1. English common law
2. Magna Carta
3. Mayflower Compact
4. Colonial freedom
5. Taxation without representation
6. Boston Tea Party
7. First and Second Continental Congress
8. Declaration of Independence
9. Age of Enlightenment and America
II. Bill of Rights and the Constitution
1. Constitutional Convention
2. Framing of the Constitution
3. Bill of Rights
a. Reasons
b. Specific freedoms
4. Powers reserved to the states
5. Important amendments
a. Thirteenth, Fourteenth, Fifteenth (slavery, due process, voting rights)
b. Nineteenth (women’s suffrage)
c. Twentieth (progressive tax)
d. Twenty-second (two-term limit to presidency)
e. Others
Evaluation
1. Short quiz for I. 1-9
2. Graded reports with specific feedback for each student; half a lesson
3. Discussion of students’ role as citizens in a free society; compare rights and responsibilities of
American citizens with rights and responsibilities of students; a full lesson or one day
4. Unit test; review I. 1-9; II. 1-5
Continued
Table 4.3 Continued
Activities
1. Filmstrip introducing part I
2. List of major points to be discussed in part I
3. Homework—reading list for each topic or lesson (I. 1-9; II. 1-5)
4. Television program on “American Freedom” and discussion after 1.9
5. Field trip to historical museum as culminating activity for I and introduction to II
6. Topics and reports for outside reading, with two-day discussion of reports after II.3
7. Two-day debate (with four teams): “What’s wrong with our Constitution?” “What’s right with our
Constitution?” after II.5
Table 4.4 Unit Plan: Activities Approach for English
Topic: Correctly Punctuating with Commas
Objectives: Upon completion of this unit the students will

1. Correctly use comma rules found in the grammar text
2. Correctly punctuate with commas in writing their own compositions
3. Recognize the value of correct commas in comprehensible writing
Content (concepts)
1. Comma use in a series of three or more items, persons, or places—one class session
2. Comma use to separate appositives—one class session
3. Comma use in prepositional phrases—one class session
4. Comma use in compound sentences—two class sessions
Activities (class sessions)

1. Pretest (see evaluation): short-answer questions and descriptive paragraphs
2. Discussion and explanations of comma rules based on test and text
3. Practice writing sentences and paragraphs orally and in writing
4. Pair off students to edit each other’s personal letters and compositions
5. Follow-up discussion related to letters and compositions
6. Posttest (see evaluation)
7. Review (if necessary)
Materials (media)
1. Text: Jones and Jones, Language Use for Students
2. Students’ sentences, paragraphs, letters, and compositions
3. Overhead projector
Evaluation
1. Pretest: ten sentences, two student paragraphs
2. Posttest
a. Twenty sentences with at least 80 percent correct
b. Students’ composition with at least 80 percent correct
Review
1. Review: based on posttest scores
Source: Allan C. Ornstein, Secondary and Middle School Teaching Methods (New York: HarperCollins, 1992),
563.
138 Section 11 The Technical Skills of Teaching
up for review and reteaching if necessary. In general, the approach is not de¬
tailed and assumes a certain amount of flexibility and fill-in on the unit as it is
taught by the teacher. Elementary school teachers use this approach more often
than secondary teachers in order to keep younger students actively involved in
their academic work.
Guidelines for Developing Unit Plans

The number of units and the time allotted and emphasis for each unit are mat¬
ters of judgment, although school practitioners tend to recommend about 15 to
30 units for a year’s course and about 5 to 10 lessons per unit. Consideration is
usually given to the organization of the textbook; the emphasis suggested by
state and school district curriculum guides; the special abilities, needs, and in¬
terests of the students; and ways in which ideas can be conceptually linked be¬
tween disciplines. A good unit enables students to see ideas from more than one
disciplinary perspective. If it is true that learning is nothing more than the
process of making meaning, then teachers need to make certain that as they
structure lessons, they organize the content in ways that help students see the
connections between different disciplines and skills they are learning. One
prominent educational researcher refers to the importance of integration when
teaching. For Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton, “Integration means that literacy
events and acts are not broken down into subskills . . . ; that reading, writing,
speaking, and listening are treated as different aspects of the same fundamental
linguistic process; and that every school subject makes important literacy con¬
tributions.”16 Also, according to test specialists, there is an increasing tendency
for teachers to plan units around national, state, and school district testing pro¬
grams, what is sometimes called “outcome-based” instruction or “high-stakes”
evaluation.17
Having already outlined the basic components of the unit plan, we now pro¬
vide suggestions that deal with some of the details. These suggestions are ap¬
plicable for all subjects and grade levels.
1. Develop the unit plan with a particular class or group of students in

mind.
2. Indicate the subject, grade level, and length of time to teach the unit.
3. Outline the unit around a general theme or idea (the unit title).
4. Identify the general objectives, problems, or topics of the unit. Each
objective, problem, or topic should correspond to a specific lesson plan
(this is discussed later in this chapter in the section “Lesson Plans”).
5. Include one or more of the following: (a) content and activities,
(b) cognitive processes and skills, (c) psychomotor skills, and
(d) attitudes and values.
6. Identify methods for evaluating the outcomes of the unit. Possibly
include a pretest and posttest to determine learning outcomes or
improvement in learning.
7. Include resources (materials and media) needed to supplement the text.

8. Plan an effective way of introducing the unit, possibly an overview
exercise, problem, or recent event.
9. Design parts of the unit for different types of learners (some hands-on
activities, some inquiry strategies).
10. Develop the unit to include the life experiences of the students or out-
of-school activities such as field trips, or work in the library or
community.
Lesson Plans
A lesson plan sets forth the instructional activities for each day; it is sometimes
referred to as a daily plan. In general, the lesson plan should be planned around
the fixed periods (usually 35 to 50 minutes) of the typical school schedule, al¬
lowing adequate time for teachers or students to arrive (if they are changing
classrooms) and to leave at the end of the period. Shorter blocks of time can be
allowed for younger students or for those whose attention span is limited. Time
periods are longer in high schools that have BLOCK scheduling (schools that
schedule students into class, for example, every other day for longer time peri¬
ods each day they do meet). Good scheduling and lesson planning are essential
to good instruction and good classroom management.
Although special school activities might require shortened or lengthened pe¬
riods, most lessons should be planned for full periods. Sometimes students need
more or less time to finish an activity or assignment, and teachers need to learn
how to be flexible in adjusting timing. As teachers develop their planning and
pacing skills, they learn to plan better schedules in advance and to plan supple¬
mentary activities and materials for use or elimination as the need arises, to
maintain a good pace. Additional activities might include performing a commit¬
tee function, completing a research assignment, finishing a workbook assign¬
ment, illustrating a composition or report, working on a study activity, perform¬
ing an honor or extra credit assignment, or tutoring another student. Additional
materials might include pictures, charts, and models to further demonstrate a
major point in the lesson, review exercises for practice and drill, and a list of
summary questions to review major points of the lesson.
To avoid over- or underemphasis on a particular topic, the teacher needs to
consider her or his style of teaching and the students’ abilities and interests. The
teacher should review the progress of each day’s lesson and periodically take
notes on important student responses to different methods, media, and activi¬
ties—to reuse with another class or at another time. Inexperienced teachers need
to plan the lessons in detail, follow the plan, and refer to it frequently. As they
grow in experience and confidence, they become able to plan with less detail
and rely more on their spontaneous responses to what happens in the classroom
as the teaching-learning process unfolds.
y'
Lesson Plans by Authorities

Many current authorities who write about what a lesson plan should contain
write from the point of view of direct instructional methods (see Chapter 5)—
that is, a view of the classroom in which teaching is teacher-directed, methods
and materials are sequenced, content is extensive and focused, students are pro¬
vided with practice as the teacher checks or monitors the work, and the teacher
provides evaluation of performance. The objectives are clearly stated in the be¬
ginning of the lesson, and a review either precedes or follows the statement of
objectives. Learning takes place in an academic, subject-centered environment.
There is little mention or concern about student needs or interests; emphasis is
on student abilities and achievement.
The authors whose views are listed in Table 4.5 (Madeline Hunter, Robert
Gagne, Thomas Good and Jere Brophy) all exhibit this direct, step-by-step ap¬
proach to learning. All lesson plan components and classroom events are con¬
trolled by the teacher, no provision is made for student choice or planning, and
the classroom is highly structured and businesslike. Most important, the empha¬
sis is on knowledge, skills, and tasks, as well as practice, review, and testing.
Very few, if any, of the prescriptions seem directed to problem solving, critical
thinking, or creativity, much less personal, social, or moral development.
Although the authorities listed in the table might not concur, we would as¬
sert that their approaches apply mainly to the teaching of basic skills and dis¬
crete processes (i.e. how to do something in a step-by-step fashion) and in basic
subjects such as reading, mathematics, and foreign language, where practice and
drill are recommended. They are not as effective, if they can be used at all, in
teaching inquiry or discovery learning or creative thinking.
Components of the Lesson Plan

There is no one ideal format to follow for a lesson plan. Teachers should modify
the suggestions of methods experts and learning theorists to coincide with their
personal teaching style and the suggestions of their school or district. Both Path-
wise criteria and ENTASC standards require careful attention to planning.
New York City, the nation’s largest school district, recommends that begin¬
ning teachers include the following seven components in a lesson plan:
1. Specific objectives of the lesson

2. Appropriate motivation to capture the students’ interest and maintain it
throughout the lesson
3. Development or outline of a lesson (sometimes referred to as content or
activities)
4. Varied methods, designed to help students learn different types of
material
5. Varied materials and media to supplement and clarify content
6. Medial and final summaries
7. Provision for an assignment or homework 18
Table 4.5 Lesson Plan Components by Authorities
Instruction Behaviors
Mastery Learning Instructional Design (Good and Grouws,
(Hunter) (Gagne) Good and Brophy)
1. Review. Focus on previous lesson; 1. Gain attention. Alert students to what 1. Review. Review concepts and skills
ask students to review questions to expect; get students started on a related to homework; provide review
orally or in writing; ask students to routine or warm-up drill. exercises.
summarize main points. 2. Inform learner of objective. Activate 2. Development. Promote student
2. Anticipatory set. Focus students’ the learners’ motivation by informing understanding of new material;
attention on lesson to be presented; them of the objective to be achieved. provide examples, explanations,
stimulate interest in new material. 3. Recall prior knowledge. Remind demonstrations.
3. Objective. State explicitly what will students of previously learned 3. Assess student comprehension. Ask
be learned; state rationale or how it knowledge or concepts germane to questions; provide controlled practice.
will be useful. new material; recall relevant 4. Seatwork. Provide uninterrupted
4. Input. Identify needed knowledge prerequisites. seatwork; get everyone involved;
and skills for learning new lesson; 4. Present the stimulus material. Present sustain momentum.
present material in logical and new knowledge or skills; indicate 5. Accountability. Check the students’
sequenced steps. distinctive properties of the concepts work.
5. Modeling. Provide several examples to be learned. 6. Homework. Assign homework
of demonstrations throughout the 5. Provide learning guidance. Elaborate regularly; provide review problems.
lesson. on directions, provide assistance; 7. Special reviews. Provide weekly
6. Check for understanding. Monitor integrate new information with reviews (exercises, quizzes) each
students’ work before they become previous (long-term memory) Monday to enhance and maintain
involved in lesson activities; check information. learning; provide monthly reviews
to see they understand the directions 6. Elicit performance. Suggest, do not every fourth Monday to further
or tasks. specify, methods for performing tasks enhance and maintain learning.
7. Guided practice. Periodically ask or problems; provide cues or
students questions or problems and directions, not answers (students are
check their answers. The same type to provide answers).
of monitoring and response formats 7. Provide feedback. Reinforce learning
are involved in checking for by checking students’ work and
understanding as in guided practice. providing frequent feedback,
8. Independent practice. Assign especially during the acquisition stage
independent work or practice when of the new material. Use feedback to
it is reasonably sure that students adapt instruction to individual
can work on their own with minimal students.
effort. 8. Assess performance. Inform students
of their performance in terms of
outcomes; establish an “expectancy”
level.
9. Ensure retention and transfer. Utilize
various instructional techniques to
ensure retention (outline, classify
information, use tables, charts, and
diagrams). Enhance transfer of
learning by providing a variety of
cues, practice situations, and
interlinking concepts.
Source: Allan C. Ornstein, Secondary and Middle School Teaching Methods. © 1992 by HarperCollins. Reprinted by permission
of Addison-Wesley Educational Publishers, Inc.
The teacher can vary how much time he or she spends on each component,
how much detail is included in each, and which components are included. With
experience the teacher discovers the most useful components to include and the
amount of detail needed in the plan as a whole. See Tips for Teachers 4.2.
Objectives
The first questions a teacher considers when sorting out the content she or he
plans to teach are these: What do I plan to teach? What do I want the students to
learn from the lesson that will be worthwhile? The answers to these questions
lead to our objectives; they form the backbone of the lesson. Motivation, meth¬
ods, and materials are organized to achieve the objectives. Establishing objec¬
tives militates against aimlessness.
Tips for Teachers 4,2
Monitoring the Lesson Plan
One school district in Aurora, Colorado has devised 3. Students grouped homogeneously
a procedure for monitoring the lesson plan—that is, 4. Excessive or no purpose for chalkboard work
seeing if the curriculum is being implemented at the
5. Teacher grading papers while students do
classroom level. Events in the classroom are identi¬
homework or students doing homework on
fied as green or red flags, with green signifying ef¬
own; homework consisting of an excessive
fective strategies and red signifying ineffective
number of similar problems
strategies. The teacher can use this list for self-
6. Students repeating operations they have
evaluation, or students, colleagues, or supervisors
mastered
can use it to provide feedback to the teacher.
7. Class bogged down on “mastery” of specific
operations
Green Flags 8. No diagnostic testing
1. Heterogeneous classes with groups within 9. Lack of variety of strategies and class
activities
2. Student interest and teacher enthusiasm
10. Too much or too little [explanation and]
3. Recognizing that students may change in
demonstration
skills
11. Students not understanding purposes of their
4. Integration of problem solving
homework
5. Students applying [content] to real-life
12. Rigidity of [student] groupings—no fluidity
situations
of movement to allow for weaknesses,
6. Use of manipulatives
strengths, or ability
7. Enrichment activities available to students
13. [Lack of] checking for understanding
14. Overemphasis on “drill and practice”
Red Flags 15. Never any use of [supplementary materials
or media]
1. All students in the class doing the same
assignments Source: Deborah Lynch and Tom Maglaras, “Monitoring the
Curriculum: From Plan to Action,” Educational Leadership
2. No or excessive homework (October 1988): 46, 2:59, Figure 2.
Instructional objectives can be phrased as statements or questions. (Most

people think they can only be written as statements.) The question form encour¬
ages students to think. Regardless of how they are phrased, whenever possible
they should be written on the chalkboard or on a printed handout for students to
see. Here are some examples of objectives for a lesson plan, written first as a
statement and then as a question:
Statement: To compare the prices of agricultural goods and industrial goods

during the depression.
Question: Why did the prices of agricultural goods decline more than the
prices of industrial goods during the depression?
Statement: To explain how the production of oil in the Middle East affects
economic conditions in the United States.
Question: How does the production of oil in the Middle East affect
economic conditions in the United States?
Statement: To identify how the skin protects people from diseases

Question: How does our skin protect us from diseases?
The major objective of a lesson might have ancillary (secondary) objectives.

Ancillary objectives divide the lesson into segments and highlight or supplement
important ideas. Below is an example of a lesson objective with two ancillary
objectives (expressed as statements and then questions):
la. Lesson objective: To explain the causes of World War I. Ancillary

objectives: To compare nationalism, colonialism, and militarism; to
distinguish between propaganda and facts.
lb. Lesson objective: What were the causes of World War I? Ancillary
objectives: How are nationalism, colonialism, and militarism related? How
can we distinguish between propaganda and facts?
Motivation
Motivational devices or activities arouse and maintain interest in the content to
be taught. Fewer motivational devices are needed for students who are intrinsi¬
cally motivated (that is, are motivated to learn to satisfy some inner need or in¬
terest) than for students who are extrinsically motivated (that is, require incen¬
tives or reinforcers for learning). Lesson planning and instruction must seek to
enhance both forms of motivation.
1. Intrinsic Motivation. Intrinsic motivation involves sustaining or increas¬

ing the interest students already have in a topic or task. Intrinsic motivation is
the best type of motivation because it starts with what the student wants to
know. The teacher selects and organizes the lesson so that it will (a) whet
students’ appetite at the beginning of the lesson; (b) maintain student curiosity
and involvement in the work by using surprise, doubt, or perplexity, novel as
well as familiar materials, and interesting and varied methods; (c) provide active
and manipulative opportunities; (d) permit student autonomy in organizing time
and effort; and (e) provide choices or alternatives to meet requirements of the
lesson. Some activities and materials that can be used to enhance intrinsic moti¬
vation are these:
• Challenging statements. “Nuclear power plants are unnecessary and

potentially dangerous.”
• Pictures and cartoons. “How does this picture illustrate the American
public’s feelings toward Japanese-made automobiles?”
• Personal experiences. “What type of clothing is best to wear during
freezing weather?”
• Problems. “What metals conduct heat well? Why?”
• Exploratory and creative activities. “I need three volunteers to come to the
chalkboard to fill in the blanks of the puzzle, while the rest of you do it in
your seats.”
• Charts, tables, graphs, maps. “From a study of the chart, what
characteristics do all these animals have in common?”
• Anecdotes and stories. “How does the paragraph I have just read convey
the author’s feelings about the South?”
• Contests and games. “Let’s see how well you remember yesterday’s
homework. We will organize five teams by rows. In your notebooks, list
eight different string instruments. You will have two minutes. We will
average the scores. The winning row, with the highest average score, will
receive extra credit.”
An illustration of one of those intrinsic motivators might help the reader see its
power. Several years ago, one of the authors watched a high school teacher
teach a lesson on the amendments of the U.S. Constitution. He began the lesson
by having the students stand, and then he made a series of statements and told
students to sit depending on their appropriate response to his statements: “If you
are not white, sit down. If you are not male, sit down. If you do not have two
dollars in your pocket, sit down.” He then had but one or two students standing.
He informed the class that without the amendments only the standing students
(those who were male, white, “wealthy,” . . . ) would be able to vote. He
wanted them to study which amendments enabled them “to stand” but he wanted
them to “experience” it before he had them study it.
2. Extrinsic Motivation. Extrinsic motivation focuses on cognitive strategies.

Activities that enhance success and reduce failure increase motivation. High-
achieving students will persist longer than low-achieving students, even when ex¬
periencing failure, so incentives for learning are more important for average and
low-achieving students. They are important for all students when the subject mat¬
ter or content is uninteresting or difficult.19 But they must be used cautiously.
Some basic principles can be used by teachers for enhancing extrinsic
motivation:
• Provide clear directions. Students must know exactly what they are
expected to do and how they will be evaluated.
• Ensure a cognitive match. Student motivation is highest when students

work on tasks or problems appropriate to their achievement levels. When
they are confused or when the work is above their abilities, they resist or
give up. When it is below their abilities, they seek other interests or move
through the lesson as fast as possible.
• Provide prompt feedback. Feedback on student performance should be
constructive and prompt. A long delay between behavior (or performance)
and results diminishes the relationship between them.
• Relate past learning with present learning. Use reinforcers to strengthen
previous learned content.
• Provide frequent rewards. No matter how powerful a reward, it might
have little impact if it is provided infrequently. Small, frequent rewards
are more effective than large, infrequent ones. Praise is a particularly
powerful reward, especially if delivered in a natural voice to students for
specific achievements.20
• Hold high expectations. Students who are expected to learn will learn
more and be motivated to learn more than students who are not expected
to learn.
One cautionary note. Teachers should limit (some would argue “eliminate”) the
use of extrinsic motivators. They seem like an easy way to motivate, but they are
not always the best way. Educational theorist Paul Chance describes how to best
use extrinsics:
The danger of undermining student motivation stems not from extrinsic rewards, but
from the use of inappropriate reward contingencies. Rewards reduce motivation
when they are given without regard to performance or when the performance stan¬
dard is so high that students frequently fail. When students have a high rate of suc¬
cess and when those successes are rewarded, the rewards do not have negative ef¬
fects. Indeed, success-contingent rewards tend to increase interest in the activity.
The evidence, then, shows that extrinsic rewards can either enhance or reduce in¬
terest in an activity, depending on how they are used. Still, it might be argued that,
because extrinsic rewards sometimes cause problems, we might be wise to avoid
their use altogether. The decision not to use extrinsic rewards amounts to a decision
to rely on alternatives. What are those alternatives? And are they better than extrin¬
sic rewards? 21
Development
The development, sometimes called the outline, can be expressed as topics and
subtopics, a series of broad or pivotal questions, or a list of activities (methods
and materials). Most secondary teachers rely on topics or questions, and most el¬
ementary teachers refer to activities.
Emphasis on topics, concepts, or skills indicates a content orientation in
teaching approach. Emphasis on activities has a more sociopsychological orien¬
tation; there is more stress on student needs and interests. For example, outlining
the problems of the ozone layer on the chalkboard is content oriented. Interview¬
ing someone about the ozone layer is an activity that encompasses a wide range
of social stimuli.
Several criteria have been proposed for selecting and organizing appropriate
content and experiences in the development section. The following are criteria
for content developed by Allan Ornstein and Frances Hunkins.22
1. Validity. The content selected should be verifiable, not misleading or

false.
2. Significance. The content needs to be constantly reviewed so that
worthwhile content—basic ideas, information, principles of the
subject—is taught, and lessons do not become cluttered by masses of
more trivial content now available through the “information
explosion.”
3. Balance. The content should promote macro and micro knowledge;
students should experience the broad sweep of content, and they should
have the opportunity to dig deep.
4. Self-sufficiency. The content should help students learn how to learn; it
should help them gain maximum sufficiency in the most economic
manner.
5. Interest. Content is best learned when it is interesting to the student.
Some progressive educators urge that the child should be the focus of the
teaching and learning process.
6. Utility. The content should be useful or practical in some situation
outside the lesson, either to further other learning or in everyday
experiences. How usefulness is defined depends on whether a teacher is
subject-centered or student-centered, but most teachers would agree that
useful content enhances the human potential of the learner.
7. Learnability. It should be within the capacity of the students to learn the
content. There should be a cognitive match between the students’
aptitudes and the subject (and between their abilities and academic tasks).
8. Feasibility. The teacher needs to consider the time needed, resources and
materials available, curriculum guides, state and national tests, existing
legislation, and the political climate of the community. There are
limitations on what can be planned and taught.
Methods
Relying on the same methods day after day would be boring, even for adults.
Different procedures sustain and enhance student motivation throughout the les¬
son. Although many different procedures can be employed in a lesson, four
basic methods for teaching specific concepts and discrete skills are (1) practice
and drill, (2) questioning, (3) explanation and discussion, and (4) demonstrations
and experiments. Depending on the type of lesson—as well as the students, sub¬
ject, and grade level—these instructional strategies should be used in varying
degrees.
Materials and Media

Media and materials, sometimes referred to as resources or instructional aids, fa¬
cilitate understanding and foster learning by clarifying verbal abstractions and
arousing interest in the lesson. Many materials and media are available. The
teacher’s selection should depend on the objectives and content of the lesson
plan; the age, abilities, and interests of the students; the teacher’s ability to use
the resources; the availability of the materials and equipment; and the classroom
time available. The materials and media can be in the form of (1) visuals such as
posters, slides, graphs, films, and videos; (2) reading materials such as pam¬
phlets, magazines, newspapers, reports, and books; (3) listening media such as
radio, records, tapes, and television; (4) verbal activities such as speeches, de¬
bates, buzz sessions, forums, role playing, and interviews; (5) motor activities
such as games, simulations, experiments, exercises, and manipulative materials;
(6) construction activities such as collages, paintings, logs, maps, graphs, draw¬
ings, and models; and (7) computer software that complements unit activities.
The materials and media should be
1. Accurate and up-to-date

2. Large enough to be seen by all the students
3. Ready for use (check in advance of the lesson)
4. Interesting and varied
5. Suited for developing the objective(s) of the lesson
6. Properly displayed and used throughout the lesson
Many lessons fail because materials or media that were needed were inade¬
quate, unavailable, or inappropriate for the level of the students. If students need
to bring special materials for a task or project, they should be told far in advance
so that they may obtain them. The teacher should be sure that necessary equip¬
ment is available, scheduled in advance, set up on the appropriate day, and in
working order.
Summaries
Teachers cannot assume that learning is taking place in the class as a whole (or
even with the majority) just because they have presented well-organized expla¬
nations and demonstrations or because some students give correct answers to
questions. Some students might have been daydreaming or even confused while
other students answered questions and while the demonstrations took place. To
ensure understanding of the lesson and to determine whether the objectives of
the lesson have been achieved, teachers should include one or more of the fol¬
lowing types of summaries.
There should be a short review of each lesson in which the lesson as a
whole and important or confusing parts are summarized. A short review can take
the following forms:
1. Pose several thought-provoking questions that summarize previous

learning (or previous day’s homework).
2. Ask for a comparison of what has already been learned with what is
being learned.
if*
3. Ask a student to summarize the main ideas of the lesson. Have other
students make modifications and additions.
4. Assign review questions (on the chalkboard or in the workbook or

textbook).
5. Administer a short quiz.
During the lesson at some point when a major concept or idea has been ex¬
amined, it is advisable to present a medial summary—a series of pivotal ques¬
tions or a problem that will bring together the information that has been dis¬
cussed. Medial summaries slow down the lesson; however, they are important
for low-achieving and young students who need more time to comprehend new
information and more links with prior knowledge. A final summary is needed
to clinch the basic ideas or concepts of the lesson. If you realize that it is impos¬
sible to teach everything you planned, then end the lesson at some logical point
and provide a summary of the content you have covered. Each lesson should be
concluded or brought to closure by a summary activity, not by the bell.
Assignments
The work that students are requested to do at home should furnish them with the
content (knowledge, skills, and tasks) needed to participate in the next day’s les¬
son. Following are some characteristics of effective assignments—also see
Table 4.6.
1. The homework should be interesting.

2. Attention should be directed to definite concepts or problems.
3. Questions should be framed so as to provide background information
necessary to answer the teacher’s questions on the following day.
4. Homework should periodically incorporate previously taught content to
reinforce learning.
5. The assignment should provide opportunities for students to grow in
written (or symbolic) expression, reading, or important skills related to
the subject.
6. Provision should be made for individual differences. There should be
minimum assignments for all students with enrichment levels for high-
achieving students.
7. The new assignment can be from the chalkboard or photocopied and
distributed at the beginning or end of the period, but any discussion
should be at the end and grow out of the lesson in a logical manner.
8. Homework should be explained, and practice or examples given if
necessary. Problems that arose for students when they were doing the
homework should be examined briefly in class at the end of the period.
9. Assignments should not be dictated, because of the time dictation takes
and the errors students make in recording oral assignments. The
homework either should be written on and copied from the chalkboard
at the beginning of the period while the teacher engages in
administrative or clerical tasks, or it should be duplicated and handed
out on a weekly basis (for younger students) or monthly basis (for older
students).
Table 4.6 A Policy for Effective Homework Assignments
A Recommended Homework Policy
For Districts
Homework is a cost-effective instructional technique. It can have positive effects on achievement

and character development and can serve as a vital link between the school and family.
Homework should have different purposes at different grades. For younger students, it should foster
positive attitudes, habits, and character traits. For older students, it should facilitate knowledge
acquisition in specific topics.
Homework should be required at all grade levels, but a mixture of mandatory and voluntary
homework is most beneficial.
The frequency and duration of mandatory assignments should be:
1. Grades 1 to 3 - one to three assignments a week, each lasting no more than 15 minutes
2. Grades 4 to 6 - two to four assignments a week, each lasting 15 to 45 minutes
3. Grades 7 to 9 - three to five assignments a week, each lasting 45 to 75 minutes
4. Grades 10 to 12 - four to five assignments a week, each lasting 75 to 120 minutes
For Schools
The frequency and duration of homework assignments should be further specified to reflect local
school and community circumstances.
In schools where different subjects are taught by different teachers, teachers should know:
1. What days of the week are available for them for assignments
2. How much daily homework time should be spent on their subject
Administrators should:
1. Communicate the district and school homework policies to parents
2. Monitor the implementation of the policy
3. Coordinate the scheduling of homework among different subjects, if needed
Teachers should state clearly:
1. How the assignment is related to the topic under study
2. The purpose of the assignment
3. How the assignment might best be carried out
4. What the student needs to do to demonstrate that the assignment has been completed
For Teachers
All students in a class will be responsible for the same assignments, with only rare exceptions.
Homework will include mandatory assignments. Failure to turn in mandatory assignments will
necessitate remedial activities.
Homework will also include voluntary assignments meant to meet the needs of individual students or
groups of students.
All homework assignments will not be formally evaluated. They will be used to locate problems in
student progress and to individualize instruction.
Topics will appear in assignments before and after they are covered in class, not just on the day they
are discussed.
Homework will not be used to teach complex skills. It will generally focus on simple skills and
material or on skills already possessed by the student.
Parents will rarely be asked to play a formal instructional role in homework. Instead, they should be
asked to create a home environment that facilitates student self-study.
Source: Harris Cooper, “Synthesis of Research on Homework,” Educational Leadership (November 1989): 90.
10. The length of the assignment will vary by grade level and subject. It is
generally thought that homework in grades 1 to 3 should not exceed 15
to 30 minutes per day; grades 4 to 6, 45 minutes; grades 7 to 9, 15 to 30
minutes per subject; and grades 10 to 12, 20 to 45 minutes per subject.
Lengthy assignments discourage students, especially slow students, and
create anxiety and stress—see also Table 4.6.
11. For variety, assignments might include (a) notebook and textbook
assignments, (b) working on projects, (c) writing letters, articles, or
reports, (d) analyzing television programs, (e) reading related books
and articles, (f) interviewing people and visiting places in the
community, and (g) conducting or summarizing an experiment or being
involved in a hands-on activity.
12. Homework should be monitored for completion and accuracy, and
students should receive timely, specific, and constructive feedback.
Where performance is poor, teachers should provide not only feedback
and additional time for review, but also additional assignments
designed to ensure mastery of content.
Reflections on Planning
As you move from education student to beginning teacher, you will have to ac¬
quire appropriate subject and pedagogical knowledge and develop your own be¬
liefs about teaching and behaviors stemming from those beliefs. Although
teacher education programs can transmit some generalized principles of teaching
and lesson planning, you need to learn to rely on your own experiences and ca¬
pabilities, incorporating them into your own classroom practices. You can also
improve your instruction by observing experienced teachers, conversing with
them, and getting feedback about your instruction. Unless you are experiencing
difficulties with the students, your supervisor or principal might rarely visit your
classroom to observe you and provide feedback, so you may need to interpret
your own instruction to grow professionally.23 Your best barometers are your
students. You need to learn to understand your instruction from a student per¬
spective, because they are the ones you are teaching and who observe you and
interact with you on a daily basis.24
With experience, good teachers grow less egocentric (concerned about
themselves) and more sensitive to student concerns. Such a shift in interest and
focus will help you analyze what is happening in the classroom on an ongoing
basis. By learning to read your students’ verbal and nonverbal behavior, you will
improve your instructional planning. As you put yourself in their place, as stu¬
dents, you should become more attuned to them as individuals—with particular
needs and abilities—as opposed to viewing them as some amoiphous group with
generic problems or concerns.25
Finally, you should be conscious of the fact that good teachers not only plan
for lessons by thinking through objectives and activities, but also by carefully
considering evaluation processes. All the teacher assessment approaches (Path-

wise and INTASC) require that .teachers think through the evaluation process.
This is extremely important because you want to know what you want your stu¬
dents to learn, how they will learn it, and whether they did actually acquire the
understandings that you originally sought to teach. Teachers often consider
the what and the how, but not the whether. Good teachers see the intercon¬
nectedness and clearly sequence new learning experiences on prior student
knowledge.
Sample Lesson Plans

Sample lesson plans are included below to illustrate how the various compo¬
nents of the lesson can be used. Explanations accompanying each plan give
some sense of what the teacher is trying to achieve. The lesson plans are written
for different grade levels and subjects, but the lesson types can be used for all
Integrating Real-Life Experiences

Ralph W. Tyler*
Former Director, Center for Advanced Study in the
Behavioral Sciences, Stanford University
I have been teaching for more than 60 years. In of school are our jobs. In school we are doing your
every one of my classes I have found some students job.”
who have difficulty in learning what I had hoped the From these experiences, I began to realize that I
class would help them leam. At first, I thought these must give my students responsibility for jobs in
students were unable to learn and that they would school, on the playground, and in the neighborhood.
never be successful in their schoolwork. But then, I Then, when they accepted these responsibilities, I
noticed that many of them were learning to play helped them learn to meet these responsibilities suc¬
games, to deliver newspapers, to plan for field trips, cessfully. Now, I try to find out from my students
and to leam to carry out many other activities. what they are trying to do, and then help them to
I asked several students, “Why are you so good at learn how to use reading, mathematics, literature,
learning things outside of school and seem to have science, art, and music by doing well in activities
difficulty with school work and with your home¬ they believe to be important. As students understand
work?” Some said, “The things we learn outside of that they need to learn what schools are expected to
school are real, while school work is dull and not teach, I become their helper, not their slave driver.
real.” Some others said, “The things we do outside Then teaching becomes fun for me.
*Professor Tyler pased away in 1994.

students regardless of age, ability, or subject matter. The words in italics coincide
with the previously discussed components of a lesson plan; they serve as anchors
or highlight the major ideas of the lessons. Notice, in particular, how the home¬
work requires students to use other forms of intelligence in order to assimilate the
meaning of the words. Though there is some controversy over whether teachers
who teach to different forms of intelligence really foster enhanced student
achievement, we would argue that there is little controversy over the fact that
teachers who emphasize different ways of learning and knowing will help reach
the wide range of individuals who constitute most classrooms. Once you teach a
skill, find different ways to help students practice what they have learned.
Flexible Grouping Lesson Plan (Table 4.7)

1. The lesson topic is derived from the unit plan on vocabulary.
2. The primary objective is to teach the meaning of 10 new words. The two
secondary objectives accomplish the primary objective and enhance
dictionary and writing skills.
3. The teacher immediately starts the lesson with a review of the previous
homework. The class as a whole discusses the homework.
4. Only materials specific to the lesson are noted in the lesson plan.
5. The teacher uses the term activities to describe the development or
outline, because the focus of attention is on classroom activities.
6. The class is divided into two groups for the activities. Group I is lower
achieving than group II.
7. Both groups do similar seatwork. Group I is given the extra step of
alphabetizing for extra practice in the process. Group II understands the
need for alphabetical order in searching through the dictionary, so this
step is omitted. Group II is given another, more difficult task of dividing
words into syllables to make up for the one task that was omitted. The
teacher monitors the seatwork of the students and helps anyone with
individual problems.
8. After seatwork, the two groups engage in different activities. The teacher
works with one group while the other is involved in independent work.
For group I the teacher provides a medial summary for feedback, review,
and assessment. (Prompt and varied feedback and review are needed for
the slower group.) Group II engages in independent work, having
selected their own books to read for enjoyment. The teacher then works
with group II in a summary activity, connecting the original objective
with the students’ independent work, while group I does its independent
assignment. Group I has 15 minutes less independent work and 15
minutes more teacher-directed summary work because these students
need more teacher time, are less able to work independently of the
teacher, and are likely to have more problems that need to be discussed.
9. The whole class receives the same homework assignment. Group I is
permitted to start the homework in class so the assignment at home does
Table 4.7 Flexible Grouping Lesson Plan
Middle Grades
Lesson Topic: Vocabulary
Objective: To define 10 new words.

1. To define the meaning of the words using a dictionary.
2. To write the meaning of the new words in a sentence.
Review: Both groups (10 minutes)

1. Correct homework, workbook, pp. 36-39.
2. Focus on questions, p. 39.
Materials: Dictionaries, logs, supplementary books
Development:
Group I: Activities Group II: Activities
Seatwork (15 minutes) Seatwork (15 minutes)

1. Alphabetize the following 10 words; 1. Find each of the following 10 words in
explicit, implicit, appropriate, the dictionary: explicit, implicit,
inappropriate, potential, encounter, appropriate, inappropriate, potential,
diminish, enhance, master, alligator. encounter, diminish, enhance, master,
2. Find each new word in the dictionary. alligator (same words for both groups).
3. Write a definition for each new word. 2. Write a definition for each new word.
3. Divide each new word into syllables.
Medial Summary (15 minutes) Independent Work (15 minutes)

1. Teach new words; students give 1. Continue reading supplementary books.
examples and discuss meaning of new 2. Underline at least five new words in the
words. pages you read.
3. Find their meaning in the dictionary.
Independent Work (10 minutes) Final Summary (10 minutes)

1. Get up-to-date with logs. 1. Discuss the 10 assigned words plus the 5
2. Include the 10 new words in logs. words students have chosen in their
independent reading.
Homework: Both Groups
1. Continue with logs.
2. Write each new word in an original
sentence.
not overwhelm them. The lesson for the day is integrated into the
homework and requires that students use two forms of intelligence that
they did not use during the formal lesson taught by the teacher.
Thinking Skills Lesson Plan (Table 4.8)

1. The lesson topi'c can be part of a separate unit on critical thinking skills,
or it can serve as an introductory lesson for a unit in almost any subject.
2. There is only one objective. It pertains to classifying—a critical thinking

skill.
3. The motivation assumes a certain amount of abstract thinking on the part
of the students. It is verbal as opposed to visual or auditory. The first
question is divergent and open-ended. The second question is more
convergent and focused. The short exercise provides students with a
challenge, introduces them to the main part of the lesson, and shows how
they handle certain information before the lesson. Some words (elephant,
donkey, Lincoln, etc.) can be categorized into various groups, but “table”
does not belong in any category. (It serves as irrelevant information to
see how students handle it.)
4. The development is a set of procedures or operations to teach students
how to classify information. The pivotal questions are to be introduced at
different stages of the lesson. They stimulate discussion, clarify points,
and check understanding. They are divergent in nature and provide
students with latitude in the way they can answer; the teacher must listen
carefully to the responses, because the answers are not necessarily right
or wrong, but involve, in part, viewpoints and subjectivity.
5. The summary is a series of important or key questions that lead to a
discussion and elaboration of what has been taught. The length of the
summary discussion is based on the time permitted. Question 1 is vague,
and students might not respond, or might respond in a way that the
teacher does not expect. Questions 2 and 3 are more focused. Question 4
leads to a good overview and reinforcement exercise. (The teacher might
or might not have time to use it.)
6. The homework is based on the lesson and leads to a slightly more
advanced type of thinking and relies on different aspects of intrapersonal
intelligence.
Mastery Learning Lesson Plan (Table 4.9)
1. Subtraction as a lesson topic is introduced in the second grade in most

school districts and continued in the third grade.
2. The objective is written in terms of a performance level.
3. Mastery learning lessons entail a good deal of practice and review.
4. The motivation is in the form of two separate problems that involve real-
life experiences and interests.
5. Only unusual materials are listed. Popsicle sticks, baseball cards, or any
other items easy to count can be used in lieu of checkers.
6. The development is in the form of problems and related activities. The
problems, involving one and two-digit numbers, coincide with the
worksheet level the students have reached. The teacher explains each
problem and then introduces the related activity. While students work on
the activity, the teacher moves around the room and monitors their work.
The problems get progressively more difficult. Each item that is missed
Table 4.8 Thinking Skills Lesson Plan
Grade: 6-12
Lesson Topic: Classifying information
Objective: To classify information on the basis of similar or common attributes
Motivation:
1. Into what groups would you classify the following information: Kennedy, table, elephant, Lincoln, Roosevelt, Chicago, Nixon,
Boston, Bush, donkey and San Francisco?
2. Why should we learn to classify information into categories or groups?
Development: Pivotal Questions

1. Procedures. Discuss at least three reasons for classifying la. When do you classify information? Why?
information. lb. What happens to information that is not organized?
Why?
2. Skim text (pp. 48-55) to get an idea of important items or
ideas that might be classified.
3. Agree on categories (groups or labels) to be used in 3a. What advantages are there to the categories?
classifying information in text. 3b. What are their unifying attributes?
3c. What other categories could we have used? Explain.
4. Focus on three practice items in the text and agree on related
categories for purpose of ensuring understanding.
5. Read carefully the same pages and place selected items into 5. Why raise your hand if you are stuck on a particular
appropriate categories. item?
6. Discuss similar or common attributes. 6a. Why did you identify these items with those categories?
6b. Why did you choose these common attributes as a
category to classify the items?
6c. What other common attributes might you have chosen?
7. Modify (change, subtract, or add) categories, if necessary. 7a. Why did you change these categories?
7b. What can we do with the items that fit into more than
one category? Which items fit into more than one
category?
8. Repeat procedures using other important items; read 8. What categories did you select? Why?
pp. 56-63.
9. Combine categories or subdivide into smaller categories. 9a. Why did you reclassify (add or subdivide) these
categories?
9b. What should we do with the leftover items? Which ones
are left over?
Summary:
1. What important things have you learned about classifying information?
2. What are different ways of classifying information?
3. When is it appropriate to subdivide categories?
4. Look at the chalkboard (text). Who wishes to categorize these five new items into one of the categories we have already
established?
Homework:
1, Read Chapter 7.
2. Classify important information into pro/con categories listed on p. 68.
Table 4.9 Mastery Learning Lesson Plan
Primary Grades
Lesson Topic: Subtraction
Objective: Students will compute the worksheet items on subtraction, with at least 80 percent accuracy after the lesson.
Review: Review yesterday’s homework on subtraction.
Motivation:
1. There are 25 students in the class, as you know. We are planning to go to a movie next Friday afternoon. Three of you—Joel,
Jason, and Stacey—have soccer practice and will not attend the movie. How many tickets should we buy?
2. We are going to plan a Halloween party in class. Each of you may have one dessert choice with your milk. Most of us enjoy
chocolate-chip cookies, but some might prefer vanilla-cream cookies. Let’s see how many prefer vanilla-cream cookies. (Show
of hands. Good.) Ten of you prefer the vanilla-cream cookies. Who can tell the class how many chocolate-chip cookies we will
need for the party?
Materials: Overhead projector, checkers (pass out to students)
Development:
Problems Activities
1. With overhead projector explain how to solve la. At their desks students use the checkers and perform
11-5, 11-7. 12-2, 12-5, 12-8.
lb. Students record work (and answers) in their notebooks.
lc. Discuss all items missed by more than 10 percent of the
students.
2. With overhead projector explain 20 - 5, 20 - 10. 2a. At their desks students use the checkers and perform
21-3,21-5,21-7.
2b. Repeat lb.
2c. Repeat lc.
3. With overhead projector explain 22 - 6, 22 - 10, 22 - 15. 3a. At their desks students use the checkers and perform
23-5,23-8, 23- 12, 23-20.
3b. Repeat lb.
3c. Repeat lc.
Practice:
1. Hand out worksheet 12.
2. Call on volunteer to do first sample item in worksheet.
3. Call on second and third volunteers to do next two sample items and then call on non volunteers.
4. Have students complete remaining worksheet on their own at their own pace.
Summary (evaluation):
1. With overhead projector show correct answers for all the items.
2. Ask students how many got each item right.
3. Discuss all the items, but emphasize items that 20 percent or more missed.
4. Have students score their own papers and turn them in.
Homework:
1. Distribute homework or explain new worksheet that is to be answered.
2. Review assignment next day.
3. Reteach problem items (items that 20 percent or more missed during previous lesson).
by even a small percentage'of students must be further explained,

because the work builds on previous learning.
7. The teacher provides additional practice before asking students to
complete the worksheet on their own. Only volunteers are called on
initially because the work is new. Nonvolunteers are called on once
students have had an opportunity to practice the skill. Three items are
explained. The teacher moves around the room monitoring the students’
work and providing additional help when necessary.
8. As a summary all items are discussed. All items missed by students,
especially those that are missed by 20 percent or more, are discussed in
greater detail. Individuals’ scores on the worksheet determine how much
practice is needed the next day in the form of review.
9. The homework is related to the lesson; it is assigned and explained. The
next day it will be reviewed. Peer teaching is quite simple. Just have
students work in pairs and then have one of the students teach the
process to his or her partner. The teacher should walk around the room to
ensure that students are explaining the material correctly.
Inquiry-Discovery Lesson Plan (Table 4.10)

1. The lesson topic is derived from a unit on plant life. It will take an
extended or double period to complete.
2. The first objective is written on the blackboard to stimulate curiosity and
interest; the second objective is only for the teacher or supervisor to see
and is a by-product of the first.
3. Since the materials are readily found at home, students should be
required to bring in their own materials to encourage responsibility and
to set the tone that they are to become less dependent on the teacher and
more independent as learners.
4. The problem is for the students to investigate using their own inquiry and
discovery techniques. The teacher is to act as a facilitator and to
encourage independent thought and activity among the students. They
are to do their own work; the teacher may form cooperative teams, based
on mixed sophistication or abilities of the students, to investigate the
problems. If this is their first or second investigation or experiment, then
teams would help alleviate some student anxieties.
5. The questions should be answered by the students; they should find their
own answers and be able to explain why. The teacher can help by
suggesting only if a student (or group of students) is unsure about how to
proceed. The crucial point is to encourage inquiry and discovery. The
students need to follow their own ideas and to make their own
conclusions.
6. As a summary, all the questions are discussed. Depending on the age and
academic sophistication of the students, the teacher may slow down the
lesson and incorporate a medial summary after five questions or so. This
Table 4.10 Inquiry-Discovery Lesson Plan
Intermediate Grades
Lesson Topic: Investigating plant growth.
Objectives: To grow plants in class and at home.

To use systematic procedures of scientific investigation.
Materials: Empty milk, juice, and/or soup containers, various types of soil and plant seeds
Problem: To investigate the best ways to grow plants.
Questions:
1. How long does it take for the seeds to sprout?
2. How deep should the seeds be planted?
3. Can seeds grow downward? (Explain.)
4. Can seeds (a plant) grow without water? Sunlight? How much water? Sunlight?
5. Does it help plant growth to have insects in the soil? Worms?
Medial Summary: Depending on the responses of the students

6. Do plants move during the day? Evening?
7. Can a plant grow if a leaf is cut? Why? Why not?
8. Can plants be used to grow new plants? (Explain.)
9. How does music affect plant growth? Smoke? Deodorants?
10. Which plants can we cross to get a hybrid?
Summary: Discuss explanation of above questions—Why? How do we know?
Homework:
1. Students are to grow two same plants with different soil and conditions (water, sun, music, etc.).
2. Students are to observe and record growth of the plants on a weekly basis.
3. Students are to report conclusions about plant growth and environment.
serves as an intermediate check on whether students understand portions

of the lesson so they can proceed to the next portion. The time devoted to
the summary is hard to determine because it is impossible to preplan
what students will understand and how much further explanation will be
needed. However, as for the mastery learning lesson, the teacher may
want to reteach or at least reemphasize certain concepts that give
students trouble.
7. The homework assignment (a series of investigative activities) is an
extension of the class investigative activities. It requires the students to
work on their own; it helps them use discovery techniques and become
more independent learners. The homework activity sets the stage for a
follow-up set of related problems and questions to be worked out in the
near future—perhaps at the end of the unit.
Teachers need to be
aware of what is
happening during the
lesson and intuitively
judge what is
worthwhile and what
needs to be modified.
Guidelines for Implementing Lesson Plans
You will need to consider several factors as you begin to move from planning to
performance. Even after you have had some experience, it is wise to review the
following factors to ensure your success in the execution of the lesson plan: stu¬
dent differences, length of period, flexibility, student participation, student un¬
derstanding, and evaluation:
1. Student differences. Individual and group differences must be considered as

you plan your lesson and then teach it. Teachers need to make provisions for
student differences in ability, age, background, and reading level. The differ¬
ences in how students learn are being accentuated because of the increased
diversity of the student population. Table 4.11 includes ways in which teach¬
ers can capitalize on the unique learning disposition of students from differ¬
ent backgrounds. Clearly those dispositional approaches are important, but
the real key to dealing with student differences is to organically structure
lessons so that students’ natural interests (what intrinsically motivates them)
are accommodated. A powerful example of this was recently reported in the
press:
NEW YORK—Like most children, the second-graders in room 205 at Public

School 116 love to see images of themselves in the stories they read.
They love the story about how people of every “shade” rally to help a His¬
panic mother and daughter who lost everything in an apartment fire. They love
to read about how children come in All the Colors of the Earth. They especially
enjoy a book about an African-American father who leaves home to find work,
only to return when the seasons change.
Table 4.11 Capitalizing on the Dispositions of Diverse Learners
Teachers Need to:
• Develop a classroom climate characterized by warmth and encouragement.

• Utilize oral modes of expression within the classroom.
• Structure the classroom in formal rather than informal ways.
• Utilize collaborative work environments that promote social interaction.
• Provide overviews and rationale to help place academic content within a context to be studied.
• Provide concept learning that moves from the concrete to the abstract.
• Design learning activities that promote kinesthetic/tactile modalities.
• Be aware of the affective dimension of the classroom environment as well as how the teacher
relates to all students.
• Utilize people-oriented examples and situations in the learning activities presented.
• Utilize as many positive role models as possible in the lessons presented to students.
• Emphasize visual-spatial skills within classroom lessons.
• Utilize analytic skills in the tasks designed for students.
• Provide learning activities that provide opportunities for students to take parts and/or components
and design new wholes and/or solutions.
• Provide time and space for thinking and personal reflection.
• Emphasize the use of social interaction within the classroom.
• Utilize collaborative work environments that promote verbal tasks.
• Utilize the family, its role, and its importance in the lives of youngsters.
• Develop a more personal relationship with students.
• Utilize positive role models in all classroom activities.
• Establish a conceptual context for new academic content.
• Emphasize visual stimuli within the learning environment.
• Develop a warm and supportive classroom environment through the use of cooperative learning.
• Utilize imagery as a tool for understanding complex concepts.
Source: Adapted from Thomas J. Lasley II and Thomas J. Matczynski, Strategies for Teaching in a Diverse Society
(Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1997). Reprinted with permission of Wadsworth Publishing, a division of International
Thomson Publishing. Fax 800 730-2215.
These are tales that most of the 27 students in Virginia Lockwood’s class can
relate to, Lockwood said. They are mostly children of employees at the United
Nations, and come from Vietnam, the Caribbean, Japan and other places, as well
as Manhattan.
In a setting so dizzyingly diverse, race and ethnicity are beside the point,
Lockwood said. Multiculturalism—a flashpoint for so much recent tension and
bitterness in the city’s public schools—is no big deal in Ms. Lockwood’s class.
“I don’t say, ‘Look, children, here’s a story about a little African-American boy,
or here’s a story about a Vietnamese girl,’ ” Lockwood said. “Instead, I say: ‘Look,
children, here’s a great story about feelings.’ Let’s read it together. The characters
might happen to be black, Hispanics or Asian, but that’s not the point.”26
Some might describe this as culturally relevant teaching. We assert that it is

nothing more than good teaching.
2. Length of period. One of the major problems beginning teachers have is

planning a lesson that will coincide with time allotted (the 30, 40, or 50 min¬
utes of each period; with BLOCK scheduling, the time frame might be as
much as 100 minutes). New teachers must learn to pace themselves, not to
plan too much (and have to end abruptly) or too little (and have nothing
planned for the last 5 or 10 minutes of the period). Remember to select fewer
concepts but to find more ways'to teach the concepts.
3. Flexibility. The teacher must be flexible—that is, prepared to develop a les¬
son along a path different from the one set down in the plan. Student reac¬
tions might make it necessary or desirable to elaborate on something in¬
cluded in the plan, or to pursue something unexpected that arises as the
lesson proceeds. Although effective teachers tend to encourage on-task be¬
havior and discourage off-task behavior, they are willing to make corrections
and take advantage of unforeseen developments. The basis for the change is
more intuitive than objective, more unplanned than preplanned.
4. Student participation. Teachers must encourage the participation of the
greatest number of students in each lesson. They should not permit a few
students to dominate the lesson and should draw nonvolunteers into the les¬
son. They should not talk too much or dominate the lesson with teacher-
directed activities. The need is to encourage student participation, student-to-
student interaction, and increased performance among shy students,
low-achieving students, and students on the sides and in the rear rows (as op¬
posed to students in the middle or front of the room).
5. Student understanding. There is often a gap between what students understand
and what teachers think they understand. Part of the reason for this gap has to
do with the rapidity of the teaching process—so much happens at once that the
teacher is unaware of everything that goes on in the classroom. Following are
suggestions to increase student understanding as you teach the lesson.
a. Insist that students respond to the questions put to them. Students

who do not know answers or have trouble in understanding the les¬
son tend to mumble or speak too quietly to be heard clearly, try to
change the subject, or ask another question instead of responding to
the original question.27
b. If a student answer lacks detail, does not cover the major aspects of
the problem, or is partially or totally incorrect, (a) probe the student’s
thinking by rephrasing the question, using another question to lead
the student toward the desired answer, or providing additional infor¬
mation, or (b) call on another student to help the first student.
c. If, after calling on a few students, you are unable to obtain the de¬
sired response, you might have to reteach parts of the lesson. Al¬
though this is not planned, you cannot ignore the fact that several stu¬
dents are having problems understanding the lesson.
d. Prepare students for demonstrations and experiments, ask questions

during these activities, and follow up with written exercises in which
students analyze or synthesize what they observed or performed.
e. Include practice, review, or applications in every lesson. The amount
of time you spend on these activities will depend on the students’
abilities. Low-achieving and younger students need more practice,
review, and concrete application.
f. Be sure to include medial and final summaries. Low-achieving and
younger students need more medial summaries than high-achieving
students.
6. Evaluation. The lesson plan must be evaluated so that it can be modified and
improved. At the end of a lesson, the teacher should have a clear idea about
how the students reacted and whether they understood and enjoyed the lesson.
To appraise your lesson plan, ask yourself the following types of questions.
a. Was the instruction congruent with the objectives?

b. Were the students motivated throughout the lesson?
c. Do I need to spend more time reviewing parts of the lesson?
d. Were the questions appropriate? Which ones came up that were not
planned and can be used in the future?
e. What problems arose? How can I correct them?
f. Was there sufficient time to complete the lesson?
g. What did I fail to accomplish in the lesson?
h. What other forms of intelligence (musical, artistic, kinesthetic) might
help students better understand the concepts?
A good teacher, no matter how experienced, is a critic of her or his lesson

and seeks new ways for improving the teaching-learning situation. The teacher
takes time for self-reflection and self-analysis. And that self-analysis should take
different forms. Good teachers critically reflect on both technique and philoso¬
phy: How did I teach? Why did I teach what I taught? If you continue to ask
how and why questions, your students will be with a teacher who goes well be¬
yond the survival levels of teaching and truly tries to impact learners. The how
and why teacher is aware of what is happening during the lesson and intuitively
judges what is worthwhile and what needs to be modified for the next time the
lesson plan is used. See Tips for Teachers 4.3.

Unit planning and lesson planning will vary according to the school district
and school in which you teach. Some school settings or supervisors will be
quite prescriptive and expect you to follow a prescribed method. Your plans
might be collected and checked on a regular basis. In other schools and with
Organizing and Implementing Lesson Plans
The teacher should always look for ways to improve '9. Give students a chance to think about what is
the lesson plan. Below are 20 research-based tips being taught.
that correlate with student achievement. As many as 10. Try to find out when students don’t
possible (not necessarily all in one lesson) should be understand.
incorporated into portions of the lesson plan. Al¬
11. Provide sufficient time for practice.
though most of the statements seem to be based on a
12. Ask frequent questions; be sure they are
mastery approach, the checklist can be used for most
challenging and relevant.
types of teaching.
13. Provide explanations, demonstrations, or
1. Plan lesson toward stated objectives or topics experiments.
of the unit plan.
14. Elaborate on difficult points of the lesson;
2. Require academic focus of students. give details, provide examples.
3. Follow the plan. Keep to a schedule, start the 15. Choose activities that are interesting and
lesson on time, and be aware of time. promote success.
4. Provide a review of previous lesson or 16. Incorporate supplementary materials and
integrate previous lesson with new lesson. media.
5. Indicate to students the objectives of the 17. Summarize the lesson.
lesson; explain what is to be accomplished.
18. Schedule seatwork; monitor and assess
6. Present lesson with enthusiasm; motivate student work.
students. 19. Give homework, provide examples of how to
7. Present lesson at appropriate pace, not too do homework, and collect and check
slow or too fast. homework.
8. Explain things clearly. Be sure students 20. Evaluate (or reflect on) lesson plan after
understand what to do and how to do it. teaching.
other supervisors, there will be no prescribed method and very little feedback
or concern about your unit and lesson plans. Hence, you will be largely on
your own when it comes to instructional planning. For this reason, the ques¬
tions below can be used to avoid common mistakes and to serve as practical
guides when you plan your own units and lessons.
Unit Planning
1. Did you consider state (or school district) requirements, as well as the
course of study?
2. Did you read the instructor’s manual for suggestions? Are there samples that
can be modified to your students’ abilities and needs?
Lesson Plans and the Professional
Albert Shanker*
Past President, American Federation of Teachers
Should teachers be required to prepare lockstep les¬ to form a single line to move to various classrooms
son plans? Of course, teachers need to plan, and in which we would take the test. Throughout this
most of them do. But does each teacher have to do march, we continued to receive instructions. “Keep
the same amount of planning and use the same for¬ in single file.” “Hurry up.” “No talking.” It was clear
mat? Do all the plans have to be inspected on the from the start that we were back in school. Even
same morning? Do some teachers plan better in their though we had gone to college and received our de¬
heads than on paper? More important, what are the grees, we were being treated very much like children
plans for? They are supposed to help teachers focus again.
and improve their instruction. But now, in many Rigid requirements for lesson plans are like that.
schools, teachers are not given a satisfactory rating, They treat educated adults, veteran teachers among
no matter how good they are as teachers, unless they them, like children, requiring them to jump to a
have complied with the ritualistic planbook require¬ whistle and “keep in single file.” Even after we have
ments. This is clear management incompetence. solved the problem of providing adequate financial
Would anybody rate Pavarotti a poor opera singer rewards, we are not going to get good teachers or
because he fails to fill out bureaucratic forms telling keep them so long as school management rewards
management how he intends to approach each aria? blind obedience to authority above creativity and
This reminds me of the morning some 40 years excellence.
ago when I appeared for the examination to become Professionalism for teachers will come only
a New York City public school teacher. After we had through hard work. This will mean not only ques¬
assembled in the school cafeteria, someone ap¬ tioning outmoded practices but also offering better
peared, blew a whistle, and ordered us to form a dou¬ alternatives that serve the interest of student success,
ble line. We were then marched down a hall and told rather than bureaucratic convenience.
*Mr. Shanker passed away in 1997. In many ways, he shaped American educational policy.
3. Are you clear about your instructional objectives? Are they appropriate?
4. Does the content tie together with the objectives? Is the content interesting
and relevant?
5. Do the skills tie together with the content? Do they allow for differences in
student abilities and needs?
6. Did you include interesting and relevant learning activities? Do some of the
activities extend beyond the classroom?
7. Did you include varied resources and materials? Did you supplement the
text with other resources and materials?
8. Are your evaluation procedures appropriate? Do they help assess your

objectives?
9. Is your plan flexible enough to accommodate various students—in terms of
abilities, interests, and learning styles?
10. Is your plan detailed enough so that another person would understand it and
know what you want to do?
Lesson Planning
1. Are your objectives clear in terms of the knowledge, skills and values you
wish to teach? Do they stem from the unit plan?
2. Is the content arranged in a logical order and in the way you wish to teach it?
3. Are your instructional methods clear? Do you vary the methods to prevent
student boredom?
4. Are your materials and equipment ready to use? Did you order them far
enough in advance?
5. Have you checked the previous work? Did you ask review questions or
problems? Did you administer a short quiz on the previous lesson or
homework? Did you reteach or provide additional practice where needed?
6. Have you checked the current work? Did you provide adequate summaries?
Did you call on new volunteers? Did you reteach when necessary?
7. Are crucial or pivotal questions included?
8. Did you include an appropriate homework assignment? Were your
directions clear? How did you check to see if the students understood
yesterday’s homework?
9. Have you budgeted sufficient time to complete the lesson? Did you finish
too soon? Did you run out of time before finishing?
10. How do you intend to evaluate the lesson? Would you enjoy the lesson if
you were a student? Would you learn from the lesson if you were a student?
Summary
1. Teachers plan at four different levels: yearly (or term), unit, weekly, and daily.
2. Strategic planning helps teachers plan together, share ideas about unit plans
and lesson plans—and reflect on their experiences.
3. The basic components of a unit plan are objectives, content, skills, activities,
resources, and evaluation.
4. Three types of unit plans are the taxonomic, topic, and activities approaches.
5. The basic components of a lesson plan are objectives, motivation,
development, methods, materials and media, summaries, and homework.
6. Four types of lesson plans were discussed: flexible grouping, thinking skills,
mastery learning, and inquiry-discovery.
1. Why do educators advise planning in cooperation with students? Why do
many teachers ignore student input when planning?
2. What are the criteria for a good unit plan?
3. According to what approach do you think a unit for your subject or grade
could best be planned? Why?
4. Which are the most essential components to consider when planning a
lesson? Why?
5. Which instructional methods do you plan to stress in your lesson plans?
Why?
Things to Do
1. Prepare a course of study for your subject and grade level.
2. Speak to an experienced teacher. Ask the teacher to provide you with a series
of unit plans for the subject or grade level you plan to teach. Examine the
major components in class. Also, ask the teacher how he or she engages in
the planning process.
3. Select one of the above units and list the activities and resources that could be
incorporated into it.
4. Plan a lesson in your subject and grade level; then teach it according to the
specifications listed. What were the good parts of the lesson? What were the
unsatisfactory parts?
5. List some common mistakes in lesson planning. Ask experienced teachers:
What are ways for preventing some of these mistakes?
Beyer, Barry K. Teaching Thinking Skills: A Handbook for Elementary School Teachers.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991. How teaching skills can be planned
and taught in most elementary classrooms, including sample exercises and lesson
plans.
Block, James H., Helene E. Efthim, and Robert B. Burns. Building Effective Mastery
Learning Schools. New York: Longman, 1989. A mastery approach to teaching and
learning, including how to plan unit plans and lesson plans for mastery.
Canady, Robert Lynn, and Michael D. Rettig. Teaching in the Block: Strategies for
Engaging Active Learners. Princeton, NJ: Eye on Education, 1996. A practical
beginning point for teachers adapting to teaching in a block schedule utilizing
strategies that engage active learners.
Cuban, Larry. How Teachers Taught: Constancy and Change in American Classrooms,
1880-1990. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1993. An
historical view of teacher practices, with emphasis on teacher-centered (as opposed
to student-centered) instruction.
Gagne, Robert M., Leslie J. Briggs, and Walter W. Wager. Principles of Instructional
Design, 4th ed. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich College and School
Division, 1992. Methods and steps'in planning for instruction, starting with
performance objectives and ending with student performance.
Good, Thomas L., and Jere E. Brophy. Looking in Classrooms, 7th ed. New York:
Longman, 1997. A research-oriented book on several aspects of teaching including
lesson planning.
Kronowitz, Ellen L. Your First Year of Teaching and Beyond. New York: Longman,
1999. Addressing concerns of beginning teachers with emphasis on instructional
planning.
Weiner, Lois, Urban Teaching: The Essentials. New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1999. Insider advice for the new city teacher.
Key Terms
course of study 128 lesson plan 139
extrinsic motivation 143 medial summary 150
final summary 150 mental planning 128
formal planning 128 strategic planning 129
intrinsic motivation 143 unit plan 129
End Notes
1. Pamela G. Grossman, “Why Models Matter,” Review of Educational Research
(Summer 1993): 171-180; Sigrun Gudmundsdottir, “Ways of Seeing Are Ways of
Knowing,” Journal of Curriculum Studies (September-October 1991): 409M22; and
John Solas, “Investing Teacher and Student Thinking About the Process of Teaching
and Learning,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1992): 205-225.
2. John A. Zahorik, “Teachers’ Planning Models,” Educational Leadership (November
1975): 134—139.
3. Christopher Clark, “Real Lessons from Imaginary Teachers,” Journal of Curriculum
Studies (September-October 1991): 429-434; Penelope L. Peterson, Christopher W.
Marx, and Ronald M. Clark, “Teacher Planning, Teacher Behavior, and Student
Achievement,” American Educational Research Journal (Summer 1978): 417^432.
4. Gail McCutcheon, “How Do Elementary School Teachers Plan?” Elementary School
Journal (September 1980): 4-23.
5. Elliot W. Eisner, The Educational Imagination, 3rd ed. (New York: Macmillan,
1993).
6. Lee S. Shulman, “Knowledge and Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform,”

Harvard Educational Review (February 1987): 1-22.
7. Rosary V. Lalik and Jerome A. Niles, “Collaborative Planning by Two Groups of
Student Teachers,” Elementary School Journal (January 1990): 319-336; Terry M.
Wildman et al., “Teacher Mentoring: An Analysis of Roles, Activities, and
Conditions,” Journal of Teacher Education (May-June 1992): 205-213.
8. Deborah S. Brown, “Twelve Middle School Teachers’ Planning,” Elementary School
Journal (September 1988): 69-87; Brown, “Descriptions of Two Novice Secondary
Teachers’ Planning,” Curriculum Inquiry (Spring 1993): 34-45.
9. Robert J. Yinger, “A Study of Teacher Planning,” Elementary School Journal
(January 1980): 107-127.
10. McCutcheon, “How Do Elementary School Teachers Plan?” 7.
11. Allan C. Omstein, “Effective Course Planning by Mapping,” Kappa Delta Pi Record
(Fall 1990): 24-26.
12. Mary Nebgen, “The Key to Success in Strategic Planning Is Communication,”
Educational Leadership (April 1991): 26-28.
13. Patricia L. Smith and Tillman J. Ragan. Instructional Design, 2nd ed. (Columbus,
OH: Merrill, 1999).
14. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday, 1996): 30.
15. Grant Wiggins and Jay McTighe, Understanding by Design (Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1998), 100-101.
16. Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton, Teaching to Change the World (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1999), 154.
17. W. James Popham, “Can High-Stakes Tests Be Developed at the Local Level?”
NASSP Bulletin (February 1987): 77-84; Mary A. Lundeberg and Paul W. Fox, “Do
Laboratory Findings on Test Expectancy Generalize to Classroom Outcomes?
Review of Educational Research (Spring 1991): 94—106; and William A. Mehrens,
“Using Performance Assessment for Accountability Purposes,” Educational
Measurement (Spring 1992): 3-9.
18. Getting Started in the Elementary School: A Manual for New Teachers, rev. ed.
(New York: Board of Education of the City of New York, 1986); Getting Started in
the Secondary School: A Manual for New Teachers, rev. ed. (New York. Board of
Education of the City of New York, 1986).
19. Deborah J. Stipek, Motivation to Learn, 3rd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1998); Martin V. Covington, Making the Grade: A Self-Worth Perspective on
Motivation (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1992).
20. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Looking in the Classrooms, 7th ed. (New
York: Longman, 1997), 145-146.
21. Paul Chance, “The Rewards of Learning,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1992): 204.
22. Allan C. Omstein and Francis P. Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and
Theory, 3rd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
23. Neville Bennett and Clive Carre, Learning to Teach (New York: Routledge, 1991);
Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan L. Lytle, Inside/Outside: Teacher Research and
Knowledge (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1992).
24. The average number of observations per year for teachers involved in special staff
development programs ranges from 1.7 to 2.8; it is assumed to be less for teachers
not involved in special training programs. See Garrett K. Manderville and Janelle L.
Rivers, “The South Carolina PET Study,” Elementary School Journal (March 1991):
377M-07.
25. Sandra Hollingsworth, Mary Dybdahl, and Leslie Turner Minarek, “The Importance
of Relational Knowing in Learning to Teach,” Curriculum Inquiry (Spring 1994):
14-23; Sharon Fieman-Nemser and Michelle B. Parker, “Making Subject Matter Part
of the Conservation in Learning to Teach,” Journal of Teacher Education
(May-June 1990): 32-M3.
26. Lynette Holloway, “Differences Embraced at Schools,” Dayton Daily News,
December 10, 1998, 5A.
27. George Hillocks, Ways of Thinking, Ways of Teaching. (New York: Teachers
H A P T E R
Instructional Strategies

Encouraging students to extend their thinking. (C3)
Monitoring students’ understanding of content through a variety of means,
providing feedback to students to assist learning, and adjusting learning
activities as the situation demands. (C4)
Using instructional time effectively. (C5)

The teacher uses an understanding of individual and group motivation and
behavior to create a learning environment that encourages positive social
interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. (Principle #5)
Focusing Questions
1. What factors should be considered in preparing a lecture?
2. Why should lecture and explanation times be limited?
3. What are the characteristics of well-formulated questions?
171
4. Why is the method of questioning crucial to good instruction?

5. When is the method of practice and drill useful?
6. How can practice and drill be made most effective?
7. What are good strategies for the problem-solving method?
To appreciate instruction, we need to make a distinction between teaching and

instruction. Teaching is the behavior of the teacher that evolves during the in¬
structional process (this was the focus of Chapter 2). Instruction is the specific
methods and activities by which the teacher influences learning (this is the focus
of Chapters 3 to 9).
The correct commingling of teaching and instruction results in the learning
paradigm we described in Chapter 1, and the artful nature of teaching and learn¬
ing emerges. In this chapter we will explore five basic and traditional instruc¬
tional methods—the methods used most of the time by the great majority of
teachers: (1) lecture, (2) questioning, (3) practice and drill, (4) experiential, and
(5) inductive methods.
Each of these has been described to a limited degree in previous chapters, but
now we organize them around specific teaching-learning problems that you will
confront in a classroom. These methods are supported by many years of research
and practice. To help you better integrate the chapter, you are asked to think of a les¬
son you will be teaching to your class. Which methods will you use? Why? What
are the consequences of using these methods? When are these methods most effec¬
tively used? How do you make these methods work for your own teaching style?
We will help you choose your strategy by showing you five if-then statements.
Clearly, many other if-then statements are possible, especially as new school struc¬
tures emerge. For example, project-based, and open-space schools organize teach¬
ers and students as partners in learning in a very different way. Students do not
function in classes the way most of us have experienced. They explore projects and
they engage in independent, self-directed learning. As the types of programs begin
to expand, more and more if-then statements will become possible.
One additional note is needed before we present our five instructional ap¬
proaches. Our focus in this chapter is on basic approaches to teaching. This text
introduces you to requisite teaching skills, but experienced effective teachers
need to be able to use a much wider variety of teaching strategies than the ones
described in this chapter. In Chapter 8 we will focus on cooperative learning ap¬
proaches, but even that discussion is somewhat limited in scope. A wide variety
of other teacher- and student-centered strategies are available that enable stu¬
dents to make meaning out of their learning. As you gain confidence using the
ideas articulated in this chapter (especially for Instructional Approaches I, II,
and III, which are very teacher centered and usually part of direct instruction),
we urge you to access other resources that will expand your repertoire of teach¬
ing skills, hi particular, we suggest you consult with experienced teachers and
supervisors to modify and refine your instructional strategies. (For example, see
Thomas J. Easley II and Thomas J. Matczynski, Teaching Strategies for a Di¬
verse Society, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1997).
Instructional Approach I: If Presenting Complex

Conceptual Ideas, Use Lecture
Lectures are divided into three types for our discussion.
1. Formal lectures last for most of, or the entire, class session; student
questions and comments are limited. Formal lectures should be used only
at the advanced high school and college levels, where students are mature
enough to sit for long periods of time and take notes on their own.
2. Informal lectures last about 5 to 10 minutes; student responses and
questions are permitted but not encouraged.
3. Brief lectures last no more than 5 minutes; student responses are
encouraged.
Formal lectures generally require extensive preparation; brief lectures in¬

volve less preplanning, perhaps only a one- or two-sentence reminder (possibly
only a word inserted in the margin) in the lesson plan.
Discussions can be an outgrowth of lectures or explanations. They are oral
exchanges between the teacher and students or among the students. Discussions
permit students to respond to teacher statements, to ask questions, and to clarify
ideas. The more involved students are in discussion, the more effective the ex¬
change of ideas is likely to be, because students’ thoughts tend to wander as
teacher talk increases. Younger and low-achieving students become inattentive
more readily than older and high-achieving students. The implication is clear:
Teachers should make an effort to maintain student attention by limiting lecture
and increasing discussion time. Discussions are opportunities for students to ex¬
press their ideas; they are not structured for students to respond to a series of
teacher questions—that is a recitation. One way to enhance discussions during
lecture is to rely on various grouping strategies and hands-on activities (see
Chapter 8).
Problems with Lecturing

During lectures delivered by a teacher, there is little give-and-take between the
teacher and students or among students. Lecturing is often described as “unnec¬
essary,” “dull,” and “a waste of time.” One observer has pointed out that it in¬
creases student passivity and reduces the student’s role to note taking instead of
luring students into more active learning.1 Another critic has noted that students
who miss a point or are lost cannot interrupt for a personal explanation or stop
and review as they could with a book, computer program, or tape.2
For levels below senior high school (grades 10 to 12), these criticisms are
valid for formal lectures, especially when teachers do not allow for student re¬
sponse and when the lectures are not adequately prepared and are repetitive or
digressive. Attention span is correlated with age and ability; in young and low-
achieving students, attention span is limited.3 For such students it is essential
that teacher talk in any form (especially lecturing and explaining) be limited to a
few minutes’ duration at any one time and be intermixed with other instructional
if
activities (audio, visual, and physical). There should be more concrete activities
than verbal and abstract presentations.
Lectures can quickly lead to boredom because the audience is passive for a
lengthy period. One method for helping high school students learn from lectures,
and also for engaging them actively, is for the teacher to prepare a series of
questions about the content to be covered. For example, “What is the main idea
of . . . ?”; “How does . . . affect . . . ?”; “Why is . . . important?”4 These
types of questions help students identify main ideas, organize notes, and engage
in critical thinking, as opposed to recording pieces of the lecture and memoriz¬
ing the information—or even worse, drifting or losing concentration. The need
is for students to integrate and anchor ideas of the lecture; that is, to become
more involved in processing information as opposed to sitting passively.
Benefits of Lecturing and Explaining
Based on a review of several studies of the lecture method, Gage and Berliner
feel that the lecture technique is appropriate when (1) the basic purpose is to dis¬
seminate information, (2) the information is not available elsewhere, (3) the in¬
formation needs to be presented in a particular way or adapted to a particular
group, (4) interest in a subject needs to be aroused, (5) the information needs to
be remembered for a short time, and (6) the purpose is to introduce or explain
other learning tasks. They further state that the lecture method is inappropriate
when (1) objectives other than acquisition of information are sought, (2) long¬
term learning is desired, (3) the information is complex, abstract, or detailed,
(4) learner participation is important for achieving the objectives, (5) higher cog¬
nitive learning, such as analysis and synthesis, is sought, and (6) students are
below average in ability.5
There are administrative and practical reasons for using informal and brief
lectures, as well as explanations. These methods are well suited to large groups,
and few materials and equipment are needed, giving the methods the additional
benefit of being economical. The methods are flexible and can be used in regular
classrooms, small groups, and large settings. Teachers who travel or change
classrooms need to carry with them only their lesson plans or notes. Although
good lectures need considerable preparation, their delivery does not require
elaborate advance planning to have materials ordered or equipment that has to
be scheduled and moved about. The fact that teachers are not dependent on oth¬
ers to carry out the lecture, explanation, or discussion makes it easy and com¬
fortable for them. See Tips for Teachers 5.1.
Presenting Lectures and Explanations
When preparing and presenting informal or brief lectures and providing explana¬
tions, you might consider the following steps and suggestions.
Establish Rapport with Students

At the beginning of a talk you should take measures to establish rapport with
students. (Periodically telling a story or joke helps maintain their interest in the
Enhancing Your Lectures/Explanations
There are numerous methods for improving your lec¬ 8. Relate new information to prior information.
tures and explanations in class. Evaluate your lesson 9. Occasionally summarize important ideas.
with regard to the following guidelines: 10. Go slowly when discussing difficult
1. Maintain eye contact with class. concepts.
2. Use handouts and overheads to help students 11. Be willing to repeat or elaborate when
follow the presentation and focus on necessary.
important ideas. 12. Use alternative explanations when necessary.
3. Avoid detail unless supplemented by graphs, 13. Develop internal connections by helping
tables, or illustrations. students see relationships, compare or
4. Write important information on the contrast, analyze, etc.
chalkboard. 14. Include questions to clarify information
5. Define new terms and concepts. being presented.
6. Provide an outline for note taking. 15. Try not to digress; be aware of time and pace
yourself accordingly.
7. Present relevant examples to explain major
ideas.
subject and rapport with you.) Always keep in mind the need to maintain the in¬
terest of students and the fact that students will react to you first on a personal
basis, then on a cognitive basis.
Prepare Lectures
The major concepts or ideas should be outlined in advance. Corresponding ac¬
tivities and materials might be indicated—say, in the lesson plan—to introduce
at a certain point. Except for short passages or quotations to make a point, you
should not read from notes. You must know the material well enough to speak
clearly and with animation and to speak extemporaneously as you sense the need
of the moment and the interests of the students.
Control Length of Lectures and Explanations

Although there are exceptions, the less you talk and the more your students talk,
the more effective you are as a teacher. The greatest danger is that by talking too
much you will create a passive audience and lose their interest. Brief lectures
and explanations of 3 to 5 minutes at most are suitable for elementary school
students. Short, informal lectures or explanations of 5 to 10 minutes are accept¬
able at the middle grade and junior high school levels. High school students can
tolerate up to 10 to 15 minutes of interesting teacher talk. Always try to limit
your lecturing and explaining and use questions, discussions, various student ac¬
tivities, and media as supplementary tools of instruction.
Motivate Students to Pay Attention

Relevant lectures motivate students. To achieve relevance, you should consider
the students’ age, ability, educational experiences, environment, interests, needs,
perceived goals, and career aspirations. You can make the lesson more under¬
standable and interesting by combining other methods, materials, and media
with your talk. When students perceive the relevance of, understand, and are in¬
terested in the topic, they become success-oriented and acquire intrinsic
motivation—that is, they pursue “the goal of achievement for the sake of
achievement.”6
Establish Structure and Sequence

A disorganized talk confuses and bores its audience. Present major concepts and
difficult ideas in a linear and logical fashion, with examples and questions to test
students’ understanding. Facts and concepts should be developed systematically
and sequentially from statement to statement. The overall topic should be related
to the topic of the previous lesson. Sentence structure and vocabulary must be
appropriate for the students’ level of development. Although this sounds obvi¬
ous, many beginning teachers speak over the vocabulary level and content level
of their students.
Criteria of a structured lecture, according to one researcher, are (1) con¬
tinuity, a sequenced arrangement of ideas expressed in intelligible and
grammatically correct sentences; (2) simplicity, the absence of complex
sentences and the use of language within the students’ vocabulary range;
and (3) explicitness, the identification and explanation of major concepts and
relationships.7
Explanatory talk that is considered effective tends to correspond with what
we often mean by coaching. The more effective teachers engage in highly struc¬
tured explanations and are (1) more responsive to student questions, (2) more
adequate in presenting content, (3) more complete in providing specific informa¬
tion, and (4) better in giving students feedback to help them learn.8
Provide Appropriate Organizers

Teachers can provide students with “advanced organizers” to help them assimi¬
late content (see Figure 5.1). They can provide means for the students to orga¬
nize the ideas to be presented by telling them in advance what the lecture or ex¬
planation will focus on and how it will be structured. In addition, research
suggests that teachers who use graphic organizers enhance higher levels of stu¬
dent achievement. Figure 5.1 illustrates three different types of graphic organiz¬
ers: expository, comparative, and sequential. Nate Gage and David Berliner, two
prominent educational researchers, use the terms hooks and anchors to refer to
major topics or concepts around which teachers structure information.9 Another
technique is to outline the major topics or parts of the lesson, either orally or in
writing (on the chalkboard), as they unfold (not in advance) during the discus¬
sions. This is especially helpful when students are listening to the teacher and
must select, process, and assimilate information with which they are working.
Figure 5.1
Three types of graphic organizers.
Expository Organizer
Structure of Constitution
Comparative Organizer
How do 4th, 6th, and 8th Amendments relate?
Amendments
4* 6th 8th
What does it say?
What does it mean?
When is it relevant to
criminal process?
Sequential Organizer
Dividing a decimal by a decimal
Step 1: Multiply the divisor and the dividend by the power
of 10, that will make the divisor a whole number
Step 2: Then divide as you would with any whole number
Avoid Vagueness
Lectures and explanations that are free of vague language are easier to follow
and understand. Researchers have labeled nine kinds of vague terms: (1) am¬
biguous designation—“somewhere, somehow”; (2) approximation—“about, al¬
most, nearly, sort of’; (3) bluffing—“anyway, as you know, so forth, to make a
long story short”; (4) error admission—“I’m not sure, I guess, perhaps”; (5) in¬
determinate amount—“a couple, few, some, many”; (6) negated intensifiers—
“not many, not very much”; (7) multiplicity—“aspects, kind of, type”;
(8) possibility—“chances are, perhaps, it seems, could be”; and (9) probability—
“frequently, generally, usually, often.”10
Another factor that leads to vagueness is discontinuous and irrelevant con¬

tent. The content might be important at another time, but when introduced at an
inappropriate time, it becomes distracting from the main ideas. In an effective
lecture, the sequence of the flow of ideas from sentence to sentence is clear, and
the language is free of ill-defined and redundant words. According to researchers,
the lecturer needs to be clear and concise—using short and precise sentences;
providing examples; using simple, jargon-free language; and including the mini¬
mum number of concepts to make a point. Avoid fillers and long pauses, and in
general, display confidence in order to maintain your credibility.11 You might
also use the form provided in Table 5.1 to assess either your own clarity in pre¬
senting a lesson or the clarity of another teacher you might be observing.
Combine Instructional Materials

Audiovisual aids and special materials and activities can enliven a talk and rein¬
force its content. Informal cooperative learning strategies (see Chapter 8) can
also enhance a lecture. Varied stimuli are important for all learners, but younger
students especially benefit from less verbalization and more illustrations and ac¬
tivities. Display such aids only when you talk about them; explain visuals to
your audience; use a marker or highlighter when using an overhead to focus stu¬
dents on key points; use the k-i-s-s (keep it short and simple) principle—
minimize detail. Make sure visuals are readable from the back of the room.
Table 5.1 Checklist for Observing Lesson Clarity
Not No Opportunity
Effectiveness Indicators Observed Observed to Observe
1. Informs learners of skills or understandings

expected at end of lesson
2. Provides learners with an advance organizer
that places lesson content in perspective
3. Checks for task-relevant prior learning at
beginning of lesson and reteaches if necessary
4. Gives directives slowly and distinctly; checks
for understanding along the way
5. Knows learners’ ability levels and uses
media, materials, and procedures at, or
slightly above, their current level of
functioning
6. Uses examples, illustrations, or demonstrations
to explain and clarify content in text and
workbooks
7. Provides review or summary
Source: Gary D. Borich, Observational Skills for Effective Teaching (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1999), 136. For more information concerning NASSP services and/or programs, please call (703) 860-0200.
Encourage Students to Take Notes

The activity of recording notes serves as an encoding (comprehension) function,
helping to integrate content into long-term memory. Note takers outperform lis¬
teners (non-note takers) about 4 to 1 at the high school and college level. Effec¬
tive note taking serves both a storage function and a review function prior to
tests.12
Summarize Content
The classroom discussion should always end with a final summary or conclu¬
sion, what some educators call postorganizers.13 We discussed this same idea in
Chapter 4 in connection with lesson planning. The lesson could also have inter¬
nal summaries, what some educators call medial summaries, conceptual frame¬
works, or chunking strategies.14 Medial summaries, with accompanying sum¬
mary activities and transitions, subdivide a lesson into main parts. It is more
important to incorporate medial summaries for low-achieving and young stu¬
dents than for high-achieving or older students.
The best type of summary (medial or final) briefly reviews the presentation
and gives students a chance to see whether they understand the material by ask¬
ing them to explain ideas, provide examples, evaluate data, and do some exer¬
cises. It lets them know what they have learned and helps identify major ideas of
the lesson.
After the final summary, the teacher should explain related homework and
prepare students for any problems they might encounter in it. Also, the teacher
might establish a connection between the lesson just completed and the next
lesson.
Instructional Approach II: If Checking for Student

Understanding, Use Various Forms of Questioning
Good teaching involves good questioning, especially when teaching large
groups of students. Skillful questioning can arouse the students’ curiosity, stimu¬
late their imagination, and motivate them to search out new knowledge. It can
challenge the students, make them think, and help clarify concepts and problems
related to the lesson. The type and sequence of the questions and how students
respond to them influence the quality of classroom discussion and the effective¬
ness of instruction. Good teachers usually can skillfully strike a balance between
factual and thought-provoking questions and select questions to emphasize
major points and stimulate lively discussion.
Types of Questions
Questions can be categorized in many ways: (1) according to thinking process
involved, from low level to high level, or (according to the cognitive taxonomy)
from knowledge to evaluation; (2) according to type of answer required, conver¬

gent or divergent; and (3) according to the degree of personal exploration, or
valuing. Some authorities have also developed descriptive categories of ques¬
tions that deal with academic tasks and activities.
Low-level questions emphasize memory and recall of information. When
was the Declaration of Independence signed? Who won the Civil War? Where is
the Statute of Liberty? These questions focus on facts and do not test under¬
standing or problem-solving skills. They correspond to lower cognitive
processes—what J. P. Guilford calls information, Jerome Bruner calls concrete
operations, and Arthur Jensen calls level-one thinking. Most typically, low-level
questions begin with what, when, where, or who (especially when who refers to
someone other than the person to whom a question is directed).
Low-level questions have their place. They are used to assess readiness for
complex and abstract thinking, to see whether students can deal with high-level
questions that involve analysis, synthesis, and problem solving. The ideal is to
reach a balance between the two types of questions. The trouble is that many
teachers do not progress beyond the knowledge-oriented questions. In fact, ac¬
cording to researchers, it is not uncommon to find that 70 to 90 percent of the
questions teachers ask are low level.15 Criticism of the use of low-level ques¬
tions is complicated by recent research that indicates that low-level and nar¬
rowly defined questions characterize an effective instructional program for
inner-city and low-achieving learners.16
High-level questions go beyond memory and factual information and call
for complex and abstract thinking. They usually begin with how or why. Unfor¬
tunately, teachers who ask high-level questions and encourage student-initiated
comments tend to be least effective with these types of students,17 because these
students lack a knowledge base and need more low-level questions and feedback
from teachers before they can move to problem-solving skills and high-level
questions. The problem is that teachers often become set in their use of low-
level questions and thus keep these students permanently in a cognitively
second-rate instructional program. All students need exposure to higher level ques¬
tions once a teacher feels students have rudimentary knowledge of the context.
Low-level questions can foster learning, especially with students who lack
prerequisite knowledge and who are developing a knowledge base and need to
experience simple questions to build their confidence in learning. According to
researchers, low-order questioning is effective for such students when it is used
for instructional activities involving basic reading and math, or in any subject
where a basic foundation needs to be built and current learning is an extension
of prior learning. The new low-order information should be related in a mean¬
ingful way to the prior knowledge and information level of the learner. But we
would expect teachers to progress to asking as many high-level questions as pos¬
sible. If we return to the subjects of our three examples of low-level questions,
we can ask a corresponding series of high-level questions: What were the rea¬
sons for signing the Declaration of Independence? What other alternative
courses of action were available to the revolutionists? How would these other
actions have affected history? What economic, political, and social events led to
the Civil War? Why did the North win the Civil War? How did the results of the
Civil War affect black-white relations for the remainder of the nineteenth cen¬
tury? or this century? What does the Statue of Liberty mean to you? to an immi¬
grant arriving in America by ship .in 1920? to a Vietnamese or Haitian political
refugee today? to a Hispanic worker today crossing the Rio Grande in search of
a job?
Questions like these are obviously more advanced, more stimulating, and
more challenging. Many have no right or wrong answers. As the questions be¬
come more advanced, they involve more abstractions and points of view. Asking
high-level questions demands patience and critical thinking on the part of the
teacher. Creating appropriate timing, sequencing, and phrasing is no easy task
for even the experienced teacher.
Benjamin Bloom’s cognitive taxonomy can be related to the categories of
low-level and high-level questions just described. Low-level questioning and
knowledge correspond to the knowledge category of the taxonomy—what
Bloom calls the “simplest” form of learning and the “most common educational
objective.”19 High-level questioning and problem-solving skills correspond to
the next five categories of the taxonomy—comprehension, application, analysis,
synthesis, and evaluation, (see Table 5.2). The six categories of the cognitive
taxonomy form a hierarchy of levels of complexity from simple to more ad¬
vanced, with each level dependent upon the acquisition of skills at the lower lev¬
els. The sample questions in Table 5.2 correspond to the cognitive categories of
the taxonomy.
Convergent questions tend to have one correct or best answer. For this rea¬
son they are often mistakenly identified as low-level and knowledge questions,
but they can also be formulated in ways that require students to select relevant
concepts and work out problems dealing with steps and structure. Convergent
questions can deal with logic and complex data, abstract ideas, analogies, and
multiple relationships. According to research, convergent questions can be used
when students are attempting to solve difficult exercises in math and science, es¬
pecially exercises dealing with analysis of equations and word problems.20 Here
the need is to focus on specific exercises and to ensure understanding before
progressing to more advanced levels.
Divergent questions are often open-ended and usually have many appropri¬
ate answers. What is most important can be how the student arrives at her or his
answer, not getting a “right” answer. Students should be encouraged by the
teacher to state their reasoning and to provide supporting examples and evi¬
dence. Divergent questions are associated with high-level thinking processes and
can encourage creative thinking and discovery learning. Often convergent ques¬
tions must be asked first to clarify what students know before advancing to di¬
vergent questions. But the ideal is to ask fewer convergent questions, especially
low-level ones, and more divergent questions. The mix of convergent to diver¬
gent questions will reflect the students’ abilities, the teacher’s ability to phrase
such questions, and the teacher’s comfort in handling varied responses.
Convergent questions usually start with what, who, when, or where; diver¬
gent questions usually start with how or why. What or who questions, followed
Table 5.2 Questions Related to the Cognitive Taxonomy
Category Sample Question
1.0 Knowledge
1.1 Knowledge of specifics Who discovered the Mississippi River?
1.2 Knowledge of ways and means of dealing with specifics What word does an adjective modify?
1.3 Knowledge of universals and abstractions in a field What is the best method for calculating the circumference of a
circle?
2.0 Comprehension
2.1 Translation What do the words hasta la vista mean?
2.2 Interpretation How do Democrats and Republicans differ in their view
of spending?
2.3 Extrapolation Given the present birth rate, what will be the world population
by the year 2000?
3.0 Application How has the Miranda decision affected civil liberties?
Given a pie-shaped lot 120 ft. x 110 ft. x 100 ft., and village
set-back conditions of 15 ft. in all directions, what is the largest
size one-story home you can build on this lot?
4.0 Analysis
4.1 Analysis of elements Who can distinguish between fact and opinion in the article
we read?
4.2 Analysis of relationships How does Picasso organize colors, shapes, and sizes to produce
images?
4.3 Analysis of organizational principles How does John Steinbeck use his characters to discuss the notion
of friendship in Of Mice and Men?
5.0 Synthesis
5.1 Production of a unique communication Who can write a simple melodic line?
5.2 Production of a plan or proposed set of operations How would you go about determining the chemical weight of an
unknown substance?
5.3 Derivation of a set of abstract relations What are the common causes for cell breakdown in the case of
mutations, cancer, and aging?
6.0 Evaluation
6.1 Judgment in terms of internal evidence Who can show the fallacies of Hitler’s Mein Kampf?
6.2 Judgment in terms of external evidence Who can judge what is wrong with the architect’s design of the
plumbing and electricity?
Source: Allan C. Ornstein, “Questioning: The Essence of Good Teaching,” NASSP Bulletin (May 1987): 73-74.
by why, are really divergent questions that are introduced by what to get to the
why aspect of the question. (For example, “Who won the Civil War?” leads to
the ultimate question: “Why?”) The differences are highlighted by the sample
questions in Table 5.3. Most teachers ask far more what, who, when, and where
questions than how or why questions; the ratio is about 3 or 4 to one.21 This is
because the convergent questions are simple to phrase and to grade. They help
keep students focused on specific data, and they give many students a chance to
participate. Convergent questions thus make good questions for practice and re¬
view. Divergent questions require the teacher to be more flexible. For the stu¬
dent they require the ability to cope with not being sure about being right and
not always getting approval from the teacher. In general, the pace of questioning
Table 5.3 Sample Convergent and Divergent Questions
Subject and Grade Level Convergent Questions Divergent Questions
Social studies, 5th-7th Where did the Boston Tea Party take place? Why did the Boston Tea Party take place?
When did it take place? Why did it take place in Boston, not New York or
Philadelphia?
Social studies, 7th-8th What are the three products from Argentina? How does wheat production in Argentina affect
wheat export in our country?
English, 5th—7th What is the verb in the sentence The girl How do we rewrite the present and future tense
told the boy what to do? of the verb in the sentence The girl told the boy
what to do?
English, 1 Oth— 11th Who wrote A Farewell to Arms? How does Hemingway’s experience as a news
reporter affect the story A Farewell to Arms?
Science, 2nd-5th Which planet is closest to the sun? How would you compare living conditions on
Mercury with those on Earth?
Who was the first American astronaut to What planet, other than Earth, would you prefer to
travel in space? visit if you were an astronaut? Why?
Science, 9th—11th What are two elements of water? How is water purified?
Math, 4th-5th What is the definition of a triangle? How have triangles influenced architecture?
Math, 6th-9th What is the shortest distance between two What is the best air route to take from
points? New York City to Moscow? Why?
is slower. There is more opportunity for students to exchange ideas and differing
opinions. There is also more chance for disagreement among students and be¬
tween students and teacher—which is often discouraged or viewed as tangential
by teachers.
Right Answers Count

In the majority of classrooms, teachers ask convergent questions, which entail a
“right” answer, and students are expected to give the answer—often resulting in
teacher approval. These questions and answers, coupled with the students’ need
for approval (especially at the elementary grade level) permit teachers to domi¬
nate classroom interaction and students learn to give the answer expected of
them. According to Jules Henry, students “learn the signal response system
called docility and thus obtain approval from the teacher.”22 Indeed, what counts
in school is getting the right answer, not necessarily how you arrived at the an¬
swer, because teachers are keyed to, and approve, right answers.
For low-achieving students, and for students who need teacher approval, the
magic word from the teacher is often “Yes!” or “Right!” The teacher determines
what is right in the classroom, and the easiest way to test students is to ask con¬
vergent questions. Divergent questions, on the other hand, lead to novel
responses—responses that the teacher does not always expect, and responses
that take up class time (or time out from the formal curriculum). This can be dif¬
ficult to deal with, for students who have come through the educational system
being right-answer oriented or for teachers who have been trained to provide and
then look for correct answers.
John Holt points out that as students become right-answer oriented, they be¬
come producers, producing what teachers want, not thinkers. It is only the rare
student who is willing to play with ideas, not caring whether the teacher con¬
firms that an answer is right. The average child has a need to be right because
that is what schools expect: “She cannot bear to be wrong. When she is wrong
... the only thing to do is to forget it as quickly as possible.”23 Few teachers
understand that wrong answers are just as important as right answers. When stu¬
dents give wrong answers, they are showing the teacher how they are thinking
about a particular question or idea. Instead of dismissing wrong answers, ask
students how they derived them. Interestingly, the Japanese, who consistently
perform well in international comparisons, tend to place more focus on how a
student derived an answer than on whether a student has the right answer.
Consistently asking questions to which there is only one right answer fos¬
ters a view of learning that is self-limiting—one that looks for simple “right” an¬
swers and simple solutions to complex problems, one that relies on authority
rather than on rational judgment to find the “right” answer. It also breeds a rigid
and narrow mind that fails to recognize or is unwilling to admit that facts and
figures are screened through a filtering process of personal and social experience
and interpretation.24
Asking Questions Correctly

Good questioning is both a methodology and an art; there are certain rules to fol¬
low that have been found to apply in most cases, but good judgment is also
needed. See Tips for Teachers 5.2 and 5.3 for some review of formulating ques¬
tions and for some recommendations for procedures in asking questions.
With respect to preparing and asking questions in class, a number of in¬
structional strategies have been shown to be effective with a large number of
different teachers and students. Most of these instructional strategies come from
Good questioning
requires good
judgment on the part
of the teacher.
Don’ts in Asking Questions
Good questioning techniques have to be developed 5. Do not ask suggestive or leading questions.
slowly and over the years. They must become second Example: “Why was Andrew Jackson a great
nature, a habit. Just as you can form good or bad president?” The question really calls for an
habits in driving a car or swinging a golf club, you opinion, but a position or judgment is
can develop good and bad habits in questioning. Try already stated.
to eliminate the don’ts in asking questions before 6. Do not ask fill-in questions. Example: “The
they become ingrained as habits and to practice the New Frontier occurred during whose
do’s. Below is a list of things a teacher should not do. presidency?” The question is embedded in the
statement rather than being clearly expressed.
1. Do not ask yes or no questions or questions
“Which president implemented the New
that allow a 50-50 chance of getting the
Frontier?” is a better wording of the question.
right answer. Example: “Did Orwell write
Animal Farm?” “Who won the Civil War?” 7. Do not ask overload questions. Example: “In
These kinds of questions encourage connection with pollution factors and the sun’s
guessing, impulsive thinking, and right- rays, what conclusions can we make about the
answer orientation, not conceptual thinking future water level?” How did Manifest Destiny
or problem solving. If the teacher lead to imperialism and colonialism, while
accidentally asks this kind of question, he or enhancing the industrialization of the
she should follow up immediately with a country?” These questions are indefinite,
why or how question. multiple, and wordy. Trim excess verbiage,
use simple rather than overly formal or
2. Do not ask indefinite or vague questions.
obscure vocabulary, and ask clear, simple
Example: “What are the important cities of
questions to avoid concealing the meaning of
the United States?” “How would you
your question and confusing the student.
describe the sentence?” Such questions are
confusing and often must be repeated or 8. Do not ask tugging questions. Example:
refined. Questions should be clearly worded “What else? Who else?” These tug at the
and coincide with the intent of the teacher. student and do not really encourage thought.
3. Do not ask guessing questions. Guessing 9. Do not ask cross-examination questions. You
questions can also be yes/no questions, might be able to assist a student by asking a
indefinite or vague questions. Ask students series of questions to draw out information.
to explain ideas and show relationships, However, this should be distinguished from
rather than searching for detailed or trivial asking many or rapid questions of the same
student. Also, the rest of the class tends to be
information.
neglected.
4. Do not ask double or multiple questions.
Example: “What is the chemical formula for 10. Do not call the name of a student before
salt?” “What is its chemical weight?” Before asking a question. As soon as students know
students can respond to the first question, the that someone else is responsible for the
second is asked. As a result, they don’t know answer, their attention lessens. First ask a
which question the teacher wants them to question, pause to allow comprehension, and
answer and they respond to the question they then call on someone to answer it.
feel more knowledgeable about. continued
Tips for Teachers 5.2 concluded 14. Do not allow choral responses (unless as part
of a direct instruction lesson) or handwaving.
11. Do not answer a question asked by a student Both are conducive to undesirable behavior.
if students should know the answer. Turn the 15. Do not allow improper speech or
question back to the class and ask “Who can incomplete answers to go unnoticed.
answer that question?” Youngsters are quick to cultivate wrong
12. Do not repeat questions or repeat answers habits. Supply the correction without
given by students. Reiteration fosters poor stopping the recitation.
work habits and inattentiveness. A good
practice is to say “Who can repeat that
question or that answer?”
13. Do not exploit bright students or volunteers.
The rest of the class becomes inattentive and Source: Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein, “Questioning The Essence
loses contact with discussion. of Good Teaching: Part II,” NASSP Bulletin (February 1988): 77.
educational psychology and the teacher effectiveness movement, not from the
curriculum, instruction, or teaching methods that one might think would con¬
tribute to this field of knowledge.
Wait-Time
The interval between asking a question and the student response is referred to as
wait-time. One study conducted by educational researcher Mary Budd Rowe in¬
dicated that the average amount of time teachers wait is 1 second. Increasing the
wait-time to 3 to 4 seconds has several beneficial effects on student responses:
(1) Length of response increases, (2) unsolicited but appropriate responses in¬
crease, (3) failure to respond decreases, (4) confidence (as reflected in an affirma¬
tive, rather than a questioning, tone of voice) increases, (5) speculative responses
increase, (6) student-to-student responses increase, (7) evidence-inference state¬
ments increase, (8) student questions increase, and (9) responses from students
rated by teachers as relatively slow increase.25
No negative side effects of increasing wait-time have been observed, and
the positive effects are numerous, yet many teachers do not employ this in¬
structional strategy. Other data suggest that asking one to four questions per
minute is reasonable and that beginning teachers ask too many questions, aver¬
aging only 1 second of wait-time.26 Also, although all students need time to
process information, low-achieving students need more time, and the data in¬
dicate that teachers tend to wait less for an answer from the students they per¬
ceive as slow. Here the need is to be willing to slow down the lesson, cover
fewer topics, focus on the most important ideas, ask more questions, and de¬
velop explanations.
Directing
As mentioned earlier, the recommended strategy in directing questions to stu¬
dents is to ask the question and then call a student’s name, because more students
Do’s in Asking Questions
Now that you know what not to do, here is a list of 8. Do allow sufficient time for deliberation.
things to do in questioning. Practice them so they be¬ Pausing for a few seconds until several
come second nature in your instructional process. hands go up gives everyone, particularly the
slow learners, a chance to consider the
1. Do ask questions that are stimulating and
question. As a result, everyone profits from
not merely memory testing or dull. A good
the discussion, and learning takes place for
teacher arouses students and makes them
all.
reflect with thought-provoking questions.
Questions that ask for information recall will 9. Do follow up incorrect answers. Take
not sustain the attention of a class and that’s advantage of wrong or marginal answers.
when discipline and management problems Probe the student’s mind. Encourage the
begin. student to think about the question. Perhaps
the student’s thinking is partially correct, even
2. Do ask questions that are commensurate
novel.
with students ’ abilities. Questions that are
dramatically below or above the abilities of 10. Do follow up correct answers. Use a correct
students will bore or confuse them. Target answer as a lead to another question. A
questions, even on difficult subjects, within correct answer sometimes needs elaboration
the ability level of the majority of the class. or can be used to stimulate student
discussion.
3. Do ask questions that are relevant to
students. Questions that draw on their life 11. Do call on nonvolunteers and volunteers.
experiences will be relevant. Some students are shy and need coaxing
from the teacher. Other students tend to
4. Do ask questions that are sequential.
daydream and need assistance from the
Questions and answers should be used as
teacher to keep attentive. Distribute
stepping stones to the next question. This
questions among the entire class so that
contributes to continuous learning.
everyone can participate.
5. Do vary the length and difficulty of questions.
12. Do call on disruptive students. This stops
Questions should be diversified so that both
troublesome students without having to
high and low-achieving students will be
interrupt the lesson.
motivated to participate. Observe individual
differences and phrase questions so that all 13. Do prepare five or six pivotal questions.
students take part in the discussion. Such questions test students’ understanding
of the lesson as well as give the lesson unity
6. Do ask questions that are clear and simple.
and coherence.
Questions should be easily understood and
trimmed of excess verbiage. 14. Do write the objective and summary of the
lesson as a question, preferably as a problem.
Do encourage students to ask questions of
Questions encourage the class to think. The
each other and to make comments. This
students are made to consider the new work
results in students becoming active learners
by presenting it as a question or problem.
and cooperating on a cognitive and social
15. Do change your position and move around
level, which are essential for reflective
the room. Teacher energy and vitality induce
thinking and social development. Good
class activity, rapport, and socialization. They
questions stimulate further questions, even
also foster an active audience and prevent
questions by students. The idea is to
daydreaming and disciplinary problems.
encourage student comments and interaction
and to refer student questions and comments,
Source: Adapted from Allan C. Omstein, “Questioning: The
even when they are directed at the teacher, to Essence of Good Teaching: Part II,” NASSP Bulletin (February
other students to promote discussion. 1988): 77.
will think about the question. Research on classroom management also confirms
that it is better to be unpredictable in calling on students to answer questions
than to follow a predictable order.27 On the other hand, a predictable order
seems to be more effective when calling on students to read in the lower grades
and with low-achieving students.28 The reason is perhaps that predictability re¬
duces anxiety, which is important for young children who are reading in front of
the class.
The research also indicates that calling on nonvolunteers can be effective as
long as students who are called on can answer the question most of the time. It is
a good idea to call on nonvolunteers when it is believed that students can re¬
spond correctly, but it is unacceptable to embarrass them with their inability to
answer the questions. This is probably true at all grade levels and subjects. It is
acceptable, however, to call on nonvolunteers with the understanding that they
might not be able to answer the question correctly, or in order to curtail disrup¬
tive or inattentive behavior—then to link their inability to answer to their behav¬
ior. If you call on a nonvolunteer and get an incorrect response, you can do two
things: (1) Match a correct statement to the wrong answer (e.g., if you ask
“What is the capital of New York” and a student responds “Harrisburg,” just re¬
spond “Harrisburg is the capital of Pennsylvania, I want the capital of New
York”). (2) Call on another student to assist.
Although the research indicates that teachers should call on nonvolunteers
no more than 15 percent of the time, practice indicates this figure might be too
low.29 By emphasizing volunteers, there is a tendency to call on high-achieving
students more often than low-achieving students. Calling on more nonvolunteers
increases the likelihood that low-achieving students will be included in the dis¬
cussion and that you will really see if students understand the material. It is gen¬
erally a good idea to call on low achievers who usually do not volunteer, and
they should periodically be called on as nonvolunteers as long as they are likely
to be able to answer the question correctly.
Redirecting and Probing

If a student response to a question is incorrect or inadequate, the teacher might
redirect the question to another student or probe for a better answer from the
same student. In general, teachers overuse redirecting. Redirecting the question
is better for high-achieving students, but probing is better for low-achieving stu¬
dents. High-achieving students seem to be able to cope better with minor aca¬
demic failure in front of their peers and thus are better able to accept redirection.
Teacher persistence in seeking improved responses from low-achieving or at-
risk students is also related to positive teacher expectations, which is important
in trying to reach and teach such students.
In probing, the teacher stays with the same student, asking for clarification,
rephrasing the question or asking related questions, and restating the student’s
ideas. It is important not to overdo it, lest the probing becomes a cross-
examination.30 On the other hand, if the teacher feels that the student was not
paying attention, it is best not to probe and give the student a second chance; un-
wittingly, the teacher would be condoning the student’s lack of attention. During
the probing process the teacher might ask a series of easier questions that lead
toward the answer to the original question. If the student answers correctly (ei¬
ther initially or in response to a rephrased question), the teacher might want to
follow with a related question to pursue the implications of the answer and to
ensure student understanding.
Probing is acceptable for all students. With high-achieving students it tends
to foster high-level responses and discussion. With low-achieving students it
tends to reduce the frequency of no response or incorrect response. In both cases
probing is positively correlated with increased student achievement.31
Commenting and Praising

Though research on the use of praise is mixed, it is generally agreed that honest
praise increases achievement and motivation. Positive reactions can simply
mean a smile, nod of approval, or brief comment (“Good,” “Correct,” “That’s
true”) indicating approval or acceptance. Phony praise or public praise can have
detrimental effects.
Most teachers do not use sufficient or genuine praise, however, while ques¬
tioning or with other methods of instruction. A summary of ten studies, for ex¬
ample, shows that, on the average, teachers use it no more than 6 percent of the
total time in regular classrooms.32 In another study it was observed that praise
was given for good answers to questions or for good work in general less than
five times per hour at the elementary school level and considerably less at the
secondary school level.33
The research is also mixed about negative comments. While the research
suggests that teachers use criticism and disapproval sparingly, even less than
praise, criticism can have a detrimental effect on student achievement. Simi¬
larly, if used by a teacher in response to a student question or comment, criti¬
cism can curtail students’ asking questions or responding to the teacher’s
questions.34 Low achievers receive more criticism than high achievers; it is
possible that low achievement causes teachers to use more criticism. Boys re¬
ceive more criticism from teachers than girls do; we also know that boys
achieve less than girls in the elementary school grades.35 In other words, some
level of correlation exists between criticism and achievement, but cause and
effect are unclear.
Finally, comments categorized as negative can be used in a supporting way
or be followed by positive suggestions or peer group recognition, as illustrated
by the italicized statements: (1) “You don’t understand. Let’s see who can help
you.” (2) “Your response is wrong. Try it again, you can answer it.” (3) “That’s
not really right. But it was a difficult question. Let’s see how we can improve the
answer.” (4) “Johnny, please be quiet. You are spoiling it for the entire class.
Besides, you know better.” Criticism is justified when the answer is wrong or the
behavior is interfering with the rules or procedures of the classroom. However,
the point is that it is not only what you say that counts, but how you say it, why
you say it, and how you follow up.
Instructional Approach III: If Teaching and Reinforcing

a Specific Skill or Process, Use Practice and Drill
The mention of practice and drill summons up images of the old-fashioned
schoolmaster, the drillmaster who made learning a repetitive response whereby
students either memorized their lessons or experienced the teacher’s wrath.
However, practice and drill is an instructional method that does serve certain
purposes well and can be used to advantage in today’s classrooms. It can help
students learn (and reinforce) content material and is often preceded by teacher-
directed input of content. One of the most common input strategies is lecturing,
which we described in our Instructional Approach I.
Applications of Practice and Drill: Negative and Positive Uses

Practice and drill is a common method used by elementary teachers to teach the
fundamentals, especially to young children. Secondary teachers also use it to
work with students who still lack basic skills or knowledge of academic subject
matter before asking them to move on to other tasks or transfer their learning to
Workbooks are an
excellent tool for
practice and drill, yet
overuse can lead to
busywork and student
boredom.
a new situation. Some teachers (K-12) believe that lots of practice is essential to
learning a basic skill or task. As a result they repeatedly drill their students.
Practice and drill has a place in a teacher’s repertoire, but it can also be misused.
Busywork
A major problem with the practice and drill method is that, if used incorrectly, it
can turn into busywork, especially if the tasks are either too easy or too difficult
for the majority of students, or if it supplants other methods. This is true whether
the teachers use published practice-and-drill material or design the material
themselves.
Teachers who emphasize routine and structure or who feel the need for a
quiet and ordered environment sometimes disregard the classroom nuances or
activities that produce those conditions and substitute busywork for meaningful
practice and drill. According to one review of the research, about 25 to 30 per¬
cent of elementary teachers (especially new teachers who need a safe environ¬
ment) fall into this category.36
Seatwork Activities
Elementary school students spend about 70 to 85 percent of their time engaged
in seatwork activities, and practice and drill takes up about two-thirds of this
time for students involved in learning the basic skills of reading, writing, and
arithmetic.37 High school students spend more time in seatwork activities, but
the activities are more varied and challenging and involve less practice and
drill.38 This is the case regardless of whether the high school teachers are experi¬
enced or beginning teachers. The negative use of seatwork occurs when students
work for long periods without any teacher feedback on what they are doing. The
positive use of seatwork occurs when teachers carefully monitor student
practice.
Back-to-Basics Approaches
Because of the dramatic decline in SAT scores over the past twenty years, and
because many high schools have permitted students who are functionally illiter¬
ate to graduate, there has been a popular cry to return to the basics—the “three
R”s at the elementary school level and “essential” academic subjects (math, sci¬
ence, English, history, foreign language) at the high school level. Proponents of
back-to-basics argue that students should be drilled until they acquire basic
knowledge in the three Rs and academic subjects; then they can become in¬
volved in inquiry-discovery learning. Practice-and-drill is not, however, a pre¬
condition for inquiry discovery learning. It is, instead, one strategy for ensuring
better student understanding of content that needs to be learned.
Behaviorist Approaches
Thorndike’s law of exercise, (i.e., that the more often a stimulus-response con¬
nection is made, the stronger it becomes) and Skinner’s finding that reinforce¬
ment of a response increases the likelihood of its occurrence both provide some
basis for the old maxim that practice makes perfect.39
Practice and drill can be provided technologically, such as through com¬

puterized instruction, which relies on a schedule of reinforcement. Instructional
materials are arranged in logical order and broken down into units, called
frames, that lead students through the program in small steps from the simplest
to the most complex material. A program might have hundreds or thousands of
frames. Repetition is used to maximize correct responses and to prevent mis¬
conceptions. Continuous reinforcement is supplied by getting answers right,
and the program is designed to present material to students in a way that en¬
ables them to have a high rate of success. From time to time, frames review
previous material or present the same material in different contexts. Practice is
essential when the learner makes a mistake and before advancing to another
level of difficulty.40
The Persistence of Practice and Drill
Herbert M. Kliebard
Professor of Curriculum, Emeritus
University of Wisconsin-Madison
The decade of the 1890s was one in which a spirit of Why, we may ask, have classroom practices
educational reform permeated the atmosphere. A changed so little from Rice’s day to the present?
young pediatrician, Joseph Mayer Rice, was caught To my way of thinking, the most plausible answer
up in this desire to remake American education and lies in a conflict between two seemingly compati¬
embarked on a tour of thirty-six American cities to ble tasks that teachers are asked to perform: con¬
observe what was going on in American schools. In trol and teaching. Hardly anyone will argue against
one New York City school. Rice observed how chil¬ the need for a measure of control in classroom sit¬
dren learned tiny bits of information by memorizing uations in order to carry forward the task of teach¬
facts and reciting loudly and rapidly. Rice was prop¬ ing. In practice, however, the emphasis on control
erly outraged and dedicated himself to eradicating as has so predominated that we can be counted as
far as possible such puerile forms of teaching. good teachers so long as our classrooms are or¬
Now, about a century later, such extreme forms derly. It almost does not matter whether we really
of drill are virtually unknown, but all contemporary teach or not.
evidence indicates that the recitation remains the Practice and drill of the sort that Rice observed
predominant form of classroom discourse. This is persist not because they have specific pedagogical
despite the fact that many astute and sensitive educa¬ sanction but because they are proven instruments of
tional reformers have called for a much greater mea¬ control. It is only when teachers are able to see their
sure of teaching procedures that involve, say, critical primary role as teaching, not as enforcing a precari¬
thinking or discovery activities. But, even if teachers ous order, that routine practice and drill will be rele¬
are not quite as rigid as in Rice’s day, they continue gated to their appropriately subordinate role in the
to rely on ditto sheets and workbooks to an uncon¬ classroom.
scionable extent.
Mastery Learning Methods

Instruction that is arranged in a logical, progressive order and that matches ma¬
terials and activities to individual needs and abilities is most effective in foster¬
ing achievement. The basis of mastery learning is to ensure that adequate learn¬
ing and mastery of certain concepts and skills have taken place, usually through
practice and drill, “before progressing to more complex concepts and skills.”41
Mastery instruction, especially when it is individualized rather than group-
based, accommodates varying rates of learning among students. In short, prac¬
tice makes for mastery.
A student who has difficulty in attaining a specific level of performance or
mastery can improve by working on the necessary prerequisites through practice
and drill. According to Bloom, the early tasks in the sequence are the most criti¬
cal; if these are not adequately learned, “the student is likely to have difficulty
with all the later tasks.” The most important techniques for teaching simple or
prior learning tasks involve practice and drill.42
Remedial Instruction
Low-achieving (and at-risk) students need more practice and drill than high-
achieving students before they can move on to subsequent tasks. The teacher
might have to reduce the breadth of the work for more depth and reduce the pace
and difficulty of the material.43 The teacher will need to monitor the practice and
drill closely, providing corrective feedback to help students grasp the material
and avoid confusion or frustration.
Students who have learning problems often need extra practice and drill and
a variety of learning experiences that relate new learning with prior learning;
they cannot easily keep up with more advanced students and should not be al¬
lowed to become embarrassed or defensive. One way to deal with the variations
in student learning speeds is to combine direct instruction, practice-and-drill
strategies, and cooperative learning approaches. We will discuss this in more de¬
tail in another chapter; the key point to remember here is that practice and drill
does not have to require that students work in isolation. This strategy can also be
an effective means of dealing with whole groups and heterogeneous classrooms
and differences in student understanding of requisite content material.
Practice and drill and other direct forms of instruction have limited value for
high-performing students. But at the same time teachers must be sure that
“slower” students learn the basic material thoroughly and are not raced through
a large amount of material with little comprehension and retention.
Review
The main goal of practice and drill is to make sure that students understand the
prerequisite skills for the day’s lesson. A high success rate on practice items is
important for student learning. Similarly, short practice sessions at one sitting
minimize the risk of student boredom or burnout. The amount of time for prac¬
tice varies with age. Younger students can tolerate less time at practice than
older students.44 Table 5.4 illustrates the instructional sequence in which
Table 5.4 Explicit (Direct) Instruction
1. Daily reviews
Check previous day’s work
Check homework
Reteach if necessary
2. Present new content/skills
Introduce with concrete examples
Proceed in small steps
Give detailed instructions and explanations if necessary
Gradually phase in material or task
3. Provide guided practice
Provide teacher-led practice
Provide varying contexts and exercises for student practice
Use prompts, cues, visuals, etc. when appropriate
Monitor students’ work
Continue practice until student responses are firm
Aim for 80 percent or higher success rate
4. Provide feedback
Offer teacher-led feedback
Provide checklists
Correct by simplifying material or task, giving clues, explaining or reviewing steps
5. Increase student responsibility
Diminish prompts, clues, explanations, etc.
Increase complexity of material or task
Ensure student engagement during seatwork
Monitor student work
Aim for 95 percent or higher success rate
6. Provide independent practice
Encourage students to work on their own
Provide extensive practice
Facilitate application of new examples
7. Weekly and monthly reviews
Check for understanding on irregular basis
Source: Adapted from Barak V. Rosenshine, “Teaching Functions in Instructional Programs,” Elementary School
Journal (March 1983): 338.
practice and drill would be situated. Although practice and drill and direct in¬
struction are not the same, they are closely aligned because the one (direct in¬
struction) is inclusive of the other (practice and drill). Practice and drill assumes
that the teacher has presented content material (perhaps through lecture) and the
students need to “overlearn” or review what the teacher presented. Direct in¬
struction is a step-by-step process (Table 5.4) that includes one step for content
input. Some teachers use lectures, others use cooperative learning, and others
use another strategy as the means of providing content.
In elementary and secondary grades the technique of beginning a lesson by
checking or reviewing the previous day’s assignment is common in many direct
instructional approaches. In a 45-minute period in mathematics, for example, ed¬

ucators recommend that daily practice and drill be used to start the lesson, that it
consist of approximately 8 minutes, and that it be related to homework assign¬
ments and computation exercises. Educators also recommend practice as part of
seatwork activity, when students are engaged in learning new concepts and
skills.45 The use of practice and drill varies by subject and grade level; the data
suggest that it occurs in 50 to 60 percent of classes, less at the high school than
at the elementary level and more in mathematics and English than in social stud¬
ies or science.46
Implementing Practice and Drill
To acquire many basic skills, especially in arithmetic, grammar, and foreign lan¬
guages, certain things need to be learned to the point of automatic response,
such as simple rules of grammar and speech, word recognition, and mathemati¬
cal calculations (adding, subtracting, multiplying). These skills are needed for
more advanced learning and are best learned through practice and drill.
Although practice and drill is accepted in theory, realistic guidelines need to
be applied to the classroom setting. Here are some recommended guidelines,
based on practice and research:
1. Practice must follow understanding and can enhance understanding.

