Читать книгу The New Art and Science of Teaching - Robert J Marzano - Страница 6
ОглавлениеINTRODUCTION
The History of The New Art and Science of Teaching
The history of The New Art and Science of Teaching reaches back to the 1980s when my colleagues and I synthesized the research and theory on the effective teaching of thinking in the book Dimensions of Thinking (Marzano et al., 1988). Relatively soon after, I authored A Different Kind of Classroom (Marzano, 1992), which combines strategies for teaching thinking with more general strategies for classroom management, engagement, and assessment. These works present a comprehensive synthesis of the research on teaching and provide deep-level background to The New Art and Science of Teaching.
The more proximal ancestry of The New Art and Science of Teaching dates back to the turn of the 21st century. In the book Classroom Instruction That Works (Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001), my colleagues and I identify nine research-supported instructional strategies. In 2003, with my colleagues I wrote a companion book titled Classroom Management That Works (Marzano et al., 2003) and then another companion book in 2006, Classroom Assessment and Grading That Work (Marzano, 2006).
While I am gratified that each book has been relatively popular and influential, I am not pleased that some have interpreted them as listings of instructional strategies that are “proven” to enhance learning for students. In fact, the nine instructional strategies in Classroom Instruction That Works have been commonly referred to as high-yield instructional strategies—a term I do not endorse. To illustrate, one need only enter the phrase “high-yield strategies” into an Internet search engine and thousands of results will be generated. In fact, in 2009, I wrote an article, “Setting the Record Straight on High-Yield Strategies” (Marzano, 2009b), to counteract the growing incorrect belief that research could ever produce a list of instructional strategies that would guarantee student learning. Specifically, I note that no single instructional strategy can guarantee student learning for a number of reasons. One is that many factors other than the use of instructional strategies affect student learning. Another is that instructional strategies work in concert or sets and should not be thought of as independent interventions. Still another is that educators have to use strategies in specific ways to produce positive results.
Over time, I created an instructional model that ties the strategies, pieces, and points together in an interactive manner; it appears in The Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007). I chose the phrase art and science purposefully to communicate a message. Specifically, research and theory will never validate the notion that teaching is simply a set of preprogrammed moves manifested as strategies. Rather, instructional strategies are best likened to techniques an artist might develop and refine over years of practice. The artist then uses these techniques to create works that are not only unique and complex but elegantly focused. The more skill the artist exhibits with available techniques, the better his or her creations. Likewise, the more skill the classroom teacher has with the instructional strategies that research and theory have uncovered over the decades, the better the teacher will be able to create lessons that optimize student learning.
The New Art and Science of Teaching, then, represents my perspective on the current state of knowledge about effective teaching. It is a perspective that certainly draws from the past but also shines light on the possible future.
The Research Supporting the Model
The research supporting The New Art and Science of Teaching is extensive since it covers so many years and so many previous works. I discuss the complete research history in detail in “Research Base for The New Art and Science of Teaching” (Marzano, 2017). I briefly summarize it here.
Narrative and Meta-Analytic Studies
The first works constituting the ancestry of The New Art and Science of Teaching provide narrative reviews of the literature (Marzano, 1992; Marzano et al., 1988). These reviews are quite extensive. For example, the Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development (ASCD) sponsored Dimensions of Thinking (Marzano et al., 1988), but a consortium of twenty-eight organizations—the Association Collaborative for Teaching Thinking—supported it. That consortium included the American Educational Research Association, the International Reading Association (now International Literacy Association), the National Council of Teachers of English, the National Council for the Social Studies, the National Science Teachers Association, and the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, among others. In effect, The Art and Science of Teaching is based on some of the most widely vetted narrative reviews of the literature to that point. As the name implies, narrative reviews are author centric in that they depend on the author’s ability to organize research and theory into logical categories. The author’s views on the extant literature greatly influence them.
While narrative reviews were the norm at that time, the norm for research syntheses changed with the popularization of meta-analysis in the early 1990s. In How Science Takes Stock, Morton Hunt (1997) describes the nature and function of meta-analysis in nontechnical terms. Briefly, meta-analytic techniques translate findings into effect sizes that report how much increase or decrease in student learning can be associated with a particular intervention. Table I.1 reports the meta-analytic findings from a number of studies on the effect of goal setting as an instructional strategy.
Table I.1: Meta-Analytic Results for Goal Setting
a Two effect sizes are listed because of the manner in which effect sizes were reported. Readers should consult that study for more details.
b As reported in Hattie (2009).
c Both Tubbs (1986) and Locke and Latham (1990) report results from organizational as well as educational settings.
d As reported in Locke and Latham (2002).
e As reported in Hattie and Timperley (2007).
