The reading scores of American children have remained about the same for over 40 years! Each year, the NAEP data shows about 35% of 4th graders are proficient in reading. This is unacceptable. But what can we do???
When we know better, we do better!
When we know better, we do better!
Research tells us that even though learning to read is harder for some students than others, with evidence-based reading instruction, the majority of our students can become proficient readers by the end of 3rd grade.
This research is called the Science of Reading. The Science of Reading is our WHY. It drives our decision-making for policies and to strengthen our instruction and assessments of reading.
What is the Science of Reading?
“The body of work referred to as the “science of reading” is not an ideology, a philosophy, a political agenda, a one-size-fits-all approach, a program of instruction, nor a specific component of instruction. It is the emerging consensus from many related disciplines, based on literally thousands of studies, supported by hundreds of millions of research dollars, conducted across the world in many languages. These studies have revealed a great deal about how we learn to read, what goes wrong when students don’t learn, and what kind of instruction is most likely to work the best for the most students.”
So what has changed in the way we teach reading?
Our families are our partners in teaching our students to learn to read. So let's teach them about the Science of Reading!
Share this knowledge with your families by grabbing this resource!
Happy and Healthy Teaching!
Well, first let’s start with some background knowledge.
What is the Science of Reading???
The Science of Reading is 20 plus years of reading research, and it gives teachers the best strategies for teaching students to read based on research of how the brain learns to read.
Our brains are wired to speak, but not to read. We have been speaking for over 100,000 years, but we have not been reading and writing for that long. The first writing systems were invented about 10,000 years ago. Alphabetic writing (so when we changed from drawings to express stories to letters to convey words) evolved about 5,000 years ago.
The Science of Reading research, provides an evidence-based best practice approach for teaching foundational literacy skills called Structured Literacy. Structured Literacy emphasizes a purposeful, direct, systematic, and explicit reading and language arts instructional framework for instructing students to decipher words in prints and to focus on the goal of reading, which is to learn, enjoy, and comprehend text, through individualized instruction, informed by deliberate assessment.
-The Simple View of Reading looks at reading like a math equation:
Decoding x Linguistic/Language Comprehension = Reading Comprehension
-There are 5 Pillars of Reading: Phonemic Awareness, Alphabetic Principle, Fluency, Vocabulary, and Comprehension, all integral to the…
-3 Layers of Reading Development:
1 - letters and sounds,
2 - phonic decoding,
3 - orthographic mapping
What are advanced phonemic awareness skills?
Early phonemic awareness are the skills typically develop in preschoolers and include rhyming (e.g. sit, pit, lit), alliteration (e.g. the cute cat can cry), being able to segment words into syllables (e.g. /syll/ /a/ /bles/), and being able to identify the first sounds in words.
Basic phonemic awareness skills are typically developed throughout kindergarten and first grade. Basic phonemic awareness skills include phoneme blending and phoneme segmentation. These basic skills are instrumental in phonic decoding and early spelling.
Advanced phonemic awareness skills are the skills typically developed by about third or fourth grade. Advanced phonemic awareness skills include the ability to manipulate phonemes, such as
AND they are required for proficient reading. This means that phonemic awareness skills must be explicitly taught. Students must be able to achieve mastery of advanced phonemic awareness skills to be able to proficiently read.
Orthographic Mapping is the formation of letter-sound connections to bond the spellings and pronunciations of specific words in memory
It explains how student brains memorize how words look-sound. The process we use to store printed words in long-term memory is the third level of reading development called orthographic mapping. Orthographic mapping is the efficient expansion of sight vocabularies, requiring letter-sound skills and advanced phonological awareness skills. Research has demonstrated that orthographic mapping is the most efficient strategy for moving word patterns into long-term memory for students, thus increasing a student’s sight word vocabulary.
Happy and Healthy Teaching!
When the school closes for summer, millions of students lose access to critical services and learning opportunities. Research shows that income-based reading gaps grow over the summer. Summer learning loss may be a contributing factor in the reading performance achievement gap between high and low-income students. And worse - many students who qualify for federally subsidized meals during the school year do not receive the same nutritional content over the summer.
So what can schools do???
Well, first districts should offer summer programming for all identified students. They can offer meals through federal funding.
Schools or teachers can check local libraries for free activities and share with families. Museums are learning opportunities.
Schools can offer game nights for families (virtually too!), camps, trips to museums, and more.
