August 31, 2024 • 19 mins
Has something in this episode resonated with you? Get in touch!
In this episode of the Structured Literacy podcast, Jocelyn explores the nuanced debate around scripted teaching programs, moving beyond polarised views to examine when and why such approaches might be appropriate. Drawing on Ken Blanchard's Situational Leadership Model, she explains how teachers at different stages, from enthusiastic beginners needing high direction to peak performers requiring autonomy, have varying needs for structured guidance, suggesting that scripted programs may suit novices but could frustrate experienced educators who need flexibility to respond to student needs in real-time.
Rather than advocating for or against scripting, Jocelyn promotes "full guidance support" that provides robust structure and consistency while preserving teachers' professional judgement to adapt instruction based on classroom dynamics, warning against swinging from unstructured approaches to over-scripted teaching that removes the human element essential for responsive, effective instruction.
Lead the Shift That Lasts
The only whole-school transformation pathway that builds trust, develops teacher thinking, and equips leaders to lead sustainable change from within while building a deep understanding of human cognition and evidence-based practice.
We are now taking bookings for 2026 to support those who are Leading Learning Success.
Click the link to book your discovery call. https://www.jocelynseamereducation.com/leadinglearning
Quick Links
Jocelyn Seamer Education Homepage
The Resource Room
Youtube channel
Facebook Page
#jocelynseamereducation #literacy #bestpractice #earlyprimaryyears #primaryschool #primaryschools #primaryschoolteacher #earlyyearseducation #earlyyearseducator #structuredliteracy #scienceofreading #classroom #learning #learningisfun #studentsuccess #studentsupport #teacherlife #theresourceroom #theevergreenteacher #upperprimary #upperprimaryteacher #thestructuredliteracypodcast #phoneme #grapheme #phonics #syntheticphonics
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Jocelyn (00:00):
Hi there and welcome to the Structured Literacy Podcast
.
I'm Jocelyn and in this episode, recorded on the lands of the
Palawa people here in Tasmania,I'm going to share my thoughts
on an issue that many peoplehave many viewpoints about:
scripted teaching.
Specifically, can greatteaching be scripted?
Now, full disclosure.
(00:20):
I don't have research to sharewith you that will definitively
answer this question.
A review of the literature onthis issue yields a number of
papers and articles, most ofwhich seem to have been written
by people who either really loveor really hate scripted
instructional programs.
I find it hard to put muchfaith in the findings and
viewpoints of an article whenclearly biased language is used
(00:43):
in statements such as scriptedprograms are being forced onto
teachers or schools committed toevidence-informed practices use
scripted programs.
This sets up an expectation ofcompetition of absolutes that's
rarely helpful to leaders anddecision makers.
When school leaders are makingdecisions for the good of their
school communities, they want toget it right.
(01:04):
They know that decisions,particularly those that come
with a price tag, carry acertain weight of accountability
.
So this podcast episode isn'tgoing to be a persuasive piece
on whether you should or shouldnot use a scripted approach to
instruction.
Rather, I hope to present somefood for thought and a little
more nuance in the discussionthan we sometimes see.
(01:25):
Firstly, I'd like to give you abit of background about the
thinking that has led me toproduce this particular episode.
Years of working with andsupporting adults in training,
coaching, leadership andday-to-day operations, both in
school settings and outside ofthem, has made it very clear to
me that grown-ups benefit fromthe explicit teaching model just
(01:48):
as much as students.
I do, We do, You do is usefulfor all.
It is also clear that there isas much variation in our
teaching teams as in ourclassrooms, with different
teachers having different needs.
Trying to come up with auniversal answer on finer points
of instruction for everyteacher in every classroom in
(02:09):
every school is a pipe dream.
Working with people is messy.
Working with students andmeeting the needs of a range of
learners is also no easy task.
When it comes to teaching, Irarely say that something is
always good or always bad.
And sure, taking a hard standand being all controversial will
get more podcast downloads, butI'd rather we had a more
(02:32):
professional conversation aboutwhen might scripted programs be
appropriate and if scripting iseven the right place to put our
focus for this conversation.
