By Sara Finegan

         There has long been a debate about the issue of teaching to mastery.  When districts and states set up learning modules on a schedule, or a series of standards to meet each year, the inclination of many teachers is to get through as many of them as possible. Some schools and districts place a great deal of pressure on teachers to move forward, and to keep moving through the year.

         I’m not averse to having a set of outcomes to work toward and achieve each year for each grade level. I am against moving forward before our kids really have become proficient at new skills, strategies, and knowledge.

         In a demanding classroom, we don’t get stuck in a routine of doing the same work over and over, and we don’t adhere to other people’s schedules about when learning should be accomplished. Instead, we focus on cementing new skills, step-by-step, concept-by-concept, so that when the foundation of math, science, and other learning is complete, there are as few weak spots as possible.

         If you think about it, if we move kids forward before they really get the previous unit or skill, you are building a house of cards on quicksand. Nothing is going to really stick and the child is going to be aware on a pretty consistent basis that he or she is missing something.

         And what are we teaching kids about learning if we do it this way? It seems to me that we are saying to our children: Learning isn’t about mastering information and strategies; it’s about zipping through lessons to completion rather than to skill.

         Given that one of the major issues for kids with special needs is that they rush through work, getting it done rather than getting it right, aren’t we re-enforcing their own poor learning habits when we teach to completion over quality?

         Many will argue that teaching to mastery takes too much time, and that we don’t have the extra hours or days to ensure that all of our students become proficient at each new lesson.

         I disagree. It isn’t necessarily so. It all depends on how we teach the new information or skills, and what kind and what quality of practice we give our students.

         It also depends on the manner in which we release responsibility back to kids as they work. If we jump too quickly from “I show you” to “you do it,” mastery will take much longer than if we move, increment by increment, from “I show you,” to “I show you again,” to “we do it together,” to “we do it together more,” to “you and a partner do it,, to “try it again, and I’ll be right here,” to “hey, try it and I’ll step back a bit,” to “hey, you can do this!”

         All of that, by the way, doesn’t take place in math, for example, for weeks and weeks; it’s really a matter of days.

demanding classroom · high expectations · learning disabled · mastery · modules · proficiency · rigor · rigorous instruction · Sara Finegan · special education · standards

By Sara Finegan 

         The other day I was reminded anew of the most powerful inspiration and teaching tool in the classroom:  peer sharing.

         We’re still at the early stage of learning how to write a paragraph describing a character that is the second part of our standard Response to Literature.  We’d done a lesson on the “how-to” where I modeled and charted the steps.

          We’d done a guided lesson  on the first several steps:   collecting facts about the character from our reading; organizing them by numbering them in the order we would write them.  For the purpose of this activity, we were all writing about the same character.

         Once kids had organized their data, I sent them off to try their hand at writing the paragraph.  They were thrilled when they realized that the writing part was soooo much easier if you had prepared the list and put numbers next to it – all they had to do was turn the jotted notes into actual sentences.  As their writing continued, they felt better and better.

They found two partners to share out with

         Since we had time left over before the bell rang, I asked them to find two partners and share out their work.   I didn’t think this was going to be particularly powerful, since everyone was using essentially the same facts about the same character.  But even in a demanding classroom there are those dead moments when things have gone faster than you’d anticipated, and there’s still instructional time left. 

         Boy, was I wrong

         Within about 7 minutes, every single one of my students was back at his or her desk, writing furiously.    As I passed by him, Robert raised his head and asked “Is it ok if I write more?  I read what Drew wrote and I realized I had more to say.”

         Was it okay if he wrote more?  I gave him the “DUH” look and a thumbs up.

         At the other end of the room, Antonio was reading his own piece, pausing to think, and then drawing arrows down to free lines on the page and adding more sentences.  “I forgot that I could write about an inference I have about the character,” he said.  “That’s what James did.” 

         Now, we all know of groups of kids with limited independent thinking skills whose interaction with the work of their peers pretty much involves copying each other, or copying off each other.   In that stage of the learning process, peer sharing is still valuable, but perhaps in a different format.  (For example, showing the whole class one student’s work at a time on the document camera and having discussions as a group about the writing often works to show kids that many styles of writing are good writing, or how one of the students handled a particularly difficult writing task.)

My guidance wasn’t needed! 

         In this case, it was perfectly fine to allow the kids unstructured time to gather in small groups and share out without my participation or direction.

         This worked because the kids are confident in their ability to learn and to improve, and their understanding that opportunities to enhance their skills exist all over the place.  They trust one another and allow themselves to be inspired by each other in ways that teachers cannot emulate. 

         In a demanding classroom, the kids sometimes demand more intellectual work of one another than the teacher!

demanding classroom · high expectations · learning disabled · peer inspiration · peer sharing · Reading · response · rigor · rigorous instruction · Sara Finegan · special education · standards · Writing