And when your schools don’t do this, what can teachers do???
15 to 30 minutes per day is all it takes to prevent regression.
Send home ideas on activities to families. During the last week of school, have students make games and activities to take home for summer practice.
Offer incentives for reading journals, writing journals, math project completion, etc.
Set up a field trip for the last few weeks of school to the library and sign up any student who does not have a library card.
Invite your students to virtual weekly game nights with you, read alouds, or a check in!
Share websites with families so students can have continued learning practice over the summer.
It takes a village to raise a child.
By: Miss Rae
Reading fluency is fundamental for academic development.
Oral reading fluency is a student’s ability to read connected text quickly, accurately, and with expression. The goal is for a student to be able to read smoothly, when reading aloud or silently. Fluent reading enables a student to understand or comprehend a text. So without oral reading fluency skills, students' understanding of content is impacted!
What is the secret to teaching oral reading fluency?
Reader's theater is a strategy that can be use for developing students' reading fluency.
What is reader's theater?
Reader's theater is when students read a text aloud as a script. Reader's theater does not typically include props or costumes. Instead, students practice reading a script and then, "perform" it as a group by standing in front of an optional audience and reading aloud from the “script”.
Okay, so back to my point - reader's theater is a strategy for developing reading fluency.
Let's think about it! Oral reading fluency is a student’s ability to read connected text quickly, accurately, and with expression. The goal is for a student to be able to read smoothly, when reading aloud or silently. Fluent reading enables a student to understand or comprehend a text.
Recording readings aloud, repeated readings of the same text, developing and increasing students’ reading confidence, drill sight words, and creating a stress-free instructional environment are all ways students can improve their oral reading fluency.
And guess what? Reader’s theater includes all of these oral reading strategies!
Reader’s theater promotes fluency.
So what better way to practice oral reading fluency than with a reader’s theater?
But here’s another good question -
How do I teach reader’s theater in my classroom
1-Find a script or turn a text into a script.
Reader's Theaters for Students...
2-Choose or assign roles to students.
When students have roles, they become the character, and this motivates our students to be more engaged in the text.
Students “become” the character. They read the script with the same expression that they believe the character would. They will read in phrases and add expression appropriately, and this increases fluency.
3-Ask students to practice reading their scripts orally for practice.
When students re-read their parts, reading fluency is improved because it helps them to develop automaticity. Essentially, students are improving their ability to read quickly and accurately
Repeated reading will help students to learn to read aloud with expression. Repeated readings help with word recognition as well. Students will build a strong sight word base. This improves their oral reading fluency rate increase.
4-Have students read assigned parts to an audience. No audience? That's okay! Read it for yourselves. Record it instead.
Watch your performance. Recorded readings help to improve fluency.
Reader’s theater makes reading easier for students, which ultimately makes reading more fun! All of the components of reader’s theater help to support student engagement in reading and the story. And we know that engagement increases progress and makes learning more meaningful. By making the learning more meaningful, the stories become more meaningful. And guess what? This improves comprehension. And we all know that comprehension is the ultimate goal of reading.
By Miss Rae
Are your students cheating on phonological assessments? Maybe!
Phonological awareness is the most powerful predictor of achievement in reading. It is a critical component in learning to read any alphabetic writing system. Research has proven that deficiencies in phonological awareness are responsible for most word-level reading problems and can be used to predict poor reading and spelling development.
Furthermore, research has demonstrated that systematic teaching of phonological awareness skills to all kindergarteners and first graders, we can reduce reading problems by 50 to 75 percent!
But when students struggle to make progress with this instruction - or in reading in general - we need to intervene! Early intervention is key! And in order to implement effective interventions, we should be strategic in our assessments. We can use these assessments to design and guide our interventions.
Phoneme manipulation tasks are more highly correlated with reading measures than segmenting tasks. These manipulation tasks can best assess advanced phonemic awareness skills.
BUT - students can CHEAT on phoneme manipulation tasks.
Are your students cheating on phonological assessments? Maybe!
Students can “cheat” on assessments that ask students to delete phonemes and substitute phonemes. They do this by using something called a mental spelling strategy, rather than by using learned phonemic awareness skills. If you ask a student to say the word /cat/ and then say /cat/ without the /c/ sound, they can "picture" the word in their head and "picture" the deletion of the /c/ sound. This would not end in an automatic response. And it does not mean that the student has advanced phonemic awareness skills! Instead, it could indicate that a student does not have these skills!
