Visible Learning in Literacy: 3 Takeaways from John Hattie and Nancy Frey

Opportunity to learn with renowned education researchers and practitioners rejuvenates the mind and reignites the passion in many educators. In the second of our two-part series, Steven Anderson and I share what we learned from the Visible Learning Institute in San Diego, this time with a focus on literacy. Head over to part one to see our initial thoughts and shares.

The second day at the Visible Learning Institute in San Diego provided attendees choice in one of two paths in which to learn;  literacy and math. Steven and I jumped at the chance to learn from Nancy Frey and chose the literacy learning to continue to grow our knowledge in this area for supporting educators around the globe. Frey and Doug Fisher (her colleague) have worked extensively with John Hattie in the realm of literacy practices and transferring his research into practice. They have multiple books with Hattie, two of our favorites being Visible Learning for Literacy Grades K-12 and Teaching Literacy in the Visible Learning Classroom, Grades 6-12. 12.

Frey consistently delivers high-quality and classroom applicable learning during her workshops and this experience was much the same. During Day 2, she used a combination of research, theory, and classroom application to deepen our understanding of high-impact instruction during each phase of learning.

3 Takeaways:

Constrained and Unconstrained Skills – Constrained skills are those that have boundaries and edges to them and are acquired at concrete stages of development. These include phonemic awareness and phonics. Unconstrained skills are boundless, limitless and continue to grow throughout life. These include vocabulary and comprehension. While no argument can be made against the direct instruction and learning of constrained skills, Frey reminded us all that they are important but not sufficient. Leveled texts are great for learning constrained skills, but unconstrained skills are not developed through these types of texts. Both constrained and unconstrained skills develop independently; it is important for all educators in all subject areas to pay attention to both.

Reading Volume – The amount one reads is important, but do you know how important it is for our students? Frey offered statistics to drive home the point about reading volume. Reading 20 minutes a day = 1,800,000 words per year & 90th percentile on standardized tests. Reading 5 minutes a day = 282,000 words per year & 50th percentile on standardized tests. Finally, a student who reads only 1 minute a day = 8,000 words per year & 10th percentile on standardized tests. Assumptions that all kids have access and time at home to read will not increase reading volume; instead, make time for students to read in your classroom.

In addition, as Frey reinforced, students need both content specific reading but also need the exploration of texts beyond the content. If a student enjoys to pleasure read graphic novels we should not dissuade that student from choosing them. Rather, we should support them while still exposing them to content specific passages and texts.

Surface, Deep, Transfer Learning – Hattie, Fisher, and Frey discuss a scale for learning and divide it up into 3 parts of a triangle. Surface, Deep, and Transfer Learning make up this scale representing learning as a process, not an event. Along with the description of each, Frey offered high-impact instructional strategies to support learning.

Surface – Surface Learning, the base of the triangle, is learning that takes place during the acquisition of skills and understanding of concepts. Learners often recognize patterns and start to build foundational knowledge to support the next level of the triangle, Deep Learning.

High-Impact Instructional Strategies to support Surface Learning and the effect size:
  • Repeated Reading (.67)
  • Feedback (.75)
  • Collaborative Learning with Peers (.59)

Deep – Deep Learning builds off of the Surface Learning students acquire. As Frey states, you have to know something before you are able to do something with that knowledge. Deep Learning consists of consolidation through connections, relationships, and schema to organize skills and concepts. Deep learning is also used to consolidate constrained and unconstrained skills. Students need more complex tasks to deepen their own learning.

High-Impact Instructional Strategies to support Deep Learning and the effect size:
  • Concept Mapping (.60)
  • Class Discussions (.82)
  • Metacognitive Strategies (.69)
  • Reciprocal Teaching (.74)

Transfer – Finally, learning and school should not stop with just Surface and Deep Learning. Transfer Learning is self-regulation to continue learning skills and content independent of the teacher. Frey admits, not everything we teach or learn is worthy of Transfer Learning. Transfer Learning places more responsibility on the learner to question, investigate, and organize to propel their learning.