Students will learn more easily and remember longer if they practice
what they understand or have learned through prior and meaningful
classroom experiences.47 At the same time, understanding can be
further increased through practice and drill of what is to be learned.
2. Practice is more effective if students have a desire to learn what is
being practiced. Students will practice what they believe has value and
if they are motivated. For these reasons, it is important for the teacher
to provide situational variety (repetition can become boring), interesting
aspects of a particular skill as well as interesting drill items, situations
in which students can use the skill or knowledge in other phases of
learning, drill items related to students’ experiences and interests, and
explanations of the relationship between the skill or knowledge being
learned and more advanced learning.
3. Practice should be individualized. Exercises should be organized so
that each student can work independently at her or his own level of
ability and rate of learning. In this way low-achieving or slow students
can devote more time to items that are difficult for them, and high-
achieving or bright students can advance without waiting for the others.
4. Practice should be specific and systematic. A drill exercise should be
related to a specific objective or skill, and students should know in
advance what is being practiced. Drill on specific skills in which
students need practice will produce better results than indiscriminate
drill. Digressions should be avoided. A systematic, step-by-step
procedure fits well with all learners, especially low-achieving students.
5. Practice should be intermixed with different materials and parts of the

lesson. Drill items can constitute part of chalkboard exercises,
mimeographed materials, workbook and textbook exercises, homework,
and reviews for tests.48 Drill may also be used in conjunction with
independent seatwork, small learning groups, or student learning teams.
6. Practice a few skills rather than many skills. It is best to focus on one
or two skills at one time and practice those few skills.
7. Practice should be organized so that students experience high rates of
achievement. Effective drill is characterized by high rates of correct
response. Correct responses serve as reinforcement. When students
discover that their answers are correct, they are encouraged to go to the
next question or item. This is especially important for slow learners.
Research suggests that most students need at least a 90 percent rate of
correct response while doing practice-and-drill activities (also for
completing homework) in material that has supposedly been learned.49
Success rate can be as low as 70 percent with students who will not
become overly confused or frustrated, as long as the teacher is available
to correct their work immediately.50
8. Practice should be organized so that students and teacher have
immediate feedback. Drills should either be student-scored or teacher-
scored, with correct answers provided as soon as possible. The teacher
needs to know scores or results in order to know if he or she can
proceed to the next point or skill. The student, especially the low-
achieving student, needs to know the correct responses here and now,
not next week or when the teacher has had time to mark the papers.
Based on a review of fifty-three students, for best results tests should be
returned within one or two days, and for specific lists (or items) to be
learned the feedback time should be 4 to 10 seconds.51 Classroom
practice also should be checked, discussed, or graded each day, with
teacher suggestions given for what to do for wrong answers.
9. Practice material should be used for diagnostic purposes. Drill items
should be constructed to reveal individual problem areas. Much of
practice material can be used for diagnostic purposes as long as the
teacher knows what skills each student is working on and has mastered.
Studying and keeping a record of students’ performances can help the
teacher recognize and treat problems before they become habits,
seriously affect later work, or cause students to be inappropriately
branded as remedial or as having a learning disability.
10. Practice material should provide progressive continuity between
learning tasks. Too often a skill is taught and left without testing. To
foster continuous mastery and systematic recall, there should be a
whole sequence of practice for a specific unit or course, with
intermittent drill at desirable intervals. Practice should be given
frequently; it should cover tasks in order of difficulty, and the range of
items should be wide enough to connect prerequisite learning tasks with
new learning tasks.52 See Tips for Teachers 5.4.
Improving Practice and Drill
Research has identified several recommendations for drill. When students have difficulty, it is
improving practice and drill and other seatwork ac¬ important to instruct in small steps to the
tivities to enhance academic learning. point of overlearning.
1. Have a clear system of rules and procedures 5. Use practice during and after learning.
for general behavior. This allows students to Practice and drill should be used only
deal with personal needs (for example, sparingly for initiating new learning. It is
permission to use the bathroom pass) and most effective mixed with other activities as
procedural routines (sharpening a pencil) learning progresses such as demonstrations,
without disturbing classmates. explanations, and questions, depending on the
students’ age and abilities. However, games
2. Move around the room to monitor students’
and simulations for young children and field
seatwork. Students should feel that the
trips and buzz sessions for older students are
teacher is aware of their behavior and alert to
not as effective (in terms of use of time) as
difficulties they may encounter. The extent of
practice and drill and other paper-and-pencil
monitoring correlates with the students’
activities (for review or reteaching).
academic ability and need for teacher
attention. 6. Provide variety and challenge in practice and
drill. Practice can easily drift into busywork
3. Provide comments, explanations, and
and frustrate or bore students if it is too easy,
feedback. The more recognition or attention
too difficult, or too monotonous.
students receive, the more they are willing to
pursue seatwork activities. Watch for signs of 7. Keep students alert and focused on the task.
student confusion and deal with it quickly; Teachers need to keep students on task—
occasionally questioning them, calling on
this increases students’ willingness to persist
both volunteers and nonvolunteers,
and helps teachers to know how students are
elaborating on incorrect answers, etc.
doing and to plan the next instructional task.
Common problems should be explained 8. Maintain a brisk pace. There should be little
immediately by interrupting the practice confusion about what to do during practice
exercise if the problems are serious, or after and drill, and activities should not be
the practice if students can wait. interrupted by minor disturbances. A snap of
the finger, eye contact, or other “signal”
4. Spend more time teaching and reteaching the
procedures should help deal with inattentive
basic skills. Elementary and low-achieving
or disruptive students without stopping the
youngsters should be exposed to heavy doses
lesson.
of skills learning, which requires practice and
Instructional Approach IV: If Fostering Critical or Creative Thinking,

Emphasize Problem Solving and Experiential Approaches
A great deal of literature since the beginning of the twentieth century has fo¬
cused on student problem solving and related thinking skills. Ever since Charles
Judd (at the University-'of Chicago) and Edward Thorndike (at Columbia Uni¬
versity) showed that learning could be explained in terms of general principles
of thinking and that methods of attacking problems could be transferred to dif¬

ferent situations, educators and psychologists have identified various methods to
teach students how to problem solve.
John Dewey’s process of reflective thinking was considered the classic
model for problem solving from 1910 until the 1950s, when Piaget s work and
other models employing various cognitive and information-processing strategies
were introduced. Although Dewey’s model is viewed as an oversimplification
by cognition theorists, it is still considered practical, especially by science and
math teachers. One of the chief functions of school, for Dewey, was to improve
the reasoning process, so he recommended adopting the problem-solving
method for all subjects and grade levels. Reflective thinking involves five steps:
(1) Become aware of difficulty, (2) identify the problem, (3) assemble and clas¬
sify data and formulate hypotheses, (4) accept or reject tentative hypotheses, and
(5) formulate and evaluate conclusions.53 We will argue that the way to teach
students how to problem solve is to provide them with experiential learning op¬
portunities. Before we discuss experiential approaches, let’s first explore prob¬
lem solving.
Problem Solving Teaching

Dewey’s reflective model is based on a mixture of theory and practice, and
many problem-solving models today are also based on the same ingredients. For
example, Bransford and Stein outline the IDEAL model for problem solving:
(1) Identify the problem, (2) Define it, (3) Explore possible strategies, (4) Act on
the strategies, and (5) Look at the effects of your efforts.54
A number of educators describe successful problem solving as relying on
heuristic thinking—that is, engaging in exploratory processes that have value
only in that they might lead to the solution of a problem. Physicians often diag¬
nose problems in this manner, for example, doing tests to eliminate what is not
the problem in order to narrow the possibilities down to a few probable diag¬
noses.55 According to Newell and Simon’s method for dealing with a problem,
the person first constructs a representation of the problem, called the “problem
space,” and then works out a solution that involves a search through the problem
space. The problem solver could break the problem into components, activate
old information from memory, or seek new information. If an exploratory solu¬
tion proves to be successful, the task ends.56 If it fails, the person backtracks,
sidetracks, or redefines the problem or method used to solve it.
Individuals are confronted with problems when they encounter situations to
which they must respond but do not know immediately what the response should
be. Regardless of the method, students need relevant information to assess the
situation and to arrive at a response—that is, to solve the problem. The choice of
strategies is related to a student’s age and the specific problem. Not all success¬
ful students will use the same strategy to solve the same problem, and often
more than one strategy can be used.
Even with simple addition or subtraction, students use different strategies to
solve problems and therefore have different frameworks about the relative
difficulty of the problems. Take this arithmetic example: John has 6 marbles and
Sally has 8; how many marbles dp they have together? Most students simply add
6 plus 8, in what we might term a common strategy. In a join strategy, elements
are added (6 + 6 = 12, 2 more is 14). With a separate strategy, elements are re¬
moved (8 + 8 = 16, 2 less is 14). A part-part-whole strategy involves undertak¬
ing two or more elements. (“I tabulated both numbers by adding 1 and 6 and
subtracting 1 from 8. That makes 7 + 7, which is 14.”) All four student ap¬
proaches are correct strategies.57 Interestingly, American teachers tend to em¬
phasize a “right” strategy; Japanese teachers tend to stress that students be able
to “defend” the strategy that they use.
Teachers often stress one specific strategy to solve specific problems, but
students often use a variety of strategies, especially with more complex prob¬
lems. In fact, as problems become more abstract, their possible solutions become
more varied. The teacher who insists on one strategy and penalizes students who
use another appropriate strategy is discouraging their problem-solving potential.
American teachers need to become aware of how students process information
and what strategies students use to solve problems, in order to teach problem
solving according to the way students think. They can do this by asking ques¬
tions, listening to responses, and inspecting student work.
Some basic problem-solving strategies do seem to emerge, however. In a
classic study, Benjamin Bloom pointed out several differences between success¬
ful and unsuccessful students engaged in problem-solving activities. Although
the subjects were college age, the findings apply to students of various ages so
long as they have reached the developmental stage (between age 11 and 15) of
logical thinking, or what Piaget called “formal mental operations.” The follow¬
ing are differences Bloom described:
1. Comprehending the problem. Successful problem solvers reacted to

selected cues and immediately began to work out a solution.
Unsuccessful students missed cues and often misinterpreted the problem.
2. Employing previous knowledge. The successful group utilized previous
knowledge to solve the problem. The unsuccessful students possessed
the accessory information, but did not utilize it. They often did not know
where or how to start.
3. Style of problem-solving behavior. Successful students were more active
and could verbalize what they were doing. They simplified the problem
whenever possible, or broke it down into parts if they could not deal with
the whole. The unsuccessful students rarely were able to clarify or state
concisely what they were doing. They often did not attempt to analyze
the various parts.
4. Attitude toward problem solving. The successful students had confidence
and viewed the problem as a challenge. The unsuccessful students lacked
confidence, became frustrated, and gave up.58
Metacognitive skills (or processes) are transferable competencies that play a

significant role in student high-order thinking. Metacognitive skills represent
knowledge of how to do something (usually involving a plan, set of steps, or

procedures) as well as the ability to evaluate and modify performance. Based on
a review of the research, the following are metacognitive skills that have been
found to distinguish successful problem solvers and that can translate into in¬
structional methods:
1. Comprehension monitoring. Knowing when one understands or does

not understand something; evaluating one’s performance.
2. Understanding decisions. Understanding what one is doing and the
reasons why.
3. Planning. Taking time to develop a strategy; considering options;
proceeding without impulse.
4. Estimating task difficulty. Estimating difficulty and allocating sufficient
time for difficult problems.
5. Task presentation. Staying with the task; being able to ignore internal
and external distractions; maintaining direction in one’s thinking.
6. Coping strategies. Staying calm; being able to cope when things are not
going easily; not giving up or becoming anxious or frustrated.
7. Internal cues. Searching for context clues when confronted with
difficult or novel problems.
8. Retracking. Looking up definitions, rereading previous information;
knowing when to backtrack.
9. Noting and correcting. Using logical approaches; double-checking;
recognizing inconsistencies, contradictions, or gaps in performance.
10. Flexible approaches. Willingness to use alternative approaches;
knowing when to search for another strategy; trying random approaches
that are sensible and plausible when one’s original approach has been
unsuccessful.59
It should be noted that low-achieving and younger students have fewer

metacognitive skills compared to high-achieving and older students.60 The im¬
plication for teachers is that an increase in knowledge of subject matter does not
necessarily produce changes in metacognitive skills. These skills in general re¬
flect high-order thinking processes that cannot be learned or developed
overnight or in one subject. Developmental age is crucial in limiting potential
metacognitive skills. An 8-year-old student is capable of just so much and can¬
not be pushed beyond her cognitive stage. According to Piaget, not until age 11
is a child capable of employing many of these metacognitive skills (correspond¬
ing to formal mental operations), and not until age 15 is the child capable of
fully employing all metacognitive skills in an efficient manner.61
Robert Sternberg points out that students do not have to rely on osmosis for
learning how to problem solve. Teachers can encourage them to use their “prac¬
tical intelligence” in schools, where so much of their lives take place. Hence,
there is a good deal of tacit knowledge that is not taught or verbalized per se but
used explicitly by successful problem solvers. As a teacher, you need to help
students manage and improve their problem-solving techniques by encouraging

them to (1) take notes, (2) get organized, (3) make sure they understand ques¬
tions, (4) ask questions, especially when they don’t know material, (5) follow di¬
rections, (6) underline main ideas in texts, (7) outline text information and class¬
room discussions, (8) see likenesses and differences in subject matter, (9) keep
track of time, and (10) get things done on time.62
Actually, most of these techniques are basic learning strategies that are
based on common sense. They correlate with school achievement. By providing
knowledge of and practice in applying learning strategies, the teacher invariably
enhances students’ self-concept and coping abilities—which, in turn, provides
the means for problem solving. Students’ confidence is essential for them to be
able to cope with minor frustration; to play with ideas; to take educated guesses;
to delete, add, or modify parts of problems; and to select a plan of action and
carry it out as opposed to closing the text or giving up on the homework (when
the teacher is not around to help). Various in-class support groups (peer tutors,
sharing dyads, cooperative learning, etc.) can help relieve anxiety and stress as¬
sociated with problem solving.
Experiential Teaching
Though most teachers acknowledge that experiential approaches are important,
many need help incorporating them into their lessons. Good and Grouws have
identified five processes for mathematics, but these can be applied to the teaching¬
learning process in all subjects:
1. Attending to prerequisites. Solving new problems is based largely on

understanding previously learned skills and concepts of the subject. The
teacher should use the skills and concepts mastered by the students as a
basis for solving problems.
2. Attending to relationships. Subjects comprise a large body of logical and
closely related ideas; the teacher should emphasize meaning and
interpretation of ideas.
3. Attending to representation. The more the student is able to represent a
problem in context with concrete or real-world phenomena, the better
able the student is to solve the problem.
4. Generalizability of concepts. Teachers need to explain the general
applicability of the idea to students; skills and processes that apply to
many settings should be practiced.
5. Attending to language. Teachers should use precise terminology of their
subject, and students must learn basic terms and concepts of the
subject.63
The test for learning to problem solve is the ability to apply or use the
strategies that have been learned in new, or at least a variety of, situations. Often
teachers think students have “mastered” relevant facts and procedures when in
reality, according to Alan-Schoenfeld, they have only learned a strategy blindly
and can use it only in circumstances similar to those in which it was taught to
them. When given a slightly different version of a problem, or when they must
make inferences or leaps in thinking, they are stymied.64 Similarly, most of the
problems found in textbooks, and those we assign for homework, are not prob¬
lems in the true sense. They are exercises or tasks that reinforce specific, usually
rote, procedures for solving a problem. In math, for example, most word prob¬
lems are solved by students who rely on a key word without fully understanding
the procedures involved. A real problem confronts a student with a difficulty,
and the answer cannot be obtained by relying on rote procedures, it calls for re¬
lating or rearranging learned concepts or procedures with new ideas generated
by the problem. It is not straightforward. A student’s understanding of the proce¬
dures, and the transfer of understanding to new situations, is crucial. Most stu¬
dents cannot function in this arena, because our instructional methods tend to
emphasize rote-mechanical procedures.
Teachers can help students become critical thinkers by becoming less con¬
tent driven and slowing down the lesson. Class time must incorporate experi¬
mental, discovery, and/or reflective processes and activities. An expectation or
norm is created in the classroom: where being right is not as important as how
we arrived at the answer, where acquiring knowledge is only the first step and
not as important as using knowledge.
This kind of teaching forces tough choices. Open-ended questioning is es¬
sential in classrooms that emphasize critical thinking, but such an approach
takes time—hence it limits content coverage. For example, for the teacher to list
the causes of the Vietnam War, the characteristics of a virus, or the social impli¬
cations of Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet for his tenth-grade students is very
different from asking students to arrive at such insights themselves.
It is one thing to demonstrate to your second-grade students how to fold a
paper plane so that it flies, but it is totally different and takes much longer to en¬
courage students to “experience” their own solutions, to discover on their own
or in small groups how to fold and fly the planes. For the sake of efficiency, the
teacher might provide some clues to get them started and then at the end of the
lesson ask students to reach a consensus on the common characteristics of planes
that fly the farthest.65
The difference in approach between giving answers to students and having
them search for answers can be summed up as lecture versus experiential teach¬
ing, direct instruction versus inquiry-based instruction, or content-based versus
process-based learning. Does the teacher provide knowledge, or do the students
construct knowledge? The latter choices have more personal meaning for stu¬
dents and equip them to integrate learning into longer-term memory more easily,
because the learners themselves have generated, predicted, and evaluated the
content. Teachers who use a more inquiry- and process-oriented approach not
only enhance student achievement but also foster long-term retention of the ma¬
terial that is learned.
New research on cognition shows that successful problem solving correlates
with a particular mind-set. According to Robert Marzano, students’ attitudes
toward school and learning, and their own social concerns and self-concept, are
important dimensions for learning. Students develop “mental habits” that make
them more or less efficient as problem solvers. For example, they leam to seek ac¬
curacy, test ideas, avoid impulsivity, and persist when answers are not apparent—
which in part is based on how they perceive themselves in learning situations.66
Being able to translate these ideas into practice is another issue. For teach¬
ers, it suggests that we take note of the broad social and psychological dimen¬
sions of learning. On a cognitive level, it means slowing down the teaching¬
learning process and studying -content in depth. It means using Socratic
questions, asking students to clarify and redefine their thinking, as well as dis¬
cussing, comparing, probing, and debating content—instructional methods that
slow down teaching and learning. As a teacher, it means you must be willing to
reveal or model your own thought processes—what you are thinking and how
you are tackling a problem—and then ask your students to reveal their thinking
during problem-solving tasks. It means sometimes discarding the lesson plan
and just listening to your students as you pinpoint or focus on a concept, elabo¬
rate on one of their statements, or help them clarify an issue or problem.
Finally, teachers must not think that problem-solving and experiential ap¬
proaches are only for high-achieving students and practice and drill is only for
low achievers. The key to successful teaching is timing and emphasis. One edu¬
cator, Robert Stevens, notes that there is a relationship between direct instruc¬
tion and problem solving. Stevens’ observation suggests why it is important to
use a variety of teaching approaches.
Teach Them to Write
Howard Gardner
John H. and Elizabeth A. Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education
Harvard University
The most important lessons presented by a teacher typical course, a student will communicate with me
are those embodied in his being. I try to convey to several times about his paper: at the time of incep¬
students my knowledge and my ignorance, my pas¬ tion, when it is in outline form, when it is in first
sion for the subject, the ways in which I approach draft, and when it is in final draft form. The student
problems, how I launch, carry out (and sometimes must submit each “installment” on time and I pro¬
abandon) projects, how I think and write. I then try vide rapid feedback. This entails lots of work for
to work with the students on these same issues, help¬ both of us but I think the process works reasonably
ing them to think about their own areas of knowl¬ well. My procedure is based on an empirical obser¬
edge and ignorance, projects of meaning to them, vation that has been much supported: One rarely
their own working styles, and their own short and learns from a single experience (i.e., writing a single
long-term aspirations. draft and getting a single grade) but one can learn
Because I am particularly interested in writing, I much from accumulated efforts over time.
work intensively with students on their papers. In a
A small but growing number of studies are demonstrating that students with learning
disabilities seem to benefit from simulations and authentic problem-solving activi¬
ties only when they are first directly taught the salient facts and concepts that under¬
lie the activities and then are provided with a structure to help them understand how
to apply the facts and concepts to authentic problem solving. . . .
Two studies . . . attempted to apply many of the principles of direct instruction to
helping students with learning disabilities develop a complex, higher-order problem¬
solving ability: the ability to set priorities and to rank items by importance. The topic
was understanding the relationship of diet, exercise, and health. Students who were
given an explicit framework for making decisions tended to benefit significantly
more from the series of simulation [problem solving and experiential] exercises than
those who merely received feedback and support. . . . It is important to note that
students’ knowledge of basic facts related to health did not differ significantly be¬
tween the two groups before or after the intervention, but their ability to apply this
knowledge was significantly aided by their use of an explicit strategy in the computer
simulations.67
Instructional Approach V: If Focusing on Student Construction

of Knowledge, Use an Inductive Teaching Strategy
The first three approaches described in this chapter focused on a teacher-
centered approach to instruction: a common practice in most classrooms across
the country. The fourth approach was student-centered (experiential) but the
focus was on student critical thinking and open-ended instructional sequencing.
This final approach is also student-centered and can take many different forms,
but we will describe two (concept formation and unguided inquiry) that provide
a more specific structure for a lesson.
The concept formation approach (see Table 5.5, Cognitive Task 1)
evolves out of the work of curriculum theorist Hilda Taba.68 Concept forma¬
tion consists of essentially four steps: data generation, categorizing and label¬
ing, and extending.
1. Data generation occurs when the teacher either provides the students
with data (see Case Study 5.1) or the teacher has the students generate
their own data.
2. Grouping occurs when students group the data into categories that make
sense to them and not categories that have been predetermined by the
teacher.
3. Labeling occurs when students create some type of label for the category
they created.
4. Extending is an essential final step. Once the category is formed, the
teacher asks students if they can think of other examples that fall within
the category. If you read carefully the final paragraph of Case Study 5.1,
you’ll see an example of extending.
Table 5.5 Cognitive Operations and Levels of Questions
Overt Activity Eliciting Questions
Cognitive Task 1: Concept Formation
1. Enumeration and listing What did you see?Jhear? note?

2. Grouping together What belongs together? on what criterion?
3. Labeling, categorizing What would you call these groups? What belongs under what?
Cognitive Task 2: Generalizing and Inferring
1. Identifying points What did you note? see? find?

2. Explaining identified items of information Why did so-and-so happen? Why is so-and-so true?
3. Making inferences or generalizations What does this mean? What would you conclude? What generalizations
can you make?
Source: Hilda Taba, Teaching Strategies and Cognitive Functions in Elementary School Children, Cooperative Research Project No. 2404 (San
Francisco: San Francisco State College, 1966), 39^40, 42. Taba also has a third cognitive task, which we have not included in this table.
The (unguided) inquiry approach (see Table 5.5, Cognitive Task 2) also
evolved out of the work of Hilda Taba. Once again students are provided with
data, but in this case the students are attempting to evolve a personal theory
about how provided data are logically connected; they generalize and infer. Un¬
guided inquiry consists of four steps: providing data, making observations, cre¬
ating generalizations, and follow-up or inferring.
1. Providing data is similar to concept formation’s first step. The teacher

gives students a set of data to explore and discuss.
2. Making observations consists of thinking about the connections between
the different forms of data: What do I notice? What other information do
I need?
3. Creating generalizations helps students explore relationships between
the data. All generalizations are acceptable as long as they can be
defended through use of the data the teacher provides.
4. Follow-up, the final phase of the lesson, occurs when students review the
generalizations generated by their peers and select the one(s) best suited
to the data.
Case Study 5.2 provides an example of an (unguided) inquiry lesson. Other

forms of inquiry teaching are available for your use (e.g., guided inquiry), but
those are somewhat more teacher-centered. One of the great things about both of
these teaching strategies (concept formation and unguided inquiry) is that they are
very intrinsically motivating. That is, they build on the natural interests of the
students.
Case Study 5.1
Concept Formation
Lou Tripodi is preparing to teach an earth science “That’s right,” responds Mr. Tripodi. “Actually,
unit on the different types of resources human beings there are many more byproducts than gasoline, but
use. Lou typically uses the direct instruction model gasoline is most likely what you would think of first.
in introducing concepts and ideas, but because he be¬ Now, are there any other terms that you want to dis¬
lieves his students have a reasonable understanding cuss before we start?”
of the available resources, he decides to use a differ¬ The students nonverbally respond that they un¬
ent instructional model to introduce the concept. He derstand all the terms, and Mr. Tripodi checks by
wants to see how his students have organized ideas questioning them on some of the terms listed.
associated with the way resources are used by people Mr. Tripodi continues the lesson. “I am going to
to lead a quality life. provide each one of you with a sheet of paper that
“Today, class, we are going to begin a unit on re¬ has three circles on it. I want you to work in your
sources that people use to sustain and enhance the peer pairs [he has each student paired with a fellow
quality of their lives. I’m going to list some re¬ student] and group these terms in a way that makes
sources on the board as examples. I then want you to the most sense to each of you. For example, if I se¬
add additional terms of your own.” lect one term, such as paper, what item(s) or term(s)
Mr. Tripodi proceeds by listing on the board the would you put with it?”
following terms: “I would select trees,” reacts Huan-Kun.
“Why?” questions Mr. Tripodi.
1. crude oil 9. forests “Because you make paper from tree pulp. I
2. paper 10. water learned that a while ago when I had Ms. Kunjufu in
3. rain 11. fish social studies.”
4. trains 12. coal “Excellent. Now, let’s see how many other items
we can put with the two terms, paper and trees.”
5. chemicals 13. factories
The students expand the category to eight
6. minerals 14. electricity
items—some of which are from the original listing
7. trucks 15. atomic energy of fifty terms. Others are new items that the students
8. gasoline 16. natural gas believe fit and that they thought of as the lesson pro¬
gressed. After about 5 minutes Mr. Tripodi stops fur¬
After he completes the list, he asks the students to ther categorization and labels the grouping “Things
name other resources that they feel are important to needed to make paper.”
people’s quality of life. The students provide addi¬ He states: “Using the same process we used here, I
tional examples, such as trees, wildlife, soil, lakes, now want you to create your own groups of items. Se¬
rivers, plants. . . . When the list grows to approxi¬ lect one item, any item, and then see what other terms
mately fifty terms, he asks them to stop. fit with the one you selected. Then after you have as
“Well, we have a nice listing of items here. Are many terms placed together in the circle as you can
there any terms you don’t understand? For example, think of, label the group. Think of a name that is ap¬
does everyone know what crude oil is? Robin, let’s propriate for all the items you have grouped together.”
make sure we all know what that term means.” The students work for 15 minutes creating then-
Robin responds, “Crude oil is the stuff in the own word groupings. Mr. Tripodi walks around the
ground that oil companies pump out and use to make room, checks on the students’ progress, and then
gasoline.” draws three large circles on the board.
continued
Case Study 5.1 concluded “Good,” responds Mr. Tripodi. “Now, class, what
other items might we put into this grouping that Lu¬
“Let’s see how you did,” states Mr. Tripodi. “Lu¬ cinda’s group left out? You might even be able to
cinda, give me one of your groupings.” identify some that were not on our original list.”
Lucinda lists all the items from one category, and The students add six additional terms before
Mr. Tripodi writes them down in a circle as follows: Mr. Tripodi stops the process and goes to the next peer
group and asks them for one of their word groups.
The students create ten groupings before
Maturates Minerals ^ Mr. Tripodi stops the lesson. Many of the groupings
(/Oater fc rests focus on natural resources. Mr. Tripodi has the stu¬
dents regroup the terms into large concept groupings
Streams and some into smaller groupings.
Cruie sit
“Class, let’s go back to Lucinda’s grouping.
What I want to do now is look more carefully at the
divers Goat interrelationship of the natural resources we’ve iden¬
tified and the actual products that result from those
lakes ■ &un'
resources. I want you to read Chapter 4 in your text
and then select two resources from Lucinda’s group¬
“Lucinda, what descriptor do you have for this
ing and identify some products that result from each
group?”
resource. I also want you to write a generalization
Lucinda responds, “Natural resources that people
about why resources are important to people.”
use.”
Methods for Teaching
Benjamin S. Bloom
Charles H. Swift Distinguished Service Professor, Emeritus
University of Chicago
There is much rote learning in schools throughout use of observations, reflections on observations, ex¬
the world. However, in a small number of perimentation with phenomena, and the use of first¬
countries—for example, Japan, South Korea, Israel, hand data and daily experiences, as well as primary
and Thailand—I find great emphasis on such higher printed sources.
mental processes as problem solving, application of In sharp contrast to these teaching methods,
principles, analytical skills, and creativity. These teachers in the United States use textbooks that
countries have very active central curriculum centers rarely pose real problems. The textbooks I observe
charged with responsibility constantly to improve emphasize specific content to be remembered and
textbooks and other learning materials, and to pro¬ give students little opportunity to discover underly¬
vide inservice training for teachers, especially as it ing concepts and principles—and even less opportu¬
relates to the curriculum and teaching methods. nity to attack real problems in their environments. I
In these countries, subjects are taught as methods estimate that over 90 percent of the test questions
of inquiry into the nature of science, mathematics, that American students are expected to answer deal
the arts, and the social studies. Subjects are taught as with little more than remembered information. Our
much for the ways of thinking they represent as for instructional materials, classroom teaching methods,
their traditional content. Much of this learning makes and testing methods rarely rise above knowledge.
Case Study 5.2
Unguided Inquiry
Ms. Wilson is preparing to teach a lesson on rites of One group, the trailblazers, agree to these three
passage as part of a unit on child development to her common points: young people are involved, extreme
eleventh-grade students. She begins the lesson by emotions, and developing countries. Some points of
distributing seven pictures that she took from Life agreement and difference exist between and among
magazine that show rites events for people in seven the groups.
different countries. The class is divided into student “Class, now that you have your common points, I
groups—four to a group. want you to tell me through a statement or general¬
“Class, I am going to give each group a set of ization what you think is happening in each picture.
these pictures. I want you to look carefully at each I’ll give you a hint. Each picture depicts a similar
picture and write down what you see.” event.”
The students work in their groups and write down The students are visibly excited. Several think
“facts” that they can all agree to that relate to the they know the answer. The teacher insists that they
picture. The first picture shows a young girl being write their responses down, which they do.
ritually circumcised; the second picture shows a One group concludes: “Each picture shows young
young boy with royal dress and blood on his hand; people going through a rite of passage that enables
the third shows two young girls sitting outside a them to become adults.”
thatched hut. . . After the students finish their analyses, Ms. Wil¬
After the students write down facts about each son asks them to select one picture and write down
picture, Ms. Wilson asks them to think about what exactly what they think is happening in the picture.
all the pictures (or at least some of the pictures) have After they finish, she distributes explanations of what
in common. The students look at their facts and then is actually happening and the students compare their
generate three “common points” for the pictures. (predicted) interpretation with the actual explanation.

Teachers and students across grade levels spend about 75 to 90 percent of their
classroom instructional time on practice and drill, questioning, explaining, or
lecturing. The remaining time (10 to 25 percent) is spent on other instructional
methods and activities such as role playing, simulations or games, small-group
discussions, inquiry and discovery, independent projects, class reporting, and
monitoring.69
Here are some basic recommendations, in the form of questions, that can
help you implement these teacher-directed methods in classrooms:
1. Are your lessons planned in advance? Do students know what to expect

and when to change activities? Is the pace of the lesson brisk? Do you
slow down when further detail or explanation is warranted?
2. Are your materials and methods prepared in advance and incorporated
without hindering the momentum of the lesson?
3. Do you combine explanations, illustrations, and demonstrations with
your methods, and with what is to be learned?
4. Does the lesson proceed in sequenced steps? Do academic tasks or

skills build on the preceding ones? Are students helped to see
relationships between previous and present learning?
5. Do you use practice-and-drill activities before and after other new
learning to ensure that students have mastered required academic tasks?
Have you incorporated practice exercises into several parts of the
lesson, including preliminary reviews and end summaries?
6. Do you give younger students and low-achieving students more
practice-and-drill activities than older and high-achieving students? Are
practice exercises checked and corrected promptly?
7. Are practice-and-drill activities spaced in short intervals in class to
prevent boredom or busywork?
8. In asking questions, do you make sure all students have the opportunity
to respond by using a variety of types of questions (low-level and high-
level, convergent and divergent)? Do you allow sufficient wait-time?
call on nonvolunteers? call on low achievers as frequently as, or more
than, high achievers?
9. Are you aiming at a high success rate in student responses to your
questions? Do you ask easier or more concrete questions with low
achievers to ensure high success rates?
10. Are your questions sequenced to ensure understanding and to build a
knowledge base before proceeding to more difficult questions? Do you
ask clear and concise questions? (Or do you find you have to rephrase
and repeat questions?)
11. Are you willing to redirect incorrectly answered questions to other
students? Do you probe for a better answer from the same student? Do
you provide appropriate comments to questions and answers, including
honest praise? Do you note correct responses to questions? Do you
encourage students who respond with no answer or a wrong answer to
try again to improve?
12. In lecturing and explaining, do you match style and content to students’
abilities and interests? Do you prepare and organize content? Do you
use appropriate and varied materials and media to clarify ideas?
13. While lecturing or explaining, do you readily ask questions to maintain
student attention and to gauge student understanding and progress?
14. Do you limit your lecturing or explaining to only a few moments,
especially with younger and low-achieving students, and rely on other
instructional methods?
15. Do you gauge the students’ learning styles and abilities when
presenting problems to students? Do you help students with various
strategies and processes to help solve problems?
16. Do you provide supportive groups in the classroom (i.e., sharing dyads,
cooperative learning groups, tutors or homework helpers, etc.) to help
students overcome their anxiety about problem solving? Do you
identify the strengths and resources of the students to enhance their

self-confidence?
17. Do you take time to model or show different ways to solve problems,
including how to compare, analyze, modify, guess, hypothesize, and
predict?
18. Do you modify your instructional methods to suit the classroom
situation—age and academic abilities of the students, subject matter,
your teaching style, and student learning style?
Summary
1. Most instructional activities can be categorized as an example of one of five
instructional methods: practice and drill, questioning, lecturing, problem
solving and experiential, and inductive.
2. Lecturing is one of the oldest instructional method. Different types of teacher
talks (formal, informal, and brief lectures and explanations) can be effective
with different students, but in general the length, complexity, and frequency
of teacher talk should be reduced for younger and slower students.
3. Questioning is incorporated in many types of lessons: Types of cognitive
questions include low-level and high-level, convergent and divergent.
4. The method of practice and drill has applications for teaching skills and
processes.
5. Experiential and inductive approaches allow students to actively take
responsibility for their own learning.
1. When should lecturing be used?
2. What is the difference between convergent and divergent questions? Why do
most teachers rely on convergent questions? Should they? When?
3. Why is the wait-time important in questioning?
4. Why is practice and drill used more often in elementary grades than in
secondary grades?
5. What are the advantages and disadvantages of the experiential and inductive
approaches as instructional methods?
Things to Do
1. Develop a checklist for improving the lecture method. In doing so, review the
procedures for preparing a lecture and recommendations for lecturing.
2. Outline ten do’s and don’ts in asking questions. Discuss each one with your
classmates.
3. Teach a short lesson to your class by asking questions. Refer to Tips for
Teachers 5.2 and 5.3 as guides to see how well you performed.
4. List five recommendations for conducting practice and drill. Indicate any that
you feel particularly comfortable or uncomfortable with as a teacher. Based
on these preferences, what conclusions can you make about how you will use
practice and drill?
5. Identify five characteristics of successful problem solvers. What
characteristics coincide with your own problem-solving strategies? What
others strategies could you use to enhance your problem-solving instruction?
Bigge, Morris L. and S. Samuel Shermis, Learning Theories for Teachers, 6th ed. New
York: Longman, 1999. Various cognitive theories—Piaget, Skinner, Vygotsky,
Bloom etc., and how they are related to classroom practices.
Fenstermacher, Gary D. and Jonnas F. Soltis, Approaches to Teaching. New York:
Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1998. A discussion of basic
approaches to teaching, exploring strengths and weaknesses.
Gage, N. L., and David C. Berliner. Educational Psychology, 6th ed. Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1998. Research pertaining to practice and drill, lecturing, and problem
solving—among other subjects.
Good, Thomas L., and Jere E. Brophy. Contemporary Educational Psychology, 5th ed.
New York: Longman, 1995. Examination of the research pertaining to practice and
drill, questioning, and problem solving.
Hunkins, Francis P. Effective Questions, Teaching Thinking Through Effective
Questioning, 2nd ed. Needham, MA: Gordon, 1994. A practical approach to the
technique of questioning.
Lasley II, Thomas J„ and Thomas Matczynski. Teaching Strategies for a Diverse Society.
Belmont CA: Wadsworth, 1997. Eight different specific teaching models that can be
used to teach students content and skills.
Stevens, Robert. Teaching in American Schools. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall,
1999. The nature of effective teaching especially related to direct instruction.
Welker, Robert. The Teacher as Expert. Albany: State University of New York Press,
1992. Prominent educational thinkers examine the concept of the teacher as expert,
with specialized knowledge—content and pedagogical.
Whimbey, Arthur, and Jack Lochhead, Problem Solving and Comprehension. Mahwah,
NJ: Erbaum, 1999. How experts and students actively construct and refine their own
skills of problem solving and reasoning.
Key Terms
concept formation 204 divergent questions 181
convergent questions 181 final summaries 179
graphic organizers 176 low-level questions 180

heuristic thinking 198 probing 188
high-level questions 180 reflective thinking 198
internal summaries 179 unguided inquiry 205
law of exercise 191 wait-time 186
lectures 173
End Notes
1. John McLeish, The Lecture Method (Cambridge, England: Cambridge Institute of
Education, 1968).
2. William J. Seiler et al., Communication in Business and Professional Organizations
(Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1982).
3. George Hillocks, Ways of Thinking, Ways of Teaching (New York: Teachers College
Press, Columbia University, 1999); Cheryl Spaulding, Motivation in the Classroom,
3rd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1992).
4. Alison King, “Reciprocal Peer-Questioning: A Strategy for Teaching Students How
to Learn from Lectures,” ClearingHouse (November-December 1990): 131-135.
5. Nate Gage and David Berliner, Educational Psychology, 6th ed. (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1998).
6. Robert M. W. Travers, Essentials of Learning, 5th ed. (New York: Macmillan,
1982), 436.
7. Elizabeth Perrott, Effective Teaching: A Practical Guide to Improving Your
Teaching (New York: Longman, 1981); Robert Welker, The Teacher as Expert
(Albany: State University of New York Press, 1992).
8. Gerald G. Duffy, “Conceptualizing Instructional Explanation,” Teaching and
Teacher Education, no. 2 (1986): 197-214.
9. David P. Ausubel, “In Defense of Advanced Organizers: A Reply to the Critics,”
Review of Educational Research (Spring 1978): 251-259; Gage and Berliner,
Educational Psychology.
10. Jack Hiller, Gerald A. Fischer, and Walter Kaess, “A Computer Investigation of
Verbal Characteristics of Effective Classroom Lecturing,” American Educational
Research Journal (November 1969): 661-675.
11. Robert Garmston and Bruce Wellman, “How to Make Presentations,” Educational
Leadership (February 1994): 88-89.
12. Kenneth A. Kiewa, “Aids to Lecture Learning,” Educational Psychologist (Winter
1991): 37-53.
13. Ruth Garner, “Interest and Learning from a Text,” American Educational Research
Journal (Fall 1991): 495-520; Michael Pressley and Elizabeth S. Ghatla, “Self-
Regulated Learning: Monitoring Learning from Text,” Educational Psychologist
(Winter 1990): 19-33.
14. Ibid.
15. Michael J. Dunkin and Bruce J. Biddle, The Study of Teaching (New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1974); Francis P. Hunkins, Effective Questions, Effective
Thinking, 2nd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Gordon, 1994); Patricia L. Smith and
Tillman J. Ragan, Instructional Design, 2nd ed. (Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1999).
16. Carl Bereiter and Siegfried Englemann, Teaching Disadvantaged Children in the
Preschool (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1966); Barak Rosenshine, “Content,
Time, and Direct Instruction,” in Research on Teaching: Concepts, Findings, and
Implications, ed. P. L. Peterson and H. J. Walberg (Berkekey, CA: McCutchan,
1979), 28-56; George H. Wood, Schools That Work (New York: Dutton, 1992).
17. Walter Doyle, “Effective Teaching and the Concept of the Master Teacher,”
Elementary School Journal (September 1985): 27-34; Donald S. Medley, “The
Effectiveness of Teachers,” in Research on Teaching, ed. Peterson and Walberg,
11-27; Jane A. Stallings and Linda F. Quinn, “Learning How to Teach in the Inner
City,” Educational Leadership (November 1991): 25-27.
18. Penelope L. Peterson, “Making Learning Meaningful: Lessons from Research on
Cognition and Instruction,” Educational Psychologist (Fall 1988): 365-373; Dale H.
Schunk “Goal Setting and Self-Efficacy During Self-Regulated Learning,”
Educational Psychologist (Winter 1991): 71-86; John Solas, “Investigating Teacher
and Student Thinking About the Process of Teaching and Learning,” Review of
Educational Research (Summer 1992): 205-225.
19. Benjamin Bloom, ed., Taxonomy of Educational Objectives: Handbook I. Cognitive
Domain (New York: Longman-McKay, 1956), 28.
20. Barry K. Beyer, Teaching Thinking Skills (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon,
1991); Lauren B. Resnick and Leopold E. Klopfer, eds., Toward the Thinking
Curriculum: Current Cognitive Research, 1989 ASCD Yearbook (Alexandria, VA:
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1989).
21. J. T. Dillon, “Research on Questioning and Discussion,” Educational Leadership
(November 1984): 50-56; Meredith Gall, “Synthesis of Research on Teachers’
Questioning,” Educational Leadership (January 1984): 40^47. Also see J. T. Dillon,
Questioning and Teaching (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia
University, 1988).
22. Jules Henry, “Docility, or Giving Teacher What She Wants,” in Readings in the
Socio-Cultural Foundations of Education, eds. J. H. Chilcott, N. C. Greenberg, and
H. B. Wilson (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1969), 249.
23. John Holt, How Children Fail (New York: Pitman, 1964), 12.
24. Allan Ornstein, “Questioning: The Essence of Good Teaching: Part I,” NASSP
Bulletin (May 1987): 71-79; Stephen T. Peverly, “Problems with Knowledge-Based
Explanation of Memory and Development,” Review of Educational Research (Spring
1991): 71-93.
25. Mary B. Rowe, “Wait-Time and Reward as Instructional Variables,” Journal of
Research in Science Teaching (February 1974): 81-97. Also see David C. Berliner,
“Laboratory Settings and the Study of Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher
Education (November-December 1985): 2-9.
26. Paulette P. Harris and Kevin J. Swick, “Improving Teacher Communications: Focus
on Clarity and Questioning Skills,” ClearingHouse (September 1985): 13-15; James
Hiebert and Diana Wearne, “Instructional Tasks, Classroom Discourse, and
Students’ Learning,” American Educational Research Journal (Summer 1993):
393-425; Kenneth Tobin, “Effects of Teacher Wait Time on Discourse
Characteristics in Mathematics and Language Arts Classes,” American Educational
Research Journal (Summer 1986): 191-200.
27. Carolyn Evertson et al.. Classroom Management for Elementary Teachers, 4th ed.
(Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997); Jacob Kounin, Discipline and
Group Management in Classrooms (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970).
28. Clark A. Chinn, “Situated Actions During Reading Lessons: A Microanalysis of Oral
Reading Error Episodes,” American Educational Research Journal (Summer 1993):
361-392; Linda M. Anderson, Carolyn Evertson, and Jere Brophy, “An
Experimental Study of Effective Teaching in First Grade Reading Groups,”
Elementary School Journal (March 1979): 193-223; Darell Morris, Beverly Shaw,
and Jan Pemey, “Helping Low Readers in Grades 2 and 3,” Elementary School
Journal (November 1990): 133-150.
29. Donna M. Kagan, “How Schools Alienate Students at Risk,” Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1990): 105-125; Alexis L. Mitman and Andrea Lash,
“Students’ Perceptions of the Academic Learning and Classroom Behavior,”
Elementary School Journal (September 1988): 55-68.
30. Jere Brophy and Carolyn Evertson, Learning from Teaching: A Developmental
Perspective (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1976); N. L. Gage, The Scientific Basis of the
Art of Teaching (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1978);
Richard T. Vacca and JoAnne L. Vacca, Content Area Reading (New York:
Longman, 1999).
31. Ellen D. Gagne, The Cognitive Psychology of School Learning, 2nd ed. (New York:
HarperCollins, 1993); Robert Marzano, A Different Kind of Classroom: Teaching
with Dimensions of Learning (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1992).
32. Dunkin and Biddle, The Study of Teaching.
33. Jere Brophy, “Teacher Praise: A Functional Analysis,” Review of Educational
Research (Spring 1981): 5-32; Jere Brophy, “On Praising Effectively,” Elementary
School Journal (May 1981): 269-280.
34. J. T. Dillon, “A Norm Against Student Questions,” ClearingHouse (November
1981): 136-139; Irma J. Van Scoy, “Differences in Teaching Between Six Primary
and Five Intermediate Teachers in One School,” Elementary School Journal
(January 1994): 347-356.
35. Dunkin and Biddle, The Study of Teaching; Thomas Good, Bruce Biddle, and Jere
Brophy, Teachers Make a Difference (New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975).
36. Louis M. Heil, “Personality Variables, an Important Determinant in Effective
Elementary School Instruction,” Theory into Practice (February 1964): 12—15.
Educational Leadership (April 1992): 20-25; Barak V. Rosenshine, “Teaching
Functions in Instructional Programs,” Elementary School Journal (March 1983)-
335-351.
38. Howard Gardner and Veronica Biox-Mansilla, “Teaching for Understanding—
Within and Across Disciplines,” Educational Leadership (February 1994): 14-18.
John I. Goodlad, A Place Called School (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984); Robert J.
Sternberg and Wendy Williams, Intelligence, Instruction, and Assessment (Mahwah,
NJ: Erlbaum, 1998).
39. Wilbert J. McKeachie, Learning, Thinking, and Thorndike,” Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1990): 127-141; Richard M. Wolf, “In Memoriam—Robert
Thorndike,” Educational Researcher (April 1991); 22-23.
40. Carl Bereiter, “Implications of Connectionism and Thinking About Rules,”
Educational Researcher (April 1991): 10-16.
41. Robert Glazer, Adaptive Education: Individual Diversity and Learning (New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1977), 77.
42. Benjamin S. Bloom, Human Characteristics and School Learning (New York:
43. Lorin W. Anderson and Leonard O. Pellicer, “Synthesis of Research on

Compensatory and Remedial Education,” Educational Leadership (September
1990): 10-16; Allan C. Ornstein and Daniel U. Levine, “School Effectiveness and
Reform,” ClearingHouse (November-December 1990): 115-118.
44. Allan Ornstein, “Homework, Studying, and Notetaking: Essential Skills for Students,”
NASSP Bulletin (January 1994): 51-71; Robert E. Slavin, Educational Psychology:
Theory and Practice, 5th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997).
45. Thomas L. Good, Douglas A. Grouws, and Howard Ebermeier, Active Mathematics
Teaching (New York: Longman, 1983); Robert J. Sternberg and Talia Ben-Zev, The
Nature of Mathematical Thinking (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1995).
46. Jere E. Brophy, “Teaching Social Studies for Understanding Higher-Order
Applications,” Elementary School Journal (March 1990): 351-417; Carolyn M.
Evertson et ah, “Relationship Between Classroom Behaviors and Student
Outcomes in Junior High School Mathematics and English,” American
Educational Research Journal (Spring 1980): 43-60; Shane Templeton, “Teaching
and Learning the English Spelling System,” Elementary School Journal
(November 1991): 185-201.
47: Neville Bennett, “The Search for a Theory of Pedagogy,” Teaching and Teacher
Education (January 1988): 19-30; M. C. Wittrock, “Generative Teaching of
Comprehension,” Elementary School Journal (November 1991): 169-184.
48. James H. Block, Helen E. Efthim, and Robert B. Burns, Building Effective Mastery
Learning Schools (New York: Longman, 1989); Robert M. Gagne, Leslie J. Briggs,
and Walter W. Wager, Principles of Instructional Design, 3rd ed. (New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1988).
49. Benjamin Bloom, Human Characteristics and School Learning; Arthur Costa, ed.,
Developing Minds (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, 1991).
50. Thomas Good and Jere Brophy, Looking into Classrooms, 7th ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997); Richard S. Marliave and Nikola N. Filby, “Success Rate: A
Measure of Task Appropriateness,” in Perspectives on Instructional Time, ed. C. W.
Fisher and D. C. Berliner (New York: Longman, 1985), 217-236.
51. James A. Kulik and ChenLin C. Kulik, “Timing and Feedback and Verbal Learning,”
Review of Educational Research (Spring 1988): 79—97; J. Kulik, C. Kulik, and Robert
L. Bangert-Drowns, “Effectiveness of Mastery Learning Programs: Meta-Analysis,”
Review of Educational Research (Summer 1990): 265-299.
52. The ten recommendations for practice and drill are based on Ornstein, “Practice and
Drill: Implications for Instruction,” NASSP Bulletin (April 1990): 112-116.
53. John Dewey, How We Think (Lexington, MA: Heath, 1910).
54. John Bransford and Barry Stem, The IDEAL Problem Solver (San Francisco:
Freeman, 1985).
55. Morris L. Bigge, Learning Theories for Teachers, 6th ed. (New York: Longman,
1999); Thomas Good and Jere Brophy, Contemporary Educational Psychology: 5th
ed. (New York: Longman, 1995); Richard E. Mayer, Thinking, Problem Solving and
Cognition (San Francisco: Freeman, 1983).
56. Allen Newell and Herbert Simon, Human Problem Solving (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1972).
57. Paul Cobb et al., “Characteristics of Classroom Mathematics Traditions,” American
Educational Research Journal (Fall 1992): 573-604; Penelope Peterson, Elizabeth
Fennema, and Thomas Carpenter, “Using Knowledge of How Students Think About
Mathematics,” Educational Leadership (December-January 1989): 42-46.
U'
58. Benjamin Bloom and Lois J. Broder, “Problem-Solving Process of College

Students,” Supplementary Educational Monograph, no. 73 (Chicago: University of
Chicago Press, 1950).
59. Jere Brophy, “Research Linking Teacher Behavior to Student Achievement,”
Educational Psychologist (Summer 1988): 235-286; David F. Lohman, “Predicting
Mathematic Effects in the Teaching of High-Order Thinking Skills,” Educational
Psychologist (Summer 1986): 191-208; John Woodward, “Effects of Curriculum
Discourse Style on Eighth Graders’ Recall and Problem Solving in Earth Science,”
Elementary School Journal (January 1994): 299-314.
60. Ruth Gamer, “When Children and Adults Do Not Use Learning Strategies,” Review
of Educational Research (Winter 1990): 517-529; Michael S. Knapp and Patrick M.
Shields, “Reconceiving Academic Instruction for Children of Poverty,” Phi Delta
Kappan (June 1990): 752-758.
61. Jean Piaget, The Origins of Intelligence in Children (New York: International
Universities Press, 1952); Piaget and Barbel Inhelder, The Early Growth of Logic in
the Child (London: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1964).
62. Robert J. Sternberg et al„ “Practical Intelligence for Success in School,” Educational
Leadership (September 1990): 35-39.
63. Thomas Good and Douglas Grouws, “Increasing Teachers’ Understanding of
Mathematical Ideas Through In Service Training,” Phi Delta Kappan (June 1987)-
778-783.
64. Alan H. Schoenfeld, “Teaching Mathematical Thinking and Problem Solving,” in
Toward the Thinking Curriculum, ed. Lauren B. Resnick and Leopold E. Klopfer
(Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development 1989)
83-103.
65. M. Beth Casey and Patricia Howson, “Educating Preservice Students Based on a
Problem-Centered Approach to Teaching,” Journal of Teacher Education
(November-December 1993): 361-370.
66. Robert Marzano, “Dimensions of Learning,” ASCD Update (August 1992): 1-3.
67. Robert Stevens, Teaching in American Schools (Upper Saddle River NJ- Prentice
Hall, 1999), 92.
68. Hilda Taba, Teaching Strategies and Cognitive Functioning in Elementary School
Children (San Francisco: San Francisco State College, 1966.)
69. Walter Doyle, “Content Representation in Teachers’ Definitions of Academic
Work,” Journal of Curriculum Studies (October 1986): 365-379; Kagan and
Deborah J. Tippins, “How Teachers’ Classroom Cases Express Their Pedagogical
Beliefs,” Journal of Teacher Education (September-October 1991): 281-291. Also
see John Goodlad, A Place Called School (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984); Alfie
Kohn, What to Look For in a Classroom (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998).
CHAPTER
6 Instructional Materials


(Principle #3)
evaluate and ensure the continuous intellectual, social, and physical
development of the learner. (Principle #8)
219

Focusing Questions
1. What factors do you consider in selecting instructional materials?
2. What are the best methods for incorporating instructional materials into
lessons?
3. What factors do you need to consider in copying materials so as to avoid
legal problems?
4. What are the advantages (disadvantages) of using textbooks?
5. How do you estimate the reading difficulty of textbooks?
6. What common textbook aids do you prefer? Why?
7. Why are workbooks often criticized? How can they be improved?
8. What problems might you encounter when using magazines or newspapers in
class?
Real-life experiences provide the most direct type of learning, but they are diffi¬
cult to supply in the traditional classroom. Most experiences in the classroom
occur through verbal symbolism—written and spoken words. These classroom
experiences might be easier for teachers to supply, but they can be more difficult
for many students to understand. Verbal symbolism depends on the ability to
conceptualize and think in the abstract, whereas the impact of firsthand experi¬
ence is immediate and concrete. Various multisensory instructional aids—
texts, pictures, games, simulations—can substitute for firsthand experiences and
enhance understanding, so they are an integral part of the learning activity.
In this chapter we will focus on written instructional materials—with em¬
phasis on textbooks and workbooks. In the next chapter we examine technologi¬
cal tools and media equipment.
Selecting Instructional Materials

Selecting appropriate commercial materials, especially textbooks, is the responsi¬
bility of teachers and administrators, sometimes acting in small professional
groups (at the district, school, department, or grade level), or in professional-
lay groups that include parents and community members, or as individuals. The
professional-lay group, according to educational theorist Elliot Eisner, is subject to
controversy when lay members have particular views about what students should
be exposed to or object to what teachers are teaching.1 Although committees make
decisions about the purchase or adaptation of materials on a schoolwide or dis¬
trictwide basis, the teacher still needs to make professional judgments about the
On Using Many Materials
Barak Rosenshine
Professor of Education Psychology, Emeritus
University of Illinois-Urbana
Judith was a student-teacher I supervised in an MA terials. The students were excited, they were learning
intern program. She was a thin, quiet, almost mousy new skills and developing an integrated map of the
person who only received average ratings in the material, but they weren’t doing it through the usual
summer microteaching program because she didn’t teacher-student discussion. Judith’s means were dif¬
have the necessary verbal pizzazz to lead a discus¬ ferent, but they were effective.
sion. I worried about her during that hot, dry Judith taught me that effective teachers come in
summer. many varieties; even quiet people can be effective.
The school year started, and as part of her intern We should remember that the goal of teaching is the
year, Judith was assigned to teach three social stud¬ learning, processing, and skill development that goes
ies classes in a local high school. Then, something on in the students’ heads, and there is a variety of in¬
new happened. Judith started writing extremely good structional methods for achieving this: It can be done
worksheets which contained well-developed integra¬ by leading discussions, by developing special mate¬
tive questions and thought questions. The students rials, by finding suitable materials developed by
prepared these before class and much of the class others, by developing thoughtful assignments, by ex¬
time focused on having students compare answers plaining with guided note taking, and/or by having
with each other and Judith elaborating upon those students explain concepts and material to each other.
answers. Judith also took charts and tables from the Judith taught me to focus on what goes on in the stu¬
various sources and developed extremely good fac¬ dents’ heads, and less on whether a currently pre¬
tual, analytic, and skill questions based on those ma¬ scribed method was used.
appropriateness and worth of the materials, because she or he is psychologically

close to students and should know their needs, interests, and abilities.
The evaluator (committee or individual) should examine as many available
materials as possible. The following general questions should be considered.
1. Do the materials fit the objectives? Materials should fit the objectives of
the course, unit plan, and lesson plan. Given the general nature of
published materials, some might fit only partially; or it might not be
possible to find materials to cover all the objectives. In such cases
teachers need to create all or some of their own materials. On the other
hand, there can be times when the teacher expands the objectives or
activities to include an outstanding set of instructional materials.
2. Do the materials provide sufficient repetition through examples,
illustrations, questions, and summaries to enhance understanding of
content? Young students and low-achieving students need more
repetition, overviews, and internal summaries, but for all students the
material should be paced properly, and students should have sufficient

time to digest and reflect on it.
3. Is the material suitable to the reading level of the students? Many
teachers can make this type of judgment intuitively by reading through
the material, and others can make the judgment after students experience
the materials. The most reliable method for all teachers is to use a
standard readability estimate.2
4. Does the difficulty of the materials match the abilities of the students?
Research indicates that highly motivated students require a minimum
success rate of 65 to 70 percent when working with reading materials (or
on related tasks) to maintain motivation and interest. Materials for low-
achieving students, especially seatwork and drill materials, require
minimum success rates of 70 to 80 percent when the teacher is nearby
to provide corrective feedback and 80 to 90 percent (depending on
individual confidence level) when students work independently.3
Some questions more specifically related to content than these general con¬
siderations are listed in Table 6.1. Committees and teachers should vary the
questions they ask to suit their own goals. The teacher might want to observe
students using the materials for several weeks and use their reactions to them in
making final judgments. See Tips for Teachers 6.1. It is also worthwhile to con¬
sult with students about the worth of textbooks, because students are the ulti¬
mate consumers of these books. They can give a fresh and a different perspec¬
tive. With the proper guidance from the teacher, students can offer questions and
Table 6.1 Questions to Consider in Selecting Instructional Materials
1. Does the material further the objectives of the lesson?

2. Does the material contribute meaningful content to the unit or lesson plan?
3. Does the material build on previous learning?
4. Does the material relate to present learning in other subjects?
5. Is the material current, accurate, and defensible?
6. Is the material appropriate for the age, maturity and experience of the students?
7. Is the material suitable to the reading level of the students?
8. Is the material free from bias, stereotyping, sexism?
9. Are the ideas, concepts, and points of views well expressed?
10. Is the physical presentation of the material acceptable? Are there appropriate margins, headings,
summaries, review exercises and questions?
11. Is the material presented at a pace that allows for reflection and review?
12. Is the material suited for individual and small group instruction? Can the material be used for
direct instruction or mastery instruction?
13. Are the physical conditions in the room conducive to using the materials?
14. Are the materials worth the time, effort, and expense?
15. Will the materials last over a period of time so the initial cost will be worth the investment?
Source: Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein, “The Development and Evaluation of Curriculum Materials,” NASSP
Bulletin (November 1995): 28. For more information concerning NASSP Services and/or programs, please call
(703) 860-0200.
comments that provide valuable insight into the texts they prefer (and why) and
those they understand and consider more interesting.
If you are in the East or Midwest, you will likely have considerable discre¬
tion (at the district level) in choosing textbooks. But if you are in the South or
far West, it is much more likely that you will be required to use a state-adopted
textbook series. More than twenty states use state adoption procedures. Some
states even align textbooks, at least to a degree, with mandated curricula. In
those states that have adoption processes, each school district typically selects its
textbook from a list of options provided by the state.
Selecting and Using Instructional Materials
How do instructional materials best serve students? 10. Tasks that require students to make
Below are some guides for selecting, using, and even discriminations must be preceded by a
developing instructional materials, with emphasis on sufficient number of tasks that provide
reading and subject-related tasks. practice on individual components.
1. Materials should be relevant to the 11. The content of materials must be accurate
instruction that is going on in the rest of the and precise; should not present wrong
unit or lesson. information or use language that contains
grammatical errors and incorrectly used
2. A portion of the materials should provide for
words.
a systematic and cumulative review of what
12. At least some tasks should be fun and have
has already been taught.
an obvious payoff.
3. Materials should reflect the most important
13. The instructional design of individual tasks
aspects of what is being taught in the course
and of task sequences should be carefully
or subject.
planned.
4. Matexials should contain, in a form readily
14. The number of different materials should be
accessible to students and teachers, extra
limited so as not to overload or confuse
tasks for students who need extra practice.
students.
5. The vocabulary and concept level of materials
15. Artwork in the materials must be consistent
should relate to that of the rest of the subject.
with the text.
6. The language used in the materials must be
16. Cute, nonfunctional, space- and time-
consistent with that used in the rest of the
consuming materials should be avoided.
lesson and in the textbook or workbook.
17. When appropriate, materials should be
7. Instructions to students should be clear,
accompanied by brief explanations of
unambiguous, and easy to follow; brevity is
purpose for both teachers and students.
a virtue.
8. The layout of pages should combine
attractiveness with utility.
9. Materials should contain enough content so Source: Adapted from Jean Osborn, “The Purposes, Uses, and
Contents of Workbooks and Some Guidelines for Publishers,”
that students will learn something and not Learning to Read in American Schools, ed. R. C. Anderson, J. Osborn,
simply be exposed to something. and R. J. Tierney, (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1984), 110-111.
Although there are positives and negatives associated with the state adop¬
tion process, the real key is for you as a teacher to be a good evaluator of what¬
ever textbooks you are required to use (even state adopted texts), especially
given the heavy current emphasis on textbooks. Some educational theorists sug¬
gest that 70 to 95 percent of all classroom time is spent using textbooks and that
70 percent of all instructional decisions rely on textbooks.4
Duplicated Materials
The types of educational materials used most by teachers are written texts (text¬
books, workbooks, pamphlets, magazines, newspapers), pictures and models, and
material used in association with classroom activities. They might be printed
(prepared and published commercially) or duplicated (prepared by the teacher or
school). Duplicated materials are used when teachers produce their own materi¬
als or when they wish to copy printed material not easily available for students.
Instructional aids that involve special materials and equipment, such as films,
slides, computers, videos and cassette tapes, will be discussed in the next chapter.
Developing Materials
Sometimes slight modifications or supplements to published materials will make
them suitable to use. Other times totally different materials are needed. If none
of the printed materials seem usable, you have to consider making your own.
Developing your own

instructional materials
is an important part of
good teaaching.
Before developing new materials, you should examine your present materi¬
als carefully. There must be sufficient “no” responses to the evaluation questions
in Table 6.1 to warrant producing new materials. There must be a sufficiently
greater number of “yes” responses for your new material to justify the time, ef¬
fort, and cost of its development.
If you decide to produce-your own, take time and cost into consideration.
Too often teachers make their own instructional materials at a high cost for
themselves and their schools. There could be better uses for the teacher’s time
and the school’s money.5 The Table 6.1 questions for evaluation of printed ma¬
terials apply as much to new materials, and they can guide your own develop¬
ment of materials.
Copying Materials
Many teachers supplement the required text or workbook with instructional

materials obtained from various sources—library texts, magazines and jour¬
nals, government reports, newspapers— and duplicate these materials without
being aware that there is a copyright law that controls their use. The law, en¬
acted in 1976, permits an educator to make a single duplication, for scholarly
or instructional purpose, of the following: (1) a chapter from a book, (2) an
article from a magazine, journal, or newspaper, (3) a short story, essay, or
poem, or (4) a chart, graph, drawing, or table from a book, periodical, or
newspaper.6
Multiple copies for students, not to exceed one copy per student for a
course, may be made without permission providing the following requirements
are met.
1. Brevity. The material may be no more than 250 words from a poem; no
more than 1,000 words or 10 percent, whichever is less, from a prose
work; no more than 2,500 words from a complete story, article, or essay;
and no more than one chart, graph, drawing, or table per book or
periodical issue.
2. Spontaneity. The materials are considered necessary for scholarly or
teaching effectiveness, and the time required to obtain permission would
interfere with the scholarship or teaching.
3. Cumulative. No more than one entire source (story, article, essay, poem)
or two excerpts may be copied from the same author. No more than three
sources may be copied from the same collective work, magazine, or
journal during one class term.
4. Prohibition. The duplicated material should not create a substitute for a
text or compilation of works, nor should it restrict the consumption or
purchase of a published work. No charge shall be made to the student
beyond the actual cost of duplication.7
Teachers should be aware of the potential consequences of violating copy¬

right laws; ignorance is no defense. When in doubt, it is best to follow the
school district’s policy (if it has one) or request written permission from the
publisher or copyright holder to use the work.
Presenting Instructional Materials

The teacher must incorporate instructional materials into the unit plan and lesson
plan and modify them in a way that considers the students’ developmental stages
or age, needs and interests, aptitudes, reading levels, prior knowledge, work
habits, learning styles, and motivation. The following factors should be consid¬
ered when presenting materials (published or teacher-made).
Are the Materials Understandable? Understanding requires matching materi¬

als to the learners’ abilities and prior knowledge. When students don’t under¬
stand the material, they become frustrated which makes learning even more dif¬
ficult. The teacher must know whether the materials are appropriate for the
students to begin with and whether the students are understanding the material
as it is being presented. Teachers must check for student understanding—
especially with younger and slower students and when teaching new information.
Some educators suggest that teachers ask students or try to observe whether
students know when they understand and when they don’t, know what they have
learned, know what they need to know, and know how to detect errors and
improve.8
Are the Materials Organized Clearly? Structuring, sometimes referred to as

clarifying, involves organizing the material so it is clear to students. This means
directions, objectives, and main ideas are stated clearly. Internal and final sum¬
maries cover the content. Transitions between main ideas are smooth and well
integrated. Writing is not vague. Sufficient examples are provided. New terms
and concepts are defined. Adequate practice and review assignments reinforce
new learning.9 Clarity is especially important when new subject matter is intro¬
duced, and when it is being integrated into previous learning.
Are the Materials Sequenced Logically? The teacher should arrange the ma¬
terial to provide continuous and cumulative learning and to give attention to
prerequisite skills and concepts. There are four basic ways to sequence materi¬
als: (1) simple to complex—materials gradually increase in complexity and be¬
come broader and deeper in meaning; (2) parts to whole—parts of information
are presented first to enable the student to grasp the whole; (3) whole to parts—
whole concepts or generalizations are presented first to facilitate organizing and
integrating new and isolated items; and (4) chronological (a favorite organiza¬
tional method for many teachers)—topics, ideas, or events are studied in the
order in which they take place.10 Part of the sequence relates to whether the ma¬
terials are vertically and horizontally balanced. Vertical curricular relation¬
ships refer to a building of content and experiences at the lesson, unit, and
course levels. For instance, ninth-grade math concepts build on eighth-grade
concepts, the second unit plan builds on the first, and so on. Horizontal curric¬
ular relationships establish an interdisciplinary and unified view of different
subjects. The content of a social studies course is related conceptually to En¬
glish and science.
Part of the sequence issue also has to do with how students learn. Some stu¬
dents (field-independent learners) acquire information better through whole-to-
part (or deductive) sequencing of information, and other students (field-
dependent learners) are able to learn through part-to-whole (inductive) processes.
Teachers who sequence materials in the same way each time will significantly
disadvantage some students and advantage others. Good teachers recognize stu¬
dent differences by varying the ways they present ideas and sequence content
material. The instructional strategies that we described in Chapter 5 are both de¬
ductive and inductive. For example, lecture (Instructional Approach I) tends to
be deductive, while concept formation and inquiry (Instructional Approach V)
tend to be inductive. Your goal as a teacher should be to vary approaches.
Are the Materials Complementary? This refers to the way headings, terms, il¬
lustrations, and summary exercises are integrated. Do the examples illustrate
major concepts? Are the major ideas identified in chapter objectives and
overviews? Do the headings outline a logical development of the content? Do
the materials show relationships among topics, events, or facts to present an in-
depth view of major concepts? The students should be able to discover impor¬
tant concepts and information and relate new knowledge to prior knowledge on
their own through the materials. In short, the content of the material should be
explicit, related, and cumulative in nature.
Do the Materials Complement How Students Learn? Students can learn bet¬
ter when they are learning in different ways. The idea is to teach students to
transform information from one form to another, and to apply new information
to prior knowledge—by using a variety of techniques such as comparing and
contrasting, drawing analogies, drawing inferences, paraphrasing, summarizing,
and predicting. Students can be taught a broad list of self-reflection questions (of
comparing and contrasting, drawing analogies, etc.) to use while reading materi¬
als, or the teacher can raise the questions in class when discussing the materials:
(1) What is the main idea of the story? (2) If I lived during that period, how
would I feel? (3) What does this remind me of? (4) How can I use the informa¬
tion in the project I am working on? (5) How do I feel about the author’s opin¬
ions? (6) How can I put this material in my own words?11
Content material, according to Posner and Strike, can best be transferred
when it is organized through salient relationships that are (1) concept-related,
drawing heavily on structure of knowledge, the concepts, principles, or theories of
the subject; (2) inquiry-related, derived from critical thinking skills and procedures
employed by learning theorists or scholars in the field; (3) learner-related, related
to the needs, interests, or experiences of the students; and (4) utilization-related,
showing how people can use or proceed with them in real-life situations.12 The
first two organizers seem to work best with students who do not need as much
context for what they will leam (especially true for many mainstream-culture and
field-independent students). The second two work best with students (field-
dependent) who do require more context for content to be learned. Such students need
to see how what they are learning now fits with what they might need to know later.
Textbooks
Traditionally, the textbook has been the most frequently used instructional mater¬
ial at all levels beyond the primary grades, and in some cases it is the only one
used by the teacher. “The textbook and its partner, the workbook,” asserts Eisner,
“provide the curricular hub around which much of what is taught revolves.”13 In
terms of purchasing decisions, textbooks receive the highest priority, with the ex¬
ception of costly hardware such as computers and copying machines. Textbooks
can have a strong influence on, or even dominate, the nature and sequence of a
course and thus profoundly affect students’ learning experiences.
Reliance on the textbook is consistent with the stress on written words as
the main medium of education—as well as the way many teachers themselves
were educated. One estimate, for example, is that 89 percent of instructional
time centers around some sort of textbook (or workbook, for younger students)
material.14 This figure is supported by other research, especially in reading and
math classrooms, where there is excessive dependence on text material.15
Disadvantages
In many classes the textbook becomes the only point of view in the course. In
effect, the course is based on the theories and biases of the author of the text.
Even though the author might try to maintain objectivity, what is selected, what
is omitted, and how the discussion is slanted reflect the author’s views. In addi¬
tion, even the accuracy of a lot of textbook content is questionable. Teachers
need to be critical consumers of textbook content.
To have wide application, and to increase potential sales, textbooks tend to
be general, noncontroversial, and bland. They are usually written for a national
audience, so they do not consider local issues or community problems. Because
they are geared for the greatest number of “average” students, they might not
meet the needs and interests of any particular group of students. Moreover, is¬
sues, topics, and data that might upset potential audiences or interest groups are
omitted or oversimplified.16 In fact, some researchers claim that the oversimpli¬
fication of textbooks since World War II might be connected to the weaker per¬
formance of American students on standardized tests such as the SAT. Not
enough empirical evidence is available to show a causal linkage, but textbooks
have been reduced in complexity in order to make them more marketable.17
Because textbooks summarize large quantities of data, they tend to be gen¬
eral and superficial and can discourage conceptual thinking, critical analysis, and
evaluation. With the exception of those on mathematics, most textbooks quickly
become outdated because of the rapid change of events; but because they are
costly, they are often used long after they should have been replaced. And even in
mathematics, where the content does not change substantially over time, ap¬
proaches to that content do change. New textbooks often claim to reflect current
“best practice” about organizing content so that students can leam the material
more effectively, nonetheless, a number of books do not live up to their claims.
Advantages
Considering these criticisms, you might ask why, when they have access to other
instructional materials, teachers rely so heavily on textbooks. The answer is, of
course, that they also have many advantages. A textbook (1) provides an outline
that the teacher can use in planning courses, units, and lessons; (2) summarizes a
great deal of pertinent information; (3) enables the students to take home in con¬
venient form most of the material they need to learn for the course; (4) provides
a common resource for all students to follow; (5) provides the teacher with ideas
regarding the organization of information and activities; (6) includes pictures,
graphs, maps, and other illustrative material that facilitates understanding;
(7) includes other teaching aids, such as summaries and review questions; and
(8) relieves the teacher of having to prepare material for the course, thus allow¬
ing more time to prepare the lesson.18
Good textbooks have many desirable characteristics. In general, they are
well organized, coherent, unified, relatively up-to-date, accurate, and relatively
unbiased. They have been scrutinized by scholars, educators, and minority
groups. Ideally, their reading level and knowledge base match the developmen¬
tal level of their intended audience. They are accompanied by teacher’s manuals,
test items, study guides, and activity guides. The textbook is an acceptable tool
for instruction as long as it is selected with care and is kept in proper perspective
so that it is not viewed as the only source of knowledge and it does not turn into
the curriculum.
Many people argue against using textbooks. This is a mistake. The key is to
know that textbooks have a place and to know that good teachers make consid¬
ered judgments about what they can and cannot cover. Textbooks are not inher¬
ently bad. In the words of controversial educational reformer E. D. Hirsch:
Often, the objection to teaching by means of textbooks has all too much validity, be¬
cause many currently available textbooks are unselective and unemphatic, having
been designed to pass through textbook-adoption committees in populous states and,
therefore, to please everyone. As a consequence, many textbooks tend to be unfo¬
cused, ill-written, bland, difficult to learn from, and lacking in discrimination be¬
tween the more and the less important aspects of a subject matter. But the alternative
to textbook instruction, in the form of hands-on, project-style teaching, has been
shown to be highly ineffective. One must be careful, therefore, to distinguish between
a justified attack on bad textbooks and an attack on the carefully focused teaching of
subject matter through good textbooks. The most effective subject-matter learning is
often achieved through the use of well-written, well-thought-out textbooks. In the sci¬
ences and in professions such as medicine and engineering, well-crafted textbooks
have always been a necessity.19
The real problem with textbooks arises when teachers become slaves to
content coverage rather than masters of curricular design. The goal of teaching
is student understanding and valuing of ideas. As you consider how and when to
use textbooks, consider the words of Linda Darling-Hammond, and the way she
would improve the curriculum and likewise textbooks.
A recent international evaluation of mathematics and science curriculum found that

U.S. curricula and textbooks cover far more topics with less depth and more repeti¬
tion, and with less attention to higher-order thinking skills than those in most other
countries. . . . For example, whereas a typical 5th-grade U.S. mathematics text
covers more than thirty topics, the Japanese curriculum framework for the first year
of lower secondary school has four simple aims in mathematics: to help students
(1) deepen their understanding of integer, (2) understand the meaning of equations,
(3) understand functional relationships, and (4) deepen their understanding of the
properties of space figures. These aims translate into only three major topics to be
taught. With respect to such areas as approximation, teachers are advised to “stress
an understanding of the meaning of it, and refrain from formal calculation.” . . .
The emphasis is on developing understanding rather than accurately applying algo¬
rithms or speeding through problems and topics. In a typical class Japanese students
might spend the entire period demonstrating and discussing their different solutions
to a single problem. By looking at a problem from many perspectives, examining
their thinking and correcting misconceptions, they learn to think flexibly. Rather
than leaving class with a set of poorly understood rules and a large number of simi¬
lar problems completed by algorithm, these students come to understand many
strategies for solving problems and thus are able to apply what they have learned to
new situations. After years of this kind of learning the average Japanese student out¬
performs the top 5 percent of the U.S. students in mathematics.20
Issues in Textbook Selection

Stereotyping
In the 1960s and 1970s, basic readers and textbooks began to be criticized as ir¬
relevant to the social realities of the inner-city and minority child. According to
Fantini and Weinstein, our schoolbooks depicted “happy, neat, wealthy, white
people whose intact and loving families live only in clean, grassy suburbs. . . .
Ethnic [and racial] groups comprising so much of our population are often omit¬
ted” or included only “as children from other lands.”21
According to one educator, all American Indians were called “Big Horn”
or “Shining Star”; people with Italian, Greek, or Polish names were likely to
appear as peddlers or organ grinders, wearing red scarves and ragged clothes.
Either there were no blacks or one black boy might appear in the background.
Yellow, brown, or black people were depicted in stories about China, India, and
Africa, but they were always strangers and foreigners. Women were portrayed
almost always as mothers, nurses, or teachers. Religion was rarely mentioned
except in relation to church attendance on Sunday morning. In short, the read¬
ers of these books were presented with a monocultural view of society. Approx¬
imately 6.5 million nonwhite children were learning to read from books that ei¬
ther scarcely mentioned them, omitted them entirely, or represented them
stereotypically.22
Today, readers, workbooks, and textbooks exclude overt racial, ethnic, reli¬
gious, and sexual stereotyping. (Obscenity, violence, and sexual topics are still
Textbook Controversy
Thomas A. Shannon
Former Executive Director
National School Boards Association
Few efforts in teaching engender more controversy profound worth in life of honesty, integrity, respect
than addressing the moral and/or spiritual dimension for others and their differing beliefs, and various cul¬
in the classroom textbooks. Yet, in our increasingly tural values, truthfulness, civic responsibility,
diverse society, there is a common body of values— courage, fortitude, industry, a profound respect for
many bearing upon moral character and our American freedoms, compassion for people
development—that all would agree should be part of poorly circumstanced, and abiding recognition of a
our American heritage that students understand, ap¬ duty to help others, and the like that, taken as a sin¬
preciate, and advance by their own conduct. gle bundle of attributes, make up the moral person.
The courts properly impose boundaries that pro¬ While this approach is sometimes denigrated as
hibit religious indoctrination in the public schools. “atheistic humanism,” there is nothing atheistic
This often is taken to mean that instructional materi¬ about it. At most, it is non-theistic. But, in our reli¬
als in morality or religion are forbidden. And that is giously neutral public schools, it is the only legally
a mistake—probably attributable to the fact that viable course if the essence of our American tradi¬
most people view instruction in moral or religious tion is to be imparted to our children through the
matters as inextricably bound to the expression of public schools, as people are demanding today.
belief in God. It is an abiding challenge for teachers in our
But it does not require reference to God to teach free society. The way teachers face it will have sig¬
children—either as a separate course or woven nificant implications for our nation in the ensuing
throughout the curriculum, including the text—the generation.
generally avoided, as are such unpleasant issues as disease and death.) Major
racial, ethnic, and minority groups, including people with disabilities and the el¬
derly, tend to be better represented in story characters and pictures. Women are
depicted as airplane pilots, police officers, construction workers, lawyers, and
doctors. Blacks, Hispanics, and other minorities have professional and manager¬
ial jobs and are not all portrayed as basketball players and musicians. Girls
rarely are depicted playing with dolls and boys rarely are depicted playing base¬
ball, at least not without girls.23
Still, balanced textbook development remains an ongoing topic of debate.
On one end of the political continuum are the charges that the content and pic¬
tures in textbooks still transmit racial and gender stereotypes—such as an
overemphasis on science, capitalism, and formal rationality, values traditionally
associated with the once dominant (white, male) power group.24 On the other
side of the continuum is criticism of the pressure being placed on publishers, and
now textbook authors, to be “politically correct”—not just to reflect the cultures

of all students, but to disparage any hint of “common culture,” and nearly every¬
thing that is European, white, or male, as if it were a vehicle for racism, sexism,
and oppression.
And so we are forced to struggle with two opposing, highly emotional
views about the politics of information and what textbook content is acceptable.
Finding good literature or good texts that reconcile all these concerns is difficult.
To accommodate some of the new criteria, many classic works of literature have
been eliminated from the curriculum, and many bland texts and instructional
materials have been included. Writes Connie Muther, “The idea is to please all
and offend none [and thus] many textbooks [and related materials] have no clear
point of view.”25 Although many new books portray the populace more accu¬
rately, they remain safe and some are boring. Teachers might be better served to
allow lists of different texts into the classroom, but then to help students become
critical consumers of information.
The Vermont Equity Project is doing just that. The teachers are having stu¬
dents critically examine their cultural messages and the textbooks’ content that
shape how they view the world. Mervyn Rutledge writes:
Our students also join us in asking hard questions of textbooks and course units:
Who are we and where are we in this curriculum? A class at Burlington’s Hunt Mid¬
dle School, for example, reviewed several textbooks to determine how many and
what types of women and men were depicted. “Did you see your own life or that of
your parents in these illustrations?” their teacher asked. “If not, what messages did
you get about your own worth and place in history?”26
Although we may never fully agree on what textbooks are balanced, it is

easier to agree on what books are offensive or demeaning to specific racial, eth¬
nic, religious and gender groups; and if we may add other groups: disabled, lan¬
guage, sexual orientation, and social class. Hence the need is to promote diver¬
sity in our classrooms and schools.
Readability
Concern about student reading problems has prompted educators to identify

textbooks and other reading materials that are suitable for specific student popu¬
lations, especially below-average readers. Reading formulas, first devised in
the 1920s to estimate the reading difficulty of a text, have increased and are
widely used by authors, publishers, teachers, reading consultants, and textbook
adoption committees.
Some reading formulas count the number of syllables or the number of let¬
ters in a word; some count the number of words not on a specific word list; oth¬
ers measure sentence length; and still others remove words in a passage and test
whether students can fill in the exact word that was removed.27 Some formulas
use graphs, regression statistics, and percentiles and range scores to calculate
reading difficulty, and computer programs are now available for doing the
counting and calculation chores involved in reading level determinations.28
The best known reading formula was developed by Edward Fry—an esti¬
mate of grade level based on average number of sentences and syllables in three
passages taken at random.29 For more information on how to use the Fry for¬
mula, the following web site is useful: http://www.school.discovery.com/
schrockguide/fry/fry.html. The Raygor Reading Estimate, developed by Alton
Raygor, counts letters instead of syllables, is easier to use than the Fry method,
and is of equal accuracy.30
Critics of the various reading formulas say that (1) they fail to consider stu¬
dents’ prior knowledge, experience, and interests, all of which influence reading
comprehension; (2) they assume that words with fewer syllables and shorter,
simpler sentences are easier to comprehend than words with more syllables and
longer sentences with subordinate clauses, which is not always true; (3) publish¬
ers have reacted to these formulas by adjusting sentence and word length to give
the appearance of certain levels of readability without necessarily providing
them;31 and (4) strict adherence to formulas robs prose of the connective words,
vocabulary, and sentence structure that make it interesting, comprehensible, and
stylistically worth reading.32 In short, rigid following of reading formulas often
results in a boring and bland text.
Whatever their faults, reading formulas do help teachers to assess reading
difficulty and select printed material that is appropriate to the students’ abilities.
Most teachers work with groups of students in which there is a range of abilities,
so the difficulty of the material should not be more than one year below or
above the average reading grade level of the group. If there is more than a one-
to two-year spread in reading ability in a group, the teacher should use more
than one set of instructional materials.
Some educators now urge that comprehendibility, not readability, is the
major quality to consider when adopting a text. Teachers and textbook commit¬
tees are identifying various textbook aids such as structural overviews, introduc¬
tory objectives, summaries, and review exercises as devices that contribute to
comprehendibility. One reading expert lists more than forty aids that might be
considered in selecting a text.33 Those techniques (or aids) include the use of ad¬
vance organizers, structured overviews, illustrations, and so on.
Cognitive Task Demands
Critics have found that, in nearly every subject and grade level, textbooks cover
too many topics; the writing is superficial, choppy, and lacking in depth and
breadth (the phenomenon is called “mentioning”); and content wanders between
the important and the trivial.34 Many texts also fail to capture the imagination
and interest of the students or make students think, and spurn current knowledge
about cognitive information and linguistic processing.35 Many of the so-called
best textbooks are designed to entertain and be decorative but provide only tid¬
bits of information, lack adequate integration of subject matter, and do not
stretch the student’s mind. They are unintentionally geared to oversimplify and
to limit thinking!
Textbook adoption committees have contributed to the problem with their

demands for topic coverage and easy-to-read prose. Special interest groups, with
their passions and legal challenges, have added to the problem, causing publish¬
ers to become politically sensitive to content at the expense of linguistic and
cognitive processes. Some teachers have unintentionally done their part, too, by
emphasizing answers to be found, not problems to be solved or methods to be
used.
Bennett and colleagues analyzed 417 language and math tasks assigned in
texts by teachers and found that 60 percent were practice tasks, or content al¬
ready known to the students. New tasks accounted for 25 percent, and tasks re¬
quiring students to discover, invent, or develop a new concept or problem made
up 7 percent of the tasks. In another study, approximately 84 percent of teachers
relied on textually explicit instruction, a method of using printed material in
which a correct answer can be obtained by selecting verbatim information from
the textbook or workbook. Rarely do teachers employ textually implicit instruc¬
tion, in which a correct answer requires students to make an inference from the
textual information supplied. Even more rarely do they require students to go
beyond the information given and call on prior knowledge and reasoning
skills.36
Far too many teachers are right-answer oriented in their teaching and test¬
ing. Hence, they are unwilling or unable to change from textbooks that are char¬
acterized by low-level cognitive demands and divorced from how students think
or reason. One might expect at least mathematics teachers to stress problem
solving, but many teachers of mathematics, especially at the upper elementary
and junior high school grades, are not much different. Some data strongly sug¬
gest that many of these “teachers don’t know mathematics. They assign the
basic problems but skip word problems because word problems are harder to
teach.”37
Word problems can also require a level of content understanding that some
teachers, even “reasonably well trained” teachers, do not have. For example, in
the early 1990s one researcher asked teacher candidates to create a story prob¬
lem for PA divided by M. According to Harriet Tyson:
A whopping 69 percent of the elementary education students were unable to do so.

But a surprising 55 percent of the mathematics majors and minors who were plan¬
ning to teach in secondary schools were also unable to devise a life situation that
would call for that division problem. All could “work” the problem, of course,
through the mechanical approach they had learned. But in trying to imagine a real-
life situation using PA divided by 'A, many created a problem that involved divid¬
ing by 2 rather than by A. This study makes it clear that those math majors and mi¬
nors didn’t understand the concept of dividing by A. If they had, they would have
known that dividing by 2 produces a smaller number, whereas dividing by Vi pro¬
duces a larger number. Engineers may not need to understand that concept, but
teachers do.38
Our point here is straightforward: good teaching is intellectually demand¬

ing. It requires complex and sophisticated decision making and textbooks cannot
do that for a teacher. Textbooks are a resource, not a content mandate. A good
textbook becomes an excellent resource if a thoughtful teacher is using it to help
students explore ideas.
Textbook Aids and Pedagogical Aids

Textbook aids, sometimes called text-based aids, instructional aids, textbook el¬
ements, or reader aids, are designed to enhance understanding of the content and
to facilitate learning. Aids that appear at the beginning of a chapter include
overviews, instructional objectives, and focusing questions (prequestions). Aids
that occur throughout the chapter include headings, key terms in special type,
marginal notes (“trigger items”), overview tables, outlines, and discussions
(point/counterpoint, pro/con), and illustrations such as graphs, charts, and pic¬
tures. Aids that come at the end of the chapter include summaries, discussion
questions (postquestions), case studies, problems, review exercises, sample test
questions, suggested activities, suggested readings, and glossaries.39
Pedagogical aids, sometimes called instructional aids or teaching aids, are
materials designed for teacher use that are provided as supplements to the text¬
book. They include (1) teacher’s manuals, (2) test questions, (3) skills books or
exercise books, (4) transparencies or cutouts to duplicate, (5) reinforcement ac¬
tivities, (6) enrichment activities, (7) behavioral objectives, (8) lesson plans,
(9) bulletin board displays, (10) supplementary tables, graphs, charts, maps,
(11) parent involvement materials, (12) teacher resource binders, (13) computer
software, and (14) audio and video cassettes.40
Those aids used before students start to read the chapter acquaint them with the
general approach and the information and concepts to be learned. The aids used
while students are reading the chapter focus on organization of the content, provide
examples, supply supplementary information, and reinforce objectives. Those used
after the chapter reinforce learning through summaries and exercises and encourage
critical thinking through problems and activities. See Tips for Teachers 6.2.
The teacher might combine approaches and, to facilitate comprehension,
guide students with questions such as these: (1) Where is the information you
need to know stated? (2) Which words are unknown to you? (3) Where in the
text can you find a clue for understanding them? (4) How do the tables and
graphs help you understand? (5) Why pay close attention to the bold print (or
print in italic)? (6) What do the marginal notes tell you? (7) Does the order of
discussion (homework) questions correspond with the order of the narrative?
Then teacher and class can practice finding the answers to selected questions in
the discussion (homework) section.
Textbook aids in particular can facilitate the development of cognitive
processes. Table 6.2 lists four developmental stages of cognitive processes and
corresponding cognitive operations, reader activities, and their relationship to
various textbook aids. In theory, the cognitive processes, operations, and reader
activities are all untested hierarchies in which one level is prerequisite to the
Student Use of Textbook Aids
Textbook aids (textbook elements) have continued to Pictures

grow, as publishers and authors respond to growing 1. Are the pictures relevant? Up-to-date?
needs of teachers and textbook selection committee 2. What is the author trying to convey in this
criteria for selecting texts. Below is a list of features picture?
now commonly found in textbooks, with questions to
3. How do the pictures reveal the author’s
ask the students to help them understand how to use
biases?
these tools.
Headings
1. What main ideas can you derive from the
Features of Text: headings? Subheadings?
Sample Questions for Students
2. How are the subheadings related to the
Contents headings?
1. How do you use the table of contents? 3. On what pages would you find a discussion of
2. What is the difference between major and _?
minor headings? Information sources (footnotes, references)
3. In what chapters would you find information 1. Where did the author get the information for
about_? the chapter?
Index 2. Are the footnotes important? Up-to-date?
1. What information do you find in an index? 3. What references might you use to supplement
2. On what pages would you find the following those at the end of the chapter?
information_? Key terms in text
3. Why is the subject on_ 1. Which are the important terms on this page?
cross-referenced? 2. Why are some terms in bold print? Why are
Opening material (overview, objectives, focusing other terms in italics?
questions, outline) 3. Where can you find the meaning of these
1. What are the main points or topics of the terms in the text?
chapter? How do we know? Marginal notes (or trigger items)
2. Do the objectives correspond with the outline 1. Do the marginal notes catch your eye?
of the chapter? 2. Why are these terms or phrases noted in the
3. In what section can we expect to find a margin?
discussion of_? 3. Quickly find a discussion of the following
Graphic material (charts, graphs, diagrams) and topics.
tabular material Supplementary discussion (point/counterpoint tables,
1. How does the legend at the bottom of the lists of suggestions, case studies)
chart explain the meaning of data? 1. Why are the point/counterpoint discussions
2. Based on the lines of the graph, what will interesting? Which side do you take?
happen in the year 2000? What do the dotted 2. What are the important issues on this topic?
lines represent?
3. Which tips make sense to you? Why?
3. Where in the narrative does the author explain
the table?
continued
Tips for Teachers 6.2 concluded End-of-chapter material (review exercises,

questions, activities, sample test items)
Summaries 1. Are the exercises meaningful? Do they tie into
1. If you could read only one page to find out the text?
what the chapter is about, what page would 2. Which discussion questions seem
you read? Why? controversial? Why?
2. Where can we find a summary of the main 3. Why should we do the activities?
ideas of the chapter? 4. Take a practice test. Answer the sample test
3. Does the summary correspond to the major questions to see what we need to study.
headings?
next. The aids are not hierarchical, but overlap—any one aid might facilitate
learning at more than one level of the hierarchy.
Without good textbook aids, poor readers will learn little and capable read¬
ers will develop default strategies, or partially ineffective strategies for process¬
ing text information. A default strategy is likely to involve focusing on topic
sentences or unusual or isolated information, instead of main concepts and prin¬
ciples.41 A default strategy also leads to copying and memorizing long lists of
information, rather than organizing, inferring, and transferring ideas of the text.
A textbook might have excellent aids but the teacher might not know how to
make good use of them. Thus there is additional need to consider Tips for
Teachers 6.2 and Table 6.2.
Reading Across the Content Areas

All teachers, whatever the subject or grade level, are reading teachers in the
sense that they should help their students be good readers of textbook material.
However, secondary teachers seem uninterested in combining reading instruc¬
tion with content instruction. Nationwide, for example, 44 percent of 466 teach¬
ers surveyed maintained that reading instruction is not the responsibility of con¬
tent-area teachers; 30 percent admitted that they lacked the skills needed to
participate in or combine reading instruction with content instruction.42 Most
secondary teachers (over 90 percent) report that they assign pages to read with¬
out providing a purpose or comprehension guides for the reading.43
Researchers suggest that students’ comprehension of what they read in the
content areas is enhanced by (1) relating their knowledge and experience to the
information in the text, (2) relating one part of the text to another, and (3) dis¬
cussing the meaning of important new words 44 Students need practice in infer¬
ential reasoning and other comprehension processes (see Table 6.2), but they
rarely get this because they are occupied with word recognition and vocabulary
demands.45
Clear evidence is emerging that when teachers use strategies to enhance the
reading comprehension of high school students, the students achieve at a higher
level. Although Beverly Showers and her colleagues examined how a high
Table 6.2 Levels of Cognition and Reading, with Implications for Using Textbook Aids
Cognitive Process Cognitive Operations Reader Activities Textbook Aids
Identifying Focusing on selective Copying Overviews

information Underlining Instructional objectives
Sequencing selective Simple notetaking or discussion Prequestions
information Key words or terms
Marginal notes
Summaries
Review exercises
Conceptualizing Classifying main ideas of text Logical or structured notetaking Headings, subheadings
Comparing main ideas of text or discussion Marginal notes
Distinguishing relevant Point-counterpoint discussions
information Summaries
Relating points to each other Postquestions
Problems
Review exercises
Integrating Analyzing main ideas of text Elaborate notetaking or Headings, subheadings
Modifying ideas of text into discussion Graphs, tables
variations or new ideas Making generalizations Models, paradigms
Deducing main ideas of text Hierarchical ordering of items Postquestions
Expanding main ideas of text Making inferences from text Case studies
Applying main ideas of text to information Problems
problems Activities
Transferring Evaluating text information Elaborate notetaking or Graphs, tables
Verifying text information discussion Models, paradigms
Going beyond text information Evaluating, problem solving, Simulations
Predicting from text information and inferring based on text Case studies
information Problems
Using text information to create Activities
new information
Source: Allan C. Ornstein, “Textbook Instruction: Processes and Strategies,” NASSP Bulletin (December 1989): 109. For more information
concerning NASSP Services and/or programs, please call (703) 860-0200.
school reading course can influence student performance, it is equally clear that
anything that teachers do to emphasize reading (inside and outside of school)
will have a salutary influence on student achievement.46
Relating the text to students’ experience can be done through asking their
opinions, having them imagine themselves as participating in the events de¬
scribed in the text, or having them think of examples from their own experience.
Relating parts of the text to one another can be achieved by asking students to
summarize and analyze main points, to explain relationships and elaborate with
examples, and to note main and minor headings, marginal notes, key terms, and
summary statements. Defining new terms can be accomplished by discussing in
class selected terms that have conceptual meaning and encouraging students to
use the dictionary and glossaries on their own. Providing repetitive sentence pat¬
terns and familiar words and concepts eases word recognition and comprehen¬
sion tasks for students who have trouble reading. Paying close attention to
instructional objectives or focusing questions, and answering review questions,

can help students determine whether they understand the text material and what
sections they need to reread.
Other methods for improving reading comprehension, as reported by Arm-
buster and Anderson, include the following:
1. Explain to students why it is important to know what they are studying

so they can match the text to the task.
2. Teach students how to use the textbook aids.
3. Teach students to relate what they know to the text. Have students draw
on their prior knowledge and experience to think of examples that relate
to what they are reading.
4. Teach students how to outline and take notes on what they read.47
The notion of advance organizers, developed by David Ausubel to en¬

hance concept thinking, can be used in teaching students how to read and com¬
prehend content material.48 Advance organizers characterize the general nature
of the text, the major categories into which it can be divided, the similarities and
differences among categories, and examples within different categories. The or¬
ganizers state the abstraction or generality under which data can be subsumed.
To be useful, the organizers should be stated in terms that are already familiar to
the students prior to their reading the text material.49 They are especially useful
when the text is poorly organized or students lack prerequisite knowledge of the
subject. Although most educators believe organizers should be presented before
the text is read, others maintain that presenting them in the middle or after the
text can also facilitate learning.50 Regardless, organizers can help students see
connections. We also discussed earlier (see Chapter 5) some specific types of
graphic organizers that might be used to assist students assimilate content.
Other types of textbook aids or cues—such as instructional objectives,
overviews, prequestions, and specific instructions—presented prior to chapter
reading can also facilitate learning of reading materials.51 These aids are similar
to advance organizers, because they provide advance information about the na¬
ture of the material to be learned. In addition, postquestions and summary activi¬
ties that apply textbook material to concepts, problems, or creative projects also
enhance learning.
The idea is to get students to think out loud and to elaborate on the strate¬
gies they use to process information they read. Students use different strategies.
If they become aware of what they are doing, they can improve their approaches
to reading text. Teachers should discuss these strategies with their students on a
regular basis.
Metacognition and Text Structure
In general, narrative structure, which deals with a broad theme and conveys in¬
formation in story form, is easier for readers to understand than expository struc¬
ture, which the reader encounters in textbooks. Children who learn to read in el¬
ementary school first learn through narratives. By fourth or fifth grade, students
Most children learn to

read through narrative
text and then move to
expository text.
begin to move into the more complex organizational patterns of the content
areas that are conveyed through texts and expository writing. The emphasis on
textbooks, and thus expository structure, increases with the grade level. Stu¬
dents who are unable to cope with this type of reading are bound to be low
achievers, because most learning in school depends on the ability to read and un¬
derstand expository text.
Students, in general, have more difficulty with expository text than with
narrative text, because of insufficient prior knowledge, poor reading ability, lack
of interest and motivation, and lack of sensitivity to how texts are organized.52
In addition, many texts are poorly written, boring, and confusing to students.53
The teacher cannot take for granted that students understand text structure—
that is, how information is organized, as well as the verbal and contextual cues
(such as the headings and subheadings or the bold or italics print) that bring
unity to the text. Good texts are written with certain expository structures that
can be taught to students. Some of the common textbook structures are defined
below.
Response Structures
Sometimes referred to as “Question/Answer,” these structures are most common
and crucial for completing classroom or homework assignments. Often a prob¬
lem is introduced, a plan discussed, an action presented, or an outcome de¬
scribed. The teacher needs to help students become aware of what is being asked
and where the solution can be found or how the problem can be worked out. By
the middle grades and with low achievers, students as a group should discuss the
difficulties encountered and what they did about them.
Cause/Effect Structures
Whereas most texts, especially in science, usually deal in cause/effect relation¬
ships, the process is often reversed in social studies texts to effect/cause—that is,
an event is stated and then the causes are explained. Students need to be taught
to search for main ideas: (a) what is happening, (b) to whom, and (c) why. With
this text form, the teacher needs to clarify the task or problem, present guided
practice to the group, then independent practice.
Comparison/Contrast Structures
This structure is common in most science and social studies texts. The author
explains likenesses and differences—sometimes with tables, charts, or graphs.
When tables or charts are used, the comparisons are usually made using cate¬
gories and columns to help cluster the information. Students must be taught to
slow down, deduce, and extrapolate data from the tables, charts, or graphs.
Generalization Structures
This structure is sometimes referred to as “Argument/Persuasion” in science
texts and “Main Ideas” in social studies and English texts. The author presents
concepts, summary data, or conclusions with supporting information. Students
then identify the generalizations and their supporting information for each chap¬
ter. One method is to view major topics in relation to subtopics.
Topic and Subtopic Structures

Good textbooks sequence topics (sometimes called headings) in logical form
and then integrate subtopics (or subheadings) within topics. Most middle school
and junior high school texts contain 7 to 15 pages per chapter; therefore, they
should have three to four topics per chapter and two to four subtopics per topic.
High school texts might have as many as 20 pages per chapter, although 15 is
the average. These texts should have four to five topics per chapter and the same
number of subtopics per topic. Sub-subtopics, sometimes called “c heads”, will
confuse or overload most readers.
Whole-to-Part Structures
Good texts are written with a whole-to-part strategy in mind—that is, the con¬
tent is organized at several macro levels (whole book, parts, chapters, sections,
subsections, and so on). Content does not just evolve; it is organized with a
larger purpose and themes in mind. The material converges—is organized in a
way that brings material together as opposed to branching. Decisions about con¬
tent and how to focus on that content are made at each level of the text. Good
text readers make use of similar macrostructures in their reading and thinking
processes. However, all students must be encouraged to organize their exposi¬
tory reading around the overall organization of the text.54
Teachers in all content areas need to foster awareness of text structure by
having students make concrete representations of the ideas within the text. Such
strategies are referred to variously as “mapping,” “networking,” and “graphing,”

and involve a number of basic strategies: (1) Diagramming: Students develop a
diagram that represents basic concepts or ideas and relationships within and
among the concepts. (2) Outlining: Students use and integrate headings, sub¬
headings, and paragraphs in the text. (3) Classifying: Students use one of the fol¬
lowing strategies: (a) compare/contrast, showing similarities and differences;
(b) problem/solution, showing a problem, attempted solutions, and results;
(c) cause/effect, describing stages of events and outcomes; (d) describe/enumer¬
ate, describing a major concept or theme, then listing supporting ideas for each
concept, and details for each idea.55
The teacher needs to stress one strategy at a time, and have students practice
it and raise questions and comments to fill in gaps in understanding. The strat¬
egy that is adopted will provide more information about selected topics, as stu¬
dents consider characteristics, specifics, explanations, and details. Ultimately,
skilled readers will become sensitive to the author’s text structure, including
pedagogical aids; will use them if they are well structured; and will process this
structure along with prior knowledge of the topic in helping to decide what in¬
formation is important to emphasize and how to integrate the new information.
Guidelines for Using Textbooks
The following general guidelines should help increase the value of the text for
students.
1.Supplement the textbook with other instructional aids and printed materials
(such as paperback books for all students, and journals, magazines, and re¬
ports for junior high and high school students).
2. Question students about their knowledge of what is to be read. This helps
them recognize what they know about the topic, what they need to know,
and what they would like to know. It will also improve their comprehension.
3. Adapt the textbook to the needs of the students and the objectives of the les¬
son. Do not allow the textbook to determine either the teaching level or
course content.
4. Organize guide sheets with definitions, questions, review exercises, supple¬
mentary readings, and assignments for each chapter.
5. Teach older students how to analyze the textbook by noting when an author
is editorializing, slanting the materials, or overgeneralizing.
6. Teach students how to interpret and use aids in the text, such as table of con¬
tents, headings, marginal notes, illustrations, and index.
7. Appraise the worth of the textbook. See Tips for Teachers 6.3.
8. When students read on their own, the teacher might make the following sug¬
gestions so that students can improve their textbook comprehension:
a. Reread unclear or difficult passages.
b. Change speeds—slow down when the material is difficult, go faster when
it is easy.
c. Look for main ideas and what holds the passage together.
d. Modify and interpret as you read.
Appraising the Worth of a Textbook
Here are some questions to keep in mind in assessing Mechanics

the worth of a textbook for teacher and student. The
1. Is the size appropriate?
first group of questions deals with text content, the
second with mechanics, and the third with overall 2. Is the binding adequate?
appraisal. 3. Is the paper of adequate quality?

4. Are the objectives, headings, and summaries
clear?
Content
5. Are the contents and index well organized?
1. Does the text coincide with the content and 6. Is there a sufficient number of pictures, charts,
objectives of the course? maps, and so on appropriate for the students’
2. Is it up-to-date and accurate? level?
3. Is it comprehensive? 7. Does it come with instructional manuals and
4. Is it adaptable to the students’ needs, interests, study guides?
and abilities? 8. Is it durable enough to last several years?
5. Does it adequately and properly portray 9. Is it reasonably priced relative to its quality?
minorities and women? To its competitors?
6. Does it foster methodological approaches
consistent with procedures used by the Overall Appraisal
teacher and school?
1. What are the outstanding features of the text?
7. Does it reinforce the type of learning (such as
critical thinking and problem solving) sought 2. What are the shortcomings of the text?
by the teacher and school? 3. Do the outstanding features strongly override
8. Does it provide the student with a sense of the shortcomings?
accomplishment, because it can be mastered Source: Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein, “The Textbook Driven
and is still challenging? Curriculum,” Peabody Journal of Education (Spring 1994): 71-72.
Workbooks
At the lower grade levels, the workbook is often used independently to provide
exercises for practice and drill in language arts, reading, and math. Along with
the textbook, it tends to dominate elementary school classrooms as the major in¬
structional tool. In fact, in one study of 45 teachers, grades 1 to 6, students spent
as much time (or more time) alone on their workbooks as they did with other
teacher-student activities.56
In another study, teachers exhibited wide variation in the use of workbooks,
variation based primarily on content area. Workbooks and other guide materials
were used chiefly in reading and language arts (as much as 19 percent of the in¬
structional time), but were used only 5 percent of the time in social studies and
4 percent in math. The same set of teachers focused an average of 25 percent of
reading instruction around textbooks, compared to 50 percent in math and

31 percent in social studies.57
At the secondary grade levels, workbooks are often used in different content
areas keyed to or as a supplement to (rarely independently of) the textbook for
purpose of practice. For example, student manuals with drill exercises (some¬
times problems) might be available that cover most of the course content. Stu¬
dents first engage in new learning derived from the textbook or another source;
then the workbook is used to reinforce the new learning. Ideally, the exercises or
problems are concrete examples of abstract learning. For this reason, many
teachers view the workbook as a pedagogical aid and check with publishers to
see whether a workbook accompanies the textbook.
Disadvantages
The value of the workbook depends on how the teacher uses it. The workbook is
sometimes used as a form of “busywork” to keep students occupied or, even
worse, as a substitute for teaching. The workbook tends to overemphasize fac¬
tual and low-level information. Students can spend hours, especially in the ele¬
mentary grades, filling in blanks, completing sentences, recognizing correct
words, and working on simple mathematical computations. According to critics,
workbook exercises have little to do with, and often discourage, critical think¬
ing, creativity, learning the whole abstract thought, or relevant hands-on activi¬
ties and materials.58
The teacher might assign workbook exercises to keep students busy while he
or she grades papers, performs clerical functions, or confers with an individual
student or group of students. The latter, in fact, often occurs at the elementary and
junior high school levels, when teachers divide students into reading or math
groups. Such approaches are used, sometimes overused, in conjunction with seat-
work activities. When workbooks are assigned either as busywork or merely to
facilitate seatwork activities, and fail to link the exercises in a meaningful way to
new information or to content coverage, the routine produces what critics call
“management mentality” in both students and teachers. Such dependence
“deskills” teachers (they become ineffective) and curtails creative instruction.59
Advantages
The merit of the workbook is that it performs the practice-and-drill function well
(see Chapter 5). It is helpful with young students who need to learn a knowledge
base and with low-achieving students who need extra concrete activities to un¬
derstand abstract learning and repeated exercises to integrate new learning. The
workbook has value insofar as it is used in one of these instructional contexts
and the exercises make learning more meaningful to students.
The criteria forjudging a workbook’s merit include the following: (1) Exer¬
cises (or problems) are related to abstract or new learning, (2) exercises are in¬
teresting and maintain students’ interest, (3) exercises exist in proper quantity,
(4) students understand the directions, (5) students can perform or answer the
majority of the exercises, (6) teachers provide needed direction and guided
practice to help students learn the necessary skills and strategies for workbook
comprehension or performance, and (7) teachers use the exercises in a discrimi¬

nating way (they supplement other instructional methods and materials).60
Workbooks are desirable for many students, but they are especially important
for students who are having difficulty learning to read. Workbooks should be
geared to these children. For workbooks to be effective, Jean Osborn insists, they
must focus on a sequenced review of what has been taught, on the most important
content, and on content that needs to be reinforced. Workbooks can provide (1) a
means of practicing details of what has been taught, (2) extra practice for students
who need it, (3) intermittent reviews of what has been taught, (4) ways for stu¬
dents to apply new learning with examples, (5) practice in following directions,
(6) practice in a variety of formats that students will experience when they take tests,
and (7) opportunity for students to work independently and at their own pace.61
Guidelines for Using Workbooks
In choosing, working with, or evaluating workbook materials, certain guidelines

should be kept in mind. Below are a number of questions that should help teach¬
ers decide if the workbook materials are appropriate for their specific teaching
and learning situation.
1. Do the workbook materials meet the goals of the school? Which ones? Do
the workbook materials meet the program objectives? course objectives?
unit or lesson plan objectives?
2. Do the workbook exercises coincide with the reading level of the students?
Do the students understand the written directions? wording of the exercises
or problems?
3. Are the workbook materials helpful for the students? What evidence is there
that students are interested in the exercises?
4. Do the workbook exercises supplement or reinforce abstract thinking? Are
the exercises intellectually stimulating? Are sample exercises or problems
worked out, step by step?
5. Do the exercises cover the content in depth? Do they have balance in terms
of scope and sequence of the content?
6. Is the workbook material user-friendly? Are there a variety of appropriate il¬
lustrations—charts, tables, pictures, drawings, etc.—to facilitate learning?
7. Do the workbook exercises coincide (or conflict) with current learning the¬
ory? Which theory? In what ways do the exercises stimulate learning? In
what ways are individual differences provided for?
8. Is the workbook used as a separate text or used in conjunction with another
text? Does the workbook have a teacher edition or instructor’s manual to
provide assistance? Is the assistance valuable?
9. Is the workbook made of quality material and binding? Is the workbook
competitively priced? Can it be reused?
10. Are teachers trained in using the workbook (most need the training)? Does
the training make any difference in how teachers use the workbook? in how
students integrate the material?
Journals, Magazines, and Newspapers

Journals, magazines, and newspapers are primary sources and are therefore ex¬
cellent materials for enhancing students’ thinking skills and research skills. Jour¬
nals are publications of professional and academic associations and are more
technical than magazines and newspapers. The most popular magazines used by
teachers are Time, Newsweek, and U.S. News & World Report, although there
are many others that can supplement or be the focal point of learning. (If you
want to teach young students how to read, Mad magazine will stimulate many of
them.)62 It is appropriate to start students with the local newspaper in the middle
grades and junior high, but the high school teacher should also consider the New
York Times, Washington Post, or Wall Street Journal. These papers are written
at the tenth- to twelfth-grade reading level; therefore, the reading abilities of the
student must be seriously considered.
To enrich content, teachers in most subjects can encourage students to read
journals, magazines, and newspapers. Many of these publications are interesting
and more informative and up-to-date than the text. Gathering suitable magazine
and newspaper materials can be delegated to the class or done primarily by the
teacher.
Beyond the Textbook

Diane Ravitch
Senior Research Scholar, New York University
Brown Chair in Education Studies, Brookings Institution
Don’t be afraid to be a critic of textbooks. Sometimes Does it hold your attention? Would you be tempted
they contain inaccuracies or poor writing. Sometimes to read more than the assigned number of pages? If
they don’t provide enough background information the answer is “no” to all of these questions, then
for students to understand their meaning. think about de-emphasizing the textbook in your
The biggest drawback of textbooks is that they classes.
may bore students. Today’s students are accustomed The best way to use a textbook is to treat it like a
to getting information about the world from televi¬ reference work. Use it as background. The main
sion and movies; many of them know how to get in¬ source of learning should come from the other mate¬
formation electronically. A textbook alone may not rials, experiences, and technology that you supply,
hold the students’ interest. When your students are either through hands-on activities (in or out of the
turned off by the dull writing in their textbooks, classroom) or through the use of supplementary ma¬
blame the textbooks, not the kids. terials that are livelier, more vivid, and more moti¬
Put yourself in the students’ place and then ask vating for students than the textbook.
yourself, would you read this if you didn’t have to?
Journal and magazine articles have not been sanitized or toned down like
textbooks. The content expresses a point of view, and it can be used to enhance
thinking and research skills. Newspapers, in theory (not always in practice), deal
in reporting, not analyzing or interpreting, data. It is up to the student to draw
conclusions about and evaluate what is being reported. Editorials, story
columns, “op-ed” (opinion) columns, and letters to the editor are quite different,
and students need to understand that such material is subjective. Although a
youngster might understand that a particular point of view is being expressed in
a journal, magazine, or newspaper article, he or she may be unable to identify
distortions or biases and therefore might accept the view as fact. In general, bi¬
ases can be conveyed in eight ways: (1) through length, selection, and omission,
(2) through placement, (3) by title, headline, or headings, (4) through pictures
and captions, (5) through names and titles, (6) through statistics, (7) by reference
source, and (8) by word selection and connotation.63
Newspapers and Newspaper in Education (NIE) programs, are prominent
throughout the country. Students who participate in these programs spend more
time reading the newspaper and take a more “investigative approach” to topics
of interest. NIE and similar programs help make students better consumers of in¬
formation and seem to cause students to think more deeply about matters that
are a part of their social environment.64
Although the teacher must use professional judgment in interpreting or as¬
signing journals and newspapers, students can learn to evaluate information
contained in them by being trained to answer the following questions: (1) Is
the account slanted? (2) Is important information treated accurately? (3) Are
controversial topics discussed rationally? (4) Is there a clear distinction be¬
tween fact and opinion? (5) Do the headlines, captions, and opening state¬
ments present the news accurately? (6) Are editorials and commentaries
clearly designated?65
The five most popular uses of journals and magazines in classrooms are
for (1) extension activities, (2) recreational reading, (3) motivation to read,
(4) change of pace, and (5) current information.66 Use varies by grade and sub¬
ject area. One study reports that in the junior high school, 76 percent of the
language arts teachers, 43 percent of the social studies teachers, and 23 percent
of the science teachers used journals or magazines in their classrooms. In the
high school, 57 percent of the science teachers, 31 percent of the English
teachers, and 24 percent of the social studies teachers used them. Actual fre¬
quency of use and type of student (student’s ability or achievement) were not
reported.67
Considering that textbooks are adopted for a period of five years or
more in some states, it is not surprising that teachers across the curriculum
look to current magazines for updated information in their respective subject
areas. These magazines are excellent up-to-date instructional tools to pro¬
mote student research skills and for independent projects. They offer multi¬
ple viewpoints, and thus encourage critical reading and controversial discus¬
sions, as well as in-depth understanding and learning of current and relevant
content.
Guidelines for Using Journals, Magazines, and Newspapers
The following guidelines should assist teachers and students:
1. Identify journal, magazine, and newspaper articles that are within the stu¬
dents’ reading and comprehension range.
2. Select journal, magazine, or newspaper articles that are compatible with your
teaching goals.
3. Train students to read and evaluate these materials. Children and adolescents
tend to believe that whatever is printed must be true. A useful project is a com¬
parative analysis of articles that take different views on a controversial subject.
4. Train students in the use of card catalogs, periodical catalogs, and the classi¬
fication and retrieval systems of journals and magazines so they can use
these materials in independent study and research.
5. Maintain a file of pertinent journal, magazine, and newspaper articles to sup¬
plement the text and incorporate into the unit or lesson plan. Update the file
frequently.
Simulations and Games

Play is pleasurable and natural for children and adolescents. Simulations and
games are formalized expressions of play that provide a wide range of social and
cognitive experiences. Simulations are abstractions of the real world, involving
objects, processes, or situations. Games are activities with goals, rules, and re¬
wards. Simulated games involve situations with goals, rules, and rewards.68
Simulations have become increasingly popular among educators, following
on their success in military, business, medical, and public administrative arenas.
Many simulations are now produced commercially for teachers, especially for
use in conjunction with computers and VCRs. However, teacher-made simula¬
tions (not for computer and VCR use) are more often used in the classroom, be¬
cause they can be geared for specific students, subjects, or grade levels. Several
“how-to-do-it” publications have been produced by teacher associations for
would-be developers of simulations and games.
One educator reports four advantages of simulations:
1. A simulation is a wonderful motivator. . .