So how do we know if our assessments are reliable and accurate enough to prevent student cheating???
One way to prevent “cheating” is through assessments of nonsense words or words that are orthographically inconsistent. Nonsense words, or orthographically inconsistent words are pronounceable letter strings that are not English words. For example, /cat/ is a real word that is orthographically consistent, but /jat/ is a nonsense word. And the most common reason a student would struggle to read a nonsense word is due to lagging phonological awareness and blending skills.
Another way to prevent cheating is to add a timed element to the assessment. Timed tests prevent cheating. Phonological manipulation tasks do not become tests of working memory when they are timed because they require instantaneous responses. When a test requires student responses to be one second or less, the test is not assessing the student’s working memory ability, but rather, proficiency and efficiency with the skill.
So now that we know two ways to prevent our students from cheating on phonological awareness tests, are we back to being teachers who have to create our own materials including assessments?
NO - teachers do enough already! They shouldn’t have to create their own assessments too!
Teachers do enough already! They shouldn’t have to create their own assessments too!
There is already a test that will prevent cheating!
The Phonological Awareness Skills Test (PAST) is an informal, verbally-administered diagnostic tool, used to evaluate 14 different aspects of phonological awareness.
The PAST actually correlates more strongly with reading than most commercially available assessments. The CTOPP-2 is the go-to test that research supports as being the best measure of phonological awareness skills, and the PAST is highly correlated to the CTOPP-2.
The PAST is a criterion-referenced test that can be used to avoid cheating! The entire test is given orally, and each section should take no longer than 3-4 minutes to administer. Due to the fact that the tester is able to give corrective feedback after each test item, a misunderstanding of directions can be ruled out, unlike on other tests such as the LAC-3 (a progress monitoring phonological awareness measure).
And even better - the PAST includes a timing element! This means that when the PAST is administered an immediate response is required from the student. Because of the timing element and the orthographic inconsistency of the items, a student would have great difficulty compensating for phonological awareness skills via mental spelling.
And get this? The PAST has five alternate forms, and it is FREE!
Grab your own copy of the PAST on my blog by clicking HERE.
By Miss Rae
RTI is a comprehensive and multi-tiered early detection and prevention strategy used to identify struggling students and provide intervention prior to the students falling behind. RTI combines universal screenings with high-quality instruction for all students with interventions targeted for struggling students (MTSS).
Here are the basics...
Tier One - reading instruction provided to all students. Instruction should be a high quality evidence-based reading instruction program with balanced, explicit, and systematic reading instruction that promotes both code-based and text-based strategies for decoding, word identification, and comprehension.
Tier Two - supplemental, small group reading instruction aimed at building foundational reading skills required to meet the general education expectations. Participating students demonstrate weaknesses on screening measures or in progress in the Tier One curriculum.
Tier Three - interventions provided to students who do not progress after a reasonable amount of time with Tier Two instruction and require more intensive support. If difficulty persists after intensive intervention, students should be evaluated for Special Education eligibility.
Things to consider...
*All tier curriculum should be high-quality and research-based
*All tier groups should be flexible
*Tiers 2 & 3 should have consistent progress monitoring of small group instruction (It is recommended that Tier 2 be assessed monthly)
*It is recommended that Tier 2 students receive small group 3 to 5 times weekly for 20 to 40 minutes
*Tiers 2 & 3 instruction should be...
**systematic - building skills gradually; introducing them first in isolation and then integrating with other skills to provide practice and generalization
**explicit - involving a high level of teacher-student interaction with frequent opportunities to practice the skills and receive clear, corrective feedback
*For Tier 3 students, recommended instruction times range from 45 to 120 minutes per week. In most cases, it is recommended to offer a “double dose” of reading time (introduce skills during one session, re-teach with added practice during the second session
*Include opportunities for extensive practice (10 to 30 times as many practice opportunities as peers) and high-quality feedback with one-on-one instruction (or small group if necessary).
*Scaffolded instruction is recommended using multi-sensory supports.
*Targeted comprehension proficiencies (summarizing, use of story grammar elements, vocabulary development, listening comprehension development) need to be part of Tier Three interventions.
More things to consider...
RTI & MTSS can be overwhelming for classroom teachers and schools!
