Welcome to another online addition of the Arizona Promising Practices forum. For those new to this service, each issue, which will now be sent to you on a regular basis, will focus on: (1) Recommended National Educational Websites; (2) A Local or Arizona Website/Practice of Importance; and (3) One promising practice article in condensed form. We welcome your recommendations for improvement to this forum or suggestions on future topics (these will be wide ranging to if nothing in this update interests you, hold on for future editions!) The Arizona Promising Practices Forum and website, www.azpromisingpractices.com is a FREE resource of the Arizona Department of Education.

Mary Urich, ACPE Director murich@mail1.ade.state.az.us  

In this issue we focus on research based Tips for Teachers using whole class instruction for reading. This guide provides an outline on how to have an impact on every learner in the classroom and organize instruction in a way that meets the needs of each student.

But first:

National Website of Importance - Engaging children in Reading learning is always a challenge. Check out Reading Rockets, a website dedicated to effective reading instruction. www.readingrockets.org

Promising Practice Research and Teaching Tips

W hole-Class Instruction

Research findings

Considerable research has focused on the fact that for much of general education the instructional format is one in which the teacher delivers education to the class as a whole. The practice of whole-class instruction as the dominant approach to instruction has been well documented (e.g., Zigmond & Baker, 1990). For example, in a study that involved 60 elementary, middle, and high school general education classrooms that were observed over an entire year, whole-class instruction was the norm (McIntosh, Vaughn, Schumm, Haager, & Lee, 1993). When teachers were not providing whole-class instruction, they typically circulated around the room monitoring progress and behavior or attended to their own paperwork.

Elementary students have also reported that whole class instruction is the predominant instructional grouping format (Elbaum, Schumm, & Vaughn, 1997). Students noted that teachers most frequently provided reading instruction to the class as a whole or by having students work alone. Students less frequently reported opportunities to work in small groups, and they rarely worked in pairs. Although students preferred to receive reading instruction in mixed-ability groups, they considered same ability grouping for reading important for nonreaders. Students who were identified as better readers revealed that they were sensitive to the needs of lower readers and did not express concerns about the unfairness of having to help them in mixed-ability groups (Elbaum et al., 1997; Thorkildsen, 1993; Vaughn, Schumm, Niarhos, & Gordon, 1993). In particular, students with LD expressed appreciation for mixed-ability groups because they could then readily obtain help in identifying words or understanding what they were reading (Elbaum et al., 1997).

Many professionals have argued that teachers must decentralize some of their instruction if they are going to appropriately meet the needs of the increasing number of students with reading difficulties (Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons, 1997; Maheady, 1997). However, general education teachers perceive that it is a lot more feasible to provide large-group instruction than small-group instruction for students with LD in the general education classroom (Schumm & Vaughn, 1991). The issue is also true for individualizing instruction or finding time to provide mini lessons for students with LD. Teachers have reported that these are difficult tasks to embed in their instructional routines (Schumm, Vaughn, Gordon, & Rothlein, 1994).

Implications for practice

Numerous routines and instructional practices can contribute to teachers' effective use of whole-class instruction and implementation of alternative grouping practices.

Teachers can involve all students during whole-class instruction by asking questions and then asking students to partner to discuss the answer. Ask one student from the pair to provide the answer. This keeps all students engaged.

Teachers can use informal member checks to determine whether students agree, disagree, or have a question about a point made (Schumm, Vaughn, & Sobol, 1997). This allows each student to quickly register a vote and requires students to attend to the question asked. Member checks can be used frequently and quickly to maintain engagement and learning for all students.

Teachers can ask students to provide summaries of the main points of a presentation through a discussion or after directions are provided (Schumm et al., 1997). All students benefit when the material is reviewed, and a student summary allows the teacher to determine whether students understand the critical features.

Because many students with LD are reluctant to ask questions in large groups, teachers can provide cues to encourage and support students in taking risks. For example, teachers can encourage students to ask a "who," "what," or "where" question.

At the conclusion of a reading lesson, the teacher can distribute lesson reminder sheets, which all the students complete. These can be used by teachers to determine (a) what students have learned from the lesson, (b) what students liked about what they learned, and (c) what else students know about the topic.