“Teaching can be a satisfying, sustainable career if and only if policies are put in place to make it so.”

Jennifer Gonzalez (see item #1)

“Teachers make hundreds, if not thousands, of instructional decisions each and every day. We can give them research-based principles and resources and suggestions about specific practices and approaches that tend to be effective. But when it comes down to it, teachers have to do what makes sense in the moment, given the specific context in which they work, the specific students they work with, and the constant stream of judgment calls they have to make.”

            Amanda Goodwin (see item #5)

“Do the best you can until you know better. Then when you know better, do better.” 

            Maya Angelou (quoted in “First Thing: Equity in a PLC” by Janel Keating and

Meagan Rhodes in All Things PLC, May 2022, Vol. 6, #2, pp. 4-6)

“When children practice taking turns while speaking, they are learning patience. When they listen intently to a peer share a story during carpet time, they are learning empathy. When they identify their own negative emotions before erupting in a tantrum, they learn forbearance and moderation. And while some enviable children exhibit these character traits naturally, most need to be taught through explicit instruction.”

            Nathaniel Grossman in “Schools Have No Choice but to Teach Social and Emotional 

            Skills” in Education Gadfly, May 12, 2022

“One’s willingness to be vulnerable to another based on the confidence that the other is benevolent, honest, open, reliable, and competent.”

            Megan Tschannen-Moran’s definition of trust (quoted in item #6)

“If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together.”

An African proverb (quoted in item #3)

“Teaching can be a satisfying, sustainable career if and only if policies are put in place to make it so,” says Jennifer Gonzalez in this Cult of Pedagogy article. She tells the heart-wrenching stories of four teachers who are quitting, one in the middle of the school year, and the conditions that drove them out of the profession. A common theme was emotionally unintelligent administrators – “a callous ego-driven attitude that made teachers feel unappreciated and uncared for.” Gonzalez then shares what she’s learned from teachers who are staying. Here’s what made the difference:

            • Administrators who showed they cared – “An overwhelming number of teachers who remained in the classroom talked about the supportive attitudes of their leadership as a key reason they stayed,” says Gonzalez. “Even in cases where circumstances remained extremely challenging and not much could be changed, having an administrator who offered genuine appreciation, a listening ear, and emotional support made the difference.” Getting specific, low-key praise, being heard, and feeling valued – that’s what came through. 

            • Flexibility with policies and curriculum – Teachers appreciated a loosening of expectations about covering the whole scope and sequence, turning in lesson plans, undergoing formal observations, sticking to the teacher dress code, and attendance. These teachers appreciated that their administrators didn’t hassle them about occasional lateness and requests for personal days. One district informally added mental health days so that no teacher would go more than three weeks without a three-day weekend. 

            • Prioritizing teachers’ and students’ physical and mental health – Teachers appreciated administrators who had consistent policies on Covid safety, bought HEPA filters and other equipment needed to cut down infections, did regular one-on-one check-ins with colleagues, and were quick to cover for a teacher who needed to go home. 

            • Lightening the load – It made a big difference when administrators cut back on meetings, duties, bureaucratic tasks, professional development, testing, evaluating teachers on SLOs (student learning objectives), and other items that weren’t absolutely necessary – and gave teachers enough planning time to get their work done. The reassuring message from one principal: We’re in a pandemic, these are not normal times, and we’re going to get through it. 

            • Trusting teachers – One administrator said to teachers, “Why does everyone feel like they need permission to do everything? If it’s good for kids, research supports it, and it’s ethical, just do it.” Some teachers felt encouraged to think about the curriculum in new ways, try new methods, and experiment with different ways of handling instructional time. 

            “If you’re an administrator who is starting feel your teaching staff slipping away from you, it may not be too late,” says Gonzalez. “You can start today by going to your staff, asking them what they need, listening to their answers, and then implementing as much of their requests as you possibly can. For anything that can’t be done, just be straight with them. And be kind. And vulnerable. And humble. It makes a difference. And for those who have been doing this all along, thank you.”