High-Impact Instructional Strategies to support Transfer Learning and the effect size.
  • Reading Across Documents to Conceptually Organize (.85)
  • Formal Discussions, Debates, Socratic Seminars (.82)
  • Problem Solving (.61)
  • Extended Writing (.43)

PBL – Problem-based Learning – effect size is low at surface level learning (.15) but significantly higher at Transfer level learning (.61)

As Day 2 came to a close, our minds were spinning with information and ideas. Nancy Frey not only shared Visible Learning in Literacy but invited us to consider what approaches work best at the right time for the right learning, never to hold an instructional strategy in higher esteem than a student, and our favorite, “Every student deserves a great teacher, not by chance, but by design.”

Top 5 Takeaways from Visible Learning Institute

My Post (14)

This week, roles were flipped as Steven Anderson and I had an opportunity to learn from John Hattie at the Visible Learning Institute in San Diego. Hattie, a researcher in education, has studied more than 150 million students, synthesizing more than 800 meta-studies to determine the effect size various influences have on teaching and learning. His work disaggregates not only what works in education but what works best. And perhaps most importantly, where we as educators need to concentrate our efforts to support student learning at high levels.

The institute was two days, with Day One led by Hattie and Karen Flories, and covered topics on research, Mindframes, feedback and how to better analyze data. Educators from around the globe had the opportunity to dig into the what, why, and how of the Visible Learning methods while being able to speak directly with both Hattie and Flories. Copious amounts of notes were taken, but the following were our Top 5 Takeaways from the first day of learning.

Top 5 Takeaways from the Visible Learning Institute:

  1. Upscaling Success – Upscaling is not typically seen in education. In fact, Hattie states that “all you need to enhance achievement is … a pulse.”  Every teacher can have success in terms of student achievement in their classroom, this is why every teacher can argue that they have evidence that what they are doing works. Hattie urges us all, “Do not ask what works – but works best!” Identify what works best for your students and upscale those practices school-wide. In most cases, it takes 10-12 weeks to see the results of new instructional methods tried with students. During that time we need to have the “sticktoitness” to follow through. But we also have to be mindful that we may not see the results we want and not be afraid to leave practices behind that just don’t work. If something works, upscale it. If it doesn’t abandon it and move on to something that does.
  2. Goldilocks Principle – “Not too hard, Not too boring.” In alignment with current brain research, Hattie introduced us to the Goldilocks Principle. In terms of learning, students prefer learning to be a challenge, but not too hard that success is impossible and also learning that is relevant and engaging. This also ties back to ability grouping and how the research shows that just isn’t what is best for students, especially those that are struggling. When we group students by ability, educators naturally slow down their teaching to ensure everyone “got it.” Rather, what should take place is a heterogeneous mix of ability levels where a challenge is the norm. Our brains, and especially those that are developing, crave a challenge.
  3. Assessment-Capable Learners – Flories introduced the concept of Assessment-Capable Learners, claiming that they should know the answers to 3 Key Questions of Visible Learning: What am I learning? How will I know I’ve been successful in my learning? What evidence can I provide to support I’ve learned? Students who can answer these questions have teachers who see learning through the eyes of their students and help them to become their own teachers. Learning can’t be a mystery to students. Nor can it be just a repetition of facts and figures. Teacher clarity has an effect size of 0.75. The more we are clear with students of what we are doing, why we are doing it and how we will know we’ve done it, the more they learn. As part of this, we would add a fourth question students should be able to answer. How will I communicate what I’ve learned to others? Not only should the learning reside within the student, but there must also be opportunities for them to share with that they know.
  4. Know Thy Impact – Repeated throughout the Institute, “Know Thy Impact”, Hattie argues that the most important Mindframe of Visible Learning is when teachers understand their job is to evaluate their own impact on student learning. Acknowledging the word “Impact” is ambiguous, Hattie sheds light that the conversations in schools relating to the definition of Impact solidify what each school views as important in terms of learning with Their students but should include triangulation of scores, student’s voice, and artifacts of student work. When educators Know Their Impact, they make better decisions on student learning success.
  5. Feedback – Flories ended the day with a focus on feedback and the .70 effect size on student learning. Startling statements were shared. “80% of feedback that kids get is from each other and 80% of that feedback is wrong – Nuthall.” And “Effective feedback doubles the speed of learning – Dylan William”. Student Feedback should be targeted to close the gap in their learning, and used by students to understand the next steps in their learning. Effective feedback begins with teacher clarity when designing and delivering tasks. Good feedback isn’t just focused on the tasks. (And actually, the feedback that is focused exclusively on task doesn’t show students grow anyway.) The feedback that does the most good is that on the self, the personal evaluation of the learner, and done during the process, not at the end. Feedback is just in time, just for me, information delivered when and where it can do the most good.