2. A successful simulation demands the use of many study skills and
techniques. ... A practical relationship is forged between study and
fun.
3. A full-dress simulation is a powerful way to make many . . . topics .
come alive.
4. A successful simulation is very rewarding to the teacher. . . . [He or
she] takes a back seat to let things develop [and watches] students live,
talk, and enter into . . . [active learning].69
In short, simulations permit students to experience the nearest thing to reality.

There are a wide variety of simulations available for all grade levels and in all
disciplinary areas. An excellent resource is http://www.interact-simulations.com.
Games are more informal and cover a wide range of situations, whereas
simulations reflect a real-life situation and are more structured. Games have
been an important instructional tool in the kindergarten and elementary school
dating back to early nineteenth-century educational pioneers such as Froebel and
Pestalozzi and, later, to the Progressive movement.
Almost any teacher guide, for almost all grade levels and subjects, will list
several games for enriching learning. Educational games have social and cogni¬
tive purposes and are not designed solely to amuse, but any game can contribute
to learning. For example, Monopoly is a game played for amusement, yet young
children who play it learn to count and deal with monetary value. Checkers and
chess, besides being amusing, challenge the mind; they involve math, logic, and
sequencing of moves.
For younger students the value of the game might lie in the game itself, in
the experience it gives them in learning to discriminate sounds or objects, to ma¬
nipulate and gain facility in motor skills, or to play together and socialize.70 For
older students, the value might lie more in the postgame discussion, or what
some educators call the “debriefing sessions.” (Simulations can also incorporate
postactivity discussions or debriefing sessions.) By proper questioning, the
teacher brings out instances of questionable behavior, when the rules were ig¬
nored, and the reasons for such behavior. Fife situations can be perceived as a
series of games, where there are winners and losers, where there is cooperation
and competition, and where rules are broken and enforced. In this connection,
games are excellent means for teaching morality and ethics, value clarification,
and affective education.
Guidelines for Using Simulations and Games
Numerous simulations and games are commercially produced, but teachers must
judge whether they are suitable for their students, whether they need modifica¬
tion or can be modified, or whether the teachers need to develop their own mate¬
rials. Here are some guidelines to follow when incorporating simulations and
games.
1. Distinguish between amusement games and educational games, between

game objectives and instructional objectives.
2. Use simulations to enable students to understand the nature of a significant
content problem and how to solve the problem.
3. Use games for teaching thinking skills and for enhancing the social skills of
children in the lower grades.
4. Relate simulations and games to the content (skills, concepts, values) you
wish to teach; this content should correspond with reality, and the relationship
between the real world and the simulation or game should be clarified to the
participants.
5. Insure that roles played by students in simulations and games are clearly de¬
fined (for example, “If you were president in 1982, how would you respond
to the first Iranian hostage crisis?”).
6. Provide a postgame (or postsimulation) discussion for older students to clar¬
ify skills, concepts, and values to be learned.
7. Incorporate a class or homework writing exercise into the post-game (or
postsimulation) discussion.
8. Employ a series of questions that require students to discuss their thoughts
during the activity: What thoughts governed their behavior? What experi¬
ences resulted in certain behavior? What strategies did they use to make de¬
cisions to achieve their goals? Which strategies were most effective? Could
they predict the behavior of others?
9. Use some form of evaluation, feedback, or discussion to determine if your
objectives have been achieved.
Simulations and games are more common in some disciplinary areas than in
others. Foi example, science and social studies areas have a wide variety of sim¬
ulations that teachers can use at all grade levels, although most are applicable to
students in the middle grades and above. Simulations take time and are often
somewhat costly. The decision you need to make as a teacher is whether use of a
simulation or game will enhance student learning in ways that warrant the addi¬
tional allocation of classroom learning time.

For each subject and grade level, basic instructional materials are needed to im¬
plement successful teaching and learning. Beginning and experienced teachers
alike should become familiar with the curriculum bulletins and guides for their
subject and grade level. Such bulletins list necessary, recommended, and supple¬
mentary materials. Teachers should become familiar with the materials available
in their school by discussing them with experienced colleagues or supervisors.
Teachers must also find out how to construct supplementary materials.
The following questions provide a guide for effective use of instructional
materials.
1. What instructional materials do you plan to use?

2. What do you hope to achieve by using these materials? Do they
correspond with your objectives?
3. How will you prepare students for the instructional materials?
4. How will you incorporate the instructional materials into the lesson?
5. Is the content of the materials suitable for your students? Consider
sequence, scope, vocabulary, and so on.
6. Are the materials user-friendly?

7. Are there a variety of materials to coincide with various topics of the
lesson?
8. How will you follow up the presentation of the materials? Are your
follow-up activities appropriate?
9. Can you justify the cost and time spent in preparing and using these
materials?
10. How do students react to the materials? Why do they react this way?
11. To what extent were the materials effective for this lesson? ineffective?
12. How can you improve the use of the instructional materials for the next
lesson?
As we finish this discussion on instructional materials, we present to you a de¬

scription of one classroom in action. The illustration is from the National Sci¬
ence Teachers Association’s (NSTA’s) Pathways to the Science Standards. No¬
tice that the teacher is not prescriptive about one resource (for example, a
textbook), but rather structures the unit activities to foster student involvement
with a variety of resources.
Leonardo da Vinci is said to have been ahead of his time. Sara Milstein wants her
students to see that often people’s culture, status in society, or the historical period
in which they live may prevent the wide acceptance of their new scientific idea or
explanation.
She divides her class into groups to study Leonardo da Vinci, Tycho Brahe, Isaac
Newton, George Washington Carver, Marie Curie, and Thomas Jefferson. One of
the groups wonders why there are so few names of women and people from Asia,
Africa, and South America. Some students form groups to look for women scientists
and scientists from other cultures.
The school’s library and media center focus on their research. The students use
CD-ROM encyclopedias, information from the Internet, and biographies. The class
has decided to create its own cross-referenced database and to add to it throughout
the year. At the end of the semester, each student will receive a copy of the class
database on a diskette.
As the year progresses, Mrs. Milstein asks students these questions about the sci¬
entists they have encountered:
• Did these scientists receive help from other scientists?

• What kind of reaction did the work of the scientists receive from other
scientists and nonscientists?71
Summary
1. Good teachers become better teachers when they use appropriate instructional
materials in their lessons. Learning what materials to use, and how to use
them, comes with experience.
2. Instructional materials may be printed (available from professional,

governmental, and commercial sources) or duplicated (teacher-made or
copied from printed material).
3. Materials should be selected in terms of well-defined and agreed-upon
criteria. For instance, do they coincide with the teacher’s objectives, are they
well organized and designed, and are they suited to the reading level of the
students?
4. In presenting materials, teachers need to consider student understanding,
structure, sequence, balance, explanation, pace, and elaboration strategies.
5. Types of instructional materials include textbooks and workbooks; journals,
magazines, and newspapers; and simulations and games. Textbooks and
workbooks tend to dominate as the major instructional material in most
classrooms.
6. Important aspects of selecting textbooks deal with stereotyping, readability,
textbook and pedagogical aids, and aids to student comprehension.
7. There are differences between textbook aids, designed to facilitate student
comprehension, and pedagogical aids, designed to facilitate the teacher’s
instruction.
8. There are several strategies for incorporating simulations and games into the
daily lesson.
1. What is the main purpose of using instructional materials?
2. How would you determine whether a textbook presents a stereotypical
picture of an ethnic or religious group, sex, labor group, or any other
minority?
3. Which textbook aids are most important? Why?
4. What are important factors to consider when supplementing the textbook
with the workbook?
5. Is there a danger in using too many materials in a class? Explain.
Things to Do
1. Discuss in class ten questions to consider in evaluating instructional
materials. Which questions or concepts are the most important? Why?
2. List five steps in developing your own materials.
3. In class prepare a checklist for evaluating textbooks.
4. Discuss which textbook aids you like in a textbook. Why?
5. Give five reasons for using the following materials: (a) workbooks,
(b) journals and magazines, and (c) simulations and games.
Apple, Michael. Teachers and Texts. New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1988.
Analysis of the politics of textbook selection and the social and cultural implications
of the content regarding class, race, and gender.
Ellington, Henry, Joannie Fowlie/and Monica Gordon. Using Games and Simulations in
the Classroom: A Practical Guide for Teachers. New York: Kogan Page Ltd., 1998.
How to develop and implement games and simulations at the primary and secondary
levels—case studies are included.
Kellough, Richard D., and Noreen G. Kellough. A Resource Guide for Teachers K-12.
Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1997. Various methods, materials, and resources for teaching
middle school students—and how to incorporate these resources into lesson plans.
McKenna, Michael C., and Richard D. Robinson. Teaching Through Text, 2nd ed.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley, 1997. Techniques that show teachers how to use
texts, including content-specific applications.
Morlan, John E., and Leonard J. Espinoza. Preparation of Inexpensive Teaching
Materials, 6th ed. Belmont, CA: Fearon, 1998. Several ways to plan, prepare, use,
and evaluate materials.
Vacca, Richard T., and JoAnne L. Vacca, Content Area Reading. New York: Longman,
1999. Reading Practices across content areas for helping students improve their
reading skills.
Key Terms
advance organizers 239 instructional aids 220
comprehendability 233 reading formulas 232
copyright law 225 simulations 248
duplicated materials 224 stereotyping 230
expository structure 240 textbook aids 235
games 249 vertical curricular relationships 226
horizontal curricular
relationships 226
End Notes
1. Elliot W. Eisner, “Why the Textbook Influences Curriculum,” Curriculum Review
(January-February 1987): 11-13; Eisner, “Who Decides What Schools Should
Teach?” Phi Delta Kappan (March 1990): 523-526.
2. Linda G. Fielding and David P. Pearson, “Synthesis of Research: Reading
Comprehension—What Works,” Educational Leadership (February 1994): 62-68.
3. James H. Block, Helen E. Efthim, and Robert B. Burns, Building Effective Mastery
Learning in Schools (New York: Longman, 1989); Thomas L. Good and Jere E.
Brophy, Looking in Classrooms, 5th ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1990).
4. David M. Sadker and Myra Pollack Sadker, Teachers, Schools, and Society (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1997), 238.
5. Paul Burden and David M. Byrd, Methods for Effective Teaching, 2nd ed. (Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1999); Jerrold E. Kemp and Don C. Smellie, A
Handbook on Educational Media (New York: HarperCollins, 1993).
6. American Library Association, The New Copyright Law: Questions Teachers and
Librarians Ask (Washington, DC: ALA, 1977); Kenneth T. Murray, “Copyright and
the Educator,” Phi Delta Kappan (March 1994): 552-555.
7. American Library Association, Copyright Primer for Librarians and Educators
(Washington, DC: ALA, 1986).
8. Rebecca Barr, Teaching Reading in Elementary Classrooms, 2nd ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997); Elfrieda H. Hiebert and Barbara M. Taylor, Getting Reading Right
from the Start (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1994).
9. Robert C. Calfee, “Organizing for Comprehension and Composition,” in Whole
Language and the Creation of Literacy, ed. R. Bowler and W. Ellis (Baltimore:
Dyslexia Society, 1991), 111-129; Peter Smagormsky and Michael W. Smith, “The
Nature of Knowledge in Composition and Literacy Understanding,” Review of
Educational Research (Fall 1992): 279-306.
10. Allan C. Ornstein and Francis P. Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and
Issues, 3rd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
Educational Leadership (April 1992): 26-35; Claire E. Weinstein et al., “Helping
Students Develop Strategies for Effective Learning,” Educational Leadership
(December-January 1989): 17-19.
12. George J. Posner and Kenneth A. Strike, “Categorization Scheme for Principles of
Sequencing Content,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1976): 401^106. Also
see Posner and Alan N. Rudnitsky, Course Design: A Guide to Curriculum
Development for Teachers, 5th ed. (New York: Longman, 1997).
13. Eisner, “Why the Textbook Influences Curriculum,” 111.
14. Report on a National Study of the Nature and Quality of Instructional Materials
Most Used by Teachers and Learners (New York: Educational Products Information
Exchange, 1987).
15. Arthur Woodward and David L. Elliott, “School Reform and Textbooks,” Educational
Horizons (Summer 1992): 176-180; Colleen Fairbanks, “Teaching and Learning
Beyond the Text,” Journal of Curriculum Supervision (Winter 1994): 155-173.
16. Harriet Tyson Bernstein, America’s Textbook Fiasco: A Conspiracy of Good
Intentions (Washington, DC: Council for Basic Education, 1988); Joan DelFattore,
What Johnny Shouldn’t Read: Textbook Censorship in America (New Haven: Yale
17. Donald P. Hayes, Loreen T. Wolfer, and Michael T. Wolfe, “Schoolbook
Simplification and Its Relation to the Decline in SAT-Verbal Scores,” American
Educational Research Journal (Summer 1996): 489-508.
18. Cleo H. Cherryholmes, “Readers Research,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
(January-February 1993): 1-32; Ornstein, “The Textbook Curriculum,” Educational
Horizons (Summer 1992): 167-169.
19. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday 1996), 269.
20. Linda Darling-Hammond, The Right to Learn (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997), 52.
21. Mario D. Fantini and Gerald Weinstein, The Disadvantaged: Challenge to Education
(New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 133. Also see Chris Stray, “Paradigms Regained:
Towards a Historical Sociology of the Textbook,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
(January-February 1994): 1-30.
22. Allen C. Ornstein, “The Irrelevant Curriculum: A Review from Four Perspectives,”
NASSP Bulletin (September 1988): 26-32. Also see Michael Pressley et al., “Beyond
Direct Explanation: Reading Comprehension Strategies,” Elementary School Journal
(May 1992): 513-516.
23. Dennis Doyle, “The Unsacred Text,” American Education (Summer 1984): 3-13;
Connie Muther, “What Every Textbook Evaluator Should Know,” Educational
Leadership (April 1985): 4-8; Allen C. Omstein, “The Textbook Driven
Curriculum,” Peabody Journal of Education (Spring 1994): 70-85.
24. Nathan Glazer, “Where Is Multiculturalism Leading Us?” Phi Delta Kappan
(December 1993): 319-323; Henry A. Giroux, “Curriculum, Multiculturalism, and
the Politics of Identity,” NASSP Bulletin (December 1992): 1-11.
25. Muther, “What Every Textbook Evaluator Should Know,” 7. Also see Connie
Muther, “Reflections on Textbooks and Teaching,” Educational Horizons (Summer
1992): 194-200.
26. Mervyn Rutledge, “Reading the Subtext on Gender,” Educational Leadership (April
1997): 71-93.
27. Harold L. Herber and Joan N. Herber, Teaching in Content Areas (Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1993); Michael C. McKenna and Richard D.
Robinson, Teaching Through Text, 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 1997).
28. Fran Lehr and Jean Osborn, Reading, Language, and Literacy (Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum, 1993).
29. Edward Fry, “Fry’s Readability Graph: Clarification, Validity, and Extension to
Level,” Journal of Reading (December 1977): 242-252.
30. Alton L. Raygor and George B. Schick, Reading at Efficient Rates, 2nd ed. (New
York: McGraw-Hill, 1980).
31. Clark A. Chinn and William F. Brewer, “The Role of Anomalous Data in
Knowledge Acquisition,” Review of Educational Research (Spring 1993): 1-50;
Alice Davidson, “Readability—Appraising Text Difficulty,” in Learning to Read in
American Schools, ed. R. C. Anderson, J. Osborn, and R. J. Tierney (Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum, 1984), 121-139; Robert J. Tierney, John E. Readence, and Ernest K.
Dishner, Reading Strategies and Practices, 4th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1995).
32. Margret T. Bernstein, “The New Politics of Textbook Adoption,” Education Digest
(December 1985): 12-15; Bernstein, “The Academy’s Contribution to the
Impoverishment of America’s Textbooks,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1988):
193-198; Mario Carbo, “Eliminating the Need for Dumbed-Down Textbooks,”
Educational Horizons (Summer 1992): 189-193.
33. Robert A. Pavlik, “Tips on Texts,” Phi Delta Kappan (September 1985): 86.
34. Bernstein, “The New Politics of Textbook Adoption”; James A. LaSpina, The
Transformation of the Textbook (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum, 1998).
35. Rebecca Barr, Marilyn Sadow, and Camille Blachowicz, Reading Diagnosis for
Teachers, 3rd ed. (New York: Longman, 1995); Robert Glaser, edAdvances in
Instructional Psychology, vol. 4 (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1993).
36. Neville Bennett and Clive Carre, Learning to Teach (New York: Routledge, 1991).
37. Ezra Bowen, “Flunking Grade in Math,” Time 20 June 1988: 79. Also see Anne
L’Hafner, “Teaching-Methods Scales and Mathematics-Class Achievement,”
American Educational Research Journal (Spring 1993): 71-94.
38. Harriet Tyson, Who Will Teach the Children (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994): 10.
39. Allen C. Ornstein, “Textbook Instruction: Processes and Strategies.”
40. Sandra Conn, “Textbooks: Defining the New Criteria,” Media and Methods
(March-April 1988): 30-31, 64.
41. Richard E. Mayer, “Aids to Text Comprehension,” Educational Psychologist (Winter
1984): 30-42; Philip H. Winne, Lorraine Graham, and Leone Prock, “A Model of Poor
Readers’ Text-Based Inferencing,” Reading Research Quarterly (January 1993): 52-69.
42. Deborah Menke and Beth Davey, “Teachers’ Views of Textbooks and Text Reading
Instruction,” Journal of Reading (March 1994): 464-470.
43. Sigmund A. Boloz and Donna H. Muri, “Supporting Literacy Is Everyone’s
Responsibility,” Reading Teacher (Lebruary 1994): 388-391; Rebecca B. Sammons
and Davey, “Assessing Students’ Skills in Using Textbooks,” Journal of Reading
(December-January 1994): 280-287.
44. Bonnie B. Armbuster, “Schema Theory and the Design of Content Area Textbooks,”
Educational Psychologist (Pall 1986): 253—268; Bruce K. Bromage and Richard E.
Mayer, “Quantitative and Qualitative Effects of Repetition on Learning from
Technical Text,” Journal of Educational Psychology (August 1986): 271-278;
Richard F. West, Keith E. Stanovich, and Harold R. Mitchell, “Reading in the Real
World and its Correlates,” Reading Research Quarterly (January 1993): 34-51.
45. Dolores Durkin, Teaching Them to Read, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1993); Anne P. Sweet and Judith I. Anderson, Reading Research into the
Year 2000 (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1993).
46. Beverly Showers, Bruce Joyce, Mary Scanlon, and Carol Schnaubelt, “A Second
Chance to Learn to Read” Educational Leadership (March 1998): 27-30.
47. Bonnie B. Armbuster and Thomas H. Anderson, “Research Synthesis on Study
Skills,” Educational Leadership (November 1981): 154-156.
48. David P. Ausubel, “In Defense of Advance Organizers: A Reply to the Critics,”
Review of Educational Research (Spring 1978): 251-257.
49. Peter H. Johnson, Constructive Evaluation of Literate Activity (New York:
Longman, 1992); McKenna and Robinson, Teaching Through Text.
50. Livingston Alexander, Ronald G. Frankiewicz, and Robert E. Williams, “Facilitation
of Learning and Retention of Oral Instruction Using Advance and Post Organizers,”
Journal of Educational Psychology (October 1979): 701-707; Mayer, “Aids to Text
Comprehension ; Robert B. Ruddell, Teaching Children to Read and Write
51. John A. Ellis et al., “Effect of Generic Advance Instructions on Learning a
Classification Task,” Journal of Educational Psychology (August 1986): 294-299;
James Harley and Ivor K. Davies, “Preinstructional Strategies: The Role of Pretest,
Behavioral Objectives, Overviews, and Advance Organizers,” Review of Educational
Research (Spring 1976): 239-265.
52. Bonnie B. Armbuster, Thomas H. Anderson, and Joyce Ostertag, “Teaching Text
Structure to Improve Reading,” Reading Teacher (November 1989): 130-137;
Marilyn M. Ohlhausen and Cathy M. Roller, “The Operation of Text Structure and
Content Schema in Isolation and in Interaction,” Reading Research Quarterly
(Winter 1988): 70-88; Raymond E. Wright and Sheldon Rosenberg, “Knowledge of
Text Coherence and Expository Writing: A Developmental Study,” Journal of
Educational Psychology (March 1993): 152-158.
53. Bernstein, The Academy’s Contribution to the Impoverishment of America’s
Textbooks”; Susan M. Hubbuch, “The Trouble with Textbooks,” High School
Journal (April-May 1989): 203-210; Allen C. Ornstein, “The Censored Curriculum-
The Problems with Textbooks Today,” NASSP Bulletin (November 1992): 1-9.
54. Robert L. Hillerich, “The Value of Structure,” Teaching K-8 (March 1990): 78-81;
Omstein, “The Textbook Curriculum.”
55. Beau F. Jones, Jean Pierce, and Barbara Hunter, “Teaching Students to Construct
Graphic Representations,” Educational Leadership (December-January 1989):
20-25; Patricia A. Herman et al., “Incidental Acquisition of Word Meaning from
Expositions with Varied Text-Features,” Reading Research Quarterly (Summer
1987): 263-284; Ohlhausen and Roller, “The Operation of Text Structure and
Content Schemata”; Steffan Ohlsson, “Abstract Schema,” Educational Psychologist
(Winter 1993): 51-66.
56. Jean Osborn, “The Purposes, Uses, and Contents of Workbooks and Some
Guidelines for Publishers,” in Learning to Read in American Schools, ed. Anderson,
Osborn, and Tierney, 45-111.
57. Lauren A. Sosniak and Susan S. Stodolsky, “Teachers and Textbooks: Materials Use
in Four Fourth-Grade Classrooms,” Elementary School Journal (January 1993):
249-276.
58. Richard L. Allington and Anne McGill-Franzen, “School Response to Reading
Failure,” Elementary School Journal (May 1989): 529-542; Ruth Gardner and
Patricia A. Alexander, “Metacognition: Answered and Unanswered Questions,”
Educational Psychologist (Spring 1989): 143-158.
59. David R. Olson and Janet W. Astington, “Thinking About Thinking,” Educational
Psychologist (Winter 1993): 7-24; Arthur Woodward, “Over-Programmed
Materials: Taking the Teacher Out of Teaching,” American Educator
(Spring 1986): 26-31.
60. Patricia M. Cunningham, “What Would Make Workbooks Worthwhile?” in
Learning to Read in American Schools, ed. Anderson, Osborn, and Tierney,
113-120; Bonnie J. Meyer, “Text Dimensions and Cognitive Processing,” in
Learning and Comprehension of Text, ed. H. Mandl, N. L. Stein, and T. Trabasso
(Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1984), 3-52; Arthur Woodward and David L. Elliott,
“Textbook Use and Teacher Professionalism,” in Textbooks and Schooling in the
United States, ed. A. Woodward and D. L. Elliott, 89th Yearbook of the National
Society for the Study of Education, Part I. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press,
1990), 146-161.
61. Jean Osborn, “The Purpose, Uses, and Contents of Workbooks.”
62. Start children who are 9 or 10 years old on Mad and they will sharpen their reading
and thinking skills—something to consider, although many educators object because
they consider the views and material it contains questionable or even objectionable.
Need a reason? The material is interesting to kids; content, stories, graphics,
cartoons, etc., both motivate and stimulate.
63. Patricia M. Cuningham and Richard Allington, Classrooms that Work (New York:
Longman, 1999): Bruce Joyce, Learning to Teach Inductively (Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
64. Jiro Yamamoto, “Survey Report on the Effectiveness of NIE,” NIE Committee of
Nihon Shinbon Kyokai (July 1997).
65. Association of Teachers of Social Studies in the City of New York, A Handbook for
the Teaching of Social Studies, 4th ed. (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1977), 127.
66. Thomas C. Gee, Mary W. Olson, and Nora J. Forester, “Classroom Use of
Specialized Magazines,” ClearingHouse (October 1989): 53-55.
67. Ibid.
68. Constance A. Barlow, Judith A. Blythe, and Margaret Edmonds, A Handbook of

Interactive Exercises for Groups (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1999);
Donald P. Kauchak and Paul D. Eggen, Learning and Teaching, 3rd ed. (Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998).
69. Edmund Sutro, “Full-Dress Simulations: A Total Learning Experience,” Social
Education (October 1985): 634.
70. Penelope Semrau and Barbara A. Boyer, Using Interactive Video Education
(Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1994); Lillian Stephens, Developing
Thinking Skills Through Real-Life Activities (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1988).
71. Lawrence F. Lowery, Pathways to the Science Standards (Arlington, VA: National
Science Teachers Association, 1997): 109.
H A P T E R
Technology
in the Classroom*


The teacher uses knowledge of effective verbal, nonverbal, and media
communication techniques to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and supportive
interaction in the classroom. (Principle #6)
Focusing Questions
1. What technological advance do you consider most valuable in improving
your instruction?
2. What problems are beginning teachers likely to have in using technology?
3. For what purposes might films, videotapes, and audiotapes be used?
4. When is it best to use an overhead projector?
5. How can teachers best use technology for improving instruction?
6. How do you expect to incorporate computers in the classroom?
7. What telecommunication systems might be useful in your teaching field?
*With Jill Lindsey-North

261
This chapter deals with using technology to enhance student learning and facili¬
tate your own professional development. Technology has changed the very na¬
ture of work, communications, and our understanding of the development of
knowledge.1 Gone are the days of teaching solely from a textbook using a
blackboard. Teaching today requires using a variety of approaches, techniques,
and information sources. The use of computers, scanners, CD-ROM, music
CDs, audiotapes, graphics, videos, cameras, projectors, cable television, and
telecommunication systems can maximize curriculum content and improve stu¬
dent learning.
The growing array of technological tools and multimedia options available
offer teachers a vast repertoire of instructional options. Just what mediums and
technologies you use will depend upon your teaching assignment, the available
resources, and your own expertise. Vast discrepancies in technological equip¬
ment exist between schools. One school might have one computer for every four
or five students, another school might have one large computer lab where class¬
rooms of students are allocated computer time, and another might restrict com¬
puter use to study halls. In addition, many students will not have access to com¬
puters or other technologies in their homes, and this can affect their skill level
with technologies. These factors, along with others, will determine how you will
incorporate technology into your instruction.
Appropriate use of technologies by students can help them develop needed
skills, maximize learning time, minimize paperwork, facilitate connections with
their community and the world, offer numerous alternative points of view, and
prepare them for a vocation. As a professional, using technology can enable you
to maximize your time, provide professional development resources, permit you
to engage in dialogue with fellow professionals and the public, and accomplish
administrative tasks efficiently.
There are two opposing views about the influence of technology upon learn¬
ing. First, there is the notion that technology is a vehicle for delivering instruc¬
tion but has no influence on student learning; that is, learning from any technical
tool or media has little to do with the medium itself. What counts are such fac¬
tors as the teacher’s instructional strategies or lesson plan design. Although tech¬
nology influences the manner in which instruction is delivered, it is unlikely to
modify the cognitive process involved in learning.2 The second view is that
technological media present images or information from which learners con¬
struct new knowledge. Learning is viewed as an active, constructive process
where new information is extracted from the environment (media) and inte¬
grated with prior knowledge.3
Three decades of research in the cognitive sciences support the notion that
knowledge is transmitted to, but actively constructed by, individual learners, who
draw upon prior experiences, established attitudes, and beliefs in order to create
and make meaning. The variety of information sources available through tech¬
nologies offer continuous, self-directed learning opportunities for students, inde¬
pendent of direct instruction from a teacher. This is not to suggest that reading
texts, direct instruction, and engaging in class discussions should be replaced by
learning through technologies, but rather to highlight the benefits of employing a
Technology + Thinking = More Learning
Bob Lazzaro
Teacher, White Plains, New York
Students walk into the classroom and immediately processing, spreadsheets, and databases all make the
turn their attention to the ceiling mounted 35" moni¬ manipulation of their work easier but it does not
tor. On display is an Internet web-site with today’s eliminate the need for good thinking.
email from a sailboat racing across the ocean off the The well-known adage of Garbage In, Garbage
coast of Australia. Through satellite links the crew Out still holds true. The garbage coming out may
describes conditions on board the 60-foot boat and look better on a word processing program but it will
their chances of placing well in the overall race. still stink the same. Students have been known to
After checking the exact location of the boat from “ignore” all the suggestions given by a Spell Check
the longitude and latitude coordinates listed on the and turn in a piece of writing full of spelling errors.
web-site and logging it in their journals, the teacher When asked to try checking it again, the program du¬
directs one student to move to a weather web-site. tifully ignored the errors. The student had taught the
Current conditions, including Doppler radar of pre¬ machine to accept the wrong answer.
cipitation, satellite photos of cloud covers, and pre¬ By the same token, once a rough draft is typed
dictions for the rest of the week are discussed and into the computer, editing and revising is so fast on a
recorded as the student clicks through the site with word processor that more time can be spent on learn¬
the mouse. ing advanced techniques of writing style rather than
Technology in the classroom is having a signifi¬ rewriting the piece by hand.
cant effect on the education of students across the Technology will continue to be put into class¬
country. Every day they are using more and more rooms to help students learn. But student learning
electronic resources and equipment such as comput¬ does not take place merely because their hands touch
ers, printers, scanners, VCRs, CD-ROMs, Internet a keyboard. We must touch their minds and technol¬
web-sites, library card catalogs, and E-mail. Word ogy can help us do that.
full range of learning opportunities. This suggests that teachers can also play the
role of advisor and assistant to the student, as a self-directed inquirer, who seeks
to research and answer questions of import and interest.
Pros and Cons of Using Technology

Modern communication devices such as VCRs, audiotapes, cable television,
computers, CDs, and the Internet provide multisensory learning and in-depth
ways of gaining knowledge. These experiences make learning come alive. They
present a multimedia dimension to learning that is more appropriate for the di¬
versity in learning styles and abilities represented by learners in most class¬
rooms. Four key assumptions are at play in this argument for the merits of using
technology in the classroom: (1) Information in school can be independently
Technology can make

learning come alive.
learned from electronic media and data sources other than the teacher or text;
(2) students are capable of assuming responsibility for their own learning, espe¬
cially if the material presented is visually and auditorally stimulating; (3) stu¬
dents learn best when they control their rate of learning; and (4) teachers can be
assisted to successfully employ technology-based instruction.
Modem electronic communication devices provide a multimedia dimension
to learning that can be more suitable for nonverbal learners and learners with
disabilities. The latest pedagogical tools from technology permit teachers to cus¬
tomize instruction to the needs and pace of individual students—and all students
do not have to be available or present at the same time in order for instruction to
take place.4
Assistive Technology (AT)

Recent developments in technology have extended to the creation of many
devices and services that can assist individuals with disabilities. This type of
technology, called assistive technology, can provide opportunities for envi¬
ronmental and curricular access to students with disabilities and offer strate¬
gies to help students with learning disabilities compensate for their disabili¬
ties. Various types of assistive technology range from a small voice
transmitter worn by the classroom teacher to aid a hearing-impaired student
Educational Technology
Henry A. Giroux
Waterburg Professor of Secondary Education
Pennsylvania State University
As a working class kid growing up in Providence, Maybe I am wrong, but I don’t think schools have
Rhode Island, I attended a high school that incorpo¬ changed much. Though students largely inhabit a so¬
rated a rigid tracking system. Most white and black ciety of mass media, educational technology appro¬
students who were economically disadvantaged like priates the new information systems in order to pro¬
myself ended up in courses in which educational duce curricula that serve commercial interests. In the
technology along with work sheets became the main end, technological innovation is reduced to turning
vehicles for teaching. Films became both a reward kids into good consumers rather than critical citizens.
for being quiet and carried the implicit suggestion The problem is that if students are to be critical
that visual culture was simply about entertainment citizens they will have to learn to be literate in a
rather than a serious object of knowledge inquiry. global world that is increasingly mediated by visual
The technology of electronic mass media became and electronic texts that are redefining the meaning
a way of policing behavior while simultaneously al¬ of culture and knowledge. This is a technology that
lowing teachers to confirm the assumption that seri¬ cannot be contained within either the imperatives of
ous learning was largely about the culture of the profit or simply dismissed as entertainment. But, of
book. When the lights went off in the class, I always course, the issue here is not about merely under¬
felt relieved; at least, in the darkness I could imagine standing the pedagogical importance of the new in¬
myself in the movie theater, a cultural space that of¬ formational systems along with the popular and cul¬
fered a brief respite from the humiliations and bore¬ tural forms that increasingly educate students outside
dom that constituted the daily experience of school¬ of schools, but one of who is going to educate the
ing for myself and others who did not grow up in educators? This is more than a technological issue, it
middle class households. is an ethical and political one.
with hearing oral directions and lectures, to special computer equipment that
offers Braille to a vision-impaired student.
With mainstreaming and inclusion practices growing, classroom teachers
will be expected to adapt to and effectively use various types of assistive tech¬
nology. Rapid advances and developments in assistive technology are making
new or improved devices more readily available. Teachers will find themselves
encountering more assistive technology in adult and K-12 classrooms.
Many educators are concerned about the developmental appropriateness of
using technology with children in the preschool and elementary grades. These
educators feel that the imagination is a critical element in creative problem solv¬
ing and that the imagination is dulled by the onslaught of external images tech¬
nology provides. They are also concerned that our emotions, when constantly
elicited and manipulated by technology, begin to be blunted by the body’s sur¬
vival instincts. Finally, they feel that human conversation and interaction is
being gradually replaced by the passive viewing technology provides.5 Though

these concerns have led a small group of educators to avoid the use of any tech¬
nologies, the majority of educators recognize these potential dangers and strive
to balance their use of technology with more traditional teaching technologies.
Teachers need to balance the potential of technological instructional modes
against their drawbacks, however. Although educational technology facilitates
individualized and self-directed learning and provides an increasingly efficient
and effective way to assess and use information, it also has the tendency to iso¬
late the learner from other learners and prescribes what and how students will
learn. It reduces the social setting that is often the avenue through which learn¬
ing occurs. No longer does the class struggle as a group to find answers or to
critically assess information and reflect on issues or problems.6 By striving to
balance text reading, lecture, group activities and discussions with the use of
technology, students will benefit from the variety and diversity of learning op¬
portunities provided.
Chalkboard and Display Board

Long before technologies were introduced in the classroom, teachers employed
visual aids and innovative presentation strategies to help their students learn.
Chalkboards, visual displays, records, filmstrips, slides, skits, and plays offered
multisensory learning opportunities in the classroom. The chalkboard is per¬
haps the oldest and most traditional piece of equipment found in the classroom.
Next to the textbook, it is the most widely used instructional aid. According to
two educators, the chalkboard “is so omnipresent that many of us fail to think of
it as an audiovisual aid at all; yet most teachers would be hard put if they had no
chalkboards available.”7
There is usually one chalkboard at the front of the classroom and sometimes
others at the sides or back. In older schools most of the chalkboards are black
(hence the name blackboard), but because black tends to absorb light and make
the room gloomy, it is being replaced. Light green and yellow reduce glare and
eye strain, absorb less light, are cheerful, and provide a good contrast with white
and colored chalk.
The chalkboard is popular because it allows for spontaneity, speed, and
change. The chalkboard can fit the tempo of any lesson in any subject. It can be
used for displaying pictures and important clippings; drawing sketches and dia¬
grams to help illustrate points of a lesson; listing suggestions or items as they are
offered; writing outlines, summaries, and assignments; and working out prob¬
lems and evaluating procedures and answers. The chalkboard is particularly
valuable for emphasizing the major points of a lesson and working out problems
for the whole class to see. Because of its flexibility and familiarity, the chalk¬
board is sometimes overused.
A display board can be used for displaying student projects and progress;
displaying current items of interest related to a lesson or unit; posting announce¬
ments, memos, and routine assignments; and decorating the room. There are
many types: bulletin board, pegboard, flannel board, magnetic board. The boards
stimulate student creativity and interest, promote student participation in the
learning activity, and make the room more cheerful and student-oriented. If
there are no display boards in the room, a portion of the chalkboard can be re¬
served for this purpose or a freestanding display board may be created.
Guidelines for Using the Chalkboard
1. Do write legibly and large enough for all to see.

2. Don’t talk toward the chalkboard while writing on it. Write and then talk or
talk and then write.
3. Do stand to the side so you don’t block the students’ view when referring to
work already on the chalkboard.
4. Do organize your chalkboard work ahead of time. When possible, outline
items with a letter or numbering system. There are many possible systems,
but use one form for purposes of consistency.
5. Don’t clutter the board. Limit your writing or drawing to major ideas of the
lesson.
6. Don’t use unusual or personal abbreviations.
7. Do utilize colored chalk, rulers, string, stencils, and other materials to make
your illustrations more effective.
8. Don’t overuse the chalkboard. Provide handouts of lengthy or complicated
materials.
9. Don’t get embarrassed or show resentment if you make a mistake and a stu¬
dent corrects your boardwork. Instead, thank the student.
10. Do establish routine use for the chalkboard. Have specific spaces for home¬
work assignments, drill problems, instructional objectives, etc.
Overhead Projectors
The overhead projector and the computerized presentation offer technological
options for presenting visual information. One of the greatest benefits to the
overhead projector and computer presentation is that the teacher can face the au¬
dience, rather than having to turn away to write, as on a chalkboard.
Overhead projectors are so convenient and easy to use, they have become
standard equipment in many classrooms. Overhead transparencies can be made
relatively quickly in most copy machines using any document that can be photo¬
copied. Commercially prepared overhead transparencies are also available for
many textbooks or can be purchased by general subject area. Overhead projec¬
tors also offer the option of writing on the transparency or actually creating the
transparency during the class activity. This can be especially helpful when small
groups work to produce information that is to be presented to the larger group.
Each small group can create a handwritten overhead slide and project the infor¬
mation for all to see.
Guidelines for Using Overhead Projectors
1. Do keep the materials up-to-date.

2. Do preview the materials or prepare them before class begins.
3. Do be sure the materials are appropriate for the students’ interests and matu¬
rity level and that they fulfill your instructional objective.
4. Do be sure all students can see the surface on which the material is pro¬
jected. Focus the materials properly.
5. Do explain and discuss each of the projected materials.
6. Do arrange the materials in sequence with the lesson.
7. Do handle transparencies with care; don’t smudge them, or let the colors of
the grease pens run together before drying.
8. Do shut off the machine when not in use.
Films
Other than television, film (or movies) is perhaps the most influential and seduc¬
tive educational medium for transmitting ideas and persuading an audience to a
point of view. Because of the vivid, often larger-than-life images it presents, the
motion picture has a dramatic impact on its audience. Films both interest and mo¬
tivate students. Thousands of good films have been made expressly for educa¬
tional purposes. A film is presented in a fixed, continuous sequence and the speed
is also fixed (unless the images are such that the projector or video equipment can
be slowed down or the projection can be stopped). Because students are forced to
think at the speed and in the sequence determined by the film, it tends to create a
passive rather than an active mind set. Offering questions or patterns to be aware
of while viewing the film may help to engage a more active mind set.
Guidelines for Using Films
1. Do keep an up-to-date film list.

2. Do be sure to order well in advance of the screening date when ordering
from sources outside the school.
3. Do preview the film to make sure it is appropriate to the students’ interests
and maturity level and to familiarize yourself with the content.
4. Do arrange to have the video equipment (or the projector) in the classroom
and set up on the day scheduled for showing the video or film. Be sure to
arrange for someone to run the projector if you do not know how.
5. Do be sure all students can see the screen. The room should be dark enough
to produce a quality picture.
6. Do prepare the students for the presentation. A list of major points or ques¬
tions to answer, or a guide to the lesson is often helpful. Hand it out to the
class before the showing.
7. Do view the film without interruption. Save questions and comments for a
summary discussion.
8. Do stop the projector or reduce the volume, if commentary is needed during
the viewing session.
Television and Videos

Recent evidence makes it clear that television has become “a second school sys¬
tem” or cultural transmitter. Children under 10 years old watch television an av¬
erage of 30 to 35 hours a week, or about one-fifth of their waking hours. By the
time a child graduates from high school, he or she will have spent 15,000 to
20,000 hours in front of the screen, compared to 11,000 to 12,000 hours in
school.8 Before children reach 18, they will have seen 350,000 commercials
“urging them to want, want, want.”9
Rather than view television as a second school system, Neil Postman views it
and other mass media (radio, comic books, movies) as the “first curriculum” be¬
cause they appear to be affecting the way children develop learning skills and ac¬
quire knowledge and understanding.10 According to Postman and others, televi¬
sion’s curriculum is designed largely to maintain interest; the school’s curriculum
is supposed to have other purposes, such as mastery of thinking skills. In addi¬
tion, watching television requires little effort and few skills; children do not have
to think about or solve problems. Rather, they become accustomed to rapidly
changing stimuli, quick answers, and “escapist” fantasies, not to mention over¬
doses of violent and sexual behaviors on the screen. See Tips for Teachers 7.1.
Television’s Influence
The average child now witnesses more than 8,000 murders and about 100,000
other violent acts by the time she or he completes elementary school. Estimates
are that by age 18 a youngster will have seen 40,000 murders and another
200,000 acts of violence on television. In a random look at ten channels on one
normal 18-hour weekday, one study reported 1,846 individual acts of violence.
Reviews of research have found that repeated exposure to violence on television
promotes a tendency to engage in aggressive behavior, such as getting into
fights and disrupting the play of others.11 The Parent Teacher Association
(PTA), consisting of more than 6.4 million members, has lobbied for years (but
with limited success) to curtail violent and sexual scenes on television, espe¬
cially during prime time (7 to 10 p.m.).12
Almost half the adolescents surveyed in another study admit to the negative
influences of television—noting that television’s value system emphasizes anti¬
social behavior (e.g., drugs, violence, and sex are okay or even “cool”). The
same percentage maintains that television viewing often detracts from participa¬
tion in more constructive and worthwhile activities. These students equate tele¬
vision viewing with wasting time and being lazy. A small number complain that
“plopping down” in front of the television and watching suggestive commercials
increases their tendency to snack and eat junk food.13
Tips for Parents for Guiding Children’s TV Watching
Teachers need to remind parents that too much time 8. Watch for children being captivated by
in front of the TV is harmful for their children. Re¬ habit-forming soap operas or serialized
search suggests that too much TV viewing interferes shows. There is little value in children
with reading, studying, and academic performance in keeping a daily appointment with such
general. Here are some tips you can communicate to shows.
parents about their children’s TV viewing. 9. Be aware that when children are alone, they
1. Decide whether your children can watch get bored. Sometimes they turn on the TV
television on school days and, if so, for how because they’re frightened. Parents need to
long. offer constructive alternatives.
2. Determine how much television can be 10. Remember that just because a sensitive issue
watched on weekends. is mentioned on a TV show, it doesn’t mean
the show should be prohibited. If the
3. Be clear about the time a child can watch
program has merit, it can open discussion.
television. Don’t let children feel TV time
can be saved up. 11. Observe whether children watch television
even when they have friends over. Offer
4. Establish rules about finishing homework,
them something to do instead.
practicing, reading, or doing chores before
watching. 12. Ask yourself if television watching could be
taking the place of activities that the family
5. Remind children that they have control over
might do together. If the television is on
the television. When a show is too scary,
during breakfast and dinner, this suggests
they can turn it off.
that it is more important than conversation.
6. Recognize that when a program is over, it is
13. Consider reading aloud to children for 15
best not to just walk away. It is important to
minutes each day. Some studies have shown
find out your child’s feelings and
that time spent each day reading aloud to
impressions about the show.
children inspires them to turn off the TV.
7. Keep in mind that specials might arise that
your child will want to see. Such an
additional show might have to be worked
Source: Joan Bergstrom, “Tips for Guiding TV Viewing,” PTA
into the weekly allotment. Today (April 1988): 16.
Given the dominant view of children as passive victims of television, it

seems important to note that many children (as young as age 7) display consid¬
erable sophistication about the relationship between television and reality, and a
high degree of criticism about the influence of advertising. They also seem quite
adept at criticizing television for its artificiality—bad acting, inept story lines,
and conspicuous consumption.14 Some of this reaction might be due to the fact
that they are aware that adults, particularly teachers and parents, often disap¬
prove of their watching television and believe that it has harmful effects on
them. Just as adults frequently displace their concerns on children, so older chil¬
dren and teenagers often assert that it is the younger viewers who are at risk,
while they are more “adult” and less at risk.
Furthermore, not all research supports negative conclusions about the im¬
pact of television on student conduct and attitudes. If utilized properly, televi¬
sion can have a positive influence on socialization and learning, and can serve as
a vehicle for information, education, news, and consumer literacy. Studies indi¬
cate that selected programs for preschool and primary grade children such as
“Sesame Street” and “Electric Company” are associated with improved coopera¬
tive behavior and cognitive-skills. Older elementary children benefit from
“Square One TV” and local television tutoring programs.15
In the area of academics, most data suggest that for upper elementary and
secondary school students, watching television more than five hours a day is as¬
sociated with lowered achievement in reading and mathematics.16 But other than
pointing out such a negative correlation, the research fails to consider how tele¬
vision detracts or competes with homework time and study time. Some research
comparing U.S. students to students in ten other countries revealed that students
from all other countries “watch less television and spend more time on home¬
work than their American counterparts.”17 Other research suggests that in inter¬
national comparisons American youngsters watch about the same amount of
television as those in other countries. The real key appears to be associated with
what American youngsters do with their free time. In other countries youngsters
are involved in substantial school and school-related activities when they are
“free.” In America, youngsters might lag behind in international comparisons
(and there is debate about whether that assertion is completely true!) because
they have so little “free” time to study. Laurence Steinberg writes:
The typical adolescent has about 120 waking hours each week (assuming an average
of 7 hours of sleep per night). The average school day in the United States lasts 6.5
hours, accounting for between 30 and 35 hours each week. According to time-use
studies, teenagers devote an additional 25 hours each week to eating, personal care,
household chores, transportation, and the like.
This leaves somewhere around 60 hours each week for students to apportion
across a variety of other activities. If the typical American teenager is devoting be¬
tween 20 and 25 hours weekly to socializing, between 15 and 20 hours weekly to a
part-time job, between 10 and 15 hours weekly to an extracurricular activity, and be¬
tween 10 and 15 hours weekly to television viewing, there isn’t any time left over
for studying outside of school—which explains why the national average for time
spent on homework is less than 5 hours per week.
When we consider that only 40 percent of the time spent in school is spent on
academic activities, it becomes clear that little of the typical American student’s
time—something on the order of between 15 and 20 hours weekly, or only about 15
percent of his or her waking hours—is spent on endeavors likely to contribute to
learning or achievement.18
There is still another possible ramification of television and other electronic

media as a factor in shaping students’ learning behaviors. The audio and visual
stimuli might produce what Lev Vygotsky termed spontaneous concepts—
concepts that are not systematic, structured, or generalized into a larger mental
framework. Spontaneous concepts differ from scientific concepts, which are
characterized by a degree of distance from immediate experience and which
arise from reading text or being exposed to the teaching-learning process (where
the learner engages in a dialogue with the teacher or other students).19 Scientific
concepts, if taught properly, involve “scaffolding”—they help learners make
connections and build upon previous knowledge.
Vygotsky’s notion of spontaneous concepts suggests that television viewers
process transient and low-level information, and assume a passive role vis-a-vis
any learning that takes place. On the other hand, reading and classroom dis¬
course involve structured linguistic activities, active learning, and systematic
thinking. We usually remember the main ideas of meaningful books we read,
even several years later, because that experience was linguistically structured,
required effort, and led to self-reflection. Television and videos rarely offer
structured, active learning opportunities except and perhaps when reflection and
discussion accompany viewing. That can be accomplished by showing selected
segments or meaningful clips of videos to allow students to process and discuss
the content.
Utilizing Television
Because of television’s impact on acculturation and socialization of children and

youth and its influence on almost all of society, educators cannot ignore this
medium. They must (1) find ways to reverse the trend toward lower achieve¬
ment resulting from too much time spent watching commercial television;
(2) counteract the tendency to use television as an escape or social companion,
which isolates some children (and adults) from contact with other people and
participation in more worthwhile activities; and finally (3) find positive ways to
incorporate the medium into the school curriculum.
Two types of programming can be employed in schools. Educational tele¬
vision refers to programs produced for broadcast on commercial or public tele¬
vision stations that are intended to inform and develop understanding. Many
commercial and public television stations produce programs that fit educational
goals and objectives. In particular, public television—broadcast in many large
cities and delivered through cable across the nation—has real educational worth
that has not been fully utilized by teachers.
Instructional television refers to programs produced by large school dis¬
tricts or colleges to teach specific subject matter in school. Master teachers teach
large numbers of classes simultaneously, with video providing greater flexibility
in individual classroom scheduling. Although such programs are usually pro¬
duced in advance, some schools have developed interactive and closed-circuit
televised instruction so that students have the means of communicating with the
instructor. In either case, we are talking about a cost-effective means of deliver¬
ing education, especially in rural areas which might not have access to special or
advanced academic courses.20
Teachers can now select cable television programs specifically developed
for educational purposes and have programs beamed into the classroom by satel¬
lite. Schools can subscribe (sometimes free of charge, depending on the contract
signed by the local government and cable company) to various commercial-free
programs such as how to improve writing, a daily or weekly series on ancient
history or classical art, first-year Russian and other specialized languages, or

world news. Some cable companies offer more than a hundred channels, with a
small number devoted specifically to educational programs. Such services are
particularly useful for small, rural schools with limited resources, and in the case
of subject matter that is highly expensive to teach or otherwise difficult to access
in individual school districts.
The availability of video recording makes using films and TV programs as
instructional tools quite simple. Most schools have at least one video-TV for use
in their media library, as well as an array of cassette tapes. Local libraries loan
videocassettes and tapes of national programs can generally be ordered from the
producers. Written transcripts of broadcasts can also be purchased for study pur¬
poses. The teacher and students can record various events and play back the
recording in class through a VCR/TV system. Interviews, community meetings,
special events, and students’ projects can be recorded. Students can produce
videos based on their own stories or research. Some large school districts now
produce their own videos through recording departments and also distribute
them to surrounding school systems.
Television has the potential for adding to students’ knowledge. Students can
learn about current events and scientific advances, be exposed to dramatic and
musical performances, become better acquainted with leading figures in the
worlds of the arts, science, politics, and business. When used properly, this in¬
structional aid can stimulate discussion and further study of the topic. It can
bring the specialist and the expert teacher to class in front of hundreds of stu¬
dents at once, or thousands of students over time.
Guidelines for Using Television and Videos
1. Do select programs to coincide with the learners’ level of interest and matu¬
rity and with instructional objectives. Consider the educational significance,
quality, content, writing, and production.
2. Do make sure the classroom or media center is suitable for viewing the pro¬
gram. Check the lights and shades, acoustic arrangements, seating facilities,
and placement of the television.
3. Do give students any necessary background data and tell them what to ex¬
pect before viewing the program. You might want to hand out question
sheets that focus on major points. These are especially helpful when students
are assigned to watch a program at home.
4. Do avoid using television as a lecturing device or a substitute for instruction.
Integrate it into the lesson and discussion.
5. Do hold a discussion after the program to analyze the main points.
6. Do keep the program to no longer than two-thirds of the subject period so
there is time for review and discussion.
7. Do make sure that students have access to a television or VCR when assign¬
ing programs for homework. A buddy system may be required.
Computers
Computer technology for school purposes has been available since the 1950s,
but in the last decade computers have begun to have a major impact on class¬
rooms and schools. In 1980 some 50,000 microcomputers were used in 15 per¬
cent of the nation’s schools. In 1995 there were more than 2.5 million computers
in use in nearly 99 percent of the schools.21 And by 1998, as a result of the
Goals 2000: Educating America Act passed by Congress in March 1994, schools
across our nation were spending billions of federal dollars on computers, soft¬
ware, and related services as well as teacher training, in an attempt to integrate
technology with teaching and learning.
Current computer technology—and related video and telecommunication
technology—has greater potential for enhancing the instructional and learning
processes today than did the computer technology of the past several decades.
The Pencil Makes the Point
Harvey S. Long
Professor of Education
George Mason University
Since the late 1950s, computer literate educators With the total number of computers in the
have been enthusiastically promoting the use of elementary/secondary schools being about two mil¬
computer technology in education. Until recently, lion and the aggregate teacher population numbering
that advocacy has involved solutions to either nonex¬ about two and one-half million, perhaps it would
istent or noncompelling problems. However, the ad¬ have been more rational first to address teacher
vent of the microcomputer and the national focus on needs as these relate to teaching in the information
growing educational issues could foster the linking age.
of technology related solutions to compelling prob¬ Few would dispute that computers through net¬
lems. Among these challenges are growing illiteracy; works provide access to information, to computing,
the need for education reform and restructure; and and most certainly to people. But today, only one in
the challenge of teaching in the information age. five faculty actually uses computers in the teaching
Having made the connection between a possible process. The remainder, either because of personal
solution and a recognizable problem has, however, choice or the lack of access to computers, deny their
in turn generated still another difficulty— students the benefits derived from information
implementing a computer-based solution. There are searches, interactive computing, and the elimination
on the average approximately 30 students sharing of teacher isolation through computer conferencing.
each computer in the country’s elementary and sec¬ With pencils in the hands of virtually all students
ondary schools. If those computers were pencils, one and teachers, the author of this text has chosen not to
would hardly consider the “bi-functional” pencil a dedicate a segment to “pencil technology.” I hope
viable student writing instrument. The multifunc¬ that practical thinking and logical implementation of
tional computer with a student-to-computer ratio of computer technology will lead on similar terms to
30:1 could certainly be predicted to be equally inef¬ the demise of “pencil technology” as well.
fective in producing a national impact.
Unlike the old computers, the new technology can supplement complex interac¬
tions between learners and information bases. Indeed, even as you read this
book, you can visit a special web site to identify computer applications for your
classroom. (See Tips for Teachers 7.2.)
We are in the midst of an “information explosion,” stemming from the gen¬
eration and availability of an ever-increasing quantity of information through the
use of the computer. People can participate in this explosion at three or four lev¬
els of computer knowledge: (1) computer literacy, general knowledge of what
Welcome to the “Teaching with Technology”

Web Site: http://www.fastforward.com
A Sample of What You’ll Find Is Provided Below
School-Wide Applications T eleconferencing
Laptop Mania Virtual Learning

Moeller High School, a private Catholic Marianist Two-way interactive videoconferencing technology
school in Cincinnati, Ohio, has gone “laptop”! Every is opening doors to new learning opportunities for
teacher and student has a personal laptop computer. teachers and students. In “virtual” staff development,
All the computers are leased, and network portals are faculties can attend training sessions with teachers
available in every classroom, lounge, and library. from across the United States without leaving their
Students use their laptops for classwork and special own building. Startup costs are high, but the poten¬
projects and to communicate with faculty and fellow tial applications reduce travel and conference ex¬
students. Teachers use their computers to keep ad¬ penses, and make training available to all teachers
ministrative records, access curriculum materials and rather than a select few. Soon students and faculty
plan lessons, and communicate with students and fel¬ will be able to visit interesting places around the
low staff. Pretty cool, huh! world through “virtual learning environments”!
Using the World Wide Web Individualize Interventions
Web Whacker Glasses for Ears

Many schools are now using the Web Whacker pro¬ A comprehensive language training program, “Fast-
gram to give students access to web sites without ForWord,” uses computer-generated artificial
giving them full access to the Internet. speech, digitized human speech, and digital tones
and sounds to create exercises in auditory processing
GlobaLearn skills that assist children who have language¬
Students in classrooms across the country are using learning impairments. Use of the program requires
GlobaLearn to make comparisons between their own certification, which is offered through Scientific
lives and those of students in different countries. Learning Corporation. For more information, visit
Discoveries range from costs of clothing and basic their web site at http://www.fastforward.com.
toiletries to exploring South America on a three-
month expedition complete with student hosts at
stops along the way. To visit GlobaLearn, just stop
off at http://www.globalearn.org/.
computers are used for and some general experience in using them; (2) computer
competency, ability to use the computer as a tool for particular purposes; and
(3) computer expertise, knowledge of how computers work.22 A new, fourth
level is a computer hacker, who is more than an expert—he or she spends days
and even nights working on games or problems, transmitting messages across
the country or across oceans, devising ingenious games and software to sell,
and/or swapping new software among fellow hackers. At best, hackers are free¬
wheeling and creative entrepreneurs in a global technological revolution. At
their worst, they become obsessed with technology in ways that blind them to
the ethics of responsible computer use in society.
As educators, we should aim at making our students computer-literate at an
early age and view computer literacy as “a fourth R,” or a fundamental skill.
Several questions arise, however. How computer-competent are teachers?
Should every teacher be computer-competent? Should every teacher be at least
computer-literate? What percentage of teachers in each school should have the
skills to teach students how to use the computer? The International Society for
Technology in Education (ISTE) is responsible for developing guidelines related
to educational computing and technology teacher preparation programs to be ac-
There is an ever-
increasing amount of
information available
because of computer
technology.
credited by the National Council of Accreditation of Teacher Education

(NCATE). Two types of guidelines have been developed: one set for programs
designed to prepare educational computing and related technologies specialists,
and one set for all professional education programs. The guidelines for all pro¬
fessional educators cover three broad areas: basic computer/technology opera¬
tions and concepts, personal and professional uses of technology, and the appli¬
cation of technology in instruction (see Table 7.1).
Table 7.1 ISTE Recommended Foundations in Technology for All Teachers

Standards Introduction/ISTE Home Page
I. Foundations. The ISTE Foundation Standards reflect professional studies in education that provide fundamental concepts and
skills for applying information technology in educational settings. All candidates seeking initial certification or endorsements
in teacher preparation programs should have opportunities to meet the educational technology foundations standards.
A. Basic Computer/Technology Operations and Concepts. Candidates will use computer systems to run software; to
access, generate, and manipulate data; and to publish results. They will also evaluate performance of hardware and
software components of computer systems and apply basic troubleshooting strategies as needed. They will be able to:
1. Operate a multimedia computer system with related peripheral devices to successfully install and use a variety of
software packages.
2. Use terminology related to computers and technology appropriately in written and oral communications.
3. Describe and implement basic troubleshooting techniques for multimedia computer systems with related peripheral
devices.
4. Use imaging devices such as scanners, digital cameras, and/or video cameras with computer systems and software.
5. Demonstrate knowledge of uses of computers and technology in business, industry, and society.
B. Personal and Professional Use of Technology. Candidates will apply tools for enhancing their own professional growth
and productivity. They will use technology in communicating, collaborating, conducting research, and solving problems.
In addition, they will plan and participate in activities that encourage lifelong learning and will promote equitable, ethical,
and legal use of computer/technology resources. They will be able to:
1. Use productivity tools for word processing, database management, and spreadsheet applications.
2. Apply productivity tools for creating multimedia presentations.
3. Use computer-based technologies, including telecommunications, to access information and enhance personal and
professional productivity.
4. Use computers to support problem solving, data collection, information management, communications, presentations,
and decision making.
5. Demonstrate awareness of resources for adaptive assistive devices for students with special needs.
6. Demonstrate knowledge of equity, ethics, legal, and human issues concerning use of computers and technology.
7. Identify computer and related technology resources for facilitating lifelong learning and emerging roles of the learner
and educator.
8. Observe demonstrations or uses of broadcast instruction, audio/visual conferencing, and other distant learning
applications.
C. Application of Technology in Instruction. Candidates will apply computers and related technologies to support
instruction in their grade level and subject areas. They must plan and deliver instructional units that integrate a variety of
software applications and learning tools. Lessons developed must reflect effective grouping and assessment strategies for
diverse populations. They will be able to:
1. Explore, evaluate, and use computer/technology resources, including applications, tools, educational software, and
associated documentation.
2. Describe current instructional principles, research, and appropriate assessment practices as related to the use of
computers and technology resources in the curriculum.
3. Design, deliver, and assess student learning activities that integrate computers/technology for a variety of student
group strategies and for diverse student populations.
4. Design student learning activities that foster equitable, ethical, and legal use of technology by students.
5. Practice responsible, ethical, and legal use of technology, information, and software resources.
A teacher can become computer-literate in workshops that meet for a few

practice sessions. The time spent in training is fundamental to the teacher’s abil¬
ity to use the computer as an integral part of the teaching day, but a key factor is
the teacher’s attitude. If the teacher is hesitant about using the computer, many
children will pick up on this attitude. If the teacher is enthusiastic, children will
learn more eagerly and more easily.
Computers can be used in three fundamental learning phases: acquisition,
transformation, and evaluation.
Acquisition. Students can use computers to access information from three

main kinds of sources:
• Information utilities. Information such as news, weather, sports, and stock

market trends can be obtained through retrieval services.
• Databanks and web sites. Students can access current information and
opinions about reports, studies, and demographic trends using sources
available on the Internet.
• Computerized books. Entire books are stored in electronic form or on
computer discs. CD-ROMs—which combine graphics, pictures, and
print—can create dynamic, real-world representations missing from
conventional printed books.
Transformation. Learning can be tailor-made or individualized. Self-

contained units or modules have been developed and are available to students
to be used as instructional supplements or as self-contained programs. Inter¬
active computer materials are also available through computerized video
lessons that present the topic and guide the student through a series of exer¬
cises to test knowledge, understanding, and application of skills and concepts.
Both approaches allow students to move at their own pace through the
lessons.
Evaluation. Students can evaluate their learning meaningfully because the

computer gives them rapid and accurate feedback. The computer can be pro¬
grammed to respond to virtually any response the student makes. The computer
can tell the student not only whether an answer is correct or incorrect, but also
what information to review. With simulations, new kinds of responses can be
tried with immediate evaluation and feedback. In short, with computers, students
can evaluate their own learning by receiving essential information about their
responses.23
Computer Software
Computer software offerings have gradually improved in quality and variety,

and are available for all subjects and grade levels. No longer do they cover only
isolated topics or provide practice in just one or two skills. Current software pre¬
sents whole units and courses of instruction.
Probably the most frequent criticism of educational software in general is

the predominance of drill-and-tutorial programs. This can also be viewed as a
strength when specific skill acquisition is the goal of learning (see Chapter 5).
But software has also progressed to a highly interactive level. Whereas the early
software consisted of sequenced questions with specific answers, the new soft¬
ware permits a variety of student responses with branching to appropriate levels
of instruction based on the student’s response. If the student fails to master the
task or concept, the new drill-and-tutorial software breaks down the concept
using analogies, examples, and suggestions rather than merely presenting a se¬
quenced repetition of the subject matter.
In selecting software, teachers need to consider how well the program sus¬
tains student interest and, most important, how well students receive and process
information. More specifically, teachers need to focus on how well (1) the soft¬
ware appeals to both the eyes and the mind, and how well visual and textual data
are integrated; (2) the software helps students select and organize concepts, and
analyze and evaluate relationships; (3) the software promotes subjective, diver¬
gent, and creative thinking;24 (4) and to what extent the program content fits
with the teacher’s instructional objectives.
Of the many information systems available for the computer, teachers will
find the CD-ROM to have particular educational potential. Its capacity is enor¬
mous. For example, abbreviated encyclopedia documents can be put on one
CD-ROM and present the user with information by auditory, visual, and kines¬
thetic means.
Whereas most school learning relies on auditory stimuli (listening to the
teacher) and is based on linear sequencing, the CD-ROM permits students to se¬
lect from diverse topics and media, entering and exiting by a sequence of easy
commands. The CD-ROM brings learning to life through audio tracks such as
music, speeches, and voices of actual people; visual tracks such as printed text,
graphs, pictures, news clippings, and films; and physical motion. Rather than
merely reading a conventional text on music, with the CD-ROM the student can
see a 25-year-old film clip of a jazz band (say, Dizzy Gilespie) in action; then
listen to a number of the music scores (the user can select which ones); go on to
hear what other musicians or experts have to say about Gilespie (again, the user
makes the selection); and finally read related text or supplementary magazine ar¬
ticles. Students can experience almost any topic in more depth and with more
understanding than had they simply read about it. There is some concern that
these multimedia experiences entertain more than they educate—and don t re¬
quire the user to think other than superficially—but clearly they offer opportuni¬
ties for learners to participate in their own learning in ways that have not previ¬
ously been possible.
Computer Simulations and Virtual Reality

Not only do the graphics and sound presentations enhance the overall appeal of
contemporary educational software, but computer simulations and virtual real¬
ity technology also permit students to vicariously experience real-life situations.
Some Quandaries in Instructional Technology

Harold G. Shane
Emeritus Professor and Former Dean of Education
Indiana University-Bloomington
Since the transistor (1947) and the single unit mi¬ tioned. One of these is the composite use of elec¬
crochip (1959) made their debuts they have had an tronic gear by young people for pranks, vandalism,
enormous and rapidly increasing impact on educa¬ and fraud. This must be discouraged.
tion. On the whole, electronic gear has created a Second, there is great, and generally unrecog¬
milestone in the history of our schools—but the era nized, danger in the electromagnetic pulse (EMP)
of the “information society” could become some¬ phenomenon. The EMP, while harmless to humans,
thing of a millstone around our necks unless we use carries an energy surge which can cause electronic
instructional technology with a measure of wisdom. damage. We must not become too dependent on mi¬
Let us review a few of the major quandaries that croelectronic support systems when an EMP blast,
are besetting us as we approach a new millennium. caused by a nuclear explosion or fire could render
For one thing, young learners must be protected much of our equipment inoperative over most of the
from the habit of letting a computer per se rather continental United States. Patently our schools must
than their minds find answers! not be so dependent on computers and robots that an
Another problem resides in the way teachers use EMP blast would render them virtually impotent.
electronic tools in the learning milieu. We must also The points above are a very small sampling of the
avoid acquiring a “frozen curriculum” dictated by quandaries of which educators must be aware as we
the equipment used. A particular challenge resides in endeavor to move forward effective teaching strate¬
utilizing suitable learning tools for pupils’ varied gies in the years before the class of 2002 is
needs in diverse schools. graduated!
Space limitations preclude the review of many
other problems, but at least two more should be men¬
Students can conduct experiments, experience past events, current trends, or fu¬
ture possibilities—and encounter “what if’ dilemmas—all through simulations.
Through interactive participation by the learner, software can promote logical
thinking, hypothesizing, and problem-solving strategies.
The idea that computer simulations can be a method of teaching and learn¬
ing is rooted in Newell and Simon’s classic text on problem solving. Newell and
Simon theorize that if human cognition operates on internal representations and
if computers can manipulate arbitrary symbol structures, computer simulations
have the potential to foster learning of knowledge, concepts, inferences, insights,
and skills.25
Because computer simulations contain explicit and implicit statements and
tasks related to different capabilities, as well as information-processing activities
underlying performance, they are considered ideal starting points for observing
student problem-solving skills. The simulation can be made increasingly more
difficult to trace the performance of the learner. However, some researchers
contend that computer simulations may contribute little to understanding actual

human problem solving because the simulations are based on oversimplified as¬
sumptions to facilitate implementation; the programs are written to work for a
restricted set of examples; and performing the tasks does not necessarily coin¬
cide with the actual mental processes.26
Simulations can also deal with reaction-time tasks or real-life tasks to test
the learner in a specified activity or subject matter. The complexity and chal¬
lenge of the simulation can be changed to coincide with the skills of the learner.
Many choices can be built into the program, so that as learners advance they are
presented with different representative cases to address. An interesting modifica¬
tion permits different learners to jointly participate in the simulation at the same
time, dividing up the tasks or problems so that each has responsibility for a spe¬
cific problem range.
Even more interesting simulations can be accessed via the Internet so that
participants can react over distance and take advantage of special training with¬
out traveling great distances. Indeed, computer-based simulations, games, and
microworlds can be integrated into a system pulling together many different stu¬
dents from various parts of the local community, nation, or world. Students can
interchange data via E-mail and thus modify the simulations to fit local condi¬
tions and tackle local problems.27
Finally, simulations can assist in learner self-evaluation by providing feed¬
back on progress, recording and reviewing learning outcomes, and serving as a
database for students to learn from each other by providing an onscreen retrieval
of actions taken. By showing student attempts to solve a problem, the system
helps other learners avoid making the same mistakes. The same system can be
used to replay proper moves or behaviors for later review sessions. Through
such retrieval systems, students can reflect on their own learning and that of
others—not only learning a subject but acquiring improved learning strategies in
the process.
Virtual reality simulations are currently designed for entertainment pur¬
poses and are relatively expensive due to the special equipment required for
the applications. Virtual reality equipment can transport the mind of the
learner into another set of experiences, such that learners feel they are actu¬
ally in that experience and not “just pretending.” This technology could offer
a more authentic learning experience not possible in the confines of the tradi¬
tional classroom. Learning that connects with emotional and physical sensa¬
tions potentially adds to the memory experience of the content learned. How¬
ever, harmful emotions can also be evoked in virtual reality. The downside to
virtual experiences will probably not be fully known for some time, but
clearly any new technology holds both promise and threats, depending on
how it is used.
For this reason, the moral and ethical implications of virtual reality applica¬
tions must be weighed. Educators must put the well-being of students above all
other considerations and use technologies wisely. The potential benefits of vir¬
tual reality learning will be explored in the twenty-first century. What must
guide all applications, technological or others, is this question: Is this in the best
interests of this particular student and this particular class?
Guidelines for Using Computers
Although computers have not yet revolutionized the teaching-learning process,

they might do so in the future as more and more students and teachers learn to
use this technology as a tool. The guidelines listed below are for teachers as they
develop and implement computerized technology in classrooms and schools.
1. Do use the computer in the classroom when its use corresponds to curricular
goals.
2. Do preview software before it is purchased by the school or for the
classroom.
3. Do decide what applications you want for the computer. Do you want to use
the computer for practice and drill? problem solving? tutorial activities? sim¬
ulations? games?
4. Do establish criteria for use based on the objectives of your subject and the
abilities and needs of your students.
5. Do use software that is sound in terms of instructional and learning theory. It
should motivate students more than conventional methods because of its
cost. It should be designed to foster students’ critical thinking, problem¬
solving strategies, and creativity. It should be accurate, up-to-date, and
clearly organized.
6. Do integrate software and other traditional materials into a comprehensive
curriculum and instructional package.
7. Do encourage your students who have advanced knowledge of computing to
network with other students—transmitting information from one computer to
another. This can be arranged at the community, national, or international
level (“E-mail pals”).
8. Do monitor Internet use to ensure that students do not obtain access to inap¬
propriate materials.
Telecommunication Systems
Telecommunication systems are systems of information exchange between two
or more locations connected by electronic media, including interactive comput¬
ers, satellite and cable networks, television, and phone lines. Instruction is com¬
ing alive to new possibilities in all subject areas through telecommunication sys¬
tems that are bringing people together in imaginative ways over vast distances.
Coupled with some 2.5 million computers already in classrooms (a number that
some suggest is increasing at the rate of 100,000 computers per year) learning
will no longer revolve around seatwork or the chalkboard.28 In the twenty-first
century, the textbook will take different forms—talking to and interacting with
the student (as on fast forward web site), monitoring learner progress, and re¬
sponding accordingly.29 Acquiring new knowledge will not be the key in ad¬
vanced educational courses because no one will be able to keep pace with it. In-
Figure 7.1
Internet access in
public schools.
Based on the total number of instructional rooms in regular public schools.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System,
“Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 57, 1995; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications
in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; and “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997. As published (in part) in Internet Access in Public Schools (NCES 98-031,
Table 1, p. 1; and Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, Fall 1996
(NCES 97-944), Table 1, p. 3.
stead, being able to access data and being networked will be critical. Progress is
being made to ensure teacher and student access to Internet service. Figure 7.1
shows Internet availability in public schools and Figure 7.2 suggests how tech¬
nology availability and school socio-economic status are related.
Teleconferences and Computer Conferences

Teleconferencing and interactive television utilize similar technology. The dif¬
ference is the audience. The word conferencing suggests a specific meeting or
classroom with a specific purpose or lesson and an exchange of information tak¬
ing place. Participants come together at different locations to discuss and ex¬
change information.
Teleconferences are just appearing in a few school districts. Groups of stu¬
dents can meet with teachers or other resource people via computer monitors.
The participants can watch, listen, ask questions, and make decisions, as if they
were across the table from one another. It is a wonderful way for students to
speak to a master teacher or expert or to communicate with their peers almost
anywhere in the world. It is also an excellent way for small, rural schools to
have students meet with other teachers, especially if the schools lack specialized
personnel (for example, a physics teacher).
Networks allow the users to contact others, conduct research, and share re¬
sources within a school or district or the global community. Electronic network¬
ing might or might not include an audio component. Information is transmitted
from one computer to another in the form of text or graphic information, any
time of the day, for potentially much longer periods than class time, and without
the receiving person(s) having to be present. Teachers can send assignments to
Figure 7.2
Percentage of public schools and instructional rooms with Internet access, by
Percentage of public percentage of students eligible for free or reduced-price lunch: Fall 1997
schools and
instructional rooms Students eligible for free
with Internet access, or reduced-price lunch
by percentage of Percent E less than 11 percent
students eligible for □ 11-30 percent
free or reduced-price ■ 31-70 percent
lunch: Fall 1997. ■ 71 percent or more
Public schools Instructional rooms*
Based on the total number of instructional rooms in regular public schools.

Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Fast Response Survey System,
“Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 51, 1994; “Survey on Advanced
Telecommunications in U.S. Public Schools, K-12,” FRSS 57, 1995; “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications
in U.S. Public Schools, Fall 1996,” FRSS 61, 1996; and “Survey on Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public
Schools, Fall 1997,” FRSS 64, 1997. As published (in part) in Internet Access in Public Schools (NCES 98-031,
Table 1, p. 1; and Advanced Telecommunications in U.S. Public Elementary and Secondary Schools, Fall 1996
(NCES 97-944), Table 1, p. 3.
students, for example, and students can send term papers back to teachers. Net¬
working also provides a record of discussion; students can reread text, save it on
a disc of their own, or print it at any time.
Electronic Mail
When the computer is used only to send mail, the messages are stored in an elec¬
tronic “mailbox” until the person receiving the messages accesses the system at
her or his convenience. The messages can be displayed on a computer screen,
printed, or saved.30 Messages can be sent across continents and oceans. In this
way, a class in New York City can communicate with a class in Chicago or
Tokyo in a matter of seconds. Many schools and colleges now have their own
network for receiving and sending mail. Of course, teachers and students can
also communicate with fax machines, but this involves a telephone charge based
on time consumption and local or long-distance rates.
Exchanges of E-mail can be used to teach written communication skills
along with content learning in virtually any field—involving whole classrooms
or individuals engaged in electronic pen-pal relationships with other students,
professionals in disciplines related to a specific class activity, or people from
other cultures and backgrounds. Indeed, as we write this book the conflict in
Kosovo is in full force. One of the television networks reported that an Ameri¬
can high school student was monitoring the situation through an E-mail contact
with an ethnic Albanian. Pen-pal correspondence has been used for decades to
promote such contacts, but the advantage to E-mail is that there is no time lag as
there is with conventional mail and the access is often much more extensive than
is evidenced in conventional mail.
Courses On-Line
Colleges and universities are offering independent study courses over the Inter¬
net. Students register and participate on-line at their convenience with a maxi¬
mum time for completion. This is an excellent way for students to explore
course content unavailable in their own institution, and it is a hint of what might
occur in the future.
Many universities in the United States have joined together to form a virtual
university. New York University alone has invested over $50 million to offer
off-campus virtual courses. The entire curriculum at the University of Phoenix is
online. Many other more mainstream institutions throughout the states offer on¬
line courses on topics of special interest. Within a short time students in K-12
classrooms might be availing themselves of a wide menu of on-line classes. That
reality suggests real change for all of us who think of school as a place. Interest¬
ingly, early research suggests that on-line coursework and distance teaming are
not yielding the positive results that many hoped for when the technology
emerged. Still, on-line courses are likely part of your future and will probably
shape school practices.
A Final Word
What you accomplish in your classroom with the use of technology will depend
upon the applications you utilize and how well those applications support your
teaching goals.
There is some question about how “dramatically” computers have changed
teaching and learning. Many schools are caught in the middle ground with nei¬
ther the financial resources to “move into the information age” nor the large
number of disadvantaged students necessary to qualify for federal programs
funding technology.31 Typically these schools have two or three computers in a
classroom or one large computer lab that can accommodate 25 to 30 students.
These computers quickly go out of date, because the schools can’t afford to up¬
grade them.
In addition, research indicates that 30 to 60 percent of computer use is time
spent in technical mastery of computer software, typing/mouse skills, and using
the Internet.32 Computer skills are considered necessary employability skills, but
some question the use of precious teaching time to teach younger students tech¬
nical mastery over technology that is changing so rapidly.
The use of technology, especially computers and telecommunications, must
be based upon meeting the needs of students and the development of lifelong
learning abilities. Ultimately, each teacher will make these decisions for each
group of students, based upon the current circumstances and classroom goals.
For examples of successful technology applications, case studies, and up-to-

date technological developments visit our web site: www.fastforward.com (See
Tips for Teachers 7.2).

As educators, we must note that electronic media are increasingly supplement¬
ing, even replacing, traditional printed material in school and flooding our
homes. Understanding and applying these new processes and systems are essen¬
tial for students and teachers alike if they are to learn from and have control over
technology.
The potential for learning is immense. Technology can promote individualized
learning and react flexibly to student responses. Correct answers can be acknowl¬
edged promptly; incorrect responses can be handled by giving students a second
chance, easier questions or problems, or a review of the program, or by showing
them correct answers. A student’s response to a question can determine what will
be presented next. Technology gives teachers more knowledge and options to guide
the process of learning and students more control over their learning.
In order to use technology effectively in the classroom, it is worthwhile to
remember some general guidelines for operation. These guidelines are written
in the form of questions regarding the equipment and media discussed in this
chapter.
1. Are you familiar with the technological materials and equipment available
in your classroom or media center?
2. Have you found out what materials and equipment are available elsewhere
in the school and what checkout procedures apply to their use?
3. Do you know how to operate the equipment you plan to use? If the answer is
no, on whom will you depend for help? Is a student assistant capable of
aiding you?
4. Did you preview the materials or software and evaluate their availability or
worth for the lesson(s) you have in mind?
5. Have you ordered the materials in advance? Did you allow enough time for
delivery by the scheduled date?
6. Will you set up the equipment before class begins to save class time?
7. Do you have a standby set of plans in case the equipment breaks down, the
materials do not arrive on time, or something else goes wrong?
8. Are you going to prepare the students for what they are going to see, hear,
or do?
9. Are you prepared to guide the students on what to look for while viewing,
listening, or reacting to the assigned media?
10. Do you monitor student responses in interactive programs for purpose of
diagnosis and evaluation?
11. Did you allow time for a summary activity to highlight the main ideas of
what the students saw or heard?
12. Who will return the equipment to the proper storage place when you are
finished? Is there any defective equipment or materials that need to be
reported?
Summary
1. Basic guidelines related to using instructional technology include
(a) selecting equipment suitable to objectives, (b) learning how to operate the
equipment, and (c) previewing the materials.
2. Visual images increase effectiveness of presentation of materials. Visual
images can be incorporated into a presentation through the use of chalkboards
and display boards; films and slides; and overhead projectors.
3. Two types of television programming for use in schools are educational
television (informative programs produced by commercial and public
television stations) and instructional television (programs produced by
educators for specific teaching purposes).
4. Teachers and students can participate in these levels of computer use:
computer literacy, computer competency, and computer expertise. (Some of
your students might be hackers who engage intensively in computer
interaction outside of school.) All students should be at least computer-literate.
5. The quality and variety of computer software have improved in recent years.
The most challenging and interesting uses of computer-based instruction are
in the growing number of simulations and interactive systems.
6. Various telecommunication systems include teleconferences, electronic mail,
and telecourses.
7. Videosystems include videotapes, videocassettes, DVD, and video games.
The use of video games for educational purposes is controversial, but they
can liven up instruction.
1. Do you agree that the chalkboard is still a valuable instructional aid? Explain.
2. What are five suggestions for using overhead projectors?
3. Some educators feel computers will revolutionize education. Do you agree?
Explain.
4. What are three important factors to consider in choosing appropriate
videosystems?
5. How can teachers encourage students to change their television and video
habits from movies to documentaries, from entertainment to education?
Things to Do
1. Select one of the instructional aids discussed in this chapter. Do an oral report
on its advantages and disadvantages.
2. Project a filmstrip or slide on a screen or light-colored curtain. Determine the
minimum size of projected image that all students in the room can see.
3. Write on a transparency with a variety of appropriate pencils and in a variety
of sizes. Project the transparency to determine the best size, color, and type of
markers for good visibility.
4. Invite an expert on computers to discuss with the class how to use them in
instruction and how to teach literacy.
5. Check nearby colleges or local cable operators to find what telecourses are
available in your local community.
6. Send an E-mail message to one of your professors.
Cooper, James et al. (eds.). Technology and the New Professional Teacher: Preparing for
the 21st Century Classroom. Washington D.C.: National Council for Accreditation
of Teacher Education, 1997. A report that reviews technology challenges for teacher
education programs and the impact of technology on teaching.
Cuban, Larry. Teachers and Machines: The Classroom Use of Technology Since 1920.
New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1986. A compact book on
the history of education technology—and why for many years teachers have not
accepted machines in the classroom.
Heinich, Robert, Michael Molenda, and James D. Russell. Instructional Media and
Technologies for Learning, 6th ed. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998.
Discusses how to select, develop, and use instructional media.
Karger, Howard J., and JoAnne Levine. The Internet and Technology for Human
Services. New York: Longman, 1999. Takes students through the process of
preparing for, getting on, and using the Internet.
Morrison, Gary R., Deborah L. Lowther, and Lisa DeMeulle. Integrating Computer
Technology into the Classroom. Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1999. Specific Instructions
on how to integrate computers into your lessons.
Papert, Seymour. The Children’s Machine: Rethinking School in the Age of the
Computer. New York: Basic Books, 1994. In a follow-up book to Mindstorms, the
author discusses where the computer revolution went wrong—and where to go from
here.
Sandholtz, Judith Haymore, Cathy Ringstaff, and David C. Dwyer. Teaching with
Technology: Creating Student-Centered Classrooms. New York: Teacher’s College
Press, 1997.
Skinner, B. L. The Technology of Teaching. New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1968.
A classic text on the art of teaching and the science of learning involving various
technological tools of the first half of the twentieth century.
A Rubric to Gauge Staff Computer Literacy. This rubric will be useful to teachers and
administrators in assessing staff computer literacy. It is available through
www. bhsl. bham. wednet. edu/
The 10 Best Web Sites for Educational Technology
Name Web Sites
Armadillo’s K-12 Resources www. chico. rice, edu/armadillo/

Rice/Resources/reshome. html
Classroom Connect - ' www. classroom, net/
Institute for Learning Technologies www. ilt. Columbia, edu/gen/index, html
Mid-continent Regional Educational Laboratory www. mcrel. org/connect/tech/index. html
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory www.ncrel.org/
Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory www.nwrel.org/
Reinventing Schools: The Technology Is Now www. nap. edu/readingroom/books/techgap/
Technical Education Research Center ra. terc. edu/alliance/H ubHome. html
U.S. Department of Education www.ed.gov/
Web66 web66. coled. umn. edu/
Source: “The 10 Best Web Sites for Educational Technology," School Administrator (April 1998): 10
Key Terms
cable television 272 film 268
chalkboard 266 instructional television 272
computer simulations 279 overhead projector 267
computer software 278 telecommunication systems 282
display board 266 virtual reality technology 279
educational television 272
End Notes
1. James M. Cooper et al. (eds.) Technology and the New Professional Teacher:
Preparing for the 21st Century in the Classroom (Washington, D.C. National
Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education, 1997).
2. Curtis J. Bonk and Kira S. King. Electronic Collaborators (Mahwah NJ: Erlbaum,
1998) ; James Lockard et al., Microcomputers for the Twenty-First Century
Educators (New York: Longman, 1997).
3. Larry Cuban, “Computers Meet Classrooms,” Teachers College Record (Winter
1993): 185-210; Robert B. Kozma, “Learning with Media,” Review of Educational
Research (Summer 1991): 179-212; Theodore Lewis, “Introducing Technology into
School Curricula,” Journal of Curriculum Studies (March-April 1991): 141-154.
4. Simon Hooper and Lloyd P. Rieber, “Teaching Instruction and Technology,” ed.
A. C. Omstein and L. Behar-Horenstein (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon,
1999) , 252-264.
5. Christopher Belski-Sblendorio, “Push-Button Entertainment and the Health of the
Soul,” in Waldorf Education: A Family Guide, ed. Pamela Johnson Fenner and
Karen L. Rivers, (Amesbury, Mass.: Michaelmas Press, 1995.)
6. Helen L. Harrington, “The Essence of Technology and the Education of Teachers,”
Journal of Teacher Education (January-February 1993): 5-15.
7. Leonard H. Clark and Irving S. Starr, Secondary and Middle School Teaching
Methods, 7th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1996), 403.
8. David Buckingham, Television Literacy: Talk, Text, and Context (New York: Palmer
Press, 1992); Aimee Dorr, Television and Children (Newbury Park, CA: Sage, 1986).
9. Evelyn Kaye, The Family Guide to Children’s Television (New York: Pantheon,
1974), 7. Also see Stuart Oskamp, Television as a Social Issue (Newbury Park, CA:
Sage, 1987).
10. Neil Postman, Teaching as a Conserving Activity (New York: Delacorte, 1979).
11. Peter Plagens, Big World, Small Screen (Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association, 1992); “Violence in Our Culture,” Newsweek (14 April 1991): 41-52;
Mortimer B. Zuckerman, “The Victims of TV Violence,” U.S. News & World Report
(2 August 1993): 64.
12. Joan M. Bergstran, “Help Your Child Find Great Alternatives to Television,” PTA
Journal (April 1988): 15-17; Nancy L. Cecil, “Helping Children Become More
Critical TV Watchers,” PTA Journal (April 1988): 12-14.
13. Kathy A. Krendel, Kathryn Lasky, and Robert Dawson, “How Television Affects
Adolescents: Their Own Perceptions,” Educational Horizons (Spring 1989): 88-91.
14. David Buckingham, “Media Education: The Limits of Discourse,” Journal of
Curriculum Studies (July-August 1992): 297-313.
15. Peggy Charen, “What’s Missing in Children’s TV,” World Monitor (December
1990): 28-34; Charen, “Kidvid Doing Battle with G.I. Joe,” New York Times (26
January 1992): H29; Fred D’lgnazio, “Why Should You Teach With TV?”
Instructor (March 1993): 24-28.
16. Herbert J. Walberg, “Productive Teachers: Assessing the Knowledge Base,” Phi
Delta Kappan (January 1990): 470^178; Hersholt C. Waxman and Herbert J.
Walberg, “Teaching and Productivity,” Education and Urban Society (February
1986): 211-220.
17. Allan S. Vann, “Debunking Five Myths About Computers in Schools,” Principal
(January 1998): 53.
18. Laurence Steinberg, Beyond the Classroom (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1996):
179-180.
19. Lev Vygotsky, Thought and Language (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1962).
20. Lewis, “Introducing Technology into School Curricula;” Paula K. Montgomery,
“Integrating Library, Media Research, and Information Skills,” Phi Delta Kappan
(March 1992): 529-532.
21. The Condition of Education, 1998 (Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing
Office, 1993), Table 14, 36; Robert Heinich and James D. Russell, Instructional
Media and Technologies for Learning. 6th ed. (Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1999).
22. Denis Newman, “Organizational Impact of School Computers,” Educational
Researcher (April 1990): 8-13; Allan C. Ornstein, “Emerging Curriculum Trends: An
Agenda for the Future,” NASSP Bulletin (February 1989): 37^48; Ornstein,
“Curriculum Trends Revisited,” Peabody Journal of Education (Summer 1994): 4-20.
23. Peter Smith and Samuel Dunn, “Human Quality Considerations in High-Tech
Education,” Educational Technology (February 1987): 35-39; Ester R. Steinberg,
Computer-Assisted Instruction (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1990).
24. David Harte, “Purchasing Mindware,” Media and Methods (March-April 1989): 22;
Dennis Dewman, “Technology as Support for School Structure,” Phi Delta Kappan
(December 1992): 308-315.
25. Allen Newell and Herbert A. Simon, Human Problem Solving (Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1972).
26. Myron J. Atkins, “Evaluating Interactive Technologies for Learning,” Journal of

Curriculum Studies (July-August 1993): 333-342; Stephen T. Peverly, “Problems
with the Knowledge-Based Explanation of Memory and Development,” Review of
Educational Research (Spring 1991): 71-93.
27. James A. Levine et al., “Education on the Electronic Frontier,” Contemporary
Education Psychology (March 1991): 46-51; Gwen Solomon, “The Computer as
Electronic Doorway: Technology and the Promise of Empowerment,” Phi Delta
Kappan (December 1992): 327-329.
28. Raymond P. Farley, “Classrooms of the Future,” American School Board Journal
(March 1993): 32-34; Allan C. Ornstein, “Bringing Telecommunications and Videos
into the Classroom,” High School Journal (April-May 1990): 252-257.
29. C. W. Kaha, “Learning Environments for the Twenty-First Century,” Educational
Horizons (Fall 1990): 45^49; Robert Kozma, “Learning with Media,” Review of
30. Dennis Le Loup, “IDEANet—An Ideal Way to Communicate,” Contemporary
Education (Fall 1991): 58-60; Solomon, “The Computer as Electric Doorway.”
31. Allan S. Vann, “Debunking Five Myths About Computers in Schools,” 53.
32. David Skinner, “Computers: Good for Education?” Public Interest (Summer 1997):
98-109.
H A P T E R
Instructional Grouping
Pathwise Criteria Relevant to the Content of This Chapter

Making the physical environment as safe and conducive to learning as possible.
(B5)
INTASC Principles Relevant to the Content of This Chapter

(Principle #3)
Focusing Questions
1. When is it appropriate to use whole-group, small-group, and individual
instruction?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of large-group instruction?
293
3. On what basis may students be organized into small groups?

4. What procedures should teachers follow in organizing small groups for
instruction?
5. What methods can be used to provide individualized instruction?
6. What methods are recommended for using adaptive instruction? mastery
instruction?
The most common means of organizing students for instruction is to group 25 to

30 students according to age and grade level, and sometimes ability, and assign
them to a specific classroom and teacher. When most instruction occurs in this
setting, it is called a self-contained classroom. At the elementary school level a
teacher typically is assigned to the class for the whole day. Students might travel
as a class to another class one or two periods a day to receive special instruction
(for example, in remedial reading, music, or physical education), or other teach¬
ers might visit the class to provide special instruction.
At the secondary level the self-contained classroom is modified by what is
commonly called departmentalization. Students are assigned to a different
teacher for each subject and might have six or seven different teachers each day.
Departmentalization usually begins at the sixth, seventh, or eighth grade—
depending on the school district and on the state. There are exceptions, for ex¬
ample, Ohio has implemented new licensure standards for teachers that will
make departmentalization more prevalent in even the fourth and fifth grades.
There are three basic ways of grouping for instruction: (1) whole-group
instruction, sometimes called large-group instruction, in which the entire class is
taught as a group; (2) small-group instruction, in which the large group is broken
up into subgroups according to ability, interest, project, or other criterion; and
(3) individualized instruction, in which the individual student works alone or
with another person on a specific task or assignment. Different groupings re¬
quire different physical settings, so we will take a look at some designs for seat¬
ing arrangement, and then look at characteristics of instruction for each
grouping.
Classroom Seating Arrangements

Room arrangements are a reflection of a teacher’s teaching philosophy. They
also necessarily influence the types of interactions that occur in the classroom.
In a classic study on teaching, two researchers found that in most classrooms
what takes place requires the attention of all the students. Teachers tend to stay
in front of the classroom more than 85 percent of the time when teaching the
whole class, but they change their location an average of every 30 seconds. Ele¬
mentary teachers tend to move around through the aisles more than secondary
teachers.1
The researchers further found that student participation is restricted by the
environment or physical setting itself in ways that neither the teacher nor
students seem to be aware of. It appeared to them that students who sit in the
center of the room are the most active learners, or what they called “responders.”
The verbal interaction is so concentrated in this area of the classroom and in a
line directly up the center of the room, where the teacher is in front most of the
time, that they coined the term action zone to refer to this area (Figure 8.1).
Teachers who are student-centered, indirect, and warm or friendly, as op¬
posed to being subject-centered, direct, and businesslike, tend to reject the tradi¬
tional formal seating pattern of rows of students directly facing the teacher at the
front of the classroom. Formal seating patterns tend to reduce student-to-student
eye contact and student interaction and to increase teacher control and student
passivity. Student-centered teachers tend to favor informal seating patterns, such
as rectangular (seminar), circular, and horseshoe (U-shaped) patterns, in which
students face each other as well as the teacher (Figure 8.2).
What usually results when elementary and middle grade students face
each other is less time on task and more inappropriate behavior by students
who lack inner control.2 At higher grade levels, or when being on task requires
greater student discussion, the informal patterns are likely to be more effec¬
tive. However, at all levels there is greater potential for discipline problems
with nontraditional seating. Insecure teachers and those who are not good
managers should keep to more traditional seating patterns until they gain more
experience.
Figure 8.1
Classroom action
zone.
Figure 8.2
Teacher
Four seating patterns.
o
p p p p p
p p p p p
p p p p p
p p p p p
p p p p p
p p p p p
Traditional
Teacher
Circular
The teacher's desk is at the corner to avoid

neck strain among students in the front of
the classroom.
Special Classroom Designs
The rectangular, circular, and horseshoe arrangements in Figure 8.2 assume no

more than 20 to 25 students. Double rectangular, double circular, and double
horseshoe (W-shaped) arrangements are needed to accommodate more than 25
students (Figure 8.3).
Figure 8.3
Teacher Teacher Teacher
Three modified seating
iO] [Oi
patterns.
P p p
$ P Ip p
& & P p p
& ©> % % P p p
t
Jr1
£ # &
T>
3
$
\ P
PP
p
p
p p
PP
p
p
Double Rectangular Double Circular Double Horseshoe (W)
Having rows of students Space is provided for teacher If space permits seating may
separated by tables prevents to move around and into be arranged to form a double
students from sitting too close smaller circle. U instead of a W.
to each other and reduces
potential discipline problems.
An open classroom seating arrangement is appropriate for elementary, mid¬

dle grade, and junior high school students (Figure 8.4). The many shelves, ta¬
bles, and work areas allow for small-group and individualized instruction. The
formal rows of fixed desks of the traditional classroom are gone. The desks are
arranged in groups or clusters and can be moved. The open classroom increases
student interaction and gives students the opportunity to move around and en¬
gage in different learning activities in different settings.
Figure 8.5 shows three additional seating designs—all of which connote a
special activity. The designs on the left and right are well suited for whole-class
debates and forums. The design in the middle is conducive to cooperative learn¬
ing or “buzz sessions.” Whereas the seating patterns in Figures 8.2, 8.3, and 8.4
suggest a home-based or permanent arrangement, the ones in Figure 8.5 suggest
a temporary design.
Because of increased student interaction, discipline problems can arise with
these special seating arrangements, unless the teacher has good managerial
skills. However, all these designs allow the teacher flexibility in activities. They
function for small groups, create feelings of group cohesion and cooperation,
and also allow the teacher to present a demonstration, ask the class to brainstorm
a problem or debate an issue, or use audiovisual materials.
Factors to Consider in Classroom Designs

Classroom design will be determined by the size of the room, the number of stu¬
dents in the class, the size and shape of tables and chairs, the amount of movable
furniture, the location of fixed features such as doors, windows, closets, and
chalkboard, the audiovisual equipment to be used, the school’s practice, and the
teacher’s approach and experience. Several factors should be considered in ar¬
ranging the classroom.
Figure 8.4 Legend f°J = chairs
An open-classroom
Testing Testing
seating pattern.
& Independent Independent &
Tutoring Study Tape Recorder Study Tutoring
Table Table / Table \ Table Table
*o»- -feF
i: :&
6 4 4
Desks Desks Desks
i:
Audiovisual Storage
(slide projector,
overhead projector,
materials)
Bookshelves „ Slide
Projector
Table
/ Small \-
Door r Group |
L Table J
v /
Overhead
Bookshelves Projector
6
Desks
4 4 4
Desks Desks Desks Computer
Software
:& i:
:& i:
Small Group
Table Computers
Student Lab
Storage Equipment
Homework
Study Teacher
/ Tables Homework Materials
Study
Two j. Table Ph
,
Tables 4* Table
Bulletin Board
Figure 8.5
Special formation
arrangements. Some
seating arrangements
help students work in
groups to pursue a
particular interest or
topic.
Source: G. Ray Musgrave, Individualized Instruction. Copyright © 1975 Allyn & Bacon, Needham Heights, MA.
1. Fixed features. The teacher cannot change the “givens” of a room and
must take into account the location of doors, windows, closets, electric
outlets, and so forth. For example, seats should not be too close to doors
or closets. Electric equipment needs to be near an outlet, and wires
should not run across the center of the room. (If they must, they should
be taped to the floor.)
2. Traffic areas. High-traffic areas, such as supply areas, closets, and space
near the pencil sharpener and wastebasket, need to be open and easily
accessible. The teacher’s desk should be located in a low-traffic area.
3. Work areas. Work areas and study areas should be private and quiet,
preferably placed in the corner or rear of the room, away from traffic
lanes and noisy areas.
4. Furniture and equipment. The room, furniture, and equipment should be
kept clean and in repair so that they can be used. Desks and chairs may
be old, but they should be clean and smooth (make the appropriate
requisition to the janitorial department or supervisor), and graphics and
doodling should be discouraged immediately. The equipment should be
stored in a designated space.
5. Instructional materials. All materials and equipment should be easily
accessible so activities can begin and end promptly and clean up time
can be minimized. Props and equipment that are not stored in closets
should be kept in dead spaces away from traffic.
6. Visibility. The teacher should be able to see all students from any part of
the room to reduce managerial problems and enhance instructional
supervision. Students should be able to see the teacher, chalkboard,
projected images, and demonstrations without having to move their
desks and without straining their necks.
Many factors
determine classroom
design.
7. Flexibility. The classroom design should be flexible enough so that it can

be modified to meet the requirements of different activities and different
groupings for instruction.3
Most school furniture is no longer bolted to the floor, so teachers can make
changes in room design. Elementary teachers will need to be more flexible, be¬
cause they are teaching several subjects; moreover, they can be more flexible,
because they rarely share the room with other teachers. The room is theirs to set
up learning areas, interest areas, work and study areas for reading, mathematics,
science, and arts and crafts. At the secondary level, where teachers teach one
subject and other teachers share the room, the possibilities are reduced, but the
room can still be divided into areas for small groups, audiovisual activities, proj¬
ects, and independent study. Cooperation among the teachers who share the
room is needed.
Unfortunately, far too few high school teachers take advantage of the mov¬
able furniture and flexibility in seating designs. By and large, students still sit in
rows behind one another, facing the chalkboard and teacher, just as they did a
hundred years ago. One possible explanation is that most high school teachers
stress content and ignore socialization and personal relations as a classroom goal
compared to teachers in the lower grades. Another explanation is that teachers are
given too little time to really plan for and reflect on changing the way they teach.4
Only through experience and time will teachers learn whether a given
arrangement suits their teaching style and the needs of their students. It may take
several tries and continual revision to have a classroom design in which students
work efficiently, materials and equipment are used to their best advantage, un¬
necessary equipment is removed, and the teacher finds it easy to instruct and to
supervise the students.
Whole-Group Instruction
Whole-group instruction is the most traditional and common form of class¬
room organization. Teachers generally gear their teaching to the “mythical” av¬
erage student on the assumption that this level of presentation will meet the
needs of the greatest number of students. A common block of content (in any
subject) is taught on the assumption that large-group instruction is the most ef¬
fective and convenient format for teaching it.5
In the large group the teacher lectures, explains, and demonstrates on a
topic, asks and answers questions in front of the entire class, provides the same
practice and drill exercises to the entire class, works on the same problems, and
employs the same materials. Instruction is directed toward the whole group, but
the teacher might ask specific students to answer questions, monitor specific stu¬
dents as they carry out the assigned activities, and work with students on an in¬
dividual basis.
Whole groups can be an economical and efficient way of teaching. The
method is especially convenient for teaching the same skills or subject to the
entire class, making assignments, administering tests, setting group expecta¬
tions, and making announcements. Bringing members of a class together for
certain activities strengthens the feeling of belonging to a large group and can
help establish a sense of community and class spirit. The whole group learns to
cooperate by working with and sharing available resources, setting up rules and
regulations for the learning environment, and exchanging ideas. Finally, this
method of grouping students is most effective for directing and managing large
numbers of students, especially when the focus is on teaching distinct skills or
processes, which we discussed fully in Chapter 5 and is reviewed in Tips for
Teachers 8.1.
Based on observations of 360 classrooms, elementary teachers who orga¬
nize students in whole groups occasionally choose to work also in smaller
groups with those students who have special needs or problems. These teachers
tend to divide the class into whole-group class discussion (70 to 85 percent of
the time) and smaller-group seat work (15 to 30 percent). The total amount of
teacher talk during a 30-minute whole-group discussion ranges from 644 words
to 1,827 words; such teacher talk occupies from 77 to 91 percent of the half-
hour period.6
Almost all conversation by teachers in whole-group instruction starts or
ends with a question. Typically, the teacher repeats or rephrases a student’s re¬
sponse, moves directly to the next question, waits for a response, and then
repeats the cycle. In a typical whole-group pattern, most students’ remarks are
responses to the teacher’s questions. This pattern is repeated across subjects and
grades.7
Components of Direct Instruction
Most teachers rely on whole-group instruction, and 5. Provide a high level of active practice for all
evidence suggests that for teaching low-achieving students.
and at-risk students in this type of setting, a high- 6. Guide students during initial practice.
structured approach, is the most effective method.
7. Ask a large number of questions, check for
This approach, today, is often called “direct” instruc¬
student understanding, and obtain responses
tion or “explicit” instruction. (Note, however, this ap¬
from all students.
proach is not suitable for high-achieving or indepen¬
dent learners who prefer a low-structured and flexible 8. Provide systematic feedback and corrections.
situation so they can utilize their initiative.) The 9. Obtain a student success rate of 80 percent or
major aspects of direct instruction are listed below. higher during initial practice.
10. Provide explicit instruction for seatwork
1. Begin a lesson with a short statement of exercises, and, where possible, monitor and
goals. help students during seatwork.
2. Begin with a short review of previous, 11. Provide for spaced review and testing.
prerequisite learning.
Source: Barak Rosenshine, “Explicit Teaching and Teacher
3. Present new material in small steps, with Training,” Journal of Teacher Education (May-June 1987): 34.
Reprinted by permission of Sage Publications, Inc.
student practice after each step.
4. Give clear and detailed instructions and
explanations.
When working with whole groups, new information is usually presented to

the total group, while splitting off into smaller groups for review and practice or
enrichment activities. The data are unclear about how small groups should be
designed, managed, or the exact number of groups. However, too many small
groups can create off-task activities and management problems.
The critics of whole-group instruction contend that it fails to meet the needs
and interests of individual students. Teachers who use this method tend to look
upon students as a homogeneous group with common abilities, interests, styles
of learning, and motivation. Instruction is geared to a hypothetical average
student—a concept that fits only a few students in the class—and all students are
expected to learn and perform within narrow limits. Students are evaluated, in¬
structional methods and materials are selected, and learning is paced on the basis
of the group average.8 High-achieving students eventually become bored, and
low-achieving students eventually become frustrated. The uniqueness of each
student is often lost in the large group. Extroverted students tend to monopolize
the teacher’s time, and passive students usually are not heard from or do not re¬
ceive necessary attention. Finally, students sometimes act out their behavioral
problems in teacher-centered whole-group instructional formats.
Different group patterns are essential for variety, motivation, and flexibility
in teaching and learning. They are also essential for meeting the needs of diverse
learners that are now a part of American classrooms. Eugene Garcia describes
teachers who are effective with language minority students with a clear eye to¬
ward the importance of varied classroom structures:
These [successful] teachers [of language minority students] organized a good por¬
tion of class time around a series of learning activities that children pursue either in¬
dependently or with others. During science and math, children work in small groups
doing a variety of hands-on activities designed to support their understanding of a
particular concept... or subject.9
Permanent Groups. A recent suggestion for organizing students is to divide

them into long-lasting groups or teams for several years to promote continuity
and stability, which are all too rare in the lives of many American children and
youth.10 Although grouping measures such as small class sizes, remedial classes,
cooperative learning, and team teaching are innovative, their nature is transitory.
The notion of a permanent group—that is, a long-lasting group—suggests that
students will learn to help and encourage one another and adopt a cohesive spirit
in school, as in the case of groups organized in military settings, college fraterni¬
ties, or among peer groups.
The idea has roots in other countries. For example, in Japan, elementary
teachers stay with their classes for two years or more, and the classes remain to¬
gether for the entire period. In Japanese high schools, teachers in each subject
area stay with a class for the entire four years in school. The same science
teacher teaches biology, chemistry, etc.11 In parts of Germany, high school stu¬
dents move through school in grade-level groups and stay with their class in all
subjects.12 Also, some American high school students stay with the same home¬
room throughout high school; the homeroom is the locus of many important so¬
cial and educational functions, including counseling, peer tutoring, intramural
sports, and community service activities.
When dividing students into these types of groups, size is not as important
as continuity. Diversity by gender and ethnicity should be a consideration, too.
Achievement and Class Size

Does class size affect whole-group learning? Some state legislatures think that it
does. California recently embraced smaller class size as a way of dealing with
the learning needs of young children. Will it make a difference? When it comes
to improving student performance, common sense would expect a clear relation¬
ship to exist. Surprisingly, class size does not automatically lead to better stu¬
dent performance. In one review, by Eric Hanushek, of 152 studies that analyzed
smaller classes and student achievement, 82 percent found no significant impact,
9.2 percent saw positive results, and 8.6 percent found negative results. And, in
a more recent analysis of the class size research, the same researcher found:
1. We have extensive experience with class size reduction and it has NOT
worked.
2. International experience suggests NO relationship between pupil-teacher
ratios and student performance.
3. Extensive econometric investigations show NO relationship between

class size and student performance.
4. Project STAR in Tennessee does NOT support overall reductions in class
size except perhaps in kindergarten.
5. The quality of the teacher is much more important than class size.13
In still another review of 8 studies of low-achieving students, Robert Slavin

found that differences in achievement levels of students in larger classes (22 to
37 students) compared to small classes (15 to 20 students) were insignificant.
Across the 8 studies the effect was only +.13—a low figure, given that the aver¬
age class size in the large groups was 27 students, compared to 16 in the small
groups (a 40 percent difference).14 In another review, Madden and Slavin found
that only when class size is reduced to a one-to-one teacher/student ratio, as in
tutoring, does size make a difference.15
Although Glass and his colleagues received considerable attention when
they concluded that class size below 15 students had a positive effect on student
achievement, the actual impact was only significant in 10 out of 77 studies.
Learning benefits did not really appear until class size was reduced to 3 students.
The effects of class size and achievement were more positive in elementary
grades than in middle grades and high school.16
In the largest single study ever performed, Tennessee kindergarten students
were randomly assigned to classes of 15 and 25 with an aide, and 25 without an
aide; these configurations were retained through grade 3. The study attributed al¬
most zero impact to the presence of aides and only moderate positive effects to
the smaller classes by the time students reached third grade; by the time the stu¬
dents were entering fourth grade, the difference was positive but insignificant.17
Similarly, other statewide studies in Indiana and South Carolina at the primary
level showed modest achievement effects when class sizes were reduced.18 (It
might be because of these effects that states like California are hoping to create
real change by limiting the size of the primary classes.)
At the secondary level, however, the impact of class size seems indistin¬
guishable.19 One possible reason is that size might have different effects with
different tracks (honors, academic, vocational, etc.); different subjects (English,
social studies, etc.); students (prior ability, motivation, study habits, high achiev¬
ing versus low achieving); and/or how content is presented (consistent review
and practice, problem solving, questioning or discussion—variables that can
blur research results.
If reduced class size seems at best to have only modest effects overall on
school achievement, and because reduction in class size is expensive (the cost in
California is by some estimates close to 1 billion dollars), that cost should be
weighed against the cost of other innovations to determine the best policy or
piograms for fostering academic achievement. For example, research suggests
that increasing school attendance among students, increasing academic time in
reading (or the school day), improving the quality of instruction (hiring better
teachers for low-achieving students), and providing more review or practice to
learn the material on tests have more positive effects than just reducing class
size.20 Educators also need to consider the effect of class size on other criterion
measures. For example, what influence does smaller class size have on student
and teacher attitudes toward learning?
Dividing the whole group (say 25 students) into smaller groups (of 4 or 5),
with the teacher spending more time with the groups who need assistance, is
perhaps more beneficial than small whole-group instruction (say, 15 students),
so long as the teacher knows how to take advantage of the extra time for the
low-achieving groups without shortchanging the other groups. Such different
grouping patterns within whole groups also are essential for variety, motivation,
and flexibility in teaching and learning. In essence, the key is not just having
smaller classes, it is in knowing how and when to group students to accomplish
learning goals.
Classroom Tasks
Instructional tasks are at the core of decisions impacting the classroom setting.
Most teachers maintain control over instructional tasks by choosing what is to be
taught, what materials and methods are to be used, and how much students are to
be allowed to interact. There are teachers, however, who do permit student input
in planning content and activities. Secondary school classrooms tend to be more
controlled settings than elementary school classrooms.21 The key variable, of
course, is the teacher and not the grade level. When the teacher has complete
control over instruction, it is likely that most students, if not all, will be engaged
in a single classroom task and work toward the same goal with the same content.
When students have input, it is likely that they will work on different classroom
tasks.22
Teacher control over tasks affects the social setting and nature of evalua¬
tion. Under single-task conditions with high teacher control, students usually
work alone, and evaluation of academic abilities and achievement is based on
comparison to others in the class or to standardized achievement levels. Under
multiple-task conditions with low teacher control, there is more social interac¬
tion and cooperative learning. Evaluation is conducted more on the basis of indi¬
vidual progress than by comparison to others.23
Classroom tasks involve one of three basic elements: (1) facts (e.g., What
is the capital of Chile?), (2) skills (e.g., reading, writing, spelling), or (3) high-
order processes (e.g., analysis, problem solving, concepts).24 Most classroom
tasks initiated by teachers are what we might call low level, involving facts or
skills. Only a small portion are high-order tasks. The reason is that in a whole-
group classroom setting, the range of ability is usually wide, and frequently it is
easier to keep things simple so students can perform the tasks without frustra¬
tion. By focusing on low-level tasks, facts or skills, and right answers, short¬
term goals are emphasized often at the expense of critical thinking and integrat¬
ing prior and past knowledge for long-term benefits.
Most classroom tasks are initiated and structured by the teacher, and con¬
centrate on the acquisition and comprehension of knowledge. Students usually
act in response to those teacher’s expectations. Basically, classroom tasks that
are initiated by the teacher fall into four categories: (1) introductory (or incre¬
mental) tasks, which focus on new skills or ideas and require recognition; (2) re¬
structuring tasks, which involve the discovery of an idea or pattern and require
some reorganization of data; (3) enrichment tasks, which involve application of
familiar skills and ideas to new problems; and (4) practice tasks, which are
aimed at making new skills and ideas automatic so they can be used in other task
situations and cognitive processes.
To facilitate learning, the teacher must learn to match appropriate tasks with
the students’ abilities and background knowledge. Matching becomes more dif¬
ficult as students get older and have the potential to learn more. It is also more
difficult in heterogeneously grouped classrooms because of the range in stu¬
dents’ abilities and interests. The teacher must consider which tasks contribute
most to students’ learning, and when it is appropriate to introduce these tasks so
students gain new insights and skills.
Success in matching can be judged by student performance. The more errors
students make in working on the tasks, the greater the mismatch. Fewer errors
mean that students are capable of working on the tasks, but not necessarily that a
good match has been made, because the tasks could be too easy to contribute to
learning.
In observing 17 second- and third-grade classes in math and language activ¬
ities, researchers found that approximately 40 percent of all instructional tasks
were matched, 28 percent were too difficult, and 26 percent were too easy (re¬
maining tasks were not characterized). Children with different abilities had dif¬
ferent experiences. High achievers were underestimated on 41 percent of the
tasks assigned to them, and low achievers were overestimated on 44 percent of
the tasks.25
This pattern of over- and underestimation of tasks was found in another
study of 21 third- to sixth-grade classes in math, language arts, and social stud¬
ies. In this study, 500 academic tasks were analyzed, and the extent of mis¬
matching was greater for both high- and low-achieving students.26
In both studies, teachers were more concerned with overestimating than un¬
derestimating tasks. In fact, no teacher saw any task as too easy. Actually, both
types of mismatching lead to failure to meet the needs of the students. When
tasks are underestimated, too many students are not learning up to potential, and
they also can become bored. When tasks are overestimated, too many students
fail to learn because they don’t understand what they are being asked to do and
they are likely to become discouraged. Furthermore, the research cited dealt
with grades 2 to 6. If the assumption that matching becomes more difficult in the
upper grades is correct, then mismatching can help explain why so many stu¬
dents drop out of school at adolescence.
Actually, understanding classroom tasks is not an all-or-nothing experience.
Students seldom experience flashes of insight. Rather, they gain gradual under¬
standing with further practice or explanation, as well as variability in tasks. High
achievers more often than low achievers have a larger knowledge base (i.e.,
more prior learning that helps them acquire the new information faster) in the
subject so they quickly integrate relevant information pertaining to the tasks;
moreover, they have more confidence in their ability to learn so they remain on
task and work on various tasks for longer periods without giving up. In fact,
some are even challenged by difficult tasks. Not so for low achievers. Low
achievers are often frustrated by difficult tasks and easily give up. That is why
varied instructional approaches are needed. Teachers who group students in one
way (e.g., teacher-centered classrooms) overadvantage one group of students
(typically the high achievers, who need no advantage) and overdisadvantage an¬
other group, the low achievers. Cooperative learning approaches, coupled with
teacher-centered instruction, potentially maximize the learning for all students,
especially if:
1. students know why they are being asked to work together,

2. students are shown how to interact with one another, and
3. student groups systematically analyze and reflect on their own
effectiveness.27
A good deal of concept learning (i.e., high-order tasks) involves multidi¬

mensional understanding, not discrete or specific representations.28 A single
task, repeated several times, might not represent effectively all features of a con¬
cept but rather might capture only particular features. Thus, low-level tasks ac¬
companied by concrete materials, often designed for low achievers, can have
their limitations because this instructional approach fails to capture all the repre¬
sentations needed for full understanding. Thus the cycle of low achievement can
be repeated by the way classroom tasks (involving facts and skills) are intro¬
duced by teachers. Think of this dilemma when you introduce tasks in your own
classroom.
Altering Instructional Variables

Researchers are focusing on elements of the classroom that teachers and schools
can change, or what some call alterable environments for purposes of measuring
the effect they have on student achievement. According to Robert Slavin, there
are four components of instruction: (1) quality of instruction, (2) appropriate
level of instruction, (3) incentives to work on instructional tasks, and (4) time
needed to learn tasks. He concludes that all four components must be adequate
for instruction to be effective. For example, if the quality of instruction is low, it
matters little how much students are motivated or how much time they have to
learn. Each of the components “is like a link in a chain, and the chain is only as
strong as its weakest link.”29
Benjamin Bloom lists nineteen teaching and instructional variables based on
a summary of several hundred studies conducted during the past half century.
His research synthesizes the magnitude of effect these variables have on student
achievement. The five most effective ones in rank order are (1) tutorial instruc¬
tion (1:1 ratio), (2) instructional reinforcement, (3) feedback and correction,
(4) cues and explanations, and (5) student class participation. The next most ef¬
fective variables for student achievement are (6) improved reading and study
skills, (7) cooperative learning, (8) graded homework, (9) classroom morale, and
(10) initial cognitive prerequisites.30
Bloom concludes that quality and quantity of instruction (teacher perfor¬
mance and time devoted to instruction) are the most important factors related to
teaching and learning. Moreover, most of the instructional variables that are ef¬
fective tend to be emphasized in individualized and small-group instruction.
Bloom assumes that two or three variables “used together contribute more to
learning than any one of them alone, especially those in the first five rankings.”31
According to Herb Walberg’s review of hundreds of studies, nine general
factors influence student achievement: (1) ability, (2) stage of development,
(3) motivation, (4) instructional quality, (5) instructional quantity, (6) home en¬
vironment, (7) classroom social group, (8) peer group, and (9) use of out-of-
school time 32 (see Table 8.1). Walberg (with Waxman) lists 23 variables under
instructional quality. The variables are similar to Bloom’s. For Walberg, teacher
reinforcement (reward for correct performance) has the largest overall effect on
student achievement, slightly more than one standard deviation; that same vari¬
able ranked second with Bloom. Reading training (programs designed to help
students improve reading) was ranked third by Walberg and sixth by Bloom.
The variable labeled “cues, participation, and feedback” was ranked fourth by
Walberg; it was split in two and ranked third and fourth by Bloom. Graded
homework and cooperative learning ranked fifth and sixth for Walberg and
eighth and seventh for Bloom. The only major differences within the top rank¬
ings are tutorial instruction, which ranked first with Bloom and tenth with Wal¬
berg; and instructional acceleration, which Bloom did not rank and which was
second with Walberg.
In a related study, after assessing 228 variables associated with learning,
Wang and Walberg conclude that the quality of instruction accounts for 16.5
percent of the variance related to student learning; that the classroom environ¬
ment can explain 14 percent; school policies another 12 percent; and instruc¬
tional time another 8 percent. All these factors are alterable, of course, but the
bottom line is that teachers and schools can account for up to .40 of the variance
in student learning. A teacher can make a difference, and several good teachers
can make a tremendous difference. The remaining variance of learning (.60)
deals with hard-to-change factors such as parent and peer influence, present cog¬
nitive abilities and motivation, and student and community demographics.33
Finally, in some of the most dramatic research yet conducted on teacher
quality, William Sanders at the University of Tennessee found that when teach¬
ers are ranked based on student learning gains, “the top 20 percent of teachers
boost the scores of low achieving pupils by 53 percentile points on average
while the bottom 20 percent of teachers produce gains of only 14 percentile
points. And the effects of having outstanding teachers are long-lived.34 Sanders’
research confirms what others like Herbert Walberg concluded, substantial
amounts of student learning are attributable to the teacher.
The general conclusion is that the classroom environment—that is, both
quality and quantity of instruction—can be modified for the students’ benefit.
The instructional variables discussed by Bloom, Walberg, and Waxman provide
Table 8.1 Instructional Factors Related to Learning
Factor Mean Correlation or Effect
Ability (IQ) Large

Development (Piagetian stage) Large
Motivation
Motivation Medium/large
Self-concept Medium
Instructional quality
Reinforcement Large
Acceleration Large
Reading training Large
Cues, participation, and feedback Large
Graded homework Large
Cooperative learning Large
Reading experiments Large
Personalized instruction Large
Adaptive instruction Large
Tutoring Large
Higher-order questions Medium/large
Diagnostic prescriptive methods Medium/large
Individualized instruction Medium/large
Teacher expectations Medium/large
Computer-assisted instruction Medium/large
Sequenced lessons Medium/large
Advanced organizers Medium/large
Direct instruction Medium/large
Homogeneous groups Small
Class size Small
Praise Small
Programmed instruction Small negative
Mainstreaming Small negative
Quantity of instruction
Instructional time Large
Assigned homework Medium
Home environment
Home interventions Large
Home environment Large
Socioeconomic status Medium
Classroom social group (class morale) Large
Peer group Medium
Use of out-of-school time Small negative
(leisure-time television)
Large: (.35 and above) Strong relationship to student learning

Medium: (.15-34) Modest relationship to student learning
Small: (.02-. 14) Little relationship to student learning
Small negative: Adverse affect on student learning
Source: Hersholt C. Waxman and Herbert J. Walberg, “Teaching and Productivity,” Education and Urban Society
(February 1986): 214,
excellent guidelines for improving instruction and the research by Sanders sug¬
gests that teachers who evidence quality do profoundly impact student learning.
Selected instructional variables seem to be effective across school districts, eth¬
nicity, gender, grade level, classroom size, and subject area. They deal mainly
with improving the process (what the teacher does), not increasing inputs or
school spending. Most important, they call attention to classroom variables that
can be altered, rather than to such practices as IQ testing or to various cognitive
deficits of students that reflect negativism and hopelessness. The hopeful sign
for a teacher is clear: A teacher really can make a difference.
Guidelines for Teaching Whole Groups
When teaching whole groups or regular classes of 20 or more students, it is im¬

portant to start well and on time. The teacher needs to set the tone for good
classroom management and make good use of allocated time. Here are some
practical suggestions to get the instructional ball rolling on the right path.
1. Be in the room before the class arrives.

