(repeat ? or pair and share) (not an opinion) RSE-TASC · special education content area...
Transcript of (repeat ? or pair and share) (not an opinion) RSE-TASC · special education content area...
December 2013
RSE-TASC reporter
LO N G I S LAN D REG I ON AL S PE C I AL E DUCATI O N—T EC HN I C AL AS S I S TAN C E S UPPORT C E N TE R
A Relationship Between Instruction and Behavior: Keeping Students Engaged By Marjorie Guzewicz ~ Special Education School Improvement Specialist
In today’s complex world of
classroom instruction, teachers
need to continuously develop skills
that extend beyond the delivery of
curriculum in order to encourage
sustained engagement in their
classrooms. This requires the
utilization of a variety of teaching
styles and approaches to meet the
needs of all learners. Classroom
populations, in this day and age,
typically include an intellectually
and socially diverse student body
that cannot be approached with a
one-size-fits-all mindset. As a
result, teachers need to understand,
be sensitive to, and most
importantly, be responsive to the
many instructional factors that may
affect student engagement for all
learners. One such factor that a
teacher has direct control over is
the classroom environment (see the
October edition of the RSE-TASC
Reporter). Also, teachers need to
continuously develop a more
informed understanding of how
children learn best, and then plan
accordingly. Some examples of
such purposeful planning are the
inclusion of students’ preferences
and interests as a context for
curricula material, Activating Prior
Knowledge (APK) before
introducing a new concept, and
utilizing Explicit, Direct
Instructional (EDI) strategies, such as
formative assessment, to inform real
time classroom decisions. With such an
array of factors to consider as an
integral part of instructional planning,
this article explores the relationship
between effective instruction and
engagement, how to prevent low student
engagement from creating classroom
disruptions, and how sustained
engagement supports positive learning
outcomes for all students.
One instructional challenge, as reported
by teachers who were asked what
factors impede their ability to meet
student needs, was the ability to keep
them engaged and interested in learning
(Godzicki, et.al., 2013). Low levels of
engagement in the classroom raises the
risk of disruptive behavior, decreases
class participation and attentiveness, and
has the potential to result in a lack of
assignment completion. This, in turn,
will typically result in lower student
learning and performance outcomes. In the
research study, Increasing Motivation and
Engagement in Elementary and Middle School
Students Through Technology-Supported
Learning Environments, researchers looked at
what elements had an impact on student
motivation and engagement, as perceived by
both students and teachers. A substantial
percentage of students interviewed (33%)
believed that class activities were not designed
to be considerate of their personal preferences
and interests. A disconnect between instruction
and student interest can create a disruption in
student focus, negatively impacting engagement.
Making personal connections between students’
preferences and interests and the lesson,
including utilizing the Career Development and
Occupational Studies (CDOS) Foundational
Skills as a part of instruction (see the November
edition of the RSE-TASC Reporter), has the
potential to increase students’ attention and
motivation. Increased attention to learning is
likely to decrease distractions which create
classroom disturbances (Cakir, Simsek, Tezcan,
2009), and therefore has great potential to
improve student outcomes. (cont. on pg. 2)
In this issue: A Relationship Between Instruction and Behavior ~ Page 1 EDI Lesson Components ~ Page 2 Long Island RSE-TASC Regional Workshops ~ Page 3 Contact Information & Related Resource s ~ Page 4
“...the best solution for discipline is effective
instruction that prevents discipline problems from
happening in the first place.” ~ John Hollingsworth, President, DataWORKS
L.I. Regional Special EducationTechnical Assistance Support Center
Checking for understanding the TAPPLE way
Source: Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI): The power of the well-crafted, well-taught lesson/John Hollingsworth and Silvia Ybarra. DataWORKS
Educational Research, © 2009
each First
sk a Question (not an opinion)
ause (repeat ? or pair and share)
ick a Non-Volunteer (3; data mining)
isten to the Responses (determines your next move)
ffective, Explicit Feedback (echo, elaborate or explain)
T
A
P
P
L
E
Please visit us on the web, at: http://www.esboces.org/Page/89
Figure 1
2
In the same study, teachers reported that disruptive behaviors and
lack of participation were two of the main factors that had an
adverse impact on student engagement. Conversely, the study
also indicated that student concentration (i.e. engagement)
increased when students felt safe and perceived that a caring
relationship with their teacher was established. As a result,
teachers can actually promote engagement and learning by
fostering a positive environment (safety), teach in close
proximity to their students (contributes to a sense of caring), and
organize the classroom space to support a variety of learning
opportunities (teacher-to-peer interaction, peer-to-peer
interaction, small groups, partners, etc.) (Archer & Hughes,
2011) that allow students to explore and express ideas through
various means and mediums. In sum, building a positive
environment that takes students’ preferences and interests into
consideration is likely to improve engagement and have a
positive impact on students’ academic outcomes. A study
conducted by Wright, Horn, & Sanders (1997) concluded that,
“the most important factor affecting student learning is the
teacher”.