“Why So Many Teachers Are Leaving, and Why Others Stay” by Jennifer Gonzalez in Cult of Pedagogy, May 12, 2022

 In an Education Week interview with Madeline Will, Gloria Ladson-Billings (University of Wisconsin/Madison) talks about three components she believes are central in today’s schools:

-   Student learning – “That’s the reason people send their kids to school,” she says, “that’s our reason for being.”

-   Cultural competence – She defines that as students gaining “fluency and facility with at least one other culture” – understanding that culture in terms of customs, experiences, histories, backgrounds, and languages.

-   Critical consciousness – This is the So what? of school learning – how kids see it applying to the joys and problems they encounter in their daily lives, and how learning relates to their culture, including music, art, fashion, and language.

Ladson-Billings says that if she were teaching U.S. history to adolescents today, she would have them read the 1619 Project and the 1776 Report. “I don’t have a problem reading a document that disagrees with my perspective,” she says. “But we’ve got to be able to look at, what does the evidence say? What is it that is so objectionable about one versus the other? That’s how you develop this critical consciousness.” She believes the current surge in parent engagement with curriculum decisions should be embraced: “I’ve always said that parents should be in classrooms and engaged in what’s happening and raising questions and participating and sharing.” 

Ladson-Billings believes there’s too much emphasis on reading and math test scores, and on policing students of color rather than pushing them intellectually. “Why does the assessment have to be only a test?” she asks. “Why couldn’t it be a performance? Why couldn’t it be an exhibit? That’s exactly what happens in private schools – they get all kinds of opportunities to display their knowledge and skills.” 

Ladson-Billings is saddened by the attacks on critical race theory and the politics of grievance. “I don’t know that there’s anything that will persuade someone who is convinced that somehow they’re not getting a fair shake,” she says. “That giving someone else an opportunity diminishes them.” She bemoans the deliberate effort to make critical race theory a toxic brand and link it to social emotional learning, cultural relevant pedagogy, and “anything I don’t like.”

Those attacks notwithstanding, Ladson-Billings believes students of color will for the most part get the curriculum they need because policymakers are seldom in their classrooms. She’s more concerned about “segregated white schools, schools in the suburbs, schools serving the wealthiest kids.” Their students have little exposure to diversity, she says, and when they get to college or the workplace, “they’re confronted with people from all over and experience people who’ve had different experiences. And then they’re angry because, why didn’t I know this? Why didn’t anybody tell me this?”

“What Should Culturally Relevant Teaching Look Like Today?” by Madeline Will in Education Week, May 11, 2022; Ladson-Billings can be reached at gjladson@wisc.edu.

(Originally titled “Reviving Collaboration in Classrooms”)

            In this Educational Leadership article, Kristina Doubet (James Madison University) says that for all the changes taking place in the U.S. workplace, one hiring criterion is always high on the list: people’s ability to work with others. The pandemic cut back on the amount of collaborative work teachers were able to organize, and as students have returned to in-person instruction, schools have focused on making up for lost time as efficiently as possible – as well as dealing with discipline problems resulting from students being out of practice at everyday social interactions. 

            Doubet believes educators need to get back to emphasizing students’ collaborative skills, heeding the African proverb: If you want to go fast, go alone. If you want to go far, go together. She believes the corporate world has some important insights on the ingredients of successful teamwork, notably a 2016 Google workplace study of the characteristics of their best teams: psychological safety, dependability, structure and clarity, meaning, and impact. Doubet teases out the K-12 implications:

• Psychological safety – Learning and collaboration suffer if students don’t feel known, seen, safe, and accepted. Coming out of the pandemic, schools need to be especially intentional about building a healthy sense of community and articulating group norms. Beginning-of-the-year get-to-know-you activities are not fluff, says Doubet. Each teacher also needs to work with students on a classroom contract and refresh and revise it as the year goes on. 