In thinking about this issueand so many others, I come back
to how we make sure thatteachers get what they need at
their particular point in theirteaching journey.
(02:52):
The foundation for me is KenBlanchard's Situational
Leadership Model.
If you've been with me for awhile, you will undoubtedly have
heard me speak about this.
The Situational LeadershipModel organises people into four
quadrants, depending on howmuch skill and knowledge they
have in relation to a particulartask.
Quadrant one is forenthusiastic beginners who have
(03:14):
no experience and just need tobe told and shown what to do.
Quadrant two is fordisillusioned learners who have
not yet developed enough skilland knowledge to perform a task
on their own, but have hadenough time trying to be in a
place of frustration.
You might know this as thelearning pit.
Disillusioned learners needhigh levels of direction and
(03:35):
also high levels of support.
They need to be told and shownwhat to do and also have highly
supportive coaching to help themthrough the rough spots.
When you have appropriatedirection and support, you move
to quadrant three, which iswhere you become an emerging
contributor.
You can perform the task, butyou doubt yourself.
You need loads of support, butnot much direction.
(03:58):
Finally, after sufficient time,and having received appropriate
support, you move to becoming apeak performer and can just get
on with what you're doing.
We'll have an image of thesefour quadrants in the show notes
of this episode atjocelynseamereducation.
com so that you can get a visualof how we develop in our skills
and knowledge.
(04:18):
The thing about SituationalLeadership is that everyone has
different tasks in their jobthat sit across at least three
of these quadrants, and across ateam you're going to have
individual teachers who sitacross these quadrants for the
same thing.
So when it comes to teachingstudents to read and spell in a
structured, explicit way, Iguarantee that your team will be
(04:39):
in different places, and unlessyou have an incredibly stable
staff who stay together for fiveyears and all row in the same
direction, you are going to havethis mix forever.
So, what's this got to do withscripted programs?
The way that this all comestogether is that one of the
benefits of a scripted programis that everyone gets the same
(05:00):
type of direction, because thewords you say and things you do
are all there, right in front ofyou.
Introducing a scripted approachto teaching can be a very quick
undertaking, making it feellike you're able to achieve a
lot in a small amount of time,and if your intention is to
introduce a program, that'sabsolutely true, you will
(05:20):
achieve that.
But here's the thing, building ahigh-performing teaching team
is not just about programs.
The programs are the thing thathelp direct our attention and
get everyone on the same page.
They don't do the teaching.
Let's reflect on those fourquadrants again and the needs of
different people.
One of the teachings that comeswith the Situational Leadership
(05:41):
Model is that the key tosuccess is in matching
leadership style with the needsof the individual and
recognising that differentpeople will have different needs
over time.
If you mismanage people, as inyour approach is not in
alignment with people's needs,then things can go awry.
Manage someone one quadrant outfrom what they need and you get
(06:04):
frustration.
Manage them two quadrants outfrom what they need and you get
anger.
Manage them three quadrants outand things get explosive.
That means that if you take anexperienced peak performer and
give them the high level ofdirection needed by someone in
the second quadrant, there's agood chance that you'll anger
the person.
Think about it this way (06:23):
if you're skilled in teaching
explicitly and have been gettingreal results for years, and
someone comes along and says no,no, you should do it this way,
let me step it out for you, andI only want you to do exactly
what it says here.
Guess what happens.
There are likely to be tersewords, but if you are new to
(06:44):
explicit teaching or an earlycareer teacher and someone gives
you that same instruction,you'll likely be pretty grateful
.
And this is why I think we getsuch mixed reviews on scripted
instruction.
Some people, those who are newto explicit instruction or only
do it once in a while, willwelcome that level of direction,
but not everyone actually needsit.
(07:05):
This might also explain thejourney that some schools have
in adopting a scripted program.
At the start it's all new, sothe high level of direction
might be appreciated by the teamat the time.
People get into a groove of howexplicit lessons run, develop
their skills and are then readyto move on and branch out.
But they can't because they'vebeen told that they have to only
(07:28):
teach doing and sayingprecisely what the book or bit
of paper says.
They're just held too tight.
They're mismanaged.
If we think about the explicitteaching model, it's a process
of gradual release.