2. Have your materials ready. Attendance book, lesson plans, instructional ma¬
terials, and other instructional materials (charts, pictures, maps) that you
might need should be readily available.
3. Be near the door, if possible, to greet students and to monitor student entry
into the room.
4. Close the door when the late bell rings. Don’t wait for stragglers.
5. Obtain the full attention of the students. Start the students on a review exer¬
cise, warm-up drill, or set of problems. Explain instructions clearly and be
sure they begin the assignment.
6. Attend to special student needs. While the students are completing the as¬
signment, attend to special student requests or problems. Attend to one stu¬
dent at a time; otherwise, you may lose control.
7. Circulate among students. This bolsters classroom management (see Chapter
9) and ensures students are prepared with books, pens, assignments, and the
like.
8. Check notebooks, homework, or other written work. If time permits, check
to see that students have their notebooks, homework, or texts with them.
9. Review assignments. Take extra time to discuss or reteach specific aspects
of the assignment.
10. Attend to academic tasks. Teach! This includes discussions, questions, ex¬
planations, demonstrations, projects, reports, and practice sessions.
11. Summarize the lesson. Learn to pace your lesson. Remind students class-
work continues until you give the word that the class has ended.
12. Dismiss the class. Some schools provide a warning bell. Don’t permit stu¬
dents to dismiss themselves, but don’t keep them too long after the end-of-
the-period bell (since they must report to another class on time).
Small-Group Instruction
Dividing students into small groups seems to provide an opportunity for students
to become more actively engaged in learning and for teachers to monitor student
progress better. Between five and eight students seems to be an optimal number
to ensure successful small-group activity. When there are fewer than five, espe¬
cially in a group discussion, students tend to pair off rather than interact as a
group.35
Small groupings can enhance student cooperation and social skills. Appro¬
priate group experiences foster the development of democratic values, cultural
pluralism, and appreciation for differences among people. Small-group instruc¬
tion can provide interesting challenges, permit students to progress at their own
pace, provide a psychologically safe situation in which to master the material,
and encourage students to contribute to class activities.
Dividing the class into small groups helps the teacher monitor work and as¬
sess progress through questioning, discussions, and checking workbook exer¬
cises and quizzes geared for the particular group. Small groups also give the
teacher a chance to introduce new skills at a level suited to a particular group.
Small-group
instruction plays an
important role in the
teaching-learning
process.
Because the number of students assigned to each group is often determined by

their progress, the group size will vary. Students may move from group to group
if their progress exceeds or falls below that of their assigned group. In effect, the
teacher is using grouping to restructure a heterogeneously grouped class into
several homogeneous subgroups.
Small groups are typically used in elementary school reading and mathe¬
matics. The teacher divides the class into two or three groups, depending on the
number of students, their range of ability, and the number of groups the teacher
is able to handle. The teacher usually works with one group at a time, while the
other students do seatwork or independent work.
The use of small groups can be extended beyond the typical grouping in ele¬
mentary reading and mathematics to all grade levels and subjects. There are sev¬
eral other reasons to form small groups; including (1) membership based on spe¬
cial interests or skills in a particular topic or activity; (2) ability grouping or
regrouping within a class for specific subjects (reading or mathematics) or spe¬
cific content (different assignments or exercises), thus reducing the problems of
heterogeneity in the classroom; and (3) integration, forming groups to enhance
racial, ethnic, religious or gender relations.
David Berliner contends that teachers who engage in small-group instruc¬
tion seem to attend to five strategies of teaching: (1) compensation, favoring the
shy, quiet, or low-achieving student; (2) strategic leniency, ignoring some inap¬
propriate behaviors of students; (3) proper sharing, enlisting some students to
aid in sharing homework or tutoring responsibility; (4) progressive sharing,
compensating for the problems of low-ability students; and (5) suppressing emo¬
tions, limiting students’ emotions or feelings because teachers feel they are inap¬
propriate or might lead to management problems. Thus, the apparently simple
task of organizing small groups involves numerous complex decisions and
strategies.36
Regardless of the basis of the grouping, assignments should be specific
enough and within the range of the students’ abilities and interests so the group
can work on its own without teacher support. This permits the teacher to single
out one group for attention or to help individuals by explaining, questioning,
redirecting, and encouraging.
Ability Grouping
The most common means of dealing with heterogeneity is to assign students to

classes and programs according to ability. In high schools, students of similar
ability might be tracked into college preparatory, vocational or technical, and gen¬
eral programs. In many middle and junior high schools, students are sometimes as¬
signed to a class by ability and stay (are tracked) with that class as it moves from
teacher to teacher. In a few cases, and more often in elementary schools, students
are assigned to a class on the basis of a special characteristic, such as being gifted,
having a disability, or being bilingual. Elementary schools may use several types
of ability grouping. In addition to the types used in the secondary schools, they
might assign students to a heterogeneous class and then regroup them homoge¬
neously by ability in selected areas, such as reading and mathematics.
Despite widespread criticism of between-class ability grouping (separate
classes for students of different abilities), teachers support the idea because of
the ease in teaching a homogeneous group and because that is the way most
schools have been structured;37 Parents of high-achieving students perceive
tracking to be in their children’s best interests. Reality is also a consideration.
By the time students are in middle school, the achievement and motivation gaps
between the top third and lowest third of achievers have grown extremely wide,
and teachers cannot accommodate this range of student abilities. Hence, the
norms of the school culture resist detracking.38
Tracking is an issue of considerable emotional debate. Some conservatives
argue for its use. Throughout the 1990s, reformers such as Jeannie Oakes have
vigorously advocated detracking schools. (See Tips for Teachers 8.2). Their ar¬
guments are compelling and political. Here is an example from Jeannie Oakes
and Martin Lipton;
Ability grouping or tracking is the routine sorting of all students into homogeneous
groups and classes of “high,” “average,” and “low” students (or any of the creative
euphemisms in vogue, such as “advanced,” “accelerated,” “opportunity,” “basic,”
“SHARP,” “VISTA,” etc.). Such sorting typically begins early in elementary
school—sometimes even in kindergarten—and it continues throughout the grades.
Many elementary schools provide separate classes so that students spend the entire
day with others judged to be at the same “ability level.” Other schools group stu¬
dents by ability for part of the day for specific subjects such as reading and math.
This “regrouping” might include students from more than one class or grade, or
more likely, it may consist of small ability groups (such as reading or math groups)
within a classroom. Sometimes ability groups follow a staggered schedule. A
kindergarten class may be divided into early- and late-birds (separating the more and
less precocious readers) so that each group has time each day to be alone with the
teacher.
Nearly all middle and senior high schools ability group some or all academic
subjects (typically English, mathematics, science, and social studies) based on stu¬
dents’ past grades, test scores, and teacher recommendations. Schools sometimes as¬
sign students to blocks of classes all at the same ability level. This typically happens
when schools assign a label to the student himself and a high-ability or low-ability
student would then go into all classes that match his designation. In recent years,
most schools deny this type of assignment exists, and most policies call for assign¬
ing students one subject at a time. However, national survey data indicate that 60 to
70 percent of tenth graders who were in honors math also enrolled in honors Eng¬
lish. A similar degree of overlap exists between remedial math and remedial or low-
level English. Because some courses, math, for example, follow a sequence, stu¬
dents’ assignments in earlier grades determine how far they can progress by the time
they graduate. Typically, students who will be in the top math classes all through
high school are identified by the sixth grade or before. Students not placed in the up¬
permost ability class by the sixth grade stand only the slimmest chance of complet¬
ing calculus in high school.39
Detracking Classrooms
Teachers and schools can provide alternatives to participate in special tutoring or coaching
tracking without ignoring the needs of high- sessions (before or after school) before being
achieving and exceptional students. Here are some assigned one track lower.
recommendations to consider.
6. Use inclusive teaching methods. Various
1. Postpone tracking. Defer tracking as late as group activities and cooperative learning
possible and only in selected subjects at the techniques that involve all students (i.e.,
middle school level. Elementary grades high-ability students assist low-ability
should be organized around within-class students) are effective for improving student
ability groups in reading and mathematics. participation and achievement in
heterogeneous classes.
2. Limit tracking. At the high schools, ability
grouping should be limited to a few academic 7. Use instructional alternatives. Other useful
subjects where student differences in skill methods such as mastery learning, continuous
areas are critical for whole-group instruction, progress, independent study, and ungraded
or where prerequisite requirements influence plans—all which permit students to complete
each step of learning. subject units at different rates—can be used
with heterogeneous classes.
3. Modify placement procedures. The use of a
single criterion—such as the students’ rank, 8. Reduce competitive grading. Much of
report card average, or score on a standardized schooling pits students against students in a
test—to determine track placement is competitive, norm-based testing situation,
misleading and should be replaced by recent whereby ranking and test grades are
grades and tests in each subject area. determined by how one scores in relation to
peers. Rather, include criterion-reference tests
4. Use new placement procedures. Encourage
students to take more advanced courses by and performance assessments—whereby
offering them various grading options (pass- students are graded on the basis of individual
improvement.
fail), extra-credit assignments, and a safety
net (students can be reassigned one track
Source: Adapted from Jomills H. Braddock and James P.
lower after three weeks in the term). McPartland, “Alternatives to Tracking,” Educational Leadership
5. Provide tutoring assistance. Students having (April 1990): 76-79; Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton, “Detracking
Schools: Early Lessons from the Field,” Phi Delta Kappan
academic difficulties should be encouraged to (February 1992): 448^454.
The primary criticism of separating students by ability is that it results in

low expectations for low-ability students, lowered self-esteem, less instruction
time, less homework, and less learning—even worse, a compounding and stig¬
matizing effect on low achievers.40 The negative consequences of these practices
disproportionately affect minorities and female students in math classrooms.
Given our democratic norms and the need to deal with diversity in schools (and
society), and given the notion that abilities are multifaceted and developmental
(not genetic), the argument is made that differences in abilities can become as¬
sets in classrooms rather than liabilities.41
On Being “Dumb”
Professor Anonymous
Heartland University
I am writing as a parent and not in my usual role as serted, “Only a fool or nitwit would read a book for
professor. 'A to 1 hour before bedtime each evening and then,
It was two years ago when the standardized read¬ after finishing the book, want to read another book.”
ing test, administered in the beginning of the term, The principal was flexible, but did not give
sealed John’s fate. The results revealed that his read¬ ground easily. He alluded to John’s age—that he was
ing grade declined from 1 year above level in the the youngest person in his class—and then reviewed
previous school year to 1.2 years below level. He Piaget’s development stages of growth. I responded
was shunted into the “slow” reading group by Mrs. with the principles of test reliability and boring
Smith, his fourth-grade teacher, and was assigned methods of instruction. A compromise was eventu¬
three times a week to a special reading teacher, Mrs. ally reached. My wife and I would make an appoint¬
Jones, who thrived on Prussian rules of order and ment with the school social worker, so she could as¬
drill activities. sess family conditions, and John would be retested.
The boy who only a few months ago during the After three additional weeks of school bureau¬
summer had read for enjoyment the abridged ver¬ cracy, the principal called with good news: John’s
sions (100-150 pages) of Treasure Island, Robinson retest score was .75 year above grade level. In order
Crusoe, Swiss Family Robinson, and Dr. Jekyll and to preserve the reading teacher’s ego, however, he
Mr. Hyde, was now unable to answer questions suggested that the program transfer take place in Jan¬
about “Tony’s Visit to the Zoo” and unable to do his uary, when the semester ended.
homework. The reading teacher’s phone call at home John is in the sixth grade, today, still bored with
confirmed his “lack of comprehension and inability his school reading assignments, but reading Dick
to keep up with the class.” Gregory, John Steinbeck, Jack London, and Pearl
A new nailbiting habit, repeated outbursts at the Buck for his own pleasure. It’s sad to think what
dinner table, fights with his brother and sister, and might have happened to my son had I not intervened.
frequent remarks about his new reading group and But what about all the children who don’t have fa¬
“dumbness”—all in six weeks—prompted me to thers sitting at the dinner table, or checking home¬
make an appointment with the school principal, the work, much less a parent with the knowledge to
popular Mr. Green, who knew every child in school challenge the system? Armed with test data and
by name and whose office magazine rack contained reading labels, Mrs. Smith and Mrs. Jones had boxed
the latest issues of Educational Leadership, Elemen¬ a nine-year-old child into a no-win, no-escape
tary Principal, Phi Delta Kappan, and Reading situation—in which he could not fend or cope by
Teacher. himself. The school, with its professional jargon, had
When I mentioned John’s behavior at home, the labeled and grouped a bright child so that he no
principal suggested further testing. “No,” I re¬ longer wanted to learn and no longer felt he could
sponded. “If you test a child long enough, the school learn. His means of expression was rebellion—
will find more things wrong with him and slap more stupidity in class and anger at home. In only a few
labels on him.” When I elaborated on my child’s weeks, the classroom’s ability group coupled with
summer reading habits, Mr. Green pointed to recent the teacher’s self-fulfilling prophecy had overshad¬
research which concluded that poor readers don’t un¬ owed the child’s past performance and behavior.
derstand what they read. Somewhat frustrated, I as¬ continued
Professional Viewpoint concluded their “stupidity” in school, and anger inside and out¬
side of school. Ask yourself, as an educator, who is
My son had all the advantages: high SES, two ed¬ responsible; then ask yourself what you intend to do
ucated parents, bright peer group, and a top-rated that is different from what Smith, Jones and Green
school—yet he could not cope with these new labels. did.
Think of all the millions of students who don’t have Since the story is true (although the names were
these advantages; in fact, who by chance are classi¬ changed) and John still attends the same school sys¬
fied into the other side of the socioeconomic and tem, I am signing with warm regards and as,
school continuum. Then think of their test scores, Professor Anonymous
Researchers have found that high-ability students benefit from separate

ability groups because the curriculum and instruction are tailored to the stu¬
dents’ abilities, and the classroom work and homework driving the group re¬
quires extra effort. There are fewer competing values that curtail the academic
ethos and less time is devoted to management problems.42
But such arguments tend to run up against our own democratic thinking—
that is, the ethos and drive to reduce inequality and differences (including out¬
comes) that can exist between high and low-achieving students. Critics of
ability-grouping contend that the gains made by high achievers do not compen¬
sate for the loss of self-esteem and achievement among low achievers, who
often find themselves slotted into groups where the instruction is less engaging.
However, it is not clear whether performance of low-achieving groups suffers
because students themselves are less responsive, because of management prob¬
lems, or because the instruction really is inferior, as critics suggest.
After reviewing sixty years of research on the issue, Robert Slavin claimed
that the outcomes of all students (high and low) in ability-grouped classes can¬
celed out or “clustered closely around zero.”43 In other words, ability grouping
rarely adds to overall achievement in a school (although it might for a particular
class), but it often contributes to inequality (highs do better, lows do worse). In
addition, studies show that instruction in mixed-ability, untracked classes more
closely resembles instruction in high-achieving and middle-track classes than in¬
struction in low-track classes—that is, the mixed-ability grouping tends to bene¬
fit low-ability students.44 Similarly, average-ability students who are grouped in
high-ability math classes achieve significantly higher math grades and higher
scores on achievement tests than do their cohorts who are placed in average
classes,45 perhaps because their teachers have higher expectations for them and
the content is more advanced.
Within-class ability grouping, on the other hand, has been assessed as ef¬
fective for all students. This is especially true if the groups are fluid and evolv¬
ing. Moreover, students in heterogeneous classes who are regrouped homoge¬
neously learn more than students in classes that do not use such grouping. This
is especially true in reading and mathematics, for which within-class grouping is
common, as well as for low-achieving students.46
The research data suggest that a small number (two or three) of evolving
within-class (skill-need or project-based) groups is better than a large number,
permitting more monitoring by and feedback from the teacher and less seatwork
time and transition time.47 For example, in a class of three ability groups, stu¬
dents spend approximately two-thirds of the time doing seatwork without direct
supervision; but with four groups they spend three-quarters of the class time
doing seatwork without the teacher’s monitoring their work.
When within-class groups are formed, students proceed at different paces
on different materials. The tasks and assignments tend to be more flexible than
those in between-class ability groups. Teachers also tend to try to increase the
tempo of instruction and the amount of time for instruction in low-achieving
within-class groups to bring students closer to the class mean.48 There is less
stigma for groups in within-class grouping than in between-class grouping,
because grouping is only for part of the day and the class is integrated the rest of
the time. Regrouping plans tend to be more flexible than with between-class
groups, because moving students from group to group is less disruptive within a
class than between classes. Finally, regrouping is most beneficial when it is
based on achievement levels that can be assessed frequently (but not daily or
weekly), so students can be regrouped during the school terms and when teach¬
ers adapt their instruction to the level and pace of the students’ abilities and
needs. The best regrouping is three or four times a year; too frequent regrouping
increases transition and off-task activities and reduces time for remedial instruc¬
tion as well as high-order thinking activities.49
In essence, grouping is negative when it stigmatizes students or groups. It is
positive when it focuses students in purposeful ways, even if that purpose in¬
cludes having similar-ability students work on common skill needs together.
Teachers who group in different ways (e.g., group project work, cooperative
small-group learning, and peer tutoring) are equipping students to explore their
full potential and the potential of their classmates. And the evidence, according
to Jeannie Oakes and Martin Upton, suggests that the effects are salutary for all
involved:
Early evidence from a carefully studied project in Philadelphia shows that when de¬
tracking is accompanied by such changes in curriculum, instruction and assessment,
both low- and high-achieving students fare very well. The National Center for the
Education of Students Placed at Risk has established a set of urban “Talent Develop¬
ment” middle and senior high schools. The Talent Development schools offer a rich,
academic curriculum (such as great literature), provide ample opportunities for stu¬
dents to assist one another, and use authentic assessments in heterogeneous class¬
rooms. Middle-school students in the project showed significantly higher achieve¬
ment gains than did tracked student in the project’s “control” schools. To many
observers’ surprise, the students with the strongest academic skills seemed to benefit
most.50
A final caution is warranted on ability grouping and tracking. Even though

research against tracking appears strong, the research regarding grouping really
is mixed and some of it is very positive.51 There might be many instances when
you might (and should) ability group students. Jeannie Oakes might not agree
with that suggestion, but she has suggested that recommendations “to just stop
tracking” inevitably oversimplify.52 The key on grouping is to vary how stu¬
dents learn and to keep reading what researchers are finding in real classroom
situations—make decisions that appear to really help students learn, not that
conform to what others suggest you must do.
Nongraded Instruction
Nongraded instruction stems from the innovations of the 1950s and 1960s,
when Frank Brown and John Goodlad advocated freeing up students to proceed
through a sequence of content and skills in each subject at their own pace rather
than proceeding lockstep through artificial grade levels. A simple version of
that approach structures the learning environment so that students can be at an
advanced level in one subject, while at an average or below average level in
other subjects. Educators have responded favorably to the concept, and as a re¬
sult, homogeneous grouping for each subject has made a successful comeback
in the 1990s. An advantage, according to Robert Slavin and others, is that the
approach allows the teacher to accommodate individual student needs without
having to do a great deal of seatwork, monitoring, grouping, and so on.53
More complex forms of this learn-at-your-own-pace instructional
approach—dependent upon diagnostic testing, tutors, learning stations, open
spaces, and such—are generally ineffective for increasing student achievement,
in part because they require experienced and effective teachers to organize the
classroom and to work with numerous groups of students proceeding at different
paces. However, the simple form, in which different groups of students use their
own common sets of materials, seems to be more effective.54
Nongraded grouping at the elementary level takes several forms. Sometimes
grouping is based around one subject (usually reading or mathematics), some¬
times many subjects, and sometimes students are placed in multiage classrooms
(e.g., grades 3 and 4 combined) according to reading or general ability. Students
in all these cases proceed through the grade level at their own pace. Because a
school has many classes and levels, a student who falls behind or spurts ahead
can be transferred easily to another class or level. At the secondary level, non¬
graded programs are usually found only in highly innovative schools that also
feature related programs such as individualized instruction, flexible scheduling,
and team teaching.
Continuous progress programs are an offshoot of the nongraded concept, in
which reading or mathematics skills are organized into hierarchical levels within
each grade. Students pick up each year where they left off, so that it is easy for
them to use a sequence of skills workbooks, moving from one level to another.
This makes sense in hierarchical subjects such as reading and mathematics
where prerequisite skills are necessary.
Today, many urban school districts are experimenting with a variety of non¬
graded programs in an attempt to maintain certain minimum standards while
varying time spent in early grades, especially at the primary grade (1 to 3) lev¬
els. The nongraded program is a way to avoid social (as opposed to academic)
promotion and also to avoid the stigma and criticism involved in ability group¬
ing. In the nongraded plan, students are flexibly grouped across grade level and
age lines, and the grouping can be easily modified as students move ahead or
fall behind.
One of the major reasons for nongrading is that it allows students more time
in the grades involved, if necessary, until they can master a specific performance
level or to spend less time if they are capable of advancing quickly. Surpris- .
ingly, however, the data suggest that there is no difference among students en¬
rolled in nongraded and graded programs. For example, on average, 4.4 percent
of students took an extra year to complete the primary level grades (1 to 3) in the
nongraded schools compared to 4.6 percent in the ungraded ones. No students
were accelerated in the graded program, and 0.1 percent were accelerated in the
nongraded schools.55 In short, according to the only study that assessed the de¬
gree to which nongraded programs modified the time to complete a three-year
sequence (grades 1 to 3), nongrading did not alter the amount of time students
spent at the primary level.
In other research on nongraded classrooms, significant positive findings
outnumber negative ones nearly five to one; however, the preponderance of no
significant findings outweigh significant positive findings approximately three
to one. Data also suggest that the benefits to students—including heightened
achievement and self-concept—increase with longer experiences in nongraded
classroom settings.56
Guidelines for Nongraded Instruction
The following selected recommendations are based on the research outcomes of

nongraded instruction. The goal is to develop self-directing autonomous stu¬
dents, respect differences in the students’ ability to learn, and nourish individual
differences.
1. Vary the students’ work situations so they have opportunity for maximum
progress.
2. Change students’ placement at any time to meet their needs and abilities.
3. Stress phases of learning—cognitive, social, personal, physical, and aes¬
thetic.
4. Regroup students to fulfill specific objectives or tasks.
5. Use a wide variety of textbooks, workbooks, and supplementary materials
among and within groups.
6. Use alternative instructional methods depending on the abilities and needs of
the students and the tasks involved.
Peer Tutoring
Peer tutoring is the assignment of students to help one another on a one-to-one

basis or in small groups in a variety of situations. There are three types of peer
tutoring: (1) Students tutor others within the same class; (2) older students tutor
students in lower grades outside of class; (3) two students work together and
help each other as equals with learning activities. The purpose of the first two
types is to pair a student who needs assistance with a tutor on a one-to-one basis,
although small groups of two or three tutees and one tutor can also be formed.
The third type, also called peer-pairing, is more than tutoring. Students working
together as equals is sometimes called cooperative learning.
Of the three pairing arrangements, peer tutoring within the same class is the
most common in elementary and middle schools. A student who has mastered
specific material or who has completed a lesson and has shown understanding of
the material is paired with a student who needs help. The research suggests that
because students are less threatened by peers, they are more willing to ask fel¬
low students questions that they fear the teacher might consider “silly.” In fact,
Jeanne Ormrod reports that in one study students in peer teaching situations
asked 240 times more questions than they did during whole-class teaching.57 In
addition, they are less afraid that fellow students might criticize them for being
unable to understand an idea or problem after a second or third explanation.58 It
has also been found that a student can sometimes explain a concept in language
that another student can grasp. Unfamiliar vocabulary is cut to a minimum, and
sometimes a few choice slang terms can make a difficult concept comprehensi¬
ble. Also, because the faster student has just learned the concept, she might be
more aware than the teacher of what is giving the slower student difficulty. Peer
tutors benefit from the relationship; their own understanding is reinforced by ex¬
plaining the idea or problem, and their social skills are enhanced.59 The teacher
benefits by having additional time to work with students who have more severe
learning problems.
Donald and Roger Johnson find these advantages in peer tutoring:
1. Peer tutors are often effective in teaching students who do not respond
well to adults.
2. Peer tutoring can develop a bond of friendship between the tutor and
tutee, which is important for integrating slow learners into the group.
3. Peer tutoring allows the teacher to teach a large group of students, but
still gives slow learners the individual attention they need.
4. Tutors benefit by learning to teach, a general skill that can be useful in
an adult society.60
The help that one student gives another can be explanatory or terminal. Ex¬
planatory help consists of step-by-step accounts of how to do something. Termi¬
nal help consists of correcting an error or giving the correct answer without ex¬
plaining how to obtain the answer or solve the problem. Most studies of
explanatory and terminal help conclude that giving explanations aids the tutor in
learning the material, whereas giving terminal help does not.61 In giving
explanations, the tutor clarifies the material in her own mind, may see new rela¬
tionships, and builds a better grasp of the material. Giving terminal help in¬
volves little restructuring of thought.
Not surprisingly, receiving explanations is correlated with achievement.
Students who receive terminal help or receive no help tend to learn less than stu¬
dents who receive explanatory help.62 The benefit of receiving explanations
seems to be that it fills in incomplete understanding of the material and corrects
misunderstandings; it also increases effort and motivation to learn. Receiving
terminal help or receiving no help is frustrating and causes students to lose inter¬
est in learning.
In two separate studies (involving 8 and 15 classrooms, respectively), the
most effective tutoring situations were when the tutor (1) elaborated informa¬
tion, (2) directed attention to task features, (3) offered procedural assistance,
and/or (4) showed how to use information. The problem is, most student tutors
do not provide adequate explanations unless they have been explicitly trained.63
When tutors have had proper training and experience, student questions during
tutoring sessions—one indicator of learning activity—increase dramatically
compared to the normal whole-classroom setting. For example, as we document
in other sections of this textbook (see Chapter 5), student questions in whole-
classroom settings are infrequent and unsophisticated. The estimated frequency
of student questions per hour range from 1.3 to 4.0, with an of average 3.0.
Given an average class of 26.7 for the studies conducted on the frequency of
questioning, the number of questions per student for one hour is 0.11 (3 ques¬
tions -r 26.7). On the other hand, teachers ask 30 to 120 questions per hour, or an
average of 69—with math teachers tending to ask the most questions. Therefore,
96 percent of the questions in a regular classroom are formulated by teachers.64
The low frequency and low sophistication of student questions could be due
to students’ difficulty in identifying their own knowledge deficits (their inability
to understand when they don’t know or to discriminate superficial from neces¬
sary information) and their loss of self-esteem or the social barriers involved in
asking questions in front of their peers. A one-to-one tutoring situation removes
many of the above barriers. Tutors, if experienced or trained properly, can tailor
questions or explanations to a particular deficit, and peer embarrassment is mini¬
mized by the privacy of the sessions.
Based on 22 tutoring sessions for seventh-grade mathematics, the average
number of student (tutee) questions was 26.5 per hour. Given the estimates that
a particular student asks 0.11 questions per hour in a classroom setting, the inci¬
dence of questions per student during tutoring increases 240 times. Similarly, tu¬
tors ask 40 percent more questions (112) in one hour than do teachers (69).65
The point is, the tutor-tutee setting is highly interactive and corresponds to what
some researchers call active learning. Students apparently have more opportu¬
nity to regulate their learning in tutoring settings by asking more questions (and
more questions that promote in-depth understanding).
Benjamin Bloom argues that tutoring (with preferably a 1:1 student-student
ratio, but no more than 3:1) is the most effective method of grouping for instruc¬
tion compared to conventional methods (30:1 student-teacher ratio) and even
Figure 8.6
Achievement
distribution for
students with
conventional, mastery
learning, and tutor
instruction.
Source: Benjamin S. Bloom, “The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective
as One-to-One Tutoring,” in Educational Researcher (June-July 1984), 5. Reprinted by permission.
mastery learning methods (which he helped develop) when the mastery methods
are used in a class of about 30 students. Bloom found that as many as 90 percent
of the tutored students and 70 percent of the mastery learning students attained a
level of increased achievement reached by only 20 percent of the students with
conventional instruction over a three-week period.66 Figure 8.6 compares
achievement with conventional, mastery, and tutor instruction.
The most effective tutoring programs, both for tutors and tutees, have the
following characteristics: (1) Procedural rules are established by the teacher,
(2) instruction is focused on basic skills and content, (3) tutorial groups are orga¬
nized with no more than three tutees per tutor and ideally one tutee per tutor, and
(4) tutorial sessions are of short duration, about four to eight weeks.67 When a
tutorial program with these features is combined with regular classroom instruc¬
tion, “the students being tutored not only learned more than they did without tu¬
toring, they also developed a more positive attitude about what they were study¬
ing.” In addition, the “tutors learned more than students who did not tutor.”68
Guidelines for Peer Tutoring
Peer tutoring, like ability grouping, can be effective if implemented properly,

but it takes substantial time and effort to get off to a good start. Following are
some suggestions for effective peer tutoring.
1. Provide directions (or structure) for each tutor about time schedules and ex¬
actly what to do (for example, “Read the sentence to the group and get at
least two students to identify the adjectives and nouns”).
2. Prevent the tutor’s assuming the role of substitute teacher.
3. Be sure students understand their respective roles. The teacher should model
appropriate tutor behavior, provide examples of what is to be achieved, and
show how it is to be achieved.
4. Plan tutoring arrangements so that tutors understand and use a mix of materi¬
als, media, and activities (for example, one week doing review and drill in
the workbooks, the next week doing library research, the next week writing
and discussing stories).
5. Inform parents of the organization, purpose, and procedures of the tutoring
program.
Cooperative Learning
Cooperative learning is an instructional approach gaining in popularity,
whereby students work together in small groups instead of competing for recog¬
nition or grades. The idea of cooperative learning is rooted in John Dewey’s no¬
tion of group activities and group projects, as well as his theories in Democracy
and Education recommending that students work together to learn civic and so¬
cial responsibility. Participating in and sharing mutual school experiences,
Dewey maintained, prepares students for democratic living. Although reintro¬
duced in the 1960s by Japanese educators to promote the ideal of teamwork and
group effort, cooperative learning was popularized by Robert Slavin and David
and Roger Johnson in the 1970s and 1980s in the United States.
In the traditional classroom structure, students compete for teacher recogni¬
tion and grades and the same students tend to be “winners” and “losers” over the
years. High-achieving students receive more rewards and are motivated to learn,
and low-achieving students experience more failure (or near failure) and frustra¬
tion, and subsequently many psychologically, and then physically, drop out of
school. Reducing competition and increasing cooperation among students may
diminish hostility, prejudice, and patterns of failure among many students.
This does not mean that competition has no place in the classroom or
school. Even the advocates of cooperation feel that competition, under the right
conditions and with evenly matched individuals or groups, can be a source of
motivation, excitement, fun, and improved performance—for example, in simple
drill activities, speed tasks, low-anxiety games, and psychomotor activities, and
athletics. Competition among groups is also accepted as a means for enhancing
academic achievement for all grade levels and subjects, so long as two elements
are present: group goals and individual accountability.69 However, some data
support a minority view that group grading decreases individual motivation and
lowers individual levels of performance because the rewards are extrinsic; high-
achieving students also feel that the group activity is a waste of their time and
express resentment in having to explain academic material to low achievers or
uninterested students.70
According to a review of the research, cooperation among participants helps
foster (1) positive and coherent personal identity, (2) self-esteem, (3) knowledge
and trust of others, (4) communication skills, (5) acceptance and support of oth¬
ers, (6) wholesome intergroup relationships, and (7) cooperation and reduced
conflicts among students. The data also suggest that cooperation and group
learning are considerably more effective in fostering these social and interper¬
sonal skills than competitive or individualistic efforts.71 Most important, accord¬
ing to Robert Slavin, when cooperative learning methods are used, achievement
effects are consistently positive compared to traditional methods.72 Those con¬
clusions applied in 37 of 44 controlled experiments at all grade levels (2 to 12);
in all major subjects (although most of the research deals with grades 3 to 9 and
in reading and mathematics); and in a wide diversity of geographic settings. See
Tips for Teachers 8.3.
In cooperative learning, students divide the work among themselves, help
one another (especially the slow members), praise and criticize one another’s ef¬
forts and contributions, and receive a group performance score. It is not enough
to simply tell students to work together. They must have a reason to cooperate
and relate as a team. The idea is to create interdependence “in such a way that
each individual’s actions benefit the group and the group’s actions benefit the
individual.”73 Similarly, the teacher needs to clarify learning goals, student
roles, and expectations; divide resources within and among groups; provide
Meaningful Methods for Cooperative Learning
Research on specific applications of cooperative variety of skills—reasoning, hypothesizing,

learning started in the 1970s and has now expanded predicting, etc.—or do they rely on rote
in various parts of the world and includes various procedures? Do students help one another
methods and techniques. Here are some practical understand concepts and skills?
questions for teachers to consider in organizing ap¬
7. What tasks will the groups be expected to
propriate cooperative learning lessons.
perform during the cooperative lesson? Are
1. Which cooperative learning model are you the roles of students clear?
using? Why? 8. How will individual and group evaluation
2. How did you form your groups? Did you (academic and social) take place? Are
consider ability, ethnicity, gender, etc.? students held accountable for individual
3. What objectives, directions, and timelines learning through testing, individual work, or
did the groups receive? specific activities? Is the group accountable
for its work and for the achievement of each
4. How did you motivate the students to
member of the group?
perform as a group, to respect others’
differences or capabilities, and to interact 9. Do you monitor group progress and
with and accept peers from different ethnic, intervene when necessary (when problems
religious, socioeconomic groups? arise)? Do you merely provide answers, or
do you assist groups in working out their
5. Are instructional examples provided? Did
problems?
you explain relevant materials and needed
skills to the class? 10. Do you provide feedback about how
progress is being made? How problems can
6. What have you observed about how the
be resolved? Do you clarify, elaborate, and
groups function? Do student groups use a
reteach when necessary?
tasks and rewards that promote team spirit; and most important, provide some
kind of incentive and recognition for individual achievement. Students at most
age and grade levels can participate in formal and informal approaches. The
challenge for teachers is to use the approaches in ways that truly enhance stu¬
dent social and academic skills.
Formal Cooperative Learning

Formal cooperative learning strategies focus more on teacher-led instruction
and a certain amount of student competition, usually between cooperative
groups rather than between individual students. For the formal groups, individ¬
ual success and team success are tied together. Some critics clearly articulate
what they perceive as the damage done by formal STAD and TGT type struc¬
tures because those structures rely on a certain amount of competition and ex¬
trinsic rewards. Still, Robert Slavin, who has been one of the most visible and
articulate voices for cooperative learning in schools, and others have shown that
formal structures can result in substantial increased student learning.
In formal cooperative learning, students share:
• a goal to maximize the learning of all members.

• both individual and group responsibility for their learning goals.
• specific work goals that can be accomplished cooperatively.
• opportunities and obligations to learn and use the interpersonal and small
group skills. . . .
• opportunities and obligations to reflect on both learning and peer
interaction.74
Student Teams-Achievement Divisions (STAD). Team membership consists

of four students, based on heterogeneous abilities. The teacher presents the les¬
son to the whole group in one or two sessions, then the class divides into teams
for mastery. Students who have mastered the material help slower teammates.
Drill and practice is stressed in groups, although students can engage in discus¬
sion and questioning. Class quizzes are frequent, and student scores are aver¬
aged into a team score to ensure cooperation and assistance within groups.
Quizzes are scored in terms of progress so that slow-performing groups have the
opportunity to gain recognition and improve. Team rewards are given based on
the performance of their team as a “good,” “great,” or “super” team. Teams are
changed every five or six weeks to give students an opportunity to work with
other students and to give members of low-scoring teams a new chance.75
Teams-Games-Tournament (TGT). Like STAD, TGT was developed by

Robert Slavin. Instead of quizzes there are weekly “tournament tables” com¬
posed of three-member teams, with each member contributing points to the par¬
ticular team score. Low achievers compete with other low achievers, and high
achievers compete with other high achievers for equal points. Thus the impact of
low achievers is equal to that of high achievers. As with STAD, high-performing
teams earn certificates or other team rewards. Student teams are changed weekly
on the basis of individual performance to equalize them.76
Jigsaw. Originally designed for secondary schools (grades 7 to 12), jigsaw

classroom students work in small groups (4 to 5 members) on specific academic
tasks, assignments, or projects. They depend on each other for resources, infor¬
mation, and study assignments. Each team member becomes an “expert” in one
area, meets with similar experts from other teams, and then returns to the origi¬
nal group to teach other team members.77 After the time for team study, the stu¬
dents are tested and once again, based on each student’s individual performance
and the student’s team performance, awards for “good,” “great,” and “super”
team are given.
Informal Cooperative Learning

Informal cooperative learning occurs when teachers ask questions and then
have students discuss among themselves or with the teacher a response, when
teachers read stories or lecture and then periodically ask questions, and when
teachers ask questions in order to encourage students to summarize or synthesize
ideas. Several forms of informal cooperative learning can be used. In general,
informal approaches are clearly linked to other instructional strategies such as
direct instruction (e.g., the teacher is teaching a specific skill). According to co¬
operative learning specialist Lynda Baloche, a format for informal groups when
coupled with another teaching strategy such as direct instruction might be this:
1. Teacher asks a question that serves as an anticipatory set or advance

organizer for the story, video, demonstration, or lecture that is to follow.
Students discuss.
2. Teacher reads story, shows video, or delivers lecture—stopping every
few minutes and asking students to discuss a teacher-prepared question
or problem. Questions and problems might be factual or conceptual; they
might focus on the material that has just been presented or might help
students bridge to a new segment of the presentation. Students discuss.
3. Teacher asks a question that helps students summarize and synthesize the
material that has been presented and provides closure for the lesson.
Students discuss.78
Several examples of informal cooperative learning strategies are outlined

below. In addition, Table 8.2 provides an example of other more informal ap¬
proaches. The informal strategies are very easy to use. Notice that some, such as
Round-Robin, help students get to know other students (they build the students’
social skills) and others, such as Numbered Heads Together, help students mas¬
ter content material (they foster student achievement).
Numbered Heads Together

1. The teacher has students number themselves off within their groups, so
that each student has a number: 1, 2, 3, or 4. (Groups can consist of three
to five students.)
2. The teacher asks a question.
3. The teacher tells the students to “put their heads together” to make sure
that everyone on the team knows the answer. (All students need to
discuss the material relevant to the question and be able to respond.)
Table 8.2 Overview of Selected Cooperative Groupings
Structure Brief Description Functions: Academic & Social
Team Building
Round-Robin Each student in turn shares something with his or Expressing ideas and opinion, creation of stories.
her teammates. Equal participation, getting acquainted with
teammates
Class Building
Comers Each student moves to a comer of the room Seeing alternative hypotheses, values, problem¬
representing a teacher-determined alternative. solving approaches. Knowing and respecting
Students discuss within comers, then listen to and different points of view, meeting classmates.
paraphrase ideas from other comers.
Mastery
Color-Coded Students memorize facts using a flash card game. Memorizing facts. Helping, praising.
Co-op Cards The game is structured so that there is a maximum
probability of success at each step, moving from
short-term to long-term memory. Scoring is based
on improvement.
Pairs Check Students work in pairs within groups of four. Within Practicing skills. Helping, praising.
pairs students alternate—one solves a problem
while the other coaches. After every two problems
the pair checks to see if they have the same answers
as the other pairs.
Source: Paul J. Vermette, Making Cooperative Learning Work (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998), 23. Reprinted by permission of
Prentice-Hall, Inc.
4. The teacher calls a number (1, 2, 3 or 4) and students with that number
raise their hands to respond.79
Think-Pair-Share
1. The teacher provides the students with a topic or idea.
2. The students then reflect independently about the meaning of the topic—
the teacher should give students 3 to 5 seconds for independent thinking.
3. The students pair up with other students to discuss the topic and to share
respective thoughts. (This can be a random pairing.)
4. The students then share their thoughts with the class—the teacher needs
to wait after each student shares (3 to 5 seconds) for all students to think
about what has been shared,80
Think-Pair-Square
1. The teacher poses a question or problem.
2. The students get together in pairs to discuss the different “solutions.”
3. Each student pair then gets together with another pair to share the ideas
within the context of a foursome—or two pairs, a “square.”
With think-pair-square students can develop interpersonal intelligence by

working with a partner and then working collaboratively with another set of
partners. This is a good variation on think-pair-share and helps enhance stu¬
dents’ interpersonal intelligence.81
Guidelines for Cooperative Learning
In addition to the steps for the various cooperative learning models already men¬
tioned, some strategies for cooperative approaches have been developed by
David and Roger Johnson in several texts. The Johnson brothers, like Robert
Slavin, have been strong voices for cooperative learning in classrooms. Much of
their emphasis has been on the efficacy of informative type cooperative struc¬
tures. A number of these cooperative strategies are presented below.
1. Determine goals and then decide on appropriate formal or informal coopera¬

tive learning approach.
2. Arrange the classroom to promote cooperative goals.
3. Communicate intentions and expectations. Students need to understand what
is being attempted.
4. Encourage a division of labor where appropriate. Students should understand
their roles and responsibilities.
5. Encourage students to share ideas, materials, and resources. Students should
look at each other and not the teacher.
6. Encourage supportive behavior and point out rejecting or hostile behavior.
Behaviors such as silence, ridicule, personal criticism, one-upmanship, and
superficial acceptance of an idea should be discussed.
7. Monitor the group. Check progress of individuals in a group and of the group as
a whole. Explain and discuss problems, assist, and give praise as appropriate.
8. Evaluate the individual and group. In evaluation, focus on the group and its
progress. Evaluate the individual in the context of the group’s effort and
achievement. Provide prompt feedback.
9. Reward the group for successful completion of its task.82
In a review of cooperative learning, the Johnsons point out that each lesson in co¬
operative learning should include five basic elements: (1) positive interdependence—
students must feel they are responsible for their own learning and other members
of the group; (2) face-to-face interaction—students must have the opportunity to
explain what they are learning to each other; (3) individual accountability—each
student must be held accountable for mastery of the assigned work; (4) social
skills—each student must communicate effectively, maintain respect among group
members, and work together to resolve conflicts; and (5) group processing—
groups must be assessed to see how well they are working together and how they
can improve.83 Those assessments can take different forms. The teacher might
keep some anecdotal notes on how groups function or make more structured ob¬
servations using a matrix such as Table 8.3. The teacher should also ask students
to see how the students thought their groups functioned (see Table 8.4), and then
use the student information for modifying the group processes.
Table 8.3 Structured Observation Form for Group Work
John Tom Amanda Lucette
Asks other group members questions XX X X
Takes notes on what others say X
Helps others clarify their thoughts X X X
Rephrases the statements of others X
Table 8.4 Personal Assessment of Work in Groups
Name:_
Place checkmarks in three boxes that best describe you in your group work today.
Circle one behavior that you want to make sure you use tomorrow.
□ I stayed with my group.

□ I made sure my voice did not get TOO LOUD!
□ I reminded others to stay on task in an agreeable way.
□ I helped manage the materials and make sure they got put back in “good shape.”
□ I participated.
□ I asked others to participate.
□ I helped my group make a plan.
□ I helped my group stick with the plan.
□ I helped summarize our work.
Source: Lynda Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1998), 182.
Reprinted by permission of Prentice-Hall, Inc.
Group Activities
In various kinds of group activities the teacher’s role moves from director to re¬
source person. As a result, many leadership functions transfer from the teacher
to the students. Although there is no clear research showing that the group tech¬
niques below correlate with student achievement, it is assumed that under appro¬
priate circumstances, instruction in these groups can be as effective as, or more
effective than, relying on the teacher as the major source of learning. It is also
assumed that having a variety of group activities (1) help teachers deal with dif¬
ferences among learners, (2) provide opportunity for students to plan and de¬
velop special projects on which groups can work together, and (3) increase stu¬
dent interaction and socialization. In short, they achieve social and emotional as
well as cognitive purposes.
There are many ways for teachers to arrange activity in groups. Differ¬
ent group arrangements, also called group projects, result in different roles
and responsibilities for the students and teacher. Here are six possible group
projects:
n"
1. Brainstorming is a technique to elicit large numbers of imaginative ideas

or solutions to open-ended problems. Group members are encouraged to
expand their thinking beyond the routine sort of suggestions. Everyone’s
suggestions are accepted without judgment, and only after all the ideas
are put before the group do the members begin to focus on evaluating
solutions.
2. A buzz session provides an open environment in which group members
can discuss their opinions without fear of being “wrong” or being
ridiculed for holding an unpopular position. Buzz sessions can also serve
to clarify a position or bring new information before the group to correct
misconceptions.
3. The debate and panel are more structured in format than some of the
other small-group activities. In a debate, two positions on a controversial
issue are presented formally; each debater is given a certain amount of
time to state a position, to respond to questions from others in the group,
and to pose questions to the other side. Alternatively, the panel is used to
present information on an issue and, if possible, to arrive at group
consensus. Several students (three to eight) may sit on a panel. Each
panel member may make an opening statement, but there are no debates
among panel members.
4. Role-playing and improvisation are techniques for stepping outside of
one’s own role and feelings and placing oneself in another’s situation.
Role playing also serves as a technique for exploring intergroup attitudes
and values.
5. Fish bowl is a technique in which group members give their full attention
to what one individual wants to express. The whole group sits in a circle.
Two chairs are placed in the center of the circle. A member who wants to
express a point of view does so while sitting in one of the chairs. Any
other member who wants to discuss the view takes the other chair, and
the two converse while the others listen. To get into the discussion,
students must wait for one chair to be vacated.
6. Round table is a quiet, informal group—usually four or five students
who sit around a table conversing either among themselves (similar to a
buzz session) or with an audience (similar to a forum).
Using group techniques in flexible and imaginative ways can have impor¬
tant instructional advantages. They give students some control over their own
personal adjustment as well as over their cognitive learning. They allow the
teacher to plan different lessons to meet the needs and interests of different
groups. They permit the teacher to vary instructional methods, to plan interest¬
ing and active (as opposed to passive) activities, and to supplement the lecture,
questioning, practice and drill methods.
The key to the success of group projects is the way the teacher organizes
them. Flexible space and furniture undoubtedly make it easier, but furniture is
not the critical factor. All of the group techniques, if planned and implemented
properly, tend to promote five group-oriented characteristics in the classroom:
(1) task structures that lend themselves to cooperation among group members,
(2) a chance for students to work at their own pace but think in terms of group
goals, (3) the development of social and interpersonal skills among participants
(students learn to communicate with and trust one another), (4) a reward struc¬
ture based on the performance of the group (which encourages helping behav¬
iors), and (5) a variety of teambuilding strategies—students learn to work to¬
gether, appreciate individual diversities, and capitalize on individual strengths
(see Tips for Teachers 8.3).
By participating in various group activities, students should engage in help¬
ing and sharing experiences. They should, ideally, experience positive expecta¬
tions of peers and learn to be considerate, cooperative, and responsible in mutual
endeavors. If groups are organized properly, with clearly defined roles and/or
rules, then positive discipline (actually self-discipline) should evolve as part of
the classroom culture. Finally, students should come to appreciate and better un¬
derstand people: their needs, intentions and feelings. All of these new group
learning experiences are important, because education and work environments
increasingly involve people working together in programs, units, departments,
and the like.
According to researchers, when students (as well as adults) work on group
projects, they need to focus on specific problems, not personalities; provide
feedback that the receiver can understand; and provide feedback on actions that
the receiver can change.84 Honest communication demands that individuals
learn to appreciate the strengths and diversity of others, to listen to others, and to
give and receive supporting feedback—all of which requires maturity, under¬
standing, and respect. Effective student group activities can nurture and rein¬
force such qualities.
Guidelines for Group Activities
Students can be assigned to group projects by interest, ability, friendship, or per¬

sonality. The teacher must know the students and the objectives for using small
groups before establishing the groups. If the objective is to get the job done ex¬
peditiously, the teacher should assign a strong leader to each group, rely on
high-achieving students to lead the activities, avoid known personality conflicts,
and limit the group size to five. If the objective is more interpersonal than cogni¬
tive, the students may be grouped according to their diversities rather than simi¬
larities, and the group might be larger.
In order to organize such group activities, the following recommendations
should be considered. They are basically sequential, although each recommen¬
dation should be used only if it coincides with your circumstances and teaching
style.
1. Decide on the group project that enhances specific objectives and outcomes.
2. Solicit volunteers for membership in group projects, reserving the right to
decide final membership.
3. Go over directions for carrying out each phase of the group activity (in writ¬
ing or orally) almost to the point of redundancy.
4. Explain the role of participants, the way they are to interact, and whatever
problems might occur. Define roles, interactions, and problems through ex¬
amples and preliminary simulations.
5. Allot class time for groups to organize, plan, and develop some of their proj¬
ects or assignments, with supervision as needed.
6. Allow group members to decide on the nature of the class presentation,
within general rules that have been established.
7. Do not allow any individual to dominate the activities or responsibilities of
the group.
8. Evaluate the completed group project with the students. Discuss problems
and decisions participants had to face and the strategies chosen by each
participant.
Individualized Instruction
In the past four decades several systematic programs for individualized instruc¬
tion have been advanced. Although the approaches vary somewhat, all the pro¬
grams seem to attempt to maximize individual learning by (1) diagnosing the
student’s entry achievement levels or learning deficiencies, (2) providing a one-
to-one teacher-to-student or machine-to-student relationship, (3) introducing se¬
quenced and structured instructional materials, frequently accompanied by prac¬
tice and drill, and (4) permitting students to proceed at their own rate. The
approaches combine behavioral and cognitive psychology. However, the behav-
iorist component seems more in evidence because of the stress on instructional
objectives and drill exercises, small instructional units and sequenced materials,
evaluation of instruction in terms of changes in learning or progress, and rein¬
struction based on posttest evaluations. Individualized instruction is a form of
mastery learning, which we will discuss in the next section.
One of the early programs for individualized instruction was the Project on
Individually Prescribed Instruction (IPI), developed at the University of Pitts¬
burgh in the late 1950s and early 1960s. For every student an individual plan
was prepared for each skill or subject based on a diagnosis of the student’s profi¬
ciency levels. Learning tasks were individualized, and the student’s progress
was continually evaluated.85
The Program for Learning in Accordance with Needs (PLAN), developed in
the 1960s and 1970s, relies on instructional objectives and two-week modules
arranged according to the student’s level of achievement. Instructional materials
are ungraded, and alternative sets of materials are available for each unit of in¬
struction.86
Individually Guided Education (IGE) is a total educational system devel¬
oped at the University of Wisconsin and introduced in several thousand schools.
Planned variations are made in what and how each student learns. The program
includes individual objectives, one-to-one relationships with teachers or tutors,
diagnostic testing, independent study, small-group instruction, and large-group

instruction.87
A more behaviorist and teacher-directed approach is the Personalized Sys¬
tem of Instruction (PSI), sometimes called the Keller plan after its originator. It
was developed initially for high school and college students. PSI makes use of
study guides, which break the Course down into small units with specific objec¬
tives. Individuals progress through the units as fast or slow as they wish, master
units (80 percent or better) before proceeding to the next unit, and act as proc¬
tors (high-achieving students assisting others).88
Field testing of these individualized instruction programs has generally been
positive. Some reports on IPI, PLAN, IGE, and PSI have shown significant
gains in student achievement, especially with low-achieving students who seem
to prefer a structured approach to learning.89 Of the four programs, IPI and IGE
were the most widely used and seemed to report the most consistent rise in stu¬
dent test scores.90 Nevertheless, individualized plans are expensive to imple¬
ment, and most schools today continue to employ group methods of instruction,
partially out of habit and because it is easier for teachers.
Mastery Learning
We finish this chapter with a discussion of mastery learning. At first glance,

this section might seem out of place in a chapter on grouping practice. We place
it here for a particular reason: Advocates of mastery learning argue that all stu¬
dents can learn if teachers know how to use (and do use) appropriate diagnostic
testing, peer assistance, and corrective feedback to ensure that students of all
ability levels learn. Notice the emphasis on peer assistance. Teachers who cor¬
rectly use mastery learning must use a variety of large-group and small-group
(peer tutoring) designs as a necessary means of assessing students and providing
them with corrective feedback.
Mastery learning is a desired educational goal for all grade levels and sub¬
jects. It is more group-based. The individualized learning approaches we dis¬
cussed in the previous section were more oriented to individual structures. The
approach being used most widely in the public schools is Learning for Mastery,
often referred to as mastery learning. It was associated originally with John Car-
roll and later with James Block and Benjamin Bloom. Their mastery-learning
ideas have gained supporters particularly in urban school districts, where there is
an obvious need to improve academic performance among inner-city students.
(Earlier in this book we discussed Madeline Hunter’s mastery teaching. Mastery
learning and mastery teaching are not the same thing. The former focuses on the
pace of instruction and levels of student learning; the latter focuses on the actual
structure of a particular lesson.)
Carroll maintained that if students are normally distributed by ability or ap¬
titude for some academic subject and are provided appropriate instruction tai¬
lored to their individual characteristics, the majority should achieve mastery of
the subject and learning should be dramatically improved. He also held that if a
student does not spend sufficient time to learn a task, she or he will not master it.
However, students vary in the amount of time they need to complete a task.
Nearly all students (assuming no major learning disability) can achieve average
outcomes if given sufficient time.91
Carroll and, later, Robert Slavin distinguish between time needed to learn
(based on student characteristics such as aptitude) and time available for learn¬
ing (under the teacher’s control). High-achieving students need less time than
low-achieving students to learn the same material. Group instruction, large or
small, rarely accommodates varying learner characteristics or considers the time
needed to learn. The teacher has the ability to vary instructional time for differ¬
ent individuals or groups of students with mastery instruction, especially for
low-achieving students who usually need additional time.92
Block and Bloom argue that 90 percent of the public school students can
learn much of the curriculum at the same level of mastery, with the slower 20
percent of students in this 90 percent needing 10 to 20 percent more time than
the faster 20 percent.93 Although slower students require a longer period of time
to learn the same materials, they can succeed if their initial level of knowledge is
correctly diagnosed, and if they are taught with appropriate methods and materi¬
als in a sequential manner beginning at their initial competency level.
To accomplish this goal, criterion-reference tests (see Chapter 10) must be
used to determine whether a student possesses skills required for success in each
step in the learning sequence. Also, small units of instruction must be used. An
entire course such as third-grade mathematics or seventh-grade social studies is
too complex to be studied in large units. Instead it should be broken down into
smaller pieces following some of the principles of programmed instruction.
A substantial body of data indicates that mastery learning can result in large
learning gains for students.94 One observer, for example, has reviewed more
than 100 studies on mastery learning and concludes that the results “indicate that
mastery strategies do indeed have moderate to strong effects on student learning
when compared to conventional methods of instruction.95 Similarly, in a review
of more than 25 studies. Block and Burns found that 61 percent of the mastery-
taught students scored significantly higher on achievement tests than non¬
mastery-taught students.96 In studies of entire school districts, the results show
that mastery approaches are successful in teaching basic skills, such as reading
and mathematics, that form the basis for later learning; moreover, inner-city
students profit more from this approach than from traditional groupings for
instruction.97
A review of 108 studies by the Kuliks showed that mastery learning has
positive effects on student achievement in secondary schools and colleges. The
effects were stronger for lower-achieving students (who seem to prefer and
make better use of direct or explicit instructional approaches) and in classes in
which the pace of learning is controlled by the teacher, not at individual student
rates. In two-thirds of the cases, the learning outcomes in the mastery group
were large enough to be significant; on the average, the final exam scores in¬
creased from the 50th to the 70th percentile.
The favorable findings do not mean that all the important questions have
been answered or that mastery strategies do not have critics. Educators do not
know, for example, how well differing mastery approaches can work for high-
order learning and affective learning or for different types of students (high-
achieving, middleclass students, and ethnic groups other than black and His¬
panic). Moreover, we are unsure to what extent teachers are teaching the tests to
their students in order to avoid'blame, because the assumption is that students
can master the material.98 And because most teachers rely on criterion-reference
or teacher-made tests to provide evidence of mastery, there is a question of the
reliability and validity of the criteria used in determining mastery. Different
teachers might reach different conclusions about what students know by using a
different criterion for testing.99
Other critics claim that basic skills—reading, writing, and mathematics—
are being broken down into discrete tasks that students master, but the students
still do not acquire actual skill (they cannot read, write, or compute any better).
Students might show gains in small skill items, but this does not necessarily
prove learning.100 What happened to the notions of wholeness and the impor¬
tance of concepts and problem-solving skills? There are students who know the
difference between a noun and a verb but cannot write a whole sentence, much
less a paragraph. There are students who are capable of memorizing vocabulary
words but still cannot read with comprehension (or understanding) at their grade
level.
Traditionally, teachers have held time constant so that individual differences
were reflected in achievement differences. A mastery-learning situation, which
varies time among students, will narrow achievement differences among stu¬
dents in favor of those who need extra time at the expense of other students.101
Also, in a situation in which high-achieving students must wait for slow students
to catch up, and high achievers must wait for the teacher’s attention because the
Psychology of Instruction
Ernest R. Hilgard
Emeritus Professor of Psychology and Education
Stanford University
The shift in emphasis in the last few years from a reach goals set by the teacher, is being contrasted
psychology of learning, which might hopefully be with the acquiring of [students’] self-regulatory
applied in the classroom, to a psychology of instruc¬ skills in which knowledge is structured for problem
tion has had promising consequences, encouraged solving in various contexts.
both by the development of cognitive psychology If the teacher understands the difference between
and by a greater awareness of the contexts in which such strategies, steps can be taken to improve the in¬
instruction is effective. A distinction between the teraction with the student as learner.
mastery model, in which instruction is engineered to
teacher spends an inordinate amount of time with low achievers so they can gain
mastery, the high achievers are being discriminated against. They will become
bored, and their learning outcomes will probably suffer.
These criticisms do not nullify the importance of mastery learning or other
direct instructional approaches.102 However, questions arise whether any instruc¬
tional approach that breaks learning into tiny, sequenced items has desirable end
results with all students, especially high-achieving, talented, or creative students;
whether all students need so much practice to master fundamental skills and
tasks; and whether it can be considered acceptable to vary instructional time to
the disadvantage of higher achievers.
Guidelines for Implementing Mastery Instruction
Mastery instruction is not easy to implement. The teacher must adapt the in¬
struction to the student, rather than the student adapting to the teacher’s instruc¬
tion. The teacher must continually monitor each student’s work, provide a vari¬
ety of instructional materials and activities, determine what skills and tasks each
student has mastered, and provide immediate feedback—not an easy task in a
class of 25 or more students, which is why varied instructional groups are essen¬
tial. As more studies on mastery learning are conducted in various settings, edu¬
cators will discover whether these problems and questions can be resolved.
Mastery approaches have been adopted in a large number of schools. The re¬
search suggests they require extensive diagnostic and criterion-reference testing,
and it is necessary to determine different standards of mastery for each class de¬
pending on the students’ abilities. Teachers have to devise alternative assignments
(remedial, corrective, or enrichment) for different students at different stages and
at least two forms of tests to measure changes in learning. Teachers must cope
with individual rates of learning and vary content coverage and time. You can be
sure that it takes a master teacher who is willing to work hard to implement mas¬
tery instruction successfully. Two of the most prominent researchers of mastery
instruction, Block and Anderson, suggest the following instructional steps.
1. Inform students about the features of the model including what they are ex¬
pected to learn, how they will be graded, and that extra time will be allowed
if needed.
2. Teach the lesson relying on large-group or whole-group instruction.
3. Give a formative quiz on a no-fault basis to assess student progress; stu¬
dents can check their own papers or switch papers.
4. Based on the results, divide the class into a “mastery” group and “nonmas¬
tery” group; 90 percent is considered mastery.
5. Give “enrichment” to the mastery group—group projects, independent study,
etc.
6. Give “corrective” instruction to the nonmastery group—small study groups
consisting of two or three students, individual tutoring, alternative instruc¬
tional materials, rereading materials, practice and drill, etc.
7. Give a “summative” or final quiz on the unit or topic; students who achieved
mastery on the “formative” quiz do not need to take this quiz.
8. Ensure that 75 percent of the students have achieved mastery by the summa¬
tive test.
9. Repeat the procedures from steps 6 to 8 if students do not achieve 75 percent
level.103

Just as it is important to use different instructional methods and materials, it is
important to mix instructional groupings to meet varied classroom conditions
and student needs, and to provide variety. No one grouping approach is appro¬
priate for every (and all) circumstance(s). A mixture of whole-group, small-
group, and individualized instruction should be used. Here we provide a few
commonsense hints written in terms of questions for whole-group, small-group,
and individualized instruction.
For Whole-Group Instruction

1. Is your classroom attractive and safe? Are the spacing and furnishings
flexible?
2. Have you involved all students in the instructional activities? Do you avoid
emphasizing teacher-student interaction on one side or in the middle of the
room?
3. Have you arranged instructional materials and media equipment so that all
students can readily see and participate in the activities?
4. Do you direct and monitor classroom activities?
5. Do you combine whole group (direct instruction) approaches with small
group (informal cooperative learning) approaches?
6. Are you able to make smooth transitions for large-group activities to either
small-group or individualized instruction? Do you maintain a brisk pace
when making transitions?
For Small-Group Instruction

1. Have you made sure students know what to do and how to proceed? Do they
understand the objectives or tasks and when they have achieved them?
2. Have you made sure students are aware of their responsibilities while
working in small groups?
3. Do you enhance communication and minimize conflicts by discussing
appropriate behavior for individuals within groups?
4. When organizing groups, do you consider the abilities and interests of
students? Do you mix groups by ethnicity, social class, and sex for purposes
of integration; by ability so they are relatively equal on a cognitive basis?
5. Have you taken into account special learning and behavior problems? Do you
separate students who do not work well together?
6. Do you permit students to work at their own pace within their respective
groups? Do you permit each group to work at its own pace?
7. Do you monitor the work of each group? Make comments, ask questions, and
assist the group as necessary?
8. Are you providing knowledge of group results by emphasizing the positive?
Providing immediate feedback and group rewards for achievement?
For Individualized Instruction
1. Do your students know what to do and how to proceed? Are your

objectives, tasks, and achievement levels clearly stated?
2. Do you make sure students understand their responsibilities when working
on individual assignments or independent study?
3. Have you selected diverse materials and media based on individual needs and
abilities? explained the various materials and media available and where they
may be found? permitted students latitude in selecting instructional tools?
4. Do you arrange instructional materials in small, sequenced units to enhance
correct responses from students, especially low-achieving students?
5. Are your students permitted to work at their own pace?
6. Do you monitor and check for understanding? Permit independent work after
students indicate understanding of the main skills or concepts of the lesson?
7. Are you able to provide enrichment activities for high-achieving students?
Do you give them more latitude in selecting materials and activities? Are
you able to provide corrective activities for low-achieving students? Do you
give them more assistance and encouragement?
8. Have you evaluated student work and provided immediate feedback?
9. Do you assess for the purpose of guiding, modifying instruction, and
measuring progress? Do you compare or rank students? Or, better, do you
emphasize individual improvement?
10. Do you provide smooth transitions from individualized instruction to either
large-group or small-group instruction? Can you maintain the pace of the
lesson when making transitions? And, do you avoid abrupt transitions?
Summary
1. Instruction may take place in whole-group, small-group, and individual
settings. The teacher is responsible for varying these three groupings
according to the needs of the students and the objectives of the lesson.
2. Classroom seating arrangements include traditional, rectangular, circular,
horseshoe, and various special formations designed to meet special activities.
3. Large-group or whole-group instruction is the most common form of

classroom organization, suitable for the teacher when lecturing and
explaining, questioning, and providing practice and drill.
4. Whole-group instruction tends to be geared to the average learner, and the
students are expected to perform within a narrow range. Most classroom
tasks performed by students are either too easy or too difficult.
5. Small groups give the teacher flexibility in instruction and an opportunity to
introduce skills and tasks at the level suited to a particular group of students.
6. There are several methods for organizing students in small groups. Small-
group activities are best achieved when group size is limited to five to eight
students per group.
7. Individualized instruction permits the student to work alone at his or her own
pace and level over short or long periods of time. Individualized instruction
permits the teacher to adapt instruction to the abilities, needs, and interests of
the learner.
1. What type of seating arrangements do you prefer during whole-group
instruction? What does this say about your teaching approach?
2. Which small-group instructional methods do you prefer? Why?
3. Which individualized instructional methods do you prefer? Why?
4. What are three advantages and three disadvantages of mastery learning?
5. In general, which methods do you expect to emphasize (or presently
emphasize) in your own class—whole group, small group, or individualized?
Why?
Things to Do
1. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of three seating arrangements for
the subject level and grade level you wish to teach.
2. Observe two or three teachers at work in the classroom and try to explain the
classroom tasks taking place. Interview them about how they teach.
3. Defend or criticize the nature of competitive and cooperative classrooms. Be
sure to describe the advantages of each, whatever your overall preference.
How would you change the reward structures in school?
4. Observe a tutoring program for students in a local school. Report back to
your peers on the merits of the program.
5. Visit a school that has adopted a mastery approach to learning. What did you
like or not like about the approach?
Bloom, Benjamin, S. Human Characteristics and School Learning. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1976. Emphasis on individual instruction and school learning, with methods of
changing the level of learning and rate of learning through mastery approaches.
Glaser, Robert. Adaptive Education: Individual Diversity and Learning. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1988. Compact description of various conditions and
characteristics of instruction that can be adapted to the individual student.
Johnson, David W., and Roger T. Johnson. Learning Together and Alone, 5th ed.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1999. One of many books authored by the
Johnsons that focuses on the need for cooperative learning through various small-
group methods.
Loveless, Tom. The Tracking Wars: State Reform Meets School Policy. Washington,
D.C.: Brookings Institution, in press. A discussion of the politics of school tracking
practices.
Oakes, Jeannie A. Multiplying Inequalities. Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1990.
The effects of tracking with regard to race and social class on opportunities to learn.
Slavin, Robert E. Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research and Practice, 2nd ed.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1995. Discusses how to set up and use
cooperative learning in classrooms.
Vermette, Paul J. Making Cooperative Learning Work. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 1998. Describes how cooperative learning structures can be used to enhance
student learning.
Key Terms
ability 312 nongraded instruction 318
between-class ability grouping 313 open classroom 297
cooperative learning 323 peer tutoring 320
classroom tasks 305 self-contained classroom 294
departmentalization 294 small-group instruction 311
formal cooperative learning 325 tracking 313
individualized instruction 332 whole-group instruction 301
informal cooperative learning 326 within-class ability grouping 316
mastery learning 333
End Notes
1. Raymond S. Adams and Bruce J. Biddle, Realities of Teaching (New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1970).
2. Saul Axelrod et al„ “Comparison of Two Common Classroom Seating
Arrangements,” Academic Therapy (September 1979): 29-36; Valerie Caproni
et al„ “Seating Position, Instructor’s Eye Contact Availability, and Student
Participation,” Journal of Social Psychology (December 1977): 315-316; Also see
Carolyn M. Evertson et al„ Classroom Management for Elementary Teachers, 4th
ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997).
3. Edmund T. Eramer et al., Classroom Management for Secondary Teachers, 4th ed.
(Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997); Allan C. Omstein and Francis P.
Hunkins, Curriculum: Foundations, Principles, and Theory, 2nd ed. (Needham
4. Judith M. Newman, “We Can’t Get There from Here: Critical Issues in School
Reform,” Phi Delta Kappan (December 1998): 288-296.
5. Thomas L. Good et al., “Investigating Work Groups to Promote Problem Solving
in Mathematics,” in Advances in Research on Teaching, vol. 3, ed. J. E. Brophy
(Greenwich, CT: JAI Press, 1992), 115-160; David W. Johnson and Roger T.
Johnson, Learning Together and Alone, 5th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1999).
6. James Hiebert and Diana Wearne, “Instructional Tasks, Classroom Discourse, and
Students’ Learning in Second-Grade Arithmetic,” American Educational Research
Journal (Summer 1993): 393^425.
7. Anne Reynolds, “What Is Competent Beginning Teaching?” Review of Educational
Research (Spring 1992): 1-35; John Woodward, “Effects of Curriculum Discourse
Style on Eighth Graders’ Recall and Problem Solving in Earth Science,”
Elementary School Journal (January 1994): 299-314.
8. Larry Cuban, How Teachers Taught (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia
University Press, 1993); David W. Johnson, Reaching Out: Interpersonal
Effectiveness and Self-Actualization, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1997); George J. Posner, Analyzing the Curriculum, 2nd ed. (New York:
McGraw-Hill, 1995).
9. Eugene Garcia, “Effective Instruction for Language Minority Students: The
Teacher” in Latinos and Education, ed. Antonio Darder, Roldolfo D. Torres,
and Henry Gutierrez (New York: Routledge, 1997), 368.
10. Deborah Sontag, “Teacher Leader Calls for Return to Tradition,” New York Times
(23 March 1992): B7; Edward A. Wynne and Herbert J. Walberg, “Persisting
Groups: An Overlooked Force for Learning,” Phi Delta Kappan (March 1994):
427^430.
11. Nancy Sato, “Teaching and Learning in Japanese Elementary Schools,” Peabody
Journal of Education (Spring 1993): 111-149; Harold W. Stevenson, “Why Asian
Students Still Outdistance Americans,” Educational Leadership (February 1993):
63-65.
12. Diana Oxley, “Organizing Schools into Small Units,” Phi Delta Kappan (March
1994): 521-536.
13. Eric A. Hanushek, “The Impact of Differential Expenditures on School
Performance,” Educational Researcher (May 1989): 45-51, 62; Hanushek, The
Evidence on Class Size (Rochester, NY: W. Allen Wallis Institute of Political
Economy, 1998): ii-v.
14. Robert E. Slavin, “Class Size and Student Achievement: Small Effects of Small
Classes,” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1989): 99-110.
15. Nancy A. Madden and Robert E. Slavin, “Effective Pull-Out Programs for Students
at Risk,” in Effective Programs for Students at Risk, ed. R. E. Slavin, N. L. Karweit,
and N. A. Madden (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1989), 16-32; Robert
E. Slavin, “Chapter 1: A Vision for the Next Quarter Century,” Phi Delta Kappan
(April 1991): 586-589.
16. Gene M. Glass and Mary L. Smith, Meta-Analysis of Research on the Relationship
of Class Size and Achievement (San Francisco: Far West Laboratory for
Educational Research and Development, 1978); Glass et al., School Class Size
(Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1982).
17. Barbara A. Nye, The Lasting Benefit Study: A Continuing Analysis of the Effect of
Small Class Size in Kindergarten Through Third Grade (Nashville: Tennessee State
University, 1991); Nye, “Smaller Classes Really Are Better,” American School
Board Journal (May 1992): 31-33.
18. Daniel J. Mueller, Clinton I. Chase, and James D. Walden, “Effects of Reduced
Class Size in Primary Classes,” Educational Leadership (February 1988): 48-50;
Robert E. Slavin, Nancy L. Karweit, and Barbara A. Wasik, “Preventing Early
School Failure: What Works?” Educational Leadership (December-January 1993):
10-17.
19. Glass and Smith, Meta-Analysis of Research on the Relationship of Class Size and
Achievement; Glen E. Robinson, “Synthesis of Research on the Effects of Class
Size,” Educational Leadership (April 1990): 80-90.
20. Harris M. Cooper, “Does Reducing Student-to-Instructor Ratios Affect
Achievement?” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1989): 79-88.
21. John I. Goodlad, A Place Called School (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1984); Philip
W. Jackson, Untaught Lessons (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia
University, 1992).
22. Ronald W. Marx and John Walsh, “Learning from Academic Tasks,” Elementary
School Journal (January 1988): 207-219; Stephen T. Peverly, “Problems With the
Knowledge-Based Explanation of Memory and Development,” Review of
Educational Research (Spring 1991): 71-93.
23. Jacques S. Benninga et al., “Effects of Two Contrasting School Task and Incentive
Structures on Children’s Social Development,” Elementary School Journal
(November 1991): 149-168; James M. Royer, Cheryl A. Cisero, and Maria S.
Carlo, “Techniques and Procedures for Assessing Cognitive Skills,” Review of
24. Nancy S. Cole, “Conceptions of Educational Achievement,” Educational
Researcher (April 1990): 2-7.
25. Neville Bennett and Charles Desforges, “Matching Classroom Tasks to Students’
Attainments,” Elementary School Journal (January 1988): 221-234.
26. Neville Bennett et al., “Task Processes in Mixed and Single Age Classes,”
Education (Fall 1987): 43-50; also Neville Bennett and Clive Carre, Learning to
Teach (New York: Routledge, 1993).
27. Paul J. Vermette, Making Cooperative Learning Work (Upper Saddle River, NJ:
Prentice Hall, 1998).
28. James Hiebert, “Mathematical, Cognitive, and Instructional Analysis of Decimal
Fractions,” in Analysis of Arithmetic for Mathematics Teaching, ed. G. Leinhardt,
R. T. Putnam, and R. A. Hattrup (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1992), 64-79; James
Hiebert, Diana Wearne, and Susan Taber, “Fourth Graders’ Gradual Construction
of Decimal Fractions Using Different Physical Representations,” Elementary
School Journal (March 1991): 321-341.
29. Robert E. Slavin, “A Theory of School and Classroom Organization,” Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1987): 89-128.
30. Benjamin S. Bloom, “The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Group
Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring,” Educational Researcher
(June-July 1984): 4-16.
31. Ibid., 6. Also see Benjamin S. Bloom, “Helping All Children Learn,” Principal
(March 1988): 12-17.
32. Herbert Walberg, “Improving the Productivity of America’s Schools,” Educational
Leadership (May 1984): 19-27; Walberg, “Synthesis of Research on Teaching,” in

Macmillan, 1986), 214-229.
33. Margaret C. Wang and Herbert Walberg, “Teaching and Educational
Effectiveness,” in Effective Teaching: Current Research, ed. H. C. Waxman and
H. J. Walberg (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan Press, 1991), 81-104; Margaret C.
Wang, Geneva D. Haertel, and Herbert Walberg, “What Helps Students Learn,”
Educational Leadership (December-January 1994): 74-79.
34. John R. Philips and Marci Kanstoroom, “Title II: Does Professional Development
Work” in New Directions: Federal Education Policy in the Twenty-First Century
(Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, 1999): 72.
35. Robert E. Slavin, “Student Teams and Comparison Among Equals: Effects on
Academic Performance and Student Attitudes,” Journal of Educational Psychology
(August 1978): 532-538; Noreen M. Webb, “Verbal Interaction and Learning in
Peer-Directed Groups,” Theory into Teaching (Winter 1985): 32-39.
36. David C. Berliner, “Laboratory Setting and the Study of Teacher Education,”
Journal of Teacher Education (November-December 1985): 2-8.
37. Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton, Teaching to Change the World (Boston:
38. Jomills H. Braddock and James M. McPartland, “Alternatives to Tracking,”
Educational Leadership (April 1990): 76-79; Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton,
“Detracking Schools: Early Lessons from the Field,” Phi Delta Kappan (February
1992): 448-454.
39. Oakes and Lipton, Teaching to Change the World, 286.
40. Thomas Good, “Two Decades of Research on Teacher Expectations,” Journal of
Teacher Education (July-August 1987): 32^47; Cloyd Hastings, “Ending Ability
Grouping Is a Moral Imperative,” Educational Leadership (October 1992): 14-18.
41. Oakes and Lipton, “Detracking Schools”; Anne Wheelock, “The Case for
Untracking,” Educational Leadership (October 1992): 14-18.
42. Adam Gamoran, The Variable Effects of High School Tracking (Madison, WI:
Center on Organization and Restructuring of Schools, University of
Wisconsin-Madison, 1992); Ralph Scott, “Untracking Advocates Make Incredible
Claims,” Educational Leadership (October 1993): 79-81.
43. Robert E. Slavin, “Grouping for Instruction in the Elementary School,” Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1987): 12; Slavin, “Achievement Effects of Ability Grouping
in Secondary Schools: A Best Evidence Synthesis,” Review of Educational
Research (Winter 1990): 471^-99.
44. Goodlad, A Place Called School; Jeannie Oakes, Keeping Track: How Schools
Structure Inequality (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1985).
45. Adam Gamoran, “Is Ability Grouping Equitable?” Educational Leadership
(October 1992): 11-17; De Wayne A. Mason et al., “Assigning Average-Achieving
Eighth Graders to Advanced Mathematics Classes in an Urban Junior High,”
Elementary School Journal (May 1992): 587-599.
46. Adam Gamoran, “Synthesis of Research: Is Ability Grouping Equitable?”
Educational Leadership (October 1992): 11-13; Jeannie Oakes, “Tracking in
Secondary Schools,” Educational Psychologist (Spring 1987): 129-153; DeWayne
Mason and Thomas Good, “Effects of Two-Group and Whole-Class Teaching on
Regrouped Elementary Students’ Mathematics Achievement,” American
Educational Research Journal (September 1993): 328-360.
47. Elfrieda Heibert, “An Examination of Ability Grouping in Reading Instruction,”
Reading Research Quarterly (Winter 1983): 231-255.
48. Robert E. Slavin, “Ability Grouping and Student Achievement in Secondary

Schools,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1990); Joseph S. Yarworth et al.,
“Organizing for Results in Elementary and Middle School Mathematics,”
Educational Leadership (October 1988): 61-67.
49. Thomas Good, “An Observation Study of Small Group Mathematics Instruction in
Elementary Schools,” American Educational Research Journal (Winter 1990):
755-782; Mason and Good, “Effects of Two-Group and Whole-Class Teaching on
Regrouped Elementary Students.”
50. Oakes and Lipton, Teaching to Change the World, 310.
51. James Kulik, “Findings on Grouping are Often Distorted,” Educational Leadership
(March 1991): 67; Tom Loveless, “The Tracking Debate” (Cambridge, MA:
Program on Education Policy and Governance, 1998-99): 6.
52. Jeannie Oakes, “Can Tracking Research Inform Practice? Technical, Normative,
and Political Considerations,” Educational Researcher (May 1992): 12.
53. Slavin, Karweit, and Wasik, “Preventing Early School Failure: What Works?” 10-18.
54. Roberto Gutierrez and Robert E. Slavin, “Achievement Effects of the Nongraded
Elementary School: A Best Evidence Synthesis,” Review of Educational Research
(Winter 1992): 333-376.
55. William P. McLoughlin, The Nongraded School: A Critical Assessment (Albany:
New York State Department of Education, 1967).
56. Gutierrez and Slavin, “Achievement Effects of the Nongraded Elementary School”;
Barbara Nelson Pavan, “The Benefits of Nongraded Schools,” Educational
Leadership (October 1992): 22-25.
57. Jeanne E. Ormrod, Human Learning (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1999).
58. Robert E. Slavin and Nancy A. Madden, “What Works for Students at Risk,”
Educational Leadership (September 1989): 4-13; Theresa A. Thorkildsen, “Those
Who Can, Tutor,” Journal of Educational Psychology (March 1993): 82-190.
59. Marilyn J. Adam, Beginning to Read (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1990); Penelope
L. Peterson et al., “Ability X Treatment and Children’s Learning in Large-Group
and Small-Group Approaches,” American Educational Research Journal (Winter
1981): 453-473.
60. Johnson and Johnson, Learning Together and Alone.
61. Susan R. Swing and Penelope Peterson, “The Relationship of Student Ability and
Small-Group Interaction to Student Achievement,” American Educational Research
Journal (Summer 1982): 259-274; Noreen M. Webb, “Predicting Learning from
Student Interaction: Defining the Interaction Variables,” Educational Psychologist
(Spring 1983): 33^11.
62. Panayota Mantzicopoulous et al., “Use of Search/Teach Tutoring Approach with
Middle-Class Students at Risk for Reading Failure,” Elementary School Journal
(May 1992): 573-586; Swing and Peterson, “The Relationship of Student Ability
and Small-Group Interaction to Student Achievement.”
63. Lynn S. Fuchs et al„ “The Nature of Student Interactions During Peer Tutoring
with and Without Peer Training and Experience,” American Educational Research
Journal (Spring 1994): 75-103; Webb, “Peer Interaction and Learning in Small
Groups,” International Journal of Educational Research (Spring 1989): 211-224.
64. William S. Carlsen, “Questioning in Classrooms: A Sociolinguistic Perspective,”
Review of Educational Research (Summer 1991): 157-178; J. P. Dillon, Questioning
Teaching (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1988).
65. Arthur C. Graesser and Natalie K. Person, “Question Asking During Tutoring,”
American Educational Research Journal (Spring 1994): 104-137.
66. Benjamin S. Bloom, “Helping All Children Learn in Elementary School—and

Beyond,” Principal (March 1988): 12-17; Bloom, “The 2 Sigma Problem: The
Search for Methods of Group. Instruction as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring.”
67. Peter A. Cohen, James A. Kulik, and Chen-Lin C. Kulik, “Educational Outcomes of
Tutoring: A Meta-Analysis of Findings,” American Educational Research Journal
(Summer 1982): 237-248; Darrell Morris, Beverly Shaw, and Jan Pemey, “Helping
Low Readers in Grades 2 and 3: An After-School Volunteer Tutoring Program,”
Elementary School Journal (November 1990): 133—150; and Linda Devin-Sheehan,
Robert S. Feldman, and Vernon I. Allen, “Research on Children Tutoring Children:
A Critical Review,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1976): 355-385.
68. Chester Finn, What Works: Research About Teaching and Learning (Washington,
DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1986), 36.
69. Robert E. Slavin, “Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning,” Educational
Leadership (February 1991): 71-82.
70. Alfie Kohn, “Group Grading Grubbing Versus Cooperative Learning,” Educational
Leadership (February 1991): 83-87; Marian Matthews, “Gifted Students Talk
About Cooperative Learning,” Educational Leadership (October 1992): 48-50.
71. Roger Johnson and David Johnson, Joining Together: Group Therapy and Group
Skills, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997); Robert E. Slavin,
Cooperative Learning: Theory, Research, and Practice, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs,
NJ: Prentice Hall, 1995).
72. Slavin, “Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning.”
73. Michael S. Meloth and Paul D. Deering, “Task Talk and Task Awareness Under
Different Cooperative Learning Conditions,” American Educational Research
Journal (Spring 1994): 139.
74. Linda A. Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice
Hall, 1998), 116.
75. Robert E. Slavin, Using Student Team Learning, 3rd ed. (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins
76. Robert E. Slavin, School and Classroom Organization (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum,
1988); Slavin, “Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning.”
77. Elliot Aronson et al., The Jigsaw Classroom (Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1978).
78. Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom, 100-101.
79. Stanley Kagan, “The Structural Approach to Cooperative Learning” Educational
Researcher (December-January, 1989-1990): 13.
80. Thomas J. Lasley and Thomas J. Matczynski, Strategies for Teaching in a Diverse
Society (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1997), 280.
81. Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom, 102.
82. David W. Johnson, Reaching Out, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon,
1997); Johnson and Johnson, Learning Together and Alone.
83. Roger Johnson and David Johnson, “Toward a Cooperative Effort,” Educational
Leadership (April 1989): 80-81.
84. Roger Johnson and David Johnson, “Gifted Students Illustrate What Isn’t
Cooperative Learning,” Educational Leadership (March 1993): 60-61;
John A. Ross and Dennis Raphael, “Communication and Problem Solving
Achievement in Cooperative Learning,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
(March-April 1990): 149-164.
85. Robert Glaser and Lauren B. Resnik, “Instructional Psychology,” Annual Review of
Psychology, 23 (1972): 207-276. Also see Robert Glaser, ed., Advances in
Instructional Psychology (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1978).
86. John C. Flanagan, Program for Learning in Accordance with Needs, paper
presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association,
Chicago, February 1968.
87. Herbert J. Klausmeier and Richard E. Ripple, Learning and Human Abilities,
3rd ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1971).
88. Fred S. Keller, “Good-Bye Teacher,” Journal of Applied Behavioral Analysis
(April 1968): 79-84.
89. Margaret Wang and Herbert Walberg, eds., Adapting Instruction to Individual
Differences (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1985). Also see Margaret Wang, ed., The
Handbook of Adaptive Instruction (Baltimore: Paul Brookes, 1992).
90. Herbert J. Klausmeier, Learning and Teaching Concepts (New York: Academic
Press, 1980); Deborah B. Strother, “Adapting Instruction to Individual Needs,” Phi
Delta Kappan (December 1985): 308-311. Also see Robert E. Slavin et al.,
Preventing Early School Failure (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1993).
91. John B. Carroll, “A Model of School Learning,” Teacher’s College Record (May
1963): 723-733.
92. John B. Carroll, “The Carroll Model: A 25-Year Retrospective and Prospective
View,” Educational Researcher (January-February 1989): 26-31; Robert E. Slavin,
“Mastery Learning Reconsidered,” Review of Educational Research (Summer
1987): 175-214.
93. James H. Block, Mastery Learning: Theory and Practice (New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1971); Benjamin S. Bloom, Human Characteristics and
School Learning (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1976); Benjamin S. Bloom, All Our
Children Learning (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981).
94. Arthur K. Ellis and Jeffrey T. Fouts, Research on Educational Foundations
(Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, 1997).
95. Robert B. Burns, “Mastery Learning: Does It Work?” Educational Leadership
(November 1979): 112.
96. Block and Burns, “Mastery Learning,” in Review of Research in Education, vol. 4,
ed. Lee S. Shulman (Itasca, IL: Peacock, 1976), 118-145. Also see James Block,
Helen Efthim, and Robert Burns, Building Effective Mastery Learning Schools
(New York: Longman, 1989).
97. Daniel U. Levine, “Achievement Gains in Self-Contained Chapter I Classes in
Kansas City,” Educational Leadership (March 1987): 22-23; Daniel U. Levine,
“Creating Effective Schools,” Phi Delta Kappan (January 1991): 394-397;
Daniel U. Levine and Allan C. Ornstein, “Reforms That Can Work,” American
School Board Journal (June 1993): 31-34.
98. ChenLin C. Kulik, James A. Kulik, and Robert L. Bangert-Downs, “Effectiveness
of Mastery Learning Programs: A Meta-Analysis,” Review of Educational Research
(Summer 1990): 265-299.
99. Lorin W. Anderson, “Values, Evidence, and Mastery Learning,” Review of
Educational Research (Summer 1987): 215-223; Thomas R. Guskey, “Rethinking
Mastery Learning Reconsidered,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1987):
225-229.
100. Linda Darling-Hammond, “Mad-Hatter Tests of Good Teaching,” New York Times
(8 January 1984): sec. 12, 57; Allan C. Ornstein, “Comparing and Contrasting
Norm-Reference Tests and Criterion-Reference Tests,” NASSP Bulletin (October
1993): 28-39; Blaine R. Worthen and Vicki Spandel, “Putting the Standardized
Test Debate in Perspective,” Educational Leadership (February 1991): 65-70.
101. Marshal Arlin, “Time, Equality, and Mastery Learning,” Review of Educational
Research (Spring 1984): 65-86; Marshall Arlin, “Time Variability in Mastery
Learning,” American Educational Research Journal (Spring 1984): 103-120;
Kevin Castner, Lorraine Costella, and Steven Hass, “Moving from Seat Time to
Mastery,” Educational Leadership (September 1993): 45-50.
102. Arthur K. Ellis and Jeffrey T. Fouts, Research on Educational Innovations
(Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, 1997).
103. James Block, Mastery Learning in Classroom Instruction (New York: Macmillan,
1975); Block, Efthim, and Burns, Building Effective Mastery Learning Schools.
A P t E
Classroom Management
and Discipline

Creating a climate that promotes fairness. (Bl)
Establishing and maintaining rapport with students. (B2)
Establishing and maintaining consistent standards of classroom behavior. (B4)
Making the physical environment as safe and conducive to learning as possible. (B5)
INTASC Standards Relevant to the Content of This Chapter

interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation. (Principle 5)
development of the learner. (Principle 8)
Focusing Questions
1. Why is classroom management an integral part of teaching?
2. What are some approaches to classroom management? Which ones best fit
your personality and philosophy?
3. What is the best way to decide on which approach best fits your classroom
management goals?
4. What are some characteristics of successful classroom managers? How many
of these characteristics coincide with your management behaviors?
349
Effective Classroom Management
Carolyn M. Evertson
Professor of Education and Educational Psychology
Vanderbilt University
The foremost concern of new teachers is managing carefully organized, systematic plans for accom¬
the classroom effectively, but, too often, managing plishing classroom tasks and activities. Good man¬
effectively is seen as simply dealing with misbehav¬ agers also make clear their expectations for stu¬
ior. To view good classroom management as a set of dents’ work and behavior, rules and procedures,
strategies for disciplining students is to misunder¬ routines for checking and monitoring student academ¬
stand the basis on which good management rests. ic work, procedures for grading and giving feedback
Effective classroom managers are distinguished by to students, incentives and deterrents, methods for
their success in preventing problems from arising in grouping students, and a whole variety of seemingly
the first place, rather than by special skills in deal¬ minor but essential procedures. Proactive planning
ing with problems once they occur. Good manage¬ helps avert behavior problems by providing students
ment practice begins on the first day of school with with ways to be successful.
5. How can preventive disciplinary measures improve classroom management?

Which ones best fit your personality and philosophy?
6. How can you analyze your strengths and weaknesses as a classroom
manager? What means or techniques would you use to evaluate your
management abilities?
To teach, you must be able to manage your students. No matter how much po¬
tential you have as a teacher, if you are unable to control the students in your
classroom, little learning will take place. Classroom management is an integral
part of teaching, and teachers can and must acquire techniques of managing
students.
Inadequate classroom management and discipline are widely considered by
the public to be the major educational problem, even though the media have cen¬
tered on school busing, school financing, declining test scores, and student
drugs. In annual Gallup polls in education, taken among parents since 1969, stu¬
dent discipline, or the lack of it, is listed as the number one, two, or three school
problem each year for the last 20 out of 25 years.1
According to a recent NEA teacher opinion poll, 90 percent of teachers
maintain that student misbehavior interferes with their teaching, and nearly
25 percent claim that it greatly interferes. The same poll revealed that, annually,
approximately 100,000 teachers suffer personal attack from students, most often
in front of other students in the classroom.2
Chapter 9 Classroom Management and Discipline 351
The problem of discipline is persistent, especially in inner-city schools, be¬

cause (1) many students lack inner control and are unwilling to defer to teacher
authority, (2) many teachers lack systematic methods for dealing with discipline
problems, and (3) many school administrators do not provide adequate support
for teachers. According to the same NEA poll, these are the four major reasons
the public gives for disciplinaryproblems in schools nationwide: parents’ failure
to discipline youth in the home (84 percent), increased use of drugs and alcohol
(83 percent), breakdown of traditional family values (72 percent), and schools’
lack of authority to deal with the problem (67 percent).
Approaches to Classroom Management

Your personality, philosophy, and teaching style will directly affect your man¬
agerial and disciplinary approach. The approach you adopt must be comfortable
for you and coincide with your personal characteristics.
Each approach has advantages and disadvantages. All are predicated on the
assumption that the extremes in terms of discipline are problematic. Teachers
fall into a range of management types. At one extreme is the authoritarian (the
my-way-or-highway type) who demands compliance and never compromises,
even when it is justified. At the other end is the whatever-goes type who toler¬
ates everything and seldom sets behavioral standards that must be met. We
know what happens when parents embrace either of these approaches when rais¬
ing children—authoritarian parents raise children who emerge more socially ir¬
responsible and personally conflicted, and the laissez-faire parents raise children
who find it difficult to know how to define acceptable behavior—or they find
that “anything goes.” Good parenting is a combination of control and clarity.
The techniques we outline all assume a need for teacher control (some ap¬
proaches are higher control than others) and teacher clarity—telling students
specifically what you mean and meaning what you say.
Six approaches, or models, are considered below. Each is grounded in re¬
search and is applicable to classrooms, and they share common features. All are
based on a mixture of psychology, classroom reality, and common sense. All
blend elements of prevention with techniques for intervention. They recommend
somewhat similar measures. They differ in the degree of control and supervision
exercised by the teacher and the relative emphasis on tasks and personalities.
They form a continuum from firm, direct, and highly structured (high teacher
control) to flexible, indirect, and democratic (moderate teacher control). Our
contention is that, in general, teachers should move from high teacher control to
moderate control systems. That is, if the teacher’s goal is to foster student self-
discipline (and we believe that is what should occur!), then the teacher needs to
find ways to help students learn how to control their own behavior. That cannot
occur if teachers are always directing and controlling students. Teachers might
need to start their careers or the school year with high control, but as they create
engaging lessons, the students should begin to engage in more self-monitoring
of their own behavior.
Learning from Your Mistakes
Ernest R. House
Professor and Director of Laboratory for Policy Studies
University of Colorado-Boulder
When I stepped before my first class as a teacher, I those kids quiet?!” No, I could not. My first year of
was totally unprepared. I had little training in educa¬ teaching was pure misery. I hated to see Monday roll
tion and no practice teaching. The high school in around. During the summer I decided this was no
which I taught was in my hometown, an area of way to live. It was either them or me.
heavy industry and oil refineries—all belching That fall I entered the classroom as a disciplinary
smoke and fumes. The students I taught were young ogre. Nothing moved unless I said so. Nobody talked
men and women who eventually went to work in unless I gave permission. I doubt that anyone learned
these factories, along with a few who would make anything that year, but it was quiet. But at least I
their way to college. As an English major fresh out didn’t dread going to school every morning.
of college, I came with a mission to teach lyric po¬ By my third year I became confident enough to
etry and writing to these students. I quickly found relax my totalitarian grip so that spontaneous learn¬
out that I could not maintain discipline in my ing could occur. By my fourth year I might even
classroom. have been a good teacher. But what a struggle.
The students were noisy continually. I could not Looking back, I discovered that discipline in the
keep control. I found myself shouting at them, re¬ classroom depends on what the teacher does in the
sorting to desperate attempts at discipline. When one first few weeks of school. The students watch to see
of the tough boys would not sit down, I confronted what the teacher will allow, then behave accordingly.
him face to face, chest to chest. After a tense mo¬ If the teacher establishes and enforces simple rules,
ment he finally backed down without violence. A the students will behave properly. The key is consis¬
week later, after attending a school function at night, tency. I learned that the teacher must be consistent in
I found the canvas top of my new MGA roadster the disciplinary pattern, especially the first few
slashed. I still remember the long walk to the princi¬ weeks. Also I found that the pattern for the entire
pal’s office to report what had happened. year is usually determined the first weeks of school.
The help I received from my fellow teachers that It is possible to relax discipline later in the year but it
first year was not much. The algebra teacher next is difficult to tighten it once it is gone. The idea is to
door complained about the noise: “Can’t you keep be a manager of students, not a disciplinarian.
Assertive Approach: High Teacher Control

The assertive approach to classroom management is an outgrowth of behavior
modification (which we describe later) and requires that teachers specify rules of
behavior and identify consequences for disobeying them; they also must com¬
municate these rules and consequences clearly. The classroom is managed in
such a way that students are not allowed to forget who is in charge of the class¬
room. According to Duke and Meckel, “Students come to realize that the teacher
expects them to behave in a certain way in class.”3 Teachers hold students

accountable for their actions. As an example, students who disobey rules might
receive “one warning and then are subjected to a series of increasingly more se¬
rious sanctions.”4 The idea is for the teacher to respond to a student’s misbehav¬
ior quickly and appropriately. Mild misbehavior is matched by mild sanctions,
but if the misbehavior continues; the sanctions toughen. The approach assumes
that misbehavior is contagious and will snowball (or ripple) unless checked
early. If misbehavior is ignored or not stopped at an early stage, it will eventu¬
ally become uncontrollable; more and more students will become disruptive.5
The assertive approach is based on Lee and Marlene Canter’s model of dis¬
cipline in which teachers insist on responsible behavior by their students. The
teacher takes charge of the classroom immediately, sets the ground rules, and in¬
teracts with students in a calm yet forceful way.6 The teacher is expected to
combine clear expectations, an active response to misbehavior, and consistent
follow-through with warmth and support for all students.
The technique assumes that good teachers can handle discipline problems
on their own and that teaching failure is directly related to the inability to main¬
tain adequate classroom discipline. Success, if not predicated on, at least corre¬
lates with, good discipline. The approach probably is most effective with stu¬
dents who are emotionally immature and who are having difficulty controlling
their own behavior.7
The Canters make the following suggestions for teachers applying assertive
discipline:
1. Clearly identify positive expectations for students.