• Dependability – Students not pulling their weight in a group will undermine effectiveness and morale, says Doubet. Clear standards about what is expected academically and behaviorally, and rubrics to measure them, push students to do their part. Students might score each other on Doing My Job, Sharing the Mic, and Respecting My Peers, each with a detailed description of what proficiency looks like (for example, with the third: speaking respectfully, not interrupting, giving constructive feedback, setting aside minor disagreements, and discussing important ones with grace and dignity). 

• Structure and clarity – Student teams can benefit from the tech tools they used individually during remote schooling for organizing, storing, and sharing work. Groups should learn how to keep a running “scrum board” of things not started, in progress, and finished, perhaps using Google Forms, Trello, Padlet, or Jamboard. This is much more than record-keeping, says Doubet, helping students “build the deeper life habits of goal setting, progress monitoring, and reflection – habits that undergird success, not just in the workplace, but in all other areas of life.” 

• Meaning – When student teams are united by a common choice or area of interest, the quality of collaboration and work soars. There’s also each student’s sense of importance within the group – who, for example, gets the job of idea-generator, question-asker, problem-solver, eagle-eye, collaborator/ambassador, illustrator/designer. The teacher might post these roles and have students sign up for two, giving them a chance to opt for their areas of strength and appreciate the contributions of peers. 

• Impact – The key here is providing “group-worthy tasks” that students see as genuinely important, interesting, and intellectually challenging. Having students collaborate on a low-level worksheet is drudgery and can even lead to conflict. Groups might work on problems in their school or community, create authentic products such as a public awareness campaign, and present their work to a real-life audience like the school board. Engaging tasks create authentic context for taking risks, assuming diverse and meaningful group roles, and engaging in purposeful reflection and evaluation. 

“Reviving Collaboration in Classrooms” by Kristina Doubet in Educational Leadership, May 2022 (Vol. 79, #8, pp. 24-30); Doubet can be reached at doubetkj@jmu.edu. 

In this article in Kappa Delta Pi Record, Virginia David, Selena Protcacio, and Susan Piazza (Western Michigan University) and Magda Tigchelaar (University of Toronto/ Mississauga) report a recent study showing that English learners speak only 11 percent of the time in whole-class discussions and 27 percent of the time in small groups, while native English speakers dominate air time in all-class settings (89 percent) and small groups (73 percent). “These findings,” say the authors, “underscore the need for teachers to provide equitable opportunities for ELs to engage in meaningful academic discourse.” 

            One strategy for boosting oral language development in the early grades is Task-Based Language Teaching (TBLT). Applied to math, this involves giving students tasks that necessitate lots of two-way sharing and discussion. These are distinct from standard group problem solving, where all students have access to the same information and some students usually talk much more than others. A TBLT task that maximizes academic talk time for English learners has these characteristics:

-   It focuses on meaning rather than linguistic form.

-   It includes a “gap” so students need to draw each other out to solve the problem.

-   It relies on the learner’s own nonlinguistic resources.

-   It has a clearly defined goal other than the use of language.

The authors describe how four teachers implemented this idea in their elementary classrooms:

            • Spot the difference – Pairs of kindergarten students sit facing each other and each is given a different picture of a night sky. There’s a barrier so students can’t see each other’s pictures, and they’re asked to describe the circles, squares, rectangles, and triangles in their picture (for example, “I see four triangle trees”) and figure out how their partner’s picture is different. Students share their results and then take down the barrier and create a new night sky that combines the attributes of their original pictures. “This task provides a meaningful opportunity for interaction,” say the authors, “because learners need to discover and communicate missing information; they also need to rely on their own linguistic resources to describe the shapes and quantities they see.” 

            • Two-way information gap – Pairs of third graders are asked to figure out if they have enough money to buy groceries for a sleepover. Both students know they have $35 to spend and what items they can purchase, but each student gets a different information sheet: one has how many items are needed, the other lists the cost of each item. Students have to ask each other questions to figure out how much the groceries will cost, whether they have enough money, and whether any money is left over (and how much). This teacher’s task was successful, the authors report, because it “tied students’ background knowledge (i.e., sleepover snacks and activities) with the multiplication skills they needed to learn.”