We hold students tight in theearly stages while they're
building knowledge, skills andconfidence and then give them
(07:48):
space to apply these things forthemselves.
I think it's important torecognise that we all need this.
We all need to have the spaceto bring ourselves into the
picture.
I heard this described anotherway recently, with a different
analogy about martial arts.
When someone's learning amartial art, their job is to do
exactly what the instructor doesand nothing else.
(08:10):
They then have to be a carboncopy.
Once they can do those moveswithout thinking to a high
standard, they can start toadjust with a flick of the wrist
or a different angle on a toe.
It's when this is successfulthat they can branch out, but
they're not held to being thecarbon copy of the instructor
forever.
(08:31):
It seems to me that a highlyscripted program may suit
newbies, but may not serve aswell into the long term with
more experienced people.
So where does that leave us?
How are we supposed to supportour teachers who are at
different points in their careerand their explicit teaching
journey?
I think that the answer herelies in a shift, and that shift
(08:53):
is a move from discussion aboutscripted teaching to full
guidance support.
Full guidance resources andprograms provide the high level
of support that novices need tofind their feet and that teams
need to get on the same page,but they don't prevent a teacher
from teaching in the way thatreflects their experience or
(09:14):
responds to the need of theirstudents.
That brings me to a point thatI'm quite firm on.
No program or resourcedeveloper knows your students or
what is going to happen in yourclassroom when you teach.
It's just not possible.
Great teaching responds to theneeds of students.
It holds students' hearts andminds close and meets them in
(09:36):
the learning.
I'm not talking aboutnamby-pamby, fluffy instruction
where you don't need any databecause we feel the learning in
our hearts.
I'm talking about explicit,teacher-led lessons where you
invite the students on a journeyand they willingly come along
with you.
There are moments in teachingwhen you feel the energy shift
(09:56):
in the room.
You can feel the students'attention lock onto what you are
teaching and know that you'vepitched the lesson just right.
But this kind of moment doesn'tcome from cookie cutter,
one-size-fits-all teaching, itcomes from reading the room,
adjusting pace, varying yourlanguage to enable or enrich,
(10:17):
pausing to provide a bit moreexplanation when it's needed,
throwing in a quick fun fact topique interest and at all times
responding to the needs of thestudents in front of you based
on what you see in a lesson.
I'm not talking about making itup as you go.
I'm talking about using fullguidance resources to provide
(10:37):
the foundation, structure andconsistency across classrooms
that you need to create acracking whole school approach,
and then that instruction beingdelivered in a way that responds
to student needs.
Yes, there must be elements ofinstruction that are not
negotiable.
You have to be clear about whatteachers can and can't adjust,
(10:59):
but I believe that there's roomfor both structure and response.
You don't have to sacrifice oneto embrace the other.
Do I think that great teachingcan come from a scripted program
?
Well, yes, I do.
But I also think that thecritical ingredient is the
teacher.
Do I understand why schoolswould choose one?
Yep, I get it.
(11:19):
You want to support yourteachers.
You want to get quick runs onthe board.
You want every student toreceive high quality instruction
.
But here's another thing.
You can have all of thosethings and give teachers the
room to be professionals.
You can have consistency acrossclassrooms, support teachers,
get your school on the road toresults and have learning done
(11:43):
with children, not to them.
You don't have to choose.
The road to this outcome isfull guidance resources that
give teachers everything theyneed to provide full guidance to
students.
So back to our question aboutwhether great teaching can come
from scripted programs.
As always, it's less about theresource itself and more about
(12:05):
how you use it.
If your team is currentlyworking through this issue and
trying to make great decisionsfor the future, here are some
questions you can discuss inyour next leadership meeting.
If we're going to create asustainable, long-term culture
of excellence where teachers aresupported to build capacity,
what elements of instruction andresources will be necessary?
(12:28):
What is it about instructionthat makes it effective and
efficient for all students andteachers?
How can we help our whole teamto build this understanding?
What percentage of instructionshould be not negotiable?
What percentage of it should benegotiated with a team, and
what percentage of instructiondo individual teachers decide on
?
And once you know what thosepercentages are, name them up.