Source: Marzano, 2009a, p. 5.
Table I.1 reports eighteen synthesis studies (each row represents a synthesis study) on the topic of goal setting. The third column lists the number of effect sizes in each study. In their 1993 study, Mark Lipsey and David Wilson report 204 effect sizes; in 2007, Steve Graham and Dolores Perin report 5 effect sizes. Each effect size represents a comparison between two groups—in this case, one group that used the strategy of goal setting and one group that did not. The fourth column reports the average effect size in the synthesis study, and the fifth column reports the expected percentile gain in achievement associated with the average effect size. For example, the average effect size of 0.55 from Lipsey and Wilson (1993) is associated with an increase of 21 percentile points for an average student. The average effect size of 0.70 by Graham and Perin is associated with an increase of 26 percentile points for the average student.
Lists of meta-analytic studies like that in table I.1 appear in the following works: A Theory-Based Meta-Analysis of Research on Instruction (Marzano, 1998), Classroom Instruction That Works (Marzano et al., 2001), Classroom Management That Works (Marzano, 2003a), Classroom Assessment and Grading That Work (Marzano, 2006), The Art and Science of Teaching (Marzano, 2007), Designing and Teaching Learning Goals and Objectives (Marzano, 2009a), and Formative Assessment and Standards-Based Grading (Marzano, 2010b). These works as a whole include lists of effect sizes for virtually every element in The New Art and Science of Teaching. The studies in table I.1 include over one thousand effect sizes. If one were to list all effect sizes across these works that are foundational to The New Art and Science of Teaching, the final count numbers in the tens of thousands.
Teacher-Designed Studies
Since The Art and Science of Teaching was published in 2007, Marzano Research has conducted its own studies. Specifically, hundreds of teachers at various grade levels and in various subjects have undertaken studies of specific elements or strategies in their classrooms. In general, teachers selected a strategy they wished to study and identified content to teach to two different classes or sets of students. Instruction was the same for both groups with the exception that teachers used the selected strategy with one group of students but not the other. They used the same pretests and post-tests with both groups. Researchers at Marzano Research then analyzed the findings and reported back to teachers.
To date, over five hundred teachers have been involved in such studies resulting in over one thousand findings reported as effect sizes. Visit marzanoresearch.com/research/database to access the results of each study. A series of studies summarizes many of the overall findings (see Haystead & Marzano, 2009). One of the more interesting aspects of these studies is that they were conducted with minimal and sometimes no teacher training. For the most part, teachers received either a very brief training (one half day or less) on a specific strategy, or they simply read a few pages about the strategy. This level of training probably represents the typical environment for a teacher, which involves minimal time for extensive training. The fact that the majority of teacher-designed studies demonstrated positive effect sizes in a short period of time (a few days to a few weeks) is an indicator that teachers can integrate the strategies into their repertoire of techniques relatively quickly.
Schoolwide Studies
Schoolwide studies examine the effects of The Art and Science of Teaching model on the average achievement scores for the school as a whole as opposed to the average achievement scores of students in the classes of specific teachers. For example, one study involves fifty-nine schools and 1,117 teachers. It examines the relationship between teachers’ usage of instructional strategies and the school’s average score on state tests of mathematics and reading (see Marzano Research, 2010, 2011). Effect sizes ranged from 0.53 in mathematics to 0.74 in reading.
Teacher Evaluation Studies
The Art and Science of Teaching as a teacher evaluation model is used in eleven countries, three provinces in Canada, and forty-three states (Basileo & Marzano, 2016). Data from these implementations indicate a relationship between teachers’ use of the strategies in the model and growth in student learning. Growth is commonly determined by value-added measures that are based on state tests at the end of the year. The book Teacher Evaluation That Makes a Difference (Marzano & Toth, 2013) discuses value-added measures in depth. Briefly though, the strength of value-added measures is that they compute student learning over a given year while controlling for students’ previous learning and demographics. These studies demonstrate that teachers’ scores on the model as a whole are positively and significantly correlated with value-added measures based on state tests (see Basileo, Toth, & Kennedy, 2015). Perhaps more important, the studies demonstrate that the individual elements in the model are positively and significantly correlated with value-added measures (see Basileo & Marzano, 2016). Most noteworthy about these studies is that they involve over one hundred and eighty thousand teacher observations spread over three school years (2012 to 2015).
The Major Features of The New Art and Science of Teaching
The New Art and Science of Teaching is new, even though the original strategies are intact, albeit greatly expanded. One of the major changes in The New Art and Science of Teaching is that it takes a student-outcomes perspective as opposed to a teacher-outcomes perspective. To illustrate, The Art and Science of Teaching identifies specific teacher behaviors. Teachers can use rating scales for each element of the model to determine the extent to which they are effectively deploying instructional strategies. While this is useful information, The New Art and Science of Teaching has a focus on student outcomes. This makes intuitive sense since instructional strategies generate certain mental states and processes in learners’ minds which, in turn, enhance students’ learning. Figure I.1 illustrates the teaching and learning progression.