Grab this RTI Response to Intervention in Reading Implementation Guide provides educators and schools with a step-by-step guide for implementing a Response to Intervention model paired with a Multi-Tiered System of Support for ALL students in reading! Use this guide to learn how to monitor and remediate student progress!
This guide will give you everything you need to implement RTI and monitor students' progress in your classroom or school.
7/4/2019 3 Comments
The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System is a popular literacy assessment, which I absolutely love! This universal screener is administered individually, requiring about 20 – 40 minutes per student. The screener includes an oral reading component and a comprehension component. When taken together, these two components provide an instructional level for each student (independent, instructional, frustrational).
The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System is a great tool to drive instruction and place students in guided reading groups, but…
A Fountas & Pinnell reading level should NOT be the determining factor for a Special Education referral!
F&P is Subjective!
The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System is a subjective measure. This is because there is no right or wrong answer, and a teacher’s beliefs, assumptions, emotions, and opinions can influence the outcome of the score.
Objective assessments have a single correct answer. Think true or false, multiple choice, and matching questions. Subjective tests include extended response questions and essays, or in other words, the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System.
In addition, many of the benchmark tests include some inherent bias toward culture, background knowledge of the student, etc.
In addition, at the start of the year, students can be hesitant to talk to a new teacher, while some students are shy all year! The open ended questioning format of the test can be biased against shy students, students lacking language, and others. The personality of a student can impact the outcome of the assessment.
F&P is Only One Data Point
As teachers, we know that one data point cannot be used to make an educational decision. Good teachers use numerous types of data from many sources to determine student strengths and areas to improve.
How often does a student score one way on the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System, but is unable to read that same level of authentic text?
Self-Correction Scores Do Not Impact F&P Reading Levels
Self-correction is not taken into account when determining a student's reading level in the Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System.
Some students are able to achieve high accuracy and high comprehension scores, despite also demonstrating a high self-correction rate.
Self-correction in reading is a good skill that teachers love to see. It shows us that students are visually attending to the text and self monitoring for meaning of the text.
Typically, a high self-correction rate impacts comprehension, but for some students, it does not. This can mean that a student is reading “too fast” and not attending to the text for phonics (decoding) principles. This should indicate to a teacher that the student requires explicit instruction in attending to the text and may indicate a need for explicit instruction of phonics skills noted in the self-corrections on the running record.
F&P is NOT Norm-Referenced
The Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment is a criterion-referenced tests. Such tests are designed to determine if a student has a set of skills. A norm-referenced assessment compares the student’s performance to other same-aged students.
Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System touts itself as just that - a benchmark assessment! This means that it can be used to measure student progress against a grade level or learning goal. Benchmark assessments, like the F&P, are interim assessments and should be given in between formative and summative assessments.
The F&P Benchmark Assessment is based on empirical research on language development, vocabulary expansion, reading acquisition, and reading difficulties. The assessment system has been field tested, but there is no empirical evidence on it.
There are NO F&P Police
The F&P Benchmark Assessment does have directions for administration; however, as teachers, we know that every student is different, and not every student follows the rules!
What happens when a student makes an error on the same word repeatedly? Does this count as multiple errors or just one?
What happens when the fluency rate is extremely low, but the accuracy and comprehension scores meet expectations?
So who do we go to with our questions about the students who do not follow the F&P rules?
Many schools have literacy coaches, but every coach seems to have their own interpretation and answers to our questions!
For instance, I was once told that we stop assessing a student when he/she has achieved one year above grade level, even if we think this student could read at a higher level. Is this right?
While scores may have F&P norms in place, who is enforcing them? Are they F&P’s rules? And doesn’t this just add to more subjectivity?
Fountas & Pinnell Should NOT be used to Refer Students to Special Education
Independent studies examining the usefulness of the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System as a universal screener are limited. Furthermore, in studies, using F&P to identify students as at-risk have resulted in moderate sensitivity, or unacceptable rates of identification (Burns, et al., 2015).
Fountas and Pinnell reading levels are one descriptor of a student’s reading ability, but it should not be our sole indicator.
But while The Fountas & Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System should not be used to refer a student for Special Education testing, it is very useful for teachers!
Its purpose is to inform instruction for teachers, relay to teachers, students, and families which skills are important to master, and express a student’s progress towards those learning goals, not to determine Special Education eligibility.