(12:51):
Be really clear.
How do we balance fidelity to awhole school approach with
teachers having the room to usetheir professional judgment in
their classrooms?
What role will data play in ourapproach and what are we
looking for to know thatinstruction is effective?
How will we use data to measureimpact and to identify teachers
(13:12):
who may need more support orwho might be going a little bit
rogue with the instruction.
How are we considering thethree elements of
evidence-informed practice andgiving weight to each?
Those three elements areresearch, practitioner knowledge
and the experience of students.
Where are we finding thewin-win-win amongst all of these
(13:32):
?
If we already have a scriptedprogram in our school, what does
it mean for us to respond tothe reality that teachers have
differing needs for directionand support?
How will we tweak things?
How will we adjust them to meetteachers where they're up to?
If we're looking for a programor suite of resources to support
student learning, what'simportant to us?
(13:53):
How are we gathering feedbackfrom our team and our students
about what drives learning andprogress in our school?
I'd like to finish this episodewith an observation.
We have made some tremendousgains in literacy instruction in
the last five years.
It would be a great shame tosee them rolled back.
You know those pendulums thatwe're all so fond of talking
(14:15):
about.
I can see one swinging rightpast on its way to another
extreme.
We've come from a position ofnot really understanding the
value of teacher-led instruction, of working under the
assumption that if we putengaging things in front of
children, they would pull thelearning out of them and all
would be well.
So many of us have built astrong understanding of
(14:36):
Cognitive Load Theory, ofInformation Processing Theory,
of understanding the need todirect student attention and
guide learning.
In the quest to standardisepractice and not leave things to
chance, we are in danger ofholding on to teachers and
holding on to instruction fartoo tight.
(14:57):
No program writer knows whatevery child needs.
In our desire to not leavethings to chance, we are in some
instances trying to engineerall of the uncertainty out of
instruction.
No process makes up for a lackof suitability to teach.
No script can replaceprofessional learning, in-school
(15:18):
coaching and the need to beconstantly focused on growing
teacher capacity.
We can't make teachingfoolproof.
What we can do is attract thebest and the brightest teachers
to our schools, remainuncompromising and unapologetic
about the need for constantimprovement and provide our
teachers with the training androbust guidance that they need
(15:40):
to do great work.
Having small scripts as part ofa program is great.
It helps everyone communicateabout concepts with confidence
and establish lesson structures.
But should every moment ofinstruction be scripted?
Personally, I don't think so.
I think there's something lostwhen there's a piece of paper
between us and the students.
Instead, look for resources andprograms that provide loads of
(16:04):
guidance, while supportingteachers to use their judgment
to respond to the needs ofstudents.
If you're a Resource Roommember or use one of our
programs, that's exactly whatyou're getting.
Until next time, happy teachingeveryone.
Bye.
Hi there and welcome to the Structured Literacy Podcast
.
I'm Jocelyn and in this episode, recorded on the lands of the
Palawa people here in Tasmania,I'm going to share my thoughts
on an issue that many peoplehave many viewpoints about:
scripted teaching.
Specifically, can greatteaching be scripted?
Now, full disclosure.
(00:20):
I don't have research to sharewith you that will definitively
answer this question.
A review of the literature onthis issue yields a number of
papers and articles, most ofwhich seem to have been written
by people who either really loveor really hate scripted
instructional programs.
I find it hard to put muchfaith in the findings and
viewpoints of an article whenclearly biased language is used
(00:43):
in statements such as scriptedprograms are being forced onto
teachers or schools committed toevidence-informed practices use
scripted programs.
This sets up an expectation ofcompetition of absolutes that's
rarely helpful to leaders anddecision makers.
When school leaders are makingdecisions for the good of their
school communities, they want toget it right.
(01:04):
They know that decisions,particularly those that come
with a price tag, carry acertain weight of accountability
.
So this podcast episode isn'tgoing to be a persuasive piece
on whether you should or shouldnot use a scripted approach to
instruction.
Rather, I hope to present somefood for thought and a little
more nuance in the discussionthan we sometimes see.
(01:25):
Firstly, I'd like to give you abit of background about the
thinking that has led me toproduce this particular episode.