Figure I.1: The teaching and learning progression.
According to figure I.1, specific mental states and processes in learners’ minds are the mediating variable between the effective application of instructional strategies and enhanced student learning. Without these mental states and processes, a given strategy will have little or no effect on students. As subsequent chapters in this book illustrate, this single fact changes the way districts, schools, and classroom educators should monitor the use of instructional strategies, provide teachers with feedback, and analyze students’ learning. Table I.2 depicts the specific mental states and processes that should be present in the learner’s mind.
Table I.2: Teacher Actions and Student Mental States and Processes
| Teacher Actions | Student Mental States and Processes | |
| Feedback | Providing and Communicating Clear Learning Goals | 1. Students understand the progression of knowledge they are expected to master and where they are along that progression. |
| Using Assessments | 2. Students understand how test scores and grades relate to their status on the progression of knowledge they are expected to master. | |
| Content | Conducting Direct Instruction Lessons | 3. When content is new, students understand which parts are important and how the parts fit together. |
| Conducting Practicing and Deepening Lessons | 4. After teachers present new content, students deepen their understanding and develop fluency in skills and processes. | |
| Conducting Knowledge Application Lessons | 5. After teachers present new content, students generate and defend claims through knowledge application tasks. | |
| Using Strategies That Appear in All Types of Lessons | 6. Students continually integrate new knowledge with old knowledge and revise their understanding accordingly. | |
| Context | Using Engagement Strategies | 7. Students are paying attention, energized, intrigued, and inspired. |
| Implementing Rules and Procedures | 8. Students understand and follow rules and procedures. | |
| Building Relationships | 9. Students feel welcome, accepted, and valued. | |
| Communicating High Expectations | 10. Typically reluctant students feel valued and do not hesitate to interact with the teacher or their peers. |
The mental states and processes in table I.2 are organized in three major categories: (1) feedback, (2) content, and (3) context. Feedback refers to the information loop between the teacher and the students that provides students with an awareness of what they should be learning and how they are doing. Content refers to lesson progression, which allows students to move from an initial understanding of content to application of content while continuously reviewing and upgrading their knowledge. Context refers to the following student psychological needs: engagement, order, a sense of belonging, and high expectations.
The column Teacher Actions corresponds to each desired mental state and process. For example, the desired mental state of students understanding the progression of knowledge they are expected to master and where they are along that progression (the first row in table I.2) is associated with the teacher action of providing and communicating clear learning goals. Students’ understanding which parts of newly presented content are important and how the parts fit together (the third row) is associated with the teacher action of conducting direct instruction lessons. Students paying attention, being energized, being intrigued, and being inspired (the seventh row) is associated with the teacher’s use of engagement strategies, and so on.
The teacher actions and student mental states and processes translate nicely into a set of questions that help teachers plan units and lessons within those units. In The New Art and Science of Teaching, these are referred to as design questions. Table I.3 depicts these.
Table I.3: Design Questions
| Design Areas | Design Questions | |
| Feedback | 1. Providing and Communicating Clear Learning Goals | How will I communicate clear learning goals that help students understand the progression of knowledge they are expected to master and where they are along that progression? |
| 2. Using Assessments | How will I design and administer assessments that help students understand how their test scores and grades are related to their status on the progression of knowledge they are expected to master? | |
| Content | 3. Conducting Direct Instruction Lessons | When content is new, how will I design and deliver direct instruction lessons that help students understand which parts are important and how the parts fit together? |
| 4. Conducting Practicing and Deepening Lessons | After presenting content, how will I design and deliver lessons that help students deepen their understanding and develop fluency in skills and processes? | |
| 5. Conducting Knowledge Application Lessons | After presenting content, how will I design and deliver lessons that help students generate and defend claims through knowledge application? | |
| 6. Using Strategies That Appear in All Types of Lessons | Throughout all types of lessons, what strategies will I use to help students continually integrate new knowledge with old knowledge and revise their understanding accordingly? | |
| Context | 7. Using Engagement Strategies | What engagement strategies will I use to help students pay attention, be energized, be intrigued, and be inspired? |
| 8. Implementing Rules and Procedures | What strategies will I use to help students understand and follow rules and procedures? | |
| 9. Building Relationships | What strategies will I use to help students feel welcome, accepted, and valued? | |
| 10. Communicating High Expectations | What strategies will I use to help typically reluctant students feel valued and comfortable interacting with me and their peers? |
These ten design questions and the general framework with the three categories provide a road map for lesson and unit planning that not only points to specific strategies but also ensures a focus on student outcomes. Additionally, the framework helps organize a wide array of instructional strategies into a comprehensive network. To illustrate, consider table I.4 (page 8).