By the end of the first day, we had taken an endless supply of notes and had much to digest and discuss. What is even more clear to us now is that while much of what we learned feels like common sense to us, it serves as a good reminder and new learning for some.

Hattie says there are no bad teachers; just Good Teachers and Great Teachers. What separates the two is the willingness to know thyself, know thy students and know thy impact. Those that do not only have students who are high achievers but they also have students who are fully prepared for what’s next.

In our next post, we will look at the 5 Takeaways from Day Two where we dove into Visible Learning in the Literacy Classroom with Nancy Frey.

3 Unique Benefits of eduCLIMBER

My Post (10).jpg

This post is sponsored by We Are Teachers and eduCLIMBER by Illuminate Education. All opinions expressed are my own. (Meaning, if I don’t like something about a particular education product I will not write about it on my blog)

When I support districts on their school improvement plans attention is given to a root cause analysis and typically analyzing data. While there is an abundance of data collected in schools and districts, using the data to make evidence-based decisions often falls shorts because of:

  • Too much data
  • Not clearly disaggregated
  • Unclear next steps
  • Inability to make sense of data
  • TIME – time to dig into the data, collaborate with colleagues, manipulate data to discern information in a way that is important to you

The importance of analyzing data can’t be stressed enough. Research shows that educators who consistently analyze data, in appropriate ways, have students who grow. Therefore, there may be an abundance of data, however, it may not be used in appropriate contexts or for the best purposes.

That’s why I was excited to preview eduCLIMBER, a cloud-based data system created for educators by educators to make data analysis more efficient and accurate. This interactive tool allows you to visualize data from assessments, behavior incidents, attendance, and response to intervention (RtI) to use in minutes.

While digging into eduCLIMBER I found multiple uses for both the teacher and district. A bonus was the parent-friendly visuals that were available to communicate with parents and guardians about their student’s learning. I also appreciated the attention to the triangulation of data. One data point is considered a snapshot; triangulating the data creates a more clear picture of our students. Finally, I found 3 unique benefits that eduCLIMBER provided that I have not seen on other platforms.

3 Unique Benefits of eduCLIMBER:

  1. Easily import data from nearly any standardized norm-referenced, criterion-referenced, formative/summative assessment. (Read my post here to understand the types of data listed) The ability to disaggregate data across sources is something every school and district should be taking advantage of.
  2.  Evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of interventions within districts. If we don’t know how well interventions are working, how can we assume they are working at all?
  3. Collect, report, and analyze school-wide behavior incidents with a fully customizable PBIS suite. Data can be used not just for academic growth but for analyzing students holistically (i.e. Social-Emotional Learning).

Want a free demo?  Use this link: eduCLIMBER demo

So You Want to Add Literature Discussion Groups to Your Classroom…

So You Want To Add Literature Discussion Groups to Your Classroom...

Developed in the 1980’s, Literature Discussion Groups (LDGs) were inspired by a group of students who wanted to continue talking about their books as a group. As a result, educators across the nation have utilized this type of small group work in their literacy classrooms. But while there are many different frameworks for Guided Reading for educators to implement, Literature Discussion Groups can look different from class to class. With this being acknowledged, there are commonalities that most share. Below is a chart which depicts the common elements of Literature Discussion Groups, as well as a comparison to Guided Reading.