By Miss Rae
Burns, M. K., Pulles, S. M., Maki, K. E., Kanive, R., Hodgson, J., Helman, L. A., Preast, J. L., (2015). Accuracy of student performance while reading leveled books rated at their instructional level by a reading inventory. Journal of School Psychology, 53, 437-445.
Center on Response to Intervention: Screening Tools Chart (https://rti4success.org/resources/tools-charts/screening-tools-chart)
Klingbeil, D. A., McComas, J. J., Burns, M. K., & Helman, L. (2015). Comparison of predictive validity and diagnostic accuracy of screening measures of reading skills. Psychology in the Schools, 52(5), 500-514. http://doi.org/10.1002/pits.21839
Parker, D. C., Zaslofsky, A. F., Burns, M. K., Kanive, R., Hodgson, J., Scholin, S. E., & Klingbeil, D. A, (2015). A brief report of the diagnostic accuracy of oral reading fluency and reading inventory levels for reading failure risk among second- and third-grade students. Reading & Writing Quarterly, 31, 56-67.
I hate teaching writing, and I know it’s not just me.
Many teachers hate teaching writing. There is no magic button that activates brainstorming. Snapping your fingers won’t make the ideas organize into cohesive thoughts. It takes more than a twitch of a nose to pull, drag, and yank the words out of some of our students. And only if you could hold their hands to write, maybe then you could read it.
Writing includes many processes from reading to spelling. It also involves varying skills from the basic tasks of writing such as letter formation (or in today’s world, this could include typing) to spelling and grammar to sentence and text structures. And these are only some of the processes and skills involved in writing.
Since writing is comprised of so many intricacies, it is important to teach writing through a mixed approach. Students should progressively learn different forms of writing or genres by moving from product to process to product.
Insert your thought bubble here: “That’s great, but what does that look like in the classroom?”
Well, here’s the format I use for teaching writing (and, I don’t hate it):
The model I use is a genre study, tweaked to meet my students’ needs.
Genre studies examine structural elements for patterns in collections of texts through an inquiry-based strategy. Common elements discovered across texts are what define genre. Essentially, each genre reflects participate language conventions or style and is written for a particular audience and purpose.
After I have chosen the genre (i.e. narrative, argument) we are focusing on, I choose the texts that are the best models of that genre. For example, Little Red Riding Hood is a great model text for the genre of fairy tales.
On immersion day, we are swamped with sample texts of our genre. For example, if we are writing narratives, I will provide students with varying examples of narrative texts. Examples include trade books, picture books, printed short stories, etc. I also incorporate technology through Google Classroom links to interactive stories online, text online, etc. Immersion may also include a read aloud of a mentor text for the genre. Students can take notes on what they notice about the text, or they can just observe.
My students act as research scientists. At first, they just submerse themselves, skimming some texts, reading others, noticing the front covers or the inside illustrations.
Then, they dissect the samples, taking notes as they go (i.e. I noticed many descriptive adjectives in the texts).
We oscillate from independent research to group collaboration of ideas.
After immersion, we discuss what we noticed about our genre as a whole group.
As the teacher, I guide the discussion, facilitating key ideas of the genre to emerge and assure inclusion of innovative student observations, all the while creating an anchor chart of what we believe defines the genre. This chart remains posted throughout the year, and we add to it as we learn and become better writers.
I then continue immersion by dissecting genre models. We begin with guided practice where I read aloud a genre mentor text and I model note taking my thoughts on the genre.
Then, students work in collaborative groups, dissecting text samples in order to gain more exposure to the genre.
After students have gained an understanding of a genre’s language, audience, purpose, and style, we learn to become authors of this genre.
My first step in transforming students into authors is to model writing the genre through interactive writing. Basically, we write a piece of text for the genre as a whole group. This models the writing process for the genre.
Similar to the think alouds we use to model reading at the lower levels, interactive writing enables educators to model how good writers write. Students can help to write the piece in order to hear their voices as well as practice being writers.
Interactive writing pieces can be considered exemplars for your students as well. Instead of using student samples as models or exemplars, consider using your interactive writing pieces.
We use our lists or anchor charts of the key ideas that define the genre to create a rubric as a class to assess whether we met expectations for writing the genre. This gives students’ ownership over their learning and provides them with guidance for each stage of the writing process, including independent writing.
Interactive Writing comes next, and this is considered guided practice.