Years of working with andsupporting adults in training,
coaching, leadership andday-to-day operations, both in
school settings and outside ofthem, has made it very clear to
me that grown-ups benefit fromthe explicit teaching model just
(01:48):
as much as students.
I do, We do, You do is usefulfor all.
It is also clear that there isas much variation in our
teaching teams as in ourclassrooms, with different
teachers having different needs.
Trying to come up with auniversal answer on finer points
of instruction for everyteacher in every classroom in
(02:09):
every school is a pipe dream.
Working with people is messy.
Working with students andmeeting the needs of a range of
learners is also no easy task.
When it comes to teaching, Irarely say that something is
always good or always bad.
And sure, taking a hard standand being all controversial will
get more podcast downloads, butI'd rather we had a more
(02:32):
professional conversation aboutwhen might scripted programs be
appropriate and if scripting iseven the right place to put our
focus for this conversation.
In thinking about this issueand so many others, I come back
to how we make sure thatteachers get what they need at
their particular point in theirteaching journey.
(02:52):
The foundation for me is KenBlanchard's Situational
Leadership Model.
If you've been with me for awhile, you will undoubtedly have
heard me speak about this.
The Situational LeadershipModel organises people into four
quadrants, depending on howmuch skill and knowledge they
have in relation to a particulartask.
Quadrant one is forenthusiastic beginners who have
(03:14):
no experience and just need tobe told and shown what to do.
Quadrant two is fordisillusioned learners who have
not yet developed enough skilland knowledge to perform a task
on their own, but have hadenough time trying to be in a
place of frustration.
You might know this as thelearning pit.
Disillusioned learners needhigh levels of direction and
(03:35):
also high levels of support.
They need to be told and shownwhat to do and also have highly
supportive coaching to help themthrough the rough spots.
When you have appropriatedirection and support, you move
to quadrant three, which iswhere you become an emerging
contributor.
You can perform the task, butyou doubt yourself.
You need loads of support, butnot much direction.
(03:58):
Finally, after sufficient time,and having received appropriate
support, you move to becoming apeak performer and can just get
on with what you're doing.
We'll have an image of thesefour quadrants in the show notes
of this episode atjocelynseamereducation.
com so that you can get a visualof how we develop in our skills
and knowledge.
(04:18):
The thing about SituationalLeadership is that everyone has
different tasks in their jobthat sit across at least three
of these quadrants, and across ateam you're going to have
individual teachers who sitacross these quadrants for the
same thing.
So when it comes to teachingstudents to read and spell in a
structured, explicit way, Iguarantee that your team will be
(04:39):
in different places, and unlessyou have an incredibly stable
staff who stay together for fiveyears and all row in the same
direction, you are going to havethis mix forever.
So, what's this got to do withscripted programs?
The way that this all comestogether is that one of the
benefits of a scripted programis that everyone gets the same
(05:00):
type of direction, because thewords you say and things you do
are all there, right in front ofyou.
Introducing a scripted approachto teaching can be a very quick
undertaking, making it feellike you're able to achieve a
lot in a small amount of time,and if your intention is to
introduce a program, that'sabsolutely true, you will
(05:20):
achieve that.
But here's the thing, building ahigh-performing teaching team
is not just about programs.
The programs are the thing thathelp direct our attention and
get everyone on the same page.
They don't do the teaching.
Let's reflect on those fourquadrants again and the needs of
different people.
One of the teachings that comeswith the Situational Leadership
(05:41):
Model is that the key tosuccess is in matching
leadership style with the needsof the individual and
recognising that differentpeople will have different needs
over time.
If you mismanage people, as inyour approach is not in
alignment with people's needs,then things can go awry.
Manage someone one quadrant outfrom what they need and you get
(06:04):
frustration.
Manage them two quadrants outfrom what they need and you get
anger.
Manage them three quadrants outand things get explosive.
That means that if you take anexperienced peak performer and
give them the high level ofdirection needed by someone in
the second quadrant, there's agood chance that you'll anger
the person.
Think about it this way (06:23):
if you're skilled in teaching
explicitly and have been gettingreal results for years, and
someone comes along and says no,no, you should do it this way,
let me step it out for you, andI only want you to do exactly
what it says here.