Literature Discussion Groups Guided Reading
Purpose To develop critical thinking, speaking and listening skills while diving deep into the text as a peer group. LDG support collaboration, independence, and reading as a social and lifelong experience.    Small group instruction to help students build their reading power so that they can apply skills independently. Must include direct instruction from an expert teacher.
Who Typically used in grades 7-12. ALL students in the class are part of LDGs. Student Choice is extended to ALL students and teachers support and scaffold access to text so that all may participate. Mostly occurring in elementary classrooms, Guided Reading can also be used to support older students on foundational skills, reading comprehension, or vocabulary needs.
Text Students have a choice in what they read. Students typically make their choice based off of book talks or other intros. of the text. All students have their own copy of the text which they can annotate or add sticky notes to while reading and prepping for the discussion.   The text is determined by the teacher. Relevance and engagement are considered in book selection, as well as appropriate challenge and instruction purpose.
Groups Groups of 5-7 students based on choice. Groups are fluid and temporary, changing with each new book selection. All LDGs occur at the same time. Groups are created based on student needs and are typically made up of 4-6 students. Groups should be fluid and evaluated and changed about every three weeks. Guided Reading groups take place one at a time with the teacher.
Teacher Role The teacher acts as a facilitator, listening in on each group but does not become a member of them. During the small group discussions, the teacher takes notes which are used for reflective feedback, whole class instruction and/or evaluation/participation. The teacher designs direct instruction to focus student comprehension, word study, and fluency during small group instruction. The teacher listens in as each student reads and makes on the spot teaching decision based on reading behaviors exhibited.  
Student Role Students develop questions, participate in substantive conversations, support thinking with textual evidence and critical thinking. Students build collective understanding through dialogic learning. Students learn and apply skills from teacher instruction to guided reading text, and independent text. Students individually read the text to self and out loud when designated by the teacher. Students participate in discussion and extension activities in Guided Reading.

This independence and thoughtful discussion about reading in Literature Discussion Groups is one of the goals for literacy teachers. We want our students to enjoy reading, have a choice in what they read, and be able to thoughtfully discuss what they read with others. While this type of small group work does not happen naturally in most classrooms, there are scaffolds and management procedures that teachers can use to set everyone up for success.

First, it is important for students to understand the purpose of LDGs and have a clear image of what a high-functioning group looks and sounds like. This can be done through a video, discussion, or demonstration. Last week I had the pleasure to tape an example LDG with a group of teachers who plan to share it with their students. This exercise allowed us to talk through the important elements we wanted to highlight in the video, as well as a way for teachers to grow their own understanding of LDG by participating in one.

Second, cocreate norms with the students. Kids are smart, they know what groups need in order to remain focused, fair, and consistent. Voicing and agreeing upon norms will support the success of all LDGs. Some norms I had in my own classroom:

  • Be Prepared
  • Ensure all voices are heard
  • Disagree with the statement, never attack the person
  • Negotiate your own time, there is NO Hand Raising in discussions

Scaffold the learning, as stated earlier, LDGs do not happen naturally in the classroom setting. Be prepared to model, live-group demonstration, and reflect. You may also consider starting slow, have all groups start with the same, short piece. Play a more active role in the beginning and drop off to a facilitator role when they get up and running, or use Role Sheets to support discussions. (Note, LDG Roles were first used to scaffold the learning and were not designed to be used by all students for every LDG). Assign each student an individual role, or have all students be the same role (Connector or Summarizer works well for this). Common Roles in LDGs:

  • Discussion Director
  • Connector
  • Vocabulary Identifier
  • Summarizer
  • Illustrator
  • Researcher
  • Literary Lumininator
  • Map Maker

Along with scaffolding, it is important for each teacher to define the purpose and end goals with the implementation of Literature Discussion Groups. During a thoughtful discussion with a group of high school teachers, the consideration of ALL students participating ensued. Should a student be able to exercise their choice in reading if they cannot access the text alone? My answer was answered with a question – what is your purpose? While students do gain and refine skills during LDG, my main purpose for implementation was independence, collaboration, discussion, and critical thinking. All of my high school students read at various levels based on skill and interest, but I never denied any student the opportunity to participate in a peer discussion. The gains far outweighed the risks for during this collaboration.

Assessing. How should I grade students during LDGs? Most educators use both a self and teacher evaluation for grading Literature Discussion Group participation. Students self-assess through a checklist or written response in which they evaluate their own role and contributions to the discussion, as well as their groupmates. This reflection can be powerful for goal-setting and student ownership of learning. Teachers also add their own notes that were gathered during the facilitation of the small groups to the evaluation process. Still, other educators assign flat points for participation or no grade at all.