During this step, students write texts in stages. For example, when teaching narrative text, I will model writing a hook for a piece of text. We will discuss other hooks I could write. I will include student examples. Then, I will release the students to write a hook of their own.
Students can write with a partner, in groups, or independently during this stage, depending on the groups’ needs.
After we have written our own hooks, we will share some, giving feedback. Then, I will model writing the introduction through the interactive writing process. I will then have the students try it, share out, and discuss. I continue this process until we have a completed writing sample of the genre.
The last step is to write! Students become authors and produce a final writing product, modeling the genre. I release my scaffolded supports to independent practice.
For mini-lessons while students are in the independent writing phase, you can edit and revise the Interactive Writing pieces you wrote as a whole group.
While independent, teachers can target writing skill needs. Lagging skills in writing should be targeted through small group and sometimes, specialized instruction. Deficits in writing should be supported with accommodations and/or modifications.
So with this model, my feelings on teaching writing have changed...now, you can say I actually love teaching writing!
~ By Miss Rae
How do I find the time to teach Science and Social Studies???
How do I find the time to cover all of the curriculum, nevermind actually teach it???
How do I get my students to work cooperatively together???
How do I get my students to work together to learn together???
Well, I have the answer.
Get your students to work together to learn together using the jigsaw reading teaching strategy!
Every student will work in an Expert Group to become an “Expert” on a topic or skill. These students will all read the same text together, determine the main idea, and then, use their expert knowledge to teach the students in their Home Groups about the topic or skill.
First, make your Expert Groups Expert Groups should consist of 3-5 students who similar reading abilities. Essentially, these should be homogeneous groups.
Next, find a set of reading selections on the content you are teaching. For example, if you are studying Plants, perhaps one Expert Group reads about the parts of the plants and their functions, another Expert Group will receive a text about the life cycle of a plant, and the last Expert Group will read a text about adaptations of plants.
These should be short texts. Think the length of an article in a magazine!
Note: It is important that the reading material assigned is at appropriate instructional levels (90–95% reading accuracy).
I use sections from textbooks, chapters from novels, or websites with FREE non-fiction articles like...Newsela (https://newsela.com/) or ReadWorks (https://www.readworks.org/)
Next, make your Home Groups. There should be one “Expert” from each Expert Group in each Home Group.
Explain to students that they will be working in different cooperative groups to become “Experts” on a topic or skill
Introduce the strategy and/or the topic to be studied.
Then, group students into their Expert Groups and provide them with their assigned text to read.
Give students an appropriate amount of time to read the assigned text.
Provide students with highlighters, sticky notes, and/or a graphic organizer for notetaking.
It should be explained to students that while reading their texts in their Expert Groups, they should be reading for main ideas, supporting details, and key terms. It is going to be the
Experts’ jobs to teach other students about what they read.
After the Experts have finished reading the text, students should work together in their Expert Groups make sure that all members of the group fully understand the ideas presented and are able to accurately summarize their learning.
Note: You may provide key questions and/or a graphic organizers to focus the discussion.
Next, students move to their Home Groups.
While in their Home Groups, each student (or Expert) will report the information learned from their Expert text (or the text they read in their Expert Group).
It is important to remind students that Home Group members are responsible to learn ALL content from one another.
Using our Plant example, each Home Group should have one student from the Expert Group that read about the parts of the plants and their functions, one student from the Expert Group that read about the life cycle of a plant, and one student from the Expert Group that read about adaptations of plants.
Each member of the Home Group is expected to learn about each topic or skill learned by the Expert.
You may wish to prepare a summary chart or graphic organizer for each Home Group as a guide for organizing the Experts' information into a report of some sort.
Facilitate a whole class discussion to summarize the students’ learning. Ask Home Groups to report out about what they learned from each other!
OR try this variation to the Jigsaw Reading Cooperative Learning Strategy:
And there you have it!
You taught your students to work together to learn together! (Oh, and you taught content you didn’t even know you had time to teacher AND you did it all in one lesson!)
All Comprehension CoPlanning CoTeaching DIY Fountas & Pinnell Graphic Organizers Guided Reading Lesson Planning Multi-Tiered Systems Of Support Read And Respond Reading Response To Intervention Retelling RTI Science Of Reading Science Of Reading For Special Education Teachers Special Education Eligibility Special Education Lesson Planning Teaching Strategy Visualizing & Verbalizing Visual Texts Vocabulary Writing Writing In Response To Reading