Guess what happens.
There are likely to be tersewords, but if you are new to
(06:44):
explicit teaching or an earlycareer teacher and someone gives
you that same instruction,you'll likely be pretty grateful
.
And this is why I think we getsuch mixed reviews on scripted
instruction.
Some people, those who are newto explicit instruction or only
do it once in a while, willwelcome that level of direction,
but not everyone actually needsit.
(07:05):
This might also explain thejourney that some schools have
in adopting a scripted program.
At the start it's all new, sothe high level of direction
might be appreciated by the teamat the time.
People get into a groove of howexplicit lessons run, develop
their skills and are then readyto move on and branch out.
But they can't because they'vebeen told that they have to only
(07:28):
teach doing and sayingprecisely what the book or bit
of paper says.
They're just held too tight.
They're mismanaged.
If we think about the explicitteaching model, it's a process
of gradual release.
We hold students tight in theearly stages while they're
building knowledge, skills andconfidence and then give them
(07:48):
space to apply these things forthemselves.
I think it's important torecognise that we all need this.
We all need to have the spaceto bring ourselves into the
picture.
I heard this described anotherway recently, with a different
analogy about martial arts.
When someone's learning amartial art, their job is to do
exactly what the instructor doesand nothing else.
(08:10):
They then have to be a carboncopy.
Once they can do those moveswithout thinking to a high
standard, they can start toadjust with a flick of the wrist
or a different angle on a toe.
It's when this is successfulthat they can branch out, but
they're not held to being thecarbon copy of the instructor
forever.
(08:31):
It seems to me that a highlyscripted program may suit
newbies, but may not serve aswell into the long term with
more experienced people.
So where does that leave us?
How are we supposed to supportour teachers who are at
different points in their careerand their explicit teaching
journey?
I think that the answer herelies in a shift, and that shift
(08:53):
is a move from discussion aboutscripted teaching to full
guidance support.
Full guidance resources andprograms provide the high level
of support that novices need tofind their feet and that teams
need to get on the same page,but they don't prevent a teacher
from teaching in the way thatreflects their experience or
(09:14):
responds to the need of theirstudents.
That brings me to a point thatI'm quite firm on.
No program or resourcedeveloper knows your students or
what is going to happen in yourclassroom when you teach.
It's just not possible.
Great teaching responds to theneeds of students.
It holds students' hearts andminds close and meets them in
(09:36):
the learning.
I'm not talking aboutnamby-pamby, fluffy instruction
where you don't need any databecause we feel the learning in
our hearts.
I'm talking about explicit,teacher-led lessons where you
invite the students on a journeyand they willingly come along
with you.
There are moments in teachingwhen you feel the energy shift
(09:56):
in the room.
You can feel the students'attention lock onto what you are
teaching and know that you'vepitched the lesson just right.
But this kind of moment doesn'tcome from cookie cutter,
one-size-fits-all teaching, itcomes from reading the room,
adjusting pace, varying yourlanguage to enable or enrich,
(10:17):
pausing to provide a bit moreexplanation when it's needed,
throwing in a quick fun fact topique interest and at all times
responding to the needs of thestudents in front of you based
on what you see in a lesson.
I'm not talking about making itup as you go.
I'm talking about using fullguidance resources to provide
(10:37):
the foundation, structure andconsistency across classrooms
that you need to create acracking whole school approach,
and then that instruction beingdelivered in a way that responds
to student needs.
Yes, there must be elements ofinstruction that are not
negotiable.
You have to be clear about whatteachers can and can't adjust,
(10:59):
but I believe that there's roomfor both structure and response.
You don't have to sacrifice oneto embrace the other.
Do I think that great teachingcan come from a scripted program
?
Well, yes, I do.
But I also think that thecritical ingredient is the
teacher.
Do I understand why schoolswould choose one?
Yep, I get it.
(11:19):
You want to support yourteachers.
You want to get quick runs onthe board.
You want every student toreceive high quality instruction
.
But here's another thing.
You can have all of thosethings and give teachers the
room to be professionals.