Finally, don’t be afraid to add your own flair and teaching style to Literature Discussion Groups. Add a new role, The Nosy Neighbor, Aesthetician, Freudian or Existentialist Lenses. Promote digital collaboration through the use of technology or connect your students with others reading the same text outside of the four walls of your classroom. Add a visual element through annotations, sketchnoting, or drawing to be completed by all students prior to the discussion.

Check out my Wakelet for resources used during this post on LDGs

 

Affinity Spaces: What Video Games and Virtual PLNs Can Teach Educators About Informal Learning

Untitled drawing

On any given night, you can find my children (grades 5 & 9) along with millions of others, playing video games. From Fortnite, to Minecraft, to Roblox; many hours are logged in these virtual spaces playing… and also learning. The learning taking place is not necessarily organized by specific disciplines but instead, a collective intelligence which blends content knowledge, creative problem solving, design thinking, along with collaborating and communicating with peers around the globe.

This informal learning is similar to my own when I think about jumping on Twitter to connect, consume, and share with other passionate educators, my virtual PLN. So what can we learn from video games, #EdChat, and other virtual spaces? All of these spaces include similar characteristics that James Paul Gee calls Affinity Spaces. While technology has led to an explosion of these spaces, they are possible to replicate face to face although it is difficult because, “institutional constraints, pre-existing status, geographical boundaries. A Classroom where students did not choose to be there and the teacher grades everyone.”

As educators, the goal is not for everyone to use video games in the classroom, but instead, understand the features of Affinity Spaces and work towards creating similar conditions in our classroom.

 15 Features of Affinity Spaces (by Gee)

  1. Organized around a common passion – A common passion, not race, gender, or socioeconomics, is primary and respected by all in the space.
  2. Not segregated by age – Older people can be beginners and younger people can be veterans. Passion, skill, and learning are respected
  3. Common space shared by all (Newbies, Veterans, Masters, etc.) – Everyone is accommodated in the same space. Newbies are not segregated from those that are considered masters of the game.
  4. Everyone can consume and create – Affinity spaces allow everyone to consume not only game-based creations but those created by players in the space. Consuming and creating are encouraged to allow everyone to build if they choose to.
  5. Content is transformed through interaction – The content is not fixed and constantly is transformed through interaction.
  6. Development and pooled broad, general knowledge as well as specialists – People are enabled to create and share knowledge and skill within the space.
  7. Individual and distributed knowledge encouraged – People are enabled to gain individual knowledge and share and spread specialized knowledge.
  8. Use of dispersed knowledge is encouraged (hacking and smashing to gain the desired product) The use of onsite and outside resources and tools is encouraged and supported to gain the creations people seek.
  9. Tacit knowledge is used and honored – Affinity spaces support people to learn by doing rather than memorizing tutorials or reading lengthy directions.
  10. Many different ways to participate – Participation in the space is varied and on multiple levels.
  11. Multiple ways to gain status – People can gain status, if they want to, in many different ways.
  12. Leadership is porous and leaders are resources – There are no bosses. People can be both leaders and followers.
  13. Roles are reciprocal – People sometimes lead, sometimes follow; mentor or be mentored; ask questions or answer them. The bottom line is there is always more to learn.
  14. Learning is individually proactive -Affinity spaces view failure as a means to success. Help is available, but individuals are still responsible for own learning.
  15. Encouragement from audience and feedback from peers – Feedback is welcomed from others interacting with your creations, while peers play an important role in providing critical advice to move individuals forward.

While all of these features are not required, an Affinity Space has most of these features. And upon reflection, most of the popular video games that our students play have these features. That is why we have students, and in my case children, who play hours on end. I, too, see some of these features in the spaces I spend my time as an educator. It is time to pay attention to attributes that make this type of learning successful for students and ask ourselves how these features can be reimagined in our own classrooms. Education is not merely producing consumers but those that can create and produce for the betterment of their space.

Source: Gee, James Paul. Literacy and Education. New York: Routledge, 2015.