            • One-way information gap – One first grader chooses a mystery number on a number line from zero to 20 and a partner asks questions (greater than, less than, before, after, even, odd?) to identify the number. Students then switch roles and repeat the guessing game. The teacher who tried this activity said, “Students enjoyed the task and took it very seriously. One pair even counted how many questions were needed to find the mystery number. Each student tried to figure it out in fewer questions than his or her partner.” 

            • Find someone who – First graders are given a sheet with 16 boxes with different math concepts and vocabulary – minus/plus/equal signs, equations, etc. – and are asked to find a classmate who can tell what one of the concepts or vocabulary words means and write that person’s name in the box. Students keep going until each box has a unique name. The teacher then leads a whole-class discussion to ensure students’ answers are correct. “This task provides a meaningful opportunity for students to preview math concepts and use math language to build and activate prior knowledge,” say the authors. “A task that uncovers previous knowledge and gaps in knowledge is valuable for practice as well as formative assessment that can inform instruction.” 

“Math Tasks to Promote Oral Language Development with English Learners” by Virginia David, Magda Tigchelaar, Selena Protcacio, and Susan Piazza in Kappa Delta Pi Record, April-June 2022 (Vol. 58, #2, pp. 65-69); the authors are at virginia.david@wmich.edu, magda.tigchelaar@utoronto.ca, selena.protacio@wmich.edu, and susan.piazza@wmich.edu. 

In this Phi Delta Kappan feature, editor Rafael Heller interviews Amanda Goodwin (Vanderbilt University), co-editor of Reading Research Quarterly, which recently devoted two issues to the current science of reading debate. Some highlights:

            Goodwin says the two special issues of RRQ tried to bring more clarity to the debate on phonics, which she was hearing a lot about as a researcher, teacher coach, and parent of a primary-grade child. Reaching out for articles, Goodwin and her colleagues expected to get differing views on this hot topic, but to their surprise, there was a lot of consensus. “The version of the science of reading that has been presented in the media is very narrow,” says Goodwin, “focusing mainly on alphabetics, phonics, and word reading. It’s also pretty directive, telling teachers that if they want to help kids learn to read, then they should do this, not that.” 

            But the 90 articles they received, 50 of which were published, didn’t say that at all. Leading experts in the field defined the science of reading much more broadly than phonemic awareness, phonics, reading fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. They said it’s also about language development, motivation, dyslexia, reading digital texts, multilingual literacy, the literacies of African-American and other students of color, and more. As the articles were edited and authors were pushed to clarify their views – which “camp” were they in? – what emerged was agreement that research is important and must continue, but there isn’t “one best way” to teach reading. 

            Goodwin says the 2000 National Reading Panel’s Teaching Children to Read report brought a helpful focus on phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. “That’s still Reading 101,” she says. But since 2000, “we’ve learned a lot more about each of those buckets and what does or doesn’t go into them. And we’ve added some more buckets, too.” Those include:

-   Morphology – how root words and suffixes work;

-   Syntax – how words can be arranged in different ways and into different kinds of sentences;

-   The nuances of words – whether they’re used with a positive or negative connotation;

-   Formal and informal language;

-   When an author is being serious or ironic;

-   When the information is factual or personal opinion.

“Our schools tend to be pretty good at teaching kids to decode written language,” says Goodwin. “Most kids are successful in the early years of reading instruction, when the focus is on reading simple texts. But if we want them to be successful in middle and upper grades, then we also need to teach them more-complex language skills, even while they’re learning to decode… Today’s science of reading says so much more about how to do this – and about what else to do.”