2. Take positions. (Say, “I like that” or “I don’t like that.”)
3. Use a firm tone of voice.
4. Use eye contact, gestures, and touches to supplement verbal messages.
5. Give and receive compliments genuinely.
6. Place demands on students and enforce them.
7. Set limits on students and enforce them.
8. Indicate consequences of behavior and why specific action is necessary.
9. Be calm and consistent; avoid emotion or threats.
10. Persist; enforce minimum rules; don’t give up.8
The assertive model holds that teachers must establish firm management
at the beginning of the year by (1) clarifying appropriate expectations of re¬
sponsible behavior, (2) identifying existing or potential discipline problems,
(3) deciding on negative and positive consequences of behavior that fit the stu¬
dents and situation, and (4) learning how to follow through and implement
these consequences. The plan is best achieved through mental rehearsal (hav¬
ing a good idea of what to do before something occurs) and practice (learning
from mistakes).
Review the following classroom example and then identify which of the
principles outlined above are evident in this classroom segment. Also, review
this same vignette in relationship to the behavior modification principles out

lined later in this chapter.
Just prior to the opening of school each year, parents of students enrolled in Alpine
Junior High receive a description of the “assertive discipline” program in which stu¬
dents’, parents’, teachers’, and administrators’ responsibilities to the program are ex¬
plained. Parents are asked to sign and return to the school office a form indicating
that they have read the material and are willing to comply with the stipulations of
the program. An orientation to the program is provided for the students during the
first week of school.
Alpine Junior High’s assertive discipline program includes the following
features:
1. Each classroom teacher specifies for students the rules for classroom conduct.
During the course of the year, new rules may be decided upon and
occasionally an old rule may be deleted. An up-to-date list of rules is always
displayed in the classroom.
2. The first time a student violates a rule during a particular class session, the
teacher writes the student’s name on a designated area of the chalkboard. The
number of the rule that was violated is put next to the name. The teacher does
not say anything about the transgression, but only writes the name and
numeral on the board and continues with the planned activity.
3. The second time in the class period that same student violates a rule (not
necessarily the same rule), the number of that rule is added to the name
appearing on the board. Again, the teacher makes no other response to the
off-task behavior.
4. Upon the third violation in the same class period, the student must leave the
class and report to a detention room. Again, the teacher does not take class
time to talk to the student about the matter. The teacher only indicates that a
third violation has occurred and the student is already aware of the
consequences.
5. There are no penalties or requirements for students who have no more than
one violation during any one class period.
6. Students with two violations are required to meet with the teacher after school
to discuss the violations and map out a plan for preventing recurrences.
7. The parents of students with three violations must appear at school to discuss the
violations and make plans for preventing recurrences with the student, the
teacher, and another school official. The student may not return to the class
where the violations occurred until a plan has been worked out with the parents.9
Applied Science Approach: High Teacher Involvement

Well-run classrooms that are free from disruptions, where students behave in an
orderly manner and are highly involved in learning, are not accidental. They
exist where teachers have a clear idea of the type of classroom conditions
(arrangement, materials), student behaviors (rules, procedures), and instructional
activities (assignments, tasks) they wish to produce. The applied science ap¬
proach, developed by Evertson and Emmer, emphasizes the organization and
management of students as they engage in academic work.10 Much of their
The classroom setting

is a place where
a structured and
organized teacher
is often successful.
work is based on real-world observations of effective and ineffective classroom

managers. Task orientation—focusing on the businesslike and orderly accom¬
plishment of academic work—leads to a clear set of procedures for students and
teachers to follow.
Evertson and Emmer divide organizing and managing student work into
three major categories: establishment and communication of work assignments,
standards, and procedures; monitoring of student work; and feedback to students.
I. Clear communication of assignments and work requirements. The teacher

must establish and explain clearly to students work assignments, features of
the work, standards to be met, and procedures. Some teachers are even
developing their own web pages as a means of keeping students (and
parents) informed of assignments and grades. Regardless of the approach
you use, it is imperative to:
1. Provide clear instruction for assignments. Explanations should be both
oral and written. In addition to telling the students about assignments,
teachers should post assignments on the chalkboard or distribute
duplicated copies. Students should be required to copy assignments
posted on the chalkboard into their notebooks.
2. Develop standards for the form, degree of neatness, and due dates of
papers. Before students start, they should be given general rules for all
assignments: type of paper and writing material to use (pencil, pen,
typewriter), page numbering system, form for headings, due dates, and
so forth. Students will then know what is expected of them without
having to be told each time.
3. Develop procedures for absent students. Routines should be established

for makeup work for absent students. These must include meeting briefly
with the students at a set time before or after school, assigning class
helpers who will be available at particular times of the day (usually
during seatwork activities) to help the students, and having a designated
place where students can pick up and turn in makeup work.
II. Monitoring student work. Monitoring student work helps the teacher to
detect students who are having difficulty and to encourage students to keep
working.
1. Monitor group work. Before helping any individual student with work,
the teacher must be sure that all students start work and are able to do the
assignment; otherwise, some students will not even start the assignment
and others may start incorrectly.
2. Monitor individual work. Work can be monitored several ways,
including circulating around the room and giving feedback where
needed, having students bring their work to the teacher one at a time at
some designated point during an activity, and establishing due dates that
correspond with stages in an assignment.
3. Monitor completion of work. Procedures for turning in work must be
established and enforced. When all students are turning in work at the
same time, the best procedure is to have the work passed in a given
direction with no talking until all the work is collected.
4. Maintain records of student work. It is important for teachers to keep a record
of the students’ work and to incorporate it as part of the grade. The record
should be divided into several headings, such as workbook assignments,
major assignments or projects, daily homework, and quizzes and tests.
III. Feedback to students. Frequent, immediate, and specific feedback is
important for enhancing academic monitoring and managerial procedures.
Work in progress, homework, completed assignments, tests, and other work
should be checked promptly.
1. Focus attention on problems. It is important for teachers to pay careful
attention at the beginning of the year to completion of classroom and
homework assignments. The first time a student fails to turn in an
assignment without a good reason is the time to talk to the student. If the
student needs help, the teacher should provide it, but should insist at the
same time that the student do the work. If the student has persistent
problems completing work, then the teacher might need to communicate
with the parents. The teacher should not wait until the grading period is
over to note the problems that exist.
2. Focus attention on good work. Part of giving feedback is to acknowledge
good work. This can be done by displaying the work, giving oral
recognition, or providing written comments.11
According to Evertson and Emmer, an effective manager incorporates

eleven managerial methods, all of which have been shown to correlate with im¬
proved student achievement and behavior. These methods are listed in Table 9.1.
Chapter 9 Classroom Management and. Discipline 357
Table 9.1 Methods of Effective Classroom Managers
1. Readying the classroom. Classroom space, materials, and equipment are ready at the beginning
of the year. Effective managers have arranged their rooms better, and they have coped more
effectively with existing constraints.
2. Planning rules and procedures. Teachers make sure students understand and follow rules and
procedures; they spend more time in the beginning of the year explaining and reminding
students of rules.
3. Teaching rules and procedures. Rules and procedures are systematically taught (i.e., lining up,
turning work in, etc.) and reinforced. Most of these teachers have taught their students to
respond to certain cues or signals, such as a bell or the teacher’s call for attention.
4. Consequences. Consequences for not following rules and procedures are clearly established by
the teachers; there is consistent follow through.
5. Beginning of school activities. The first few days are spent getting students ready as a coherent
and cooperative group. Once the group is established, these teachers sustain a whole-group
focus.
6. Strategies for potential problems. Strategies for dealing with potential problems are planned in
advance. With these strategies teachers can deal with misbehavior more quickly than can less
effective managers.
7. Monitoring. Student behavior is closely monitored; the teacher does not lose audience contact;
student academic work is also monitored.
8. Stopping inappropriate behavior. Inappropriate or disruptive behavior is handled promptly and
consistently—before it worsens or spreads.
9. Organizing instruction. Teachers organize instructional activities at suitable levels for all
students in the class. There is a high degree of student success and content related to student
interests.
10. Student accountability. Procedures have been developed for keeping students accountable for
their work and behavior.
11. Instructional clarity. Teachers provide clear instructions; these help keep students on task and
allow them to learn faster, while reducing discipline problems. Directions are clear, thus
confusion is minimized.
Sources: Edmund T. Emmer and Carolyn M. Evertson, “Synthesis of Research on Classroom Management,”
Educational Leadership (January 1981): 342^17; Evertson and Catherine H. Randolph, “Classroom Management
in the Learner-Centered Classroom,” Teaching: Theory and Practice, ed. A. C. Omstein (Needham Heights, MA:
AHyn & Bacon, 1995), 116-131; Randolph, “Perspectives on Classroom Management in Learner-Centered
Schools,” New Direction for Teaching, eds. Hersholtl. Waxman and Herbert J. Walberg (Berkley CA- McCuthan
1999): 249-268.
The general approach and methods used by Evertson and Emmer are appro¬
priate for both elementary and secondary teachers. The approach coincides with
various instructional techniques, especially as a complement to Rosenshine’s di¬
rect instruction (see Chapter 5).
The applied science approach involves a high degree of “time on task” and
“academic engaged time” for students. The idea is that when students are work¬
ing on their tasks, there is little opportunity for discipline problems to arise.
The teacher organizes students’ work, keeps them on task, monitors their work,
gives them feedback, and holds them accountable by providing rewards and
penalties.12 It is a no-play, no-frills approach, corresponding to old-fashioned
“three Rs” and now packaged as part of the “academic productivity” movement
in education.
Behavior Modification Approach: High Teacher Intervention

Behavioral modification is rooted in the classic work of John B. Watson and the
more recent work of B. F. Skinner. It involves a variety of techniques and meth¬
ods, ranging from simple rewards to elaborate reinforcement training. Behavior-
ists assume that behavior is shaped by environment and pay little attention to the
causes of problems.
Teachers using the behavior modification approach strive to increase the
occurrence of appropriate behavior through a system of rewards and reduce the
likelihood of inappropriate behavior through punishments. According to Albert
Bandura, teachers would ask the following questions: (1) What is the specific
behavior that requires modification (increase, reduction, elimination)? (2) When
does the behavior occur? (3) What are the consequences of the behavior? Or,
what happens in the classroom when the behavior is exhibited? (4) How do
these consequences reinforce inappropriate behavior? How can the conse¬
quences be altered? (5) How can appropriate behavior be reinforced?13
These are the basic principles of the behavioral modification approach:
1. Behavior is shaped by its consequences, not by the causes of problems

in the history of the individual or by group conditions.
2. Behavior is strengthened by immediate reinforcers. Positive reinforcers
are praise or rewards. Negative reinforcers take away or stop something
that the student doesn’t like.14 For example, the student is reprimanded
by the teacher; the student agrees to behave according to classroom
rules, and the teacher stops reprimanding. In a negative reinforcing
situation the student behaves in such a way as to remove aversive
stimuli (such as loss of recess time) from the environment.
3. Behavior is strengthened by systematic reinforcement (positive or
negative). Behavior is weakened if not followed by reinforcement.15
4. Students respond better to positive reinforcers than they do to
punishment (aversive stimuli). Punishment can be used to reduce
inappropriate behavior, but sparingly.
5. When a student is not rewarded for appropriate or adaptive behavior,
inappropriate or maladaptive behavior can become increasingly
dominant and will be utilized to obtain reinforcement.
6. Constant reinforcement—the reinforcement of a behavior every time it
occurs is most often used in establishing a new behavior—produces the
best results, especially in new learning or conditioning situations.
7. Once the behavior has been learned, it is best maintained through
intermittent reinforcement—the reinforcement of a behavior only
occasionally.
8. Intermittent reinforcement schedules include (a) variable-ratio schedule
(supplying reinforcement at unpredictable intervals) and variable
interval, supplying reinforcement following the first correct response
and after a particular time period, (b) fixed-ratio schedule (supplying
reinforcement after a preselected number of responses) and (c) fixed-

interval schedule (supplying reinforcement at preselected intervals).16
9. There are several types of reinforcers, each of which may be positive or
aversive. Examples of positive reinforcers are (a) social reinforcers,
such as verbal commentS'(“Right,” “Correct,” “That’s good”), facial
expressions, and gestures; (b) graphic reinforcers, such as written words
of encouragement, gold stars, and checks; (c) tangible reinforcers, such
as cookies and badges for young students and certificates and notes to
parents for older students; and (d) activity reinforcers, such as being a
monitor or sitting near the teacher for young students and working with
a friend or on a special project for older students.17
10. Rules are established and enforced. Students who follow rules are
praised and rewarded in various ways. Students who break rules are
either ignored, reminded about appropriate behavior, or punished
immediately. The response to rule-breaking differs somewhat in
different variations of the behavioral modification approach.
Each teacher has an undetermined value as a potential reinforcing agent for

each student. This value is assigned initially by students on the basis of past ex¬
periences, and it changes as a result of the teacher’s actions. The teacher must
realize that this evaluation process is going on in the student, and that a positive
relationship with the student will enhance the teacher’s potential for influencing
behavior in class. Moreover, the teacher is one of many adults who serve as rein¬
forcing agents in the student’s life. To facilitate the classroom management
process, the teacher might have to enlist the support of others.
There are a number of systems or variations of behavioral modification that
are applicable to classroom management. They basically build limits and conse¬
quences into behavior and employ various rules, rewards, and punishments.
Modeling is a well-known system used in various social learning situations.
Models are effective in modifying behavior to the degree that they capture at¬
tention, hold attention, and are imitated. Effective models can be parents, relatives,
teachers, other adults (community residents), public figures (sports people, movie
stars), and peers. The best models are those with whom individuals can identify on
the basis of one or more of the following traits: (1) sex, (2) age, (3) ethnicity,
(4) physical attractiveness, (5) personality attractiveness, (6) competence, (7)
power, and (8) ability to reward imitators. Teachers who want to use modeling in
classroom management should recognize that the first five traits are personal char¬
acteristics that are hard to change, but the last three are institutional and role char¬
acteristics that are easier to manipulate to increase models’ effectiveness.
Building good discipline through modeling includes the following.
1. Demonstration. Students know exactly what is expected. In addition to

having expected behavior explained to them, they see it and hear it.
2. Attention. Students focus their attention on what is being depicted or
explained. The degree of attention correlates with the characteristics of
the model (teacher) and characteristics of the students.
Suggestions for Analyzing Preventive Measures
Some of the causes of misbehavior are beyond your 5. Communicate with parents on a regular basis
control. Knowing what measures to take to avoid to learn about their management philosophies
common discipline problems and to handle problem for purposes of support and follow-up in the
student behaviors will increase your time for teach¬ class.
ing and general teacher effectiveness. Here are sug¬ 6. Keep informed on current legal issues
gestions for analyzing your preventive measures. concerning discipline. Read education
journals, state law digests; talk to union
1. Meet privately with other teachers to discuss
representatives.
problems and successful strategies.
7. Document carefully all serious student
2. Identify and analyze the strengths of
behavior problems.
colleagues in dealing with discipline
8. Evaluate your expectations about your
problems. Watch other teachers teach.
disciplinary measures and what you ought to
3. Determine which supervisors and
accomplish.
administrators will provide support when
necessary.
4. Ask another teacher, supervisor, or
administrator to visit your classroom on a Source: Adapted from Daniel L. Duke and Adrienne M. Meckel,
regular basis to analyze your classroom Teacher’s Guide to Classroom Management (New York: Random
management. House, 1984).
3. Practice. Students are given opportunity to practice the appropriate

behavior.
4. Corrective feedback. Students receive frequent, specific, and immediate
feedback. Appropriate behavior is reinforced; inappropriate behavior is
suppressed and corrected.
5. Application. Students are able to apply their learning in classroom
activities (role playing, modeling activities) and other real-life situations.18
Teachers who do not understand how students learn from modeling produce
less learning in their students and have more discipline problems than teachers
who are successful at using modeling.
Group Managerial Approach: Moderate Teacher Intervention

The group managerial approach to discipline is based on Jacob Kounin’s re¬
search. Kounin was one of the first researchers to systematically study class¬
room management procedures, especially the relationship between teacher be¬
haviors and student behaviors. He emphasizes the importance of responding
immediately to inappropriate or undesirable group student behavior in order to
prevent problems, rather than dealing with problems after they have emerged.
Table 9.2 Kounin’s Behaviors and Categories for Observing

Classroom Management
Categories of Pupil Behavior
I. Work Involvement II. Deviancy

A. Involved A. No misbehavior
B. Mild involvement B. Mild misbehavior
C. Not involved C. Serious misbehavior
Categories of Teacher Management Behavior
I. Desist Techniques III. Group Focus

A. “With-it-ness” A. Alerting
1. Target students 1. Encourage suspense
2. Timely fashion 2. Pick reciter randomly
B. Overlapping 3. Call on non volunteers
1. Multiple behaviors 4. Present new materials
II. Movement Management 5. Ignore group in favor of reciter
A. Smoothness-Jerkiness 6. Select reciter before asking question
1. Stimulus-bounded 7. Ask question, then call reciter
2. Thrust B. Accountability
3. Dangle 1. Ask students to hold up props
4. Truncation 2. Actively attend to mass unison response
5. Flip-flop 3. Call on others
B. Momentum 4. Ask for volunteers
1. Overdwelling 5. Check products of nonreciters
2. Fragmentation 6. Require student to demonstrate performance
7. Review frequently
Source: Adapted from Jacob Kounin, Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms (New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1970), Chaps. 3, 7.
Kounin describes this as the “ripple effect.”19 If a student misbehaves, but the
teacher stops the misbehavior immediately, it remains an isolated incident and
does not develop into a problem. If the misbehavior is not noticed, is ignored, or
is allowed to continue for too long, it can spread throughout the group and be¬
come more serious and chronic.
Kounin analyzes classroom activities for management purposes by dividing
them into categories of pupil behavior and teacher management behavior (see
Table 9.2). Major categories of pupil behavior are work involvement and de-
viancy. Major categories of teacher behavior are desist techniques, movement
management, and group focus.
Work involvement is the amount of time students spend engaged in as¬
signed academic work. (It closely resembles what other researchers call “time on
task” or “academic engaged time.”) Students who are involved in work (writing
in a workbook, reciting, reading, watching a demonstration) exhibit fewer disci¬
plinary problems than students who are not involved in any assigned task. If the
teacher keeps students involved in work, there is less chance that boredom and
discipline problems will arise.
Deviancy ranges from no misbehavior to serious misbehavior. Mild misbe¬

havior means the student unwittingly is upsetting another student or teacher or is
slightly off task. Mild misbehavior includes such actions as whispering, making
faces, teasing, reading a comic book, passing notes. Serious misbehavior is ag¬
gressive or harmful behavior that interferes with others or violates school or so¬
cial codes. The point is to prevent mild misbehavior from degenerating into seri¬
ous misbehavior by dealing with the mild misbehavior as soon as it occurs.
Desist techniques are teacher actions taken to stop misbehavior. Kounin
feels that they depend on two abilities. With-it-ness is the ability to react on tar¬
get (react to the proper student) and in a timely fashion. It also involves commu¬
nicating to students that one knows what is happening, or, as Kounin puts it, that
one “has eyes in the back of one’s head.” Overlapping behavior refers to the
teacher’s ability to handle more than one matter at a time. He or she can attend
to more than one student at the same time—say, a student who is reciting and
another student who is interrupting with a question or comment.
Movement management is the organization of behavior in transitions from
task to task within and between lessons. Movement can be characterized as
smooth or jerky. Smoothness is an even and calm flow of activities. It involves
uninterrupted work periods and short, fluid transitions that are made automati¬
cally and without disruption. In particular, the teacher (1) avoids unnecessary
announcements and interruptions when students are busy doing work, (2) fin¬
ishes one activity before starting on the next, and (3) doesn’t abruptly end or
start an activity. Jerkiness is a disorderly flow of activities; it can result if the
teacher tries to do too many things at once or does not make clear to students
procedures for ending one task and changing to a new one. The teacher might
have to shout during transitions, disorder might arise as students have to ask
questions about what to do, and unengaged students might create disruptions. To
prevent jerkiness, these five subcategories of behavior should be avoided:
1. The teacher is so immersed with a small group of students or activity that

he or she ignores other students or misses an event that is potentially
disruptive.
2. The teacher bursts into activities without assessing student readiness and
gives orders, statements, or questions that only confuse the students.
3. The teacher ends an activity or drops a topic before it is completed.
4. The teacher ends an activity abruptly.
5. The teacher terminates one activity, goes to another, and then returns to
the previously terminated activity. The teacher lacks clear direction and
sequence of activities.
Movement management also involves momentum—keeping activities at an

appropriate “pace.” Momentum is slowed or impeded if the teacher engages in
overdwelling or fragmentation. Overdwelling can take the form of giving expla¬
nations beyond what is necessary for most students’ understanding, or lecturing,
preaching, nagging, overemphasizing, or giving too many directions. Fragmen¬
tation takes the form of giving too much detail, breaking things down into too
many steps, or duplicating or repeating activities. For example, a teacher who
calls students to the desk to read, one by one, when one student can read aloud
while the others listen, is engaging in fragmentation.
Group focus is keeping the students focused on the group activity or task.
It can be achieved by what Kounin calls “alerting.” Alerting activities include
creating suspense, presenting new'material, choosing reciters randomly, and se¬
lecting reciters (see Table 9.2 for other methods Kounin lists). Group focus can
also be achieved by using accountability. This involves such methods as asking
students to hold up props, circulating to check the products of nonreciters, and
requiring students to perform and checking their performance (see Table 9.2).
In summary, Kounin believes that student engagement in lessons and activi¬
ties is the key to successful classroom management. Students are expected to
work and behave. The successful teacher monitors student work in a systematic
fashion, clearly defines acceptable and unacceptable behavior, and exhibits
with-it-ness and overlapping abilities. The successful teacher has a clear sense of
direction and sequence for tasks. Smooth transitions are made from one activity
to another, so that student attention is turned easily from one activity to another.
Similarly, lessons are well paced.
Almost all the major applied-science theorists of classroom management—
Brophy, Doyle, Emmer, Evertson, and Good—have been influenced by Kounin. Most
of what they have to say was said by Kounin thirty years ago. See Tips for Teachers
9.2 for an overview of the principles appropriate to the group managerial approach
Acceptance Approach: Moderate Teacher Intervention

The acceptance approach to discipline is rooted in humanistic psychology and
maintains that every person has a prime need for acceptance. Students, like
everyone else, strive for acceptance. More than they want to learn, they want to
belong and to be liked by others who are important to them. Similarly, they
would rather behave than misbehave. The acceptance approach is also based on
the democratic model of teaching in which the teacher provides leadership by
establishing rules and consequences, but at the same time allows students to par¬
ticipate in decisions and to make choices.
Rudolph Dreikurs is noted for a disciplinary approach based on the need for
acceptance.20 He maintains that acceptance by peers and teachers is the prerequi¬
site for appropriate behavior and achievement in school. People try all kinds of be¬
havior to get status and recognition. If they are not successful in receiving recogni¬
tion through socially acceptable methods, then they will turn to “mistaken” goals
that result in antisocial behavior, and, unfortunately, some of that anti-social be¬
havior is deadly, as Americans saw in the horrific 1999 Columbine High School
tragedy in Littleton, Colorado. Dreikurs identifies four mistaken goals:
1. Attention getting. Students who are not getting the recognition they
desire often resort to attention-getting misbehavior. To get other students
or the teacher to pay attention to them, they might act as the “class
clown,” ask special favors, continually seek help with assignments, or
refuse to work unless the teacher hovers over them. They function as
long as they obtain their peers’ or teacher’s attention. Teachers can
determine if a misbehavior has this goal by asking, “Am I annoyed?”
Enhancing Your Classroom Management Approach
How do you develop and maintain a positive approach Procedural Dimensions

to classroom management or whatever discipline ap¬
7. Establish classroom rules. Make rules clear
proach you wish to adapt? Here are some practical
and concise and enforce them. Your rules
suggestions that will work in most situations.
should eventually be construed as their rules.
8. Discuss consequences. Students should
Affective Dimensions understand the consequences for acceptable
1. Be positive. Stress what should be done, not and unacceptable behavior. Invoke logical
what should not be done. consequences—that is, appropriate rewards
and punishment. Don’t punish too often; it
2. Use encouragement. Show that you appreciate
loses its effect after a while.
hard work and good behavior.
9. Establish routines. Students should know
3. Trust. Trust students, but don’t be an easy
what to do under what conditions. Routine
mark. Make students feel you believe in them
procedures provide an orderly and secure
as long as they are honest with you and don’t
classroom environment.
take advantage of you.
10. Confront misbehavior. Don’t ignore violations
4. Express interest. Talk to individual students
of rules or disruptions of routines. Deal with
about what interests them, what they did over
misbehavior in a way that does not interfere
the weekend, how schoolwork is progressing
with your teaching. Don’t accept or excuse
in other areas or subjects. Be sensitive and
serious or contagious misbehavior, even if
respectful about social trends, styles, and
you have to stop your teaching. If you ignore
school events that affect the behavior of the
it, it will worsen.
group. Be aware that peer group pressure
affects individual behavior. 11. Reduce failure, promote success. Academic
failure should be kept to a minimum since it
5. Be fair and consistent. Don’t have “pets” or
is a cause of frustration, withdrawal, and
“goats.” Don’t condemn an infraction one
hostility. When students see themselves as
time and ignore it another time.
winners and receive recognition for success,
6. Show respect; avoid sarcasm. Be respectful
they become more civil, calm, and confident;
and considerate toward students. Understand
they are easier to work with and teach.
their needs and interests. Don’t be arrogant or
12. Set a good example. Model what you preach and
condescending or rely on one-upmanship to
expect. For example, speak the way you want
make a point.
students to speak; keep an orderly room if you
expect students to be orderly; check homework
if you expect students to do the homework.
2. Power seeking. Students might also express their desire for recognition
by defying adults to achieve what they perceive as power. Their defiance
is expressed in arguing, contradicting, teasing, temper tantrums, and low-
level hostile behavior. If the students get the teacher to argue or fight
with them, they win, because they succeed in getting the teacher
involved in a power struggle. Teachers can determine if a misbehavior

has this goal by asking, “Am I threatened?”
3. Revenge seeking. Students who fail to gain recognition through power
might seek revenge. Their mistaken goal is to hurt others to make up for
being hurt or feeling rejected and unloved. Students who seek revenge
don’t care about being punished. They are cruel, hostile, or violent
toward others. Simple logic doesn’t always work with them. Being
punished gives them renewed cause for action. The more trouble they
cause for themselves, the more justified they feel. Teachers can
determine if a misbehavior has this goal by asking, “Am I hurt?”
4. Withdrawal. If students feel helpless and rejected, the goal of their
behavior could become withdrawal from the social situation rather than
confrontation. They guard whatever little self-esteem they have by
removing themselves from situations that test their abilities. Such
withdrawal displays their feelings of inadequacy. If not helped, they
eventually become isolated.21
The first thing teachers need to do is to identify students’ mistaken goals.

The type of misbehavior indicates the type of expectations students have or their
mistaken goal.
1. If students stop the behavior and then repeat it, their goal is getting
attention.
2. If students refuse to stop or increase their misbehavior, their goal is
power seeking.
3. If students become hostile or violent, their goal is getting revenge.
4. If students refuse to cooperate or participate, their goal is withdrawal.
After teachers identify the mistaken goals, they need to confront the stu¬
dents with an explanation of what they are doing. Dreikurs maintains that
by doing this in a friendly, nonthreatening way, teachers can get students to
examine—even change—their behavior. The teachers should then encourage
students in their efforts to recognize their mistaken goals and to change their be¬
havior. Dreikurs sees an important distinction between encouraging and prais¬
ing. Encouragement consists of words or actions that convey respect and belief
in students’ abilities. It tells students they are accepted; it recognizes efforts, not
necessarily achievements. Praise, on the other hand, is given when a task is
achieved, it must be genuine otherwise students will see through it.
The teacher needs to be sure the students are aware of and understand the
consequences of inappropriate behavior. The consequences must be as closely
related to the misbehavior as possible, and the teacher must apply them consis¬
tently, immediately, and in a calm manner, displaying no anger or triumph. For
example, failing to complete a homework assignment means staying after school
and finishing it. Disturbing others in class results in isolation from the group for
a short period. Students gradually learn that poor choices result in unpleasant
consequences, and that these are nobody’s fault but their own. Eventually,
Table 9.3 Strategies for Carrying Out the Acceptance Approach
To Encourage Students To Enforce Consequences
1. Be positive; avoid negative statements. 1. Give clear directions.

2. Encourage students to improve, not be perfect. 2. Establish a relationship with each student based on mutual trust
3. Encourage effort; results are secondary if students try. and respect.
4. Emphasize strengths; minimize weaknesses. 3. Consequences must be logical; a direct relationship between
5. Teach students to learn from mistakes. misbehavior and consequences must be understood by students.
6. Stimulate motivation; do not exert undue pressure. 4. Perceive behavior in its proper perspective; avoid making issues
7. Encourage student independence. out of trivial incidents.
8. Exhibit faith in student’s abilities. 5. Permit students to assume responsibility for their own behavior.
9. Offer to help overcome student’s obstacles. 6. Treat students as social equals.
10. Encourage cooperative or team effort among students. 7. Combine friendliness with firmness; students must see the
11. Send positive notes home; note improvement. teacher as a friend, but limitations must be established.
12. Show pride in student’s work; display it. 8. Distinguish between the deed and doer; react to the behavior,
13. Be optimistic, enthusiastic, supporting. not the person.
14. Set up situations that lead to success for all. 9. Set limits at the beginning, but work toward a sense of
15. Use encouraging remarks; “I know you can”; responsibility on the part of the student.
“Keep trying”; “That a boy.” 10. Keep demands or rules simple.
11. Mean what you say; carry out your rules.
12. Close an incident quickly; revive good spirits; mistakes are
corrected, then forgotten.
Source: Adapted from Rudolph Dreikurs, Maintaining Sanity in the Classroom, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1982).
students learn to control their actions and to make better decisions, and thus they
reach a point where their behavior is controlled by self-discipline.
Dreikurs suggests several strategies for working with students who exhibit
mistaken goals to encourage them and to enforce consequences. These points are
listed in Table 9.3.
Provided below are two examples of misbehavior described by C. M.
Charles. In the first example, Sally exhibits attention-seeking behavior; in the
second, Jerry exhibits threatening behavior. Notice how the teachers deal with
these students’ behavior, and compare the teachers’ responses to the ideas de¬
scribed above.
Sally’s Misbehavior (Attention Seeking)

Ms. Morton’s class was doing independent seat work. Every few minutes Sally
raised her hand to ask for some kind of direction: Should she number the sentences?
Should she put her name on the paper? Was this answer right? Ms. Morton became
very exasperated. Many times in the past she had to explain things over and over to
Sally. Finally, she told Sally she would not help her any more during seat work. She
said she would explain the directions to the class once, and if Sally did not under¬
stand them she would have to wait and do the assignment at recess. Ms. Morton then
ignored all Sally’s requests for help. She did, however, immediately encourage Sally
when she saw her working without assistance.
Working together
in small groups
encourages
cooperation and
accountability.
Jerry’s Misbehavior (Power Seeking)

Jerry and another student were scuffling near dangerous equipment in woodshop
class. They knew this was against the rules and would result in their being removed
temporarily from the class. Mr. Graves approached them and asked them to leave.
Jerry refused. Mr. Graves was tempted to remove him physically. Instead, he walked
to the front of the room and told everyone to turn off their machines and put their
work down. He explained to the students that woodshop could not continue because
Jerry was behaving in a dangerous way around equipment and refused to follow the
class rule and leave the room. The class waited, not without directing looks at Jerry.
Jerry soon chose to leave the shop.22
Success Approach: Moderate Teacher Intervention
The success approach is rooted in humanistic psychology and the democratic

model of teaching. However, instead of dealing with inappropriate behavior
and the consequences of such behavior, it deals with general psychological
and social conditions. William Glasser is most noted for this approach, which
he calls “reality therapy.” Glasser insists that although teachers should not ex¬
cuse bad behavior on the part of the student, they need to change whatever
negative classroom conditions exist and improve conditions so they lead to
student success.23
On Humanistic Approaches
Vincent Rogers
University of Connecticut, Storrs
The humane school recognizes that all children (in¬ teacher’s perceptiveness, sensitivity, and responsive¬
deed, all human beings) need to be valued and re¬ ness. Wordsworth could have had the teacher in
spected as people—that they need to have some mind when he wrote of the poet as “a man endued
measure of control over their lives and activities, in with more lively sensibility, more enthusiasm and
school and out, and that they need, above all, to ex¬ tenderness, who has a greater knowledge of human
perience a reasonable amount of success in order to nature and a more comprehensive soul.”
develop feelings of competence and self-worth. This is, of course, asking a great deal of teach¬
Rules are needed, but whatever rules govern the ers; yet I see no other way if schools are to become
school are fair and primarily serve the needs of the the sort of place where children learn not only to
students, not the needs of teachers. read and to write, but also to understand and to
The humane school places great faith in the im¬ care.
portance of the classroom teacher as the key to its It matters, then, how time is spent, for the quality
success or failure. The teacher is the link between of children’s lives in school probably has the most
the child and the curriculum; the “humaneness” of direct relationship to the quality of the lives they will
that curriculum will be directly related to the live later as adults.
Glasser’s view about discipline is simple but powerful: Behavior is a matter

of choice. Good behavior results from good choices; bad behavior results from
bad choices. A teacher’s job is to help students make good choices. Students
make choices according to whether they see the results of those choices as desir¬
able. If bad behavior gets them what they want, they will make bad choices.
Students who have feelings of positive self-worth and experience success
will make good choices most of the time. The road to positive self-worth and to
success begins with a good relationship with people who care. For some students,
school will be the only place they meet people who genuinely care for them. Yet
some students resist entering into positive relationships with adults, especially
teachers. Teachers, therefore, must show that they care and are positive and be
persistent about both. The emphasis is on helping—exactly what the teaching
profession is about—and therefore the approach is attractive to many educators.
Glasser makes the following suggestions.
1. Stress students’ responsibility for their own behavior continually. Because

good behavior comes from good choices, their responsibility for their
choices and behavior must be explored and clarified on a regular basis.
2. Establish rules. Rules are essential, but they should be established and
agreed upon early in the term by the teacher and students. Rules
should facilitate group achievement and group morale. Rules can be

evaluated and changed, but as long as they are retained, they must be
enforced.
3. Accept no excuses. The teacher should not accept excuses for
inappropriate behavior as long as the student is able to distinguish right
from wrong. This is especially true if the student has made a
commitment to a rule.
4. Utilize value judgments. When students exhibit inappropriate behavior,
the teacher should call on them to make value judgments about their
behavior. This enhances the students’ responsibility to make better
choices.
5. Suggest suitable alternatives. Alternatives to inappropriate behavior
should be suggested by the teacher. The students should make the
choice, reinforcing their responsibility.
6. Enforce reasonable consequences. Reasonable consequences must
follow whatever behavior the students choose. The consequences of
inappropriate behavior should not be erratic, emotional, sarcastic, or
physically punishing. The consequences of good behavior should be
satisfying to students. The teacher should never manipulate events or
make excuses in order to avoid administering reasonable consequences
for student behavior.
7. Be persistent. The teacher must make sure, repeatedly and constantly,
that students are committed to desirable behavior. The teacher must
always help students make choices and have them make value judgments
about bad choices.
8. Continually review. Topics and issues relevant to these procedures
should be discussed and developed during a classroom meeting
separate from academic activities. This is the time for students and
teacher to seek plausible solutions to problems. Students should never
be allowed to find fault with or place blame on others, to shout or
threaten. If attention is directed to real matters of concern, a bonding
or caring attitude between teacher and students may have a chance to
take form.24
In a summary of his views, Glasser makes the point that teachers must be sup¬
portive and meet with students who are beginning to exhibit difficulties, and they
must get students involved in making rules, making commitments to the rules, and
enforcing them. School must be a friendly, warm place, especially for students
who have previously experienced failure in school. Student misbehavior is often
intertwined with academic problems. The failing student, frustrated by an inability
to function in the classroom, frequently expresses uneasiness by acting out. To
correct an academic problem, the student, teacher, and school must make a spe¬
cific commitment to overcome the problem. But too often the student is unaware
of how to deal with the problem, the teacher is too burdened with other problems,
and the school lacks the resources for helping the student and teacher.25
For Glasser, school reform is not linked necessarily to stimulating teachers

and students to work harder. People, including students, will not be more
productive unless what is being asked of them is psychologically satisfying. We
have to change school not by changing the length of the school day or year or
the amount of homework, but by making it more satisfying to students and more
consistent with their interests, so that they gain a sense of power, fulfillment,
and importance in the classroom. Solutions to the problems of discipline and
achievement are related to and based primarily on making students feel that
someone listens to them, thinks about them, cares for them, and feels they are
important.
Although Glasser is somewhat vague on just what teachers can do in deal¬
ing with academic or behavior problems, most of his ideas involve time set aside
for classroom meetings and group discussion. Glasser generally argues for three
different types of meetings: social-conduct meetings where teachers and stu¬
dents discuss the students’ behavior; open-ended meetings where teachers and
students discuss topics of intellectual significance; and curriculum meetings
where teachers and students discuss how well students are doing relative to cur¬
ricular objectives.26
One-on-one conferences are also sometimes needed. The one-on-one ses¬
sions require that the teacher and student identify problem behaviors, indicate
the specific reasons why that behavior is problematic, and then seek to find spe¬
cific ways to ameliorate the behavior. James Cangelosi provides an example of a
teacher working with a student in one of these one-on-one sessions:
For two consecutive days during the time Mr. Dean allocated for his high school in¬
dustrial arts students to work on a project, Elmo either sat and stared into space or
slept. Responding to this display of off-task behavior, Mr. Dean meets privately with
Elmo. Mr. Dean takes a seat directly in front of Elmo so that he can readily achieve
eye contact during the following conversation:
Mr. Dean: Thank you for coming. Tell me, Elmo, were you in shop class today?
Elmo: Yeah, you saw me there.
Mr. Dean: How long were you in shop class today?
Elmo: I was there the whole time; I didn’t skip out or nothin’! Somebody else
might of slipped out, but I didn’t.
Mr. Dean: I don’t want to talk about anybody else, just about what you did in
shop class today.
Elmo: Maybe, Sandra was the one who—
Mr. Dean (interrupting): We’re not going to talk about Sandra or anyone other
than you and me. What did you do during the 55 minutes you spent in shop
today?
Elmo: I don’t know.
Mr. Dean: Tell me just one thing you remember doing in shop today.
Elmo: I watched you show us how to use that new machine.
Mr. Dean: And what did you do after I finished showing you how to use the drill
press?
Elmo: I dunno, I guess I went to sleep.
Mr. Dean: Do you remember what I asked you to do right before you went to
sleep?
Elmo: Work on my project, but I was tired.
Mr. Dean: I’m sorry you were tired, but would it be better for you to sleep in
shop or get your project done?
Elmo: But the project is so boring!
Mr. Dean: I’m sorry you find the project boring. What happens if you don’t
finish your project by next Monday?
Elmo: I know, you told us. We don’t pass shop.
Mr. Dean: Not passing shop, is that good or bad for you?
Elmo: That’s bad, that’s real bad!
Mr. Dean: Do you want to pass shop?
Elmo: Of course!
Mr. Dean: What will it take for you to pass shop?
Elmo: Do my project.
Mr. Dean: By when?
Elmo: Monday.
Mr. Dean: What must you do to have it done by Monday?
Elmo: I’ll have to work on it this week.
Mr. Dean: When will you have time to work on it?
Elmo: In class, that’s the only time you let us work on it.
Mr. Dean: And there are only two more class days for you to get it done. You
don’t have any time to waste. What are you going to do in class tomorrow when I
direct the class to work on projects?
Elmo: I’m going to work on my project.
Mr. Dean: What if you’re tired?
Elmo: I’ll work on my project anyway.
Mr. Dean: You’ve made a smart choice. Would you be willing to write a note
telling me that you will work on your project for the last 45 minutes of shop class
tomorrow? I’ll use the note to remind myself to leave you at least 45 minutes of
class time for your project and I’ll make a copy to keep to remind you of your
commitment.27
Implementing Alternative Approaches to Classroom Management

All six approaches have elements of prevention and intervention, and all, re¬
gardless of how firm or flexible they appear to be, deal with a set of rules,
limitations, and consequences of behavior. In all the approaches students
must complete academic work and they are held accountable for their behav¬
ior and work. A brief overview of the six approaches is shown in Tables 9.4
and 9.5.
Whereas all the approaches advocate having clear and well-communicated
rules, the firmer approaches expect the teacher to assert more power and authority
with students. The moderate teacher intervention (MTI) approaches rely more
on mutual trust and respect between teacher and students. The high teacher inter¬
vention (HTI) approaches look to the teacher to take control of the
Table 9.4 Overview of Classroom Management Models
High-Intervention Approaches
I. Assertive Approach
1. Firm, assertive approach
2. Insistence on appropriate behavior
3. Clear limits and consequences
4. Taking action promptly
5. Follow through, checking, and reinforcing rules
II. Applied Science Approach
1. Identifying and enforcing school and classroom rules
2. Procedures for seatwork, teacher-led activities, transition between activities
3. Purposeful academic instruction, student accountability
4. Procedures for assignments and monitoring student work
III. Behavior Modification Approach
1. Reinforcement through rewards
2. Constant and then intermittent reinforcement produces the best results
3. Shaping desired behavior quickly and strongly
4. Modeling appropriate behavior
5. Use of verbal comments, observations, practice, prizes, etc.
Moderate-Intervention Approaches
IV. Group Management Approach
1. Group focus and group management
2. On task, work involvement
3. With-it-ness, overlapping, smoothness, and momentum
4. Variety and challenging instruction
5. Teacher alertness, student accountability
V. Acceptance Approach
1. Acceptance of and belonging to a group
2. Student recognition and praise
3. Routines and limitations
4. Firmness and friendliness
5. Teacher leadership, corrective action by teacher
VI. Success Approach
1. Student success and achievement
2. Reasonable rules with reasonable consequences
3. Student responsibility and self-direction
4. Good choices result in good behavior
5. Teacher support, fairness, and warmth
classroom and quickly establish rules. The MTI approaches emphasize positive ex¬
pectations of students; they have more faith in the student’s abihty to exhibit self-
control and to work out the rules with their peers and the teacher. It is also impor¬
tant to note that there are some low teacher intervention approaches. However, few
beginning teachers have the inteipersonal skill and classroom instructional abihty to
rely heavily on low control strategies. As you develop expertise, you may want to
rely more heavily on low control approaches because those are the ones that require
maximum student responsibility. Of course, your willingness to apply this approach
will be a function of your teaching philosophy and personality.
Table 9.5 Characteristics of Models: Primary Emphases
1 2 "" 3 4 5 6
Applied Behavior Group

Assertive Science Modification Management Acceptance Success
Approach Approach Approach Approach Approach Approach
Clear, teacher-defined rules X X X X
Punishments for inappropriate behavior X X X X
Logical consequences X X X
Reinforcement of appropriate behavior X X X X
Redefinition of teacher role X X X
Group problem solving X X X
Negotiated conflict resolution X
Collaborative decision making

for classroom rules X X X
Efforts to make students aware

of origins of their behavior X X X
Parental involvement X
Although all the approaches establish limitations, the MTI approaches

permit greater latitude in enforcing rules and allow the students to share
power with the teacher. In the HTI approaches, the teacher asserts authority,
takes charge, and tends to intervene immediately and automatically in all
cases of misbehavior, even mild ones (on the theory that this will prevent
more serious problems).
All the approaches (moderate and high intervention) rely on consequences.
The difference is that the HTI approaches advocate stricter imposition of gener¬
ally more severe sanctions as a consequence of disobedience. Punishment for
inappropriate behavior is permissible as long as it is logical and related to the
severity of the disturbance. The MTI approaches impose sanctions, but empha¬
size making students aware that their behavior influences others, helping them to
examine their behavior, and helping them to identify the consequences of their
misbehavior.
All the approaches hold students accountable for academic work. The HTI
approaches limit students’ socializing and group activities, determine academic
tasks, and demand that they complete assignments. Students are told what is ex¬
pected of them, and little time is spent in any activities other than academic
work. The classroom is. organized so that students’ engagement in academic
work is continuous. In the MTI approaches, students are still accountable for
academic work, but they participate in planning the curriculum, and socializing
is tolerated. Engagement in academic tasks is less intense and work is often per¬
formed on a cooperative or group basis.
In choosing an approach, teachers must be objective about their personality
and philosophy and what they are trying to accomplish. It is important that they
be honest about their own strengths and weaknesses, and they must also
consider their student populations—their developmental needs, abilities, and
interests—and how they behave as a group. You might have to adjust your ap¬
proach for certain classroom situations; reality, not theory, will dictate if adjust¬
ments are necessary. In general, HTI approaches are better for younger, more
emotionally immature students. MTI approaches are better for older, more emo¬
tionally mature students.
Still another point to consider is that some educators are quick to package
programs that are discussed in the professional literature or advertised as “re¬
form” or a “quick fix.” It is wrong to assume that a process as complicated and
multidimensional as managing students can be fully understood by reading a list
of do’s and don’ts or attending a two-day workshop.
Certain rules are central to all the models, but they are conceptual and
must be modified according to the classroom situation and personalities in¬
volved. The models (for example, “Always raise your hand when you wish to
speak”) should not be construed as set in stone. There are many gray areas in¬
volved in managing students that involve common sense and maturity by the
teacher. The models, if taken literally, limit teacher discretion and judgment,
and in some cases offer only one preferred reaction or option for teachers
when a rule is violated.
The point is, teachers need to be flexible and examine the models in rela¬
tionship to their own classroom situation and personality. But, according to ex¬
perts, the models are supported by research and they provide an effective strat¬
egy for teachers to use, as well as a way to respond to real discipline problems.28
They are the best we have now, and teachers do need a strategy now to apply in
the classroom.
To find what is best for you, you must consider your teaching style, your
students’ needs and abilities, and your school’s policies. As you narrow your
choices, remember that approaches overlap and are not mutually exclusive. Also
remember that more than one approach might work for you. You might borrow
ideas from various approaches and construct your own hybrid. The approach
you finally arrive at should make intuitive sense to you. Don’t let others impose
their teaching styles or disciplinary approaches on you. Remember, what works
for one person (in the same school, even with the same students) might not work
for another person.
As new teachers, it is imperative that you begin by learning a relatively nar¬
row set of skills and perhaps one HTI approach and one MTI approach. Expand
the number of approaches as you develop your professional repertoire of skills
and your understanding of classroom dynamics. In essence, we are arguing for
an aggregative approach. Begin by learning how to use a selected set of skills in
a real classroom. Once you have confidence in your abilities to manage the use
of these skills, go back and review the various HTI and MTI strategies and
learn how to use them in specific contexts. Outlined below are the survival
management skills that we deem essential, along with the specific behaviors you
must know how to exhibit.
Skill 1: Teachers should organize instruction to maximize student time-on-task.

Behavior 1: Start class on time.
Behavior 2: Move around the room to monitor student behavior.
Behavior 3: Establish clear procedures for turning in work.
Behavior 4: Establish clear routines for transition times.
Skill 2: Teachers should identify and implement specific classroom rules.
Behavior 1: Rules are reasonable, enforceable, and understandable.
Behavior 2: Rules are taught to students; they are rehearsed; and the
students receive feedback on rule comprehension.
Skill 3: Teachers should know how to use both low- and high-profile desists in
dealing with mild misbehavior.
Behavior 1: Use misbehaving students’ names as part of the classroom
lesson (low profile).
Behavior 2: Move close to the disruptive student (low profile).
Behavior 3: Use nonverbal cues (low profile).
When behaviors 1 to 3 do not work, attempt the following.
Behavior 4: State specific student’s name and direct student toward
appropriate tasks (high profile).
Behavior 5: Give punishment (detention or other consequence) for
misbehavior (high profile).
Skill 4: Teachers should identify specific consequences for use with severe,
chronic misbehavior.
Behavior 1: Know how and when to use different types of punishment.
(See next section.)
Behavior 2: Do not overreact, try to remain calm, avoid audience
situations if possible.
Both INTASC and Pathwise focus attention on managing a classroom. The infor¬
mation we provide parallels their requirements. Provided in Table 9.6 is the Path-
wise standard on classroom management and discipline. Compare what is implied
in this standard as being necessary with what we describe in the above narrative.
Discipline Issues
Thus far, we have outlined some strategies that are grounded on the theories and
philosophies of a wide variety of educators and educational psychologists. Em¬
bedded in the various approaches are some inherent issues that emerge and that
will influence what you can and should do in the classroom. We now discuss
some of those issues.
Table 9.6 The Praxis Series™ Standard B4: Establishing and

Maintaining Consistent Standards of Classroom Behavior
Description
This criterion refers to the desired standards of teacher and student interaction that will ensure an
appropriate climate for learning. Both students and teacher may contribute to the development of
standards for appropriate classroom behavior. The exact nature of such standards may vary widely,
in response to students’ developmental levels, their cultural backgrounds, the subject being taught,
the model of teaching that is implemented, the level of noise or informality that the teacher is
comfortable with, and so on. Once established and agreed on, these standards must be maintained
consistently, although there will, of course, be situations that require “exceptions to the rule.”
It is not expected that all students will behave at all times in accordance with the behavioral
standards for the class. Students as individuals obviously differ widely in their attitudes and then-
willingness to accept behavioral standards. In addition, classes, as groups, have their own
“personalities.” In all cases, it is important for the teacher to demonstrate positive behavior. At the
basic level, teachers may have trouble anticipating potentially disruptive behavior and may,
therefore, have to respond frequently to major disruptions (that is, behavior that constitutes a serious
breach of the standards for the class). As the teacher gains skill she or he should be able to move to a
level of skill that enables her or him to handle the range of behavior issues more consistently and
effectively and to anticipate misbehavior.
The assessor should not expect to see the teacher actively establishing standards for behavior
during every lesson that is observed. In many cases, the students’ behavior may enable the
assessor to infer that standards have been established and maintained. In evaluating how
standards of behavior have been established, implemented, and maintained, it is also important to
keep in mind that there is a range of standards for behavior that can contribute to a range of
positive learning environments. There is no single right way to keep order. In all cases, however,
the standards must embody a sense of respect for students as people.
If there are school policies that affect standards of classroom behavior, the assessor should be
aware of them and of the rationale for them.
Questions for Assessor Reflection

1. Are consistent standards of classroom behavior evident?
2. How are standards established?
3. Does the teacher model respectful and appropriate standards of behavior?
4. Do established standards of behavior convey a sense of respect for the students?
5. How are the standards maintained?
6. How does the teacher respond to serious behavior problems? Are her or his responses
appropriate?
7. Does the teacher respond to inappropriate behavior consistently and appropriately?
Scoring Rules
The teacher makes no attempt to respond to disruptive behavior.
1.0 OR
The teacher’s response to disruptive behavior does not demonstrate respect for the students.
The teacher makes appropriate attempts to respond to disruptive behavior in ways that
demonstrate respect for the students.
2.0 OR
There is no disruptive behavior during the lesson.
In addition to the requirements for level 2.0, the teacher responds to minor misbehavior
consistently and with reasonable success, in ways that demonstrate respect for students.
3.0 OR
Student behavior during the lesson is consistently appropriate.
Source: Teacher Performance Assessments: A Comparative View (Princeton: Educational Testing Service, 1995): 11.
Issue 1: Dealing with Misbehaviors Through Punishment

Educators disagree on the extent to which misbehavior should be ignored. Some
researchers have found repeatedly that the best procedure is to ignore undesir¬
able behavior while paying attention to and reinforcing desirable behavior.29
Other researchers (especially the applied scientists) suggest that misbehavior
should only be ignored if it is momentary, or if one student is involved, or if
dealing with it might disrupt the entire class. For example, Good and Brophy are
skeptical about avoiding or ignoring inappropriate behavior.30 They contend that
certain misbehaviors are too disruptive or dangerous to be ignored. Ignoring
such behavior leaves students with the impression that the teacher is unaware of
what is going on or is unable to cope with it. Other observers take the middle
stance that undesirable behavior can be ignored by the teacher when it is mo¬
mentary, not serious, unlikely to be disruptive, and attributable to a student who
is usually well behaved.31
Robert Slavin makes still another distinction. Many forms of misbehavior
are motivated by the desire for peer attention and approval. Students who dis¬
obey the teacher are usually (consciously or unconsciously) weighing the effect
of their defiance on their standing among classmates. This is especially true as
students enter adolescence. Slavin concludes that ignoring misbehavior is inef¬
fective if it is reinforced or encouraged by peers. Such behavior cannot be ig¬
nored, for it will worsen and attract more peer support.32
Ornstein makes still another distinction among misbehaving students. He
asserts that emotionally disturbed children and children who lack healthy ego
development pose a special challenge. Their inability to get along with normal
children makes them isolated and rejected. Often, they are unaware of their re¬
sponsibility for or contribution to events. They have almost no feelings of guilt
and are not responsive to others’ feelings. When they realize they are wrong,
they tend to withdraw. He claims that “by threatening or punishing, the teacher
makes the mistake of appearing hostile; in turn, these children feel they have a
right to hate the teacher and be ‘bad.’ ” It is advisable, Ornstein asserts, for the
teacher “to be sympathetic,” not overly assertive, and even “make special al¬
lowances.” The other children know these disturbed children are different and
will accept the fact that concessions are made “or rules are modified to accom¬
modate their special needs.”33
For situations in which it is decided that punishment is appropriate and will
be effective, the teacher must decide on its form and severity. The teacher
should establish criteria for using it. Punishment is construed by behaviorists as
an unpleasant stimulus that an individual will try to avoid. Common punish¬
ments, according to Gage and Berliner, range from low-profile desists such as
soft reprimands (those experienced only by the student concerned) to high-
profile desists such as social isolation (detention, missed recess) and being re¬
ported to someone outside the classroom (disciplinarian, principal, parent).34
Corporal punishment should not be used. The negative side effects out¬
weigh the temporary advantages of squashing inappropriate behavior. It tends to
demoralize the class. Although it might keep young and physically immature
students in check, it also creates anger and resentment. If it is to have any effect,
the teacher will at some point have to use it with physically stronger students,
and the teacher who backs down loses face and authority.
Although teachers need to know the negative consequences of corporal pun¬
ishment, they also need to be aware of the fact that most American parents (al¬
most 90 percent) use corporal punishment at home. Hence, many parents might
encourage teachers to use a technique they like but that does not work.35
It should be clear to the student why he or she is being punished. Moreover,
the punishment should fit the misbehavior (overreacting will cause anger, sup¬
pressed hostility, or an emotional response from the student). To avoid overreac¬
tion, the teacher should avoid punishing while angry or emotional.
One researcher, who refers to punishment as management strategies, has
assessed 24 common strategies employed by junior high school teachers.36 The
sample consisted of 281 students and 80 teachers who were asked to rate the
severity of each strategy. The data reveal that teachers tend to employ as many
relatively unsevere strategies as moderately severe and very severe strategies
combined. Relatively unsevere strategies involve task assignments, removal of
privileges, or a classroom seating change. Moderately severe strategies impose
constraints on students’ freedom or time, a trip to the principal s office, or de¬
tention after class. Very severe strategies involve removal or transfer of the stu¬
dent; conferring with the parent; shaming or insulting the student; or suspending
the student. Although there were significant differences between student and
teacher mean ratings for about half the items, the rank orderings of the strategies
were similar (correlation of .84), implying comparable perceptions of the sever¬
ity of punishment.
According to Good and Brophy, a number of general principles apply when
meting out punishment: (1) The threat of punishment is usually more effective
than punishment itself especially when phrased in such a way that there are un¬
known consequences; (2) punishment should be threatened or warned before im¬
plemented (but teachers should threaten only once!); (3) the punishment should
be accompanied with positive statements of expectations or rules, focusing on
what the students should be doing; (4) punishment should be combined with
negative reinforcement, so that the student must improve to avoid the punish¬
ment; and (5) punishment should be systematic and deliberate.37 Educators also
point out that teachers should avoid punishing while angry or emotional; punish
when inappropriate behavior starts (don’t wait until things build up); and make
your motivation clear (without preaching or overexplaining) while the student is
being punished.38 Two other suggestions are worth noting: (1) Do not punish an
entire class or group because of the misbehavior of one student. (This is a sign
of weakness, and eventually the class or group will unite against you). (2) Avoid
excessive punishment; this can unite the students in self-defense against you.
See Tips for Teachers 9.3.
It would be nice to say that classroom decisions by the teacher are usually
rational and reflective. Not so. Many managerial problems are caused by teach¬
ers themselves: by overaction to minor incidents, by ignoring small problems
Chapter 9 Classroom Management and Discipline
379
Strategies for Managing Problem Students
Here are general strategies for dealing with problem 7. Rely on motivation, and not on your
students, sometimes called “difficult” students, prowess, to maintain order; an interesting
based on the experience of teachers. Although origi¬ lesson can keep the students on task.
nally developed for junior high school inner-city stu¬
8. Be a firm friend, but maintain a
dents, the strategies apply to most school settings
psychological and physical distance so your
and grade levels.
students know you are still the teacher.
9. Keep calm, and keep your students calm,
1. Accept the students as they are, but build on especially when conditions become tense or
and accentuate their positive qualities. upsetting. It might be necessary to delay
2. Be yourself, because these students can action until after class, when emotions have
recognize phoniness and take offense at such been reduced.
deceit. 10. Size up the situation, and be aware of
3. Be confident. Take charge of the situation, undercurrents of behavior, because these
and don’t give up in front of the students. students are sizing you up and are knowing
4. Provide structure, because many of these manipulators of their environment.
students lack inner control and are restless 11. Anticipate behavior. Being able to judge
and impulsive. what will happen if you or a student decide
5. Explain your rules and routines so students on a course of action might allow you to
understand them. Be sure your explanations curtail many problems.
are brief; otherwise you lose your 12. Expect, but don't accept, misbehavior. Learn
effectiveness and you appear to be defensive to cope with misbehavior, but don’t get
or preaching. upset or feel inadequate about it.
6. Communicate positive expectations that you Source: Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein, “Teaching the
expect the students to learn and that you Disadvantaged," Educational Forum (January 1967): 215—223;
Ornstein, “The Education of the Disadvantaged,” Educational
require academic work. Researcher (June 1982): 197-221.
and letting them build until they become out of control, or by meting out the in¬
appropriate punishment (mismatching the incident and response to the incident).
Educators would have you believe that the teachers’ decisions in classrooms
and reactions to student behavior are reflective in nature and can be understood
within a psychological context of prior beliefs, personal perspectives, and em¬
bedded theories of behavior.-^9 The fact is, the complexity and immediacy of
many classroom situations require teachers to make intuitive rather than reflec¬
tive or clinical decisions. Thus, disciplinary decisions, which are often complex
and require immediate decisions, are likely to be more reactive than prescriptive
and more influenced by prior social experiences and personality than well-
thought-out techniques.
Guidelines for Using Punishment
The twelve guidelines listed below can be used for all disciplinary approaches.
Underlying the guidelines is the idea that punishment should be flexible and tai¬
lored to the specific student and situation.
1. Learn what type of punishment school authorities allow. Different schools
have different guidelines for punishment and punish students for infringe¬
ment of different rules.
2. Don’t threaten the impossible. Make sure the punishment can be carried out.
Telling a student to stay after class at 3:00 p.m. when you have a 3:30 ap¬
pointment with the dentist illustrates that you reacted hastily and cannot fol¬
low through.
3. Don’t assign extra homework as punishment. This creates dislike for home¬
work as well as the subject.
4. Be sure the punishment follows the offense as soon as possible. Don’t im¬
pose punishment two days after the student misbehaves.
5. Be sure the punishment fits the misbehavior. Don’t overreact to mild misbe¬
havior or underplay or ignore serious misbehavior.
6. Be consistent with punishment. If you punish one student for something,
don’t ignore it when another student does the same thing. However, students
and circumstance differ, and there should be room for modification.
7. Don’t use double standards when punishing. You should treat both sexes the
same way, and low-achieving and high-achieving students the same way.
(Perhaps the only allowance or difference can be with emotionally disturbed
children.) Avoid having teacher “pets.”
8. Don’t personalize the situation. React to misbehavior, not the student. Do not
react to the student’s anger or personal remarks. A misbehaving student usu¬
ally doesn’t mean them and is reacting out of emotion. Stay focused on the
deed. Remind the student he doesn’t mean what he is saying and that things
will worsen unless he calms down. When the student is out of control, the
main thing is to get him to calm down. Punishment comes later, if it is re¬
quired, after the student is calm.
9. Document all serious incidents. This is especially important if the misbehav¬
ior involves sending the student out of the room or possible suspension.40
Issue 2: Preventing Misbehaviors Through Feedback, Trust, and Communication

David Johnson has written several books that deal with interpersonal relations,
cooperation, and self-actualization.41 His methods of enhancing self-awareness,
mutual trust, and communication among people serve as excellent preventive
strategies. Johnson’s methods correspond with flexible and democratic ap¬
proaches to discipline such as the acceptance and success approaches. They
might be used by anyone who wishes to build a humanistic classroom based on
student rapport and understanding. The specific methods can be applied on a
one-to-one basis or on a group basis in which teachers emphasize interpersonal
relations and cooperative processes.
Building Self-Awareness Through Feedback

Feedback tells students what effect their actions are having on others. It is im¬
portant for the teacher to provide feedback in a way that does not threaten the
student. The more threatened and defensive the student becomes, the more likely
it is that he or she will not understand the feedback correctly. Increasing a stu¬
dent’s self-awareness through feedback gives the students a basis for making in¬
formed choices in future behavior.
1. Focus feedback on behavior, not on personality. Refer to what the

person does, not to what you believe her traits to be. The former is a
response to what you see or hear, and the latter is an inference or
interpretation about character.
2. Focus feedback on objective descriptions, not on subjective judgments.
Refer to what occurs, not to your judgments of right or wrong, good or
bad. (“You are not spelling the word correctly” or “We cannot hear you”
rather than “You are a terrible speller” or “You don’t know how to speak
up in public.”)
3. Focus feedback on a specific situation, not on abstract behavior. (Share
with a student “Your homework has not been turned in for three days”
instead of “You are so irresponsible.”) Feedback tied to a specific
situation leads to self-awareness. Feedback that is abstract is open to
interpretation and is often misunderstood.
4. Focus feedback on the present, not on the past. The more immediate the
feedback, the more effective it is. (“You are becoming angry now as I
talk to you” rather than “Sometimes you become angry.”)
5. Focus feedback on action that the person can change. It does little good
to tell a person that you don’t like the color of his eyes. This is
something that cannot be changed.
Developing and Maintaining Trust

To build a healthy relationship among students and between students and
teacher, a climate of mutual trust must grow and develop. Fears of rejection or
betrayal must be reduced, and acceptance, support, and respect must be pro¬
moted. Trust, like order, is not something that can be built once and forgotten
about; it constantly changes and constantly needs nourishment.
1. Building trust. Trust begins as people take the risk of disclosing more
and more of their thoughts and feelings to each other. If they do not
receive acceptance or support, they back off from the relationship. If
they receive acceptance or support, they will continue to risk self¬
disclosure, and the relationship continues to grow.
2. Being trusting. The level of trust that develops between two people is
related to both individuals’ willingness and ability to be trusting. Each
must be willing to risk the consequences of revealing oneself to and be
dependent upon the other person. Each must be openly accepting and
supporting of the other to ensure that the other experiences beneficial
consequences froth the risk taken.
3. Trusting appropriately. A person must be able to size up a situation and

make a wise judgment about when, whom, and how much to trust. Trust
is appropriate when a person is reasonably confident that the other
person will not react in a way that will be harmful.
4. Trusting as a self-fulfilling prophecy. Assumptions made about another
person or a situation affect an individual’s behavior. That behavior often
elicits the expected reactions from the other person. The assumptions
become a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you make other people feel they can
trust you, they will often do so.
Communicating Effectively
All behavior conveys messages. A person sends messages to evoke a response
from the receiver. The messages and responses are verbal and nonverbal. Effec¬
tive communication takes place when the receiver interprets the sender’s mes¬
sages in the way that was intended; effective communication enhances under¬
standing and cooperation among individuals. Ineffective communication arises
when there is a discrepancy between what the sender meant and what the re¬
ceiver thought the sender meant. This reduces understanding and cooperation.
Mutual trust enhances the possibility of effective communication; distrust is a
primary cause of miscommunication. Skill in sending messages can increase
communication between teachers and students.
1. Use the first-person singular. Take responsibility for your own ideas or
feelings. People doubt messages that use terms like “most people,”
“some of your classmates.”
2. Make messages complete and specific. People often make incorrect
assumptions about what their listeners know, leave out steps in
describing their thinking, and do not mention specific items or ideas that
are necessary if their intentions are to be conveyed to their listeners.
3. Make verbal and nonverbal messages congruent. Communication
problems arise when a person’s verbal and nonverbal messages are
contradictory.
4. Be redundant. Use more than one means of communication, such as
verbal and nonverbal cues, to reinforce your message.
5. Ask for feedback. The only way to learn how a person is actually receiving
and interpreting your message is to seek feedback from the receiver.
6. Consider the listener’s frame of reference. The same information
might be interpreted differently by a child and by an adult. It may
be necessary to use different words or different nonverbal cues
depending on the listener’s age, maturity level, educational level, and
cultural background.
7. Make messages concrete. It is important to be descriptive, to use verbs
(“I like working”), adverbs (“Your homework is due tomorrow”), and
adjectives (“Johnnie is an excellent student”) to communicate your
feelings clearly.
8. Describe behavior without evaluating it. Describe the student’s behavior

(“You are interrupting Johnnie”) rather than evaluating it (“You are self-
centered and won’t listen to anyone else’s ideas”).42
We will finish this chapter with an issue related to how to prevent problems:
good teaching. The emphasis on good teaching is intentional. Many teachers
think that the key to classroom management is to know how to deal with stu¬
dents who are disruptive. The real key is to know how to prevent problems from
occurring or at least to lessen the likelihood that they will occur. To drive home
that point, we finish with a vignette about a real first-year teacher.
Susan Gruell is a first-year teacher in Long Beach, California. ABC News, on a

“Prime Time Live” segment, captured her story. Ms. Gruell was teaching and
struggling. Her students, at least some of them, wanted her to fail, and some even
wanted to make her cry or break down in front of the class. One day, Ms. Gruell
confiscated a note that depicted in caricature form a black boy with big lips. The
caricature was derisive and degrading. Many teachers would have dealt with the
situation by using high teacher control (and punishment!) procedures. Ms. Gruell
did not. She reacted, but (recall our discussion in Chapter 1) she reacted out of a
learning paradigm. She wanted students to see what the act meant in personal and
interpersonal terms. She drew connections to the Holocaust and how the Nazis
dehumanized the Jews. Her passion to help the students learn about why people
act as they do, rather than to punish them for acting as they do, started as a jour¬
ney for her class that was truly extraordinary. Over the next weeks and months
they studied prejudice and injustice, in their lives and in the lives of others. Their
journey changed their lives. If you watch this taped segment (which was shown
on ABC, 4 April 1998) you will see students who are moving outside of them¬
selves and inside the lives of others—Anne Frank, Zlata Filipovic, and a variety
of others whose lives have been touched, changed or ended by prejudice. In this
case, Ms. Gruell’s, the lives of her students (she calls them Freedom Writers) are
“started.”
The authors have provided you with information about how to manage
students. We are encouraging you to use that knowledge selectively. You
need to have control of a classroom in order for students to learn. But you re¬
ally need to use good instructional strategies (and good planning) and then
use preventing and dealing with strategies when even the best plans fail.
When you begin teaching and confront your first behavior problems, you
might recall Ms. Gruell’s approach. She used a misbehavior episode as a way
to teach, not to punish. Most teachers are threatened by misbehavior and as a
result they often miss great opportunities to use the learning paradigm to con¬
trol student behavior.

To move from theory to the practice of good management and discipline, you
need to consider some overview or wrap-up questions. Ideally you should be
able to say yes to all thirty questions below. This will probably not be the case if
you have a problem managing students. More than five negative responses sug¬
gests you are probably contributing to your own problem and/or that you are
heading for bigger problems unless you take corrective action.
I. Background Information Yes No

1. Do I know the student’s personal needs? □ □
2. Have I examined the student’s records? □ □
3. Have I spoken to colleagues (other teachers) □ □
about the student?
4. Is the student’s home life psychologically safe
and secure? (Does she or he eat a good breakfast,
sleep enough, have a quiet place to work, etc.?) □ □
5. Do I know which peers influence the student
and what students he or she influences? □ □
II. Attitude
6. Do I interact positively with the student? □ □
7. Do I listen to the student? □ □
8. Do I show respect toward the student? □ □
9. Do I provide helpful feedback? □ □
10. Do I communicate high expectations to the student? □ □
11. Do I compliment or praise the student when
it is appropriate? □ □
12. Do I recognize (call on the student) in class? □ □
13. Do I emphasize the strengths of the student
in front of the class? □ □
III. Routines and Procedures
14. Have the routines or rules been clearly stated
to the student? □ □
15. Are the routines appropriate and succinct? □ □
16. Is there consistent routine in the classroom that
the student can understand and model? □ □
17. Are the routines enforced equally with all students,
including the student exhibiting inappropriate
behavior? □ □
18. Do students understand the rationale for routines
and rules? □ □
19. Have I been clear about the consequences of
inappropriate behavior? □ □
20. Are the consequences fair and consistent with
the misbehavior? □ □
IV. Instruction
21. Are the instructional demands appropriate to the
ability and needs of the student? □ □
22. Is the student interested in the classroom tasks? □ □
23. Does the student understand how to do the
homework? □ □
24. Are special academic provisions (enrichment, Yes No

tutorial) made for the student? □ □
V. Preventive Measures
25. Have I followed through with my warnings
to the student? □ □
26. Have I changed the student’s seat? □ □
27. Have I spoken to the student privately? □ □
28. Am I willing to spend extra time talking to
and getting to know the student outside of class? □ □
29. Have I communicated to the student’s parent(s)?
Is there consistent follow-up with the parent(s)? □ □
30. Have I spoken to the guidance counselor or dean
of discipline for advice about the student? □ □
Summary
1. This chapter presents six approaches to establishing and maintaining good
discipline. All establish clear rules and expectations, all include recommendations
for preventive measures, and all are positive and practical. They differ in the
degree of control exercised by the teacher and the emphasis on tasks.
2. Which approach or combination of approaches a teacher adopts largely
depends on the teacher’s philosophy, personality, teaching style, and teaching
situation. Teachers should begin their teaching by learning one high- and one
moderate-intervention strategy extremely well. Do not try to use all of them
until a couple of the approaches are fully mastered.
3. Punishment is sometimes necessary to enforce rules and regulations.
Punishment should fit the situation and take into consideration the
developmental stage and specific personality of the student. It should also be in
line with school policy.
4. Preventive measures for maintaining and enhancing discipline are based on
the need to curtail classroom problems before they become disruptive and
affect teaching.
1. What goals do you expect classroom management to achieve?
2. What approaches to classroom management do you prefer? Why?
3. How do a teacher’s personality characteristics affect her or his disciplinary
strategies?
4. Under what conditions, if any, might you touch a student? Under what
conditions, if any, would you use corporal punishment?
5. Which preventive measures discussed in the chapter seem to coincide best
with your personality and philosophy?
Things to Do
1. Arrange a conference with a teacher who is known as a “good disciplinarian.
Which of the approaches described in the chapter does the teacher’s approach
resemble? What are the constructive or positive factors in the teacher’s
methods and strategies?
2. Arrange to visit a nearby school to observe a teacher. Does that teacher have
any special “tricks of the trade” for preventing disorder or confusion? What
methods do you like? dislike? Why?
3. Invite a guidance counselor, dean of discipline, or supervisor to the
classroom. Discuss the procedures used at his or her school for handling
discipline cases.
4. Prepare a list of preventive disciplinary techniques and common errors of
discipline. Discuss the preventive techniques and common errors in class.
Which common errors could have been prevented with which preventive
techniques?
5. Discuss in class how you would respond as a teacher to the following
classroom situations: (a) student constantly calls out; (b) student refuses to do
work; (c) student uses improper language as an affront against a classmate;
(d) student begins to argue with another student.
Canter, Lee, and Marlene Canter. Assertive Discipline: A Take Charge Approach for
Today’s Educator, 3rd ed. Santa Monica, CA: Canter & Associates, 1997. A tough-
minded approach to dealing with discipline.
Charles, C. M. Building Classroom Discipline, 6th ed. New York: Longman, 1999.
Outline of various disciplinary models and practices.
Emmer, Edmond T., et al. Classroom Management for Secondary Teachers, 4th ed.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997. A business-academic approach to
organizing and controlling students, including several practical techniques for
secondary teachers.
Evertson, Carol M., et al. Classroom Management for Elementary Teachers, 4th ed.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997. The companion book to the one
above, mainly for elementary teachers.
Froyen, Iverson. Schoolwide and Classroom Management. Columbus, OH: Merrill, 1999.
A mix of research-based and practical strategies for managing students, and building
productive learning environments.
Glasser, William. Schools Without Failure. New York: HarperCollins, 1975. A classic
book on discipline that emphasizes humanitarian and democratic strategies and a
positive approach to discipline.
Kounin, Jacob S. Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms. New York: Holt,
Rinehart & Winston, 1970. A classic piece of research, emphasizing group
discipline problems.
Key Terms
acceptance approach 363 high teacher intervention (HTI) 371
applied science approach 354 . moderate teacher intervention (MT1) 371
assertive approach 352 movement management 362
behavior modification approach 358 overlapping behavior 362
group focus 363 success approach 367
group managerial approach 360 with-it-ness 362
End Notes
1. The annual poll is published in the September or October issue of Phi Delta Kappan.
See, for example, the September 1999 issue.
2. Public and K-12 Teacher Members (Washington, DC: National Education
Association, 1993).
3. Daniel L. Duke and Adrienne M. Meckel, Teacher’s Guide to Classroom
Management (New York: Random House, 1984), 23.
4. Ibid.
5. Allan C. Ornstein, “Techniques and Fundamentals for Teaching the Disadvantaged,”
Journal of Negro Education (Spring 1967): 136-145.
6. Lee Canter and Marlene Canter, Assertive Discipline, rev. ed. (Santa Monica, CA:
Canter Associates, 1993).
7. Thomas J. Las ley, “A Teacher Development Model for Classroom Management,”
Phi Delta Kappan (September 1989): 36-38.
8. Lee Canter and Marlene Canter, Assertive Discipline, rev. ed. (Santa Monica, CA:
Center Associates, 1993).
9. James S. Cangelosi, Classroom Management Strategies, 3rd ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997), 37.
10. Carolyn M. Evertson et ah, Classroom Management for Elementary Teachers,
4th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997); Edmund T. Emmer et ah,
Classroom Management for Secondary Teachers, 4th ed. (Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon, 1997).
11. Ibid.
12. Allan C. Omstein, “Emphasis on Student Outcomes Focuses Attention on Quality of
Instruction,” NASSP Bulletin (January 1987): 88-95; Omstein, “Teacher Effectiveness
Research: Theoretical Considerations,” in Effective Teaching: Current Research, ed.
H. Waxman and H. J. Walberg (Berkeley, CA: McCutchan, 1991), 63-80.
13. Albert Bandura, Principles of Behavioral Modification (New York: Holt, Rinehart &
Winston, 1969); Bandura, Social Foundations of Thought and Action: A Social-
Cognitive Theory (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1986).
14. B. F. Skinner, “The Evolution of Behavior,” Journal of Experimental Analysis of
Behavior (March 1984): 217-222; Skinner, “Cognitive Science and Behaviorism,”
British Journal of Psychology (August 1985): 291-301.
15. Paul A. Schutz, Facilitating Self-Regulation in the Classroom, paper presented at the
annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans,
April 1994.
16. Robert F. Biehler and Jack Snowman, Psychology Applied to Teaching, 9th ed.
(Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000).
17. C. M. Charles, Building Classroom Discipline, 6th ed. (New York: Longman, 1999).
18. Bandura et al., “Representing Personal Determinants in Causal Structures,” Journal
of Personality and Social Psychology (June 1985): 406—414; Virginia W. Beminger
and Robert D. Abbott, “The Unit of Analysis and the Constructive Process of the
Learner,” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1992): 223-242; Skinner, “The
Evaluation of Verbal Behavior,” Journal of Experimental Analysis of Behavior
(January 1986): 115-122.
19. Jacob S. Kounin, Discipline and Group Management in Classrooms (New York:
Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1970); Kounin, Discipline and Classroom Management
(New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1977).
20. Rudolph Dreikurs, Psychology in the Classroom, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper &
Row, 1968); Rudolph Dreikurs and Pearl Cassel, Discipline Without Tears, rev. ed.
(New York: Dutton, 1988).
21. Rudolph Dreikurs, Bernice B. Grunwald, and Floyd C. Pepper, Maintaining Sanity in
the Classroom, 2nd ed. (New York: Harper & Row, 1982); Dreikurs and Loren
Grey, Logical Consequences: A New Approach to Discipline (New York: Dutton,
1988); Dreikurs, Children: The Challenge (New York: Dutton, 1990).
22. C. M. Charles, Building Classroom Discipline, 4th ed. (New York: Longman, 1992),
70- 71.
23. William W. Glasser, Reality Therapy: A New Approach to Psychiatry (New York:
Harper & Row, 1965); Glasser, The Quality School: Managing Students Without
Coercion (New York: HarperCollins, 1990).
24. William W. Glasser, School Without Failure (New York: Harper & Row, 1969);
Glasser, The Quality School.
25. William W. Glasser, Control Theory in the Classroom (New York: Harper & Row,
1986).
26. Ibid.
27. James S. Cangelosi, Classroom Management Strategies, 3rd ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997), 30-31.
28. Lee Canter, “Let the Educator Beware,” Educational Leadership (October 1988):
71- 73; Carol Goodenow, “Strengthening the Links Between Educational Psychology
and the Study of Social Contexts,” Educational Psychologist (Spring 1992):
177-196.
29. Carl Bereiter, “Implications of Connectionism for Thinking About Rules,”
Educational Researcher (April 1991): 10-16; Schutz, “Goals in Self-Directed
Behavior,” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1991): 55-67.
30. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Looking in Classrooms, 7th ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997).
31. Joseph Cambone, Teaching Troubled Children (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1994); Robert T. Tauber, Classroom Management from A to Z
(Fort Worth, TX; Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1990).
32. Robert E. Slavin, Cooperative Learning, 2nd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1990); Slavin, Educational Psychology: Theory into Practice, 6th ed.
33. Allan C. Omstein, “Teaching the Disadvantaged,” Educational Forum (January
1967): 221.
34. N. L. Gage and David C. Berliner, Educational Psychology, 6th ed. (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1998).
35. William Damon, Greater Expectations (New York: Free Press, 1995).
36. Moshe Zeidner, “The Relative Severity of Common Classroom Management
Strategies: The Student’s Perspective,” British Journal of Educational Psychology
(February 1988): 69-77.
37. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Contemporary Educational Psychology,
5th ed. (New York: Longman, 1995); Good and Brophy, Looking in Classrooms.
38. Robert Laslett and Colin Smith, Effective Classroom Management, 2nd ed. (New
York: Routledge, 1992); Tom V. Savage, Teaching Self-Control Through
Management and Discipline, 2nd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon,
1999).
39. Christopher M. Clark and Penelope L. Peterson, “Teachers’ Thought Processes,” in
Macmillan, 1986), 255-296; Bud Wellington, “The Promise of Reflective Practice,”
Educational Leadership (March 1991): 4-5.
40. Allan C. Ornstein, “Techniques and Fundamentals for Teaching the Disadvantaged”;
Omstein, “Teaching the Disadvantaged”; Ornstein, “A Difference Teachers Make:
How Much?” Educational Forum (Fall 1984): 109-117. Also see Joseph E.
Williams, “Principles of Discipline,” American School Board Journal (February
1993): 27-29.
41. David W. Johnson, Reaching Out: Interpersonal Effectiveness and Self-
Actualization, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997).
42. Ibid.
CHAPTER
10 Assessing Student
Progress

Reflecting on the extent to which the learning goals were met. (Dl)

Focusing Questions
1. What does it mean for a test to be reliable? valid?
2. What are the most common methods for testing reliability? validity?
3. What are the differences between norm-referenced measurements and
criterion-referenced measurements?
4. How can criterion-referenced tests be improved?
5. How can classroom tests be improved?
6. What short-answer test questions generate the most controversy? Why?
7. How can the teacher improve the writing and scoring of essay test questions?
8. What test-taking skills can be taught to students? When was the last time you
taught these skills to your students?
391
Evaluation is a process in which we put a value on or assign worth to something.

The essential characteristic of evaluation is judgment. Measurement is quantita¬
tive. It describes something in terms of specific numbers or percentages. In eval¬
uation a judgment is made that attaches a value or a qualitative description to a
measurement derived from a test.
For example, suppose a student scores 65 on a test. This score is a measure¬
ment. However, the number 65 does not indicate whether the score should be
judged good or poor, high or low. If most students score over 65, we might de¬
cide that the score is low and indicates poor performance. If most students score
in the 60s, we might decide that the score is not so low. Measurement provides
us with test data (numbers, percentages); judgment interprets the numbers and
turns them into evaluations.
Evaluation is a two-step process. The first step is measurement, in which
data are obtained by the use of one or a series of tests. Once the measurement
has been made, judgments are made about the adequacy of performance, usually
in the context of instructional objectives.
Evaluation is also necessarily connected to testing and teaching. Sternberg,
asserts that when teachers teach material in a variety of ways, students are more
likely to understand the content.1 Indeed, students who are required to go be¬
yond the rote memorization of content and to analyze and creatively and practi¬
cally engage content remember the material better. You need to think about test¬
ing and evaluation as an extension of instruction, not as separate from the
instructional process. In this chapter we will focus on testing, and in the next
chapter we will discuss evaluation.
Criteria for Selecting Tests

Two major criteria for selecting tests are reliability and validity. No matter what
type of test you use, it should be reliable and valid. By reliability we mean that
the test yields similar results when it is repeated over a short period of time or
when an equivalent form of the text is used. A reliable test can be viewed as
consistent, dependable, and stable. By validity we mean that the test measures
what it is represented as measuring. An invalid test does not measure what it
should measure. For example, a pen-and-pencil test is not suitable for measuring
athletic abilities.
Reliability
Test reliability can be expressed numerically. A coefficient of .80 or higher indi¬
cates high reliability, .40 to .79 fair reliability, and less than .40 low reliability.
Many standardized tests contain several subtests or scales and thus have coeffi¬
cients to correspond to each of the subtests, as well as the entire test. For exam¬
ple, reliability for a reading test might be reported as .86 for comprehension,
.77 for vocabulary, .91 for analogies, and .85 for the test as a whole.
There are three basic methods for determining test reliability. Each has a
different purpose. Our goal here is not to make you a test expert, but rather to
help you see the complexity of making certain that tests are reliable. In the
method called test-retest, a test is administered twice (i.e., the same test is given
twice to the same students), usually with several weeks between tests.2 The rank
order of individual test scores on the two tests is compared. If the rank order of
scores is exactly the same, then the correlation coefficient is 1.00, or perfect reli¬
ability. A correlation of .86 indicates that the test is highly consistent over time.
The test-retest estimate of reliability is also referred to as a measure of stability.
A number of objections have been raised to the test-retest method. Because
the same items are used on both tests, the respondents’ answers on the second
test can be influenced by their memory of the first test and by discussions about
the items with classmates or teachers between tests. If the interval between tests
is too short, memorization is a factor. If the interval is too long, scores can
change as a result of learning. The two test conditions might also differ. Lack of
interest on the student’s part during one of the test situations, a change in a stu¬
dent’s health or diet, a change in the mood of the student or the test administra¬
tor may affect the scores.
To overcome the problems introduced by repeated test items in the test-
retest method, the equivalent-forms method (or measures of equivalence) may be
used. Two different but equivalent forms of the test are produced, and students
are given both forms of the test. The correlation between scores on the two tests
provides a good estimate of reliability. One drawback to this method is that
equivalent forms are not always available, especially with teacher-made tests,
but even with many standardized tests. The two forms are not always equivalent
and can differ in difficulty.3 Also, the equivalent-forms method does not address
the problem of differing test conditions.
The difficulties associated with the test-retest and equivalent-forms methods
have led to the development of the split-half (or measures of internal consis¬
tency) reliability method. A single test is split into reasonably equivalent halves,
and these two subtests are used as if they were two separate tests to determine
reliability coefficients. One common method of splitting a test is to score the
even-numbered and odd-numbered items separately. Of course, splitting a test in
half means that the reliability scores are determined by half the number of items.
Too few items in calculations can lead to greater distortions and more chance ef¬
fects. In short, test reliability is higher when the number of items is increased,
because the test involves a larger sample of the material covered.
Each of the measures (or different methods of estimating reliability) has dif¬
ferent strengths and weaknesses. In general, there are more sources of error with
the first two than with the split half.4 The key is to not just look at the numerical
value of a reliability estimate, but also look at which method is reported.
Another type of reliability is scorer reliability. This refers to the consistency
of the scorer (typically the teacher) in scoring test items. Quite obviously, a
true/false test can be more reliably graded than an essay test. High scorer relia¬
bility is not always possible, but it is important that you as a grader understand
the fact that you can increase or decrease scorer reliability by simply changing
the type of test you give.
In conclusion, keep in mind that reliability can be enhanced generally by
giving longer tests rather than shorter ones. More importantly, reliability is nec¬
essary in order for a test to be valid.
Validity
There are several types of validity. Basically, we try to determine whether we
are measuring what we think we are measuring. Depending on a person’s
knowledge of research and reason for administering the test, an individual can
choose from several types of validity; we will discuss only those that you as a
classroom teacher should know. You won’t use these forms of validity in con¬
structing tests, but knowing about them is essential to constructing good tests.
Professional testing services go to great expense to ensure that their tests have
measurable validity. You should go to great effort to ensure that your tests have
reasonable validity.
Content Validity
When constructing a test for a particular subject, we must ask whether the items
adequately reflect the specific content of that subject. If test items can be an¬
swered on the basis of basic intelligence, general knowledge or test wiseness,
the content of a course or knowledge of a subject is not being tested adequately.
The test lacks content validity.
Of all the forms of validity, content validity is perhaps the most important.
An eighth-grade science test should measure scientific knowledge and skills
taught in eighth grade—not reading comprehension, not mathematics, and not
tenth-grade science. To achieve reasonable content validity, select items repre¬
sentative of the curricular content you want students to know.
Curricular Validity
A standardized test that covers a good sample of a subject, but not the subject or
course as taught in a particular school, would have content validity but not cur¬
ricular validity. A test that reflects the knowledge and skills presented in a par¬
ticular school’s curriculum has curricular validity. In such a test the items ade¬
quately sample the content of the curriculum the students have been studying.5
The problem of curricular validity arises more often with standardized (or
norm-referenced) tests than with teacher-made (or criterion-referenced) tests.
Many standardized tests have excellent content validity on a nationwide or
statewide basis, but the items are not matched on a local school basis.
Predictive Validity
Predictive validity involves the relation of test scores to performance at some fu¬
ture time. For example, valid aptitude tests, administered in the twelfth grade or
first year of college, can predict success in college. This is what the Scholastic
Aptitude Tests (SATs) that students take in high school are supposed to do. In¬
formation on how a student is likely to perform in an area of study or work can
be helpful in counseling students and in selecting students for different pro¬

grams. (It is important to consider other factors as well, including previous
grades and letters of recommendation.)
Usability
A third criterion for selecting a test is usability. A test should be easy for stu¬
dents to understand, easy to administer and score, within budget limitations if it
has to be purchased, suitable to the test conditions (for example, time available),
and appropriate in degree of difficulty.6
A test could be valid in content but contain questions that are ambiguous or
directions that are difficult to follow, and consequently a student who under¬
stands the material might give wrong answers. Or the questions might be
phrased in such a way that a student who does not understand the material might
guess right answers. For example, students expect a true/false or multiple-choice
item containing the word always or never to be false or an inappropriate choice.
They sometimes answer such an item correctly when they are ignorant of the
facts. By the same token, the vocabulary of the test should not be too difficult
for students taking the test, or the test will no longer be measuring only content,
but also reading comprehension. Placing too many difficult items in the front of
the test will cause students to spend too much time on them at the expense of
reaching items at the end that they could have easily answered. Finally, if a test
is too short, representative content will not be adequately tested—resulting in
lower test validity.7
Standardized and Nonstandardized Tests

A standardized test contains a set of items that are administered and measured
according to uniform scoring standards. The test can be either norm- or
criterion-referenced. The test has been pilot-tested and administered to represen¬
tative populations of similar individuals to obtain normative data. Most
standardized tests are published and distributed by testing companies (such as
Educational Testing Service); publishing companies (such as Houghton Mifflin
and Macmillan), which usually publish reading and math tests to accompany
their textbooks; and universities (such as Iowa State University and Stanford
University) that have developed and validated specific achievement and IQ tests.
Standardized tests are widely used in schools, and you most certainly have
taken a number of them throughout your academic career. Standardized tests
usually have high reliability coefficients and good validity, because they have
been tested on representative sample populations. The unreliable or invalid test
items have been eliminated through pilot testing over the years. Normative data
are useful in interpreting individual test scores and in ranking individual scores
within a comparative population. However, normative data are less useful in
special school or class situations in which the students have abilities, aptitudes,
needs, or learning problems that are quite different from reliability and validity
The standardized
testing process has
developed on a large
scale recently.
data obtained for various sample populations. A test manual should provide a
comprehensive description of procedures in establishing normative data. Al¬
though norms can be reported for almost any characteristic (sex, ethnicity, geo¬
graphical setting, and so forth), such data are usually not shown or are incom¬
plete for students who have special characteristics or backgrounds.
Sometimes an educator is not concerned with how well a student performs
compared to other students, but whether the student exhibits progress in learn¬
ing. The educator establishes a set of objectives with corresponding profi¬
ciency or achievement levels and then compares the student’s performance to
those objectives rather than to the normative population. The content of stan¬
dardized tests does not always coincide with the content in a particular school
or classroom—that is, the tests can lack curricular validity for that school or
classroom.
Nonstandardized tests, sometimes referred to as teacher-made tests or
classroom tests, usually have not been tested on sample populations and there¬
fore are not accompanied by normative data. These test scores cannot indicate
an individual’s position with reference to a standard or larger sample. Standard¬
ized tests are usually administered only once or twice a year; teacher-made tests
provide more frequent evaluations. Teacher-made tests are more closely related
to the school’s and/or teacher’s objectives and content of the course. Who
knows better than the teacher what content was covered and emphasized and
hence should be tested? Who knows better than the teacher what the needs, in-
terests, and strengths of the students are, when to test, and when, based on test
outcomes, to proceed to the next instructional unit?
Norm-Referenced Tests
A norm-referenced test involves the comparison of one individual (a student)
to a set of individuals (or students)—that is, the performance of sample popula¬
tions has been established and serves as a “basis for interpreting a [student’s]
relative test performance. A norm-referenced measure allows comparisons be¬
tween one individual and other individuals.”8 The idea of norms, especially if
the norms are based on a larger population, nationwide or statewide, is to com¬
pare a student’s test score with the scores of students from other schools. For ex¬
ample, suppose that Jack’s score on a statewide achievement test places him in
the 98th percentile in his school, but in the 58th percentile in the state. Although
Jack’s score is extremely high when compared with scores of students in his
school, it is barely above average compared to scores of a large pool of students.
Students who attend inner-city schools might exhibit excellent performance
when compared with, classmates or peer groups, but poor performance on a na¬
tional or statewide basis. If their scores are compared only with scores from
other inner-city schools or even with the city norms rather than statewide or na¬
tional norms, their percentile scores are likely to be higher because the norm
group has lower scores than the larger population.
Norm-referenced tests tend to have high estimates of reliability and validity
because the norms are based on large populations. The test manual usually com¬
pares students to other students, and the teacher assesses the student only on the
basis of a predetermined standard. Scores can demonstrate progress (or minimal
progress) in learning over long periods of time—not short term progress because
the tests are not sensitive or accurate enough.
Criterion-Referenced Tests
Criterion-referenced tests measure individuals’ abilities in regard to a crite¬
rion, that is, a specific body of knowledge or skill. The tests are used to deter¬
mine what students know or can do in a specific domain of learning rather than
how their performance compares with other students.
Criterion-referenced tests are usually locally developed and sometimes
teacher-made. Norm-referenced tests sometimes have better overall reliability
and validity, because they have been constructed by test experts and tested on
larger sample populations.9 The exception would be the custom-built state profi¬
ciency tests that are increasingly being used by states to assess specific student
knowledge. Those state tests are criterion-based and by legal necessity they typi¬
cally have extensive validity and reliability testing. Criterion-referenced tests
allow the teacher to judge students’ proficiency in specific content areas, and
therefore they usually have better curricular validity than norm-referenced tests.
Criterion-referenced measurements can be practical in areas of achievement
that focus on the acquisition of specific knowledge (for example, the Civil War
in history or gas laws in physics) and in special programs such as individually pre¬
scribed instruction, mastery learning, and adaptive instruction. What is important
about this testing situation is that it considers the context of the classroom, what has
actually been taught, and learning that might not be reflected on textbook or other
preplanned tests.10 It is important to note, however, that it is difficult to develop re¬
liable or valid criterion measurements that test for high-order or abstract thinking.
Your assessment should consider the kinds of learning (e.g., knowledge or
problem solving) you expect from students, the content of the curriculum, and
the context of the classroom. Your tests should be fair, provide incentives for
students to learn, and give you information for purposes of instruction and cur¬
riculum decision-making. See Tips for Teachers 10.1.
Differences Between Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Tests

The norm-referenced test measures a student’s level of achievement at a given
period of time compared to other students elsewhere. Scores from a criterion-
referenced test do not indicate a relative level of achievement or produce stan¬
dards, because no comparisons are made. The test indicates how proficient a stu¬
dent is in terms of a specific body of learning. It can measure changes in
learning over time, but it cannot produce meaningful comparisons or standards
among students.
Gronlund and Linn point out five differences between norm- and criterion-
referenced tests: (1) The norm-referenced test covers a large or general domain
of learning tasks, with only a few items measuring each task, but the criterion-
referenced test covers a limited or specific domain, with a relatively large num¬
ber of items measuring each task. (2) The norm-referenced test discriminates
among students in terms of relative levels of learning or achievement, whereas
the criterion-referenced test focuses on description of what learning tasks stu¬
dents can or cannot perform. (3) The norm-referenced test favors average diffi¬
culty and omits easy or difficult items; the criterion-referenced test matches item
difficulty to the difficulty of learning tasks and does not omit easy or difficult
items. (4) The norm-referenced test is used for survey or general testing,
whereas the criterion-referenced test is used for mastery or specific test situa¬
tions. (5) Interpretation of a norm-referenced score is based on a defined group,
and the student is evaluated by her or his standing relative to that group. Inter¬
pretation of a criterion-referenced score is based on a defined learning domain,
and the student is evaluated by the items answered correctly.11
Some criterion-referenced tests are teacher-made and are used by teachers
to tailor tests to their objectives, to develop more efficient and appropriate teach¬
ing strategies, and to fit the needs of the classroom population. Other norm-
referenced tests are prepared for many different school districts (or for a whole
state) that have schools with different curricular and instructional emphases.
Criterion-referenced tests are intended to better coincide with the actual
teaching-learning situation of a particular class or school. The problem is that
local school officials and teachers often lack the expertise in test construction
needed to develop criterion-referenced tests. Thus, it is recommended that
Improving Your Assessment Procedures
The tips below reflect the assessment policy of the 6. Teachers should be involved in designing
Washington-based National Forum on Assessment and using assessment systems.
(an advocacy organization intent on protecting the a. To correlate with instruction, and to
rights of students) and the National Council on Mea¬ improve learning outcomes, teachers
surement in Education. The suggestions can be used need to be involved in the assessment
with norm-referenced and criterion-referenced tests. practices and be committed to, and use,
the test outcomes for decisions involving
1. Educational standards—specifying what
curriculum and instruction.
students should know and be able to do—
7. It is inappropriate to limit instruction to the
should be clearly defined before assessment
objectives of a test or assessment program,
procedures and exercises are developed.
a. Tests should not drive the curriculum.
a. Assessment should be based on a
Focusing on specific content or skills of a
consensus definition, based on input from
test limits the students’ ability to learn
teachers, administrators, parents, and
the larger content and skills of the subject
policy makers, of what students are
or course.
expected to learn, and the expected level
of performance. 8. Assessment practices and results should be
understood by students, teachers, parents,
2. The primary purpose of assessment systems
and policy makers.
should be to help educators improve
a. Test results reported in technical terms,
instruction and advance student learning.
such as grade equivalents and stanines,
a. All purposes and procedures of
are often misunderstood or misleading to
assessment should benefit students; for
the public. Results should be reported in
example, the results should be used to
terms of educational standards or
improve instruction or remediate learning
performance levels.
problems.
9. Assessment programs should provide
3. Assessment standards and procedures should
appropriate information and interpretation
be fair to all students.
when test scores are released to students,
a. Assessment tasks and procedures must be
parents, employment agencies, or colleges
sensitive to class, cultural, racial, and
and universities.
gender differences.
a. The interpretation should describe in
4. The assessment exercises should be valid
simple language (free of jargon) what the
and appropriate representations of the
test covers, what the scores mean, the
standards students are expected to achieve,
norms in terms of which comparisons are
a. A sound assessment system provides being made, and how the scores will (or
information about a full range of
can) be used.
knowledge and skills students are to
10. Assessment systems should be subject to
learn.
continuous review and improvement,
5. Assessment results should be reported in the a. Even the “best” testing (and grading)
context of other relevant information. systems need to be modified to adapt to
a. Student performance should consist of a changing conditions (e.g., community,
multiple system of indicators; generally
class of students), resources (expenditures
speaking, the more indicators the more per student, staffing, etc.), and programs
valid is the information about the (class size, curriculum objectives, etc.).
student’s performance.
teachers develop these tests as a group, so that they can exchange information
with colleagues and perhaps with a test consultant. Table 10.1 provides an
overview of the difference between norm-referenced and criterion-referenced
tests. Norm-referenced tests are usually more carefully constructed than crite¬
rion-referenced (teacher-made) tests, because the former are developed by test
experts and test items are pilot-tested and revised. The advantage of criterion-
Table 10.1 Comparison of Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Tests
Characteristic Norm-Referenced. Test Criterion-Referenced Test
1. Major emphasis Measures individual’s achievement (or Measures individual’s change in achievement (or
performance) in relation to a similar group performance) over an extended period of time
at a specific time
Survey test, achievement test Mastery test, performance test
2. Reliability High reliability; usually test items and scales Usually unknown reliability; when test items are
are .90 or better estimated, they are about .50 to .70
3. Validity Content, construct, and predictive validity Content and curricular validity usually high if
usually high appropriate procedures are used
4. Usability For diagnosing student difficulties; estimating For diagnosing student difficulties; estimating
student performance in a broad area; student performance in a specific area; certifying
classifying students; and making decisions competency; and measuring what a student has
on how much a student has learned learned over time
compared to others
Administration procedures are standardized Administration procedures usually vary among
and consistent from class to class teachers or schools
Large group testing Small group, individual testing
5. Content covered Usually covers a broad area of content or Typically emphasizes a limited area of content or
skills skills
School (or teacher) has no control over School (or teacher) has opportunity to select content
content being tested
Linked to expert opinion Linked to local curriculum
6. Quality of test items Generally high Varies, based on ability of test writer
Test items written by experts, pilot tested, and Test items written by teachers (or publishers); test
revised prior to distribution; poor items items are rarely pilot tested; poor items omitted
omitted before test is used after test has been used
7. Item selection Test items discriminate among individuals to Includes all items needed to assess performance;
obtain variability of scores little or no attempt to deal with item difficulty
Easy and confusing items usually omitted Easy or confusing items are rarely omitted
8. Student preparation Studying rarely helps student obtain a better Studying will help student obtain a better score
score, although familiarity with the test
seems to improve scores
Students are unable to obtain information Students are able to obtain information from teachers
from teachers about content covered about content covered
9. Standards Norms are used to establish a standard or to Performance levels are used to establish student’s
classify students ability
Intended outcomes are general, relative to Intended outcomes are specific, relative to a
performance of others specified level
Score is determined by a ranking, average, or Score is determined by an absolute number, e.g., 83
stanine percent right
Source: Adapted from Allan C. Ornstein, “Norm-Referenced and Criterion-Referenced Tests,” NASSP Bulletin (October 1993): 28M0.
referenced tests is that the teacher (or school) has more control over the content
of the test, and therefore it should better coincide with classroom instruction.
Types of Standardized Tests

There are basically four types of standardized tests. The scores from these tests
will appear in the student record, often called the cumulative record.
Intelligence Tests
Intelligence tests have come under attack in recent years, and most school sys¬
tems use them only for special testing. The two most commonly used individu¬
ally administered intelligence tests are the Stanford-Binet (SB) and the Wechsler
Intelligence Scale for Children (WISC).
Group tests to measure students’ general aptitude (or intelligence) are also
used in schools. Most of those group tests are used for older children (age 6 and
above). The tests administered for children in the middle grades (grades 5 to 8)
produce the most stable results. The Cognitive Ability Test and Otis Lennon
School Ability Test are two examples of group intelligence tests. In the Otis
Lennon, for example, students make classifications (e.g., they are shown five
pictures and select the one that does not belong) or analogies (e.g., identify what
object fits with the pattern of the previous set of objects).
Achievement Tests
The use of achievement tests has increased in recent years, replacing intelli¬
gence testing as the prime source of information for educators about students
and how they perform in comparison to each other and to students elsewhere.
Every elementary student is exposed to a series of reading, language, and mathe¬
matics standardized tests to evaluate performance at various grade levels. There
are several types of achievement tests:
1. The Stanford Achievement Tests (grades 2 through 9) and the Iowa Test
of Basic Skills are among the most popular achievement tests used by
schools. The National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
exams are designed to measure the knowledge and skills of American
students in ten subject areas (with emphases in the arts, science, math,
and career development) at ages 9, 13, and 17.
2. Many elementary and junior high school students are required to take
diagnostic tests, usually in the basic skills and in study skills, to reveal
strengths and weaknesses for purposes of placement and formulating an
appropriate instructional program.
3. An increasing number of students in many school systems must pass
competency tests to prove they are competent in reading, language, and
math. Students who fail are usually provided some type of remediation.
In some cases the tests are used as “break points” or “gate guards”
between elementary, junior high, and high school, and as a requirement
for graduation from high school. Students in some states are denied
promotion or a diploma until they pass the examinations.12 The policy
debate on denying promotion is just beginning to heat up, especially

since it appears that retained students may do more poorly than even
those students who receive social promotions. In addition, litigation is
occurring now about the potential discriminating effects of testing.
For example, Florida, in 1978, passed legislation to require students to
pass a functional literacy exam in order to receive a diploma. That legislation
was challenged in court because under the Fourteenth Amendment the
requirement appeared to have a disproportional impact on blacks. After a
series of appeals, the U.S. Court of Appeals granted Florida the right to use
the test and asserted that “the competency is not discriminatory, if the skills
in the test have been taught in the school program.”13
4. Subject exit tests are used in a few school systems at the high school
level. Students must pass tests to graduate, to receive a particular
diploma, or to enroll in certain programs. For example, New York State
uses the Regents examination in basic academic subject areas (English,
history, science, mathematics, foreign language) as a screen for
eligibility to matriculate full time in a state college or university; the
student must also pass these examinations to receive an academic
diploma. Actually, these exams may be considered competency tests.
A variation on the subject of exit tests is the Oregon Certificate of
Initial Mastering (CIM). The CIM must be completed by the end of tenth
grade. Students must exhibit both content and applicational knowledge.
Evidence of student acquisition of the knowledge is determined, in part,
from on-demand performance assessments that are both state and local in
character, with teacher usage of discipline-based scoring rubrics or
guides—see Table 10.2.14
Aptitude Tests
The difference between aptitude tests and achievement tests is mainly one of
purpose. Achievement tests provide information about present achievement or
past learning on a cumulative basis. Aptitude tests predict achievement.
Whereas achievement tests deal with content that the schools teach (or should be
teaching), aptitude tests might stress what is not taught in schools. The most
common aptitude tests are briefly discussed below.
1. Most students who wish to go on to college have to take a number of

general aptitude tests to provide information to college admissions
officers. You probably took the Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SAT) or the
American College Testing program (ACT) exam. Students applying to
graduate school might take the Miller Analogies Test (MAT) or the
Graduate Record Examination (GRE). The MAT is a general aptitude
test in logic and language skills. The GRE is a general aptitude test, but
the advanced parts are considered a professional aptitude test.
2. Special or talent aptitude tests are frequently administered as screening
devices for students who wish to enroll in a special school (such as
music, art, or science) or for students who wish to enroll in a special
Table 10.2 Example of Oregon Discipline-Based Scoring Guide

One Section of the Science Inquiry Scoring Guide
Use of Content and Concepts

(always scored)
Science concepts and principles are used accurately.

HIGH • Scientific facts and concepts are accurately and appropriately used.
(5/6) • Scientific vocabulary is accurately used in describing and explaining processes and concepts.
• Illustrations and models help explain processes and concepts.
• Previous learning or experience is directly related to the concepts.
MID-RANGE • Scientific facts and concepts are used, but some may be inaccurately applied or are incomplete.
(3/4) • Some scientific vocabulary is accurately used.
• Illustrations and models offer some help in explaining processes and concepts.
• Connections of previous learning or experiences are indirectly related to the scientific concepts.
LOW • Scientific facts and concepts are not used accurately or are omitted.
(1/2) • Scientific vocabulary is used incorrectly or not used.
• Illustrations and models do not help explain scientific processes and concepts or they are omitted.
• Connections of previous learning or experiences are inappropriately related to the scientific concepts
or are omitted.
Source: Ron Smith and Steve Sherrell, “Milestones on the Road to a Certificate of Initial Mastery,” Educational Leadership (December
1996-January 1997): 46-51
course (such as an honors course or a college course with credit) or a

special program (such as creative writing or computers).
Personality Tests
Personality tests are generally used for special placement of students with learn¬
ing problems or adjustment problems. Most students in school are not tested for
personality. The most commonly used personality tests are the California Test of
Personality, the Pinter Personality Test, and the Thematic Apperception Test, all
intended for use in primary grades to college and designed to measure various so¬
cial and personal adjustment areas. For older students (ages 16 and above), the
Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory (MMPI) can be used.
1. A number of general attitudinal scales, which estimate attitudes in

diverse economic, political, social, and religious areas, are available;
among the more common ones are the Allport Submission Reaction
Study and the Allport-Vernon-Lindsey Study of Values.
2. Among occupational attitudinal tests, the Occupational Interest
Inventory is suitable for students with at least a sixth-grade reading level,
and the Kuder Preference Record is designed for high school and college
students.
Questions to Consider in Selecting Tests

Hundreds of standardized tests exist, and selecting an appropriate one is diffi¬
cult. Individual classroom teachers usually do not have to make this choice, but
you may be called upon to make selections if you serve as a member of a test or
evaluation committee for your school district. Below are twelve questions that
can help you select an appropriate standardized test, or, more likely, help your
work on a school committee that is endeavoring to select a standardized test. If
you are involved in a field experience, ask teachers what criteria were used to
select standardized tests and compare their responses with the following ideas,
which are based on criteria formulated by W. James Popham.
1. Is the achievement test in harmony with course instructional objectives?

An achievement test should correspond with the objectives of the course,
and it should assess the important knowledge, concepts, and skills of the
course.
2. Do the test items measure a representative sample of the learning tasks?
The test items cannot measure the entire course or subject matter, but
they should cover the major objectives and content.
3. Are the test items appropriate for measuring the desired outcomes of
learning? The test items should correspond to behaviors or performance
levels consistent with the course level.
4. Does the test fit the particular uses that will be made of the results? For
example, a diagnostic achievement test should be used for analyzing
student difficulties, but an aptitude test should be used for predicting
future performance in a given subject or program.
5. Is the achievement test reliable? The test should report reliability
coefficients for different types of students, and they should be high for
the student group you are testing.
6. Does the test have retest potential? Equivalent forms of the test should
be available so that students can be retested if necessary. There should
also be evidence that the alternative forms are equivalent.
7. Is the test valid? Standardized tests usually have poor curricular validity,
but the test should have good construct validity.
8. Is the test free of obvious bias? It is difficult to find a test that is totally
free of bias toward all student groups, but teachers should look for tests
that are considered culturally fair or at least sensitive toward minority
groups and that provide normative data (reliability and validity data) for
minority groups. Tests should also be free of gender bias.
9. Is the test appropriate for students? The test must be suitable for the
persons being tested in terms of reading level, clarity of instructions,
visual layout, and so forth. It must be at the appropriate level of
difficulty for students of a given age and grade level.
10. Does the test improve learning? Achievement tests should be seen as
part of the teaching and learning process. This means a test should
provide feedback to teachers and students and be used to guide and
improve the teacher’s instruction and the student’s learning.
11. 75- the test easy to administer? Tests that can be administered to large
groups are more usable than tests that can only be given to small groups
or individuals. Tests that require less time and are still reliable are more
usable than lengthy tests.
12. Is the cost of the test acceptable? The total cost of the test, including the
time involved in administering and scoring it, should be commensurate
with the benefits to be derived. If similar information can be obtained by
some other method that is just as reliable and valid, and less costly, then
that method should be considered.15
Trends in Testing
It is important to recognize that students’ placements and progress in school,
from grades 1 to 12, are largely determined by their scores on achievement tests
in reading and math and, later on, aptitude tests of general knowledge or liter¬
acy. On a practical basis most standardized tests, at all grade levels (with the ex¬
ception of personality tests), focus on declarative or simple content, and not on
important or high-level cognitive processes, which cut across subject matter and
are useful for critical thinking.
Cognitive Levels of Testing

As many as twenty-two cognitive processes have been identified by thinking
skills theorists. However, in a review of 6,942 test items on standardized tests,
Marzano and Costa found that only nine cognitive processes were involved in
answering the items. Two were involved in some way in answering every item:
retrieving information from long-term memory, and comparing different pieces
of information. The seven other processes, with corresponding percentage of
use, were these: referencing, or identifying explicit or implicit information (17
percent); visual matching, or relating a picture or symbol to a linguistic term
(8.5 percent); inferring, or deducing unstated information (6.5 percent); order¬
ing, or ranking or sequencing data (5.5 percent); representing, or devising a
graphic or pictorial representation of information (5 percent); transposing, or
translating information from one source to another (5 percent); and summariz¬
ing, or combining information (3 percent). The remaining thirteen high-order
thinking skills were considered absent on standardized tests.16
Until standardized tests are revised to reflect important cognitive processes
such as extrapolating, synthesizing, verifying, and predicting, teachers will con¬
tinue to stress these nine as well as lower-level cognitive processes during teach¬
ing and instructional practices to prepare students for the tests they must take.
To be sure, curriculum and instruction are test-driven. It behooves test develop¬
ers to improve their tests if they wish teachers to upgrade and incorporate criti¬
cal thinking or problem solving in the content or subject matter.
So long as school authorities focus their attention on test results and not on
how students think, standardized tests will continue to emphasize low-level cog¬
nitive operations. Some states, including Illinois, Michigan, and Ohio, are begin¬
ning to develop standardized tests that attempt to determine how well readers
process information.17 This information is much more important than reading re¬
sults if we are going to help students become better readers. The same is true in
math, science, and other subject areas. The truth is, when students are required
to make inferences or explain their answers, many students who usually test in
the highest percentiles on standard multiple-choice tests perform less well.18
Another way to deal with the inability of students to process information on
tests that are more cognitively complex, is to change the way information is pre¬
sented to students. Teachers who teach just for memory will not educate stu¬
dents to deal with more complex thinking processes, especially when students
confront sophisticated test items. Teachers who use triarchic approaches (see
Table 10.3) foster enhanced student performance on all types of tests. Robert
Sternberg has now provided us with some empirical evidence for this phenome¬
non:
On average, on analytical, creative, and practical performance assessments, students

in triarchic-instruction conditions outperformed students in the other two conditions
[students who were in teachers’ classrooms where there was a focus on just memory
or memory and analysis]. But more interestingly, the triarchic condition was supe¬
rior to the other two conditions on the multiple-choice memory assessments.19
Authentic Assessment
Current standardized tests are designed to assess large numbers of students inex¬
pensively while at the same time permitting prompt and almost error-free scor-
Table 10.3 Robert Sternberg’s Triarchic Instruction
Focus Teacher Behavior
Memory Teacher asks students a who, how, what, when, where question.
Analysis Teacher asks students to compare and contrast or to analyze and
evaluate.
Creativity Teacher asks students to create, invent, discover, or imagine.
Practical Assessment Teacher asks students to utilize, implement, or apply content.
Traditional Analytical Triarchic
Memory Memory Memory

+ +
Analysis Analysis
+
Creativity
+
Practical Assessment
ing. In addition, the items are screened and piloted to enhance reliability and
validity of the test. But the price for this efficiency is that the measurement is in¬
direct and one dimensional; it does not measure direct performance or “real life”
contexts.20
At the classroom level, however, the use of authentic assessments (which
often include performance assessment systems) is feasible because there are
fewer students and therefore the costs are manageable. Most important, class¬
room tests are not high-stakes settings where the reliability and validity of the
tests are crucial. As long as the stakes are low and the primary aim is to provide
feedback, empower students, and correlate instruction with assessment, then au¬
thentic testing is a viable option.
Unlike standardized tests, authentic assessments, such as essay examina¬
tions, research projects, group projects, scientific experiments, oral presenta¬
tions, exhibits, and portfolios of various subject areas, also monitor and assess
“know-how” with knowledge—capacities required of students in our complex
world. More common in European classrooms and American experimental
schools, authentic assessment techniques encourage learners to stretch their ca¬
pacities, undertake independent assignments, and generate new ideas and pro¬
jects. Teachers are expected to act as facilitators and coaches during the instruc¬
tional process, engage learners in a dialogue, and ask them to defend their ideas
during the assessment process. According to critics, standardized tests do not tap
the same high-order skills and abilities that students need in later life. They en¬
courage students to do little more than recall information, rather than prepare
them to solve problems, evaluate alternatives, and create ideas or products.21
In the opinion of Grant Wiggins, authentic assessments often involve a panel,
such as classmates or other teachers in the role of examiner, and do not rely on
time constraints. The skills or tasks being tested are essential, and not needlessly
intrusive or esoteric; they are contextualized and involve complex thought
processes, not atomized tasks or isolated bits of information. The students are
graded in reference to a performance standard or expectation, not on a curve or ab¬
solute standard. The scoring system (or rubric) is multifaceted instead of one ag¬
gregate grade, and self-assessment is part of the assessment process (see also
Table 10.2). The performance provides room for various student learning styles,
aptitudes, and interests—and comparisons among students are minimized.22
In such a setting, the students and teachers become part of a learning com¬
munity. Standards are clear, agreed upon, and in line with the goals of the school
so that students are not surprised. Students also have a chance to modify or re¬
vise their performance. Their work is important enough to be a source of public
learning and public display—providing classmates an opportunity to learn
from one another. In short, authentic tests are designed to be representative
of performance in the subject or field. Greater attention is paid to aligning teach¬
ing, learning, and assessment, and students take an active role in their own
assessment—to the extent of defending their ideas publicly.
The enthusiasm among many educators for introducing authentic testing re¬
flects disappointment with standardized tests and the view that multiple-choice
test items are too restrictive in providing evidence of students’ real learning.
Although eliminating standardized tests is unlikely, it is more likely that many

school districts and states will adopt some form of authentic assessment. Perhaps
the major theoretical difference between standardized and authentic testing is
that whereas standardized tests are concerned with right and wrong answers, in
authentic assessment the structure of the responses (i.e.; how the learner thinks)
are considered important. On a cost and time basis, and for testing large groups
of students, however, standardized tests are still more practical. We will discuss
authentic assessment in more detail later in this chapter.
High-Stakes Tests
High -stakes tests—where results impact important decisions—evolved from

the minimum competency and basic skills tests of the 1980s. Some states, under
pressure from the public, began to impose “gatekeeping” tests for student pro¬
motion at selected grades, “exit” tests for high school graduation or a diploma,
and “certifying” tests for beginning teachers.23 By 1998, some 25 states had im¬
plemented competency tests for high school graduation and 37 had implemented
testing to certify beginning teachers.
In the 1990s the stakes were increased. Many school districts began to use
the California Achievement Test (CAT) in the lower grades and the Scholastic
Assessment Test (SAT) in the upper grades, as well as other statewide achieve¬
ment tests, to compare schools and hold teachers and school administrators ac¬
countable for the outcomes. State assessments also increased in number and
complexity, and an incentive system was tied into the process. Some school dis¬
tricts today either are rewarded for improvement with increased allocation of
funds and bonuses for teacher salaries or penalized for continuous failure by re¬
ductions in funding and even loss of accreditation.24
In the context of the growing movement for a national system of standards
and assessment, the 1990s also saw the growing influence of the National As¬
sessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), which provided information on the
nation’s students on the achievement of 9, 13, and 17-year-olds in ten selected
areas of learning (reading, mathematics, and science are the most important
achievement areas). Different learning areas are assessed each year, and all areas
have been assessed periodically in order to track changes in educational achieve¬
ment at the national level. The results have ultimately led to concern with the os¬
tensible failure of American schools.25 Test scores are now used as a report card
to compare states and school districts within states; they are also used to com¬
pare students from different countries.26 Other far-reaching uses for the NAEP_
including school evaluation, professorial accountability, and student achieve¬
ment benchmarks—are still being proposed and in some states have already
been implemented.
Local, state, and national testing programs have taken on such importance
that standardized tests now drive the curriculum and affect the school culture.
The cunent high-stakes testing climate gives way to dysfunctional instruction
such as teaching toward the tests and emphasizing recall of information and
right answers found on standardized tests. What suffers are those aspects of the
curriculum not tested, such as critical thinking and creativity, as well as written
and oral expression.27 The pressure is so great on schools that it is not uncom¬
mon for many to exclude low-achieving students, who might lower the average
test scores, from taking these tests—justifying the practice by classifying the
students as disabled or limited English speaking. Some teachers fearful of nega¬
tive ratings might avoid teaching at-risk students or students with special needs,
thus compromising the educational chances of disadvantaged students who al¬
ready are served by a high percentage of inexperienced teachers. Still other
teachers (and administrators) have been criticized for teaching the tests, and
even for cheating, in order to raise test scores. High-stakes tests also can inhibit
curriculum innovation and variety, screen out applicants with low scores who
might otherwise possess skills for real-life contexts, and force students to leave
school before they have to take and fail the examination.28
The testing mania is creating a test-based accountability. Accountability is
not bad, but it is negative if schools are punished for student poor performance;
it can be positive if the focus is on how to improve instructional delivery. Linda
Darling-Hammond powerfully describes the difference between the two ap¬
proaches, punishment versus instructional improvement, in Kentucky and
Vermont:
An alternative approach to reform uses standards and assessments as means of giv¬

ing feedback to educators and as tools for organizing student and teacher learning,
rather than as a sledgehammer to beat schools into change. The different effects of
the two approaches can be seen in Kentucky and Vermont—states that have taken
distinctive approaches to reform.
Both states set out in the late 1980s to create performance-based assessment sys¬
tems that would allow more thoughtful evaluation of student learning on more chal¬
lenging and authentic measures. However, Kentucky’s system was framed by a
punitive accountability structure that proposed rewards for schools whose average
scores improved by specific ratios each year and sanctions for those whose scores
did not improve to the level specified in the statute. Vermont’s system was launched
with the goal of measuring and reporting student learning, and using the results to
focus attention on how instructional improvement should be pursued. The wide in¬
volvement of educators in designing and implementing the assessments and a more
appropriate use of stakes have made it a powerful tool for improving teaching.29
New Tests and Standards

The national demand is for higher standards and better assessment tools. The
contention is that American education can be reformed by setting high standards
and using new assessments to hold students, teachers, and school districts
accountable. Similarly, there is pressure for the states to establish delivery
standards—a description of what the schools must provide so that all students
have a fair chance of achieving certain standards.30 Recent attempts to move
standard testing beyond primary emphasis on basic skills and knowledge and
multiple-choice questions emerge in part from the New Standards Project, a co¬
operative venture of the Learning Research and Development program at the
University of Pittsburgh and the National Center on Education. A national
system of education standards and assessments would include three types of

tests: (1) content standards, which would specify what students should know in
various subjects; (2) performance standards, to be illustrated by exemplars of
student work on various tasks and skills reflecting the content standards; and
(3) school delivery standards, criteria for assessing whether schools are provid¬
ing opportunity to learn the content and performance standards.
In addition, the National Council on Education Standards endorsed the fol¬
lowing recommendations:
an overarching “vision”; content standards, such as those developed by the National

Council of Teachers of Mathematics, which define what schools should teach; stu¬
dent performance standards, such as those being developed by NAEP’s governing
board, which outline the levels of achievement students should attain; school deliv¬
ery standards, which describe a school’s capacity to enable students to attain the
standards; and system performance standards, which indicate the extent to which
school systems succeed in educating students to the standards. In a move that would
prove hotly controversial, the Council recommended that the school delivery stan¬
dards should be set by the states themselves from among a set of standards devel¬
oped by the states collectively. All other standards would be developed nationally.31
As an educator, the overriding reasons for using tests should be to integrate

your instruction and assessment, to measure and determine whether the impor¬
tant knowledge and skills of the subject you are teaching have been learned, and
to promote the development of human talent. Tests should be used as a tool, not
as a weapon. Standardized test content cannot be explicitly taught; rather make
students test wise and take small amounts of time teaching students how to re¬
spond to sample test items. Test reporting to consumers—both students and
parents—is expected. In fact, some states are now issuing report cards on
schools that measure the students’ performance on tests against wider state
norms. An example of one school report card is provided in Table 10.4. But ap¬
propriate information about what the scores mean, and how to interpret the
scores, should be part of the reporting process. Parents should also receive infor¬
mation about how they can help their children improve their test scores, not just
how the school is doing on comparisons of test performance. Decisions about
test scores should be made in context with multiple sources of information. In
addition to weighing all these factors, it helps as a teacher to remember your
own days as a student, your own test anxieties, and the ways test scores were
used to make decisions about you, including grading systems and placement in
programs. With those experiences in mind, you are likely to exercise a little
more caution as you assess your own students and make judgments about
whether they are “making the grade.”
One final note on standardized tests before we go on to classroom tests.
Many critics of education argue that the performance of American students is
woefully weak. Students today, they argue, are just not as good as students in
the past. The issues around generational or international comparisons are incred¬
ibly complex. Conservative critics use test data from commercially produced
tests to show that schools (and teachers) are failing. Defenders of schools use in¬
formation from those same tests to illustrate that schools are succeeding. Two
Table 10.4 Example of School Report Card
Percentage of Students Who Passed the Tests
Minimum
State Your Your Overall
Performance School’s District’s State 1994-95 1995-96 1996-97
Standard % Average % Average % Average % Results % Results % Results %
9th Grade Citizenship 75% 93.4 93.4 77.3 96.9 88.9 94.5
Test Mathematics 75% 83.1 83.1 63.6 83.1 79.7 87.0
Reading 75% 98.4 98.4 85.2 100.0 96.9 98.2
Writing 75% 91.8 91.8 80.1 95.3 85.9 94.4
Science NS NA NA NA NA NA NA
9th Grade Citizenship 85% 94.1 94.1 88.1 93.3 95.4 93.7
Test (10th Mathematics 85% 84.2 84.2 77.5 76.0 89.2 88.9
grade Reading 85% 98.5 98.5 93.2 96.0 100.0 100.0
students) Writing 85% 97.0 97.0 91.1 97.3 96.9 96.8
Science NS NA NA NA NA NA NA
12th Grade Citizenship 60% 57.7. 49.6 58.1 NA 77.3 41.5