Extensive research has also concluded that for all students, and
especially students with disabilities, at-risk students, and English
Language Learners, Explicit Direct Instruction (EDI) improves
student engagement and learning. DataWORKS, an educational
research company dedicated to using real data to identify best
practices for teaching low performing students, concluded the
following: “we have found that the best solution for discipline
is effective instruction that prevents discipline problems from
happening in the first place.” EDI is an instructional
framework consisting of several researched validated
components (see Figure 2 above) that combine the design and
delivery of lessons that explicitly teach content. New Annual
Professional Performance Review (AAAR) mandates and New
York State’s dual Accountability Systems place an emphasis on
increasing performance outcomes for all students, including
students with disabilities. A meta-analysis of over twenty years
of research revealed that the best evidence-based practice in
special education content area instruction is EDI. One such
reason is that, when analyzed separately, each component of EDI
promotes sustained student engagement, increased time-on-task,
and a decrease in classroom disruption.
John Hollingsworth, President of DataWORKS, believes that the
most important component of EDI is the continuous Checking for
Understanding (CFU). Checking for understanding is the
essence of formative assessment and is defined as:
(cont. from pg. 1)
“…a process used by teachers and students during
instruction that provides feedback to adjust ongoing
teaching and learning to improve students’ achievement of
intended instructional outcomes.” (CCSSO, 2008)
Further research has concluded that the use of formative assessment
alone can significantly increase student engagement and outcomes,
especially for lower achieving students. The research, by Black and
Wiliams (2010), reveals that when achievement gains for students
exposed to enhanced instruction (stronger use of formative
assessment practices) is compared to achievement gains of students
where instruction is not enhanced, significant and often substantial
achievement gains are noted for the students who received the
treatment (enhanced instruction). Black and Wiliams also agree that
lower achieving students benefit more from formative assessment
then higher achieving students, in part because of resultant increased
engagement, therefore reducing the achievement gap while raising
overall classroom performance.
To put this into a statistical perspective, consider the following
achievement measure:
The effects of effective formative assessment on
achievement can be as much as .4 to .7 standard
deviations, the equivalent of moving from the
50th percentile to the 65th or 75th percentile on
a standardized test.
(ASCD, 2010)
By utilizing formative assessment strategies to CFU, teachers not
only ensure that students are learning more, it also increases
attention to the lesson, increases student participation, and
consequently decreases the occurrences of distracting and off-task
behaviors (Hollingsworth & Ybarra, 2009). This principally occurs,
according to Hollingsworth, because teachers are continuously
requiring students to “do something” of an academic nature.
As an example, Figure 1 (page 1) depicts the strategy TAPPLE.
This is one EDI strategy used to guide teachers in CFU throughout
instruction. In following the components of EDI (figure 2), lessons
can be designed to increase student participation and engagement,
resulting in an increase in student outcomes. Since an engaged
student is less likely to participate in disruptive classroom
behaviors, a positive environment may evolve into one that supports
learning for all.
Teacher effectiveness directly impacts student achievement (Wright,
Horn & Sanders, 1997). By increasing student engagement through
the design of instruction that is considerate of students’ preferences
and interests, creating a caring and safe environment, and utilizing
EDI strategies, such as formative assessment, research strongly
suggests that disruptive classroom behaviors will decrease and
positive student outcomes will improve, creating a win-win situation
for all.
EDI lesson design components
Learning Objective - CFU
Activate Prior Knowledge - CFU
Concept Development - CFU
Skill Development - CFU
Lesson Importance - CFU
Guided Practice - CFU
Lesson Closure - CFU
Independent Practice - CFU
Strategies for Increasing Student Engagement:
Design instruction that is considerate of students’ preferences and interests
Create a caring and safe environment that supports a variety of learning opportunities
Utilize research validated EDI strategies
Figure 2
3
L ON G I S L A ND RS E - TA SC RE GI ON AL W OR KS H OPS
behavior workshops • bilingual workshops • non-district workshops • regulations • transition
To Register for our Regional Workshops, you may visit our new and improved website by clicking on this link: http://www.esboces.org/Page/89, or...
Please go to http://webreg.esboces.org to register online. Under “Search Options”, pull-down and check RSE-TASC and then click “Search”.
Then, simply scroll down to register for the workshop you are interested in. Clicking on the hyperlinked
workshop dates below will bring you directly to the respective MyLearningPlan® registration page.