            Other areas in which recent research has added to the 2000 NRP report, says Goodwin, include the role of content knowledge, digital literacy, writing instruction and its relationship to reading, and what’s involved in teaching reading to English learners and multilingual students. “We’ve become much more aware of the many strengths that students from diverse cultural and linguistic backgrounds bring to the classroom,” she says, “such as differing ways of using language, telling stories, and interpreting texts. And, just as important, we’ve become more aware of how complex and uncertain the work of reading instruction is.” 

            There’s one more contribution from recent research: “the ways in which effective reading instruction depends on teachers’ expertise and judgment… Teachers make hundreds, if not thousands, of instructional decisions each and every day. We can give them research-based principles and resources and suggestions about specific practices and approaches that tend to be effective. But when it comes down to it, teachers have to do what makes sense in the moment, given the specific context in which they work, the specific students they work with, and the constant stream of judgment calls they have to make.” 

            Are state policymakers getting this more-nuanced message – that there’s no simple, all-purpose formula for effective reading instruction? Goodwin is concerned that some states – including Tennessee, where she lives – are mandating narrow approaches and overemphasizing phonemic awareness and phonics. She worries that more-recent insights are being ignored, especially how to teach foundational skills more effectively, higher-level literacy skills, differentiating to meet students’ needs, and better serving students from diverse linguistic and cultural backgrounds. 

            In addition, Goodwin says, even in an area as well-researched as phonics, “researchers continue to raise questions about what we thought we knew for sure.” For example, some advocates claim that it’s ineffective to teach students to use pictures and other context cues to figure out words they’re trying to decode. “Even some state literacy boards have become adamant that this is bad practice,” she says: “No pictures! Teachers need to make students sound out the letters!” 

But in one of the RRQ articles by Donna Scanlon and Kimberly Anderson, a review of 25 years of rigorous experimental studies showed that students tended to become more successful readers when they got both kinds of instruction, compared to those who got phonics alone. “It’s self-defeating to insist on an either-or choice between phonics and context cueing,” says Goodwin, “as though these practices were at war with each other. It’s more helpful to treat them as complementary.”

Telling teachers that the science of reading is definitive and they have to follow a specific script all the time is not helpful, she says. “Real life is messy and complicated, and sometimes the worst thing we can do is to make everybody stick to the script. Teachers need to know what the science says about phonics instruction, but they also need some room for discretion and creativity and joy… Not everything lends itself to a randomized control study, and a lot of teachers have talents and gifts that are hard to measure.”

Goodwin bridles when she sees commercial curriculum materials that claim to be “research based.” What’s their evidence? Where are their citations? She believes researchers need to do a better job explaining and communicating their findings in plain English and empowering teachers to use that knowledge to advocate for the best curriculum materials for their students. 

“Ultimately,” she concludes, “the term science of reading can be interpreted in divisive ways or in informative ways. We know a lot about reading and how to teach reading (and writing!), and we should use that. Classrooms should be full of these effective, research-based practices. But there is no single way that is a magic solution. I have learned that the science of reading is most effective when it is broad, bridges perspectives, and has the goal of sharing accurate, evidence-based, and meaningful understandings that can move us forward.” 

“Taking Stock of the Science of Reading: A Conversation with Amanda Goodwin” by Rafael Heller in Phi Delta Kappan, May 2022 (Vol. 103, #8, pp. 32-36); Goodwin can be reached at amanda.goodwin@vanderbilt.edu.

In this All Things PLC article, author/consultant Bill Hall says school leadership teams usually deal with a broad array of issues – curriculum, budget, extracurriculars, hiring, facilities, athletics, and more. If a professional learning community (PLC) initiative is added to the agenda, it will be competing with lots of other priorities and might not get the attention it needs.

            “There is consistent agreement among leadership experts and thought leaders,” says Hall, “that the best way to lead complex change is through a guiding coalition. This type of leadership team is structured differently, behaves differently, and leads differently than a standard leadership team. A PLC guiding coalition would focus on leading the initiative through “predictable turmoil,” showing teacher teams how to work collaboratively as they analyze student work and continuously improve teaching and learning. Hall suggests the following steps to a guiding coalition:

            • Assemble the right people. The group should have representation from each grade level, department, and organizational area. There should also be a mix of people with positional power, expertise, credibility, and leadership ability. Possible questions when selecting members: Do they have a deep commitment to the school’s mission and core values? Do they readily embrace change and risk-taking? Are they reasonably self-directed, not needing to be micromanaged? 