Test Mathematics 60% 47.4 41.2 47.6 NA 65.9 32.1
Reading 60% 65.3 60.3 68.1 NA 80.0 52.8
Writing 60% 57.7 56.9 67.0 NA 81.8 37.7
Science NS 43.8 38.5 54.1 NA 68.2 23.1
Note: The percentage of students who take and pass all five sections of the state proficiency tests at each grade level will be provided in the Year
2000 report card.
Source: State of Ohio—1998 School District Report Card (Ohio Department of Education). You can obtain the report card for every school in the
State of Ohio by visiting the following Web site: http://www.ode.ohio.gov/www/reptcard/report_card.html.
particularly articulate defenders are David Berliner and Bruce Biddle. We pro¬
vide here an example of their argument:
Commercial tests of achievement provide yet another source of evidence concerning

school performance in America. Each year, millions of students all over the country
take tests that are prepared by commercial firms. One informant estimates that in the
state of New York, a student in a college bound, academic track will have taken
twenty-nine state-mandated tests between kindergarten and the twelfth grade. Local
districts may impose many more assessments. So lots of additional data are available
to examine whether schools have, as the critics would have it, recently been “failing.”
These commercial tests are associated with an interesting effect that is not widely
known. According to Robert Linn, M. Elizabeth Graue, and Nancy M. Sanders, each
year students tend to score higher on these various tests. For example, on average,
students in the 1980s gained roughly 2.10 percentile ranks for reading and 2.04 per¬
centile ranks for mathematics, per year, on the California Achievement Test (CAT).
These are large gains. . . .
The same rising trends were also exhibited by the Stanford Achievement Test
(SAT), the Metropolitan Achievement Test (MAT), and the Comprehensive Tests of
Basic Skills (CTBS). . . . Why then is this effect not more widely known? The an¬
swer seems to be that all these tests are recalibrated about every seven years, and
when this is done, the test developers take pains to make certain that in all cases the
typical student scores at the fiftieth percentile rank for each subject assessed by the
tests. In other words, whenever the tests are recalibrated, the achievement gains that
students had earned over the past few years are wiped out in the process. So, if com¬
mercial tests were not recalibrated, virtually all of them would show that today’s stu¬
dents are out-achieving their parents substantially.32
What this suggests is that you need to be a thoughtful consumer of test data
and a critical reader of research about schools, tests, and student performance. You
will be bombarded with information about what schools are like and how they are
doing. The best defense is to be knowledgeable and to keep yourself informed.
Classroom Tests
Teachers are expected to write their own classroom tests. Most of these tests will
be subject-related, will focus on a specific domain of learning, and will assess
whether a subject has been mastered and when it is time to move on to a new con¬
tent area. In this context, classroom tests are criterion-referenced measurements.
Most teachers develop more than half the tests they use in class. About a
third of teachers surveyed estimate they spend 11 to 20 percent of their profes¬
sional time on developing and correcting teacher-made tests, and slightly more
than a third estimate they spend more than 20 percent of their time on such tests.
A teacher must keep

many things in mind
when preparing and
evaluating tests.
It is further estimated that a student might take as many as 400 to 1,000 teacher-
constructed tests prior to high school graduation.33
It could be said that teachers and schools are in the business of testing and
that they are highly influenced (sometimes hypnotized) by test scores. Accord¬
ing to researchers, the bulk of the testing is done with teacher-made tests that
have unknown or low reliability, and most teachers do not know how to check
for reliability or how to ensure appropriate weighing of content (which impacts
on validity).34 Analysis of teacher-made tests reveals that about 80 percent of
test questions emphasize knowledge or specific content, that tests frequently do
not give adequate directions or explain scoring, and that about 15 to 20 percent
contain grammatical, spelling, and punctuation errors.35
In spite of these limitations, classroom tests still serve important and useful
purposes. One study states that classroom tests are used by teachers (1) to group
or place students initially, (2) to decide on what to teach and how to teach it to
students of different abilities or achievement levels, (3) to monitor student
progress, (4) to change student grouping and placement, (5) to guide changes in
teaching approach, and (6) to evaluate students on their performance.36
A final note before we outline the different types of tests. Some students in
classrooms require adaptations in order to be successful learners. What adaptations are
needed depends on the uniqueness of each learner. Tips for Teachers 10.2 describes
various adaptation and intervention possibilities. In addition, teachers must be aware
of new changes in federal legislation. One way to monitor the legislative changes
is to access the Council for Exceptional Children web site: http://www.cec.sped.org
and then click the Public Policy and Legislative Information link.
For Students Needing Adaptations in Testing/Assessment
• Provide students with all handouts/test copies • On vocabulary tests give the definition and
that are easy to read (typed, clear language, at have student supply the word, rather than
least double-spaced, clean copies, ample providing the word and student needing to write
margins). out the definition.
• Avoid handwritten tests. • Provide word bank to select from for fill-in-the-
• Eliminate unnecessary words and confusing blank tests.
language on the test. • Allow extended time for completing the test.
• State directions in clear terms and simple • Take exam in the classroom, then in a small
sentences. group or with special education teacher, and
• Underline or color highlight directions or key average the two grades.
words in the directions. • Provide students an example when possible of
• Provide opportunities for short-answer different types of test questions they will be
assessment (multiple-choice, matching). responsible for on the exam.
continued
Tips for Teachers 10.2 concluded rather than 20 to 25. When dictating the words
on the test, dictate those 15 words in any order
• Provide more work-space on the tests first; then continue with the other words for the
(particularly for math tests). rest of the class. Those students on modified
lists have the option of trying the additional
• Allow students to use graph paper or other paper
words for bonus points. . . .
to solve math problems and attach to test, rather
than require that computation must be done on • Score tests for number correct/total number
the limited work space directly on the test. assigned per student (which can be shortened
assignments or tests for individual students).
• Enlarge the print.
• Eliminate need for students with writing
• Divide a test in parts, administering on different
difficulties to copy test questions from the
days rather than rushing students to complete
board or book before answering.
lengthy tests in one class period.
• Teach students the strategies and skills for taking
• Allow student to retake the test orally after
a variety of tests (true/false, multiple choice, fill
given in written form to add points to his/her
in the blank, essay, fill in the bubble, etc.).
score if he/she is able to demonstrate greater
knowledge/mastery than shown on written tests • Practice all types of testing formats.
(especially for essay questions). • Collaborate with special educators to rewrite the
• Administer frequent short quizzes throughout tests for special needs students (shorter sentences,
the teaching unit and review the next day; thus simplified vocabulary, easier to read format).
providing feedback to students on their • Test what has been taught.
understanding of the material. These short • Avoid questions that are worded in a way to
quizzes do not need to be graded for a score, deliberately trick the student.
but to help students in their learning and • Write multiple-choice questions with choices
confidence prior to the exam. listed vertically rather than horizontally (as it is
• Substitute an oral for a written test as appropriate. easier to read).
• Assign take-home tests on occasion. • Utilize portfolio assessment (progress evaluated
• Allow taped tests if needed, and permit student on individual performance and improvement as
to tape-record answers to essay questions rather opposed to comparing to other students).
than write them. • Reduce weight of test grade.
• Read test items orally to student(s). • Color the processing signs on math tests for
• Don’t penalize for spelling, grammar, etc., on students who don’t focus well on details and
tests that are measuring mastery of content in make careless errors due to inattention. For
other areas. example, highlight yellow = addition problem,
• Give credit for what is done correctly. green = subtraction, blue = multiplication.
• Read aloud the directions for the different parts • Utilize privacy boards at desks during test¬
of the test before students begin the exam. taking time, and/or find other means of
reducing distractions when students are tested.
• Before providing final grade on test, point out
test items that you spot are incorrect, and allow • Allow use of a calculator on math tests that are
student to try to self-correct careless errors assessing problem-solving skills, not computation.
before scoring.
Source: Sandra F. Rief and Julie A. Heimburge, How to Reach and
• Give reduced spelling lists for students who Teach All Students in the Inclusive Classroom (West Nyack, NY:
struggle with spelling: for example, 15 words Center for Applied Research in Education, 1996): 200-202.
Table 10.5 Reasons for Selecting Short-Answer or Essay Tests
Short Answer (multiple choice, matching,

completion, true/false) Essay
1. Provides good item pool 1. Calls for higher levels of cognitive thinking
2. Samples objectives and broad content 2. Measures student’s ability to select and organize ideas
3. Is independent of writing ability (quality of handwriting, 3. Is easy and quick to prepare
spelling) and verbal fluency 4. Tests writing ability
4. Discourages bluffing by writing or talking “around 5. Eliminates guessing or answering by process of elimination
the topic” 6. Measures problem-thinking skills
5. Is easy and quick to score 7. Encourages originality and unconventional answers
6. Scoring and grading are reliable procedures 8. Is practical for small groups of students, older students, and
7. Scoring is objective high-achieving students
Source: Theodore R. Sizer. “An Exhibition: Performance from Memory” from Horace's School. © 1992. Reprinted by permission of Houghton
Mifflin Co. All rights reserved.
Differences Between Short-Answer Tests and Essay Tests
Most classroom tests fall into two categories: short-answer tests (multiple-choice,
matching, completion, and true/false), sometimes called objective tests, and
essay (or discussion) tests, sometimes called free-response tests. Short-answer
tests require the student to supply or select a specific and brief answer, usually
one or two words; essay tests require the student to organize and express an an¬
swer in his or her own words and do not restrict the student to a list of responses.
An essay test usually consists of a few questions, each requiring a lengthy
answer. A short-answer test consists of many questions, each taking little time to
answer. Content sampling and reliability are likely to be superior in short-
answer tests. Essay tests provide an opportunity for high-level thinking, including
analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. Most short-answer items emphasize low-level
thinking or memorization, not advanced cognitive operations. See Table 10.5.
The quality (reliability, validity, usability) of an objective test depends pri¬
marily on the skill of the test constructor, whereas the quality of the essay test
depends mainly on the skill of the person grading the test. Short-answer tests
take longer to prepare, but are easier to grade. Essay tests can be easier to pre¬
pare, but they are difficult to grade. Short-answer items tend to be explicit, with
only one correct answer. Essays permit the student to be individualistic and sub¬
jective; the answer is open to interpretation, and there is more than one right an¬
swer. Short-answer tests are susceptible to guessing and cheating; essay tests are
susceptible to bluffing (writing “around” the answer).37 Table 10.5 provides an
overview of some relative advantages of selecting short-answer and essay tests.
According to Mehrens and Lehmann, there are six factors to consider in
choosing between short-answer and essay tests:
1. Purpose of the test. If you want to measure written expression or critical

thinking, use an essay. If you want to measure broad knowledge of the
subject or results of learning, use short-answer items.
2. Time. The time saved in preparing an essay test is often used up in
grading the resppnses. If you are rushed before the test and have
sufficient time after it, you might choose an essay examination. If you
must process the results quickly, you should use short-answer items—
provided you have sufficient time to write good questions.
3. Numbers tested. If there are only a few students, the essay test is
practical. If the class is large or if you have several different classes,
short-answer tests are recommended.
4. Facilities. If typing and reproduction facilities are limited, you might be
forced to rely on essay tests. Completion and true/false questions can be
administered by reading the question aloud, but all short-answer tests
should be typed, reproduced, and put in front of students to respond to at
their own pace.
5. Age of students. Use essay tests beginning in the lower intermediate
grades and limit the format arrangement of tests. Older students (sixth
grade and above) can deal with a variety of types of test items, but
younger students are confused by changing item formats and
accompanying directions.
6. Teacher’s skill. Some types of items (true/false) appear easier to write
than others, but in fact all test items take time to construct if they are
going to be appropriate in the content. Some teachers develop a
preference for one type of item over another. However, different types
should be included especially with older students. Test writing is a skill
that can be improved with practice.38 (See Tips for Teachers 10.3.)
Short-Answer Tests
Short-answer items include multiple-choice, matching, completion, and
true/false. Regardless of the type of objective test, the writing of the test ques¬
tions or items by the teacher generally involves finding the most appropriate
manner in which to pose problems to students. The test questions or items
often involve the recall of information, exemplified by knowledge of facts,
terms, names, or rules, but they can also involve higher-order cognitive abilities.
(Multiple-choice and even matching items are easier to devise for testing ad¬
vanced cognitive abilities; the other short-answer types are more difficult.) A
number of suggestions should be considered when preparing and writing short-
answer tests.
1. The test items should measure all the important objectives and outcomes
of instruction.
2. The test items should not focus on esoteric or unimportant content.
3. The test items should be clearly phrased so that a knowledgeable person
will not be confused or select a wrong choice. The test items should not
contain clues that might enable an uninformed person to answer correctly.
4. Trick or trivia test items should be avoided because they penalize
students who know the material and benefit students who rely on
guessing or chance.
Preparing Classroom Tests
Teacher-made tests are frequently the major basis for 10. How will I arrange the items within each
evaluating students’ progress in school. Good tests item format?
do not just happen! They require appropriate plan¬ 11. What do I need to do to prepare students for
ning so that instructional objectives, curriculum con¬ taking the test?
tent, and instructional materials are related in some
12. How are the pupils to record their answers to
meaningful fashion. Below is a checklist to consider
objective items? On separate answer sheets?
when preparing your classroom tests.
On the test booklet?
1. What is the purpose of the test? Why am I 13. How is the objective portion to be scored?
giving it? Hand or machine?
2. What skills, knowledge, attitudes, and so on, 14. How is the essay portion to be graded?
do I want to measure? 15. For objective items, should guessing
3. Have I clearly defined my instructional instructions be given? Should a correction
objectives in terms of student behavior? for guessing be applied?
4. Do the test items match the objectives? 16. How are the test scores to be tabulated?
5. What kind of test (item format) do I want to 17. How are scores (grades, or level of
use? Why? competency) to be assigned?
6. How long should the test be? 18. How are the test results to be reported?
7. How difficult should the test be?
8. What should be the discrimination level of
Source: William A. Mehrens and Irwin J. Lehmann, Measurement
my test items?
and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 4th ed. (Fort Worth.
9. How will I arrange the various item formats? TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1991), 64.
5. Test items should not be interrelated. The answer to one item should not
furnish the answer to another.
6. Test items should be appropriate to the students’ age level, reading level,
and cognitive and developmental levels.
7. Test items should not be racially, ethnically, or gender biased.
8. Test items should have a definite correct answer, that is, an answer that
all experts (other teachers) can reasonably agree on.
9. Tests should not be the only basis for evaluating the students’ classroom
performance or for deriving a grade for a subject.
To write an appropriate test, the teacher obviously must know the course
content (specific knowledge, skills, concepts, common misconceptions, difficult
areas, etc.). But knowledge of content is not enough. The teacher must be able to
translate the objectives of the course into test items that will distinguish between
students who know the material and students who do not, and that will measure
qualitative differences (preferably in higher-order thinking) related to the course
as well as knowledge.
Rules of Thumb for Taking a Short-Answer Test
Bruce W. Tuckman
Professor of Educational Psychology
Ohio State University
Once upon a time, when I was a student, I was a 3. Do not make the right answer choice longer,
good test taker. While all my friends were busy more complex, or in any way visibly different
being overcome by test anxiety and forgetting every¬ from the wrong answer choices or else the wise
thing they had crammed into their heads the night test taker, when in doubt, will always choose
before, I was being focused and super “cool” and the “meatier” choice and invariably be right.
looking for any advantage I could get. I figured that 4. Do not follow a pattern in choosing what
all was fair in love, war, and taking a test. I had stud¬ choice, a, b, c, d, or e, will be the correct
ied hard, outlined all my notes and all the chapters choice. Pick letters out of a hat or use some
that would be covered, and tried to figure out what other truly random procedure. Otherwise,
the teacher thought was important enough to ask when in doubt, the “wily fox” will choose the
about on the test. But I also had some ideas about letter choice that has not been right for the
what kinds of clues to look for on the test itself. longest time.
Back then I was working on intuition, but today, as a 5. Make all the answer choices grammatically
person who teaches teachers how to build tests, I consistent with the question. Any choices that
have tried to specify what all those clues I used to are not will be automatically disregarded by
use were so that the teachers I taught wouldn’t inad¬ the sharp-eyed student.
vertently provide them for their students.
Since we don’t want to reward test-taking skills Beyond these five rules of thumb, in scoring the
as a substitute for acquiring knowledge through hard test include a penalty for guessing (for example, test
work such as coming to class and studying, these are score equals number right -1/4 number wrong) if
the clues that students should not be given in the you do not want students to benefit unduly from
tests that you build. guessing. In addition, while giving the test be wary
of students who ask a lot of questions about the
1. Do not include any obviously wrong answer items that require you to give them explanations.
choices. If you do, students can just cross You may be giving away the right answer without
them out and thereby reduce their odds of knowing it.
guessing the correct answer. If you want to try to help your students, tell them
2. Do not write one item that actually contains to skip items they cannot answer and come back to
the answer to another item on the same test. If them, to guess at answers they do not know (if there
you do, clever students will skim over the is no penalty for guessing), and to try to answer each
whole test, find the items that overlap, and question before they look at the answer choices. And
then use one to answer the other. wish them EFFORT rather than luck.
Multiple-Choice Items
Multiple-choice questions are the most popular objective test items, especially at
the secondary level, and some students think they are fun to answer because they
see the task almost as a puzzle, putting pieces together: doing easy pieces first
and saving the hard pieces for last. The basic form of the multiple-choice test
item is a stem or lead, which defines the problem, to be completed by one of a
number of alternatives or choices. There should be only one correct response,
and the other alternatives should be plausible but incorrect. For this reason the
incorrect alternatives are sometimes referred to as “distracters.” In most cases
three or four alternatives are given along with the correct item.
The idea in writing the question is to have the knowledgeable student
choose the correct answer and not be distracted by the other alternatives; the
other alternatives serve to distract the less knowledgeable student. The effect of
guessing is reduced, but not totally eliminated, by increasing the number of al¬
ternatives. In a 25-item four-alternative multiple-choice test, the probability
of obtaining a score of at least 70 percent by chance alone is 1 in 1,000. To
achieve a similar freedom from the effect of guessing in a true/false test requires
200 items.39
The teacher can control the difficulty of the test by using plausible distrac-
tors. They should not be tricky or trivial. The major limitation of the multiple-
choice format is that the distracters are often difficult to construct, particularly
when the number of choices increases to five. Unless the teacher knows the
content of the course well, he or she is usually limited in the number of good
multiple-choice test items that can be constructed.
Following are three examples of multiple-choice questions. The first tests
simple knowledge, the second the application of a formula, and the third the ap¬
plication of a concept.
1. Henry Kissinger is a well-known . . .

a. corporate lawyer.
b. avant-garde playwright.
c. surrealistic artist.
d. international statesman.
e. pop musician.
2. What temperature, in degrees Fahrenheit, is equivalent to 10° Centigrade?
a. 0° F
b. 32° F
c. 50° F
d. 72° F
<?. 100° F
3. Based on the map provided, which product is most likely to be exported from
Bango (a fictitious country for which longitude, latitude, and topography are
shown)?
a. fish
b. oranges
c. pine lumber
d. com
Like the other forms of tests, good multiple-choice test items are difficult to
construct. Some teachers disdain multiple-choice (recognition) items, believing
them to be too simple, but these items can be very intellectually demanding
when they are well constructed. Multiple-choice items take time to develop and
can come in different forms, such as direct-question, incomplete statement, and
best answer. An example of each is provided below.
Direct Question
In what war was Thadeus Lowe’s invention The Intrepid (an observational
balloon) first used for making observations of troop movements?
a. War of 1812
b. Mexican-American War
c. Civil War
d. Spanish American War
Incomplete Statement Form

The higher-education institution that trained the most military officers for the
Civil War was . . .
a. Harvard College.
b. West Point.
c. Annapolis.
d. Oberlin College.
Best Answer
Which of the following best explains why Black regiments were not more
prominent in fighting for the North?
a. Most Blacks refused to fight for the North.
b. Northern whites, like Southerners, held stereotypes that Blacks were not
brave enough to fight.
c. There were too few Blacks in the North to form many Black regiments.
d. Training Blacks was difficult because they were relatively unskilled.
Guidelines for Writing Multiple-Choice Items
Below are some suggestions for writing multiple-choice items.
1. Use, where possible, a direct question rather than an incomplete statement in

the stem. (A direct question will result in less vagueness and ambiguity, es¬
pecially among inexperienced test writers.)
2. Avoid negative statements in the stem, because they lead to confusion.
3. Use numbers to label stems and letters to label alternatives.
4. Avoid absolute terms (always, never, none), especially in the alternatives; a
test-wise person usually avoids answers that include them.
5. Arrange alternatives in some logical order—for example, alphabetically or
chronologically.
6. Arrange alternatives so that they are parallel in content, form, length, and
grammar. Avoid making the correct alternative different from wrong alterna¬
tives: longer or shorter, more precisely stated, having a part of speech others
lack.
7. Make certain that correct responses are in random order. Do not use one par¬
ticular letter more often than others or create a pattern for the placement of
correct responses.
8. Use alternatives such as “All of the above” and “None of the above”
sparingly.
Matching Questions
In a matching test there are usually two columns of items. For each item in
one column, the student is required to select a correct (or matching) item in
the other. The items might be names, terms, places, phrases, quotations, state¬
ments, or events. The basis for choosing must be carefully explained in the
directions.
Matching questions have the advantages of covering a large amount and va¬
riety of content, being interesting to students (almost like a game), and being
easy to score. Matching questions may be considered a modification of multiple-
choice questions in which alternatives are listed in another column instead of in
a series following a stem. The questions are easier to construct than multiple-
choice questions, however, because only one response item has to be con¬
structed for each stem. One problem with matching tests, according to test ex¬
perts, is finding homogeneous test and response items that are significant in
terms of objectives and learning outcomes. A test writer might start with a few
good items in both columns, but might find it necessary to add insignificant or
secondary information to maintain homogeneity.40
Another problem is that matching questions often require recall rather than
comprehension and more sophisticated levels of thinking. Higher levels of cog¬
nition might be called for in matching questions that involve analogies, cause
and effect, classifications, complex relationships, and theories, but such items
are hard to construct.41
Below is an example of a matching exercise.
Famous American presidents are listed in column A, and descriptive phrases

relating to their administration are listed in column B. Place the letter of the
phrase that describes each president in the space provided. Each match is worth
1 point.
Column A: Presidents Column B.: Descriptions or Events
_1. George Washington a. Civil War president
___ 2. Thomas Jefferson b. “New Deal”
_3. Abraham Lincoln c. First American president
_4. Woodrow Wilson d. Purchased Louisiana Territory
_ 5. Franklin Roosevelt e. “New Frontier”
f. World War I president
Guidelines for Writing Matching Questions
The following suggestions might improve your construction of matching ques¬

tions.
1. Provide directions that briefly and clearly indicate the basis for matching
items in column A with items in column B.
2. Ensure that column A contains no more than 10 test items; 5 or 6 items is
probably ideal.
3. Provide more responses in column B than there are “premises” in column A in
order to prevent answering the last one or two items by simple elimination. Col¬
umn B should contain 6 or 7 items if column A contains 5. A list of 10 items in
column A should be accompanied by about 11 or 12 items in column B.
4. Number the column A items, as they will be graded as individual questions,
and column B items should be lettered.
5. Present column B items in a logical order, say alphabetically or chronologi¬
cally (but not one that gives away the answer), so the student can scan them
quickly in search for correct answers.
6. Ensure that items in both columns are similar in terms of content, form,
grammar, and length. Dissimilar alternatives in column B result in irrelevant
clues that can be used to eliminate items or guess answers by the test-wise
student.
7. Avoid negative statements (in either column), because they confuse students.
Completion Questions
In a completion test, the student is presented with sentences from which a word
or words have been omitted. The student is to fill in the blank to complete the
meaning. This type of short-answer question, sometimes called a fill-in or fill-in-
the-blank question, is suitable for measuring a wide variety of content. Although
it usually tests recall of information, it can also demand thought and ability to un¬
derstand relationships and make inferences. Little opportunity for guessing and
for obtaining clues is provided, as with other short-answer questions. The major
problem with this type of test question is that the answers are not always entirely
objective, so scoring is time-consuming and the grading outcomes can vary with
the grader. Using both multiple-choice and completion items on a test is an effec¬
tive method for reducing ambiguity in test items and making scoring more objec¬
tive. However, this combination does restore the opportunity for guessing.
The examples below illustrate how guessing is reduced. To answer the com¬
pletion item (question 1), the student must know the capital of Illinois. To arrive
at an answer to the multiple-choice question (question 2), the student might
eliminate alternatives through knowledge about them or simply choose one of
them as a guess.
1. The capital of Illinois is_.

2. The capital of Illinois is (a) Utica, (b) Columbus, (c) Springfield,
(d) Cedar Rapids.
Guidelines for Writing Completion Questions
Here are some general suggestions for writing completion items.
1.Do not use questions or statements that are copied directly from the textbook
or workbook, because this encourages memorization.
2. Ensure that completion items have only one possible correct answer.
3. Ensure that the fill-in is plausible to the knowledgeable student; it should not
be based on trivia or trick data.
4. Use one blank, or certainly no more than two, in any item; more than two
blanks leads to confusion and ambiguity.
5. Use completion items that are specific terms (person, place, object, concept).
An item requiring a more general phrase can elicit more subjective responses
and be harder to score.
True/False Questions
Of all types of short-answer questions used in education, the true/false test
question is the most controversial. Advocates contend that the basis of “logical
reasoning is to test the truth or falsity of propositions” and that “a student’s com¬
mand of a particular area of knowledge is indicated by his [or her] success in
judging the truth or falsity of propositions related to it.”42 The main advantages
of true/false items are their ease of construction and ease of scoring. A teacher
can cover a large content area, and a large number of items can be presented in a
prescribed time period. This allows the teacher to obtain a good estimate of the
student’s knowledge. If the items are carefully constructed, they can also be
used to test understanding of principles.
Critics assert that true/false items have almost no value, arguing that they
encourage, and even reward, guessing, and measure memorization rather than
understanding. Others say that true/false questions tend to elicit the response set
of acquiescence—that is, the response of people who say yes (or true) when in
doubt.43 The disadvantages of true/false questions can outweigh their advantages
unless the items are well written. Precise language that is appropriate for the stu¬
dents taking the test is essential so that ambiguity and reading ability do not dis¬
tort test results.
Here are two examples of weak true/false questions. True/false:
1. Australia, the island continent, was discovered by Captain Cook.

2. Early in his career, Will Rogers said, “I never met a man I didn’t like.”
Question 1 makes two statements (“Australia is the island continent” and

“Australia was discovered by Captain Cook”), and it is unclear whether the stu¬
dent is to respond to both or only one; moreover, the item also tests for the
meaning of island and continent. In question 2, is the student being asked
whether Rogers made the statement early or late in his career or whether this is
the exact statement he made? A test-wise person might say false, because there
are two ways of being wrong in this question, but the person would be wrong in
this case.
Guessing is the biggest disadvantage to true/false tests. When students

guess, they have a fifty-fifty chance of being right. Clues in the items and being
test-wise improve these odds. The purpose of the test is to measure what stu¬
dents know, not how lucky or clever they are. This disadvantage can be compen¬
sated for, to some extent, by increasing the number of test items and by penaliz¬
ing (deducting a fraction of a point) for an incorrect answer. True/false items
should be used sparingly for older students, who are more test-wise and able to
find clues in questions. These items are more appropriate for younger students,
who respond more to the content than to the format of questions.
Guidelines for Writing True/False Questions
Here are some suggestions for writing true/false items.
1. Ensure that each true/false item tests an important concept or piece of

information.
2. Ensure that true/false statements are completely true or false, without exception.
3. Avoid specific determiners and absolute statements (never, only, none, al¬
ways), because they are unintentional clues. Most important, do not use them
in statements you want to be considered true.
4. Avoid qualifying statements and words that involve judgment and interpreta¬
tion (few, most, usually). Most important, do not use them in statements you
want to be considered false.
5. Avoid negative statements and double negatives. These confuse students and
can cause knowledgeable students to give the wrong answer.
6. Avoid verbatim textbook and workbook statements, because use of such
statements promote memorization.
7. Use the same form and length for true and false statements. For example, do
not make true statements consistently longer than false statements; test-wise
students will recognize a pattern.
8. Present a similar number of true and false items.
9. Use simple grammatical structures. Avoid dependent clauses and compound
sentences, because they may distract the student from the central idea. There
is also a tendency for the knowledgeable student to see a more complex item
as a trick question or to read more into the meaning than is intended.
Summary on Short-Answer Tests

Table 10.6 summarizes many of the points we have discussed. All types of
short-answer tests have advantages and disadvantages, and some teachers will
eventually prefer certain types and avoid others. Although each has features that
make it useful for specific testing situations, the different types can be used to¬
gether to add variety for the test taker and to test different types and levels of
knowledge.
Table 10.6 Advantages and Limitations of Short-Answer Test Questions
Question Type Advantages Disadvantages Precautions
Multiple choice 1. Flexibility in measuring 1. The stem or alternatives are 1. Write short, parallel stems and
objectives or content sometimes too long, alternatives
2. Well-constructed items have confusing,'or vague 2. Avoid clues based on longer or
potential to measure high- 2. A correct answer can shorter alternatives or incorrect
level thinking sometimes be determined grammar
3. Guessing can be minimized without knowledge of content 3. Use plausible choices or
by a built-in penalty 3. Susceptible to guessing and alternatives
4. Easy to score; little eliminating incorrect choices 4. Avoid textbook language or direct
interpretation to count 4. Time consuming to write phrases
correct responses 5. Sometimes there is more 5. Be sure there is only one correct
5. Requires knowledge of test than one possible correct answer
construction and dependent answer
upon constructing plausible
incorrect answers
Matching 1. Relatively easy to write, easy 1. Necessary to use single 1. Avoid trivia information; avoid
to score words or short phrases textbook language
2. Well suited to measure 2. Cannot be used to assess all 2. Be sure the choices are parallel;
associations types of thinking; lists or avoid clues within items; avoid
3. Amenable to testing a large individual pieces of additional or modifying words
body of content; many information can mainly 3. Attend to complete directions and
options available assess limited situations mechanical arrangement of
4. Fun for students to take, 3. Directions are sometimes choices
especially for those who confusing; students are not 4. Provide consistency in
enjoy puzzles always told clearly how to classification of items for each
5. Guessing can be minimized respond set; place all test items and
by a built-in penalty 4. Harder to write than other choices on the same page
short-answer items because 5. Provide extra choices, say 6 or
all items must fit together 7 per 5 test items; avoid too many
and be distinguishable from choices because of confusion
each other
5. By eliminating choices, last
few questions are susceptible
to guessing
Completion 1. Easy to write test items 1. Difficult to score 1. Consider scoring convenience;
2. Minimal guessing; clues are 2. Some answers are subjective require one word
not given in choices or or open to interpretation 2. Be sure there is only one correct
alternatives 3. Usually measures simple answer
3. Amenable to what, who, recall or factual information 3. Avoid too many blanks, or long
where, and how many 4. Test items are sometimes sentences, to prevent confusion
4. No distractors, options, or confusing or ambiguous; 4. Keep test items brief; avoid
choices to worry about constrained by grammar instances where grammar helps in
answering question
True/false 1. Easiest test items to write; 1. Sometimes ambiguous or too 1. Ensure a single correct answer,
easy to score broad true or false; avoid “trap” or
2. Comprehensive sampling of 2. Simplicity in cognitive “tricky” items
objectives or content demands; measures low-level 2. Avoid long sentence structure,
3. Guessing can be minimized thinking double negatives or “not,” in
by a built-in penalty 3. Susceptible to guessing order to avoid confusion
4. No distractors to worry 4. Dependence on absolute 3. Avoid clues such as absolute
about; highly reliable and judgments, right or wrong terms (“always,” “never,” “all”)
valid items 4. True items are easier to construct
than false items; use approximately
equal true and false items
£<"
Multiple-choice questions are the most difficult and time-consuming

items to construct, but they can test higher levels of learning better than other
short-answer items. Matching questions are also difficult and time-consuming
to write, but they are interesting for students and can be used for variety.
Completion questions are open to subjective interpretation and scoring, but
they can be used also to test higher levels of learning. True/false questions
tend to focus on trivia, but they are easy to construct and score.
Essay Questions
Short-answer questions generally are not intended to measure divergent
thinking—subjective or imaginative thought. To learn how a student thinks, at¬
tacks a problem, writes, and utilizes cognitive resources, something beyond the
short-answer test is needed. Essay questions, especially where there is no spe¬
cific right answer, produce evaluation data of considerable value. One test ex¬
pert, in fact, considers the essay to be “the most authentic type of testing” for
middle school students on up through college, and is perhaps the best one for
“measuring higher mental processes.”44
Authorities disagree on how structured and specific essay questions should
be. For example, some authorities advocate using words such as why, how, and
what consequences. They claim questions worded in this way (which we call
type 1 essay questions) call for a command of essential knowledge and concepts
and require students to integrate the subject matter, analyze data, make infer¬
ences, and show cause-effect relations.45 Other educators urge words such as dis¬
cuss, examine, and explain, claiming that this wording (type 2 essay questions)
gives the student less latitude in responding but provides an opportunity to learn
how the student thinks.46 Although more restricted than the first type, this type of
question can still lead to tangential responses by some students. It is useful when
the object is to see how well the student can select, reject, and organize data from
several sources. Other test specialists advocate more structure or precision
through the use of words such as identify, compare, and contrast.41 We call these
type 3 questions. In addition to giving more direction to the student, such word¬
ing demands that the student select and organize specific data. Thought processes
and samples of associated essay questions are listed in Table 10.7.
In effect, we are talking about the degree of freedom permitted the student
in organizing a response to a question. All types have their disadvantages. Essay
questions of types 1 and 2 allow an “extended response”; they can lead to dis¬
jointed, irrelevant, superficial, or unexpected discussions by students who have
difficulty organizing their thoughts on paper. Type 3 essay questions suggest a
“focused response”; they can lead to simple recall of information and a mass of
details.
Essay questions can effectively determine how well a student can analyze,
synthesize, evaluate, think logically, solve problems, and hypothesize. They can
also show how well the student can organize thoughts, support a point of view,
and create ideas, methods, and solutions. The complexity of the questions, and
the complexity of thinking expected of the student, can be adjusted to
Table 10.7 Sample Thought Questions for Various Cognitive Levels

of Thinking
1. Comparing
a. Compare the following two people for . . .
b. Describe the similarities and differences between . . .
2. Classifying
a. Group the following items according to . . .
b. What common characteristics do the items below have . . .
3. Outlining
a. Outline the procedures you would use to calculate . . .
b. Discuss the advantages of. . .
4. Summarizing
a. State the major points of . . .
b. Describe the principles of. . .
5. Organizing
a. Trace the history of. . .
b. Examine the development of. . .
6. Analyzing
a. Describe the errors in the following argument. . .
b. What data are needed to . . .
7. Applying
a. Clarify the methods of. . . for purposes of . . .
b. Diagnose the causes of . . .
8. Inferring
a. Why did the author say . . .
b. How would (person X) more likely react to . . .
9. Deducing
a. Formulate criteria for . . .
b. Based on the premise of . . ., propose a valid conclusion.
10. Synthesizing
a. How would you end the story of. . .
b. Describe a plan for . . .
11. Justifying
a. Provide a rationale for . . .
b. Which alternatives below do you agree with? Why?
12. Evaluating
a. What are the reasons for . . .
b. Based on the following criteria . . ., assess the value of. . .
13. Predicting
a. Describe the likely outcomes of. . .
b. What will most likely happen if. . . ? Why?
14. Creating
a. Develop a theory of. . .
b. Propose a solution for . . .
Source: Allan C. Omstein, “Essay Tests: Use, Development and Grading,” Clearing House (January-February
1992): 176.
correspond to students’ age, abilities, and experience. Another advantage is the

ease and short time involved in constructing an essay question. The major disad¬
vantages of essay questions are the considerable time required to read and evalu¬
ate answers and the subjectivity of scoring. (The length and complexity of the
answer, as well as the standards for responding, can lead to reliability problems
in scoring.)
Some studies report that independent grading of the same essay by several
teachers results in appraisals ranging from excellent to failing. This variation il¬
lustrates a wide range in criteria for evaluation among teachers. Even worse, one
study showed that the same teacher grading the same essay at different times
gave the essay significantly different grades.48 It has also been demonstrated that
teachers are influenced by such factors as penmanship, quality of composition,
and spelling, even when they are supposed to grade on content alone.49
One way to increase the reliability of an essay test is to increase the number
of questions and restrict the length of the answers. The more specific and re¬
stricted the question, the less ambiguous it is to the teacher and the less affected
by interpretation or subjectivity in scoring.50 Another way is for teachers to de¬
velop an outline of what information a desirable answer might contain—to cre¬
ate, in essence, a rubric. The more clearly the teacher defines the expected out¬
comes, the more reliably the various student responses can be graded. Notice we
said “more reliably,” not “reliably.” The reason for this is clear: Essay tests are
inherently subjective, and because of that fact there will always be a level of un¬
reliability in assessing student responses.
An entire test composed of essay questions can cover only limited content
because only a few questions can be answered in a given time period. However,
this limitation is balanced by the fact that in studying for an essay test, high-
achieving students are likely to look at the subject or course as a whole, and at
the relationships of ideas, concepts, and principles.
The essay answer is affected by the student’s ability to organize written re¬
sponses. Many students who can comprehend and deal with abstract data have
problems writing or showing that they understand the material in an essay exam¬
ination. Students might freeze and write only short responses, write in a dis¬
jointed fashion, or express only low-level knowledge. One way to help alleviate
this problem is to discuss with students in detail how to write an essay question.
Sadly, few teachers take the time to teach students how to write essay examina¬
tions. They often expect English teachers to perform this task, and English
teachers are often so busy teaching grammar, spelling, and punctuation that they
cannot approach the mechanics of essay writing.
On the other hand, there are students who write well but haven’t learned the
course content. Their writing ability can conceal their lack of specific knowledge.
It is important for the teacher to be able to distinguish irrelevant facts and ideas
from relevant information. Even though essay questions appear to be easy to write,
careful construction is necessary to test students’ cognitive abilities—that is, to
write valid questions. Many essay questions can be turned around by the student
so that he or she merely lists facts without applying or integrating information to
specific situations and without showing an understanding of concepts. “What were
the causes of World War II?” can be answered by listing specific causes without
integrating them. A better question would be “Assume that Winston Churchill,
Franklin Roosevelt, and Adolph Hitler were invited to speak to an audience on the
causes of World War II. What might each of them say? What might each select as
the most important causal factors? On what points would they agree? disagree?”
Factors to be considered in deciding whether to use essay questions are the
difficulty and time involved in grading essays, the low reliability of grading, the
limited sampling of content, and the validity of the essay itself versus the ease in
formulating questions, the testing of advanced levels of cognition, and the foster¬
ing of the integration of the subject as a whole. Many teachers take advantage of
what both short-answer questions and essay questions have to offer by writing
tests consisting of both, perhaps 40 to 60 percent short-answer and the remainder
essay. This balance to some extent is determined by grade level. In the upper
grades there is a tendency to require students to answer more essay questions be¬
cause it is believed they should have the ability to formulate acceptable answers.
According to Piagetian developmental stages, students should begin to be able to
handle essays (actually, short essays) at the formal operation stage, beginning at
approximately age 11. This assumes average or above-average cognitive abilities.
Guidelines for Writing Essay Questions
Here are suggestions for preparing and scoring essay tests.
1.Make directions specific. Indicate exactly what the student is to write

about. Write up to three or four sentences of directions if necessary.
2. Word each question as simply and clearly as possible.
3. Allow sufficient time for students to answer the questions. A good rule of
thumb is for the teacher to estimate how long he or she would take to an¬
swer the questions, and then multiply this time by two or three depending
on the students’ age and abilities. Suggest a time allotment for each ques¬
tion so students can pace themselves.
4. Ask questions that require considerable thought. Use essay questions to
focus on organizing data, analysis, interpretation, formulating theories,
rather than on reporting facts.
5. Give students a choice of questions, say, two out of three, so as not to pe¬
nalize students who know the subject as a whole but are limited in the par¬
ticular area asked about.51
6. Determine in advance how much weight will be given to each question or part
of a question. Give this information on the test, and then score accordingly.
7. Explain your scoring technique to students before the test. It should be
clear to them what weight will be given to knowledge, development and or¬
ganization of ideas, grammar, punctuation, spelling, penmanship, and any
other factor to be considered in evaluation.
8. Be consistent in your scoring technique for all students. Try to conceal the
name of the student whose answer you are grading to reduce biases that
have little to do with the quality of the student’s response and more to do
with the “halo effect” (the tendency to grade students according to impres¬
sions of their capabilities, attitudes, or behavior).
9. Grade one question at a time, rather than one test paper at a time, to in¬
crease reliability in scoring. This technique makes it easier to compare and
evaluate responses to each specific question.
10. Write comments on the test paper for the student, noting good points and
explaining how answers could be improved. Do not compare a student to
others when making comments.
Testing Issues
You need to decide when and how often tests will be given. Many teachers who
consider testing important give several tests at short intervals of time. Those for
whom testing is not so vital might give fewer tests. Teachers who prefer a
mastery or competence approach to instruction generally give several criterion-
referenced tests for purposes of diagnosing, checking on learning progress, and
individualizing instruction, as well as for grading. Those who prefer a broad, cog¬
nitive approach might rely more on standardized tests or fewer classroom tests
that integrate the subject matter. Whatever the approach to testing, it is recom¬
mended that teachers announce tests well in advance. Discuss what will be cov¬
ered, how it will be evaluated, and how much it will count toward a final grade.
Test-Taking Skills
Conditions other than students’ knowledge can affect their performance on tests.
One such factor is their general test-taking ability, completely apart from the
subject matter of particular tests. Test-taking skills are important for all students.
Almost any student who has taken a few tests and who has common sense can
learn certain skills that will improve her or his scores. Developing good test¬
taking strategies should not be construed as amoral or dishonest. Rather, it is a
way of reducing anxiety in test situations. A number of test authorities contend
that all students should be given training in test-wiseness.52
Important test-taking skills can be taught to students. When students are
given practice in diagnosing test questions and in strategies involved in taking
tests, their test scores usually improve (although researchers differ as to the size
of the effect).53
Students need to know that consistent studying or review over the duration
of the course is more effective than cramming. Advise them to get a good
night’s sleep before the test. Remind them to come prepared with more than one
pen or pencil and, if there is no clock in the room, to wear a watch to help pace
themselves.
Tips for Teachers 10.4 will help the teacher prepare students for test taking.
Of course, one of the best strategies is for the student to see the teacher after
class, just to make “points,” to say hello, so the teacher gets to know the student
Test Performance and Students’ Thinking
Roger Farr
Indiana University
Teachers need to know how students do certain students and the teacher and students discuss the an¬
tasks, not just how well they perform those tasks. swers. This strategy is more effective if it is done
For example, in helping a student develop reading with small groups of students—or even on an indi¬
comprehension, the teacher needs to know if the stu¬ vidual basis when possible.
dent has the background knowledge to read various In discussing the answers, the teacher is not just
social studies or science texts or whether the student pointing out to students their errors and telling them
has had experiences to read specific stories with un¬ the correct answers. Rather, the teacher should focus
derstanding. The problem may be lack of vocabulary on asking students why they chose the answer they
knowledge or the student may not have established did—regardless of whether the answer is correct or
thinking strategies such as prediction and visualiza¬ incorrect. Discussion of so-called wrong answers
tion that will help him to comprehend a story. should also take place. The alert teacher will learn a
Test scores provide information about how well a great deal about each student’s background knowl¬
student has performed, but the score doesn’t tell the edge, comprehension strategies, and vocabulary
teacher how the student arrived at the answers. It is strengths and weaknesses. The teacher will learn
important to know how well students perform, but what needs to be taught to help students comprehend.
the most important information for the teacher con¬ The key to success in using this technique is get¬
cerns the things a student does, or doesn’t do, to ting students to discuss answers—and to probe be¬
comprehend. yond merely checking answer choices. Important
A useful procedure to learn about how a student questions are: “Why do you think that?” “What
performs is to administer a formal test informally. made you answer that way?” “Could another answer
This can be done with standardized tests, chapter and be correct?” or “If we changed this part of the ques¬
unit tests included in textbooks, and teacher-made tion could another answer be correct?” It is also im¬
tests. The procedure is actually quite simple. After portant for the teacher to be open and accepting of
the test has been administered in the usual fashion, all rationales for answer choices. The goal for the
and the results as to how well students can perform teacher is to help students to reflect about their
have been recorded, the tests are returned to the thinking.
by name and as an individual. Under these circumstances, most teachers will

give the benefit of the doubt to the student—what is often the difference be¬
tween a B+ or an A- as the final grade.
Test Routines
Both short-answer and essay tests must be administered carefully to avoid con¬
fusion. A routine should be established by the teacher for handing out the test
questions and answer sheets, papers, or booklets. The answer sheets, papers, or
booklets should be passed out first, for example, with the exact number for each
Test-Wise Strategies
Testing is an integral part of the education process, or shorter, (b) are more general or specific,
and it affects the lives of all students. As students be¬ (c) are placed in certain logical positions
come more test-wise, the better they should perform within each set of options, (d) include or
on classroom and standardized tests. The test-taking exclude one pair of diametrically opposed
suggestions below are aimed at high school and col¬ statements, and (e) are grammatically
lege students. inconsistent or consistent with the stem.
11. Wording of a test item might imply that the
correct response begins with a vowel or
1. Determine the basis upon which the consonant, thus eliminating some
responses will be scored. Will points be alternatives.
subtracted for wrong answers, punctuation,
12. True items might be longer than false items
spelling, etc.?
because they require qualifying phrases.
2. Read each test item carefully.
13. Words such as always, never, and none are
3. Be aware that both human scores and usually associated with false items.
machine scores place a premium on neatness
14. Words such as usually, often, and many are
and legibility.
usually associated with true items.
4. Establish a pace that will permit sufficient
15. Some alternatives in a multiple-choice item
time to finish; check the time periodically to
might not be parallel with other alternatives,
see if the pace is being maintained.
and this might eliminate some alternatives.
5. Bypass difficult test questions or problems; Make sure all choices are grammatically
return to them at the end of the test. consistent with the question—grammatically
6. If credit is given only for the number of right incorrect items are usually wrong.
answers, or if correction for guessing is less 16. Periodically check to be sure the item
severe than a wrong response (e.g. -1/4 number and answer number match,
point for a wrong response and +1 point for especially when using an answer sheet.
a correct response), it is appropriate to
17. Reflect on and outline an essay before
guess.
starting to write; decide how much time you
7. On matching or multiple-choice questions, can afford for that question, given the
eliminate items you know to be incorrect available time. In all cases, attempt an
before guessing. answer, no matter how poor, to gain some
8. Make use of relevant content information on points.
other test items and options. 18. Write short paragraphs for an essay; develop
9. Consider the intent of the test constructor; one idea or concept around each paragraph
answer the item as the test constructor to make your points easier for the reader
intended; consider the level of sophistication (teacher) to discern. Include several short
of the test and audience for which the test is paragraphs as opposed to a few long
intended. paragraphs that tend to blend or fuse distinct
10. Recognize idiosyncrasies of the test ideas.
constructor that distinguish correct and 19. If time permits, return to omitted items (if
incorrect options; for example, whether any); then check your answers and correct
correct (or incorrect) options (a) are longer any careless mistakes.
row given to the first student in each row and then passed back along the row for
distribution. Students should be instructed to fill out information required on the
answer papers, such as their names and class. To avoid confusion, the test itself
should not be handed out until the answer papers or booklets have been distrib¬
uted. In some cases, the answer paper can be inserted into the test so as to hand
out the necessary papers in one step.
Before the test begins, be sure that students understand the directions and
questions; that the test papers are clear, complete, and in proper order; and that
students have any necessary supplies, such as pencil or pen, ruler, calculator, or
dictionary. The teacher needs to have on hand extra copies of the test and extra
supplies.
Establish a procedure for clarifying directions and test items during test
time. Once the test begins, a student with a question should raise his or her hand
without talking out loud or disturbing classmates. With young students, the
teacher should go to the student’s desk and both should whisper. Older students
may be permitted to come to the teacher. If several students have the same ques¬
tion or a problem with the same item, the teacher should interrupt the students
briefly to clarify it for all. This should be done sparingly to limit distractions.
To further reduce distractions or interruptions, the door to the hallway
should be closed and a sign saying “Testing—Do Not Disturb” should be posted
on the door. Late students will disturb the others no matter how quiet they are in
picking up the test papers and getting seated. Unless they have a proper pass or
excuse for being late, the teacher should not give them extra time to complete
the examination. If students enter the room late for a standardized examination,
they should not be permitted to take the exam, because the norms are based par¬
tially on time allotments.
Some students who are under pressure to get good grades will cheat. Short-
answer tests are particularly vulnerable to cheating, because a student can easily
see someone else’s answer by glancing at his or her paper.54 To reduce cheating,
some teachers have students sit in alternate seats if sufficient seating is avail¬
able, or have students sit at a distance from each other if seats can be moved.
Using two versions of the same test or dividing the test into two parts and hav¬
ing students in alternate rows start on different parts also helps reduce cheating.
One of the best deterrents to cheating is the teacher’s presence. To what extent
the teacher needs to police students during the test depends on how common
cheating is. Even if there is no cheating problem, a teacher should stay alert and
not bury her or his head in a book while the test is being administered.
Routines should be established for collecting tests at the end of the period.
Students who finish early should be reminded to review their answers. When the
test period ends, the papers should be collected in an orderly fashion—for exam¬
ple, with papers being passed forward to the first student in each row and then
collected by the teacher.
Table 10.8 indicates some things a teacher can do to improve test conditions
and help students. Most of these strategies are geared to limiting confusion and
interruptions before and during the test, ensuring that students know what to do,
curtailing their anxieties and nervousness, and motivating them to do their best.
Table 10.8 Test Giver’s List of Things to Do
1. Before giving a standardized test:

a. Order and check test materials in advance of the testing date.
b. Be sure there are sufficient tests and answer sheets.
c. Securely store all test materials until the testing date.
d. Follow the testing instructions, including how to administer the test.
2. Before giving a teacher-made test:
a. Check the questions for errors and clarity.
b. Be sure there are sufficient tests and answer sheets.
c. Be sure the test pages are sequenced properly.
d. Securely store all test materials until the testing date.
e. Announce testing date; avoid days that are before holidays or coincide with major events.
3. Be sure classroom conditions are adequate:
a. Is there adequate workspace, desks, chairs?
b. Is there sufficient light, heat, and ventilation?
c. Is it a quiet location?
d. Is there a wall clock that is visible to the students? If not, you will need your own watch to
post the time or announce it at intervals.
e. See that desks are cleared.
4. Study the test materials before the test:
a. Are the directions clear?
b. Are the time limits clear?
c. Are the methods for indicating answers clear?
5. Minimize distractions and interruptions during the testing period:
a. Decide the order in which materials are to be distributed and collected.
b. Be sure that students have pencils or pens and other needed supplies. Have extra pencils or
pens handy for students who are unprepared.
c. Close the hallway door.
d. Post a sign: “Testing in Progress: Do Not Disturb.”
e. Decide what students who finish early are to do.
6. Motivate students to do their best:
a. Explain the purpose of the test.
b. Ask students to do their best: “I will be pleased if you try your best,” for example.
c. Reduce test anxiety: “Take it easy.” “Take a deep breath.” “Shake your fingers and wrist.”
“Relax, it’s only a test.”
7. Reassure students; provide positive expectations and strategies:
a. “Some test questions are difficult. Don’t worry if you can’t answer all of them.”
b. “It is all right to guess. Choose the answer you think is best. Don’t blindly guess.”
c. “If you don’t finish, don’t worry about it. Just try your best.”
d. “Don’t work too fast—you might start making careless mistakes.”
e. “Don’t work too slow—you could start falling behind. Work at a moderate pace.”
f. “Don’t dwell on a difficult question; return to it when you finish and if there is time to do
so.”
g. “Pay close attention to your work and to the time.”
h. “Good luck” (or better, “I know you’ll do well”).
8. Follow directions and monitor time:
a. Distribute materials according to predetermined time allotment.
b. Read test directions, if permitted.
c. Give signal to start.
d. Do not help students during the test, except for mechanics (i.e., providing an extra pencil or
answer sheet).
e. Stick to the time schedule, especially if you are administering a standardized test.
f. Periodically post or announce time; provide 5- to 10-minute time announcements during last
15 to 20 minutes of test.
continued
Table 10.8 Continued
9. Observe significant events:

a. Pay attention to students; monitor the test situation.
b. Make sure students are following directions and answering in the correct place.
c. Replace pens or pencils if needed; provide extra test booklets, sheets, or papers if needed.
d. Note if any student displayed behavior that might affect his or her test results; curtail
cheating.
e. Note any major distractions or interruptions that could affect the test results. If administering
a standardized test, report these problems to the administration.
10. Collect test materials:
a. Attend to students who finish early; remind them to check answers before handing in the test.
b. Collect materials promptly and without confusion.
c. If administering a teacher-made test, perhaps provide a few minutes extra for slow students
or students who walked in late. Use good judgment.
d. Count and check to see that all materials have been turned in.
Test Anxiety
Test anxiety involves potentially debilitating emotions and worries about taking
a test. Test anxiety is common among students and should not be ignored. Most
of us studying to become teachers can recall our own anxieties about certain sub¬
jects (usually our weaker ones), certain tests (midterms, finals, and standardized
tests) where the stakes were high, and with certain teachers who used test scores
and grades as a weapon and who rarely gave students the benefit of the doubt.
Elementary teachers particularly report that their students have a host of
anxiety-related symptoms. The six most common are (1) excessive concern over
time limitations, 44 percent; (2) perceptions of freezing temperatures in the test¬
ing classroom, 41 percent; (3) headaches, 40 percent; (4) irritability, 38 percent;
(5) increased aggression, 33 percent; and (6) stomachaches, 29 percent. Sec¬
ondary teachers report fewer signs of test anxiety, probably because their stu¬
dents have had more experience taking tests. Nonetheless, older student symp¬
toms include (1) truancy, 29 percent; (2) increased aggression, 25 percent;
(3) irritability, 21 percent; (4) excessive concern over time limitations, 17 per¬
cent; (5) complaints about cold classroom temperatures, 14 percent; and
(6) headaches, 12 percent.55
Anxiety is at its highest during standardized tests. More than 80 percent of
high school student respondents in one state felt that their scores on standardized
tests were not a true reflection of what they had learned, and more than 65 per¬
cent felt too much was at stake with the exam.56 Teachers express similar anxi¬
ety over state-mandated and annual achievement tests. Nearly 40 percent re¬
ported feeling pressure from administrators to raise test scores, and over
two-thirds felt threatened by the results of the tests.57
A review of 562 studies, involving more than 20,000 students, shows that
test anxiety correlates with feelings of academic inadequacy, helplessness, and
anticipation of failure. A child’s original view of self, before entering school, is
likely to be positive. However, after grade 4, students who exhibit high test
anxiety wish to leave the test situation and consistently score low on tests. This
pattern reinforces a negative self-image. Performance on tests also strongly
varies with students’ perceptions of the test’s difficulty; average-achieving stu¬
dents are impacted more than other groups.58
The high test anxiety/low test performance cycle is difficult to reverse. In¬
centives, praise, rewards, and prompt feedback all have minimal benefits, as do
frequent tests, detailed test instructions, and test reviews. What works best, ac¬
cording to the research, is to teach students study skills and test-taking skills.59
Teach students how to study for your tests and then how best to take your tests
in order to be successful.
Returning Tests and Feedback
Tests should be returned to students as quickly as possible. As the papers are re¬
turned, the teacher should make some general comments to the class about
awareness of the group effort, level of achievement, and general problems or
specific areas of the test that gave students trouble.
Each question on the test should be discussed in class, with particular detail
given to questions that many students missed. If the missed test items are funda¬
mental for mastery, the teacher should take extra time to explain the material
and provide similar but different exercises for students to review. Some teachers
call on volunteers to redo and explain parts of the test that were missed, al¬
though this method is not always the most profitable use of time.
For students who have achieved a good grade, especially an unexpectedly
good grade, the teacher should provide approval. Students who have performed
poorly should be given special help in the form of extra reading, selective home¬
work, or tutoring. In some cases, teachers will retest them after they have restud¬
ied the material. The teacher should meet with students who have questions
about their grades after class privately, or possibly in a small group if several
students have the same question. Regardless of the type of test, the teacher
should make some comments about the individual student’s answers and
progress, with more personal comments directed at younger children. Personal
comments, so long as they are objective and positive, help motivate students and
make them aware that they need to improve in specific areas.
Assessment
Educators who have long protested the misuse of standardized tests, and often
criticized teacher-made tests as even more unreliable than published ones, wel¬
come the trend of performance assessment—the measurement of actual perfor¬
mance. Perhaps more than any other form of measurement, performance assess¬
ment allows students to integrate learning and apply problem-solving skills to
broad and specific course content. Other than essay writing (which is a good ex¬
ample of performance assessment), most teacher-made and standardized tests
rely on short-answer responses to knowledge-based questions that assess skills
that have been broken down into discrete parts. Critics contend that by encour¬
aging teachers for years to break down learning into “factoids” and then to test
those “factoids,”60 the result was to deemphasize teaching or assessment aimed
at high-order thinking.
The idea behind performance assessment is that if students are supposed to
conduct a scientific experiment, then have them do it and assess them while
doing it. If they are to learn a foreign language, have them read and speak it. If
students are to demonstrate how much they have learned in a course, have them
submit a portfolio of their “best work.” According to William Spady, a student
responsible for a performance test should present an actual demonstration in¬
volving an entire range of learning experiences. Moreover, that demonstration
should be in a performance context, dealing with the process and operation, not
simply the name or definition of a fact or concept, and there should be an in¬
tended outcome toward which the student plans, organizes, and works from start
to finish.61
Major problems are associated with judging such demonstrations, however.
It is time consuming for the teacher to assess the performance of students in real
situations, because testing usually must be done on one-to-one basis. Moreover,
an answer key or other objective grading system cannot be used, as with tradi¬
tional short-answer questions.62 Not only do the students perform differently on
different tasks or forms of the same tasks, but they will perform differently even
when assigned the same task. Consistent assessment criteria are hard to develop
in a performance assessment situation, and the students’ scores or results are not
easy to compare. With no “right” or “wrong” answer, unless teachers are very
careful, it is easy to make unfair judgments that compare apples with oranges.
Anyone who has graded thirty essay exams knows how time consuming it is and
how difficult it is to maintain comparable (much less absolute) standards. After
just reading five or six essays, they often begin to look alike—only the very
good and poor ones can be distinguished. There is a similar problem when the
teacher is required to assess the fifth or sixth student performing the same cogni¬
tive tasks, especially because an objective or close-ended answer key is hard to
come by in this performance-test situation.
Elements of performance assessment have been around for a long time
under different labels, such as performance-based education, task analysis, exit
testing, and even outcome-based education. Much of the theory of mastery
learning involves performance standards; the difference is that the mastery typi¬
cally involves content knowledge recall, whereas the new emphasis is on the
demonstration of what the student knows and can demonstrate in a testing situa¬
tion of some type.63 Rather than dealing with knowledge or recall of informa¬
tion, there is more emphasis on application and some culminating performance
in a demonstration situation.
Performance assessment requires that students demonstrate in some tangible
way their knowledge or skill relative to a specific task. Indeed, proponents argue
that the advantage of performance assessment is that it requires students to solve
a real problem or perform a real task in order to demonstrate the knowledge they
possess (see Table 10.9). The disadvantage, according to E. D. Hirsch, is “that
Table 10.9 Example of Performance Assessment on Concept of Volume
Background: Manufacturers naturally want to spend as little as possible, not only on the product, but
on packing and shipping it to stores. They want to minimize the cost of production of then-
packaging, and they want to maximize the amount of what is packaged inside (to keep handling
and postage costs down: the more individual packages you ship, the more it costs).
Setting: Imagine that your group of two or three people is one of many in the packing department
responsible for M&M’s candies. The manager of the shipping department has found that the
cheapest material for shipping comes as a flat piece of rectangular paperboard (the piece of
posterboard you will be given). She is asking each work group in the packing department to help
solve this problem: What completely closed container, built out of the given piece of posterboard,
will hold the largest volume of M&M’s for safe shipping?
1. Prove, in a convincing written report to company executives, that both the shape and the
dimensions of your group’s container maximize the volume. In making your case, supply all
important data and formulas. Your group will also be asked to make a three-minute oral report at
the next staff meeting. Both reports will be judged for accuracy, thoroughness, and persuasiveness.
2. Build a model (or multiple models) out of the posterboard of the container shape and size that you
think solves the problem. The models are not proof; they will illustrate the claims you offer in
your report.
Source: P. Wiggins, Assessing Student Performance: Exploring the Purpose and Limits of Testing (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1993), 114.
when used for high-stakes testing, performance tests are much less fair and reli¬
able than well-constructed objective tests.”64
The trend toward performance assessment grew during the 1990s (in some
states more than others), and it is important for teachers to become knowledge¬
able in this area. Even if the state you are in is “back to basics” oriented, the per¬
formance assessment approach may offer useful data about the academic progress
of students beyond traditional pencil-and-paper tests, and force teachers to focus
on the learning capabilities of their students and competencies expected of all
students. If you decide to use performance tests, you will need to assess your stu¬
dents on several tasks to get an accurate assessment. You will have to change
your way of teaching: moving from specific time blocks to flexible scheduling,
from focusing on how well students do the first time to how well they eventually
do, and from less individual learning to more cooperative learning.
A form of assessment closely tied to performance assessment is the use of
portfolios. Portfolios can take on many different forms. Some types of portfolios
are a compilation of best work (a showcase); others entail much more reflection
on work completed. Long popular with painters, photographers, and others in
the arts, portfolios have emerged as a new means of documenting what students
accomplish. Portfolios adhere to the following guidelines:
1. Developing a portfolio offers the student an opportunity to learn about

learning. Therefore, the end product must contain information that shows
that a student has engaged in self-reflection.
2. The portfolio is something that is done by the student, not to the student.
Portfolio assessment offers a concrete way for students to learn to value
Testing What We Intend to Teach
Robert E. Yager
Professor of Science Education
University of Iowa
Too often, testing never gets beyond seeing what a assure learning and often negates the value of identi¬
student can remember from reading, discussions, fying goals and objectives for the classroom.
and/or class activities. And yet, the course goals and Effective teachers use their goals to select a cur¬
lesson objectives seldom begin with the verbs “re¬ riculum that is a vehicle for meeting those goals, in¬
member” or “recall.” It is reasonable, then, to expect structional stategies to drive the vehicle, and skills in
skills and competencies in quizzes and examinations testing that match the actions used in the goal state¬
that coincide with the verb forms in the statement of ments. Too many of us espouse general goals, pro¬
goals and objectives. ceed with telling students information that we know,
Some who are intimately involved with and evaluate student retention of this information.
competency-based and/or behavioral learning strate¬ Such is a common temptation for many beginning
gies are guilty of defining the competencies or be¬ teachers. However, as we mature and have time to
haviors for mastery as lists that can be transferred to ponder what our testing actions do, we are humbled
test items that require recognition of definitions in as we note the mismatch between what we purport to
multiple-choice items, matching terms with defini¬ be our goals and the measures we select or create to
tions, or a short answer item requiring a straightfor¬ assess student success.
ward definition or eleboration. Such recall does not
their own work and by extension to value themselves as learners. Therefore,

the student must be involved in selecting the pieces to be included.
3. The portfolio is separate and different from the student’s cumulative
folder. Scores and other cumulative folder information that are held in
central depositories should be included in a portfolio only if they take on
new meaning within the context of the other exhibits found there.
4. The portfolio must convey explicitly or implicitly the student’s activities;
for example, the rationale (purpose for forming the portfolio), intents (its
goals), contents (the actual displays), standards (what is good and not-so-
good performance), and judgments (what the contents tell us.)
5. The portfolio may serve a different purpose during the year from the
purpose it serves at the end. Some material may be kept because it is
instructional, for example, partially finished work on problem areas. At
the end of the year, however, the portfolio may contain only material that
the student is willing to make public.
6. A portfolio may have multiple purposes, but these must not conflict. A
student’s personal goals and interests are reflected in his or her selection
of materials, but information included may also reflect the interests of
teachers, parents, or the district. One purpose that is almost universal in

student portfolios is showing progress on the goals represented in the
instructional program.
7. The portfolio should contain information that illustrates growth. There
are many ways to demonstrate growth. The most obvious is by including
a series of examples of actual school performance that show how the
student’s skills have improved. Changes observed on interest inventories,
records of outside activities such as reading, or on attitude measures are
other ways to illustrate a student’s growth.65
One of the emerging forms of performance assessment is Ted Sizer’s con¬

cept of “exhibitions.” Sizer, who is founder of the Coalition of Essential
Schools, argues that a “student must exhibit the products of his learning. If he
does that well, he can convince himself that he can use knowledge and he can so
convince others. It is the academic equivalent of being able to sink free throws
in basketball.”66 Table 10.10 provides several examples of exhibitions that stu¬
dents must perform to demonstrate their memory skills. Exhibitions can emerge
in a variety of forms—some require memory, others writing, others entail some
form of skill demonstration. Each exhibition, though, holds the common element
of making students do what the teacher wants them to know. Exhibitions enable
students to represent knowledge in more personal, and hopefully, meaningful
Table 10.10 An Exhibition: Performance from Memory
As part of your final Exhibitions, you must show yourself and us that you can do the following, from
memory:
1. Recite a poem or song or story that is special to your family or community.

2. Draw a map of the world, freehand (conventional Mercator projection), and be prepared to place
properly on your map at least twelve of fifteen members of the United Nations that we shall
randomly select for you.
3. Draw a map of the United States, freehand, and accurately position on your map at least twelve of
fifteen states that we will select for you at random.
4. Identify and answer questions about the current United States president and vice president, this
state’s two United States senators, the representative from your district, your state representative
and senator, and the mayor of this city.
5. Recite for us from memory a speech from history or literature that you find compelling and that
we agree is appropriate for this exercise.
6. Present a time line since 1750 that you have assembled over the last several years and be prepared
to answer questions about any event that appears on it.
7. Be prepared to identify five birds, insects, trees, mammals, flowers, and plants from our
immediate local environment.
8. At a time mutually agreed on, we shall give you a text or an analogous “problem” (such as a
machine to disassemble and reassemble) and three days in which to memorize or master it. We
will ask you then to show us how well you have done this exercise.
9. Be prepared to reflect with us on how you completed this memory task, that is, how you best
“learned” to memorize.
Source: T. R. Sizer. Horace’s School: Redesigning the American High School (New York- Houghton Mifflin
1992), 66-67.
ways. Personal representations, as we will suggest later, foster greater ownership

of ideas and enable students to be more motivated in their learning.
A final form of performance assessment is project work. Whereas perfor¬
mances tend to require short-term demonstration of a skill (reciting a poem), a pro¬
ject is more long-term and often a collaborative endeavor. Greeno and Hall note:
Teachers who engage their students in . . . project-based activities usually have

groups of students present their work to the rest of the class. In some projects, pre¬
sentations by students are videotaped and submitted to a panel of reviewers, as well
as being seen by students in other classes who are working on projects involving the
same problems. These presentations are a major source of information for assess¬
ment and a valuable learning activity. Teachers in the Middle-School Mathematics
Through Applications Project have found it essential to have presentations midway
through students’ work. The presentations are reviewed by teachers and by other
groups of students. The students preparing presentations learn to evaluate alternative
ways of representing their ideas and findings. Those reviewing other students’ pre¬
sentations leam ways of judging the effectiveness of representations for communi¬
cating understanding.67
Students work over an extended time period to show what they know and to
earn some recognition, reward, or grade. Projects foster a certain measure of
student self-discipline and motivation. Indeed, the daughter of one of the au¬
thors had a project-oriented German teacher who substantially enhanced her
self-discipline and motivation. The projects were unique opportunities for the
daughter to demonstrate what she knew in representational forms that “played
to” her personal strengths. But projects also are problematic to assess unless
teachers create clear rubrics (or scoring criteria) for the students’ completed
work.
Finally, in some cases, assessment experts assert that what the students do
to illustrate what they know constitutes authentic assessment, which they dif¬
ferentiate from performance assessment. Indeed, in some cases, project work
might be considered authentic. To keep the language simple, we have been
using, in this section, performance assessment as a generic term, and, in fact,
there are a number of assessment experts who concur with this view. Others
would disagree. For example, Carol Meyer argues that performance and au¬
thentic assessments are different. In an authentic assessment, the student not
only completes or demonstrates a desired behavior (a performance assessment)
but also does so within a real life context (authenticity). However, in perfor¬
mance assessments, the situation is contrived; in authentic assessment, the sit¬
uation is real. In Meyer’s words “the locus of control [for a writing assign¬
ment] rests in [authentic assessment] with the student; that is the student
determines the topic, the time allocated, the pacing, and the conditions under
which the writing sample is generated.”68
All these forms of alternative assessment require teacher thought and stu¬
dent time. They also, asserts Robert Rothman, cause “students to demonstrate
complex thinking, not just isolated skills. . . . These assessments . . . chal¬
lenge the view, implicit in multiple choice tests, that there is only one right an¬
swer to every question and that the goal is to find it and to find it quickly.”69
All these forms of assessment are also tied to helping students become more
active in constructing their own knowledge and then demonstrating what they
know. Elliot Eisner poignantly writes:
Performance assessment is aimed at moving away from testing practices that require
students to select the single correct answer from an array of four or five distractors
to a practice that requires students to create evidence through performance that will
enable assessors to make valid judgments about “what they know and can do” in sit¬
uations that matter. Performance assessment is the most important development in
evaluation since the invention of the short-answer test and its extensive use during
World War I.70

Although the specific purposes of tests and intended use of outcomes vary
among teachers and schools, tests play an important part in the life of students
and teachers. One of your goals as a teacher should be to improve your tests.
Below is a checklist to consider when constructing your classroom and/or
criterion-referenced tests.
I. Is my test appropriate?
1. Does it fit my objectives?
2. Do the test items reflect a wide representation of content and skills of
the subject?
3. Does the test have credible and worthwhile items to anchor the scoring
system?
4. Does it consider reality: the conditions of the classroom, school, and
community?
II. Is my test valid?
5. Does it discriminate between performance levels?
6. Does it fit external and agreed-upon standards?
7. Will my colleagues in the subject or at the grade level agree that all
necessary items are included?
8. Does the test measure actual performance, not the students’ reading
levels or simple recall of information?
9. Are all test items clear and understandable?
10. Are there sufficient test items to measure important content and skills?
III. Is my test reliable?
11. Are the items consistent with test performance?
12. Are there at least two items per objective, and do students who get one
item of a pair correct get the other item correct?
IV. Is my test usable?
13. Is my test short enough to avoid being tedious?
14. Does it have sufficient breadth and depth to allow for generalizations
about student performance?
15. Are there clear and standard procedures for administration of the test?
16. Is it authentic: Does it measure worthwhile behaviors and tasks, not

what is easy to score?
Summary
1. A good test is reliable and valid. Methods for establishing reliability are test-
retest, parallel forms, and split-half. Forms of validity are content, curricular,
and predictive.
2. There are two major types of tests: norm-referenced and criterion-referenced.
Norm-referenced tests measure how a student performs relative to other
students. Criterion-referenced tests measure a student’s progress and appraise
her or his ability relative to a specific criterion.
3. For general appraisal of an individual’s performance or behavior, the
standardized (norm-referenced) test is an excellent instrument. There are four
basic types of standardized tests: intelligence, achievement, aptitude, and
personality.
4. Teacher-made tests can be short-answer tests or essay tests. Short-answer
questions include multiple-choice, matching, completion, and true/false.
Essay, or free-response, questions also include discussion questions.
5. Proper test administration reduces confusion, curtails students’ anxieties, and
motivates and helps them to do as well as possible.
6. Important test-taking skills can be taught to students.
7. Performance tests measure actual performance—allowing students to exhibit
learning through actual demonstration.
1. What are the most important factors to consider in choosing a test?
2. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a norm-referenced test?
3. What are the advantages and disadvantages of a criterion-referenced test?
4. What are the advantages of teacher-made tests over standardized tests? What
are the advantages of standardized tests over teacher-made tests?
5. What strategies or principles should be considered in administering a test?
Things to Do
1. Explain the differences between reliability, validity, and usability.
2. Visit a school and talk to a few teachers, the school counselor, or one of the
administrators about the standardized tests the school uses. Try to find out
which ones are used, and why. What are the advantages and disadvantages of
the tests? Report back to the class.
3. Discuss in class five guidelines for constructing multiple-choice questions

and five guidelines for constructing matching questions.
4. Develop five essay questions (in the subject you plan to teach or are teaching)
that test critical thinking. Indicate in class what type of thinking these
questions test.
5. Invite a test specialist to class to discuss strategies that students can learn to
increase their test-wiseness.
Ebel, Robert L. and David A. Frisbie. Essentials of Educational Measurement, 5th ed.
Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991. Several suggestions for constructing
various types of tests, including short-answer and essay tests.
Hopkins, Kenneth D. Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation, 8th
ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998. Practices needed to develop tests
and other evaluation procedures.
Linn, Robert L., ed. Educational Measurement, 3rd ed. Phoenix: Oryx Press, 1996. An up-
to-date treatment of measurement theory with emphasis on test reliability and validity.
Lyman, Howard. Test Scores and What They Mean, 6th ed. Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon, 1998. A description of assessment principles that relate to
instruction.
Payne, David A. Measuring and Evaluating Educational Outcomes. New York:
Macmillan, 1992. An important text dealing with the fundamentals of constructing,
administering, and interpreting tests.
Worthington, Blaine R., Karl R. White, and Xitao Fan, Measurement and Assessment in
the Schools, 2nd ed. New York: Longman, 1999. Describes the difference between
measurement and evaluation, and how they should be used by teachers and school
administrators. Important concepts and issues dealing with testing and evaluation of
students and teachers.
Wiggins, Grant. Educative Assessment, San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998. How school-
based assessment can improve student performance.
Key Terms
achievement tests 401 performance assessment 437
aptitude tests 402 personality tests 403
authentic assessments 407 project work 441
completion test 425 reliability 392
criterion-referenced tests 397 short-answer tests 415
essay test 415 standardized test 395
high-stakes tests 408 teacher-made tests 396
intelligence tests 401 test anxiety 435
matching test 425 true/false test 423
multiple-choice test 425 usability 395
nonstandardized tests 396 validity 392
norm-referenced tests 397
End Notes
1. Robert Sternberg, Bruce Torff, and Elena Grigorenko, “Teaching for Successful
Intelligence Raises Achievement,” Phi Delta Kappan (May 1998): 667-669.
2. Anne Anastasi, Psychological Testing, 6th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1988);
William A. Mehrens and Irwin J, Lehmann, Measurement and Evaluation in
Education and Psychology, 4th ed. (Ft. Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
1991) .
3. Jum C. Nunnally, “Reliability of Measurement,” in Encyclopedia of Educational
Research, 5th ed., ed. M. C. Wittrock (New York: Macmillan, 1982), 1589-1601;
Ross E. Traub and Glenn L. Rowley, “Understanding Reliability,” Educational
Measurement {Spring 1991): 37^15.
4. William A. Mehrens and Irvin J. Lehmann, Using Standardized Tests in Education
(New York: Longman, 1987), 64-65.
5. Samuel Messick, “Validity,” in Educational Measurement, 3rd ed., ed. R. L. Linn.
(New York: Macmillan, 1989), 13-103; Pamela A. Moss, “Shifting Conceptions of
Validity in Educational Measurement,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1992):
229-258.
6. Norman E. Gronlund and Robert L. Linn, Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching,
6th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1990); Tom Kubiszyn and Gary Borich, Educational
Testing and Measurement, 5th ed. ( New York: Longman, 1996).
7. Gronlund and Linn, Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching; Robert M.
Thorndike, George K. Cunningham, Robert L. Thorndike, and Elizabeth P. Hagen,
Measurement and Evaluation in Psychology and Evaluation, 5th ed. (New York:
Macmillan, 1992).
8. N. L. Gage and David C. Berliner, Educational Psychology, 6th ed. (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 1998), 572.
9. Allan C. Ornstein and David A. Gilman, “The Striking Contrasts Between Norm-
Reference and Criterion-Reference Tests,” Contemporary Education (Summer
1992) : 287-293; W. James Popham, “A Tale of Two Test-Specification Strategies,”
Educational Measurement {Summer 1992): 16-17.
10. Peter W. Airasian, “Perspectives on Measurement Instruction,” Educational
Measurement (Spring 1991): 13-16; Herbert C. Rudman, “Classroom Instruction
and Tests,” NASSP Bulletin (February 1987): 3-22; Robert E. Stake, “The Teacher,
Standardized Testing and Prospects of Revolution,” Phi Delta Kappan (November
1991): 241-247.
11. Gronlund and Linn, Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching.
12. Peter Airasian, “Teacher Assessments,” NASSP Bulletin (October 1993): 55-65;
Ornstein, “Accountability Report from the USA,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
(December 1985): 437^139; Allan C. Ornstein, “Teacher Accountability: Trends and
Policies,” Education and Urban Society (February 1986): 221-229.
13. Joan Thrower Timm, Four Perspectives in Multicultural Education (Belmont, CA:
Wadsworth, 1996), 126.
14. Ron Smith and Steve Sherrell, “Milestones on the Road to a Certificate of Initial
Mastery,” Educational Leadership (December 1996-January 1997): 46-51.
15. W. James Popham, Classroom Assessment, 2nd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn
& Bacon, 1999).
16. Robert J. Marzano and Arthur L. Costa, “Question: Do Standardized Tests Measure
General Cognitive Skills? Answer: No,” Educational Leadership (May 1988): 66-71.
17. Roger Farr, “New Trends in Reading Assessment: Better Tests, Better Uses,”
Curriculum Review (September-October 1987): 21-23; Sheila W. Valecia et al..
“Theory and Practice in Statewide Reading Assessment,” Educational Leadership

(April 1989): 57-63; Nancy Karweit, “Driving School Improvement with
Assessments,” NASSP Bulletin (October 1993): 1-11.
18. Jessica Siegel, “Test Makes Students Explain, Not Answer,” Chicago Tribune
(20 March 1994): 7.
19. Robert Sternberg, Bruce Torff, and Elena Grigorenko, “Teaching for Successful
Intelligence Raises School Achievement,” Phi Delta Kappan (May 1998): 667-669.
20. Gregory J. Cizek and Robert E. Rachor, “The Real Testing Bias,” NASSP Bulletin
(March 1994): 83-92; Cunningham, “Educational Testing and Educational Reform”;
Robert J. Steinberg, “T & T is an Explosive Combination: Technology and Testing,”
Educational Psychologist (Summer 1990): 201-222; Grant P. Wiggins, “Practicing
What We Preach in Designing Authentic Assessments,” Educational Leadership
(December 1996): 18-25.
21. Linda Darling-Hammond, “The Case for Authentic Assessment,” NASSP Bulletin
(November 1993): 18-26; Lorrie A. Shepard, “Psychometrician’s Beliefs About
Learning,” Educational Researcher (October 1991): 2-15.
22. Grant P. Wiggins, “Teaching to the (Authentic) Test,” Educational Leadership
(April 1989): 41^47; Wiggins, “Creating Tests Worth Taking”; Wiggins, Assessing
Student Performance (San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass, 1993).
23. Allan C. Ornstein, “National Reform and Instructional Accountability,” High School
Journal (October-November 1990): 51-56; Ornstein, “The National Reform of
Education: Overview and Outlook,” NASSP Bulletin (September 1992): 89-101.
24. Mark J. Raivetz, “Can School Districts Survive the Politics of State Testing
Initiatives?” NASSP Bulletin (September 1992): 57-65; Victor L. Wilson,
“Performance Assessment, Psychometric Theory and Cognitive Learning,”
Contemporary Education (Summer 1991): 250-254.
25. Robert A. Forsyth, “Do NAEP Scales Yield Criterion-Referenced Interpretations?”
Educational Measurement (Fall 1991): 3-9, 16; Daniel U. Levine and Allan C.
Ornstein, “Assessment of Student Achievement: National and International
Perspectives,” NASSP Bulletin (November 1993), 46-59.
26. Gerald W. Bracey, Setting the Record Straight (Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1997), 83-84.
27. Cunningham, “Educational Testing and Educational Reform”; Linda Darling-
Hammond, “The Implications of Testing Policy for Quality and Equality,” Phi Delta
Kappan (November 1991): 220-225.
28. George Madaus, “The Effects of Important Tests on Students,” Phi Delta Kappan
(November 1991): 226-231; Milbrey W. McLaughlin, “Test-Based Accountability
as a Reform Strategy,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1991): 248-251; Donald
Monroe, “Toward a Reconsideration of School Assessment,” NASSP Bulletin
(November 1993): 28-35.
29. Linda Darling-Hammond, The Right to Learn (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997),
241-242.
30. America’s Choice: High Skills or Low Wages (Washington, DC: Commission on the
Skills of the American Workforce, 1991). Also see John O’Neil, “Can National
Standards Make a Difference?” Educational Leadership (February 1993): 4-8.
31. Robert Rothman, Measuring Up (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995), 131-132.
32. David C. Berliner and Bruce J. Biddle, The Manufactured Crisis (New York:
Longman, 1995), 31-33.
33. Howard B. Lyman, Test Scores and What They Mean, 6th ed. (Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998); William A. Mehrens, “Facts About Samples, Fantasies,
and Domains,” Educational Measurement (Summer 1991): 23-25.
34. William A. Mehrens and Irwin J. Lehmann, “Using Teacher-Made Measurement

Devices,” NASSP Bulletin (February 1987): 36-44; James Popham, “Can High-
Stakes Tests Be Developed at the Local Level?” NASSP Bulletin (February 1987):
77-84.
35. Margaret Fleming and Barbara Chambers, “Teacher-Made Tests: Windows in the
Classroom,” in Testing in Schools, ed. W. E. Hathaway (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1983), 29-38; Richard J. Stiggins, “Relevant Classroom Assessment Training for
Teachers,” Educational Measurement (Spring 1991): 7-12.
36. Tina Blythe, David Allen, and Barbara S. Powell, Looking Together at Student
Work. (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1999).
37. Robert L. Ebel and David A. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, 5th
ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991); Thorndike et al„ Measurement
and Evaluation in Psychology and Evaluation.
38. Mehrens and Lehmann. Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology.
(The fifth point is mainly based on the author’s ideas about testing students at various
ages.)
39. David A. Payne, Measuring and Evaluating Educational Outcomes (New York:
Macmillan, 1992).
40. Anastasi, Psychological Testing-, Kenneth D. Hopkins, Julian C. Stanley, and B. R.
Hopkins, Educational and Psychological Measurement and Evaluation, 7th ed.
41. Benjamin S. Bloom, J. Thomas Hastings, and George F. Madaus, Evaluation to
Improve Learning (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981); Cunningham, Educational and
Psychological Measurement, 2nd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
42. Ebel and Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, 164-165.
43. Gage and Berliner, Educational Psychology; James Popham, Educational
Evaluation, 3rd ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1993).
44. Bruce W. Tuckman, “Evaluating the Alternative to Multiple-Choice Testing for
Teachers,” Contemporary Education (Summer 1991): 299-300.
45. Allan C. Ornstein, “Questioning: The Essence of Good Teaching,” NASSP Bulletin
(February 1988): 72-80; Barak V. Rosenshine and Carla Meister, “The Use of
Scaffolds for Teaching Higher-Level Cognitive Strategies,” Educational Leadership
(April 1992): 26-33.
46. Penelope L. Peterson, “Toward an Understanding of What We Know About School
Learning,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1993): 319-326; Francis P.
Hunkins, Teaching Thinking Through Effective Questioning, 2nd ed. (Needham
Heights, MA: Gordon, 1995).
47. Norman E. Gronlund, How to Construct Achievement Tests, 5th ed. (Englewood
Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1993); Robert L. Lin, Educational Measurement, 4th ed.
(New York: Macmillan, 1994).
48. Peter W. Airasian, Classroom Assessment 3rd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997).
49. Ray Bull and Julia Stevens, “The Effects of Attractiveness of Writer and
Penmanship on Essay Grades,” Journal of Occupational Psychology (April 1979):
53-59; Jon C. Marshall and Jerry M. Powers, “Writing Neatness, Composition
Errors, and Essay Grades,” Journal of Educational Measurement (Summer 1969):
97-101.
50. Tuckman, “The Essay Test: A Look at the Advantages and Disadvantages,” NASSP
Bulletin (October 1993): 20-27.
51. Most authorities (for example, Ebel, Gronlund, and Payne) recommend that students
answer all questions and that no choice be provided because a common set of
questions tends to increase reliability in scoring while options tend to distort results.
However, weighed against this advantage is the fact that being able to select an area
they know well increases students’ morale, reduces test anxiety, and gives them a
greater chance to show they can organize and interpret the subject matter.
52. Darling-Hammond, “The Implications of Testing Policy for Quality and Equality”;
Madaus, “The Effects of Important Tests on Students.”
53. Henry S. Dyer, “The Effects of Coaching for Scholastic Aptitude,” NASSP Bulletin
(February 1987): 46-53; Samuel Messick, “Issue and Equity in the Coaching
Controversy: Implications for Educational Testing and Practice,” Educational
Psychologist (Summer 1982): 67-91.
54. Jane Canner, “Regaining the Public Trust: A Review of School Testing Programs,
Practices,” NASSP Bulletin (September 1992): 6-15; Samuel Messick, “Meaning and
Values in the Test Validation: The Science and Ethics of Assessment,” Educational
Researcher {March 1989): 5—11.
55. Susan B. Nolan, Thomas M. Haladyna, and Nancy S. Hass, “Uses and Abuses of
Achievement Tests,” Educational Measurement (Summer 1992): 9-15.
56. Steven Hass, “Standardized Testing in Arizona,” Technical Report 89-3 (Phoenix:
Arizona State University West, 1989).
57. Marshall L. Smith et ah, “Put to the Test: The Effects of External Testing on
Teachers,” Educational Researcher (November 1991): 8-11; Nolan et ah, “Uses and
Abuses of Achievement Tests.”
58. Ray Hembree, “Correlates, Causes, Effects and Treatments of Test Anxiety,” Review
of Educational Research (Spring 1988): 47-77.
59. Ibid.
60. Joan L. Herman, Pamela R. Aschbacher, and Lynn Winters, A Practical Guide to
Alternative Assessment (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1992); Ellen Weber, Student Assessment that Works
61. William G. Spady and Kit J. Marshall, “Beyond Traditional Outcome-Based
Education,” Educational Leadership (October 1991): 67-72.
62. Robert L. Linn, Eva L. Baker, and Stephen B. Dunbar, “Complex, Performance-
Based Assessment: Expectations and Validation Criteria,” Educational Researcher
(November 1991): 15-23; Estelle S. Gellman, School Testing: What Parents and
Educators Need to Know, 2nd ed. (Westport, CT: Greenwood, 1999).
63. William G. Spady, “It’s Time to Take a Close Look at Outcome-Based Education,”
Communique (February 1992): 16-18.
64. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 263.
65. F. Leon Paulson, Pearl R. Paulson, and Carol A. Meyer, “What Makes a Portfolio a
Portfolio?” Educational Leadership (February 1991): 60-63.
66. Ted Sizer, Horace’s School (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1992), 25.
67. James Greeno and James G. Hall, “Practicing Representation: Learning with and
About Representational Forms,” Phi Delta Kappan (January 1997): 363.
68. Carol A. Meyer, “What’s the Difference Between Authentic and Performance
Assessment” Educational Leadership (May 1992): 40.
69. Robert Rothman, Measuring Up (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1995), 72.
70. Elliot Eisner, “The Uses and Limits of Performance Assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan
(May 1999): 659.
CHAPTER
11 Evaluating Student
Progress ...


Focusing Questions
1. Why should students be evaluated?
2. What is the difference between placement evaluation and diagnostic
evaluation? formative and summative evaluation?
3. What methods other than tests are available for evaluating students?
4. What are the advantages and disadvantages of absolute grade standards and
relative grade standards?
5. When is it appropriate to grade students on the basis of contracts, mastery
learning, or effort?
6. Why is it important to communicate with parents about their children’s work
and progress? How might communication with parents be improved?
7. How might the grading system in schools be changed to reduce student
anxiety and student competition?
451
In relative terms, testing of students is more objective than evaluation. Testing

is based on quantifiable data, evaluation involves human judgment. We make
evaluations of people and their performance not only in school, but also on the
job and at home. Similarly, we make evaluations of consumer goods (food,
clothing, cameras, televisions) and services (auto repair, insurance, medical
treatment, legal advice). We use various kinds of information, including test
data and other objective measurements. We weigh our information against vari¬
ous criteria and evaluate people or products. As teachers, we strive to reduce
the chance for misjudgment in our evaluation of students by carefully designing
evaluation procedures.
To be of any use to students, teachers, or parents, evaluation of students
must be fair. Students must feel that the evaluation of their performance is ob¬
jective and that the criteria are the same for all students. If students feel that
some students are evaluated more leniently or more strictly than others, the ef¬
fectiveness of the evaluation will be reduced.
Students must feel that their academic efforts will lead to success. The eval¬
uation process should motivate them; it should encourage them to set progres¬
sively higher goals for personal achievement. Students who feel that they will
fail the evaluation process or feel that the process is unfair will be discouraged
by it.
The evaluation process should also be realistic. Students should be able to
assess their own performance in relation to classmates and normative standards.
In a class where most students cannot read well, a student who is an average
reader might get an inflated impression about his or her real abilities. Evalua¬
tions are more effective when students are provided with valid norms of what
constitutes success. Evaluation is also more effective when teachers think be¬
yond the use of just criterion or normative tests. Good teachers provide students
with a wide variety of ways to show what they know.1
All students, during their school career, will experience the pain of failure
and the joy of success as a result of the evaluation process. The student must
learn, according to Philip Jackson, “to adapt to the continued and pervasive
spirit of evaluation that will dominate his school year.” Although school is not
the only place “where the student is made aware of his strengths and weaknesses,”
school evaluation happens most frequently and has the most lasting impact.2
The impact of school evaluation is profound because students are form¬
ing their identities during their school years, they are going through their
most critical stages of development, and they lack defensive mechanisms to
ward off extreme or continuous negative evaluations. Whether evaluation fo¬
cuses on academic work, behavior, or personal qualities, it affects the stu¬
dents’ reputations among their peers, their confidence in their abilities, and
their motivation to work. Students’ popularity, confidence, personal adjust¬
ment, career goals, even physical and mental health are related to the judg¬
ments that others communicate to them throughout school. We are what we
see ourselves to be, and like it or not, we see ourselves as others perceive and
evaluate us. The self is a social product that emerges as the person grows and
interacts with others.
Reasons for Evaluation

Daniel L. Stufflebeam
Professor and Director, The Evaluation Center
Western Michigan University
The most important reasons to evaluate are: also needed to assist the search for efficient teaching
methods that work well with groups, it is crucial that
1. To assure that one is doing all one can to help
the teacher become skilled in those kinds of evalua¬
each student to learn.
tion that can lead to individual diagnoses, reinforce¬
2. To find ways to conduct group instruction as ment, and direction for growth. Unfortunately, many
efficiently and effectively as possible. of the evaluation devices for sale, especially stan¬
3. To provide students and their parents with dardized tests, and many of the evaluation designs in
progress reports they can use to guide the the literature, especially pre-test/post-test designs,
learning process. have little utility to teachers for doing the types of
4. To certify levels of achievement. evaluation that are most important to them and to the
5. To provide records and reports that will help individual students and families they serve. Hence,
other professionals work with individual teachers should not fall into a pattern of using what¬
students. ever standardized measures are available but instead
should become proficient in designing evaluations
It is noteworthy that four of the five purposes de¬ that produce useful information about their students,
note the need for individualized evaluation and con¬ and in devising homespun instruments that will re¬
tinuous assessment and feedback. While evaluation is spond well to the pertinent data requirements.
Types of Evaluation
There are four basic evaluation techniques that are appropriate for and com¬
monly used in the classroom: (1) Placement evaluation helps determine student
placement or categorization before instruction begins. (2) Diagnostic evaluation
is a means of discovering and monitoring learning difficulties. (3) Formative
evaluation monitors progress. (4) Summative evaluation measures the products
of instruction at the end of instruction.
Placement Evaluation
Placement evaluation, sometimes called preassessment, takes place before in¬
struction. The teacher wants to find out what knowledge and skills the students
have mastered, to establish a starting point of instruction. Sufficient mastery
might suggest that some instructional units can be skipped or treated briefly. In¬
sufficient mastery suggests that certain basic knowledge or skills should be em¬
phasized. Students who are required to begin at a level that is too difficult or be¬
yond their understanding will be frustrated and will most likely be unable to
gain new knowledge and skills. Students who are required to review old material
they already know are wasting instructional time and can become bored.
It is also important to find out a student’s knowledge, interests, and work
habits in order to decide on the best instruction type (group or independent, in¬
ductive or deductive), methods, and materials for that student.
A third reason for placement evaluation is to assign students to specific
learning groups. Although this procedure can lead to tracking, which is criti¬
cized by many researchers, many teachers find (and some researchers suggest)
that grouping students by knowledge and skills facilitates teaching and learning.
Placement evaluation is based on readiness tests, aptitude tests, pretests on
course objectives, and observational techniques.
Diagnostic Evaluation
Diagnostic evaluation attempts to discover the causes of students’ learning
problems. If a student continues to fail a particular subject or is unable to learn
basic skills in elementary school or basic content in secondary school, diagno¬
sis of the cause of the failure may point to ways to remedy it. According to
Bruce Tuckman, “where proficiency has not been demonstrated, remedial in¬
struction aimed directly at those [deficiencies] can be instituted.” Evaluation
can “provide the kind of information that will make it possible to overcome
failure.”3
In many cases diagnostic and formative evaluation (discussed below)
overlap. Formative evaluation is mainly concerned with progress, but the lack
of progress can indicate a problem, which should then be investigated with
more specific diagnostic evaluation. According to Gronlund and Linn, forma¬
tive evaluation serves as a guide to general, everyday treatment, but diagnos¬
tic evaluation is necessary for detailed, remedial treatment.4 Diagnostic eval¬
uation is based on teacher-made and published tests and observational
techniques.
Formative Evaluation
Formative evaluation and summative evaluation are terms coined by Michael
Scriven in his analysis of program and curriculum evaluation.5 Formative evalu¬
ation monitors progress during the learning process, whereas summative evalua¬
tion measures the final results at the end of an instructional unit or term. Ben¬
jamin Bloom and his associates describe formative evaluation as a major tool of
instruction: “Too often in the past evaluation has been entirely summative in na¬
ture, taking place only at the end of the unit, chapter, course, or semester, when
it is too late, at least for that particular group of students, to modify either . . .
the teaching [or] learning . . . process.”6
If evaluation is to help the teacher and student, it should take place not only
at the end point of instruction, but also at various points during the teaching-
learning process while modifications can be made. Instruction can be modified,
based on the feedback that formative evaluation yields, to correct learning prob¬
lems or to move ahead more rapidly.
Formative evaluation focuses on small, comparatively independent units of

instruction and a preset range of objectives. It is based on teacher-made and pub¬
lished tests administered throughout the term, homework, classroom perfor¬
mance, informal teacher observations, student-teacher conferences, and parent-
teacher conferences.
Formative assessment and evaluation is critical to student success. A sys¬
tematic review of assessment studies by a group of researchers revealed that en¬
hanced formative assessments resulted in “significant and substantial learning
gains” for students.7 And those learning gains appear to be even more dramatic
for the lower achievers. If teachers grade papers in ways that show students how
to improve their performance, enhanced student learning appears to be a real and
substantive result.
Summative Evaluation
Summative evaluation takes place at the end of an instructional unit or course.

It is designed to determine the extent to which the instructional objectives have
been achieved by the students and is used primarily to certify or grade students.8
Summative evaluation also can be used to judge the effectiveness of a teacher or
a particular curriculum or program. Whereas formative evaluation provides a
tentative judgment of the learning that has occurred and of the learning that
needs to take place, summative evaluation, coming when teaching and learning
are over, is a final judgment.
Summative evaluation focuses on a wide range of objectives and relies on
an accumulation of student work and performance. Although teacher-made tests
can be used for this purpose, it is often based on formal observation scales or
ratings and standardized tests.
Table 11.1 provides a summary of the four evaluation categories the teacher
can use during the instructional process.
Table 11.1 Types of Evaluation
Type Function Illustrative Instruments Used
Placement Determines skills, degree of mastery before Readiness tests, aptitude tests, pretests,
instruction to determine appropriate level and observations, interviews, personality profiles, self-
mode of teaching reports, videotapes, anecdotal reports
Diagnostic Determines causes (cognitive, physical, emotional. Published diagnostic tests, teacher-made diagnostic
social) of serious learning problems to indicate tests, observations, interviews, anecdotal reports
remedial techniques
Formative Determines learning progress, provides feedback to Teacher-made tests, tests from test publishers,
facilitate learning and to correct teaching errors observations, checklists
Summative Determines end-of-course achievement for grading Teacher-made tests, rating scales, standardized tests
or certification
Source: Adapted from Peter Airasian, Classroom Assessment (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1991); Norman E. Gronlund and Robert L. Linn.
Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching, 6th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1990).
Evaluation Methods and Approaches

Everyone is evaluated and makes evaluations on a daily and informal basis.
Students and teachers continuously evaluate each other informally in class.
When teachers observe students at work or answer students’ questions, they
are engaging in informal evaluation. When they make a decision to assign
one of two alternative books for students to read, they are also engaging in in¬
formal evaluation. Evaluation, when it is thorough and precise, is usually for¬
mal evaluation. When it is impressionistic or based on hunches, it is informal.
Good teachers use both types, and this section reviews the variations, with par¬
ticular attention to the more informal strategies, which are inherently more
subjective.
Testing, which we discussed earlier, is the most obvious formal method by
which students are evaluated, but it is not the only one. In fact, evaluation with¬
out tests occurs on a daily basis and is considered by Philip Jackson to be more
powerful and influential than tests. He asserts that students quickly come to real¬
ize “when things are right or wrong, good or bad, largely as a result of what the
teacher tells them.” The teacher “continuously makes judgments of students’
work and behavior [and communicates] that judgment to the students in question
and to others.”9
A second source of daily evaluation is the judgment of peers. Sometimes
the class as a whole is invited to participate in the evaluation of a student’s
work, as when the teacher asks, “Does everyone agree with Billy?” or “How
many believe that Shirley read the poem with a lot of expression?” At times an
obvious error evokes “laughter” or destructive criticism, or an outstanding per¬
formance wins “spontaneous applause.”10 Little urging on the part of the
teacher is needed, although the teacher might consciously or unconsciously egg
the students on.
A third source of daily evaluation is student self-judgment. Students ap¬
praise their own performance without the “intervention of an outside judge.”
This type of evaluation is more difficult to discern and describe, but it occurs
throughout instruction—for example, when the student works on the chalkboard
and knows that her work is correct or incorrect, but the teacher does not bother
to indicate one way or another.11
There are many other types of evaluation, both private, such as IQ and per¬
sonality test scores (that always follow the student and lead to labels) or certain
communications to parents or other teachers about students, and public, such as
the display of work for others to see or a teacher review for the class of some¬
one’s homework. Evaluations in class and school never cease.
Critics make many negative comments about the evaluation process, but
evaluation is necessary. Although it can be argued that tests are not always nec¬
essary for grading, classifying, or judging students, evaluation is. In fact, if
evaluation is done properly, it leads to enhanced student learning. Teachers
need to evaluate students’ performance and progress; otherwise, they are sur¬
rendering an important role in teaching. On the other hand, the teacher should
consider the students’ feelings and self-concepts, and avoid labels that lead to
Alternative Assessment Criteria
The Aurora (Colorado) School District has imple¬ III. Complex thinker
mented a nontraditional method of grading students 10. Uses a wide variety of strategies for
based on judging the abilities of students to perform managing complex issues.
complex tasks which are not just cognitive—but also 11. Selects strategies appropriate to the
psychological, social, and civic in nature. The five resolution of complex issues and applies
categories, which the district calls the “big out¬ the strategies with accuracy and
comes,” and their 19 components or examples can be thoroughness.
used for all grade levels and subjects. This method 12. Accesses and uses topic-relevant
suggests a radical change in student assessment. knowledge.
I. Self-directed learner IV. Quality producer

1. Sets priorities and achieves goals. 13. Creates products that achieve their
2. Monitors and evaluates progress. purpose.
3. Creates options for self. 14. Creates products appropriate to the
4. Assumes responsibility for actions. intended audience.
5. Creates a positive vision for self and future. 15. Creates products that reflect craftsmanship.
16. Uses appropriate resources/technology.
II. Collaborative worker
6. Monitors own behavior. V. Community contributor
7. Assesses and manages group 17. Demonstrates knowledge about his or her
functioning. diverse communities.
8. Demonstrates interactive 18. Takes action.
communication. 19. Reflects on role as a community contributor.
9. Demonstrates consideration for
Source: Nora Redding, “Assessing the Big Outcomes,” Educational
individual differences. Leadership (May 1992): 49, 8:50.
traps, embarrassment, and despair among students whose performance is less than
average. The various informal methods and approaches that can be used to supple¬
ment formal test data (see Chapter 10) are summarized in Tips for Teachers 11.1.
Quizzes
Quizzes provide an excellent basis for checking homework and for evaluating
student progress. Some teachers give unannounced “pop” quizzes at irregular in¬
tervals, especially related to specific assignments. Others give regular, scheduled
quizzes to assess learning over a short period of time, say a week or two.
Quizzes encourage students to keep up with the assignments and show them
their strengths and weaknesses in learning. Quizzes can take many different
forms (see Chapter 10)—and they should, if teachers are to develop a good un¬
derstanding of what the students know or don’t know.
Frequent and systematic monitoring of students’ work and progress through
short quizzes helps teachers improve instruction and learning. Errors serve as
early warning signals of learning problems that can be corrected before they
worsen. According to researchers, student effort and achievement improve when
teachers provide frequent evaluation and prompt feedback on quizzes.12 Quizzes
are easy to develop, administer, and grade, thus providing an avenue for multi¬
ple and prompt evaluation.
Observation of Student Work

The teacher has the opportunity to watch students perform various tasks on a
daily basis, under various conditions, alone and with different students. The
teacher sees students more or less continually simply by virtue of being in the
classroom, but she or he needs to know what to look for and to have some objec¬
tive system for collecting and assessing data.
Although the teacher should observe all students, individuals who exhibit
atypical behavior or learning outcomes are often singled out for special study.
The keys to good observation are objectivity and documentation. Teachers can¬
not depend on memory or vague subjective statements, such as “Johnny misbe¬
haves in class.” They must keep accurate, specific written records that contain
objective statements of what students are doing: “Barb is unable to use apostro¬
phes correctly with possessive nouns” or “John was out of his seat five times
today without permission.”
The teacher has the

opportunity to watch
students perform
various tasks, under
various conditions,
on a daily basis.
If observations are free from bias and tempered with common sense, this in¬
formal, nonstandardized evaluation method can provide more insightful infor¬
mation about a student than would test scores alone. Some teachers use a format
for providing feedback that is prescriptive in that it highlights strengths and
weaknesses but also outlines specific ideas for improving weaknesses (see Tips
for Teachers 11.2). These format's, when used, are an outgrowth of specific
teacher observations of student behavior. The key is: make observations of stu¬
dents and then make specific learning prescriptions based on those observations.
Group Evaluation Activities
Teachers can set aside a time to allow students to participate in establishing in¬
structional objectives, to evaluate their strengths and limitations, and to evaluate
their own progress in learning. Students can evaluate themselves or their class¬
mates on study habits and homework, class participation, quizzes, workbook or
textbook activities, and other activities. They can keep anecdotal reports or logs
about their own work in which successes and difficulties are recorded and then dis¬
cussed in class. They can check off assignments they complete and evaluate their
Learning Prescription
Name Lionel_ Age 5 Date_1/20_

Areas of Strength and Confidence
1. Does manipulative activities well by self __

2. Performs or participates in music and rhythm activities__
3. Has good small motor coordination______
Areas Needing Strengthening
1. Needs to develop large motor skills_

2. Needs to learn to play with others___
3. Needs to develop small motor skills of writing, drawing, cutting_
Activities to Help
1. Bring in pair of left-handed scissors and have Lionel cut out pictures of cars from magazine to make a
car scrapbook with one of the other boys_
2. Bring a hammer, nails, and tree stump; ask Lionel to help another child with pounding nails to make
rhythm instrument shaker__
3. Have Lionel and other children paint the rhythm instruments they make_
Source: Janice Beaty, Observing Development of Young Children (New York: Merrill, 1994), 208
work in group discussions. Evaluation techniques such as these make it possible

for teachers to diagnose and measure student progress quickly and efficiently.
Class Discussions and Recitations

Many teachers consider a student’s participation in class discussion an essential
source of data for evaluation. Teachers are impressed by students who volunteer,
develop thoughts logically, and discuss relevant facts and relationships. Answer¬
ing the teacher’s questions frequently and carrying out assignments in class are
considered to be evidence of progress. The inability to answer questions and the
inability to perform assignments in class are taken to be indications of learning
problems or lack of motivation. In fact, there could be many reasons why stu¬
dents do not respond to teacher questions correctly. Observers outline some
possibilities:
A particular feature of the talk between teacher and pupils is the asking of ques¬
tions by the teacher. This natural and direct way of checking on learning is often
unproductive. One common problem is that, following a question, teachers do
not wait long enough to allow pupils to think out their answers. When a teacher
answers his or her own question after only two or three seconds and when a
minute of silence is not tolerable, there is no possibility that a pupil can think
out what to say.
There are then two consequences. One is that, because the only questions that
can produce answers in such a short time are questions of fact, these predominate.
The other is that pupils don’t even try to think out a response. Because they know
that the answer, followed by another question, will come along in a few seconds,
there is no point in trying. It is also generally the case that only a few pupils in a
class answer the teacher’s questions. The rest then leave it to these few, knowing
that they cannot respond as quickly and being unwilling to risk making mistakes in
public. So the teacher, by lowering the level of questions and by accepting answers
from a few, can keep the lesson going but is actually out of touch with the under¬
standing of most of the class. The question/answer dialogue becomes a ritual, one in
which thoughtful involvement suffers.
There are several ways to break this particular cycle. They involve giving
pupils time to respond; asking them to discuss their thinking in pairs or in small
groups, so that a respondent is speaking on behalf of others; giving pupils a choice
between different possible answers and asking them to vote on the options; asking
all of them to write down an answer and then reading out a selected few; and so
on. What is essential is that any dialogue should evoke thoughtful reflection in
which all pupils can be encouraged to take part, for only then can the formative
process start to work.13
Homework
The teacher can learn much about students’ achievements and attitudes by
checking homework carefully. A good rule is not to assign homework unless it
is going to be checked in some way, preferably by the teacher and in some cases
by another student or by the student herself. The idea is to provide prompt feed¬
back to the student, preferably emphasizing the positive aspects of work while
making one or two major recommendations for improvement. As Herbert Wal-

berg points out, student achievement increases significantly when teachers as¬
sign homework on a regular basis, students conscientiously do it, and comments
and feedback are provided when the work is completed.14 But for homework to
accomplish its purposes, it must be assigned properly. Table 11.2 outlines gen¬
eral guidelines for assigning homework.
Table 11.2 Homework Do’s and Don’ts
The following homework do’s and don’ts provide a quick summary of the points covered in the preceding narrative. Our lists are
selective but not mutually exclusive. We have tried to limit our admonitions to those few we feel would really matter if heeded.
For Teachers
1. Do understand that not all types of homework assignments are equally valuable for all types of students.
2. Do explain the specific purpose of every homework assignment.
3. Do listen to what students say about their experiences in completing your homework assignments.
4. Do acknowledge and be thankful for efforts students make to complete their homework.
5. Do not ever give homework as punishment.
6. Do not make up spur-of-the-moment homework assignments.
7. Do not assume that because there are no questions asked about a homework assignment students have no questions about the
assignment.
8. Do not expect students (even your best students) always to have their homework assignments completed.
For Parents
1. Do make sure your child really needs help before offering to help with homework.
2. Do help your child see a purpose or some value in homework assignments.
3. Do encourage your children to complete assignments after absences from school.
4. Do suggest an alternative to watching TV on nights when no homework is assigned, such as sharing a magazine article,
enjoying a game together, or going to an exhibit or concert.
5. Do not try to help with homework if you are confused and really cannot figure out what is expected.
6. Do not hesitate to have your child explain legitimate reasons for nights when homework simply cannot be completed.
7. Do not place yourself in an adversarial role between your child and the teachers over homework issues until all other
alternatives are exhausted.
8. Do not feel your child always has to be doing “something productive.” (There are few things sadder than a burned-out
14-year-old is.)
For Students
1. Do ask your parents for help with your homework only when you really need help.
2. Do ask the teacher to help before or after class if you are confused about a homework assignment.
3. Do explain to teachers legitimate reasons that sometimes make it impossible to complete some homework assignments.
4. Do make every effort to complete homework assignments when they are very important for a particular class.
5. Do not expect that your parents will be able to help with all your homework. (Parents forget things they have learned, and some
of what is taught in school today is foreign to adults.)
6. Do not ask teachers to help with any homework assignment you really can complete independently.
7. Do not confuse excuses for incomplete homework assignments with legitimate reasons.
8. Do not think doing your homework “most of the time” will be satisfactory for those classes where homework counts the most.
(In such classes, even a 75% completion rate may not be enough.)
Source: D. A. England and J. K. Flatley, “Homework Do’s and Don’ts,” in Homework—and Why (Bloomington, IN: Phi Delta Kappan, 1985), 36-38.
Notebooks and Note Taking

Notebooks should be used as an assessment tool for evaluating students’ writing
and understanding of subject matter in elementary school and, to a lesser extent,
in the middle grades and junior high school.
Note taking is more important for secondary school students, especially at
the high school level. At this level students should begin to be able to take notes
on some of the unwritten ideas that emerge from the classroom discussions.
Good note taking consists of arranging information in a systematic form, focus¬
ing on major points of discussion, condensing material, and integrating new with
old information.15 Verbatim note taking or simple paraphrasing or listing of in¬
formation is not as effective.16
Reports, Themes, and Research Papers

Written work serves as an excellent way to assess students’ abilities to organize
thoughts, to research topics, to develop new ideas. In evaluating projects, the
teacher should look to see how well students have developed their thoughts in
terms of explanations, logic, and relationship of ideas; whether ideas are ex¬
pressed clearly; whether facts are documented or distinguished from opinion;
and what conclusions or recommendations are evidenced. Spelling and grammar
should not be the key to evaluating students; rather, emphasis should be on the
student’s thinking process, use of reference materials, and ability to keep to the
topic and develop it logically. In grading any student written work, it is impera¬
tive that teachers have informal or formal rubrics. Table 11.3 is an example of a
rubric for student writing that is used in a statewide assessment program. Ap¬
proximately 38 states are using such rubrics, so it is quite likely that you will
confront their use at some point in your career.
Discussions and Debates

Evaluation of oral work is less reliable than evaluation of written samples, but oral
work can reveal creative and critical thinking that cannot be measured with other
methods. David and Roger Johnson and others point out that when students freely
discuss topics that are of interest to them, their thinking is based on many skills, in¬
sights, and experiences not evidenced in a one-hour written test.17 The idea is to in¬
volve students and for them to discover, in front of their peers, that they can suc¬
ceed. Because they are in front of their peers, it is essential that no humiliation, no
sarcasm, and no negativism be introduced into the discussion or evaluation process.
Free discussion in groups brings values out in the open and forces students
to think about other people’s values. Analysis of problems and attempts to find
solutions to problems through debates, panel discussions, or buzz sessions are
valuable tools for teachers to use to understand how their students think and feel.
During discussions, students can be rated not only on their mastery of and
ability to analyze material, but also on several social and cognitive characteristics.
Such characteristics include the way in which the student (1) accepts ideas of oth¬
ers, (2) initiates ideas, (3) gives opinions, (4) helps others, (5) seeks information,
Table 11.3 Rubric for Holistic Scoring of Student Writing
4 The writing focuses on the topic with ample supporting ideas or examples and has a logical structure. The paper coveys a
sense of completeness, or wholeness. The writing demonstrates a mature command of language, including precision in
word choice. With rare exceptions, sentences are complete except when fragments are used purposefully. Subject/verb
agreement and verb and noun forms are generally correct. With few exceptions, the paper follows the conventions of
punctuation, capitalization, and spelling.
3 The writing is generally related to the topic with adequate supporting ideas or examples, although development may be
uneven. Logical order is apparent, although some lapses may occur. The paper exhibits some sense of completeness, or
wholeness. Word choice is generally adequate and precise. Most sentences are complete. There may be occasional
errors in subject/verb agreement and in standard forms of verbs and nouns but not enough to impede communication.
The conventions of punctuation, capitalization, and spelling are generally followed.
2 The writing demonstrates an awareness of the topic but may include extraneous or loosely related material. Some
supporting ideas or examples are included but are not developed. An organizational pattern has been attempted. The
paper may lack a sense of completeness, or wholeness. Vocabulary is adequate but limited, predictable, and
occasionally vague. Readability is limited by errors in sentence structure, subject/verb agreement, and verb and noun
forms. Knowledge of the conventions of punctuation and capitalization is demonstrated. With few exceptions,
commonly used words are spelled correctly.
1 The writing is only slightly related to the topic, offering few supporting ideas or examples. The writing exhibits little or
no evidence of an organizational pattern. Development of ideas is erratic, inadequate, or illogical. Limited or
inappropriate vocabulary obscures meaning. Gross errors in sentence structure and usage impede communication.
Frequent and blatant errors occur in basic punctuation and capitalization, and commonly used words are frequently
misspelled.
0 Non-scorable. A paper may be considered non-scorable for any of the following reasons:
• illegible
• not enough text
• flagrant disregard of the topic
Note: Highest score is 4; lowest score is 0.