• LONG ISLAND RSE-TASC REGIONAL CATALOGUE SAMPLE • FOR A COMPLETE LISTING OF WORKSHOPS, GO TO WEBREG
December New York State Career Development and Occupational Studies (CDOS) (Suffolk) — 12/2/13
Commencement Credential—Module I—Overview (Nassau) — 12/5/13 & 12 6/13 facilitated by Ms. Arlene Crandall
New York State Career Development and Occupational Studies (CDOS) Commencement Credential—Module III Connecting the CDOS Standards to Work Based Learning Opportunities (Nassau) — 12/17/13 facilitated by Ms. Cathy Pantelides
Making Decisions at CSE for an English Language Learner—Diff. Vs. Disability (Suffolk) — 12/19/13 facilitated by Ms. Elizabeth DeFazio-Rodriguez
January Exit Summaries (Nassau) — 1/9/14
facilitated by Ms. Cathy Pantelides
Transition Assessment to Inform the Development of the IEP (Suffolk) — 1/22/14 facilitated by Mr. Matthew Jurgens
Evidence Based Practices in Classroom Management (2 Day Training) (Suffolk) — 1/16 (1) 1/23 (2) facilitated by Ms. Michelle Levy
Quality IEP: Measureable Annual Goals (Suffolk) — 1/28/14 facilitated by Ms. Arlene Crandall
February New York State Career Development and Occupational Studies (CDOS)
Commencement Credential—Module II—The Three CDOS Learning Standards (Suffolk) — 2/7/14 facilitated by Mr. Matthew Jurgens
Adapting Instruction to Address Behavior (Suffolk) — 2/27/14 facilitated by Ms. Michelle Levy
4
Resources Archer, A., & Hughes, C. A. (2011). Explicit instruction: Efficient and effective teaching. New York, NY: Guilford Publications.
Brookhart, S.M. (2010). Formative Assessment Strategies for Every
Classroom: An ASCD Action Tool. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
Cakir, O., Simsek, N., & Tezcan, N. (2009). A web based generation
system for personalization of e-learning materials. International
Journal of Social Sciences, 4(4), 283-286 retrieved from http://www.waset.org/journals/ijhss/v4/v4-4-40.pdf on August 21, 2013
CCSSO (2008). Formative assessment: Examples of practice. A work product initiated and led by Caroline Wylie, ETS, for the Formative
Assessment for Students and Teachers (FAST) Collaborative.
Council of Chief State School Officers: Wash., DC.
DataWORKS at http://www.dataworks-ed.com/
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2010). The Purposeful Classroom: How to
Structure Lessons with Learning Goals in Mind. Alexandria, VA: ASCD.
Godzicki, L., Godzicki, N., Krofel, M., & Michaels, R. (2013). Increasing Motivation and Engagement in Elementary and Middle
School Students through Technology-Supported Learning
Environments. Online submission retrieved from http://
www.eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/recordDetail?accno=ED541343
Hollingsworth, J., & Ybarra, S. (2009). Explicit direct instruction:
The power of the well-crafted, well-taught lesson. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press
Heritage, M. (2010). Formative Assessment and
Next-Generation Assessment Systems: Are We Losing an Opportunity? prepared for the Council of Chief State School Officers
Wright, S. P., Horn, S. P., & Sanders, W. L. (1997). Teacher and
classroom context effects on student achievement: Implications for
teacher evaluation. Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education, 57-67.
IN SUFFOLK CALL • 631.218.4197 IN NASSAU CALL • 516.396.2989
CENTRAL OFFICE (Suffolk office): Vincent Leone, Coordinator
Sharon Van Winckel, Senior Account Clerk Lynn Hayes, Senior Clerk Typist
NASSAU SPECIAL EDUCATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT SPECIALISTS (SESIS):
Naomi Gershman Monique Habersham
Matthew Zegers Roxane Diamond, Senior Typist Clerk
SUFFOLK SPECIAL EDUCATION SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT SPECIALISTS (SESIS):
Marjorie Guzewicz Elizabeth Silva
REGIONAL TRAINERS (Suffolk office):
Arlene B. Crandall, Regional Special Education Training Specialist Elizabeth DeFazio-Rodriguez, Bilingual Special Education Specialist
Michelle Levy, Behavior Specialist Cathy Pantelides, Nassau Transition Specialist Matthew Jurgens, Suffolk Transition Specialist
Non-District Specialist, TBD
• RSE-TASC STAFF •
Creating Student Engagement
“Student engagement is created when the teacher asks the student to
do something.” DataWORKS
Check that all stu-dents are learning Promote rehearsal of the new language Processes new infor-mation to understand Refocuses students during the lesson Helps students read new words
Supports students with pronunciation
Stores information in multiple ways
For more information on student engagement
go to: http://www.dataworks-ed.com/