            • Build a high level of trust. Hall embraces the definition of trust articulated by Megan Tschannen-Moran: “one’s willingness to be vulnerable to another based on the confidence that the other is benevolent, honest, open, reliable, and competent.” To maintain trust, any violations must be addressed immediately and forthrightly.

            • Create and pursue a common goal created and shared by all members. The guiding coalition’s goal is distinct from districtwide, strategic, or school improvement goals. It’s best summed up in the SMART acronym: Strategic and Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Results-oriented, and Time-bound. 

“Transforming the School Leadership Team into a Powerful Guiding Coalition” by Bill Hall in All Things PLC, May 2022, Vol. 6, #2, pp. 4-6); Hall’s new book is Powerful Guiding Coalitions (Solution Tree, 2022)

In this article in Principal Leadership, leadership coach Marck Abraham recommends that secondary school leadership teams plan based on data in three key areas:

            • Attendance – It’s important to know attendance for students (broken down by grade, gender, and subgroups), administrators, teachers, and other staff members. “Attendance data tell stories,” says Abraham. “People show up to school when they feel loved and welcomed.” When attendance is low, leaders need to ask, “What kind of culture am I creating so that students and teachers do not want to be here?”

            • Behavior – When asked, “Who are our best-performing and best-behaved students? Who are the top 15 students in each grade level? What makes those students the best?”, administrators often have difficulty coming up with names – but they’re quick to list students who are in trouble. Describing positive behaviors is a better place to start. The leadership team also needs a system for reporting detailed behavior data, says Abraham, for example:

-   The number of write-ups submitted each week;

-   The gender and race of the students;

-   The areas of concern;

-   The adult who generated each write-up;

-   The consequences.

Analyzing and interpreting information like this allows leaders to identify the school’s biggest issues, think about root causes, and plan initiatives that will make a difference.

            • Course passing – Twice a semester, teachers should report achievement data by range (0-54, 55-64, 65-74, 75-84, 85-94, 95-100), map trends by class period, and create an action plan for supporting struggling students. The leadership team then looks at data across classes and also from state tests, benchmark assessments, and other measures of student learning and follows up with teachers and teacher teams. 

“Leading a Data-Driven School” by Marck Abraham in Principal Leadership, May 2022 (Vol. 22, #9, pp. 44-47); Abraham can be reached at marck@meaconsultantsllc.com.

In this School Library Journal feature, Brigid Alverson recommends ten standout graphic novels:

-   Almost American Girl by Robin Ha, grade 7 and up

-   Chibi Usagi: Attack of the Heebie Chibis by Julie and Stan Sakai, grade 4-7

-   Geraldine Pu and Her Cat Hat, Too! by Maggie Chang, grade 1-3

-   Lola: A Ghost Story by J. Torres, illustrated by Elbert Or, grade 3-6

-   Marshmallow & Jordan by Alina Chau, grade 4-7

-   Palimpsest: Documents from a Korean Adoption by Lisa Wool-Rim, grade 11 and up

-   The Princess Who Saved Her Friends by Greg Pak, illustrated by Takeshi Miyazawa, grade 4-6

-   The Rema Chronicles Book 1: Realm of the Blue Mist by Amy Kim Kibuishi, grade 3-7

-   Stealing Home by J. Torres, illustrated by David Mamisato, grade 4-7

-   Wingbearer by Margorie Liu, illustrated by Teny Issakhanian, grade 5-8

“APA Artistry: 10 Standout Graphic Novels” by Brigid Alverson in School Library Journal, May 2022 (Vol. 68, #5, pp. 24-27)