Source: High School Proficiency Testing: Fact Sheets, Ninth-Grade Writing (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio Department of Education, 1990).
(6) tries to make the best decision as opposed to trying to “win,” (7) encourages
others to contribute, (8) works well with all group members, (9) raises provocative
questions, (10) listens to others, (11) disagrees in a constructive fashion,
(12) shows willingness to reverse an opinion, and (13) makes an overall positive
contribution to the group.18 In essence, if you are going to rate students during dis¬
cussions, make certain they know what it is that you will be rating.
Peer Evaluators
Developing a “community of learners” enhances student interaction and cooper¬

ation and enables them to learn from one another. It also enhances group spirit
and contributes to student empowerment. Research suggests, too, that students’
social responsibility and achievement are enhanced when they provide and re¬
ceive feedback from peers about their academic work.19 Students can serve as
peer evaluators for quizzes or peer editors for written projects. Ideally, the an¬
swers or a preset of criteria should be provided to enable students to evaluate
others. Peer interactions are also an effective means of breaking a routine of
low-level teacher questions in the classroom.
Students can also provide valuable ideas and information to each other re¬
garding various cooperative activities and projects. Here the teacher’s role in ini¬
tiating and fostering trust and cooperation among students is important. The
teacher can promote these aims by (1) encouraging students to contribute
openly, (2) sharing materials and resources, (3) expressing acceptance and sup¬
port during their interactions, and (4) pointing out rejecting and non-supportive
behaviors that hinder peer evaluation and cooperation.20
Student Journals
In journals, students can record their ideas about what they are reading, relate
content to their own experiences, make comparisons, or develop thoughts, plots,
or projects. They can also keep logs about articles or books they are reading.
These journals can serve as a basis for student-teacher conferences or group dis¬
cussions. Also, the journals are a basis for fusing writing and reading activities
across the curriculum, and provide samples of student work that exemplify some
task or project for assessment.
Student Portfolios
Student portfolios (see also chapter 10) can be used to demonstrate a sample of
the students’ work—to show a range of performance or the “best” pieces of
work. With most portfolios, students are expected to show a variety of skills
and the ability to improve performance. Portfolios tell an in-depth story, espe¬
cially if they are maintained for the entire year and cut across domains or sub¬
jects. They might consist of a written autobiography; a statement about work
(including a resume); an essay on a particular subject, or a series of essays; a
special project, paper, or experiment; a series of photographs, drawings, or
plans; or even a video, a computer printout, or software developed by the stu¬
dent.21 See Case Study 11.1 for an example of how a mathematics teacher uses
portfolios.
Portfolios are becoming increasingly popular because they are considered
an excellent way for the teacher to get to know the student. They are particularly
useful in inclusion classrooms where students exhibit a wide range of needs and
abilities. They help students see the “big” picture about themselves, heightening
their awareness of their own learning. Allowing students to select the contents of
the portfolio also enables them to take an active role in their own instruction and
assessment. The portfolio makes it possible to document instruction and learning
over time, and it is an excellent resource as teacher, parent, and student discuss
overall school performance and progress. Portfolios portray a wide and rich
array of what students know or can do. In effect, they capture multiple dimen¬
sions of learning, not only right answers or cognitive dimensions. They illumi¬
nate the process by which students solve problems, produce work, or perform in
real life contexts—what some educators call “authentic” assessment. Portfolios
also help students integrate instruction and reflect on their personal efforts.22 As
a tool for developing habits of reflection, they can lead to greater student confi¬
dence in their own learning.23
Case Study 11.1
How I Use Portfolios in Mathematics

Pam Knight
Last summer I became fascinated with the possibility scale drawing, their best tests, their worst tests, prob¬
of using something other than the standard math test lems of the week, daily class notes, and homework.
for assessment. The algebra classes I teach seemed Next, I had them search through their folders and
to lend themselves to no other form of assessment collect five items that they believed represented their
than what had been done for the last 50 years. De¬ math knowledge and effort. At this time I was really
spite the fact I hadn’t a clue about how to begin, the glad I had all their work for the semester because the
more I read about the concept of the math portfolio, students attached significant value to assignments
the more interested I became. Finally, I decided to that I would not have.
give portfolios a try. The class then discussed the format of a good
First, I purchased boxes and file folders from the portfolio. We decided it should be neat, typed or in
local discount store. I labeled a box for each period ink, in a cover, and include a table of contents. In ad¬
of math and assigned a file folder to each student. dition, each entry was to contain a personal statement
Well, this gave me a place for storage, but to store as to why this piece was important to the learner. I
what? I thought I would be safe and keep everything gave the class a week to organize portfolios.
the students handed in. After I collected the portfolios, I immediately
My county department of education had estab¬ handed them out again to a different person in the
lished a portfolio network for math teachers who class. I wanted my students to see their classmates’
each month shared ideas. The first meeting was work. Almost instantly those who had put little time
wonderful! There must have been 60 people there. into this project became uncomfortable when they
By the third meeting the number had dwindled to saw the effort of others. I asked my students whether
20; the last meeting had just enough people to sit they would like four extra days to revisit their port¬
comfortably around one table. folios. There was obvious relief.
I was disturbed by the narrow scope of what my I was truthful with my students when I told them
colleagues were suggesting should go into the port¬ that using portfolios was a new experience for me. I
folios. They wanted to include only their students’ had no idea what would come in, nor did I have a
efforts at problem solving. While problem solving is clue how I would go about assessing them. I told
a portion of the mathematics I teach, there is a lot them that I didn’t know if I was going to include a
more to algebra than problems of the week. As the portfolio grade in their average. For all they knew,
semester came to a close, I was surprised at the ab¬ they were doing this purely as an intellectual exer¬
solute quantity of work my students had done. Ex¬ cise. Looking at their portfolios, I realized that many
amples of this work included long-term projects, had crawled out on quite an intellectual limb for me.
daily notes, and journal entries about troublesome About a third of my students had turned in a superior
test problems. All this work we faithfully filed. job on the first due date. Many of their reflective
One day I handed the folder to the students, then statements told me much about them as people and
went to the board and wrote the word portfolio. I about their math learning. We were learning portfo¬
asked the class what should be included in a portfo¬ lios together.
lio. What would show their effort and learning in al¬ I eventually decided to have the portfolios peer
gebra? What activities had been the most meaning¬ graded. Students were to write comments and
ful? I noted their suggestions: daily notes, the
Personal Budget long term projects, Lottery Project, continued
Case Study 11.1 concluded doing them rather than doing just normal take home
math assignments. These papers definitely show me at
my best.
suggestions for improvement on grading sheets, not
on the actual portfolio. I devised a grading matrix
My students are now collecting work for their
and weighted the portfolio grade to be equivalent to
next try, which they are calling “Son of Portfolio.”
about one-fifth of a test grade. After the students
As a result of trying to implement portfolio as¬
wrote comments, I added my own.
sessment, my classroom has definitely changed. It
Having students grade one another’s portfolios
became apparent early on that if I wanted variety in
served two purposes. First, they received immediate,
my children’s portfolios, I had to provide variety in
constructive feedback from a peer. Second, graders
assignments. I have changed my curriculum to in¬
had an opportunity to read another student’s work
clude more problem-solving opportunities with writ¬
carefully. Some student graders felt that the intro¬
ten explanations. I have also had my students do two
ductions they read were so insightful that they asked
long-term situational problems. In the past, although
me to read the comments aloud to the whole class.
I knew my algebra classes found such projects enter¬
This is an excerpt from an 8th grader’s portfolio:
taining, I had questioned their lasting value. Now I
I chose these papers for my portfolio because they see that these problems are the ones the kids remem¬
show my best work and my worst work. They portray ber most.
both sides of my academic performance in math this I now believe portfolio assessment is a way to as¬
last semester. sess total student performance. Not only do portfolios
The 45 percent math test is in my portfolio because offer teachers insights into their students’ maturity,
it shows that I have some problems in math. It shows self-esteem, and writing abilities, but they are also an
my bad work. It shows that sometimes I have a bad day.
important tool for student self-evaluation. While port¬
It shows also that I forgot to study (ha ha ha).
folio assessment is extra work, the work is enlighten¬
I can sum up three papers in this paragraph. Those
ing. Math portfolios are a wonderful way for students
are the Personal Budget, the James project, and the
$2,000 lottery project. On all these papers I did really to celebrate their learning.
well. That shows that I do much better on those pro¬ Source: Pam Knight, “How I Use Portfolios in Mathematics,”
jects, especially the creative ones. I have a bit more fun Educational Leadership (May 1992): 71-72.
Despite the compelling reasons for using portfolios, certain potential prob¬
lems accompany their use. Unless the portfolio system is designed carefully, ac¬
curate conclusions about what learning outcomes have been achieved cannot be
made. The work in the portfolio might not be representative of what the student
knows or can do, the criteria used to evaluate the product might not reflect rele¬
vant dimensions of the course content or skill, and the work that a student puts
into the portfolio might not really be authentic or reflect the curriculum.24
Defining selection and assessment criteria becomes crucial. The work as¬
signed to students for the portfolio should match the behavior and content the
teacher is trying to portray. For example, we cannot conclude that the writing
sample or research project in the portfolio is “typical” work for the student, if
the student has selected only his “best” sample. The significance or value of the
portfolio product also changes with the teacher analyzing it. Teacher bias and
subjectivity in grading are much harder to control with this assessment system as
opposed to a short-answer test or when grading is based on right answers or a
prescribed answer key.
The point is, portfolios represent a relatively new assessment and grading
strategy that can reveal much about a variety of learning outcomes; though most
educators seem to favor their use, there is no agreed-upon way to design a port¬
folio system. Effective use really depends on your intended purpose and audi¬
ence, as well as your definition of a “good” portfolio. As a teacher, if you do not
fully understand how portfolios can be developed and to what end, what content
or skills should be assessed, and what criteria or standards used, then you are
likely to become confused as you implement them as part of your assessment
plan. Many schools are using them in one form or another, so it is advisable to
ask experienced teachers for help. Listen, for example, for the advice in the
words of two experienced teachers who use portfolios:
When it came time to measure cumulatively students’ progress for the report cards,
student portfolios were our main tool for assessment along with our observations.
We knew that all of our children entered the school year on different levels with a
variety of gifts. The portfolio would document growth from September through June
and included teacher-suggested, student-selected work . . . our students gained
ownership of their portfolios early on. These portfolios comprised the children’s
work across the curriculum, with an emphasis on their reflective writing pieces. By
looking at samples of their writing month after month, we could tangibly assess their
growth in grammar, spelling, and sentence structure, along with their developing
thought processes.
We wanted our students to become self-reflective learners. At the end of each
marking period, we asked them to review their work to examine the growth they had
made. Each wrote a reflection for the different curriculum areas, reviewing the
strides they had made and how they wanted to improve in the upcoming months.
These pieces went into their portfolios along with the reflections that they had been
writing throughout the year; students became engaged in their own learning as they
engaged in self-assessment. . . .
Periodically, we had one-on-one conferences with each student about the port¬
folios. We began by asking them, “What does your portfolio say about you?” The
responses included, “I am proud of my math, but I need to work on word prob¬
lems,” “I like chapter books now; I didn’t in September,” “I need to work on orga¬
nizing my work,” and “I am a good writer, but I need to work on editing.” With
practice, all of our students became quite comfortable with this self-assessment
process. They were more accountable for their work and we watched them take
pride in their efforts.25
Grading
The purposes of grading differ somewhat for teachers at different grade levels.
Some studies indicate that elementary school teachers tend to say they give
grades because the school district requires it, not because grades are an impor¬
tant yardstick of achievement for them. In contrast, secondary school teachers
feel grades are necessary for informing students, other teachers, and colleges
about performance.26 The same studies showed that elementary school teachers
rely more on their observations of student participation in class, motivation,
and attitudes than on tests. Secondary school teachers assign grades mainly on
the basis of test results (on the average, no more than 15 percent of the grade
is based on professional judgment about student effort, class participation,
etc.).
Teachers need to recognize that young students (grade 4 and lower) have lit¬
tle understanding of what grades mean. Understanding of grading concepts in¬
creases with age. Grading in the lower grades is usually for the benefit of par¬
ents. They expect to see how a student stands, and that usually means in
relationship to other students in class. It is not until the upper grades that most
students understand schemes such as grading curve, grade point average, and
weighted grading. Students below the intermediate grades attach less importance
to grades and consider external and uncontrollable factors to be important influ¬
ences on grading. Older students attach more importance to grades, see them as
linked to internal and controllable factors, and are aware of the reasons for grad¬
ing. However, older students are likely to be critical of grading practices and
less accepting of low grades they receive than are younger students.27
Researchers list the following general purposes for grading: (1) certifica¬
tion, or assurance that a student has mastered specific content or achieved a cer¬
tain level of accomplishment; (2) selection, or identifying or grouping students
for certain educational paths or programs; (3) direction, or providing informa¬
tion for diagnosis and planning; and (4) motivation, or emphasizing specific ma¬
terial or skills to be learned and helping students to understand and improve
their performance.28
Grades often result in the same group of students being “winners” or
“losers” from grade to grade. Robert Slavin puts it this way: “In the usual, com¬
petitive reward structure, the probability of one student’s receiving a reward
(good grade) is negatively related to the probability of another student’s receiv¬
ing a reward.”29
Great Expectations
Robert E. Stake
Professor and Director, Center for Instructional Research
University of Illinois, Champ aign-Urb ana
Some call it the knowledge explosion. It is better Each of us learners is a mouse gnawing at an ex¬
often to think of it as an ignorance explosion. ploding castle.
Not to belittle people but to realize that when any Grading someone down for not mastering a
one person discovers something, billions of people “body of knowledge” is like faulting the mouse for
become ignorant of one more thing. not gnawing the entire castle.
A demonstrable relationship exists between formal instruction and student

performance at all grade levels, but constructing tests and grading accurately to
reflect classroom tasks and intended learning are difficult for most teachers. Al¬
though teachers report that they feel they are able to interpret test results and
transfer test scores into grades or grade equivalents, when teachers are tested on
these abilities, the majority misinterpret concepts presented to them.30
Assigning grades to students’ schoolwork is inherently subjective, regard¬
less of the method used. Not only does it take a high degree of expertise to be an
accurate grader; there is the false assumption that teacher-made tests reflect pre¬
cisely what is being taught. Teachers are required to make judgments, and few,
if any, are purely objective or accurate. What test items should be included and
how the items should be weighted are matters of judgment. Should points be de¬
ducted for wrong answers? How many A’s or B’s or F’s should be awarded?
Will grading be on a curve or absolute? And what about all those special cases
(“I lost my notebook”) and problems (“I was sick last week”)? Should students
be allowed to retake an exam because their grade deviates from past perfor¬
mance? Should extra-credit assignments be used to modify grades and to what
extent? If test modification, additional tests, or extra-credit assignments are per¬
mitted, then teachers are forced into a more subjective role. But if a teacher fails
to consider extraneous circumstances, possibly modifying the scoring results,
then it can be argued that grades are being used as a weapon, certainly as a cold
symbol of learning. It can also be argued that students are entitled to extra
coaching and practice, but retaking exams or extra credit is unfair because it af¬
fects the grades of some, but not all, students.
Homework is another consideration. Who should grade the homework, stu¬
dents or teacher? Prompt scoring by students enables the teacher to decide
promptly what material needs further analysis. When the teacher grades the
homework, however, it increases her or his paper load and possibly delays feed¬
back to students. Yet in the very act of grading homework, teachers get more in¬
formation about their students’ specific thinking skills and problems. Moreover,
researchers point out that when the teacher takes time out to write encouraging
and constructive comments on the homework (or other student papers), it has
positive measurable effects on achievement.31
Homework might be important in the learning process, but there is a ques¬
tion about whether it should be counted in the grading system. Some educators
say no. There are similar questions about lowering grades for minor discipline
problems (such as chewing gum, not typing a paper, not doing an assignment on
time, coming to class late). A student whose behavior is unacceptable must be
held accountable, but most educators are against reducing grades as a deter¬
rent.32 Many teachers, however, take another view, especially when classroom
discipline is at stake.
There is also considerable disagreement about the value of using routine
class activities, class participation, recitations, oral reading, chalkboard work,
oral presentations, and notebooks as part of the grade system. Although such
practices broaden the base of information on student performance and also give
students a chance to be evaluated on grounds other than tests, there are serious
questions about the quality of information they provide. For example, some stu¬
dents “talk a good game” and know little, whereas others are introverted or shy
but know the material. Other educators maintain that grades should be divided
into primary measures of performance (unit tests, term papers) and secondary
measures (homework, quizzes). The secondary measures are considered less im¬
portant and are given less weight, because their purpose is to prepare students to
achieve the primary learning outcomes.33
Regardless of what you think about grading, considerable evidence supports
its efficacy for improving student learning, especially when the grading process
is conducted in a fair and objective manner. E. D. Hirsch, writes:
It has been shown convincingly that tests and grades strongly contribute to effective
teaching. This commonsense conjecture was confirmed by research conducted after
the antigrade, pass/fail mode of grading had become popular at colleges and univer¬
sities in the 1960s and ’70s. Quite unambiguous analysis showed that students who
took courses for a grade studied harder and learned more than students who took the
course for intrinsic interest alone.34
Form of Grades
The most popular form in which grades are presented is the letter grade. Ac¬
cording to David Payne, the letter grade represents a translation from a number
base, resulting from a combination of test scores, ratings, and the like. Good
teachers use grades to show how well students have learned material in relation¬
ship to an established absolute criterion level—what the teacher intended them
to learn. That’s an appropriate form of grading. A much weaker (but frequently
used) form is to compare students’ performances and then to give grades based
on those relative performances.35
The conversion from numbers to letters (A, B, C) to some extent distorts
meaning and masks individual student differences. Because a letter represents a
range of numbers, different students might receive the same letter grade from
the same teacher for different levels of performance. However, although the
number system is more precise, often the difference between two or three points
for a final grade is not that meaningful.
Most schools convert letters to an even more general statement of evalua¬
tion as follows:
A = Superior, excellent, outstanding

B = good, above average
C = fair, competent, average
D = minimum passing, weakness or problems
F = failure, serious weakness or problems
The standards upon which grades are based vary considerably among school dis¬
tricts, so that a B student in one school might be an A student in another school.
Hence schools and school districts eventually get reputations about how low or
high standards are.
Absolute Grade Standards
Grades can be given according to fixed or absolute standards, as illustrated in

Table 11.4. One disadvantage of this approach is that the standards can be subject
to the error of leniency; that is, students who have an easy grader will get many
A’s and B’s, and students who have a tough grader will get many C’s and D’s.36
Also, student scores depend on the difficulty of the tests given. In some tests a
score of 65 percent might be above average, but with an absolute or fixed stan¬
dard, as indicated on the table, this score would be a D. Hence, many students
would be given a minimum passing grade under an absolute grading approach.
Despite these limitations, most teachers use this method of grading. It
makes a great deal of sense as long as teachers have a firm idea of what students
should be able to do and as long as standards are realistic and fair. The main ad¬
vantage, according to Good and Brophy, is that “it puts control of grades in stu¬
dents’ hands.” If the standards are fair, students should work hard to earn good
grades. “However, if standards are too high, students will give up.”37
An absolute grading standard usually is imposed by traditional teachers,
school administrators, and boards of education. The process assumes that the
teachers can predict the difficulty level of their tests—hence, predetermine the
distribution of scores, so that a specified number of students will get A’s, B’s,
C’s, etc. Not only is this task nearly impossible, but also it requires the teacher
to play “catch up” at the end of the semester (to purposely administer an easy or
difficult test) to get a more even distribution of grades—or to ignore an uneven
distribution of grades, skewed as too high or too low.38
Relative Grade Standards
Grades can also be given according to how a student performs in relation to oth¬
ers. If a student scores 80 on an examination, but most others score above 90,
the student has done less than average work. Instead of receiving a B under the
relative, or norm-referenced, method of grading, the student might receive a C.
Table 11.4 Examples of Absolute and Relative Standards of Grading
Relative Standard Percent Number of Students

Absolute Standard of Students* (Total = 32)
A = 90% or above A= 7% 2-3

B = 80-89% B = 24% 7-8
C = 70-79% C= 38% 12-13
D = 60-69% D= 24% 7-8
F = Below 60% F = 7% 2-3
*Based on a normal curve.

Source: Adapted from Robert E. Slavin, Educational Psychology: Theory into Practice, 4th ed. (Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1994).
If a student scores 65, but most others score below 60, she or he has done well
and might receive a B instead of a D.
Relative grading can be based on a curve, either a normal bell-shaped
curve or a curve derived from a simple ranking system. With a normal curve,
few students receive A’s or F’s, the majority receive C’s (the midpoint of the
curve), and many receive B’s and D’s. This is also shown in Table 11.4, which
uses a 7-24-38-24-7 percent grade distribution. In a ranking system, which is
more common, the teacher determines in advance the percentage equivalents for
each letter grade: For example, the top 25 percent will receive A, the next
30 percent B, the next 25 percent C, and the next 20 percent D or F. The grading
on this curve is not always as precise as with the normal curve, and it tends to be
a little easier for students to score higher grades.
Grading on a curve and other relative grading practices assure that grades
will be distributed on the basis of scores in relation to one another, regardless of
the difficulty of the test. It takes into consideration that the ability levels of stu¬
dents vary, and that tests vary in difficulty; thus, the distribution of scores or
grades cannot be predicted. However, researchers contend this process can cre¬
ate competition among students and inhibit them from helping each other in
class.39 It can also have a negative affect on a student’s desire to learn—highly
competitive environments cause unnecessary comparisons that cause lower-
ability students to lose interest in a task and perhaps in school. Indeed, some ed¬
ucators argue that unnecessary comparisons could be the reason so many stu¬
dents decide to drop out, psychologically or physically.
Combining and Weighting Data
Some researchers recommend that grades at all levels be based on: exams,
50 percent; class work, 30 percent; assigned papers, 10 percent; and homework,
10 percent.40 Another group of experienced teachers maintain that grades should
be based on tests and quizzes, 60 percent; class participation, 15 percent; written
and oral projects, 15 percent; and notebook and homework, 10 percent.41 Al¬
though researchers generally agree that grading should be based on several indi¬
cators that are directly related to the instructional program, there is less agree¬
ment on what should be included, and how the indicators should be weighted,
and whether indicators not directly related to instruction, such as participation,
effort, neatness, and conduct, are appropriate at all.42
Grades based on little information, say one or two tests, are unfair to stu¬
dents and probably invalid. Assigning too much importance to term papers or
homework is also invalid and unwise because these indicators say little about
whether the students have really learned the material. Relying more heavily on
test data is preferred, especially at the secondary school level, as long as there
are several quizzes or examinations and the tests are weighted properly.
There are a number of problems related to combining several test scores
into a single measure (or grade) for each student, including the fact that test
scores might have different significance. For example, a teacher who wishes to
combine scores on two separate tests might consider that each contributes
50 percent to the composite score. However, this rarely is the case, especially if
one test was more difficult than the other; the composite score is a function not
only of the mean but also of the standard deviation.
A question arises whether scores from different sources, representing differ¬
ent learning outcomes and levels of difficulty, can be combined into a composite
score. Although there are arguments for and against this procedure, it is accept¬
able as long as the composite score is based on several sources that are indepen¬
dent of each other. (See Tips for Teachers 11.3).
Advantages and Disadvantages of Point System of Grading
Most teachers, especially from the middle grades Disadvantages

onward, rely on a point system of grading which as¬
1. Emphasizes objectivity of scoring, not
signs points or percentages for various tests and
learning. Conveys the message that learning
class activities. Some teachers even post summaries
is equivalent to the accumulation of points,
at regular intervals so students can see their point
not the acquisition of skills and knowledge.
totals as the term progresses. The point system has
advantages and disadvantages and special caution is 2. Presents an illusion of objectivity. Every test
recommended. and assignment result from a series of
subjective decisions by the teacher (e.g. what
areas to cover, and how to weight particular
answers or aspects of performance).
Advantages
3. Reduces teacher’s judgment. Point systems
1. Is fair and objective. The teacher is not apt to tend to be inflexible and minimize teachers’
be swayed by subjective factors, and the need professional input.
for interpretation is minimized. 4. Hides importance of patterns. Average or total
2. Is quantifiable, explicit, and precise. Students scores outweigh improvement or decline.
and teachers know exactly what the numbers 5. Gives undue weight to fine distinctions. A
are and what they represent. single point difference (perhaps only a small
3. Minimizes conflict over what grade a student difference in learning) may be the difference
should receive. between a B- and a C+.
4. Facilitates the weighting of tests and class 6. Leads to cumulative errors. A particular score
activities (e.g., points for each quiz, 25 points or activity may not truly reflect the student’s
for a special project, 25 points each for the abilities or learning. The final total represents
midterm and final). the sum of all such errors.
5. Is cumulative. The final grade can be 7. Is subject to misinterpretation. Without norms
determined by a single computation at the end it is false to assume that a certain range (90 to
of the grading period. 100) or number (93) represents a valid indictor
6. Facilitates grading by establishing clear (e.g., an A) of performance or that categories
distinctions. Once categories are weighted (breakpoints) can be decided in advance.
and points totaled, assigning the grade for Source: Adapted from Robert F. Madgic, “The Point System of
each student is a straightforward task. Grading: A Critical Appraisal,” NASSP Bulletin (April 1988): 29-34.
Contracting for Grades
A few schools permit teachers and students considerable flexibility in formulating

grading standards. The teacher and students come to an agreement early in the
term concerning grades for specific levels of performance or achievement on vari¬
ous tasks. Maximum, average, and minimum standards or performance levels are
usually established for those who wish to receive passing and progressively higher
grades. In effect, the teacher promises to award a specific grade for specified per¬
formance; a contract grade is established. With this contract grading approach,
students know exactly what they have to do to receive a certain grade. Depending
on the amount of work they wish to do, they can receive a particular grade.
The plan seems suited to criterion-referenced learning and to teaching and
learning by a set of objectives. The approach is not recommended for elementary
school students because of their lack of maturity and their inability to engage in in¬
dependent work for a sustained period of time and to follow through on individual
activities. The contract can be implemented at the upper elementary level (grade 5
or higher) if great care is taken to match student maturity and abilities with perfor¬
mance requirements. Different standards will be needed with different students.
Revised contracts can be designed for students whose work is not satisfac¬
tory or who expected a higher grade than they received. This grading system
provides more latitude for teachers in responding to unsatisfactory work and
gives students a chance to improve their work and their grade. Good grade con¬
tracts take into account both the quality and the quantity of student work.
Mastery and Continuous Progress Grading
Many elementary schools and a few middle grade and junior high schools now
stress mastery grading or grading to criterions, which is an outgrowth of the
mastery learning approach. Teachers who use this approach define specifically
what content and objectives students must know. Schools using these ap¬
proaches may not use grades, but rather evaluate the student in terms of ex¬
pected and mastered skills and behaviors.43 Reports for the student and parents
describe how the student is performing and progressing without any indication
of how the student is doing in relation to others. Although a judgment is made
about the student, the absence of a standard for comparison reduces some pres¬
sure related to grades. In mastery learning situations and continuous progress re¬
porting, grades are usually based on criterion-referenced measurements. In
essence, teachers who use mastery learning require that students know the old
material before new material is presented.
Richard Arends describes how this approach might be used in spelling:
For example, in spelling, the teacher might decide that the correct spelling of 100
specified words constitutes mastery. Student grades would then be determined and
performance reported in terms of the percentage of the 100 words a student can
spell correctly. A teacher using this approach might specify the following grading
scale: A = 100 to 93 words spelled correctly; B = 92 to 85 words spelled correctly;
C = 84 to 75 words spelled correctly; D = 74 to 65 words spelled correctly, and
F = 64 or fewer words spelled correctly.44
Grading for Effort or Improvement
To what extent should teachers consider effort or improvement as part of the

grade? This question surfaces with most teachers when they grade their students.
Problems with considering effort.are that bright students might show the least im¬
provement and effort and that by raising the grade or average of low-achieving
students to reflect effort rather than achievement, you are to some extent lowering
the value of the grade given to high-achieving students.45 Also low-achieving stu¬
dents have more opportunity to improve by simple regression toward the mean;
that is, statistically, low-achieving students have a better chance to improve their
scores than do students whose scores are already above the mean.
Most teachers, especially in the elementary and middle grade schools,
leave some room for judgment in grading. The more effort and improvement
are considered in deciding on final grades, the more subjective the grades will
be and the more biased they are likely to be. Teachers must examine their
perceptions for accuracy. If the teacher feels strongly about a judgment, then
the movement in a grade from a B to a B+ or an A- to an A is acceptable. A
major change in a grade, say from a C to an A, cannot be justified on the
basis of the student’s effort or teacher’s hunches about the student. Regard¬
less of whether you decide to “reward” effort by modifying a student’s grade,
we do urge you to place an emphasis on effort as you interact with your stu¬
dents. Why? Students can change their effort levels; they cannot change their
innate abilities. In this regard, Americans might learn something from the
Japanese:
In Asia, the emphasis on effort and the relative disregard for innate abilities are de¬
rived from Confucian philosophy. Confucius was interested above all in the moral
perfectibility of mankind. He rejected categorization of human beings as good or
bad, and stressed the potential for improving moral conduct through the creation of
favorable environmental conditions. His view was gradually extended to all aspects
of human behavior. Human beings were considered to be malleable, and like clay,
subject to molding by the events of everyday life. Differences among individuals in
innate abilities were recognized, for no one can claim that all people are born with
the same endowments. But more important was the degree to which a person was
willing to maximize these abilities through hard work.
A typical example of Confucian position is found in the writings of the Chinese
philosopher Hsun Tzu, who wrote, “Achievement consists of never giving up. . . .
If there is no dark and dogged will, there will be no shining accomplishment; if there
is no dull and determined effort, there will be no brilliant achievement.” Lack of
achievement, therefore, is attributed to insufficient effort rather than to a lack of
ability or to personal or environmental obstacles.46
Records and Reports of Performance

There is usually a difference in the way student performance is recorded and re¬
ported in elementary and secondary school. Elementary teachers are usually
more sensitive about a student’s feelings, attitudes, and effort, and are willing to
consider these factors in reporting performance. Elementary school report cards

often contain a narrative or a combination of grades and narrative about the
child’s progress. The parents might be asked to write a reply, instead of merely
signing the report card, or to schedule a conference perhaps two or three times a
year during which the parent and teacher discuss the child’s work.
Fewer middle grade and junior high schools have such elaborate reporting
systems, and at the high school level this human (or social) dimension of report¬
ing is almost nonexistent, partly because teachers have more students (perhaps
150 or more) and thus cannot easily write narratives and hold conferences for
the parents of each student.
Report Cards
Test scores and teachers’ judgments are communicated to students and parents
by means of a report card. The reports should not come as a surprise to students.
Both students and parents should know how marks or grades are to be computed
and to what extent tests, class participation, homework, and other activities con¬
tribute to their overall grade. Many students and parents become anxious if they
do not know the basis for the marks or grades on the report card.
At the lower elementary grade levels (below grade 4), and to a lesser ex¬
tent at the upper elementary and junior high school levels, the school might
use a mastery report card or progress report card on which a list of de¬
scriptors or categories is given and the teacher indicates what the student can
do by checking off terms such as “very good” (VG), “good” (G), and “needs
improvement” (NI), or “outstanding” (O), “satisfactory” (S), and “unsatisfac¬
tory” (U). Below is a list of common reading descriptors and the accompany¬
ing progress options.
o s u
1. Reads orally at appropriate level _ _ _
2. Reads with comprehension _ _ _
3. Identifies main ideas in stories _ _ _
4. Recognizes main characters in stories _ _ _
5. Finds details in stories _ _ _
6. Draws conclusions from reading stories _ _ _
7. Demonstrates appropriate vocabulary _ _ _
8. Reads with appropriate speed _ _ _
9. Finishes reading assignments on time _ _ _
10. Persists even if understanding does not come
immediately _ _ _
Teachers can make up their own lists for any basic skill or subject. A mas¬
tery report might also involve individualized descriptions of progress or prob¬
lems rather than standardized ones. At some levels and for some types of course
content, the list of descriptors or categories can be precise, with a date for
achievement or mastery to be shown.
The approach fits in with a criterion-reference system of evaluation and is

useful for schools that wish to eliminate grades and put more emphasis on
progress or mastery. The same approach can be used for various subjects and
grade levels. For example, eighth-grade math might consist of the following
mastery items: (1) fractions and decimals, (2) solving equations, (3) geometric
figures, (4) percentages and probability, (5) powers and roots, (6) areas and vol¬
umes, and (7) graphs and predictions. Space can also be provided for the teach¬
ers’ comments—permitting in-depth analysis of the students’ strengths and areas
for improvement.
A traditional report card would use letter or numerical grades. At the ele¬
mentary grade level, the emphasis would be on reading and language skills, and
there would be grades for citizenship or conduct, work habits or social habits,
and absenteeism and lateness. At the secondary level, the emphasis would be on
academic subjects (such as English, mathematics, and science) and there would
be a place for reporting on minor or elective subjects (such as music, art, or
physical education). Most schools, regardless of grade level, should have a space
on report cards for a parent’s signature, teacher comments, and parent or teacher
requests for a conference to discuss the report. (See Tips for Teachers 11.4.)
Electronic Recordkeeping
Careful record keeping is an important part of the teacher’s evaluation of

students and has financial and legal implications for the school. Research
shows that the average teacher, with the assistance of a calculator, takes 87
minutes to average and record grades for 30 students in a traditional record
book. The same teacher with a computerized recordkeeper takes 15 minutes
to do the same work—a saving of 62 minutes for one class during a single
grading period.47
The computerized recordkeeper can generate school reports and parent re¬
ports, as well as customized letters and printout lists concerning student grades
by numerous categories, in 10 to 20 seconds per report, compared to an average
of 20 minutes per report with traditional methods. Figuring on a minimum of
one school report per week for 40 weeks and two customized letters or progress
reports per year for 30 parents, the savings is another 33 hours.
Two researchers have listed 22 tasks that computerized recordkeeping can
accomplish more effectively than a traditional recordkeeping book. Ten are
listed below.
1. Permitting the teacher to make easy and quick modifications of

recorded scores, to correct clerical errors, or to accommodate retest
scores or new test scores.
2. Computing grade averages and applying weighted formulas to grade
students on various categories: e.g., 40 percent for exams, 30 percent
for weekly quizzes, 15 percent for homework, and 15 percent for class
participation.
3. Converting numerical grades to letter grades according to specific
standards.
Innovative Practices for Reporting Student Performance
In lieu of traditional report cards, teachers might ex¬ “good,” and “fair”) new categories or
periment with new reporting procedures for provid¬ written individual statements such as “needs
ing information on student performance and progress. more time to develop,” “advanced
A number of innovative ideas are listed below. Some understanding for the child’s age.”
are in practice in a few schools. Just how innovative 7. Stress strengths of the student. Point out only
you can be will depend, to a large extent, on your two or three weaknesses or problem areas,
school’s policy and philosophy about grading. and specify ways for improving weak or
problem areas.
1. Consider more than a single grade or mark.
8. Replace or supplement the standar d card
Develop a progress report for each activity
with a larger more detailed folder, one that
detailing specific instructional tasks and
contains explanations for students and
student performance.
parents and perhaps pictures or cartoons at
2. List more than cognitive development and the younger grade levels.
specific subjects. Include social,
9. Provide space for comments by both teachers
psychological, and psychomotor behaviors
and parents, not just for their signatures.
and creative, esthetic, and artistic learning as
10. Provide space for requests by both parents
well as scientific and technical abilities.
and teachers for parent-teacher conferences.
3. Develop forms of report cards specifically
11. Organize committees of students, teachers,
suited to particular grade levels rather than
and parents to meet periodically (every three
using one form for the entire school.
or four years) to improve the school
4. Grade students on the basis of both an
district’s standard report card.
absolute standard and a relative standard
12. Supplement report cards with frequent
(especially in lower grades).
informal letters to parents, parent-teacher
5. Report each student’s progress (especially in
conferences, and student-teacher conferences.
lower grades.)
Source: Adapted from Allan C. Omstein, “The Nature of Grading,”
6. Replace or use in addition to standard letter Clearing House (April 1989): 65-69; David A. Payne, Measuring and
grades or categories (such as “excellent,” Evaluating Educational Outcomes (New York: Macmillan, 1992).
4. Providing records of student performance by ranking, percentages,

frequency distributions, etc., for subgroups or the entire class.
5. Making comparisons of one student or subgroup on any recorded
category for purpose of placement, diagnostic, formative, or summative
evaluation.
6. Providing printouts of student performance on specific tests or subtests
for purposes of instruction.
7. Designating or flagging students according to specific levels of
performance on specific tests (students who failed, or who received 80
percent or higher).
8. Generating reports that include standardized comments for one student
or group of students.
9. Generating personal letters for individual students, including specific

comments about grades.
10. Reusing names for different reports, labels, printouts, or another
grading period; creating class lists for attendance, lateness, extra credit,
phone numbers, addresses, etc.48
We must keep in mind that we are in the age of electronics, and the pencil-
and-paper method of recording data is quickly becoming dated. It behooves
teachers to efficiently manage information, and use various databases and
spreadsheets for grading, evaluating, and reporting student performance. These
methods provide many alternatives to help busy teachers take advantage of the
tools of the twenty-first century.
Cumulative Record
Each student has a permanent record in which important data are filed during his
or her entire school career. It contains information about subject grades, stan¬
dardized test scores, family background, personal history, health, school service,
parent and pupil interviews, special aptitudes, special problems (learning, behav¬
ioral, or physical), number of absences, and tardiness.
The cumulative record is usually stored in the main office or guidance of¬
fice. Teachers are permitted access to the cumulative records of the students in
their classes to obtain information about them. They are also required to add to the
information at the end of the term to keep the records complete and up to date.
Although the information found in the cumulative records is extremely
helpful, a major criticism of using these records is that the teacher might pre¬
judge students before even meeting them in class. For this reason, some educa¬
tors argue that a teacher should not look at cumulative records until a month or
more after the school year begins. The point is, looking at records can predis¬
pose teachers to classify students. That should not be done. But it is imperative
that you know all relevant facts about your students’ health (diabetes, epilepsy,
etc.), and reading student files is the usual way to get this information.
Federal legislation (Records Law 93-830) permits student records to be open
to inspection and review by the child’s parents. Therefore most educators are re¬
luctant to write statements or reports that could be considered controversial or
negative, unless supported with specific data. Sometimes important information
is omitted. When parents review information in cumulative records (they also
have the right to challenge the information), a qualified employee of the school
(principal’s secretary or guidance counselor) should be present to give assistance.
Guidelines for Grading Students
Here are some suggestions for deriving grades.
L Become familiar with the grading policy of your school and with your col¬
leagues’ standards-/Each school has its own standards for grading and pro-
cedures for reporting grades. Your standards and practices should not con¬
flict with those of the school and should not differ greatly from those of your
colleagues.
2. Explain your grading system to your students. For young students, explain
your grading system orally and with concrete examples. Older students can
read handouts that describe assignments, tests, test schedules, and grading
criteria, although this information can also be explained orally.
3. Base grades on a predetermined set of standards. For example, a student
who is able to perform at a significantly higher performance standard than
another student should receive a higher grade.
4. Base grades on a variety of sources. The more sources of information used
and weighted properly, the more valid the grade is. Although most of the
grade should be based on objective sources, some subjective sources should
also be considered. For example, a student who frequently participates in
class might be given a slightly higher grade than her test average.
5. As a rule, do not change grades. Grades should be arrived at after serious con¬
sideration, and only in rare circumstances should they be changed. Of course,
Evaluating Students in Schools
Martin Haberman
Distinguished Professor of Curriculum and Instruction
University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee
I learned two lessons while teaching second grade in My second lesson also came from parents.
the stone age. The first was from Arthur, who should Martha was a “sweet” little second grader who
have been in a special class but we liked each other played with a doll all day, every day. When I met
and I never sent him to the school psychologist to be with her father, I was surprised to see a Danish
tested. Arthur had trouble learning anything and if he sailor who was at least 6'6". He picked Martha up
did, he had trouble remembering it the next hour. In and perched her on his shoulder while I gave him
order to “encourage” him (but also to be fair to the one-half hour of jargon about how he might inter¬
others) I gave him C’s on his first report card. The pret norm-reference test scores related to Martha’s
next day he came in with a black eye and some facial achievement. I used every bit of jargon that I
cuts. His sister explained that their parents had knew. But I noticed he was holding her just like
beaten him because he hadn’t come home with all she held her doll and the only thing I thought to
A’s. After meeting the parents I learned that they say was that it was a real pleasure to have Martha
were religious zealots who believed that God told in class.
them to beat Arthur to shape him up; indeed, it was I never did learn how to communicate honestly
their duty. I saw to it that Arthur got all A’s on his with abusive parents but with doting ones I learned
subsequent report cards and included some specific to enjoy how much they loved their kids. I’ll bet
information on the permanent record of just what some people might not think this has anything to do
Arthur’s achievements were in the various subjects. with “evaluation.”
an obvious mistake or error should be corrected, but if students think you will
change grades, they will start negotiating or pleading with you for changes.
6. Record grades on report cards and cumulative records. Report cards usually are
mailed to parents or given to students to give to parents every six to nine weeks.
Cumulative records are usually completed at the end of the school term or year.40
Remember to use the evaluation procedure as a teaching and learning de¬

vice, to be fair in your evaluation of students, to interpret evaluative data prop¬
erly, and to give students the benefit of the doubt.
Communication with Parents

The importance of parent involvement is well documented. How the teacher can
help parents to improve the child’s academic work and behavior is often the
major concern among parents and teachers alike. According to Joyce Epstein,
more than 85 percent of parents spend 15 minutes per day or more helping their
child at home when asked to do so by the teacher. Parents claim they can spend
more time, 40 minutes on the average, if they are told specifically how to help,
but fewer than 25 percent receive systematic requests and directions from teach¬
ers to assist their children with specific skills and subjects.50 Epstein further
notes that parents become involved most often with reading activities at the
Including the student

in parent-teacher
conferences
encourages open
communication.
Figure 11.1
Level of fathers’ and mothers’ involvement in school, by family type:
Students in grades K-12, 1996.
Two-parent families
Fathers Mothers
Single-parent families
Fathers Mothers
Low involvement is participation in none or only one activity; moderate involvement is participation in two activities;
and high involvement is participation in three or four activities.
Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 1996 National Household Education
Survey.
lower grades: reading to the child or listening to the child read, taking the child
to the library, and helping with teaching materials brought home from school for
practice at home.51 Parents of older students (grade 4 and above) become more
involved with specific homework and subject-related activities.
Parent involvement in school matters and children’s learning decreases with
the level of schooling. Figure 11.1 shows the levels of parental involvement for
different types of families. Involvement and concern are considerable at the ele¬
mentary school level, less at the middle school or junior high school level, and
least at the high school level. Research also shows that children have an advan¬
tage in school when their parents support their learning, participate in school
activities, and communicate on a regular basis with school officials.52 Schools
typically communicate with parents in three ways: reports cards, conferences,
and letters. Parents expect feedback from the teachers and school, and usually
welcome the opportunity to meet with the teacher and to stay in touch through
phone calls and letters.
Parent Conferences
Scheduling parent-teacher conferences is becoming increasingly difficult be¬

cause an increasing number of children have only one adult living at home, have
two parents in the workforce, or have parents who are working more than one
job each. Few parents are able to attend school activities or conferences during
normal school hours, and many have trouble scheduling meetings at all. Today’s
teacher must adjust to these new circumstances with greater efforts through let¬
ters and telephone calls to set up .meetings and greater flexibility to accommo¬
date the needs of the parents.
Usually both teacher and parents are a little apprehensive before a confer¬
ence, want to impress each other favorably, and don’t know exactly what to ex¬
pect. Teachers can reduce their anxiety by preparing for the conference, assem¬
bling in advance all the information pertinent to the student and the subject to be
discussed with parents. This might include information regarding the student’s
academic achievement, other testing results, general health, attendance and late¬
ness, social and emotional issues, work habits, special aptitudes, or other note¬
worthy characteristics or activities. If the conference is about subject grades, the
teacher should assemble the student’s tests, reports, and homework assignments.
If it is about discipline, she or he might have on hand written and detailed ac¬
counts of the student’s behavior.
The conference should not be a time for lecturing parents. If the teacher
asked for the conference, the teacher will set the agenda, but should remain sen¬
sitive to the needs of the parents. The atmosphere should be unrushed and quiet.
The information presented should be based on as many sources as possible—
but it should be objective, not subjective, in content. See Tips for Teachers 11.5
for suggestions on making communication objective for classroom management
problems. It is advisable to begin and end on a positive note, even if a problem
has to be discussed. The idea is to encourage parents. The teacher should not
monopolize the discussion, should be truthful, yet tactful and constructive, and
should remain poised. The teacher should be cautious about giving too much ad¬
vice, especially with regard to the child’s home life. The average conference, un¬
less there is an important problem, lasts 15 to 30 minutes.
The parent-teacher conference is helpful for both parties. The conference
helps teachers (1) understand and clarify parents’ impressions and expectations
of the school program or particular classes, (2) obtain additional information
about the child, (3) report on the child’s developmental progress and suggest
things the parents can do to stimulate development, (4) develop a working rela¬
tionship with parents, and (5) encourage parents’ support of the school. Accord¬
ing to some educators, the conference, in turn, helps parents (1) gain a better un¬
derstanding of the child’s school program, (2) learn about school activities that
can enhance the child’s growth and development, (3) learn about the child’s per¬
formance and progress, (4) learn about the school’s faculty and support staff,
(5) communicate concerns and ask questions about the child, and (6) both pro¬
vide and receive information that can benefit the child’s development in school
and at home.53 Clark, Starr, and others also point out that the conference should
examine (l)how the student behaves in class (or school); (2) how the student
gets along with classmates; (3) whether the student is working up to potential;
(4) the strengths of the student; (5) the special abilities or interests of the stu¬
dent; (6) ways for the student to improve; (7) how the parent can help the stu¬
dent; and (8) how the parent can help the teacher.54
Directing a Parent Contact by Phone
1. Call a parent by correct name. If unsure: “Is 7. Reinforce parent and teacher responsibility: “I
this John’s mother?” believe it will help if you tell John to keep his
2. Identify yourself and provide neutral focus for hands to himself. Please remind him that
contact: “I’m Mrs. Dawson and I’m calling to failure to do so is the reason he must serve
talk about John’s behavior in math class.” detention tomorrow. In addition, I will attempt
to involve him in more group activities.”
3. State general purpose for contact. Then state
specific behavior(s) in objective, not subjective 8. State if and when a follow-up contact will
terms. Objective (what actually occurred): occur: “I will contact you next week to share
“Today John grabbed a classmate’s book and how John is doing. With your help John can
hid it.” Subjective (your interpretation of what correct his behavior.”
occurred): “John is very immature.” 9. Finish contact on a cooperative note: “Thank
4. Enlist parent support by stating desired you for your time. Please don’t hesitate to call
student behavior: “You need to encourage me if you have questions or concerns.”
John to concentrate on his work in class.”
5. Identify parent’s responsibility: “John
sometimes sleeps in class. Is he staying up
late or going to bed late?”
6. Ask parent for additional ideas: “What ideas Source: Thomas J. Lasley, “Teacher Technicians: A ‘New’
Metaphor for New Teachers,” Action in Teacher Education
do you have that might help me as I work (Spring 1994), 11-19, and adapted from a form developed by
with John?” Charlene Sinclair.
Letters to Parents
Letters to parents fall into three categories. First, letters are sent to make parents
aware of or invite them to participate in certain classroom or school activities or
functions. Second, letters may be sent out regularly, perhaps weekly or bi¬
monthly, to keep parents up to date about their children’s academic work and
behavior. Parents are entitled to and appreciate this communication. Informing
parents and seeking their input and support can help to stop minor problems be¬
fore they become serious. Of course, letters can be about commendable behav¬
ior. Third, letters are written to address specific problems. In such letters prob¬
lems are described, parents are asked for their cooperation in one or more ways,
and a conference might be requested.
Guidelines for Communicating with Parents
Over the years many suggestions have been offered for teachers in conducting a
parent conference and communicating to them. The guidelines below emphasize
the need for (1) establishing a friendly atmosphere, (2) discussing the child’s po¬
tential and limitations in an objective manner, (3) avoiding arguments and re¬
maining calm, and (4) observing professional ethics.
Mechanics of the Parent Conference

1. Make an appointment for the conference well in advance.
2. Provide two or more options for the parent’s visit.
3. If the parent is upset or emotional, let him express his feelings without inter¬
ruptions. Do not become defensive; remain calm.
4. Be objective in analyzing the child’s progress; also, show interest in the
child’s development, growth, and welfare.
5. Explain how you and the parent can work together to help the student.
6. Set up a date for a follow-up conference, if needed.
Discussion About the Child

1. Begin on a positive note.
2. Be truthful and honest.
3. Accept the parent’s feelings.
4. Emphasize the child’s strengths.
5. Be specific about the student’s learning difficulties—use objective, not sub¬
jective, language (e.g., “John has not gotten homework in for five straight
days” rather than “John is irresponsible”).
6. Have ready samples of the student’s class work and homework as well as a
record of his or her test scores, attendance, etc.
7. Be receptive to the parent’s suggestions.
8. Let the parent have the opportunity to talk about his or her concerns.
9. Avoid arguments; avoid pedantic language.
10. Provide constructive suggestions.
11. Be willing to explain activities or changes in the school curriculum that
meet the needs of the child.
12. Close on a positive note, with a plan of action.55
A Cautionary Note
Finally, as you read this chapter and the previous one on testing, we dis¬
cussed a number of alternative assessment procedures. There is a real ten¬
dency to assume that alternative strategies are better strategies. That is not
empirically proven, though it is intuitively logical. The key is for teachers to
be able to use a variety of approaches in order to understand what students
know. In a synthesis of the research on assessment, two educators say it
most powerfully:
The alternative assessment movement is in many ways a breath of fresh air in an at¬
mosphere gone stale over time. We applaud those teachers and administrators who
continue to search for ways to involve students more fully in their own learning to¬
ward a heightened state of consciousness of purpose in learning. Traditional tests
and measures have so many obvious shortcomings that we hardly need go back over
that ground in the closing moments of this chapter. Still, we are equally convinced
that traditional measures have value and that it would be most unwise to abandon
them in spite of the allure of ‘authentic’ approaches. Both are needed. We will make
the controversial statement here that teachers and students simply do not do enough
assessing in school settings. Assessment at its best is the stuff of reflection,
metacognition, communication, and moral judgment. We can thank the alternative
assessment movement for reminding us of that thought. In fact, the movement may
be more about teaching/learning strategies than about assessment.56

We live in groups, and regardless of how competitive or noncompetitive we
want others to be, we will always be evaluating people and making comparisons.
As teachers you are expected to assess your students, and to give them a grade;
however, you need to seek new ways to improve your evaluation system. You
need to temper your judgments with balance and humanness. Give your students
the benefit of the doubt, and try to reduce the anxiety and stress that often ac¬
company the testing and grading process.
Below are questions to consider for improving your own grading system.
1. Does your evaluation system coincide with your instructional objectives?

2. Do you make use of previous evaluation information for purposes of
beginning instruction?
3. Do your students understand your grading system?
4. Does your grading system motivate student learning?
5. Does your grading system adequately represent the content and skills you
expect students to attain?
6. Are your grades derived from multiple sources (tests, quizzes, homework,
papers, projects, class participation, and so forth)? Are these sources
weighted according to importance?
7. Do your students know in advance how grades are to be determined?
8. Is your grading system fair and objective? Does it consider your students’
abilities, previous achievement, and maturity level?
9. Does your grading system enable students to demonstrate their progress and
capabilities?
10. Are you careful not to use artificial bias or arbitrary methods of grading?
Are you careful to encourage effort and personal achievement?
11. Does your grading system include authentic, real-world tasks?
12. Is your grading system economical in terms of teacher time?
13. Do you use both formative and summative evaluation techniques? Are you
willing to modify or reteach content, based on evaluation results?
14. Does your grading system coincide with school policy or school guidelines?
15. Are there provisions in your grading policy for students who have special
needs and are either fully included or mainstreamed in your class?
Summary
1. The reasons for evaluating students include motivating students, providing
feedback to students and teachers, informing parents, and making
instructional decisions.
2. Four types of evaluation are placement, diagnostic, formative, and
summative.
3. Sources of information for evaluation in addition to tests and quizzes include
classroom discussion and activity, homework, notebooks, reports, and
research papers, student journals, peer evaluations, and portfolios.
4. Grades are based on absolute or relative scales. Alternative grading practices
include contracts, mastery grading, and grades for effort and progress.
5. The conventional report card emphasizes basic subject areas and uses letters
to designate grades; more contemporary methods of reporting include
mastery and progress reports, statements about progress, and performance
assessments.
6. The cumulative record is a legal document that includes important data about
the student’s performance and behavior in school; it follows students
throughout their school career.
7. Communication with parents takes place in the form of report cards,
conferences, and letters.
1. Can a teacher be objective in evaluating student performance? Explain.
2. How would you distinguish between placement, diagnostic, formative, and
summative evaluation?
3. How might you improve your own grading practices compared to those of
teachers you had in school?
4. What are the differences between absolute and relative standards in grading?
Which do you prefer? Why?
5. Why is it desirable to use several sources of data when arriving at a grade for
a student?
Things to Do
1. From your past school experiences, list some examples of inappropriate
evaluation techniques.
2. List and discuss criteria for good grading.
3. Outline a grading procedure you expect to follow as a teacher.
4. Visit local schools, obtain sample report cards, and discuss their major
characteristics in class. Analyze how various report cards differ.
5. Pretend you are about to have a general conference with a parent for the first
time. Discuss with your classmates what topics might be important to include
in a conference.
Airasian, Peter. Classroom Assessment, 3rd ed. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1997. A
practical text that examines how assessment and grading procedures can be used to
enhance instruction and learning.
Bloom, Benjamin S., J. Thomas Hastings, and George F. Madaus. Handbook of
Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning. New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1971. A mammoth-size text that can serve as an excellent source for technical
questions about evaluation.
Goodwin, A. L. Assessment for Equity and Inclusion. New York: Routledge, 1997. An
overview of how assessment can be used to enhance the performance of all students
in schools.
Gronlund, Norman E., Assessment of Student Achievement, 6th ed. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998. An appreciation of the advantages and disadvantages of
various tests and evaluation procedures.
Herman, Joan L., Pamela R. Aschbacher, and Lynn Winters. A Practical Guide to
Alternative Assessment. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and
Curriculum Development, 1992. A practical guide for creating and using alternative
assessments.
Mehrens, William A., and Irving J. Lehmann. Measurement and Evaluation in Education
and Psychology, 4th ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1991. An important
reference on testing and evaluation that is both theoretical and practical,
comprehensive but easy to read.
Popham, W. James. Classroom Assessment, 2nd ed. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1999. Various models and strategies for evaluating student outcomes.
Key Terms
absolute standards 471 cumulative record 479
computerized record-keeper 477 diagnostic evaluation 454
contract grading 474 formal evaluation 456
formative evaluation 454 portfolios 464

informal evaluation 456 progress report card 476
mastery grading 474 relative grading 472
mastery report card 476 summative evaluation 455
placement evaluation 453
End Notes
1. Vito Perrone, Expanding Student Assessment (Alexandria, VA: Association for
Supervision and Curriculum Development, 1991); Blaine R. Worthen, Karl R.
White, and Xitao Fan, Measurement and Assessment in the Schools, 2nd ed.
(New York: Longman, 1999); Vito Perrone, “Toward an Education of
Consequence: Connecting Assessment, Teaching, and Learning,” in Assessment
for Equity and Inclusion, ed. A. Lin Goodwin (New York: Routledge, 1997),
305-315.
2. Philip W. Jackson, Life in Classrooms, 2nd ed. (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1990), 19.
3. Bruce W. Tuckman, Measuring Educational Outcomes, 2nd ed. (San Diego:
Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1985), 300. Also see Tuckman, “The Essay Test:
A Look at the Advantages and Disadvantages,” NASSP Bulletin (October 1993):
20-27.
4. Norman E. Gronlund and Robert L. Linn, Measurement and Evaluation in Teaching,
6th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1990).
5. Michael Scriven, “The Methodology of Evaluation,” in Perspectives on Curriculum
Evaluation, ed. R. W. Tyler, R. Gagne, and M. Scriven (Chicago: Rand McNally,
1967), 39-83.
6. Benjamin S. Bloom, J. Thomas Hastings, and George F. Madaus, Handbook on
Formative and Summative Evaluation of Student Learning (New York: McGraw-
Hill, 1971), 20.
7. Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam, “Inside the Black Box: Raising Standards Through
Classroom Assessment,” Phi Delta Kappan (October 1998): 140.
8. Norman E. Gronlund, Assessment of Student Achievement, 6th ed. (Needham
Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1998); Robert M. Thorndike et al., Measurement and
Evaluation in Psychology and Education, 5th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1991).
9. Jackson, Life in Classrooms, 19.
10. Ibid., p. 20.
11. Nancy S. Cole, “Conceptions of Educational Achievement,” Educational Researcher
(April 1990): 2-7; Penelope L. Peterson, “Toward an Understanding of What
We Know About School Learning,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1993):
319-326.
12. Benjamin S. Bloom, George F. Madaus, and J. Thomas Hastings, Evaluation to
Improve Learning (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1981); Tom Kubiszyn and Gary
Borich, Educational Testing and Measurement, 5th ed. (New York: Longman,
1996); and Merlin C. Wittrock and Eva L. Baker, Testing and Cognition (Needham
13. Paul Black and Dylan Wiliam, “Inside the Black Box,” 143-144.
14. Herbert J. Walberg, “Homework’s Powerful Effects on Learning,” Educational

Leadership (April 1985): 75-79; Melanie F. Sikorski, Richard P. Niemiec, and
Herbert J. Walberg, “Best Teaching Practices,” NASSP Bulletin (April 1994): 50-54.
15. M. R. Moran, B. S. Myles, and M. S. Shank, “Variables in Eliciting Writing
Samples,” Educational Measurement (Fall 1991): 23-26.
16. Kenneth A. Kiewra, “Providing the Instructor’s Notes: An Effective Addition to
Student Note-Taking,” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1985): 33-39; Kenneth A.
Kiewra, “Aids to Lecture Learning,” Educational Psychologist (Winter 1991):
37-53.
17. David W. Johnson and Roger J. Johnson, Learning Together and Alone, 5th ed.
18. Elizabeth G. Cohen, Designing Groupwork (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1994); David A. Jacobsen et al., Methods for Teaching, 5th ed.
(Columbus OH: Merrill, 1999). Also see Johnson and Johnson, “Critical Thinking
Through Structured Controversy,” Educational Leadership (May 1988): 58-64.
19. Jan La Bonty and Kathy Everts-Danielson, “Alternative Assessment and Feedback in
Methods Courses,” ClearingHouse (January-February 1992): 186-190; Allan C.
Omstein, “Assessing Without Testing,” Elementary Principal (January 1994):
16-18.
20. David Johnson and Frank P. Johnson, Joining Together: Group Theory and Group
Skills, 6th ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1997).
21. F. Leon Paulson, Pearl R. Paulson, and Carol A. Meyer, “What Makes a Portfolio a
Portfolio?” Educational Leadership (February 1991): 60-64; Richard J. Shavelson
and Gail P. Baxter, “What We’ve Learned About Assessing Hands-On Science,”
Educational Leadership (May 1992): 20-25.
22. Judith A. Arter and Vicki Spandel, “Using Portfolios of Student Work in Instruction
and Assessment,” Educational Measurement (Spring 1992): 36—44; Doris Sperling,
“What’s Worth an ‘A’?: Setting Standards Together,” Educational Leadership
(February 1993): 73-75; Lynda A. Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom (Columbus,
OH: Merrill, 1998).
23. Darlene M. Frazier and F. Leon Paulson, “How Portfolios Motivate Reluctant
Workers,” Educational Leadership (May 1992): 62-65; Elizabeth A. Herbert,
“Portfolios Invite Reflection from Students and Staff,” Educational Leadership
(May 1992): 58-61.
24. Arter and Spandel, “Using Portfolios of Student Work in Instruction and
Assessment”; Richard J. Stiggins, “Relevant Classroom Assessment Trainers for
Teachers,” Educational Measurement (Spring 1991): 7-12.
25. Julie Heiman Savitch and Leslie Ann Serling, “I Wouldn’t Know I Was Smart If I
Didn’t Come to Class,” in Assessment for Equity and Inclusion, ed. A. Lin Goodwin
(New York: Routledge, 1997), 157-158.
26. Robert L. Ebel and David A. Frisbie, Essentials of Educational Measurement, 5th
ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1991); Gary Natriello and James
McPartland, Adjustments in High School Teachers’ Grading Criteria (Baltimore:
John Hopkins University Press, 1988).
27. Ellis D. Evans and Ruth A. Engleberg, “Student Perceptions of School Grading,”
Journal of Research and Development in Education (Winter 1988): 45-54; Mary A.
Lundeberg and Paul W. Fox, “Do Laboratory Findings on Test Expectancy
Generalize to Classroom Outcomes?” Review of Educational Research (Spring
1991): 94-106.
28. William W. Cooley, “State-Wide Student Assessment,” Educational Measurement

(Winter 1991): 3-6; Gary Natriello, “The Impact of Evaluation Processes on
Students,” Educational Psychologist (Spring 1987): 155-175.
29. Robert E. Slavin, “Classroom Reward Structure: An Analytical and Practical
Review,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1977): 633-650; Robert E. Slavin,
“Synthesis of Research on Cooperative Learning,” Educational Leadership
(February 1991): 71-82.
30. Neville Bennett and Charles Desforges, “Matching Classroom Tasks to Students’
Attainments,” Elementary School Journal (January 1988): 221-234; W. James
Popham, “Appropriateness of Teachers’ Test-Preparation,” Educational
Measurement (Winter 1991): 12-15; and Robert E. Stake, “The Teacher,
Standardized Testing, and Prospects of Revolution,” Phi Delta Kappan (November
1991): 243-247.
31. Robert L. Bangert-Drowns, “The Instructional Effect of Feedback in Test-Like
Events,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1991): 213-238; Gary Natriello
and Edward L. McDill, “Performance Standards, Student Effort on Homework and
Academic Achievement,” Sociology of Education (January 1986): 18-31; and Alvin
C. Rose, “Homework Preferences,” NASSP Bulletin (March 1994): 65-75.
32. Gary Natriello, “The Impact of Evaluation Processes on Students”; Educational
Psychologist (Spring 1987): 155-75; Marv Nottingham, “Grading Practices—
Watching out for Land Mines,” NASSP Bulletin (April 1988): 24-28.
33. Robert F. Madgic, “The Point System of Grading: A Critical Appraisal,” NASSP
Bulletin (April 1988): 29-34; Margot A. Olson, “The Distortion of the Grading
System,” ClearingHouse (November-December 1990): 77-79.
34. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need (New York: Doubleday, 1996), 181-182.
35. David A. Payne, Measuring and Evaluating Educational Outcomes (New York:
Macmillan, 1992).
36. Allan C. Ornstein, “Grading Practices and Policies,” NASSP Bulletin (April 1994):
55-64.
37. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Contemporary Educational Psychology, 5th
ed. (New York: Longman, 1995), 793.
38. William A. Mehrens and Irvin J. Lehmann, Measurement and Evaluation in
Education and Psychology, 4th ed. (Fort Worth, TX: Holt, Rinehart & Winston,
1991); Payne, Measuring and Evaluating Educational Outcomes.
39. Carole Ames, “Motivation: What Teachers Need to Know,” Teachers College
Record (Spring 1991): 409-421; Pamela A. Moss, “Shifting Consequences of
Validity in Educational Measurement,” Review of Educational Research (Fall 1992):
229-258; Baloche, The Cooperative Classroom.
40. Good and Brophy, Contemporary Educational Psychology.
41. Association of Teachers of Social Studies in the City of New York, A Handbook for
the Teaching of Social Studies, 2nd ed. (Boston: Allyn & Bacon, 1985).
42. Lundeberg and Fox, “Do Laboratory Findings on Test Expectancy Generalize to
Classroom Outcomes?”; Popham, “Appropriateness of Teachers’ Test
Preparation”; Herbert C. Rudman, “Classroom Instruction and Tests: What
Do We Really Know About the Link?” NASSP Bulletin (February 1987): 3-22;
John W. Young, “Grade Adjustment Methods,” Review of Educational Research
(Summer 1993): 151-166.
43. Benjamin S. Bloom, “The 2 Sigma Problem: The Search for Methods of Instruction
as Effective as One-to-One Tutoring,” Educational Researcher (June-July 1984):
4-16; Robert E. Slavin, “Grouping for Instruction in the Elementary School,”

Educational Psychologist (Spring 1987): 109-128; Robert E. Slavin, “On Mastery
Learning and Mastery Teaching,” Educational Leadership (April 1989): 77-79.
44. Richard Arends, Learning to Teach 4th ed. (Boston: McGraw-Hill, 1998), 228.
45. S. Alan Cohen and Joan S. Hyman, “Can Fantasies Become Facts?” NASSP Bulletin
(Spring 1991): 20-23; George F. Madaus, “The Effect of Important Tests on
Students,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1991): 226-231.
46. Harold Stevenson and James W. Stigler, The Learning Gap (New York: Summit
Books, 1992): 97-98.
47. Edward L. Vockell and Donald Kopenec, “Record Keeping Without Tears,”
ClearingHouse (April 1989): 355-359.
48. Ibid.
49. Allan C. Omstein, “The Nature of Grading,” ClearingHouse (April 1989): 365-369.
50. Joyce L. Epstein, “Parents’ Reactions to Teacher Practices of Parent Involvement,”
Elementary School Journal (January 1986): 277-294; Joyce L. Epstein and Susan L.
Dauber, “School Programs and Teacher Practices of Parent Involvement in Inner-
City Elementary and Middle Schools,” Elementary School Journal (January 1991):
289-305.
51. Joyce L. Epstein, “How Do We Improve Programs for Parent Involvement?”
Educational Horizons (Winter 1988): 58-59; Joyce L. Epstein, “Parent Involvement:
What Research Says to Administrators,” Education and Urban Society (February
1987): 119-136.
52. James P. Comer and Norris M. Haynes, “Parent Involvement in Schools,”
Elementary School Journal (January 1991): 271-277; Margaret Gredler, Classroom
Assessment and Learning (New York: Longman, 1999). Judith A. Vandegrift and
Andrea L. Greene, “Rethinking Parent Involvement,” Educational Leadership
(September 1992): 57-59.
53. Jeffrey L. Gelfer and Peggy B. Perkins, “Effective Communication with Parents,”
Childhood Education (October 1987): 19-22.
54. Leonard H. Clark and Irving S. Starr, Secondary and Middle School Teaching
Methods, 5th ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1986); Richard Kindsvatter, William
Wilen, and Margaret Ishler, Dynamics of Effective Teaching, 3rd ed. (New York:
Longman, 1996).
55. Allan C. Omstein, “Parent Conferencing: Recommendations and Guidelines,” Kappa
Delta Phi Record (Winter 1990): 55-57.
56. Arthur K. Ellis and Jeffrey T. Fonts, Research on Educational Innovations
(Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education, 1997), 241.
SECTION
HI Professional Growth
In the first two sections of this text, we outlined the relationship of the art and
science of teaching (Section I) and the skills of teachers (Section II) who seek to
create best practice for students. In this section (Chapter 12), we look ahead for
you and for the profession. Good teachers necessarily understand that teaching is
complex. And to deal with that complexity, they must find ways to push them¬
selves academically and pedagogically.
Professional growth requires that you understand what your professional ed¬
ucation experiences (your teacher education program) did and did not do for
you. You must then assess how you can grow so that your abilities are ex¬
panded, not encapsulated. We begin Chapter 12 with a discussion of the prob¬
lems facing, and the supports that should be available to, the beginning teacher.
Then we describe the variety of assessments that are now used. Finally, we close
with a description of collegial associations. Most teachers think of these as the
AFT or NEA, but other associations are just as important, in particular those that
are related to the subject, grade level, (or in some cases the special-type student)
you are teaching.
Your professional preparation program provided you with many ideas, but
for those ideas to have power, they need to be used. Similarly, this book docu¬
ments a lot of what is now known about teaching. And even as this book is
being written new data are emerging. For example, in the 1960s, James Coleman
argued that family socioeconomic status was the strongest influence on student
achievement. In the 1990s some researchers began to challenge that notion.
William Sanders (University of Tennessee) asserted teachers are an equally im¬
portant factor influencing student achievement. What you do in the classroom
does make a difference for students. And, what you do to sustain your profes¬
sional growth will ultimately influence how students view their own learning.
c H A P T E R
Professional Growth

Reflecting on the extent to which the learning goals were met. (Dl)
Building professional relationships with colleagues to share teaching insights
and to coordinate learning activities for students. (D3)

The teacher is a reflective practitioner who continually evaluates the effects of
his/her choices and actions on others (students, parents, and other professionals
in the learning community) and who actively seeks out opportunities to grow
professionally. (Principle 9)
The teacher fosters relationships with school colleagues, parents, and agencies
in the larger community to support students’ learning and well-being.
(Principle 10)
Focusing Questions
1. Why is reform of teacher education necessary?
2. What are some methods for improving the support and learning opportunities
for teachers during the first few years of their teaching career?
3. How can students’ evaluation of their teachers be implemented?
4. How does self-evaluation improve a person’s capabilities as a teacher? What
methods of self-evaluation might a teacher use?
5. How do peer evaluation and supervisory evaluation contribute to evaluating
teachers?
495
496 Section III Professional Growth
6. What sources and products can supply information to be used for teacher
evaluation and growth?
7. How do professional organizations serve teachers?
You can always improve your teaching. The extent of improvement is related to
how much improvement you think you need and how hard you work at it. Be¬
ginning teachers will encounter some problems and frustrations, but they should
also learn from their experiences and improve their technical skills over time.
If you hope to be an effective teacher and enjoy your work, not only will
you need to be well prepared for each day’s lessons, but also you will need to
possess a variety of skills in working with students, colleagues, supervisors, and
parents. You will need a general education, knowledge of the subject you teach,
and training in teaching your grade level and type of student. The preceding
chapters in this book dealt with methods to prepare you for teaching. This final
chapter is intended to help you grow as a teacher.
Reforming Teacher Education

All professions have a monopoly on certain knowledge that separates their
members from the general public and allows them to exercise control over their
vocation. Indeed, one social critic once observed that professions were nothing
more than a conspiracy against the laity. Members of a profession have mastered
a body of knowledge that establishes their expertise and protects the public from
quacks, untrained amateurs, and special interest groups. There is, however, no
agreed-upon specialized body of knowledge that is “education” or “teaching.”1
Whereas the behavioral sciences, physical sciences, and other professions such
as law and medicine are guided by extensive rules of procedure and established
methodologies, education has no agreed-upon set of procedures to guide teach¬
ers in the classroom.
As a result, many nonexperts talk about education as if they were experts_
and we end up with a great deal of conflicting and sometimes negative conversa¬
tion about teachers and the pedagogy of teaching. The content of teacher educa¬
tion courses varies from state to state and among teacher training institutions
within states, and even within specific departments and schools of education.
According to Kenneth Sirotnik, “two students in the same program [at the same
college or university] could end up with very different experiences.”2
In short, there seems to be no overriding philosophy or policy in teacher ed¬
ucation programs, no agreed-upon pedagogy that must be learned by all candi¬
dates, and no set of criteria for making professional decisions in classrooms. In¬
deed, Chapters 3 to 12 of this text begin with both the Pathwise (PRAXIS
Series) and INTASC criteria and principles because different states emphasize
different skills. Nearly everyone has her or his own values, philosophy, and
views about pedagogy relating to teaching. Insight and intuition—what in
Chapter 12 Professional Growth \91
Chapter 1 we called the “art of teaching”—tend to rule, not scientific procedures

as in the case of medicine or professional procedures as in the case of law.
At the very least, there should be some agreement nationally on the mix of
teacher education courses devoted to liberal education, subject matter specializa¬
tion, and professional educational knowledge. There should be some agreement
on the proper mix of educational foundation courses: what basics should be in¬
cluded, whether they should be taught early in the students’ program or inte¬
grated throughout the teacher training curriculum, and whether such basic
courses should deal with timeless historical or philosophical issues (e.g., the
broad purposes and functions of schooling in society) or whether they should
deal with immediate or current issues such as women’s roles in education, sex
education and AIDS, or cultural diversity as part of the K-12 curriculum. There
should also be agreement on pedagogy courses: whether educational psychology
should be taught as a foundations or a pedagogical course; whether a general
methods and subject-based methods course are both appropriate, or whether we
need only one; whether there are generic core behaviors and methods common
to effective teaching, or whether each content or subject area has its own knowl¬
edge structures and pedagogy. Who should supervise student teachers? Tenured
faculty members (junior or senior), part-time clinical professors (many of whom
are retired teachers), experienced practicing teachers, graduate students, or in
some institutions Pathwise-trained classroom teachers become campus supervi¬
sors for the student teachers assigned to their classrooms. Although most depart¬
ments and education schools continuously formulate committees to revise and
improve teacher education programs and continuously debate the course content
in foundations and pedagogy, most decisions are still made, according to Donna
Kagan, “on the basis of tradition, politics, or the relative persuasiveness of indi¬
vidual faculty members.”3
The result is sometimes a hodgepodge of professional courses packaged to¬
gether as a program, driven by state guidelines, and varying from one teacher-
preparation institution to another. Although some proponents might argue this is
an unfair criticism of teacher education, mandates to improve and better coordi¬
nate teacher education efforts (for example, as outlined by the Project 30 Al¬
liance, Holmes Partnership, and Renaissance Group) still go largely unheeded.
The debate over teacher education courses goes back to the 1960s, when
James Conant pointed out that professors of arts and science and professors of
education were at war with each other over several important questions: the
proper mix of courses, who should teach these courses (professors in content
areas or professors of education), and even whether courses in pedagogy were
worthwhile at all.4 James Koemer described the problem further in his highly
critical book The Miseducation of American Teachers. Koerner argued that by
requiring too many education courses—as many as 60 hours at state teacher
colleges—and by making these courses too “soft,” colleges of education were
producing teachers versed in pedagogy at the expense of academic content.5
Both critics argued that the academic quality of teachers needed to be
upgraded.
Quality of teacher training was still a problem in the 1970s and 1980s, as a
substantial percentage of prospective teachers, especially minorities, were un¬
able to demonstrate minimum competency on basic skills and writing tests.
Reports from the early 1990s show that, for the first time since the late
1980s and 1940s, the average SAT scores of prospective teachers were slightly
above the national average for entering college students and that the perfor¬
mance of education and noneducation students in general education coursework
is quite similar.6 But in 1998, Massachusetts was the focus of controversy be¬
cause of the poor performance of prospective teachers on a set of standardized
basic-skills examinations: more than 50 percent failed.
Although Conant and Koemer influenced the number of required education
courses and made us aware of academic standards among teacher candidates, the
controversy continues. The 1960s critics were people like James Koemer. The
1990s critics were people like John Silber of Massachusetts, who has been vitri¬
olic in his attacks on teacher quality and teacher education. Even traditional edu¬
cation advocates are joining the debate. For example, John Goodlad and his col¬
leagues point to a host of shortcomings in teacher education; namely, that
departments and schools of education are fraught with instability, they still
search for institutional identity, their research base is limited, their programs are
disjointed, and professors of education too easily yield to state guidelines and
school district expectations of what constitutes good teaching.7 In short, they are
not in control of their own mission or policies. More recently, E. D. Hirsch,
wrote:
The very thing which Horace Mann called upon teacher-training schools to do and
which the American public assumes that such schools are doing—the teaching of ef¬
fective pedagogy—is a domain of training that, according to both sympathetic and
unsympathetic observers, gets short shrift in our education schools. Instead, it is
mainly theory, and highly questionable theory at that, which gets more attention in
education-school courses. That point should be stated even more strongly: not only
do our teacher-training schools decline to put a premium on nuts-and-bolts class¬
room effectiveness, but they promote ideas that actually run counter to consensus re¬
search into teacher effectiveness.8
Goodlad makes nineteen recommendations, what he called “postulates,” for

improving teacher education. They center around screening candidates on the
basis of moral and ethical decency, establishing well-defined program proce¬
dures and measurable outcomes, enhancing research and reflective practices, ex¬
panding the education faculty to include the entire university and public schools,
resisting curriculum regulation by external authorities, and taking responsibility
for the induction year of teaching.9 Bold new suggestions? Although there are
differences in emphasis, much of what Goodlad says has been said before—his
recommendations reflect the findings of Conant and Koerner and present-day re¬
form movements such as the Carnegie Task Force on Teachers, Holmes Partner¬
ship, Renaissance Group, and Project 30 Alliance.’0
The problem of teacher education is an ongoing national concern and needs
to be addressed by establishing national standards for teacher preparation. The
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education (NCATE) has set stan-
dards that specify the types of “inputs” needed in programs and the qualifica¬
tions of the faculty who teach in these programs. However, in 1998 only 42 per¬
cent of the 1,200 colleges involved in preparing teachers were accredited by
NCATE.11 As this textbook is being written, NCATE is moving away from
input standards to performance standards. That focus represents an important
new emphasis for programs.
Many states have collaborative agreements with NCATE, but teacher-training
institutions can still receive state approval even if they are not accredited by
NCATE. Moreover, the graduates of non-NCATE-accredited institutions find jobs
just as readily as graduates of accredited institutions. The current director of
NCATE, Arthur Wise, hopes to remedy this confusing situation by making all
teacher-education institutions measure up to more rigorous national standards by a
single accrediting organization—and both the American Federation of Teachers
Enhancing Teacher Professionalism
Arthur E. Wise
Chief Executive Officer
National Council for Accreditation of Teacher Education
Teacher professionalism demands: 2. Reform of state licensing so that prospective

teachers must demonstrate that they have
1. Reform of teacher education so that
acquired the knowledge and developed the
prospective teachers are well-educated and
skills necessary to practice independently.
knowledgeable about teaching. To ensure a
Several states are now developing
qualified teacher in every classroom:
performance-oriented licensing systems.
All teachers will receive a liberal arts
3. Reform of schools so that they can
education, know the subjects they teach as
accommodate the professional practice of
well as the professional and pedagogical
teaching. Increasingly, this change is seen as
knowledge bases of teaching, and be able to
required teacher leadership in school planning
apply that knowledge in daily practice.
and decision-making.
All teachers will be graduates of nationally
4. Accreditation, state licensing, and advanced
accredited schools of education. Professional
certification standards will complement and
accreditation provides these benefits:
reinforce each other. Teaching professionals
—assures the public and prospective teachers
will be recognized through rigorous licensing
that accredited institutions have met
and advanced certification processes
standards set by professionals in the field
developed by the state and private agencies.
—encourages excellence in schools of
The result will be a system of quality
education
assurance in which accreditation is
—provides a common set of national
compatible with performance-based licensing
standards for the preparation of teachers
and advanced certification.
and other school specialists
and National Education Association support this idea.12 Nonetheless, the confu¬
sion will persist until educators agree on which candidates will most likely suc¬
ceed as teachers (what combination of variables predict teacher success?), the
basic body of professional knowledge that teachers need to learn (what founda¬
tions and pedagogical courses are needed in order to teach?), and the clinical and
field experiences a beginning teacher needs before taking on their own classroom.
We conclude this section with an analysis provided by Linda Darling-
Hammond, who is one of the staunchest and most articulate defenders of teacher
education programming. Darling-Hammond writes:
Other research confirms the effectiveness of teachers who comprehend their subject
matter, understand student learning and development, know a wide range of teach¬
ing methods, and have developed their skills under expert guidance in clinical set¬
tings. Over two hundred studies illustrating the positive effects of teacher education
contradict the long-standing myth that “teachers are born and not made.” This re¬
search also makes it clear that teachers need to know much more than the subject
matter they teach. Teachers who have had more opportunity to study the processes
of learning and teaching are more highly rated and successful with students in fields
from early childhood and elementary education to mathematics, science, and voca¬
tional education.13
Helping the Beginning Teacher

What are the general needs of the beginning teacher? Most schools provide
teacher orientation, but many beginning teachers still have problems adjusting.
A review of the research on problems of beginning teachers shows that feelings
of isolation, poor understanding of what is expected of them, work load and
extra assignments that they were unprepared to handle, lack of supplies, materi¬
als, or equipment, poor physical facilities and lack of support or help from expe¬
rienced teachers or supervisors contribute to their feelings of frustration and fail¬
ure.14 The result is that many potentially talented and creative teachers find
teaching unrewarding and difficult, especially in inner-city schools, and nearly
50 percent of newly hired teachers leave the profession within five years.15
Problems of Education Students and Beginning Teachers
Frances Fuller suggests that there is a progression in the types of concerns teach¬
ers have. Education students are characterized by “nonconcem”; student teach¬
ers are characterized by increased concern”; beginning teachers are preoccu¬
pied with “survival concerns”; and experienced teachers focus on the tasks and
problems of teachers (they have gotten past initial survival) and are more in¬
volved with “self’ concerns.16
Most people have concerns about the unknown when they embark on a new
job, especially their first job but a number of factors can contribute to the in¬
creasing concerns and anxieties student teachers have about the difficulty of
teaching. The content of their introductory teacher education courses might not
Becoming a Teacher
Julian C. Stanley
Former Director of the Study
of Mathematically Precocious Youth (SMPY) and
Professor of Psychology at Johns Hopkins University
I entered teaching during the Great Depression, per¬ half-year high school teaching career, which ended
haps chiefly because of having graduated from a when World War II called me into service, I taught
state teachers college. The year was 1937, and I was ten different subjects, including spelling, remedial
barely 19 years old. Teaching positions for high mathematics, and English.
school chemistry teachers were not scarce, but the Other aspects were strange. We had only six
ones offered me paid little: $75 per month for seven days of sick leave each school year at half pay, so
months in a Georgia village, and the munificent sum my only absence in 810 days was for three consec¬
of $120 per month for ten months in the county sur¬ utive days of influenza. Women could not teach in
rounding Atlanta. Of course, those dollars were high school initially unless they were in home eco¬
worth far more than now. I began in the lowest- nomics or library science; they had to start in ele¬
socioeconomic-level high school the Atlanta area mentary schools, no matter what their college
had—only white students. major had been. One I knew served six years there,
Imagine my surprise when, shortly before school at far less pay than high school teachers received,
started, the assistant principal told me I would be teach¬ before getting to teach mathematics in the same
ing commercial arithmetic to ninth-graders and general high schools that had hired me straight out of
business training to eighth graders, subjects of which I college.
(who had graduated in the “classical” curriculum from Women could not even get married and continue
another high school in the same Fulton County system) to teach in this school system. Fortunately, these ut¬
had never heard. Other teachers “owned” chemistry terly sexist rules were changed after the war.
and physics. I was even more disconcerted to discover Maybe in the “good old days” discipline was con¬
that about two-thirds of my arithmetic students had siderably easier than it is in some schools nowadays,
failed the subject the preceding year. but in many respects teaching is more attractive now
I somehow managed to survive the nine months than then. Also, the type of college I attended, which
(including five classes, management of large study prepared only for teaching, has virtually vanished.
halls, and many other duties). During my four-and-a- You have more choices. Consider them well!
prepare teachers for the realities of the job. And age and optimism might be in¬
versely related. It takes a few years of seasoning to face reality, and college stu¬
dents who have not yet started student teaching tend to have overconfidence in
their abilities and to believe that they are better equipped than others (older peo¬
ple) to be teachers. After all, most young students can reasonably criticize many
former teachers and expect to do a better job.
In a recent study, education students and beginning teachers were asked to
rank problems they expected. Although there was some agreement between the
groups in the ranking of important problems, there was significant disagreement
on the perceived difficulty of the problems. First-year teachers consistently

ranked their perceived problems as significantly more difficult than education
students.17 A logical deduction is that experience had brought them up against
the challenges posed by day-to-day work in the classroom—problems they were
no longer as optimistic about handling as they might have been as preservice
teachers. The major problems they identified centered around workload, improv¬
ing the academic performance of low-achieving students, dealing with misbe¬
havior and maintaining control, and adapting materials to the needs and abilities
of their students.
Numerous reports over the last several years document how the realities
of the school and classrooms can shock new teachers. Organized programs
and internal support systems for beginning teachers are scarce.18 Mentor rela¬
tions between experienced and beginning teachers and support from col¬
leagues for continued learning and professional development are still excep¬
tions, not the rule, even though they are being mandated by many states and
school districts.
Without question, there is recognition that the first two or three years of
teaching are critical in developing teachers’ capabilities, and that beginning
teachers should not be left alone to sink or swim. Several state education agen¬
cies have recently developed internship or mentoring programs for new teachers;
other states have increased staff development activities.19 However, most impor¬
tant for the professional development of new teachers are the internal support
systems and strategies that the schools adopt—that is, the daily support activities
and continual learning opportunities.
We need to identify and address the common causes of failure for new
teachers. One school administrator has identified six general causes of failure
that the schools should rectify.
1. Assignment to difficult classes. “Good” courses and “good” students are

assigned to teachers on the basis of seniority; beginning teachers are
given the “dregs” or “leftovers” to teach. A better balance is required
(actually the opposite assignments) to permit beginning teachers to
survive and learn from their mistakes in the classroom.
2. Isolation of classrooms from colleagues and supervisors. The classrooms
farthest from the central office are usually assigned to beginning
teachers. Isolating the new teacher from experienced teachers contributes
to failure. Beginning teachers need to be assigned to rooms near the main
office and near experienced teachers to encourage daily communication.
3. Poor physical facilities. Classrooms, room fixtures, and equipment are
usually assigned on the basis of seniority. Providing the leftovers to new
teachers is damaging to morale. A more equitable assignment of
facilities is needed.
4. Burdensome extra class assignments. Extra class duties are cited as a
source of ill feelings more than any other item. New teachers are often
assigned burdensome or tough assignments that they were unprepared for
and did not expect as teachers, such as recess duty, hall patrol, cafeteria
patrol, or study hall duties. Assignments given to beginning teachers

should not be so burdensome that they affect the quality of their teaching.
5. Lack of understanding of the school’s expectations. School officials
should clarify the school’s goals and priorities and the responsibilities of
teachers early in the first term. Although orientation sessions and written
guides are usually provided, the problem seems to be the dearth of
continuing communication and reinforcement as the teacher progresses
through various stages of role acquisition.
6. Inadequate supervision. Most problems of beginning teachers could be
either prevented or curtailed with proper supervision. Supervision often
consists of only two or three formal visits a year to the classroom and
possibly a few informal contacts and one or two meetings. The need is
for increased supervisory contact, both formal and informal, so that
assistance is provided regularly in the early stages of the teacher’s
career.20
The problems that teachers confront in classrooms remain relatively stable.

Even though slight changes have occurred over time in the types of problems,
the frequency of the specific problems remains relatively stable. Some problem
behaviors of students have increased at certain levels (e.g., 17 percent more ele¬
mentary teachers in 1997 than in 1984 perceive students as disrupting class), but
the same figures are not true at other grade levels. In essence, the types of prob¬
lems that teachers face typically are contextually specific.
Teaching Inner-City and Culturally Diverse Students

Teachers assigned to inner-city schools tend to feel significantly greater anxiety,
even symptoms of exhaustion and battle fatigue. They deal with classroom man¬
agement and discipline problems, the inability of many of their students to grasp
basic fundamentals, especially reading and writing, the nonresponsiveness or
nonavailability of parents, and lack of meaningful assistance from supervisors
and administrators.
Ornstein and Levine summarized forty years of research aimed at under¬
standing and overcoming the problems of teaching low-achieving and inner-city
students.21 They categorized problems into ten classroom realities, illustrated in
Table 12.1. The first five are teacher-related, and the remaining five are student-
or school-related. The inference is that the finger of responsibility should not be
pointed at any one group or one person. The researchers provide six teacher edu¬
cation solutions for the teacher-related problems: (1) increase the number of mi¬
nority education students, (2) improve instructional strategies for low achievers,
(3) permit student teachers more opportunity to work with an effective cooperat¬
ing teacher, (4) promote greater assistance to teachers during the first three years
(intern period) of teaching, (5) put greater emphasis on classroom management
techniques during the preservice and intern periods, and (6) examine several
teacher effectiveness models in the preservice and intern stages of education.22
The increasingly rich diversity of multicultural/multilinguistic students has
created a challenge for teacher education. Many beginning teachers prefer to
Table 12.1 Realities of Teaching Inner-City, Low-Achieving Students
Realities
l- Differences in teacher-student backgrounds. Teachers with middle-class backgrounds may have

difficulty understanding and motivating inner-city students; this may be particularly salient with
white teachers working with minority students.
2. Teacher perceptions of student inadequacy. Many teachers working with inner-city students
conclude from achievement test scores that large numbers are incapable of learning; hence the
teachers may work less hard to improve student performance.
3. Low standards of performance. By the time many inner-city students reach middle or senior
high school, low performance has become the norm, expected and accepted by both students and
teachers.
4. Ineffective instructional grouping. Low achievers are frequently grouped into slow classes (or
sub-grouped in regular classes) where instruction proceeds at a slow rate.
5. Poor teaching conditions. As inner-city students fall further behind academically, and as both
they and their teachers experience frustration and disappointment, classroom behavior problems
increase and teachers find working conditions more difficult; the words “battle fatigue,” “battle
pay, and blackboard jungle” have been used in the literature to describe teaching conditions in
inner-city schools.
6. Differences between parental and school norms. Differences between the way the inner-city
home (physical punishment) and the school (internalization of norms) punish, shame, or control
youngsters make it difficult for many students to follow school rules or for teachers to enforce
them.
7. Lack of previous success in school. Lack of academic success in earlier grades hinders learning
more difficult material and damages a student’s perception of what he or she is capable of
learning.
8. Negative peer pressure. High-achieving inner-city students are frequently ridiculed and rejected
by peers for accepting the middle-class school norms.
9. Inappropriate instruction. As inner-city students proceed through school, academic tasks and
concepts become increasingly more abstract, and many of these students fall further behind
because their level of mastery is too rudimentary to allow for fluent learning.
10. Delivery of services. The tasks of delivering effective instruction and related services to students
are increasingly more difficult in a classroom or school comprised mainly of lower-achieving,
inner-city students (because their learning problems are more serious) than in a middle-class
classroom or school that has a small percentage of lower-achieving, inner-city students.
Source: Adapted from Allan C. Omstein and Daniel U. Levine, “Social Class, Race, and School Achievement:
Problems and Prospects,” Journal of Teacher Education (September-October 1989): 17-23.
teach white middle-class students because they themselves are white and from
middle-class communities, but the reality is that most of them will teach a very
diverse group of students. If they are unprepared to deal with this diversity in the
classroom, they will be unsuccessful, because America’s classrooms are diverse.
In California almost 140 distinct cultural groups are represented in the class¬
rooms. At present, evidence suggests that current approaches do not adequately
prepare teachers in terms of attitudes, behaviors, and teaching strategies—for
dealing with this diverse student population.23
Legal immigration now accounts for up to one-half of the annual growth in
the U.S. population. From 1930 to 1950, 80 percent of the immigrants to the
United States came from Western Europe and Canada. From 1970 through 1990,
however, as many as 90 percent came from developing countries—chiefly, and

in rank order, from Mexico, the Philippines, South Korea, Taiwan, Vietnam, Ja¬
maica, India, Dominican Republic, and Guatemala. Moreover, estimates of the
illegal population, mainly from Latin America and the Caribbean, total about
one million people in a given year (approximately half establishing permanent
residence).24 Partly as a result of these immigration trends and the current birth¬
rate trends of white, black, Hispanic, and Asian Americans, by the year 2000
nearly one-third of the U.S. population—and 40 percent or more of the student
population (in Arizona, California, Colorado, Texas, New Mexico, and New
York, more than 50 percent)—will be minorities.25
A significant number of these culturally diverse and immigrant families are
“structurally poor,” meaning that their family conditions are unstable or disorga¬
nized and the children have few chances to escape from poverty. Most minority
children are at risk in school and lack the requisite cognitive skills for learning
because of poverty and lack of family structure. Unfortunately, such children
might be labeled “learning disabled” or “slow” primarily because of cultural dif¬
ferences in learning styles and thinking patterns. In fact, these children really
lack the social capital of many mainstream students. It is not a lack of ability, as
much as a lack of background and/or language experience, that poses a threat for
many non-mainstream students.
If one looks at the performance of immigrant children, research suggests
that in almost all academic subjects, the immigrant students outperform native
children who come from similar economic backgrounds. Ironically, the longer
immigrant students are in the United States, the poorer they perform in school.
Laurence Steinberg describes quite poignantly this phenomenon:
We would hypothesize, therefore, that students born outside the United States would
be doing worse in school than those who are native Americans, and that native
Americans whose families have been in this country for several generations would
be faring better than their counterparts who arrived more recently.
Surprisingly, just the opposite is true: the longer a student’s family has lived in
this country, the worse the youngster’s school performance and mental health. Con¬
sider some of the following findings from our study. Foreign-bom students—who,
incidentally, report significantly more discrimination than American-born young¬
sters and significantly more difficulty with the English language—nevertheless earn
higher grades in school than their American-born counterparts . . .
It is not simply that immigrants are outperforming nonimmigrants on measures of
school achievement. On virtually every factor we know to be correlated with school
success, students who were not born in this country outscore those who were bom
here. And, when we look only at American-born students, we find that youngsters
whose parents are foreign-bom outscore those whose parents are native Americans.26
Beginning teachers often do not learn to make modifications in their pedagogi¬

cal efforts or in subject matter to adjust to culturally diverse learners. Asking
teachers (novice or experienced) about culturally diverse learners usually results
in socially acceptable responses because teachers might not want to admit to ig¬
norance or biases. But responding to scenarios or questions in education classes
or on job interviews is obviously not the same as teaching. As a result, teacher
education programs, and even internship programs in the first three years of
teaching, need to explore the attitudes and understandings that teachers have to¬
ward students who are culturally different from themselves, toward related
learning and pedagogy issues, the teacher’s role, and the effects of teacher ex¬
pectations and behavior on the performance of minority students.27
At the same time it is imperative to explore the problem behaviors of at-risk
student populations regardless of the racial, ethnic, or socioeconomic implica¬
tions. To ignore the impact on schooling of such factors as early sexual activity,
truancy, delinquency, and early use of drugs can result in the creation of educa¬
tional underclasses under the guise of tolerance or political correctness.
How Beginning Teachers (Novices) Teach
The personal styles and images of beginning teachers, commonly called

“novices,” tend to remain inflexible throughout their preservice training. Candi¬
dates tend to use the information provided in course work to confirm rather than
to reconstruct their views about teaching. Further compounding the problem of
adjusting to future classroom life, according to Dona Kagan, candidates are
often presented with contradictory and inconsistent views of teaching and learn¬
ing in their coursework and while student teaching.28 As a result, novices come
to their first job with an inadequate and oversimplified notion of classroom prac¬
tice (what is commonly called pedagogy) and are unprepared to adjust their ap¬
proach in response to varied problems of classroom management, instruction,
and student learning. As beginning teachers acquire knowledge on the job, they
must begin to use it to modify, adapt, and reconstruct their views as a teacher
and their teaching methods. Eventually, those who are successful (in the lan¬
guage of Chapter 1, those who move from an instructional to a learning para¬
digm) move from focusing on their own behaviors to focusing on those of their
students; they move from emphasizing classroom management to emphasizing
instructional techniques, and finally, to how and whether students learn.
Two separate research studies draw similar conclusions: Many teacher edu¬
cators oversimplify the reality of student teaching and ignore many complex
teaching and learning variables that affect a teacher’s classroom decisions. Both
student teachers and beginning teachers are expected to function on levels be¬
yond their capacity; in fact, many possess minimal survival skills. At issue is the
failure of teacher educators to provide student teachers with sufficient technical
and procedural knowledge (the type of knowledge outlined in Chapters 3 to 11).
Lacking sufficient knowledge when thrust into the classroom as beginning
teachers, novices tend to rely on their own recent experiences as a student—an
approach that is inappropriate or insufficient for teaching younger pupils.29
Although mastering procedural routines or generic teaching methods is im¬
portant, another group of teacher educators contend that beginning teachers, or
novices, must be concerned with learning how to teach content and helping stu¬
dents learn it.30 This position stresses the importance of subject matter and
subject-matter pedagogy if there are any methods to learn, they are methods
related to subject matter delivery. This school of thought is rooted in the post-
Sputnik era and in the old schism between professors of arts and science and
professors of education over the centrality of disciplinary knowledge versus

knowledge of pedagogy. Arts and science faculty today, as in the past, continue
to advocate the necessity of disciplinary knowledge and are likely to remain
skeptical of pedagogy.
More recently, Lee Shulman introduced the phrase pedagogical content
knowledge and sparked a whole new wave of scholarly articles on teachers’
knowledge of their subject matter and the importance of this knowledge for suc¬
cessful teaching.31 For the most part, content knowledge was ignored by re¬
searchers on teaching in the 1970s and 1980s because generic methods and prin¬
ciples of effective teaching were emphasized (see Chapter 2). In the 1990s, the
shift in interest was toward the ecology of the classroom and the overall struc¬
ture of the learning environment.32 In some respects, the 1970s and 1980s were
instructionally focused (on the behaviors of the teacher) and the 1990s were
learning focused (on the consequences of teaching for student learning).
In Shulman’s theoretical framework, teachers need to master two types of
knowledge: (1) content, also known as “deep” knowledge of the subject itself;
and (2) knowledge of curricular development. Content knowledge encompasses
what Jerome Bruner would call the “structure of knowledge”—the theories,
principles, and concepts of a particular discipline. Especially important is con¬
tent knowledge that deals with the teaching process, including the most useful
forms of representing and communicating content and how students best learn
the specific concepts and topics of a subject.
In short, teachers’ orientation to their subject matter influences their method
of planning, their choice of content, the way they use textbooks, the supplemen¬
tary materials they use, their pedagogical strategies, and their perceptions of stu¬
dents’ instructional needs. Likewise, it determines the way they formulate, demon¬
strate, and explain the subject so that it is comprehensible to learners. All this
suggests that beginning teachers need to integrate subject-matter content and peda¬
gogy.33 Indeed, teachers must know process and content. Pam Grossman con¬
ducted research to determine the effects of teacher education coursework on sub¬
sequent professional practice.34 Grossman’s study is unique in that she attempted
to determine whether and how teacher education experiences influence teacher
performance in the classroom. Grossman concluded that teachers who do and
those who do not have teacher education backgrounds do teach differently. They
make different assumptions about the students as learners. Grossman writes:
The six teachers in this study represent, in many ways, the best and brightest of
prospective teachers. All are well prepared in their subject matter; four of the six
hold BAs in literature from prestigious colleges and universities, while one teacher
was completing his doctorate in literature at the time of the study. Three of the
teachers—Jake, Kate, and Lance—elected to enter teaching without formal prepara¬
tion, while the other three—Megan, Steven, and Vanessa—graduated from the same
teacher education program at a research university that emphasized strong subject-
specific preparation in the teaching of English. All six of the teachers were techni¬
cally first-year teachers, although three of them had had prior experience as teaching
interns or aides. Of the six teachers, three taught in suburban public schools and
three taught in independent schools. Two of the teachers, one with and one without
teacher education, taught at the same independent school, which provided opportu¬
nity for at least one cross-case analysis in which teaching context was controlled.
The results of this study suggest that, in this case, subject specific coursework
did make a difference in these beginning teacher’s pedagogical content knowledge
of English. The two groups of teachers differed in their conceptions of the purposes
for teaching English, their ideas about what to teach in secondary English, and their
knowledge of student understanding.35
If beginning teachers are to be successful, they must wrestle simultaneously

with issues of pedagogical content (or knowledge) as well as general pedagogy
(or generic teaching principles). Only by integrating both forms of pedagogy can
a teacher personally define and understand the purpose of teaching, understand
students’ learning, and develop realistic curricular and instructional strategies.
In the ideal, you will have matriculated through a program that combines
theory and practice in ways that help you see the connections between what is
known and how that known knowledge can be applied. If true, you should be
able to negotiate the problems of teaching in ways that improve your practice
and foster enhanced opportunities for your students. You will develop, in
essence, your artful twist on the known science of teaching. We believe that is
only possible if you have had long term exposure to teacher education content.
You cannot “short-course” a teacher, nor should you. Some evidence is emerg¬
ing to suggest that we are correct and that good intentions are a necessary but
not a sufficient condition for success.
Even very bright people who are enthusiastic about teaching find that they cannot
easily succeed without preparation, especially if they are assigned to work with chil¬
dren who need skillful teaching. Perhaps the best example of the limitations of the
“bright person” myth about teaching is Teach for America (TFA), a program created
to recruit talented college graduates to disadvantaged urban and rural classrooms for
two years en-route to careers in law, medicine, and other professions. If anyone
could prove that teachers are born and not made, these bright, eager students, many
of them from top schools, might have been the ones to do it. Yet four separate evalu¬
ations found that TFA’s three- to eight-week training program did not prepare candi¬
dates to succeed with students.
Many recruits knew that their success, and that of their students, had been com¬
promised by their lack of access to the knowledge needed to teach. Yale University
graduate Jonathan Schorr was one of the many to raise this concern. He wrote:
I—perhaps like most TFAers—harbored dreams of liberating my students from

public school mediocrity and offering them as good an education as I had received.
But I was not ready. ... As bad as it was for me, it was worse for the students.
Many of mine . . . took long steps on the path toward dropping out. ... I was
not a successful teacher and the loss to the students was real and large.
Schorr argued that “sending recruits into the classroom with just eight weeks of
training . . . may be long enough to train neighborhood clean-up workers or even
police auxiliaries but [it isn’t] enough for teachers.” Others agreed. One recruit who
left in the first year and later entered a teacher preparation program confessed, “I felt
very troubled about going into an elementary classroom having had six weeks [of
training], I didn’t even know where to start. I was unprepared to deal with every as¬
pect. ... I had a lot of kids who were frustrated, and I was frustrated because I
wanted to help them and didn’t have the training to do that.”36
Peer interaction and

feedback are essential
for the teacher’s
professional growth.
Support from Colleagues for Beginning Teachers
In general, having to learn by trial and error without support and supervision has
been the most common problem faced by new teachers. Expecting teachers to
function without support is based on the false assumptions that (1) teachers are
well prepared for their initial classroom and school experiences, (2) teachers can
develop professional expertise on their own, and (3) teaching can be mastered in
a relatively short period of time. Researchers find that there is little attempt to
lighten the class load and limit extra class assignments to make the beginning
teacher’s job easier. In the few schools that do limit these activities, teachers
have reported that they have had the opportunity to “learn to teach.”37
Unquestionably, new teachers need the feedback and encouragement expe¬
rienced teachers can provide. The exchange of ideas can take place in school and
out, such as sharing a ride to a local meeting. Most important, experienced
teachers must be willing to open their classrooms to new teachers. Because of
the desire for autonomy in the classrooms, there is “seldom as much communi¬
cation or visitation between classrooms as there should be.” In some case stud¬
ies, as many as 45 percent of the teachers report no contact with other teachers
during the school day, and another 32 percent report having infrequent contact
with other teachers.38 No matter how successful individuals are as student teach¬
ers and how good their preservice training is, they can benefit from the advice
and assistance of experienced colleagues. Talking to other teachers gives
novices the chance to sound out ideas and assimilate information.
Studies of elementary and secondary schools have shown that teachers ex¬
pect to learn from one another when the school provides opportunities for teach¬
ers (1) to talk routinely to one another about teaching, (2) to be observed regu¬
larly in the classroom, and (3) to participate in planning and preparation.39
Teachers who are given opportunity to (1) develop and implement curriculum
ideas, (2) join study groups about implementing classroom practices, or (3) ex¬
periment in new skills and training feel more confident in their individual and
collective ability to perform their work.40
Thinking About Teaching
James Raths
University of Delaware
Trial and error is a magnificent approach to learning. terms of putting Band-Aids on scratches. Another is
However, its efficacy as an heuristic process depends to think of teaching in lofty, ethereal terms which
on knowing when an error has been made. One prob¬ have no observable indicators. Under this approach,
lem with teaching as a field of study is that there is almost any practice can be justified. Teachers must
no consensus as yet as to what counts as an “error.” learn to live with the ambiguity of the profession,
Put another way, there is very little agreement about without taking on dogmatic views, but by working
what comprises “effective” teaching. One approach with colleagues who are nearby, across the hall, in
to this problem is arbitrarily to define narrow, mea¬ the building, in the district to build some sort of con¬
surable, short-term goals, and argue that the effective sensus of what education might be while at the same
teacher is the one who can reach those goals. That is time positing some indicators that might suggest the
tantamount to defining effective medical practice in consensus is credible.
Peer coaching or mentoring takes place when classroom teachers observe

one another, provide feedback concerning their teaching, and together develop
instructional plans. Whether observing other teachers is done on an informal or
formal basis, permission should be granted by the teacher to be observed and by
the supervisor or administrator in charge of the new teacher’s professional de¬
velopment. The new teachers should look for techniques of teaching and lesson
planning that are unfamiliar to them, that coincide with their teaching style, and
that are an improvement over what they are doing. A short follow-up conference
with the experienced teacher to go over specific points should be scheduled ei¬
ther the same day or the next day while the observation is fresh. See Tips for
Teachers 12.1.
According to Joyce and Showers, an experienced teacher who acts as a peer
coach or mentor teacher for an inexperienced teacher performs five functions:
(1) companionship, discussing ideas, problems, and successes; (2) technical
feedback, especially related to lesson planning and classroom observations;
(3) analysis of application, integrating what happens or what works as part of the
beginning teacher’s repertoire; (4) adaptation, helping the beginning teacher
adapt to particular situations; and (5) personal facilitation, helping the teacher
feel good about himself or herself after trying new strategies.41
Similar data have been reported by Neubert and Bratton, involving visiting
mentor teachers in Maryland school districts who, rather than observe classroom
teachers, teach alongside them. Five characteristics of the resource teachers that
promote an effective coaching relationship are (1) know ledge—more knowledge
Professional Interaction in Staff Development Programs
In various staff development programs, exchanging alternative and describe specifically what
ideas and asking teachers to examine what they ob¬ you anticipate might have happened.
served or did in the classroom makes them feel less 9. How did you know this might happen?
isolated and more confident about their teaching.
10. What knowledge did you use in making this
Questions designed to promote professional dialogue
decision?
and reflective thinking in such programs include:
11. What is another situation like this one?
1. What do you remember about the classroom 12. What percentage of this decision was based
situation?
on intuition and what percentage on
2. What do you recall were your thoughts at the knowledge?
time?
13. How would you act in a similar situation in
3. What seemed to be the most important issue the future?
in the situation? 14. What might you change?
4. What alternatives did you consider? 15. What did you learn from this situation that
5. Why did you select the action you did? you can transfer from intuition to knowledge
6. Did it turn out to be the right choice? How for the future?
did you know it was the right choice?
7. What was inappropriate about the other
Source: Adapted from Patricia Heitmuller et al., “Dimensions of
alternatives in this situation? Professional Growth for Educational Leaders,” Journal of Staff
Development (Winter 1993): 30; Joellen P. Killon and Cynthia R.
8. What might have happened if you had
Harrison, “Evaluating Training Programs,” Journal of Staff
chosen another alternative? Take one Development (Winter 1988): 36.
about teaching methods than the classroom teacher; (2) credibility—demonstrated

success in the classroom; (3) support—a mix of honest praise and constructive
criticism; (4) facilitation—recommending and encouraging rather than dictating,
assisting rather than dominating in the classroom; and (5) availability—accessible
to the classroom teacher for planning, team teaching, and conferences.42
In one Pennsylvania school district, a “buddy system” has been developed
for beginning and experienced teachers who need additional assistance. Continu¬
ous peer support is provided, with teachers teamed together from the same sub¬
ject or grade level. The teacher “coaches” who are selected work full-time (and
often after school) helping their less experienced colleagues become better
teachers. Four characteristics help define this program: (1) collegiality and team¬
work, such as coaches covering classes so that their colleagues can observe
other teachers and gather ideas to adapt to their own teaching style, or coaches
engaging in direct peer coaching; (2) instructional support, coaches introduce
new instructional strategies that enhance student learning; (3) professional
growth, coaches take an active role in presenting in-service sessions so that new
teachers are helped to better understand the school philosophy and policies; and
(4) special services, coaches provide specialized services and programs that can
be used by all teachers in the school (visiting authors, artists in residence, envi¬
ronmental projects, computer assistance, etc.).43
Data suggest, however, that beginning teachers are selective in who they
ask for help. They seek help from experienced teachers they perceive as “knowl¬
edgeable,” “friendly,” and “supportive,” independent of whether the teachers are
formally recognized as their “mentors” or “coaches.” In a study of 128 teachers
in 90 different schools, 75 percent (n = 96) sought help from teachers who were
not their mentors; moreover, only 53 percent were generally satisfied with their
mentors.44
Although mentors are usually comfortable offering help to their inexperi¬
enced colleagues, the success of any mentoring program hinges on whether the
inexperienced teacher is comfortable seeking help from the experienced counter¬
part. The decision for adults to seek help, then to accept it, is influenced by nu¬
merous variables. Basically two tensions impact: the embarrassment of contin¬
ued failure versus the embarrassment of asking for help in solving a problem.
Indeed, the staggering number of teachers who leave the profession after only a
few years of service suggests the need to be sensitive to the concerns of begin¬
ning teachers and the need to improve mentoring programs.
Perhaps the most important ingredient for a coach, resource teacher, or
buddy teacher is to allow new teachers to reflect, not react or defend. An integral
part of any good program for helping beginning teachers is to observe experi¬
enced teachers on a regular basis, then for experienced teachers to observe the
novice teachers. With both observational formats, there is need to discuss what
facilitated or hindered the teaching-learning process and precisely what steps or
recommendations are needed for improving instruction. The coach or buddy
needs to serve as a friend and confidante, functioning in a nonevaluative role.
The term peer sharing and caring among colleagues best describes the new
spirit of collegial openness and learning advocated here.
Some textbooks are being written now that focus on providing more spe¬
cific feedback to teachers, and that would have particular utility to teachers who
seek specific data on their teaching. For example, many of the reform models for
schools place an emphasis on direct instruction in basic skills areas. Unfortu¬
nately, many teachers perceive that direct instruction is analogous to lecturing. It
is not, as we describe in detail in Chapter 5. Lasley and Matczynski structure
their methods text to provide assessment procedures for all the different models
of teaching. By using such forms (see Table 12.2), teachers can either self-assess
or have a peer assessment that enables them to know how they are using a
model.45
Support from Other Beginning Teachers

Without question, there is recognition that the induction period—the first two or
three years of teaching—is critical in developing teachers’ capabilities. Beginning
teachers should not be left alone to sink or swim. Thus, the internal support systems
that schools adopt (both the daily support activities and continual teaching opportu¬
nities for growth) are vital for the professional development of new teachers.
Table 12.2 Direct Instruction Assessment
Phase 1: Review
1. Does the teacher review ideas from the previous day’s lesson? □ Yes □ No
2. Does the teacher reteach content material that students had difficulty
understanding? □ Yes □ No
Phase II: Presenting New Material

1. Does the teacher clearly state the objectives for the lesson? □ Yes □ No
2. Does the teacher teach the skill or action sequence in a step-by-step
fashion? □ Yes □ No
Phase III: Guided Practice

1. Does the teacher frequently ask questions to assess student understanding? □ Yes □ No
2. Does the teacher call on both volunteers and nonvolunteers? □ Yes □ No
3. Do all students have an opportunity to respond to the teacher’s questions? □ Yes □ No
4. Are students successfully responding to most of the teacher’s questions
(at approximately an 80 percent rate of success)? □ Yes □ No
5. Does the teacher continue to practice the skill until student understanding
appears firm? □ Yes □ No
Phase IV: Feedback and Correctives

1. Does the teacher provide specific feedback to students when their responses
are hesitant? □ Yes □ No
2. Does the teacher reteach material when student responses are incorrect? □ Yes □ No
Phase V: Independent Practice

1. Does the teacher provide an appropriate number of problems for independent
practice? □ Yes □ No
2. Are students assigned homework that is meaningful and appropriate? □ Yes □ No
3. Do students appear to know how to do the homework successfully? □ Yes □ No
Source: Thomas J. Lasley II and Thomas J. Matczynski, Strategies for Teaching in a Diverse Society (Belmont,
CA: Wadsworth, 1997), 259-260. Reprinted with permission of Wadsworth Publishing, a division of International
Thomson Publishing. Fax 800 730-2215.
Unfortunately, some schools (and school districts) do not adequately re¬

spond to the needs of their new teachers and expect too much from them in
terms of expertise. Other support activities can fill such a vacuum or, in the face
of strong institutional programs, even serve as a supplementary support mecha¬
nism. One such activity is for beginning inservice teachers to share classroom
experiences, to tell their stories, and to reflect on ways of addressing problems
within the structure of a college course or as part of a staff development program
at the school district level. In effect, beginning teachers from various schools
can share, organize, and apply what they know about teaching in sort of a self-
help program or collective problem solving process.46 Preservice teachers, espe¬
cially student teachers, have been doing this for years as they come back from
their field experiences and meet in groups with a supervisor. In fact, such shar¬
ing of personal stories and experiences, with feedback and interpretation from
peers, can have a nurturing effect and help change and improve the lives of
teachers at many stages of their professional growth.
In effect, teachers who are part of this process are in groups where they
share problems and successes, assist one another in solving problems, and then
evaluate the results. Even if the school district where you are hired does not
have formal support groups, try to create an informal one for yourself, by asking
the administration to organize a group that meets weekly or bimonthly.
Support Through Computer Networks

Still another method for supporting beginning teachers is for them to set up or
link to a computer network or broader learning community. Across the country
in various schools and colleges, teachers, administrators, professors, and even
students frequently communicate to each other using electronic mail (E-mail).
One network is the Beginning Teacher Computer Network (BTCN), initiated at
Harvard University to help its first-year teacher graduates, now based in schools
across the country, to stay in touch with each other.47 Unlike larger computer
conferencing systems such as Bitnet or Prodigy, the BTCN network is small and
relies on personal computers and modems. It is an inexpensive way for teachers
to work out small problems; to offer and receive peer diagnosis, rather than
analysis of an “expert” or supervisor; and to provide nonevaluative feedback.
The network provides support, collegiality, and opportunity for professional
growth; participants know that a friend and former classmate is close at hand to
listen and offer ideas and advice. Teachers can and are also forming their own
support networks in specialty areas. Some teachers are using computer networks
to link with classroom colleagues. Examples include the Mathematics Learning
Forum Projects (www.edc.org/cct/) and the PBS Math Line (www.pbs.org/
webguide/webguide/mathlineweb.html/).
Guidelines for Improving Support for Beginning Teachers
Whatever the existing policies are regarding the induction period for entry teach¬
ers, there is the need to improve provisions for their continued professional devel¬
opment, to make the job easier, to make them feel more confident in the classroom
and school, to reduce the isolation of their work settings, and to enhance interac¬
tion with colleagues. Below are some recommendations for achieving these goals.
Although the recommendations are for beginning teachers, they have real implica¬
tions for the persons who administer programs that involve beginning teachers.
1. Pair beginning teachers with master teachers to meet regularly to identify

general problems before they become serious.
2. Provide for coaching groups, tutor groups, or collaborative problem-solving
groups for all beginning teachers to attend. Encourage beginning teachers to
teach each other.
3. Provide for joint planning, team teaching, committee assignments, and other
cooperative arrangements between new and experienced teachers.
4. Schedule reinforcing events, involving beginning and experienced teachers,
such as tutor-tutee luncheons, parties, and awards.
5. Provide regular (say, twice monthly) meetings between the beginning

teacher and supervisor to identify problems as soon as possible and to make
recommendations for improvement.
6. Carry on regular evaluation of beginning teachers; evaluate strengths and
weaknesses, present new information, demonstrate new skills, and provide
opportunities for practice and feedback.
Self-Evaluation
Teaching presents ample opportunities for self-evaluation. The teacher who does
a good job, and knows it, has the satisfaction of seeing students grow, feeling
their respect and affection, and obtaining the recognition of colleagues, parents,
and the community.
Self-evaluation by the teacher can contribute to professional growth. This
idea is a logical outgrowth of modern belief in the value of teacher-supervisor
cooperation. If teacher evaluations are accepted as an integral part of an ef¬
fective supervisory situation for professional development, then teachers
should be involved in the clarification and continual appraisal of their goals
and effectiveness.
According to Good and Brophy, “The first step in improving teaching is to
evaluate your current strengths and weaknesses. . . . To improve your teaching
you must decide what you want to do and how to determine whether your plans
are working. . . . Resolutions are more likely to be fulfilled when they specify
the desired change: ‘I want to increase the time I spend in small-group project-
based work by 25 percent.’ ”48 Bruce Tuckman concludes that teachers are will¬
ing to engage in, and even welcome, self-evaluation if they can participate in the
planning stages of the evaluation process and if they have some assurance of
how the results will be used.49
Recent data also indicate that teachers favor self-evaluation over evaluation by
students, peers, and supervisors. (Part of the reason for this may be that evaluators
are often not trained for their roles as assessors.) Teachers rated as “good” by super¬
visors picked self-evaluation as their first choice among methods for judging
teacher effectiveness (selected by 37 percent of more than 2,700 teachers sur¬
veyed). Objective evaluations by students and reactions of other teachers familiar
with their work were second (19 percent), and alternative choices for assessing per¬
sonal performance ranked third (16 percent). Furthermore, as many as 52 percent of
teachers assert that it is relatively easy to know when one is teaching effectively.50
There are good reasons for self-evaluation. A United States government sur¬
vey of 10,000 secondary teachers and 400 schools revealed that one-fourth
(26 percent) of the respondents indicated they were “never” evaluated by their
building principal or supervisor the previous year, and another 27 percent indi¬
cated only one visit. When teachers were asked how many times they visited
other teachers to observe or discuss teaching techniques, 70 percent said
“never.”51 In other words, teacher evaluation and feedback from administrators,
supervisors, or colleagues are infrequent and, in many cases, nonexistent.
Most teachers operate with virtual autonomy in the classroom and receive
minimal assistance from supervisors or colleagues, so it follows that self-
evaluation might be more useful than we might initially think, and could be less
biased than an outside evaluation based on one or two visits from a person who
is rushed or going through motions to satisfy some school policy.
Although there are several forms of self-evaluation. Teachers should rate
themselves on their teaching methods at the classroom level. This type of evalu¬
ation form can be developed by the teacher, a group of teachers, the school dis¬
trict, or by researchers. The main consideration is for teachers to have input in
devising the instrument (to build acceptance of the process), or they can agree
on an instrument already developed or in use in another school district, and
modify it according to their purposes. The point is, the teachers should feel com¬
fortable with the evaluation instrument, and they should make decisions about
what to do with the results. Two types of instruments can be used for such self-
evaluation. One type is general in nature and focuses on general instructional ef¬
fectiveness (see Table 12.3). The second type is specific in nature and focuses
on particular instructional skills, such as those related to direct instruction
(see Table 12.2).
Teachers can also rate themselves on their professional responsibilities at
the school and community level or on how they arrange the classroom. Accord¬
ing to administrators, this form might include such things as (1) classroom cli¬
mate, (2) contractual responsibilities, (3) service to school, and (4) professional
development.52 To this list might be added (5) relations with colleagues, (6) re¬
lations with parents, and (7) service to the community.
California is building these types of “environment” requirements into their
formative evaluation systems. One “element,” of the California Formative As¬
sessment and Support System for Teachers (CFASST), is “Creating a physical
environment that engages all students.”53 Beginning teachers need to be con¬
scious of both what students are learning and the environment within which that
learning is occurring.
Reflection
The terms reflection and reflective practice partially come from the works of
Carl Rogers and Donald Schon who have studied the actions and thoughts of
workers in a variety of fields who learn to analyze and interpret events in ways
that guide their own development and day-to-day practice. According to these
authors, each person is capable of examining questions and answers needed to
improve their own professional performance. Through open-mindedness and
maturity, and with the help of colleagues, individuals can discover new ideas
and illuminate what they already understand and know how to do.54 Such reflec¬
tion, in effect, combines the essentials of self-evaluation and peer evaluation.
And, such reflections are increasingly becoming a part of mandated evaluation
systems such as the California CFASST program. Caroline Lucas describes this
approach:
Reflection is an important part of professional development. Teachers need to look

at their intended objectives and to determine their effectiveness. New teachers must
Table 12.3 Formative Evaluation Process
USE: When the teacher lectures, presents information, or demonstrates skills to the class.
PURPOSE: To assess the effectiveness of the presentation.