Table I.4 depicts forty-three categories of instructional strategies (referred to as elements) embedded in the ten design areas found within three general categories. These forty-three elements address instructional strategies detailed in the multiple and diverse sources briefly mentioned at the beginning of this introduction (Marzano, 1992, 2006, 2007, 2010; Marzano et al., 1988; Marzano et al., 2001; Marzano et al., 2003). Additionally, each element involves multiple strategies. For example, consider element twenty-four within the design area of engagement: increasing response rates. It includes the following nine strategies—nine different ways to increase students’ response rates.
1. Random names
2. Hand signals
3. Response cards
4. Response chaining
5. Paired response
6. Choral response
7. Wait time
8. Elaborative interrogation
9. Multiple types of questions
In all, The New Art and Science of Teaching involves over 330 specific instructional strategies embedded in the forty-three elements.
Table I.4: Elements Within the Ten Design Areas
The Old and New Art and Science of Teaching
The New Art and Science of Teaching has many similarities with the initial framework, although it has undergone significant changes. For example, both the original and revised framework have three overarching categories. The original three overarching lesson categories are (1) routine segments, (2) content segments, and (3) on-the-spot segments. As their names imply, classrooms engage in routine segments on a systematic basis, content segments address content lessons, and on-the-spot segments address strategies that teachers use when unplanned, immediate situations occur. Again, these three categories emanate from the perspective of what the teacher does. The three overarching categories in The New Art and Science of Teaching emanate from a perspective of what must occur in students’ minds to learn effectively. Specifically, (1) they must receive feedback, (2) they must receive content instruction that triggers specific types of thinking, and (3) they must have a psychological context in which their basic needs are met.
The Art and Science of Teaching has design questions, as does The New Art and Science of Teaching. Indeed, eight of the design questions in The New Art and Science of Teaching are basically identical to the originals. However, The New Art and Science of Teaching has two design questions that are not part of the original: one deals with assessment (design question 2: How will I design and administer assessments that help students understand how their test scores and grades are related to their status on the progression of knowledge they are expected to master?); the other deals with the continuous development of understanding (design question 6: Throughout all types of lessons, what strategies will I use to help students continually integrate new knowledge with old knowledge and revise their understanding accordingly?).
Both versions of The Art and Science of Teaching have categories of instructional strategies referred to as elements. The original version has forty-one elements; the new version has forty-three. Of the forty-three elements in the new model, thirty-nine are identical to the old model. Thus, four elements in the new model are not in the old. (For a detailed comparison of elements from the old and new models, visit go.SolutionTree.com/instruction to view the Compendium Crosswalk.)
Finally, both The Art and Science of Teaching and The New Art and Science of Teaching identify specific instructional strategies for each element. As mentioned previously, The New Art and Science of Teaching has more strategies than the original version. Specifically, the book Becoming a Reflective Teacher (Marzano, 2012), which is based on the original model, identifies 280 strategies. The New Art and Science of Teaching identifies over 330 specific strategies.
A Framework for Change
The New Art and Science of Teaching, however, is much more than an update of the original model. Rather, it is a framework for substantive change. Indeed, one might even consider it a manifesto.
At its core, a manifesto is a written statement that describes a person’s or group’s policies and goals. The New Art and Science of Teaching describes those changes at the individual teacher level, school level, and district level that I believe are warranted by the research in education since the 1960s and through my observations of teachers, schools, and districts during that time. As such, each chapter includes a section titled Implications for Change that describes how the model elements highlight alterations teachers must make in current practice. Additionally, each chapter contains a section on planning issues teachers should consider.
Chapters 1 and 2 address the elements in the overall category of feedback. Chapter 1 examines providing and communicating clear learning goals, and chapter 2 considers assessment.
Chapters 3 through 6 address the overall category of content. Chapter 3 considers direct instruction lessons. Chapter 4 examines practicing and deepening lessons. Chapter 5 addresses implementing knowledge application lessons. Chapter 6 presents strategies that teachers should use in all three types of lessons.
Chapters 7 through 10 address the overall category of context. Chapter 7 focuses on engagement. Chapter 8 examines implementing rules and procedures. Chapter 9 spotlights strategies for building relationships, and chapter 10 focuses on communicating high expectations with an emphasis on the reluctant learner.
The final chapter of this book addresses change at the macro level. Specifically, it addresses eight recommended system-level changes that are logical consequences of The New Art and Science of Teaching framework.