You can have consistency acrossclassrooms, support teachers,
get your school on the road toresults and have learning done
(11:43):
with children, not to them.
You don't have to choose.
The road to this outcome isfull guidance resources that
give teachers everything theyneed to provide full guidance to
students.
So back to our question aboutwhether great teaching can come
from scripted programs.
As always, it's less about theresource itself and more about
(12:05):
how you use it.
If your team is currentlyworking through this issue and
trying to make great decisionsfor the future, here are some
questions you can discuss inyour next leadership meeting.
If we're going to create asustainable, long-term culture
of excellence where teachers aresupported to build capacity,
what elements of instruction andresources will be necessary?
(12:28):
What is it about instructionthat makes it effective and
efficient for all students andteachers?
How can we help our whole teamto build this understanding?
What percentage of instructionshould be not negotiable?
What percentage of it should benegotiated with a team, and
what percentage of instructiondo individual teachers decide on
?
And once you know what thosepercentages are, name them up.
(12:51):
Be really clear.
How do we balance fidelity to awhole school approach with
teachers having the room to usetheir professional judgment in
their classrooms?
What role will data play in ourapproach and what are we
looking for to know thatinstruction is effective?
How will we use data to measureimpact and to identify teachers
(13:12):
who may need more support orwho might be going a little bit
rogue with the instruction.
How are we considering thethree elements of
evidence-informed practice andgiving weight to each?
Those three elements areresearch, practitioner knowledge
and the experience of students.
Where are we finding thewin-win-win amongst all of these
(13:32):
?
If we already have a scriptedprogram in our school, what does
it mean for us to respond tothe reality that teachers have
differing needs for directionand support?
How will we tweak things?
How will we adjust them to meetteachers where they're up to?
If we're looking for a programor suite of resources to support
student learning, what'simportant to us?
(13:53):
How are we gathering feedbackfrom our team and our students
about what drives learning andprogress in our school?
I'd like to finish this episodewith an observation.
We have made some tremendousgains in literacy instruction in
the last five years.
It would be a great shame tosee them rolled back.
You know those pendulums thatwe're all so fond of talking
(14:15):
about.
I can see one swinging rightpast on its way to another
extreme.
We've come from a position ofnot really understanding the
value of teacher-led instruction, of working under the
assumption that if we putengaging things in front of
children, they would pull thelearning out of them and all
would be well.
So many of us have built astrong understanding of
(14:36):
Cognitive Load Theory, ofInformation Processing Theory,
of understanding the need todirect student attention and
guide learning.
In the quest to standardisepractice and not leave things to
chance, we are in danger ofholding on to teachers and
holding on to instruction fartoo tight.
(14:57):
No program writer knows whatevery child needs.
In our desire to not leavethings to chance, we are in some
instances trying to engineerall of the uncertainty out of
instruction.
No process makes up for a lackof suitability to teach.
No script can replaceprofessional learning, in-school
(15:18):
coaching and the need to beconstantly focused on growing
teacher capacity.
We can't make teachingfoolproof.
What we can do is attract thebest and the brightest teachers
to our schools, remainuncompromising and unapologetic
about the need for constantimprovement and provide our
teachers with the training androbust guidance that they need
(15:40):
to do great work.
Having small scripts as part ofa program is great.
It helps everyone communicateabout concepts with confidence
and establish lesson structures.
But should every moment ofinstruction be scripted?
Personally, I don't think so.
I think there's something lostwhen there's a piece of paper
between us and the students.
Instead, look for resources andprograms that provide loads of
(16:04):
guidance, while supportingteachers to use their judgment
to respond to the needs ofstudents.
If you're a Resource Roommember or use one of our
programs, that's exactly whatyou're getting.
Until next time, happy teachingeveryone.
Bye.
Popular Podcasts
24/7 News: The Latest
The latest news in 4 minutes updated every hour, every day.
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show
The Clay Travis and Buck Sexton Show. Clay Travis and Buck Sexton tackle the biggest stories in news, politics and current events with intelligence and humor. From the border crisis, to the madness of cancel culture and far-left missteps, Clay and Buck guide listeners through the latest headlines and hot topics with fun and entertaining conversations and opinions.