Enter a check mark for each of the following features that was included effectively in the
presentation, and a 0 for each feature that was omitted or handled ineffectively. Add your comments
below, emphasizing constructive suggestions for improvement.
CHECKLIST:
INTRODUCTION
_ 1. States purpose or objectives
_ 2. Gives overview or advance organizer
_ 3. Distributes a study guide or instructs the students concerning how they are expected to
respond (what notes to take, etc.)
BODY OF PRESENTATION
_ 4. Is well prepared; speaks fluently without hesitation or confusion
_ 5. Projects enthusiasm for the material
_ 6. Maintains eye contact with the students
_ 7. Speaks at an appropriate pace (neither too fast nor too slow)
_ 8. Speaks with appropriate voice modulation (rather than a monotone)
_ 9. Uses appropriate expressions, movements, and gestures (rather than speaking woodenly)
_ 10. Content is well structured and sequenced
_ 11. New terms are clearly defined
_ 12. Key concepts or terms are emphasized (preferably not only verbally but by holding up or
pointing to examples, writing or underlining on the board or overhead projector, etc.)
_ 13. Includes appropriate analogies or examples that are effective in enabling students to
relate the new to the familiar and the abstract to the concrete
_ 14. Where appropriate, facts are distinguished from opinions
_ 15. Where appropriate, lengthy presentations are divided into recognizable segments, with
clear transitions between segments and minisummaries concluding each segment
_ 16. When necessary, questions the students following each major segment of a lengthy
presentation (rather than waiting until the end)
_ 17. Monitors student’s response; is encouraging and responsive regarding student questions
and comments on the material
CONCLUSION
_ 18. Concludes with summary or integration of the presentation
_ 19. Invites student questions or comments
_ 20. Follows up on the presentation by making a transition into a recitation activity, a follow¬
up assignment, or some other activity that will allow the students an opportunity to
practice or apply the material
COMMENTS: _
Source: Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Looking in Classrooms, 7th ed. (New York: Addison-Wesley, 1996),
393. Reprinted by permission.
learn to observe outcomes and to determine the reasons for success or failure. The
role of the support provider is to guide the novice in reflective experiences, such as
examining delivery of instruction and student outcomes. BTSA/CFASST [Begin¬
ning Teacher Support and Assessment/California Formative Assessment and Sup¬
port System for Teachers] support providers are trained to make and record objec¬
tive observations of beginning teachers. New teachers in California become familiar
518 Section 111 Professional Growth
with the California Standards for the Teaching Profession . . . ; therefore, when pro¬
vided with objective feedback after an observation, teachers center their reflective
conversation on when and how they meet or fall below any given standard.55
Reflection can help beginning and experienced teachers alike, and can be
incorporated into preservice, internship, and in-service or staff development
programs. Most participants are resistant at the beginning, and usually ex¬
press some ambivalence or confusion about what is required, especially as
unsettling questions about their own teaching are examined. But more often
than not, according to one researcher, reflection results in more questions and
clearer perceptions of themselves and in better plans for solving individual
problems.56
One of the more sophisticated tools for analyzing teachers’ reflective
thoughts was developed by Dorene Ross, who contends that reflection becomes
increasingly complex depending on the individual’s maturity and perception of
safety in expressing one’s views. Ross identifies three levels of complexity in
the reflection process: (1) describing a teacher’s practice with little detailed
analysis and little insight into the reasons behind teacher or student behaviors;
(2) providing a cogent critique of a practice from one perspective but failing to
consider multiple factors; (3) analyzing teaching and learning from multiple per¬
spectives and recognizing that teachers’ actions have a pervasive impact beyond
the moment of instruction.57
In the later levels, individuals come to realize that behaviors (and feelings)
are contextually based. Rather than dealing in absolutes, they begin to deal in
relative truths and points of view. In the third level, people are open to more
change and willing to admit that they don’t always know the answer. However,
the third level suggests considerable experience and maturity. The inference is
that beginning teachers operate at the lower levels of reflection, and therefore,
are more closed-minded and unwilling to accept other viewpoints about their
teaching. This is only an educated guess, yet it does conform to research data
that suggest that only about 1 out of 5 preservice teachers function above
level 2, and then only for particular topics.58
Through reflection, teachers focus on their concerns, come to better under¬
stand their own teacher behavior, and help themselves or colleagues improve as
teachers. Through reflective practices in a group setting, or forums, teachers
learn to listen carefully to each other, which also gives them insight into their
own work. In turn, as researchers hear teachers reflect on their practices or what
they do in the classroom and the basis for those actions, they are in the position
to translate the teachers’ practical knowledge and particular point of view into
theoretical knowledge and integrate it with other viewpoints.
Thus, as teachers probe and further examine specific teaching situations, a
language of practice can emerge which allows us to better understand how
teachers cope and deal with the complexity of their work. Here the key is to
make sense of what teachers have to say, to clarify and elaborate on particular
scripts or situations, and to delineate what meaning these reflections have for the
teachers themselves and other professionals.59
Teacher Reflections on Professional Growth
Beth Lazzaro
Teacher, New Paltz Central Schools
New Paltz, NY
Keeping current is one of the challenges of teaching these days are unspecified and the outcomes are usu¬
as careers progress. Opportunities for staff develop¬ ally shelved. Long range planning for these days and
ment come through subject area conferences, district providing programs based on a survey of teacher’s
staff development days, college courses and other needs would be more helpful. Cooperation among
programs offered through local BOCES (Board of area school districts might also help to provide pro¬
Cooperative Educational Services) centers or teacher grams that better address the needs of the teachers.
centers. Whether it is the latest teaching methods, BOCES and teacher centers are often places
use of technology or an update in your teaching where teachers can pursue courses or programs that
methods, these lessons can make a difference in the will help them update their technology skills. Up¬
quality of the teaching we demonstrate. grades in hardware and software are to be expected.
College courses, if available, provide an excellent Without opportunities for teachers to keep up with
opportunity for professional growth. They also have the changes they would fall behind the technology
the promise of additional salary if they relate to your and not be able to help students.
area, so this makes them very attractive. Many districts provide teachers with release time
Subject area conferences that are chosen by staff from classes to attend conferences and workshops
related to the courses they teach can be very effec¬ that they approve. Some programs are offered in the
tive to update teachers on the latest research and de¬ evenings or during the summer so that teachers are
velopments in their field. Such programs also give able to take advantage of them, without interrupting
teachers an opportunity to network with other pro¬ the school day. Many districts offer inservice credit
fessionals in their area of expertise, thereby adding (compensation) for non-college programs that take
to the quality of their experience. place after school hours. Some districts are negotiat¬
District staff development days are poorly uti¬ ing with their bargaining units to require teachers to
lized as a teaching tool. They are often planned at earn a certain amount of inservice or graduate credits
the last minute, using the least effective teaching periodically. This practice will encourage teachers to
techniques, such as lecture, that research has shown grow professionally and will in the long-run improve
to have a 10 percent retention rate. Objectives for education.
Guidelines for Self-Evaluation and Reflection
Self-evaluation can serve as the initial step in an ongoing attempt to improve

teaching and instructional procedures. A written self-evaluation instrument can
be used to describe almost any aspect of teaching and instruction, with freedom
to focus on any item perceived as important. Reflection, on the other hand, sug¬
gests both inner dialogue and other-oriented open discussion among colleagues
(no instrumentation) for the purpose of self-evaluation and improvement.
1. Self-evaluations may be used as part of the contract or formal evaluation

process.
2. Self-ratings should be compared with student ratings if the same items are
included in the forms. Discrepancies between the ratings should be inter¬
preted or analyzed.
3. Self-evaluations can be used as a starting point for the formal evaluation of
the teacher by the supervisor.
4. Reflection takes place when teachers volunteer to participate and exchange
ideas among colleagues.
5. Reflection allows teachers to better understand themselves and confront their
strengths and weaknesses.
6. Reflection requires an ability to be honest with yourself and with col¬
leagues or peers, and to listen to them as they help you analyze your own
teaching.
Supervisory Evaluation and Assistance

In most schools the purpose of supervisory observation and conferences is to in¬
crease morale and effective teaching. Supervision, however, can take many dif¬
ferent forms.
A number of school districts and teacher education institutions use clinical
supervision. In clinical supervision, members of the supervisory and adminis¬
trative staff meet with new teachers at the beginning of the school year to ac¬
quaint them with school policies and programs. As the school year gets under
way, a grade-level or subject-related supervisor helps the novice plan lessons,
suggests appropriate materials and media, and provides curriculum suggestions.
Ideally, she or he informally visits the class for short periods of time to learn
about the new teacher’s style, abilities, and needs. Later, at the teacher’s invita¬
tion or by mutual agreement, the supervisor observes a complete lesson. Such a
visit is often formally planned in conjunction with a pre-observation conference
to talk over the plans for the lesson and a post-observation conference to discuss
the observation and evaluation of the lesson.
This three-step process (pre-observation conference, observation, and post¬
observation conference) has been enlarged to eight “phases” by Morris Cogan, a
major theorist in the area of supervision of teachers: (1) establishing the teacher-
supervisor relationship, (2) planning the lesson with the teacher, (3) planning the
strategy of observation, (4) observing instruction, (5) analyzing the teaching¬
learning process, (6) planning the strategy of the conference, (7) the conference,
and (8) renewed planning.60
Robert Goldhammer, a student of Cogan, developed a similar model con¬
sisting of five “stages”: (1) pre-observation conference, (2) observation,
(3) analysis and strategy, (4) supervision conference, and (5) post-conference
analysis. In both of these models the teacher’s behavior and techniques are ob¬
served, analyzed, and interpreted and decisions are made in order to improve the
teacher’s effectiveness.61
According to Ben Harris, the teacher can learn to assume increasing respon¬
sibilities for each step in the process. As the teacher learns to analyze and inter¬
pret observational data and confronts his or her own concerns and needs, he or
she should become less dependent on the supervisor and more capable of self-
analysis.62
Obviously, several observations and conferences are needed before any for¬
mal judgment is made about a teacher’s performance. However, even one or two
observations by a skilled supervisor can be helpful to the teacher, especially for
the new teacher who lacks practical experience in the classroom. There is also
evidence, according to both Glatthorn and Wise, that beginning (and experi¬
enced) teachers value supervisory feedback and appreciate supervisors’ and
principals’ input in diagnosing, prescribing, and recommending teaching strate¬
gies and skills. The input helps teachers learn to teach and to understand the ex¬
pectations of the school district.63 The latter is considered important in view of
the fact that the turnover among new teachers is significant despite improved
salaries and benefits.
Another form of supervision is technical coaching. Technical coaching in¬
cludes supervisory evaluations; it assists teachers in developing and refining
new teaching strategies and skills (Table 12.2 would be an example of a techni¬
cal coaching process). Technical coaching, however, tends to inhibit profes¬
sional dialogue and peer exchange. Discussions often focus on the presence or
absence of a particular behavior or item on an evaluation form that, in fact,
might have little value for the individual teacher or for students.
The supervisor-teacher system assumes that objective feedback and evalua¬
tion, given in a nonthreatening and constructive climate, can improve teaching.
According to two supervisors, an effective supervisor-teacher evaluation system
must do the following:
1. Be accepted as fair and objective by teachers.

2. Be related to the requirements of the job and needs of the school.
3. Specify the factors and behaviors on which the teacher will be judged.
4. Reliably measure teacher performance and indicate how the
measurement will be performed.
5. Clearly communicate the expectations for performance to the teacher.
6. Provide for teacher development as part of the system.64
In this connection, Carl Glickman distinguishes between teachers who think

in concrete terms and those who think in abstract terms. Both types of teacher
are willing to accept feedback and evaluation. However, concrete types (to
whom Glickman attributes low conceptual professional thought patterns) are
often confused about their instructional problems, lack ideas about what to do,
and need assistance in clarifying such issues—that is, they profit from concrete
and highly structured recommendations (for example: “You need to call on more
nonvolunteers when teaching skills during a direct instruction lesson”). Highly
conceptual, abstract recommendations will only confuse them. The second type
(who function at a high conceptual level) can identify instructional problems and
seek and generate multiple sources of ideas about what can be done; they can vi¬
sualize and verbalize consequences of various choices or actions and easily
make modifications in their teaching—hence, a subtle, more generalized ap¬
proach to coaching is more likely to succeed. In practice, many teachers are
moderately abstract and fall between the two groups.65
Supervisors must be sensitive to a teacher’s needs for concrete, structured
recommendations as well as the needs of those who benefit from broad recom¬
mendations. Teachers are at different stages of development, in part due to dif¬
ferences in experience and age and in part because of differences in their will¬
ingness to accept recommendations for change. Different supervisory
approaches—from directive (technical) to collaborative or nondirective (clinical)
techniques—should be considered in context with the developmental stage and
thinking pattern of the teacher to enhance positive changes in teaching. Cer¬
tainly, an experienced or older teacher needs different types of coaching than an
inexperienced or younger teacher.
Guidelines for Supervisory Evaluation and Assistance
Procedures for the pre-observation, observation, and post-observation of super¬

visory evaluation are interrelated. During the pre-observation conference, the
teacher and supervisor get to know each other and build mutual trust and re¬
spect. According to Harris, pre-observation preparations should include the fol¬
lowing:
1. Identifying and accepting the purpose of observation

2. Setting the time of the observation
3. Selecting and agreeing on an instrument or method for observation
4. Reviewing observation procedures
5. Reassuring the teacher
6. Deciding on follow-up activities.66
During the observation, the supervisor should pay attention to specific be¬
haviors and teacher-student interactions. The observation should be objective
and free of any prejudgments about the teacher. John Robinson has eight sug¬
gestions for the overall observation process:
1. Analysis of the classroom observation should be written in a report by the

supervisor and include comments on actual events, an overall evaluation of
the lesson, and recommendations for improving instruction.
2. Supervisors should make an effort to observe classes more often than they
do at the present. (On the average, teachers are observed only twice during a
school year.)
3. Supervisors should announce in advance when they intend to visit the
teacher. (Many teachers claim their observations are unannounced.)
4. The pre-observation conference should be emphasized as an integral and
necessary part of the observation report.
5. Observations should be planned with the goal of effecting long-range im¬

provement of instruction in a few basic but important areas.
6. The observation report should concentrate on major points, both favorable
and unfavorable. Minor recommendations should be made in the post¬
observation conference and should not be part of the report.
7. The report should be sent to the teacher before the post-observation confer¬
ence.
8. School districts should offer an in-service course in observation and feed¬
back methods. (Supervisors report they receive little help from their district
in their supervisory functions.)67
The post-observation conference is essential for analyzing the lesson and the
teacher’s behavior in general. Agreements reached during the pre-observation
conference about what is to be observed should be helpful in focusing the
post-observation discussion. The observer should also bring up any specific
problem or recurring behavior that came to his or her attention (for example,
the teacher repeatedly calls the name of the student before asking a question;
the teacher repeatedly turns her or his back to the class when writing on the
chalkboard).
As the teacher receives feedback on behavior, he or she is likely to feel ten¬
sion and anxiety. A solid base of mutual trust and respect must exist for maxi¬
mum benefit to be derived from these supervisory-teacher functions. Those peo¬
ple who have high self-esteem are more likely to accept objective feedback, to
see themselves as others see them, to make desirable changes, and to behave in a
cooperative and collegial way.68
New Forms of Evaluation

Some school districts and states are experimenting with other forms of evalua¬
tion. These new methods are intended to more fully explore the professional na¬
ture of the teaching act.
Artifacts of Teaching
Samples or artifacts of teaching are sources of data for teacher evaluation and
growth. These are rarely considered as a source of feedback or information, but
teachers should recognize that these products offer prime examples of their
workmanship and are representative of their performance. Artifacts of teaching,
like the following, can be excellent alternative sources for evaluating teachers:
1. Lesson plans and unit plans. Examination of lesson plans and unit plans
should indicate whether the curriculum or course syllabus is being
taught, whether the teacher’s pace and focus are correct, how individual
student differences are provided for, whether the instructional objectives
are clear and the activities appropriate, and whether study and homework
exercises are adequate.
2. Tests. Do quizzes and examinations reflect the important objectives and

learning outcomes? Are the directions clear? Are the test questions
appropriately written? Is there a good mix of different types of
questions?
3. Laboratory and special projects. These handouts should be examined for
clarity, spelling, punctuation, and appropriateness. They should coincide
with the important objectives and content of the course and serve to
motivate students and enrich their learning experiences.
4. Materials and media. The quality and appropriateness of materials and
media and the way they are incorporated into the instructional process
partially reveal the teacher’s knowledge, skills, and effort for facilitating
student learning.
5. Reading lists and bibliographies. These lists should accommodate varied
student abilities, needs, and interests.
6. Student outcomes. Samples of student work and test results indicate
students’ mastery of skills and subject matter. They provide feedback for
teachers and provide a basis on which to judge whether the teacher has
achieved his or her own objectives as well as the standards set by the
school.69
7. Teacher portfolios. Portfolios, although difficult to construct and
vulnerable to misrepresentation, provide a rich portrayal of the teacher’s
performance. Such materials as videotapes, lesson plans, teacher logs or
personal commentaries, student work (writing samples, laboratory
exercises, etc.) and records of teacher observations can be used for
purpose of documentation, assessment, and/or reflective analysis.70
Indeed, teacher portfolios should contain materials from the previous
items listed above (items 1 to 6).
These artifacts (when several, not just one or two are considered) are
sources of valid and valuable data that can be used by the teacher for self-
examination. They can also be used by supervisors as a supplement to the formal
evaluation process. One advantage of these artifacts is that they can be collected
quickly and examined with a colleague or supervisor to provide objective feed¬
back and recommendations for improvement. Another is that they enable the
teacher to look at his or her teaching and instructional skills over an extended
period of time, even the entire school year (or longer), as opposed to a one-time
rating or classroom observation. Also, because the teacher selects the artifacts,
she or he might feel more at ease and be more willing to examine the data than
when evaluation is based on formal rating scales or observations where the
teacher has less input and control. Finally, most colleagues and supervisors do
not have enough time for thorough classroom observations and pre- and post¬
observation conferences, and examining the artifacts is apparently less time-
consuming.
One of the newest forms of teacher evaluation, especially for new teachers,
is the PRAXIS Series. The Educational Testing Service initiated the series this
evaluation phase. The first two PRAXIS phases focus on skills in basic perfor-
mance areas (PRAXIS I) and in content and professional areas (PRAXIS II).
The third phase, PRAXIS III Classroom Performance Assessments, is now being
used by some states for the purpose of making initial licensing decisions. In
Pathwise/PRAXIS III, students (or prospective teachers) are expected to exhibit
a certain level of performance (unsatisfactory to distinguished) in each of four
domains: planning and preparation, the classroom environment, instruction, and
professional responsibility. (Table 12.4 illustrates the levels of Domain la:
Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy). It is likely that if you are
in a PRAXIS series state you will have the Pathwise criteria used to assess your
teaching performance during student teaching. If you stay in that state, PRAXIS
III will be used during your first year of teaching.
If you are not in a PRAXIS series state, you might be in a state that em¬
braces the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium
(INTASC). More than 30 states use INTASC standards. Those standards
Table 12.4 Illustration of PRAXIS III Criteria
Domain 1: Planning and Preparation
Component la: Demonstrating Knowledge of Content and Pedagogy Elements:
• Knowledge of content • Knowledge of prerequisite relationships • Knowledge of content-related pedagogy
Level of Performance
Element Unsatisfactory Basic Proficient Distinguished
Knowledge of Teacher makes Teacher displays basic Teacher displays solid Teacher displays
Content content errors or content knowledge content knowledge extensive content
does not correct but cannot articulate and makes knowledge, with
errors students connections with connections between evidence of
make. other parts of the the content and other continuing pursuit of
discipline or with parts of the discipline such knowledge.
other disciplines. and other disciplines.
Knowledge of Teacher displays little Teacher indicates Teacher’s plans and Teacher actively builds
Prerequisite understanding of some awareness of practices reflect on knowledge of
Relationships prerequisite prerequisite understanding of prerequisite
knowledge learning, although prerequisite relationships when
important for such knowledge may relationships among describing instruction
student learning of be incomplete or topics and concepts. or seeking causes for
the content. inaccurate. student
misunderstanding.
Knowledge of Teacher displays little Teacher displays basic Pedagogical practices Teacher displays
Content-Related understanding of pedagogical reflect current continuing search for
Pedagogy pedagogical issues knowledge but does research on best best practice and
involved in student not anticipate pedagogical practice anticipates student
learning of the student within the discipline misconceptions.
content. misconceptions. but without
anticipating student
misconceptions.
Source: Teacher Performance Assessments: A Comparative View.(£rinceton: Educational Testing Service, 1995).
correlate well with the PRAXIS domains because both are based on essentially the
same body of research—they just represent different ways of organizing the con¬
cepts. You could also be in a state like California, that has its own (CFASST) stan¬
dards, or in New York which is in the process of establishing its own standard.
The National Board of Professional Teaching Standards

In 1990, the National Board of Professional Teaching Standards (NBPTS)
launched its $50 million research and development program to improve teacher
certification and teacher assessment. Its mission is to develop a voluntary certifi¬
cation system that establishes high standards of what teachers should know and
be able to do, and identifies a governing board (composed mainly of teachers) to
enforce these standards. Many school districts around the country now have
board certified teachers. These new forums of evaluation and assessment offer
dynamic new ways of improving educational practice. Linda Darling-Hammond
describes the phenomenon:
Probably the most important policy level for improving teaching and learning is the
recent development of professional standards that capture the important aspects of
teaching. These standard-setting efforts are being led by the new National Board for
Professional Teaching Standards, established in 1987 and the first professional body
(a majority of its members are teachers) to set standards for accomplished teaching;
the Interstate New Teacher Assessment and Support Consortium (INTASC), a con¬
sortium of thirty-two states working with teachers and teacher educators to develop
“National Board-compatible” licensing standards; and the National Council for Ac¬
creditation ot Teacher Education (NCATE), which has been strengthening standards
for teacher education programs, recently incorporating the performance standards
developed by INTASC. These initiatives are the basis for a shared knowledge base
reflected in sophisticated performance assessments that enable teachers to demon¬
strate skills and knowledge in real teaching contexts.
The various teacher standards share a view of teaching as complex, contingent,
and reciprocal; that is, continually shaped and reshaped by students’ responses to
learning experiences. By examining teaching in light of learning, they put considera¬
tions of effectiveness at the center of good practice. This view contrasts with that of
the recent “technicist” era of teacher training and evaluation, in which teaching was
seen as the technical implementation of set routines and formulas for behavior,
which were disconnected from the needs and responses of students. The new stan¬
dards and assessments explicitly address subject matter standards for students and
the demands of learner diversity and also the expectation that teachers will collabo¬
rate effectively with colleagues and parents in order to improve their practice.71
The new “advanced” certification system consists of different teaching cer¬

tificates that consider two dimensions: developmental level of students (how
they should be taught) and subject matter (what should be taught). Four develop¬
mental levels have been identified; early childhood, middle childhood, early
adolescence, and adolescence/young adulthood.72 This new focus differs from
traditional practices of state licensing by school level. Instead, it focuses on de¬
velopmental levels of learners and yields teaching certificates for generalists
(e.g., early and middle childhood generalists, K-6) and subject specialists (e.g..
early adolescence English, Language Arts, adolescence and young adulthood

math).
Most of the guidelines of the NBPTS deal with new assessment procedures
for teachers. Among the ten recommended procedures is that assessment should
(1) correlate with student learning; (2) consist of a variety of methods (including
some that may involve assessment centers); (3) detect and eliminate external and
internal biases with respect to age, gender, and ethnicity among teachers;
(4) provide constructive feedback; and (5) involve professional teacher associa¬
tions, academic institutions, and state agencies.73 If you want more information
on NBPTS, visit the NBPTS web site: http://www.nbpts.org.
It is essential that the criteria for assessment be reliable, valid, and cost-
effective; that multiple criteria for good teaching be accepted; and that the evalu¬
ation system be constructive and bolster excellence in teaching (and provide
concurrent rewards) and not minimum competency, political pork barrel bureau¬
cracy, or favoritism. In short, the evaluation system used to assess teachers
should place what we know about good teaching in appropriate classroom and
school contexts and should coincide with sound evaluation methodologies.
Professional Associations and Activities

Membership in professional organizations and participation in meetings,,re¬
search, and advanced study can contribute to professional growth and help im¬
prove conditions for teachers.
Teacher Associations
There are two major teacher associations, the American Federation of Teachers
(AFT) and the National Education Association (NEA). In most school districts
teachers vote on which of the two associations all of them will join. In some
school districts, the choice of joining or not joining a local chapter of the AFT or
a state affiliate of the NEA is left to the individual. If you have a choice, you
should not be rushed into making a decision. Keep in mind, however, that both
organizations have helped improve salaries, benefits, and working conditions for
teachers and that you should probably join one of them. At present nearly
85 percent of public school teachers belong to either the AFT or the NEA.74
The AFT has approximately one million members, organized in 2,200 lo¬
cals, mainly in cities. Included in the membership are some 700,000 teachers,
100,000 municipal workers and nurses who are not teachers, 75,000 college
teachers, and 25,000 auxiliary staff (secretaries, paraprofessionals, cafeteria
workers, etc.). (See Table 12.5.) The NEA has a membership of nearly 2.5 mil¬
lion, including 35,000 students, 250,000 retired members, 50,000 auxiliary staff,
50,000 college professors, 200,000 professional support staff (guidance coun¬
selors, librarians, administrators), and nearly 1.5 million classroom teachers
(more than half the nation’s 2.4 million public school teachers). Table 12.5
shows the actual and projected size of the AFT and NEA.
Table 12.5 Membership in AFT and NEA
Year AFT NEA
1857* 43
1870 170
1880 354
1890 5,474
1900 2,322
1910 6,909
1916* 1,500 12,500
1920 10,000 22,850
1930 7,000 216,188
1940 30,000 203,429
1950 41,000 453,797
1960 59,000 713,994
1970 205,000 1,100,000
1980 550,000 1,650,000
1985 600,000 1,700,000
1990 750,000 1,900,000
1995 950,000 2,200,000
2000f 1,000,000 2,450,000
*Year organization was founded

■i'Estimated membership.
Source: Allan C. Omstein and Daniel U. Levine, Introduction to the Foundations of Education, 7th ed. (Boston:
Houghton Mifflin, 2000).
Disproportionately suburban and rural, NEA membership is served by a

large network of affiliates in every state, Puerto Rico, and the District of Colum¬
bia. There are more than 12,000 local affiliate groups, but unlike the AFT
(where the local affiliate is powerful), most of the power is derived from the
state affiliates. In terms of numbers, the NEA is the second largest lobby force in
the country, behind the Teamsters.
Although the two organizations occasionally take different positions on ed¬
ucational matters and battle over membership, “no raid” efforts have been dis¬
cussed at the state level. Most important, both organizations seek to improve the
status of the teaching profession, agree on many issues concerning teachers and
schools, and sometimes join forces on policy matters. Merger talks have been
seriously discussed in recent years, and to be sure, there are immense political
and economic advantages to be gained from the formation of a united “super”
teacher organization.
Professional Organizations
At the working level of the classroom, the professional organization of greatest

academic benefit to a teacher (and education student) is usually one that focuses
on his or her major field. Each professional association provides a meeting
ground for teachers of similar interests. The activities of these professional orga¬
nizations usually consist of regional and national meetings and publication of a
monthly or quarterly journal that describes accepted curriculum and teaching

practices.
Some organizations are subject-centered, such as the National Council for
the Social Studies, National Council of Teachers of English, Modern Language
Association, National Science Teachers Association, and National Council of
Teachers of Mathematics. Others focus on the needs of specific students, such as
the Council for Exceptional Children, National Association for Bilingual Chil¬
dren, National Association for the Education of Young Children, and the Na¬
tional Scholarship Service and Fund for Negro Students. Such associations are
organized to ensure that specific children and youth are served by well-prepared
school personnel and to improve specialized teaching techniques.
Still another type of professional organization cuts across subjects and stu¬
dent types. These organizations tend to highlight innovative teaching and in¬
structional practices in general. They describe, in their journals, new trends and
policies that affect the entire field of education, have a wide range of member¬
ship including teachers, administrators, and professors, and work for the ad¬
vancement of the teaching profession in general.
Perhaps the best known organization of this type is Phi Delta Kappa, which
includes 675 local and 8 regional chapters in the United States and Canada and
10 international chapters. As of 2000 it had approximately 125,000 members,
with no distinctions made among graduate students, administrators, and grade
school and college-level teachers. Originally open only to men, it opened its
membership to women in 1974. The purpose of the organization is to promote
Keeping up with the

professional literature
and enrolling in
professional course
work are important
for developing and
maintaining teacher
effectiveness.
quality and equality of education, with particular emphasis on public education.

Members receive the Phi Delta Kappan, a highly respected journal published ten
times a year, and the organization’s newsletter. Paperback publications of inter¬
est are available at reduced rates for members.
Another major teacher organization is Kappa Delta Pi. It is an international
honor society in education, and even some college campuses have Kappa Delta
Pi chapters. Several books are issued by Kappa Delta Pi annually along with
journal publications such as The Educational Forum and the Record.
Professional Activities and Collaboration
If you are to continue to do a good job teaching, you must keep up with your
subject and the latest teaching and instructional trends in your specialization.
Without continued updating, one’s teaching becomes dated and dry. To keep up-
to-date with developments in your field, you will need to do three things:
(1) read professional books and journals, (2) attend professional conferences, at
least one or two a year, and (3) enroll in advanced courses in conjunction with a
university-sponsored program or a school district in-service program. All three
activities will help you keep up on changes in methods and materials, teaching
and learning theories, and current experimentation.
Readings
Almost any professional organization you join should have a monthly or quar¬
terly journal. The journal that will have the most immediate value for you is the
one that focuses on your subject and grade level. For example, reading teachers
might subscribe to the Journal of Reading, Reading Teacher, or Reading Today.
Math teachers might want to subscribe to Teaching Children Mathematics or
Mathematics Teacher, and social studies teachers would do well to read Social
Education and Social Science Quarterly. For teachers who are more tuned to
their grade level, elementary school teachers might subscribe to Childhood Edu¬
cation or Young Education, and high school teachers might want Clearing
House or High School Journal.
There are many professional journals in education (more than 100 are avail¬
able), and the need is to pick and choose wisely because of time and the cost of
subscriptions. The answers to two questions can help determine your reading
and subscription focus: Do I want practical advice and easy-to-read articles or
theoretical and in-depth reading? Do I want to focus on subject or grade level is¬
sues, or do I want a broad discussion of education issues?
Meetings
The two major teacher organizations—the American Federation of Teachers and
the National Education Association—meet annually in different cities. If you be¬
come a member of one of these organizations, you would benefit from being an
active participant and attending the annual meeting. The various subject-related
associations and specialized student associations also have conferences. Keep an
eye on your local colleges and universities; their departments or schools of
education often sponsor professional meetings, short seminars, and summer in¬
stitutes that are excellent for updating your knowledge about teaching and for
meeting other professionals in the local area. State departments of education and
local school districts frequently organize in-service workshops and one- or two-
day conferences on timely educational topics and teaching techniques.
The idea is to choose wisely which meetings and conferences best serve
your professional needs and interests and to organize your schedule so you can
attend them. Become acquainted with the scheduling and travel policy of your
school district. If the meetings take place during the school calendar, you will
need special permission to attend. Some school districts allow travel reimburse¬
ment for certain meetings. Local meetings sponsored by colleges or universities,
state departments, regional education agencies, or local school districts often
convene after school hours or on weekends. These sessions are easier to attend
in terms of scheduling, time, and cost.
Course Work
You should take advantage of university coursework and programs that lead to a
graduate degree and state certification in a field of study. You might also attend
summer sessions, workshops, special institutes, and in-service courses con¬
ducted by a local university or the school district.
Check to see whether special stipends, scholarships, or grants are available.
Several states offer monetary incentives for enrolling in programs in special
fields, especially science education, math education, and special education.
Many school districts offer partial or full reimbursement for graduate work.
Although many of the recent reports on excellence in education recommend
reducing the role of teacher training institutions in the preparation and certifica¬
tion of teachers by limiting the number of professional educational courses, oth¬
ers, such as the Carnegie Report, A Nation Prepared and the National Commis¬
sion on Excellence in Education, call for increased professional education and
field experiences. Reports by the Education Commission of the States, the Na¬
tional Governor’s Association, and the Holmes group (now called the Holmes
Partnership) call for a fifth-year (not five-year) program, where education
courses are offered after the student receives a bachelor’s degree.75 Currently,
these same groups (especially Holmes) have placed more emphasis on specific
practices with school partnerships and less on the amount of time spent in a pro¬
gram. Perhaps the most consistent recommendation is for closer cooperation be¬
tween schools and universities in offering preservice and in-service education of
teachers (what the Holmes Partnership describes as professional development
schools, or PDSs).
Researcher-Teacher Collaboration
In what is often called the collaborative research model, university researchers
are increasingly joining with schools in an effort to deal with a range of educa¬
tional problems and involve teachers in the solutions to these problems. The
model has spread because of the belief that through cooperative problem solving
researchers can get a better grasp for practitioners’ problems and develop strate¬
gies that improve teaching and benefit teachers and schools. Indeed, some teach¬
ers are finding that collaborative research is an excellent form of professional
development. In fact, a large portion of the new research on teacher effective¬
ness is derived from such cooperative efforts. The collaborative centers (some¬
times called R&D education centers or laboratory research centers) tend to focus
less on theory and what researchers want to study and more on practical and en¬
during problems of teachers.
Decisions regarding research questions, data collection, and reporting are
jointly determined by the university and the school. Collaboration between
teachers and researchers is stressed, and both groups work together to improve
the theory and practice of education. Researchers are learning to respect teachers
and to conduct research of practical value, and teachers are learning to appreci¬
ate the work of researchers and to do research.76
A most interesting development in collaborative relationships is that many
teachers no longer want anonymity in studies conducted by researchers. With
the old relationship, the need was to protect the rights and anonymity of “infor¬
mants” or “respondents.” Now, however, teachers often seek full partnership in
the research, so they can share in the recognition when it is published. This ethi¬
cal issue has not been pressed in the past and might very well become an issue
as experienced teachers develop relationships with researchers—and perceive
only the researchers’ benefit when the materials are published. This also deals
with the teachers’ sense of ownership and empowerment, as well as how we can
improve teacher-researcher relations so that theory and practice are blended bet¬
ter in the future.77

Ralph Tyler, (the man responsible for the curriculum planning model that most
teachers use) pointed out most professionals reach their peak performance by
their seventh year of practice, and then performance begins to decline. (If the
number who express fatigue, show stress symptoms, or drop out is any indica¬
tion, the peak may be earlier.) To prevent this decline, teachers need challenging
and practical in-service programs. Each school has to concentrate on a few of its
most serious problems and then develop in-service programs to meet these prob¬
lems. In-service programs can be vastly improved if the staffs of teacher educa¬
tion institutions and school districts work together to identify and focus on seri¬
ous problems.
If you expect to be an effective teacher, you will need to be able to cope
with frustrations and problems that arise on the job. Regardless of the amount of
satisfaction you obtain from teaching, there will be dissatisfying aspects of the
job. What follows is a list of mental health strategies: ten keys to professional
well being in the form of questions that are a mix of common sense and psychol¬
ogy for self-understanding. They are presented to help you deal with problems
or dissatisfactions that may arise on the job.
Key 1. Are you aware of your strengths and weaknesses? The ability to
make realistic self-estimates is crucial, given the fact that your
students and colleagues will observe and make judgments about
your behavior, attitude, and abilities. Learn to see yourself as
others see you and to compensate for or modify areas that need to
be improved.
Key 2. Are you aware of your social and personal skills? You will need to
understand the attitudes and feelings of your students, colleagues,
and supervisors, how to adapt to and interact with different persons,
how to learn from them, and how to work cooperatively with them.
Key 3. Can you function in a bureaucratic setting? Schools are
bureaucracies, and you must learn the rules and regulations, as well
as the norms and behaviors of the school. As a teacher, you are an
employee of an organization that has certain expectations of you
and all employees.
Key 4. Can you cope with school forms and records? Schools expect
teachers to complete a host of forms, reports, and records
accurately and on time. The quicker you become familiar with this
work, the smoother it will be for you. At first the various forms,
reports, and records may seem burdensome, yet neither you, your
supervisors, nor the school can function without them.
Key 5. Can you study and learn from someone else with similar problems?
It helps to assess people with similar problems to see what they are
doing wrong to avoid making the same mistakes.
Key 6. Do you look for help on specific questions? Often teacher
dissatisfaction pertains to a specific problem, such as inability to
maintain discipline. Consulting with an experienced colleague or
supervisor sometimes helps.
Key 7. Do you take out your frustrations in class? Don’t vent your
dissatisfactions on your students. It solves nothing and adds to your
teaching problems.
Key 8. Do you understand your roles as a teacher? The teacher’s role
goes far beyond teaching a group of students in class. Teaching
occurs in a particular social context, and much of what you do and
are expected to do is influenced by this context. Different students,
supervisors, administrators, parents, and community members
expect different things from you. You must expect to perform
varied roles depending on the realities, demands, and expectations
of a school’s culture.
Key 9. Are you able to organize your time? There are only so many hours
in a day, and many demands and expectations are imposed on you
as a person and professional. You will need to make good use of
time, to set priorities, to plan, and to get your work done.
Key 10. Can you separate your job from your personal life? Never let the
teaching job (or any job) overwhelm you to the point that it
interferes with your personal life. There are times when you may
have to spend a few extra hours in school helping students or
working with colleagues, and there are times when you will have to
spend extra after-school hours grading papers and tests, preparing
lessons, and performing clerical tasks, but for your own mental
health be sure you have time left for your private, family, and
social life.
As we conclude this chapter and this textbook, it is important to note that teach¬
ing can be difficult and rewarding. Few roles are more exciting and important
than teaching. When competent teachers work with young children, there is
rarely a dull moment. Through their students, teachers can contribute to the
shaping and growth of the community and the nation; teachers’ impact is
long-term—and we are unable to determine where the influence ceases. Teach¬
ing is a proud profession, and professional growth and development are an im¬
portant part of the life of a teacher. Unfortunately, it is likely that you will not
receive all the professional development that you need to be successful. Most
American teachers do not! Interestingly, Japanese teachers receive almost
Questions Interviewers Ask Teacher Candidates
Applying for a teacher’s job? Here are some ques¬ use in the classroom and in what
tions written by an administrator for administrators situations?
to ask young teachers being interviewed for a job. 6. Flexibility within ability levels. What special
Although not all these questions will be asked or will talents or abilities are needed to help a slow
be asked in this exact form during your interview, learner?
anticipating these types of questions should help you
7. Adaptability to administrative decisions.
to prepare. Good luck.
What would be your attitude and reaction to
1. Philosophy of education. In your opinion, an administrative decision with which you
what are the purposes of public education? do not wholeheartedly agree?
2. Age/grade level suitability. What do you see 8. Expected relationship with peers. How do
as the main differences between the needs of you feel you will go about fitting into an
elementary and middle level students, and established teaching staff that has had little
middle level and high school students? turnover?
3. Subject matter competence. What would you 9. Extracurricular interests. Which activities
say are the comparative strengths and would you be willing and able to direct if the
weaknesses of the_book series? opportunity should arise?
4. Discipline and class management. Have you 10. Plans for professional improvement. Where
found that any one form of disciplinary do you hope to be as an educator in
action is more effective than any other? approximately 10 years?
5. Lesson planning skills. What variety of
Source: Thomas P. Kopetskie, “An Administrator’s Guide to Hiring
teaching techniques would you plan to the Right Person,” NASSP Bulletin (January 1983): 14.
20 days of in-service training during their first year of teaching. Imagine! You
will be lucky to receive more than a couple, and that leads us to our final point.
As you begin your professional practice, beware of two negative realities
that are in large part not your fault, but rather a by-product of the structure of
American education. One is burnout; the other is the lack of personal and profes¬
sional self-esteem. Both are caused, directly or indirectly, by a lack of personal
and professional growth. That is, you will be placed in classrooms and expected
to do too much, too soon, with too little. The best way for you to counter the po¬
tential negative realities is to identify ways to continue to extend your own skills
(through computer networks) and to understand the complexity of the teaching
act. Jennifer Bradford, an experienced teacher, also offers some lessons for you
to consider when you need renewal:
1. Get a massage . . . find a way to relax

2. Exercise
3. Get a dog . . . or at least some perspective
4. Don’t expect “outsiders” to understand
5. Realize that schools have many faculty members for a reason
6. Vacation means. . . vacate. Find ways to “recharge.”78
A book such as this one necessarily examines teaching practices. As a

teacher who grows professionally, you must be able to see how the different
practices can be commingled to address the inherent complexity of the teaching¬
learning process. But, for now, or very soon you will need to consider how to
make sense of all the “parts” of teaching to prepare for interviews. Tips for
Teachers 12.2 offers guidance as you approach interviews. Good luck! We hope
your professional journey for the next 20 to 30 years is rewarding. To become
an effective teacher is to make a difference in children’s lives!
Summary
1. There is little national agreement on the number and mix of educational
courses needed for teacher preparation.
2. Beginning teachers need support and assistance to ease into their position and
improve their instructional skills.
3. To become a master of the trade, you will need to continually improve your
teaching abilities. People closely associated with your teaching and
instruction, including peers and supervisors, are best able to provide feedback
and evaluation. Several procedures for utilizing the ratings and observations
of these three groups have been outlined.
4. Supplementary sources for evaluating teachers include analyzing lesson and
unit plans, special projects, instructional materials and media, reading lists,
and student work and test outcomes.
5. There are hundreds'of education associations for teachers to join; the two
largest ones and the ones that have probably done the most to improve
teacher salaries and working conditions are the American Federation of

Teachers and the National Education Association.
6. Several other opportunities exist to help teachers grow as professionals,
including reading the professional literature, attending conferences, taking
courses, and collaborating with researchers.
1. Why should you begin now to consider ways to improve your skills as a
teacher?
2. What are some ways to cope with problems or concerns related to the job of
teaching?
3. Which of your experiences as a preservice teacher do you think will help you
as a beginning teacher?
4. Of the following evaluation alternatives—student, peer, self, and
supervisory—which would you prefer as a beginning teacher? Why? As an
experienced teacher? Why?
5. Name two or three professional associations you expect to join as a teacher.
How do you expect to benefit from membership in these organizations?
Things to Do
1. Survey the class on the basic adjustment problems of new teachers. Rank
order them. Discuss in class how problems considered important (top five)
can be remedied.
2. Study the important evaluation techniques of teaching. If your professor
permits, select one instrument (e.g., Table 12.3) and evaluate the professor’s
performance.
3. Have a class member teach a sample lesson in her or his subject or grade
level. Evaluate the lesson in terms of instructional methods, use of media, and
organization of subject matter.
4. Invite a representative of the AFT and NEA to your class to discuss the
organizations.
5. The text lists several professional organizations and several professional
journals. Identify the ones that offer potential for your professional
development. Explain the reasons to the class.
Darling-Hammond, Linda, Arthur E. Wise, and Stephen P. Klein. A License to Teach.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999. A plan for improving teacher licensing and
raising standards for teaching.
Goodlad, John I. Education Renewel. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997. A plan for
improving teacher preparation, along with an analysis of school change.
Holmes Group. Tomorrow’s Schools: A Report of the Holmes Group. East Lansing, MI:
Holmes Group, 1990. A host of teacher education reforms, including the need for
teacher education students to have early experiences in schools and culminating in a
fifth-year internship supervised by a mentor teacher and university faculty.
Lieberman, Ann and Lynne Miller. Teachers—Transforming Their World and Their
Work. New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1999. An
insightful book on improving teaching in context with personal and institutional
processes.
Omstein, Allan C. Teaching: Theory into Practice. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn &
Bacon, 1995. A discussion of the thoughts and behaviors of teaching, as well as the
social and cultural contexts of teaching.
Sarason, Seymour. Political Leadership and Educational Failure. San Francisco: Jossey-
Bass, 1998. What changes are needed to improve teaching and implement school
improvement.
Shulman, Judith H. Case Methods in Teacher Education. New York: Teachers College
Press, Columbia University, 1992. Focuses on case studies of teaching which enable
teachers and students alike to explore real-life teaching situations.
Key Terms
artifacts of teaching 523 peer coaching/mentoring 510
clinical supervision 520 reflection/reflective practice 516
collaborative research model 531 technical coaching 521
mental health strategies 532
End Notes
1. David Dill, What Teachers Need to Know (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990); Judith
W. Little and Milbrey W. McLaughlin, Teachers’ Work (New York: Teachers
College Press, Columbia University, 1993); Phillip C. Schlechty, Inventing Better
Schools (San Lrancisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997).
2. Kenneth A. Sirotnik, “On the Eroding Foundations of Teacher Education,” Phi Delta
Kappan (November 1989): 714.
3. Donna M. Kagan, “The Cost of Avoiding Research,” Phi Delta Kappan
(November 1989): 221. Also see Kagan, “The Reform of Teacher Education,” Phi
Delta Kappan (May 1991): 675-677.
4. James B. Conant, The Education of American Teachers (New York: McGraw-Hill,
1964).
5. James D. Koerner, The Miseducation of American Teachers (Boston: Houghton
Mifflin, 1963).
6. Susan Chira, “In the Drive to Revive Schools: Better Teachers But Too Lew,” New
York Times (2 August 1990): Al, A12; “School Administrators Report New
Teachers Are Better Prepared Than Predecessors,” AACTE Briefs (13 May 1991):
1,8. Thomas J. Matc^ynski, Earl R. Siler, Mary Levin McLaughlin, and John W. R.
Smith, “A Comparative Analysis of Achievement in Arts and Sciences Courses by
Teacher Education and Non-teacher Education Graduates,” Journal of Teacher

Education (May-June 1988): 32-37.
7. John I. Goodlad, Roger Soder, and Kenneth Sirotnik, Places Where Teachers Are
Taught (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1990).
8. E. D. Hirsch, The Schools We Need and Why We Don’t Have Them (New York:
Doubleday, 1995).
9. John I. Goodlad, Teachers for Our Nation’s Schools (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass,
1994); Goodlad, Educational Renewal (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1998).
10. James W. Fraser, “Preparing Teachers for Democratic Schools: The Holmes and
Carnegie Reports Five Years Eater,” Teacher College Record (Fall 1992): 7-39
11. Thomas J. Easley and Greg R. Bernhardt, “Preparation of Teachers Must Improve,”
Columbus Dispatch (3 October, 1998): 10A.
12. “Meet Teaching’s Toughest Critic,” NEA Today (April 1991): 8-9; telephone
conversation with Arthur E. Wise, director of NCATE (March 1, 1993.)
13. Finda Darling-Hammond, “Educating Teachers,” Academe (January-February
1999): 29.
14. Hilda Borko, “Research on Beaming to Teach,” in Research Perspectives on the
Graduate Preparation of Teachers 2, ed. A. Woolford (Englewood Cliffs, NJ:
Allyn & Bacon, 1989), 69-87; Simon Veenman, “Perceived Problems of Beginning
Teachers,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1984): 143-178; Also See
Ellen L. Kronowitz, Your First Year of Teaching and Beyond, 3rd ed. (New York:
Longman, 1999).
15. Joel A. Colbert and Dianna E. Wolff, “Surviving in the Urban Schools: A
Collaborative Model for a Beginning Teacher Support System,” Journal of Teacher
Education {May-June 1992): 193-199.
16. Frances F. Fuller, “Concerns for Teachers,” American Educational Research Journal
(March 1969): 207-226.
17. Carol S. Weinstein, “Preservice Teachers’ Expectations About the First Year of
Teaching,” Teaching and Teacher Education, no. 1 (1988): 31^-0; Weinstein,
“Prospective Elementary Teachers’ Beliefs About Teaching,” Teaching and Teacher
Education, no. 6 (1990): 279-290.
18. Marilyn Cochran-Smith and Susan Lytle, “Research on Teaching and Teacher
Research,” Educational Researcher (March 1990): 2-11.
19. Peg Gratiam et al., Teacher/Mentor: A Dialogue for Collaborative Learning. (New
York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1999).
20. William H. Kurtz, “How the Principal Can Help Beginning Teachers,” NASSP
Bulletin (January 1983): 42^15. Also see Thomas J. Sergiovanni, Building
Communities in Schools (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1994).
21. Allan C. Ornstein and Daniel U. Levine, “Social Class, Race, and School
Achievement Problems and Prospects,” Journal of Teacher Education
22. Ibid.
23. Maria Enchautequi, Immigration and County Employment Growth (Washington, DC:
Urban Institute, 1992); Edward Taylor, Phillip L’Martiniand, and Michael Fix,
Poverty and Prosperity (Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1997).
24. Michael Fix and Wendy Zimmerman, Educating Immigrant Children (Washington,
DC: Urban Institute, 1993).
25. Allan C. Omstein, “Enrollment Trends in Big City Schools,” Peabody Journal of
Education (Summer 1988): 64-71; Roger Passel and Edward Edmonston,
Immigration and Race in the United States: The 20th and 21st Centuries
(Washington, DC: Urban Institute, 1992).
26. Laurence Steinberg, Beyond the Classroom (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1996), 97.
27. James A. Banks, “An Introduction to Multicultural Education (Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1999); Pedro Reyes et al., Lessons from High-Performing
Hispanic Schools (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1999).
28. Kagan, “Professional Growth Among Preservice and Beginning Teachers,” Review
of Educational Research (Summer 1992): 129-170. Also see Robert V. Bullough
and Kerrie Baughman, First Year Teacher, Eight Years Later (New York: Teachers
29. F. Michael Connelly and D. Jean Clandinin, Shaping a Professional Identity (New
York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1999); Margaret Eisenhart,
Linda Behm, and Linda Romagnano, “Learning to Teach: Developing Expertise or
Rite of Passage?” Journal of Education for Teaching (January 1991): 51-71; Anne
Reynolds, “What Is Competent Beginning Teaching,” Review of Educational
Research (Spring 1992): 1-36.
30. Pamela Grossman, “Why Models Matter: An Alternative View on Professional
Growth in Teaching,” Review of Educational Research (Summer 1992): 171-179.
31. Lee Shulman, “Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching,”
Educational Researcher (March-April, 1986): 4-14; Lee Shulman, “Knowledge and
Teaching: Foundations of the New Reform,” Harvard Educational Review
(February 1987): 1-22; Lee Shulman, “Ways of Seeing, Ways of Knowing, Ways
of Teaching, Ways of Learning About Teaching,” Journal of Curriculum Studies
32. Susan E. Wade, Preparing Teachers for Inclusive Education (Mahwah, NJ: Erlbau,
1999).
33. Sigrun Gudmundsdottir, “Values in Pedagogical Content Knowledge, ” Journal of
Teacher Education (May-June 1991): 44-52; Rick Marks, “Pedagogical Content
Knowledge: From a Mathematical Case to a Modified Conception,” Journal of
Teacher Education (May-June 1990): 3-11; Also see Martha Hawkes Germain,
Worldly Teachers: Cultural Learning and Pedagogy (Westport, CT: Bergin &
Garvey, 1998).
34. Pamela L. Grossman, “A Study in Contrast: Sources of Pedagogical Content
Knowledge for Secondary English,” Journal of Teacher Education
35. Ibid., p. 25-26.
36. Linda Darling-Hammond, “Educating Teachers,” Academe (January-February
1999): 30.
37. Karen Carter, “Teachers’ Knowledge and Learning to Teach,” in Handbook of
Research on Teacher Education, ed. W. R. Houston (New York: Macmillan, 1990),
291-310; Daniel L. Duke, “How a Staff Development Program Can Rescue At-Risk
Students f Educational Leadership (December-January 1993): 28-30.
38. Shirley F. Heck, and C. Ray Williams, The Complex Roles of the Teacher (New
York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University, 1990).
39. Rachel C. Livsey and Parker J. Palmer, The Courage to Teach, (San Francisco:
Jossey-Bass, 1999).
40. Thomas D. Bird, Early Implementation of the California Mentor Teacher Program,
paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
Association, San Francisco, April 1986; Auroro Chase and Pat Wolfe, “Off to a
Good Start in Peer Coaching,” Educational Leadership (May 1989): 37-38; Alan
Reiman and Lois Thies-Sprinthall, Mentoring and Supervision for Teacher
Development (New York: Longman, 1998).
41. Bruce Joyce and Beverly Showers, Power in Staff Development Through Research
in Training (Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum
Development, 1983); Bruce Joyce and Beverly Showers, Student Achievement
Through Staff Development 2nd ed. (New York: Longman, 1995).
42. Gloria A. Neubert and Elizabeth C. Bratton, “Team Coaching: Staff Development
Side by Side,” Educational Leadership (February 1987): 29-32.
43. Judith T. Witmer, “Mentoring—One District’s Success Story,” NASSP Bulletin
(February 1993): 71-78.
44. Kip Tellez, “Mentors by Choice, Not Design,” Journal of Teacher Education
(May-June 1992): 214-221.
45. Thomas J. Lasley and Thomas J. Matczynski, Strategies for Teaching in a Diverse
Society (Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 1997).
46. Mary R. Jalongo, “Teachers’ Stories: Our Ways of Knowing,” Educational Leadership
(April 1992): 68-73; Dwight L. Rogers and Leslie Bobinski, “Breaking through
Isolation with New Teacher Groups” Educational Leadership (May 1999): 38-40.
47. Katherine K. Merseth, “First Aid for First-Y'ear Teachers,” Phi Delta Kappan
(May 1992): 678-683.
48. Thomas L. Good and Jere E. Brophy, Looking in Classrooms, 7th ed. (New York:
Longman, 1997), 463.
49. Bruce W. Tuckman, Evaluating Instructional Programs, 2nd ed. (Boston: Allyn &
Bacon, 1985).
50. Robert B. Kottkamp, Eugene F. Provenzo, and Marilyn M. Cohn, “Stability and
Change in a Profession: Two Decades of Teacher Attitudes, 1964-1984,” Phi Delta
Kappan (April 1986): 559-566.
51. High School and Beyond: Teacher and Administrator Survey (Washington, DC:
National Institute for Education, 1985).
52. Carol A. Dwyer, “Teaching and Diversity: Meeting the Challenges for Innovative
Teacher Assessment,” Journal of Teacher Education (March-April 1993): 119-129;
Carolyn J. Wood, “Toward More Effective Teacher Evaluation,” NASSP Bulletin
(March 1992): 52-59.
53. Margaret Olebe, Amy Jackson, Charlotte Danielson, “Investing in Beginning
Teachers—The California Model,” Educational Leadership (May 1999): 41-44.
54. Carl Rogers, A Way of Being (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1980); Donald A. Schon,
ed., The Reflective Turn (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia University,
1991).
55. Caroline Allyson Lucas, “Developing Competent Practitioners,” Educational
Leadership (May 1999): 46-47.
56. Linda Darling-Hammond and Gary Sykes, eds., Teaching as the Learning Profession
(San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1999).
57. Dorene D. Ross, “First Steps in Developing a Reflective Approach,” Journal of
Teacher Education (March-April 1989): 22-30.
58. Anne DiPardo, Teaching in Common (New York: Teachers College Press, Columbia
University, 1999); Ross, “First Steps in Developing a Reflective Approach.”
59. Thomas J. Lasley, “Promoting Teacher Reflection,” Journal of Staff Development
(Winter 1992): 24-29; Robert J. Yinger and Martha S. Hendricks-Lee, “A Pattern
of Language for Teacher Education,” Journal of Teacher Education
(November-December 1992): 367-375.
60. Morris Cogan, Clinical Supervision (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1973).
61. Robert Goldhammer et al., Clinical Supervision: Special Methods for the
Supervision of Teachers, 2nd ed. (New York: Holt, Rinehart, 1980).
62. Ben M. Harris, In-Service Education for Staff Development (Needham Heights, MA:
Allyn & Bacon, 1989); Ben M. Harris, Personnel Administration in Education
63. Allan A. Glatthorn, Supervisory Leadership (New York: HarperCollins, 1990);
Arthur E. Wise et al., Effective Teacher Selection: From Recruitment to Retention
(Santa Monica, CA: Rand Corporation, 1987).
64. Robert J. Gamstom, “How Administrators Support Peer Coaching,” Educational
Leadership (February 1987): 34-36; Thomas J. Sergiovanni, “Why We Should Seek
Substitutes for Leadership,” Educational Leadership (February 1992): 41—45.
65. Carl D. Glickman, et al., Supervision of Instruction: A Developmental Approach, 4th
ed. (Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon, 1990/1998); Mary D. Phillips and
Glickman, “Peer Coaching: Developmental Approach to Enhance Teacher
Thinking,” Journal of Staff Development (Spring 1991): 20-25.
66. Harris, Supervisory Behavior in Education.
67. John J. Robinson, “The Observation Report—A Help or Nuisance?” NAASP Bulletin
(March 1988): 22-26.
68. Gene I. Maeroff, “Building Teams to Rebuild Schools,” Phi Delta Kappan (March
1993): 512-519; Also see Ann Lieberman and Lynne Miller, Teachers—
Transferring Their World and Their Work (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1999).
69. John G. Savage, “Teacher Evaluation Without Classroom Observation,” NASSP
Bulletin (December, 1982): 41—45; Lee Shulman, “A Union of Insufficiencies:
Strategies for Teacher Assessment in a Period of Educational Reform,” Educational
Leadership (November 1988): 36—41.
70. Elizabeth A. Hebert, “Portfolios Invite Reflection,” Educational Leadership (May
1992): 58-61; Kenneth Wolf, “The Schoolteacher’s Portfolio,” Phi Delta Kappan
(October 1991): 129-136.
71. Linda Darling-Hammond, The Right to Learn (San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1997):
313-314.
72. Hal Lawson, “Beyond the New Conception of Teacher Induction,” Journal of
Teacher Education (May-June 1992): 42-45; Joan Baratz-Snowden, “The NBPTS
Begins Its Research and Development Program,” Educational Research
(August-September 1990): 19-24; Arthur E. Wise, “Policies for Reforming Teacher
Education,” Phi Delta Kappan (November 1990): 200-202.
73. Ibid.
74. Allan C. Ornstein and Daniel U. Levine, Introduction to the Foundations of
Education, 7th ed. (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2000).
75. Carnegie Task Force, A Nation Prepared: Teachers in the 21st Century (New York:
Carnegie Corporation, 1986); J. T. Sandefur, Analysis of Teacher Education Reform
Initiatives (Bowling Green, KY: Western Kentucky University, 1991); “Third Vision
StatementHolmes Forum (Fall 1991): 1-3.
76. Christopher M. Clark, Thoughtful Teaching (New York: Teachers College Press,
Columbia University, 1995); Michael O’Loughlin, “Engaging Teachers in
Emancipatory Knowledge Construction,” Journal of Teacher Education
(November-December 1992): 42—48.
77. Judith H. Shulman, “Now You See Them, Now You Don’t,” Educational
Researcher (August-September, 1990): 11-15.
78. Jennnifer J. Bradford^ “How to Stay in Teaching (When You Really Feel Like
Crying),” Educational Leadership (May 1999): 67-68.
,
NAM E I D E X
Adler, M„ 17 Brown, F., 318 Ennis, R., 20-21

Airasian, P., 455 Bruner, J., 17,26, 180, 507 Epstein, J., 481
Anderson, A., 172 Bums, R., 334 Escalente, J., 6, 9, 13, 14, 26-27, 61, 65,
Anderson, L. W., 336 66, 69
Anderson, R. C., 223 Campbell, D., 10-12 Evertson, C. M., 57, 350, 354-356,
Anderson, T. H., 239 Cangelosi, J., 370 357, 363
Arends, R., 474 Canter, L„ 8, 353
Armbuster, B. B., 239 Canter, M„ 353 Fantini, M. D., 230
Amn, J. W„ 53 Carroll, J., 333, 334 Farr, R„ 431
Ashton-Wamer, S., 68, 69 Chance, P., 145 Fief, S. F„ 414
Astington, J., 22 Charles, C. M., 366 Finn, C. E., 113
Ausubel, D., 239 Clark, K„ 44 Flatley, J. K„ 461
Clark, L. H„ 483 Fonts, J., 485
Baloche, L., 326, 329 Cogan, M., 520 Fried, R„ 9, 13
Bandura, A., 358 Coleman, J., 493 Fromm, E., 24
Barr, A. S„ 48^19 Conant, J., 497, 498 Fry, E„ 233
Barr, R., 6 Copper, H„ 148 Fuerestein, 17
Beaty, J., 459 Como, L., 125 Fuller, F„ 500
Bellack, A., 39 Costa, A. L., 405 Furst, N. F., 54
Bennett, N., 234 Csikszentmihalyi, M., 23
Berliner, D., 174, 176, 312, 377, 411 Cushing, K. S., 60 Gage, N„ 5, 55, 174, 176, 377
Biddle, B„ 174, 176, 312, 377, 411 Gagne, R., 140, 141
Black, P„ 455, 460 Darling-Hammond, L., 409, 500, 526 Galloway, C., 42-43
Block, J., 333, 334, 336 Dewey, J., 198, 323 Garcia, E., 303
Bloom, B„ 93, 99, 106, 109, 181, 193, Doyle, W„ 57, 363 Gardner, H„ 23, 203
199, 207, 307,321,322, 333, Dreikurs, R., 363, 365, 366 Giroux, H. A., 265
334, 454 Dreyfus, H. L., 60 Glasser, W., 367-370
Bonnstetter, R., 27, 28 Dreyfus, S. E., 60 Glatthom, A. A., 521
Borich, G. D., 127, 178 Duke, D. L„ 352, 360 Glickman, C., 521
Braddock, J. H„ 314 Goldhammer, R., 520
Bradford, J., 535 Eisner, E„ 62, 125, 220, 228, 442 Good, T., 45, 46, 56, 57, 140, 141,201,
Bransford, J., 198 Elbaz, F„ 69 363,377, 378,471,515,517
Bratton, E. C., 510 Ellis, A., 485 Goodlad, J., 87, 88,318, 498
Brophy, J., 45, 56, 57, 140, 141, 363, Emmer, E. W.' 57, 354-356, 357, 363 Greene, M., 62
378,471,515,517 England, D. A., 461 Greeno, J., 441
543
544 Index
Grigorenko, E., 392 Linn, R. L„ 398, 454, 455 Rogers, C., 24, 516
Gronlund, N„ 108-110, 111,398, Lipham, 17 Rogers, V., 368
454, 455 Lipman, M., 19, 20, 21 Rose, M., 10, 12
Grossman, P., 507 Lipton, M„ 138,313,317-318 Rosenshine, B„ 54, 55, 57, 194t, 221,
Grouws, D., 201 Long, H. S„ 274 302, 357
Grumet, M., 69 Lortie, D., 4 Rosenthal, R., 44
Guilford, J. P„ 180 Lowery, L., 101 Ross, D., 518
Gutierrez, R., 319 Lucas, C., 516 Rothman, R., 441
Lynch, D., 142 Rutledge, M., 232
Haberman, M., 58, 480 Ryans, D., 49, 50
Hall, J. G„ 441 Macrorie, K., 10, 16
Hamby, J., 64 Madaus, G. F., 109 Sadler, W. A., 21
Hammond, L. D., 229 Madden, N. A., 304 Sanders, W„ 308, 310, 493
Hanushek, E., 303 Madgic, R. F., 473 Schoenfeld, A., 201
Harris, B., 521, 522 Mager, R„ 110, 111, 112 Schon, D., 516
Harrison, C. R., 511 Maglaras, T., 142 Scriven, M., 454
Harrow, A., 101, 105 Mangieri, J. N., 53 Shane, H. G., 280
Hastings, T., 109 Marzano, R. J., 202, 405 Shanker, A., 164
Heimburge, J. A., 414 Matczynski, T. J., 160, 172, 512, 513 Shannon, T. A., 231
Heitmuller, P., 511 Mathews, J., 69 Sherrell, S„ 403
Henry, J., 183 McCutcheon, G„ 125, 128 Showers, B., 238, 510
Hilgard, E. R„ 335 McDermott, R., 14 Shulman, L., 48, 507
Hirsch, E. D„ Jr., 115,229, 437, McGuire, C., 109 Silber, J., 498
470, 498 McPartland, J. P., 314 Simon, H., 198, 280
Holt, J., 184 Meckel, A. M„ 352, 360 Sirotnik, K., 496
Hood, L„ 69 Mehrens, W. A., 415, 417 Sizer, T., 7, 440
House, E. R., 352 Metfessel, N. S„ 103, 104 Skinner, B. F., 191, 358
Hunkins, F. P„ 114, 146 Meux, M., 40 Slavin, R„ 304, 307, 316, 318, 319, 323,
Hunter, M„ 59, 140, 141,333 Meyer, C. A., 438, 441 324, 325, 328, 334, 377, 468, 471
Michael, W. B„ 103, 104 Smith, D„ 403
Jackson, P., 452, 456 Musgrave, G. R., 299 Smith, 0., 40
Jacobsen, L., 44 Muther, C., 232 Spady, W„ 437
Jensen, A., 180 Stake, R. E., 468
Johnson, D„ 320, 323, 328, 380, 462 Neubert, G. A., 510 Stanley, J.C., 501
Johnson, R„ 320, 323, 328, 462 Newell, A., 198, 280 Starr, I. S„ 483
Joyce, B., 510 Newmann, F., 21 Stein, B., 198
Judd, C., 197 Steinberg, L., 271, 505
Oakes, J„ 138,313,317-318 Stephens, P., 42
Kagan, D., 45^16, 497, 506 Ormrod, J., 16, 320 Sternberg, R„ 20, 21, 22, 24, 200, 406
Kaufman, B., 68 Ornstein, A. C„ 114, 137, 146, 182, 186, Stevens, R., 203
Keller, F. S., 333 187, 222, 237, 243, 377, 379, 400, Stevenson, H., 9
Killon, J. P.,511 427, 478, 503, 504, 528 Stigler, J., 9
Kinnucan-Welsch, K., 25 Osborn, J., 223, 245 Strike, K. A., 227
Kirsner, D. A., 103t, 104 Stufflebeam, D. L., 453
Klieband, H. M„ 192 Patterson, M., 41
Knapp, M„ 48 Paulson, F. L., 438 Taba, H„ 85; 96, 203, 204
Knight, P., 466 Paulson, P. R., 438 Tagg, J„ 6
Koerner, J., 497, 498 Payne, D. A., 114, 470, 478 Taigue, M., 10-12
Kohl, H„ 68 Penick, J. E., 28 Thorndike, E., 191, 197
Kopetskie, T. P., 534 Piaget, J., 198, 199, 200 Thorndike, R., 45
Kounin, J., 360, 361, 362, 364 Popham, W. J., 404 Tierney, R. J., 223
Kozol, J., 68 Posner, G. J., 227 Torff, B„ 392
Krathwohl, D„ 101, 109 Postman, N., 40, 269 Torrance, E. P., 15
Kulik, C. C„ 334 Progrow, 17 Tuckman, B. W., 51, 418, 454, 515
Kulik, J. A., 334 Tuska, S. A., 4
Raths, J., 510 Tyler, R„ 93, 97-98, 99, 110, 151, 532
Ladson-Billings, G., 47, 59 Ravitch, D., 246 Tyson, H., 234
Lasley, T. J., 160, 172, 484, 512, 513 Raygor, A., 233
Lazzaro, B., 519 Redding, N., 457 Velantine, J., 42
Lazzaro, R., 263 Resnick, L., 17 Vermette, P. J., 327
Lehmann, I. J., 415, 417 Rice, J. M„ 192 Vukovich, S., 16
Levine, D. U„ 503, 504, 528 Robinson, J., 522 Vygotsky, L„ 271-272
Index 545
Walberg, H. J„ 93, 308, Whimbey, A., 21 Yager, R. E„ 439

309, 461 Wiggins, G. R„ 392 Yinger, R., 126
Wang, M. C„ 308 Wiggins, P., 438 Youngs, B. B., 64
Watson, J. B., 358 Wiliam, D„ 455, 460
Waxman, H. C., 309 Wise, A. E„ 52, 499, 521 Zahorik, J., 124
Weinstein, G., 230 Wright, B. D., 4
546 Index
u B E N D E
Note: Page numbers in italics indicate illustrations; those followed by d indicate display text; and those
followed by t indicate tables.
Ability grouping, 312-318. See also Affective domain, in taxonomy of Attitudinal tests, 403
Instructional grouping educational objectives, Authentic assessment, 405—408
between-class, 313 103-104, 104t versus performance assessment, 441
criticisms of, 313-316, Aims, educational, 84, 85-86, 86. See Autobiographies, of teachers, 68-69
314d-316d also Instructional objectives
regrouping and, 316-318 Alameda Graduate Profile, 89-92, 92t Back-to-basics, practice and drill
tracking and, 313-316 Alerting, 363 and, 191
within-class, 316-318 Alternative assessment procedures, Beginning teachers, 60-61, 500-515,
Absolute standards, 471, 47It 457d, 485^186. See also 509-514
Academic achievement. See also Evaluation causes of failure for, 502-503
Learning American College Testing (ACT) computer networks for, 514
class size and, 303-305 test, 402 concerns and problems of, 500-503
factors affecting, 307-310, 309t American Federation of Teachers (AFT), evaluation of, 512, 513t, 515-527
grading and, 470 527-528, 528t in inner-city and culturally diverse
socioeconomic status and, 504-506 annual meetings of, 530-531 schools, 503-506
television viewing and, 271-272 Anxiety, test, 435-436 mental health strategies for, 532-534
Acceptance approach, in classroom Applied science approach, 354-357 peer coaching for, 510-512
management, 363-367, 366t Aptitude tests, 402—403 professional development for,
Accountability, test-based, 409 Argument/persuasion structures, 241 495-537
Accreditation, of teacher education Artifacts of teaching, 523-526 self-evaluation by, 515-520
programs, 498-500 Art of teaching, 5-15 Behavior modification approach, to
Achievement. See Academic Assertive discipline, 352-354 classroom management, 358-360
achievement Assessment, 391-443. See also Best answer item, 420
Achievement tests, 401^102 Evaluation; Test(s); Testing Between-class ability grouping, 313
Action system knowledge, instructional authentic, 405^108, 441 Biographies, of teachers, 68-69
planning and, 124 of beginning teachers, 512, 513t Blackboard, 266-267
Action zone, 295, 295 performance, 436-442. See also BLOCK scheduling, 139
Activities approach, for unit planning, Performance assessment lesson plans and, 161
134-138, 137t Assignments, homework, 147-149, 148t Body language, 43
Adaptations, testing, 413d-414d Assistive technology, 264-266 Books, depiction of teachers in, 9-14
Advance organizers, 239 Attitudinal factors, in learning, 64t Brainstorming, 330
Index 547
Buddy teachers, 511-512 Classroom seating arrangements, in transformation, 278

Burnout, 535 294-301. See also Seating utilization of, 274d
Buzz session, 330 arrangements virtual reality and, 279-281
Classroom tasks, direct instruction and, Computer competency, 275-276
Cable television, 272-273 305-307 Computer conferences, 283-284
California Achievement Test Classroom tests, 396-397, 412—443. See Computer expertise, 276
(CAT), 408 also Test(s) Computer hackers, 276
California Formative Assessment and adaptations for, 413d—414d Computerized instruction, practice and
Support System for Teachers completion, 422—423, 425t drill in, 192
(FASST), 516, 526 criterion-referenced, 397—4-01,400t Computerized recordkeeping,
Cardinal Principles of Secondary essay, 415, 415t, 415-416, 426—430 477-479
Education, 85-86 limitations of, 413 Computer literacy, 275
Cause/effect structures, 241 matching, 421—422, 425t Computer networks, 283-284
CD-ROM, 279 multiple-choice, 419-421, 425t for beginning teachers, 514
Certification, by National Board of preparation of, 416—417, 417d, 418d Computer simulations, 279-281
Professional Teaching Standards, purposes of, 413 Conferences
526-527 short-answer, 415—426, 425t. See parent-teacher, 482—485
Chalkboard, 266-267 also Short-answer tests post-observation, 521-523
Cheating, 433 true/false, 423—424, 425t Conferencing, computer, 283-284
Class discussions, participation in, 460 Class size, academic achievement and, Content, in unit plan, 130, 13 It
Classifying, 242 303-305 Content-based learning, versus
Classroom Clinical supervision, 520-523. process-based learning, 202
open, 297, 298 Cognitive Ability Test, 401 Content validity, 394
self-contained, 294 Cognitive development, textbook aids Continuing education, 531
Classroom management, 349-385 and, 235-237, 237t Continuous progress programs, 318
acceptance approach to, 363-367, Cognitive domain, in taxonomy of grading in, 474
366t, 372t, 373 educational objectives, 101-102, Continuous reinforcement, 192
applied science approach to, 102t-103t, 106 Contract, parent, 483, 484d
354-357, 372t, 373 Cognitive operations, levels of questions Contract grading, 474
assertive approach to, 352-354, and, 205t, 427t Convergent questions, 181, 182t
372t, 373 Cognitive structures, 15 Cooperative learning, 323-329
behavior modification approach to, Cognitive task demands, textbook benefits of, 323-324
358-360, 372t, 373 selection and, 233-235 definition of, 323
communication in, 382-383 Cognitive taxonomy, 181, 182t formal, 325-326
consistency in, 352d essay questions and, 427t guidelines for, 328
continuum of, 351 Collaborative research model, 531-532 informal, 326-328, 327t
discipline in, 375-383 Colleagues, support from, 509-513 methods of, 324d, 325-328
effective methods of, 357t Color-coded co-op cards, 327t Copyright law, 225
essential skills in, 375 Commission on the Reorganization of Comers, 327t
feedback in, 381 Secondary Education, 85-86 Corporal punishment, 377-378
group managerial approach to, Common strategy, 199 Course objectives, 95
360-363, 364d, 372t, 373 Communication, 382-383 Courses of study, 128
high teacher intervention approaches nonverbal, 41—44, 43t planning and, 128-129
in, 352-360, 371-375, 372t with parents, 481—485 Creativity, 23-28
in inner-city schools, 503-506 verbal, 39—41 characteristics of, 24
modeling in, 359-360 Comparison/contrast structures, 241 fostering of, 25-28, 28t
moderate teacher intervention Compensation, in small groups, 312 versus intelligence, 24
approaches in, 360-375, 372t Competency tests, 401—402, 408—409 measurement of, 23
movement management in, 362-363 Competition, pros and cons of, 323 types of, 23
overview of, 349-351 Completion test, 422—423, 425t versus wisdom, 24
parent contracts and, 483, 484d Computer(s), 273-282. See also Criterion-referenced tests,
Pathwise standards for, 376t Instructional technology 397—401, 400t
preventive strategies in, 360d, E-mail and, 284-285 in mastery learning, 334, 336
380-383 in evaluation, 278 versus norm-referenced tests,
punishment in, 377-380 in information acquisition, 278 398-401,4001
self-assessment for, 383-385 networking via, 283-284, 514 Critical thinking, 17-22, 20t
success approach to, 367-371, on-line courses and, 285 characteristics of, 20-21
372t, 373 pros and cons of, 274d, 278, 280d importance of, 19-21
trust in, 381-382 software for, 278-279 versus ordinary thinking, 20
Classroom objectives, 95-97, 96t teachers’ expertise in, 276-278, 277t teaching of, 19-21
Classroom observation, 38t in telecommunication, 282-285 Criticism, 189
548 Index
Cultural diversity Educational goals, 84, 86-92, 90t-92t quizzes in, 457458
beginning teachers and, 503-506 instructional objectives and, 85. See realistic, 452
lesson plans and, 159-161, 160d, 160t also Instructional objectives report cards in, 476477
teacher expectations and, 47 Tyler model for, 97-99, 98 reports, themes, and research papers
textbook selection and, 230-232 Educational television, 270-271, 272. in, 462,463t
Culturally relevant pedagogy, 47, 47t See also Television self-judgment in, 456
Cumulative record, 479 Education journals, 530 summative, 454, 455t
Curricular validity, 394 Education students, concerns of, supervisory, 520-523
Curriculum 500-503 of teachers, 52-54, 512, 513t,
hierarchy of, 727 Effective teaching. See Teacher 515-527. See also Teacher
nationalization of, 115-116 effectiveness evaluation
Curve, grading, 47It, 471472 Electronic mail, 284-285 versus testing, 452
Electronic networking, 283-284 types of, 453455,455t
Dangerous Minds, 6, 8 Electronic recordkeeping, 477-479 Evaluation procedures, in unit plan,
Dead Poets Society, 13, 14 E-mail, 284-285 13 It, 132
Debate and panel, 330 Emotions, suppression of, 312 Evertson-Emmer model, 57
Debates, in evaluation, 462463 Employment interviews, 534d Exhibitions, 440t, 440441
Default strategies, 238 Encouragement, versus praise, 364 Exit tests, 402
Democratic model, of teaching, 363 Equivalent-forms method, 393 Experiential teaching, 201-203
Departmentalization, 294 Escalante: The Best Teacher in America Expert teachers, 59-61
Desist techniques, 362 (Mathews), 69 versus novice teachers, 60-61
Development, in lesson plan, 145-146 Essay tests, 415t, 415416, 426-430. Explanatory help, 320-321
Diagnostic evaluation, 454, 455t See also Test(s) Explicit instruction. See Direct
Diagramming, 242 cognitive levels and, 427t instruction
Direct instruction. See also Whole-group grading of, 428 Expository structure, 240
instruction preparation of, 426, 429—430 Extrinsic motivation, 144-145
versus inquiry-based instruction, 202 pros and cons of, 415t, 415-416,
practice and drill in, 193-195, 194d 426-429 Fair use rules, 225
problem-solving and, 203 reliability of, 428 Feedback
Direct-question item, 420 versus short-answer tests, 415t, in evaluation, 459, 459d
Disabled 415-416 in supervisory observation, 521-523
assistive technology for, 263-264 student preparation for, 428 for tests, 436
test adaptations for, 413d-414d writing ability and, 428-429 Films, 268. See also Instructional
Discipline, 375-383. See also Classroom Evaluation, 392. See also Assessment; technology
management Test(s); Testing depiction of teachers in, 6-9
assertive, 352-354 alternative criteria for, 457d, 485—486 Final summary, 150, 179
for difficult students, 377, 379d of beginning teachers, 512, 513t, Fish bowl, 330
grading and, 469 515-527 Flexible grouping lesson plan,
guidelines for, 380 class discussions and recitations 152-153, 153t
implementation of, 378 in, 460 Fordham Foundation, 114
parent contracts and, 483, 484d cumulative record in, 479 Formal mental operations, 199-200
Pathwise standards for, 376t definition of, 392 Formal planning, 128. See also
preventative, 380-383 diagnostic, 454, 455t Instructional planning
punishment and, 377-380 discussions and debates in, 462463 Formative evaluation, 454455, 455t
seating arrangements and, 294 electronic recordkeeping in, 477-479 Fragmentation, 362
severity of, 378 fairness in, 452
Discussions formal, 456 Gage model, 55-56
in evaluation, 462-463 formative, 454-455, 455t Games, 248, 249-250
lectures and, 173 grading and, 467475. See also Generalization structures, 241
student participation in, 460 Grading General objectives, 108
Display board, 266-267 group activities for, 459460 Goals, educational, 84, 85, 86, 86-92,
Distracters, 419 homework in, 460461, 46It 88t, 90t-92t. See also Instructional
Divergent questions, 181-183, 183t impact of, 452 objectives
Diversity, lesson plans and, implementation of, 486487 GOALS 2000, 87, 90t-91t
159-161, 160d informal, 456 Good-Brophy model, 56
Drill-and-tutorial programs, 279 methods and approaches in, 456467 Grading, 467475
Duplicated materials, 224 notebooks and note taking in, 462 absolute, 471, 47It
observation of student work in, achievement and, 470
Education 458459 combining and weighing data in,
continuing, 531 peer, 456, 463464 472473
teacher, 496-500 placement, 453454, 455t continuous process, 474
Educational aims, 84, 85-86 purposes of, 392, 453d contract, 474
Index 549
of essay tests, 428 Inner-city schools, 503-506 educational goals and, 84, 85, 86,
guidelines for, 479^181 Inquiry-based instruction, versus direct 86-92
of homework, 469 instruction, 202 formulation of, 97-115, 113d
items included in, 469^170, 472^173 Inquiry-discovery lesson plan, general, 108
letter, 470 157-158, 158t Gronlund method for, 108-110, lilt
mastery, 474 Inquiry-discovery techniques, information sources for, 112-114
methods of, 470-473, 473d 27, 28t lesson plan, 96t, 96-97
point system in, 473d Instruction Mager method for, 110-112
purposes of, 467-468 direct. See Direct instruction nationalization of, 115-116
relative, 47It, 471—472 individualized, 332-337 program, 93-95, 94t
subjectivity in, 469 inquiry-based, 202 in psychomotor domain,
Graduate Record Examination nongraded, 318-319 104-106, 105t
(GRE), 402 on-line, 285 responsibility for, 112-114, 113d
Gronlund method, for instructional reading. See Reading instruction state standards for, 112-114, 113d
objectives, 108-110, lilt remedial, 193 taxonomy of, 99-106, 102t-105t
Group activities, 329t, 329-331 small-group, 311-322 Tyler model for, 97-99, 98
Group focus, maintenance of, 363 versus teaching, 172 types of, 92-97
Grouping triarchic, 406, 406t unit plan, 95-97, 96t
ability. See Instructional grouping whole-group, 301-310 Instructional paradigm, 6, 7, 7t
homogeneous versus heterogeneous, Instructional aids, 220, 235-238, versus learning paradigm, 7t, 7-9
312-318 236d-237d, 237t Instructional planning, 123-166
Group managerial approach, in Instructional design approach, to lesson action system knowledge and, 124
classroom management, plans, 140, 141t actual versus theoretical, 124—126
360-363, 364d Instructional grouping, 293-337 collaborative, 125-126
Guessing, in true-false tests, 424 ability, 312-318 courses of study and, 128-129
classroom tasks and, 305-307 daily, 126
Hackers, 276 class size and, 303-305 decision-making in, 124-126
Handicapped in direct instruction, 300-301 flexibility in, 126
assistive technology for, 263-264 implementation of, 337-338 flow of teaching content in, 127
test adaptations for, 413d—414d in individualized instruction, formulaic versus flexible, 124—126,
Heterogeneous grouping, 312-318. See 332-337 125d, 164d
also Instructional grouping permanent groups and, 303 lesson plans in, 139-150. See also
Heuristic thinking, 198 Instructional materials Lesson plans
High-level questions, 180-181 complementarity of, 227 by level of instruction, 126-129,127
High school, reading instruction in, copying of, 225 levels of, 126-129,127
238-239 development of, 224—225 mental versus formal, 128
High-stakes tests, 408—409 duplicated, 224 overview of, 124-126, 150-151
High teacher intervention approaches, games, 248, 249-250 principles of, 150-151
352-360, 371-375, 372t guidelines for, 250-251 process of, 124-126
Homework, 147-149, 148t, journals, magazines, and real-life experiences in, 15 Id
460-461, 461t newspapers, 246-248 reflections on, 150-151
grading of, 469. See also Grading learning styles and, 227 strategic, 129
guidelines for, 147-149, 148t, 4611 organization of, 226 students' learning styles and,
Homogeneous grouping, 312-318. See presentation of, 226-227 126-128
also Instructional grouping selection of, 220-225, 222t, 223d subject matter knowledge and, 124
nongraded instruction and, 318-319 sequence of, 226-227 unit plans in, 126,127, 129-139. See
Hooks and anchors, 176 simulations, 248-250 also Unit plan(s)
Horizontal curricular relationships, 226 structure of, 226 weekly, 126
Humane schools, 368d textbook and pedagogical aids, at yearly level, 126-129
235-238, 236d-237d, 237t Instructional strategies, 171-210
Inclusive education textbooks, 228-235. See also implementation of, 208-210
assistive technology and, 263-264 Textbooks inductive teaching, 204—205
test adaptations and, 413d-414d understandability of, 226 lectures, 173-179
Incomplete statement item, 420 workbooks, 243-245 practice and drill, 190-197
Independent study, online, 285 Instructional objectives, 83-118 problem solving, 197-201
Individualized instruction, 332-337 in affective domain, 103-104, 104t questioning, 179-189
implementation of, 338 classroom, 95-97, 96t unguided inquiry approach, 205,
Individually Guided Education (IGE), in cognitive domain, 101-102, 205t, 206d-208d
332-333 102t-103t, 106 Instructional technology, 261-289
Inductive teaching, 204-205, 205t, course, 95 chalkboard and display board,
206d-208d definition of, 84-85 266-267
Informal lectures, 173 educational aims and, 84, 85-86, 86 computers, 273-282
550 Index
for disabled, 263-264 Learning, 15-28. See also Academic materials and media in, 146-147
films, 268 achievement methods in, 146
impact of, 285-286 attitudinal factors in, 63-65, 64t monitoring of, 142d, 150
implementation of, 286-287 cognitive structures and, 15-17 motivational devices in, 143-145
overhead projectors, 267-268 cooperative, 323-329 objectives in, 142-143
overview of, 261-263 critical thinking and, 17-22 outline for, 145-146
pros and cons of, 263-264 factors affecting, 307-310, 309t overview of, 139
telecommunications systems, leaming-to-learn skills and, 17 real-life experiences in, 151
282-285 motivational factors in, 63-65, 64t sample, 151-158
television, 269-273 psychosocial dimensions of, 203 student diversity and, 159-161,
videotapes, 268, 273 Learning activities 160d, 160t
web sites for, 289t in unit plan, 130, 13It student participation and, 161
Instructional television, 272. See also in unit plans, 130-132, 13It student understanding and,
Television Learning disabilities, test adaptations 161-162
Instructional variables, in direct for, 413d-414d summaries in, 149-150
instruction, 307-310, 309t Learning for Mastery, 333. See also thinking skills, 153-154, 155t
Instruction behaviors approach, to lesson Mastery learning time frame for, 161
plans, 140, 1411 Learning paradigm, 7t, 7-9 Literature
INTASC (Interstate New Teacher Learning skills, teaching of, 15-17 depiction of teachers in, 9-14
Assessment and Support Learning styles, instructional materials professional, 530
Consortium), 79, 80—81 and, 227 Low-level questions, 180-181
instructional objectives and, Lectures, 173-179
115-116 advantages of, 174 Magazines, 246-248
instructional planning and, 151 brief, 173 Mager’s method, for instructional
teacher evaluation and, 525-526 clarity in, 177-178, 178t objectives, 110-112, lilt
Intelligence disadvantages of, 173-174 Mainstreaming
versus creativity, 24 discussions and, 173 assistive technology and,
versus knowledge, 106 versus experiential teaching, 202 263-264
Intelligence tests, 401 formal, 173 test adaptations and, 413d-414d
Interest stations, 297, 299 guidelines for, 175d Master teachers, 57-59
Internal (medial) summary, 150, 179 informal, 173 Mastery grading, 474
International Society for Technology in length of, 175 Mastery learning, 333-337
Education (ISTE), 276 note taking in, 179, 462^-63 benefits of, 333-335
Internet. See also Computers organizers in, 176,177 competency tests in, 401-402
access to, 283, 283, 284 preparation of, 175 criterion-reference testing in,
simulation access on, 281 presentation of, 174-179, 175d 334, 336
Teaching with Technology Web site relevance of, 176 criticisms of, 335-336
on, 275d structure and sequence in, 176 grading in, 474
Interviews, sample questions summaries in, 179 guidelines for, 336-337
for, 534d visual aids for, 178 peer assistance and, 321-322, 333
Intrinsic motivation, 143-144 Legislative mandates, standardized practice and drill in, 193
Intuitive thinking, 25-26 testing and, 14 versus self-regulatory skills, 335
Iowa Tests of Basic Skills, 401 Lesson plan objectives, 96-97, 97t Mastery learning approach, to lesson
Lesson plans, 123-165. See also plans, 140, 14 It
Jerkiness, 362 Instructional planning Mastery learning lesson plan,
Jigsaw, 326 assignments in, 147-149, 148t 154-157, 156t
Job interviews, 534d components of, 140-150, 141t Mastery report cards, 476-477
Joint strategy, 199 definition of, 139 Matching test, 421^122, 425t
Journals development in, 145-146 Materials and media, in lesson plans,
as instructional material, 246-248 direct instructional approach for, 146-147
professional, 530 140, 141t Medial summary, 150, 179
student, 464 evaluation of, 162 Mental health strategies, 532-534
flexibility in, 161, 164d Mental planning, 128. See also
Kappa Delta Pi, 530 flexible grouping, 152-153, 153t Instructional planning
Keller plan, 333 implementation of, 159-162, 163d Mentoring, for teachers, 510-512
K-i-s-s principle, 178 inquiry-discovery, 157-158, 158t Merit pay, evaluation for, 52-54
Knowledge, versus intelligence, 106 instructional design approach for, Metacognition, 17, 199-200
Kuder Preference Record, 403 140, 141t Metaphors, 67
instruction behaviors approach for, Miller Analogies Test (MAT), 402
Labeling, of high and low achievers, 140, 141t Minnesota Multiphasic Personality
45^18, 46t mastery learning approach for, 140, Inventory (MMPI), 403
Law of exercise, 191 141t, 154-157, 156t Minority students, expectations of, 47
Index 551
Misbehavior Novice teachers, 60-61 Portfolios, 438—440, 464-467, 466d

management of, 377. See also support for, 500-515 Positive reinforcement, in classroom
Classroom management; Numbered heads together, 326-327 management, 358-360
Discipline Possible Lives (Rose), 10, 19
punishment for, 377-380 Objectives Practice and drill, 190-197
Modeling, in classroom management, instructional. See Instructional applications of, 190-195
359-360 objectives back-to-basics movement and, 191
Moderate teacher intervention in unit plan, 130, 13It behaviorist approaches and, 191-192
approaches, 360-375, 372t Observation as busy work, 191
Motivation, 143-145 classroom, 38t computers in, 279
criticism and, 189 supervisory, 520-523 in direct instruction, 193-195, 194d
extrinsic, 144—145 Occupational Interest Inventory, 403 guidelines for, 195-196, 197d
intrinsic, 143-144 Occupational interest tests, 403 implementation of, 195-196, 197d
praise and, 189 On-line courses, 285 in mastery learning, 193
Motivational devices, in lesson plans, Open classroom, 297, 298 persistence of, 192d
143-145 Oregon Certificate of Initial Mastering in remedial instruction, 193
Motivational factors, in learning, 64t (CIM), 402, 403t in review, 193-195
Motivational theories, application Otis-Lennon test, 401 in seatwork, 191
of, 18d Outline, in lesson plan, 145-146 workbooks in, 244-245
Movement management, 362-363 Outlining, 242 Praise, 189
Movies, 268. See also Instructional Overdwelling, 362 versus encouragement, 364
technology Overhead projectors, 267-268 PRAXIS, 79
depiction of teachers in, 6-9 Overlapping behavior, 362 instructional objectives and, 115-116
Mr. Holland's Opus, 6, 8 in teacher evaluation, 524—526, 525t
Multiculturalism Pairs check, 327t Preassessment, 453—454, 455t
beginning teachers and, 503-506 Paradigm Predictive validity, 394-395
lesson plans and, 159-161, instructional, 6, 7, 7t Proactive thinking, 24
160d, 160t learning, 7t, 7-9 Probing, 188-189
teacher expectations and, 47 Parent contract, 483, 484d Problem solving, 197-201
textbook selection and, 230-232 Parents, communication with, 481^185 in experiential teaching, 201-203
Multiple-choice test, 419—421, 425t. See Part-part-whole strategy, 199 fostering of, 202
also Short-answer tests Pathwise assessment criteria, 79, successful strategies for, 199-201
80d, 151 teaching of, 198-201
Narrative structure, 239 Pedagogical aids, 235-238, Problem-solving, direct instruction
National Assessment of Educational 236d-237d, 237t and, 203
Progress (NAEP), 401, 408 Pedagogical content knowledge, 507 Process-product approach, 37, 54-66
National Board of Professional Teaching Peer coaching, for teachers, 510-512 limitations of, 61-66
Standards, 526-527 Peer evaluation, 456, 463-464 Professional development, 495-537
National Council for Accreditation of Peer tutoring, 320-323, 322, 333 for beginning teachers, 500-515
Teacher Education (NCATE), Performance, observation of, 458^459 collaborative research and, 531-532
498-500 Performance assessment, 436—442, continuing education and, 531
National Education Association (NEA), 485—486 professional journals and, 530
527-528, 528t versus authentic assessment, 441 reading for, 530
annual meetings of, 530-531 example of, 43 8t reflection in, 516-520
National Science Teachers Association exhibitions and, 440t, 440-441 self-evaluation in, 515-520
(NSTA), learning goals of, 98-99, portfolios in, 438^440, supervisory evaluation and
lOOt-lOlt 464^467, 466d assistance in, 520-523
National standards, 116 project work and, 441 teacher associations and,
Nation at Risk, A, 86 pros and cons of, 437^438 527-528, 528t
Negative reinforcement, in classroom Performance records/reports, 475^479 Professional journals, 530
management, 358-360 Permanent groups, 303 Professional organizations, 528-530
Networking, electronic, 283-284 Permanent record, 479 Professional self-esteem, 535
Newspapers, 246-248 Personality tests, 403 Program for Learning in Accordance
Nongraded instruction, 318-319 Personalized System of Instruction with Needs (PLAN), 332, 333
Nonstandardized tests, 396-397 (PSI), 333 Program objectives, 93-95
Nonverbal communication, 41^14, 43t Phi Delta Kappa, 529-530 Progressive sharing, in small
Norm-referenced tests, 397 Placement evaluation, 453^454, 455t groups, 312
versus criterion-referenced tests, Planning Progress report cards, 476-477
398-401, 400t instructional, 123-165. See also Project on Individually Prescribed
Notebooks, in evaluation, 462-463 Instructional planning Instruction (IPI), 332, 333
Note taking, 179 strategic, 129 Project work, 441
in evaluation, 462-463 Political correctness and, 232 Proper sharing, in small groups, 312
552 Index
Psychomotor domain, 104-106, 105t Religion, textbook selection and, 231 student participation and,
Punishment, 377-380 Remedial instruction, practice and drill 294-295, 295
corporal, 377-378 in, 193 teaching style and, 294, 295
guidelines for, 380 Report cards, 476^177 traditional, 295, 295
implementation of, 378 school, 410, 41 It Seatwork, 191
Purposes, educational, 97-99, 98 Reports, in evaluation, 462, 463t practice and drill and, 191
Pygmalion in the Classroom, 44^15 Research workbooks and, 244
biographies and autobiographies in, Secondary education, reading instruction
Question/answer structure, 240-242 68-69 in, 238-239
Questioning, directing in, 186-188 on effective teaching, 36-39, 54-70 Self-contained classroom, 294
Questions, 179-189 future directions for, 66-70 Self-esteem
cognitive operations and, 205t holistic approach in, 66-70 learning and, 64t, 65
cognitive taxonomy and, 181,182t limitations of, 61-66 professional, 535
commenting and praising and, 189 metaphors in, 67 Self-evaluation, by teachers, 515-520
convergent, 181-184, 182t, 183t overview of, 36-39 Self-fulfilling prophecies, 44, 46t
divergent, 181-183, 183t process-product approach in, 37, Self-judgment, 456
guidelines for, 184-189, 54-66 Separate strategy, 199
185d-187d, 460 stories in, 67-68 Short-answer tests, 415-426
high-level, 180-181 on teacher characteristics, 48-54 completion questions in, 422^123
interview, 534d on teacher effects, 54—60 versus essay tests, 415t, 415^416
low-level, 180-181 on teacher expectations, 44^-8 matching questions in, 421^122
for nonvolunteers, 188 teacher participation in, 70 multiple-choice, 419-421
probing and, 188-189 on teacher-student interactions, preparation of, 416^117, 417d, 418d
redirecting of, 188 39-44 pros and cons of, 415t, 415-416
right answers and, 183-184 voice in, 69-70 true/false questions in, 423-424
student, 321 Researcher-teacher collaboration, Simulations, 248-250
test. See Test(s) 531-532 computer, 279-281
types of, 179-184 Research papers, in evaluation, 462, 463t Skills, in unit plan, 130, 13 It
wait-time for, 186 Resources and materials, in unit plan, Small-group instruction, 311-332
Quizzes, 457-458 13 It, 131-132 ability grouping and, 312-318. See
Response structures, 240-242 also Ability grouping
Race, teacher expectations and, 47 Review, practice and drill in, 193-195 advantages of, 311-312
Reactive thinking, 24 Role-playing, 330 cooperative learning and, 323-329
Readability, of textbooks, 232-233 Rosenshine-Furst model, 54-55 definition of, 311
Reader aids, 235-238, 236d-237d, 237t Round Robin, 326, 327t group activities in, 329t, 329-331
Reading Round table, 330 guidelines for, 331-332
across content areas, 238-239 implementation of, 337-338
cognitive development and, Scaffolding, 271 instructional strategies and, 312
235-237, 237t Scheduling, BLOCK, 139 nongraded, 318-319
default strategies for, 238 Scholastic Aptitude Tests (SAT), 402 peer tutoring and, 320-323, 322
Reading formulas, 232-233 Schools Software, 278-279
Reading instruction humane, 368d Space, in nonverbal communication, 42
narrative versus expository structure inner-city, 503-506 Specific learning outcomes, 108
and, 239-240 learning paradigm, 7t, 7-9 Spirituality, textbook selection and, 231
at secondary level, 238-239 report cards for, 410, 41 It Split-half method, 393
Reality therapy, 367 Science of teaching, 14, 35-70 Spontaneous concepts, 271-272
Real-life experiences, integration of, 15 Id Scorer reliability, 393-394 Stack formation, 297, 299
Records Seating arrangements, 294-301 Staff development programs,
computerized, 477^179 action zone and, 295, 295 510-513, 51 Id
student, 479 circular, 295, 295 Stand and Deliver, 6
Reflection, in professional development, discipline and, 294, 297 Standardized tests, 14, 395^110. See
516-520 double circular, 295, 296 also Test(s); Testing
Reflective practice, 516-520 double horseshoe, 295, 296 achievement, 401-402
Reflective thinking, 198 double rectangular, 295, 296 cognitive processes in, 405-406
Regrouping, 316-318 factors affecting, 297-301 high-stakes, 408^109
Reinforcement formal, 294, 295 improvement of, 409-412
in classroom management, 358-360 grade level and, 295, 297, 300 intelligence, 401
in practice and drill, 192 horseshoe, 295, 295 limitations of, 405-408, 410^112
Relative standards, 47 It, 471^172 informal, 294, 295 norm-referenced, 397
Reliability in open classroom, 297, 298 overreliance on, 408—409
scorer, 393-394 rectangular, 295, 295 purposes of, 409^-12
test, 392-394, 428 for special activities, 297, 299 recalibration of, 411-412
Index 553
recommendations for, 409-412 Teacher(s) self-evaluation in, 515-520

teaching to, 138, 408-409 beginning, 60-61, 500-515 supervisory, 520-523
test anxiety and, 435^-36 biographies and autobiographies of, Teacher expectations, 44-48, 46t
unit planning and, 138 68-69 Teacher-made tests. See Classroom tests
validity of, 392, 394-395, buddy, 511-512 Teacher planning, 123-165. See also
410-412 computer skills of, 276-278, 277t Instructional planning
Standford-Binet test, 401 continuing education for, 531 Teacher processes, 54-55
Stanford Achievement Tests, 401 evaluation of, 52-54, 512, 513t, Teacher professionalism, enhancement
Star teachers, 58-59 515-527 of, 499d
Stereotyping, in textbooks, 230-232 expert, 59-61 Teacher-student interaction, 39-44
Stories, in research, 67-68 instructional paradigm, 6, 7t nonverbal, 41—44, 43t
Strategic leniency, 312 learned, 40 verbal, 39—41
Strategic planning, 129 learning paradigm, 7t, 7-9 Teacher thinking, 66-70
Student(s) in literature, 9-14 Teaching. See also under Instructional
labeling of, 45-48, 46t master, 57-59 as art, 5-15
teacher expectations of, 44-48, 46t in movies, 6-9 artifacts of, 523-526
Student achievement. See Academic professional development for, by beginning teachers, 506-508
achievement 495-537. See also Professional canned approaches in, 13-14
Student activities, in unit plans, development culturally relevant, 47, 47t
130-132, 13 It professional organizations for, democratic model of, 363
Student diversity 528-530 effective, 5-15
beginning teachers and, 503-506 as research collaborators, 70 experiential, 201-203
lesson plans and, 159-161, self-evaluation by, 515-520 inductive, 204-205, 205t, 206d-208d
160d, 160t star, 58-59 versus instruction, 172
teacher expectations and, 47 stories by, 67-68 reasons for, 3-4, 4t
textbook selection and, 230-232 voice of, 69-70 research on, 36-39
Student participation, 460 Teacher (Ashton-Warner), 68 science of, 14
seating arrangements and, Teacher associations, 527-528, 528t Teaching aids, 235-238,
294-295, 295 annual meetings of, 530-531 236d-237d, 237t
Student performance, observation of, Teacher burnout, 535 Teaching content, flow of,127
458-459 Teacher certification, by National Board Teaching cycles, 39—41
Student products, teacher processes and, of Professional Teaching Teaching models
54-55 Standards, 526-527 Evertson-Emmer, 57
Student records, 479 Teacher characteristics, research on, Gage, 55-56
Student teachers, concerns of, 48-54, 49t, 50t, 53t Good-Brophy, 56
500-503 Teacher competencies, 51-54, 53t limitations of, 61-66
Student teams-achievement divisions Teacher development, stages of, 60 product-oriented, 37, 54-61
(STD), 325 Teacher education Rosenshine-Furst, 54-55
Study of Schooling (Goodlad), 87, 92t performance effects of, 507-508 Teaching programs, canned, 13-14
Subject matter knowledge, instructional reform of, 496-500 Teaching styles
planning and, 124 Teacher effectiveness of beginning teachers, 506-508
Success approach, in classroom evaluation of, 36-39 research on, 54-66
management, 367-371 process-product view of, 37, 54-66 seating arrangements and, 294, 295
Summaries, 149-150 research on, 36-39, 54-70 teacher effectiveness and, 54-66
final, 150, 179 teacher thinking and, 66-70 types of, 62
in lesson plans, 149-150 threats to, 13-14 Teaching to the test, 138, 408-409
medial (internal), 150, 179 Teacher effects, 54-61 Teaching with Technology
Summative evaluation, 454, 455t analysis of, 61-66 Web site, 275d
Supervisory evaluation and assistance, Evertson-Emmer model for, 57 Teams-games tournament (TGT), 325
520-523 Gage model for, 55-56 Technical coaching, 521
Sylvia (Hood), 69 Good-Brophy model for, 56 Technology. See Instructional
master teachers and, 57-59 technology
Taxonomic approach, for unit planning, Rosenshine-Furst model for, 54-55 Telecommunications systems, 282-285.
134, 135t teaching experience and, 60-61 See also Instructional technology
Taxonomy of educational objectives, Teacher evaluation, 52-54, 515-527 Teleconferences, 283-284
99-106 artifacts of teaching in, 523-526 Television, 269-273. See also
affective domain in, 103-104, 104t INTASC standards for, 525-526 Instructional technology
application of, 106-112, 109d National Board of Professional academic achievement and, 271-272
cognitive domain in, 101-102, Teaching Standards for, cable, 272-273
102t-103t, 106 526-527 educational, 270-271, 272
psychomotor domain in, new forms of, 523-527 guidelines for, 273
104-106, 105t PRAXIS criteria for, 524-526, 525t influence of, 269-270
554 Index
instructional, 272 overrelianpe on, 408409 Unitplan(s), 129-139

interactive, 283 trends in, 405412 activities approach for,
parent tips for, 270d Test performance 134-138, 137t
utilization of, 272-273 analysis of, 43 Id components of, 130-132, 13It
Terminal help, 320-321 anxiety and, 435436 definition of, 129-130
Term papers, in evaluation, 462, 463t factors affecting, 430436 focus and specificity in, 133
Test(s), 391-443. See also Evaluation Test-retest method, 393 guidelines for, 132d, 138-139
achievement, 401—402 Test-taking skills, 418d, 430431, 432d organization and implementation of,
administration of, 431434, Textbook aids, 235-238, 132d, 132t
434t435t 236d-237d, 237t taxonomic approach for, 134, 135t
aptitude, 402-403 Textbook elements, 235-238, topic approach for, 134, 136t— 137t
attitudinal, 403 236d-237d, 237t Unit plan objectives, 95-97, 96t
in authentic assessment, 4054-08 Textbooks, 228-235. See also University, virtual, 285
cheating on, 433 Instructional materials Usability, 395
classroom (teacher-made), 412443. advantages of, 229-230 . S; > „
See also Classroom tests balanced viewpoirtts|in, 23'i- 232 Validity, test, 392, 394-395, 410412
competency, 401402, 408410 cognitive 4sk demands and, Values, textbook selection and, 231
completion, 422423, 425t 233-235 .... Verbal communication, 3941
criterion-referenced, 334, 336, disadvantages of, 228, 246d Vermont Equity Project, 232
397401,4001 evaluation of, 243d Vertical curricular relationships, 226
essay, 415t, 415416, 426430 expository structure in, 240 Videotapes, 268, 273. See also
exit, 402 guidelines for, 242, 246d Films; Television
feedback for, 436 metacognition and, 239-242 Virtual reality, 279-281
grading of, 467475. See also narrative structure in, 239 Virtual,university, 285
Grading readability of, 232-233 Visual aids, for lectures, 178
high-stakes, 408409 selection of, 220-225, 222t, 223d, Voice, 69-70
intelligence, 401 230-235
limitations of, 405408, stereotypes in, 230-232 Wait-time, 186
410412,413 Themes, in evaluation, 462, 463t Web sites. See also
matching, 421422, 425t Thinking Computer(s); Internet
multiple-choice, 419421, 425t creative, 23-28 for education technology, 289t
nonstandardized, 396-397 critical, 17-22, 20t Teaching with Technology, 275d
norm-referenced, 397, 398401, 400t intuitive, 25-26 Wechsler Intelligence Scale for
occupational aptitude, 403 reactive versus proactive, 24 Children, 401
personality, 403 Thinking skills lesson plan, Whole-gron]i instruction, 301-310. See
preparation of, 416417, 417d 153—154, 155t atso Direct instruction
preparing students for, 430431 Think-pair-share, 326-327 advantages of, 301-302
purposes of, 413 Think-pair square, 327-328 classroom tasks and, 305-307
reliability of, 392-394 Thomas B. Fordham Foundation, 114 disadvantages of, 302
returning of, 436 Time constraints, 13 guidelines for, 310
selection of, 392-395, 403405 Time utilization, in nonverbal implementation of, 337
self-assessment for, 442443 communication, 42 instructional variables and,
short-answer, 415426, 425t Topic and subtopic structures, 241 307-310, 309t
standardized, 14, 395410. See also Topic approach, for unit planning, 134, Whole-to-part structures, 241-242
Standardized tests 136t—137t " "• Wisdom, versus creativity, 24
teaching to, 408409 Touch, in nonverbal communication, 42 Within-class ability grouping, 316-318
true/false, 423424, 425t Tracking, criticisms of, 313-316, With-it-ness, 362
usability of, 395 314d-316d Workbooks, 243-245
validity of, 392, 394-395, 410412 Transcripts, of television broadcasts, 273 Work involvement, classroom
ways to improve, 399d Triarchic instruction, 406, 406t management and, 361
Test anxiety, 435436 True/false questions, 423424, 425t Writing assignments
Test-based accountability, 409 Trust, discipline and, 381-382 evaluation of, 462463, 463t
Testing Twenty Teachers (Macrorie), 10, 19 holistic scoring of, 463t
accountability and, 409
authentic assessment in, 405408 Unguided inquiry approach, 205, 205t,
cognitive processes in, 405406 206d-208d
versus evaluation!, 452 Unions, teacher, 527-528, 528t
MARYGROUE COLLEGE
3 ns? 0DD752BD fl
DATE DUE
V— i f 2001 |^| :r u ^
a
A s?52 * ' 1 * 41 f
;
r j )4
IUN 2 2 2! p ns | fl i ZDKS
1
Jill i 1 pflfi/ &| «? QMt 5
A!
JUL 2' 9 , MAR 1 3 >006
DEC 1 ^ HBT JUL isw
MAR f 0 200!)
wn tout
WWTS Ms APF 0 1 2UU9
~Wim S
inn/
mar n 5 CtJUl
3DI . 2 2 2004
DEMCO 38-296
S
K-12 METHODS
trategies for Effective Teaching, third edition is designed to enhance pre-service teachers'
understanding of major teaching functions and to help them master the art and science of
teaching. It provides pre-service teachers with excellent coverage of inclusive classrooms,
multicultural education, and how teachers can integrate technology into their programs. With a
focus on PRAXIS and INTASC criteria, the text fosters a basic appreciation for the growing move¬
ment toward national standards that define competencies for effective teachers. It is an excellent
tool and resource for developing practical teaching skills that work in today's classrooms.
New to this edition:
• Increased coverage of diversity issues
• Expanded information on creating more inclusive classrooms
• Hundreds of updated references
Here's what professors are saying about Strategies for Effective Teaching, third edition:
"I believe the text is particularly strong in the breadth of chapters, the clear, readable prose and
the objectivity with which the material is presented. The material is well researched and cited....
I found no major weaknesses in the text....The approach is interesting and given the increased
emphasis on standards, the approach is valid and informative for the beginning teacher."
—Athena Waite, The University of California-Riverside
"I like the approach of this book because each chapter adds another dimension of teaching....
The revision is excellent; most of the revised parts make the book easier to read....This book is a
gold mine for prospective teachers....I encourage all students to keep this book for their profes¬
sional library. Anytime they have a question about setting up a group plan, developing problem
solving skills, or how to choose a textbook, they can reference this book."
—Joan Black, Governor's State University
"The main strength of the text is the research and content as well as the readings....It covers
what we believe teachers need to know to survive in the classroom."
—Anne Mungai, Adelphi University
"The various models of the science of teaching are excellent, including the research on teacher
characteristics. I believe there is a much-needed place for this text in the educational world.
The information is vital."
—Constance Hoag, The University of South Dakota
"I do not know of any other textbooks that are on a par with [this] text."
—Lyle R. Smith, Augusta State University
ISBN O-b^-ETAflS-X
00
McGraw-Hill Higher Education
A Division of The McGraw-Hill Companies
9 780697 298850
www.mhhe.com

Strategies For Effective Teaching, Third Edition

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Strategies For Effective Teaching, Third Edition

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

i e J o r Third Edition

STRATEGIES FOR EFFECTIVE TEACHING, THIRD EDITION

This book is printed on acid-free paper.

1234567890 QPF/QPF 09876 543210

Editorial director: Jane E. Vaicunas

Cover designer: Heidi Baughman

Library of Congress Cataioging-in-Publication Data

The Art and Science of Teaching

Chapter 1 The Art of Teaching 3

The Technical Skills of Teaching

Chapter 3 Instructional Objectives 83

Chapter 12 Professional Growth 495

Preface xi 2 The Science of Teaching 35

SECTION II Lesson Plans 139

6 Instructional Materials 219 Electronic Mail 284

Applied Science Approach 354 Test Anxiety 435

Electronic Recordkeeping All Support from Other Beginning

Becoming a teacher is an extraordinarily complex venture. Some of what is

1. Teachers must possess thorough disciplinary knowledge.

Reviewers Who Made It Possible

Joan Black Anne Mungai

Chapter 1 1.1 Strategies and Methods for Motivating Students 18

Chapter 9 9.1 Suggestions for Analyzing Preventative Measures 360

Chapter 1 E. Paul Torrance, Be a Great Teacher! 15

Chapter 10 Bruce W. Tuckman, Rules of Thumb for Taking

research. Consequently, a good deal of the subject matter is rooted in educational

• Pathwise (PRAXIS Series) and INTASC standards that ground teaching

The Art and Science

1 The Art of Teaching

The Reasons for Teaching

Table 1.1 Categories of Reasons for Deciding to Teach

Crusader One who seeks to change the system or society

Content Specialist One who wants to teach a specific content area

Which One Best Describes You?

The Art of Effective Teaching

Effective Teachers in the Movies

A number of teacher movies draw attention to the power of effective teaching.

Table 1.2 Paradigms for Teaching

The Instructional Paradigm The Learning Paradigm

Mission and Purposes

• Provide/deliver instruction • Produce learning

• Atomistic; parts prior to whole • Holistic; whole prior to parts

Learning-paradigm teachers focus on whether and how students learn.

What most of the excellent teacher movies depict is a pedagogical paradigm

Instead of accepting his assessment, Iris Holland challenges her husband to

Effective Teachers in Literature

Opportunity 1: Practice, practice, practice. Good teachers work hard at what

Teaching requires a lot of mental effort. Focus your effort on designing

These opportunities, however, will be difficult for you to see because of

Rightly understood, engaging students in content requires us to change our peda¬

Threat 3: Legislative mandates. Legislatures around the country are seek¬

Artful Teaching and Knowledge Construction

Compared to low-achieving students, high-achieving students have a more

I break the I-Search project down into four steps:

Learning-paradigm teacher's know how to foster leaming-to-leam skills be¬

Tips for Teachers 1.1

Strategies and Methods for Motivating Students

One of the most

explore alternatives to their own viewpoints, to consider evidence, to make dis¬

Table 1.3 Critical Thinking Skills Underlying Intelligent Behavior

1. Recognizing and defining the nature of a problem

Critical Thinking in the Everyday World

To stimulate creative thinking, learning-paradigm teachers encourage stu¬